Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma urges removal of 'secularism' and 'socialism' from Constitution's Preamble
Sarma said that this is the right time to remove the legacies of the Emergency, including the words secularism and socialism added to the Constitution.
He said these words were not part of the original Constitution and should be dropped, as secularism goes against the Indian idea of Sarva Dharma Sambhava, and socialism was never part of India's original economic vision.
Speaking to the reporters, Himanta Biswa Sarma said, 'Today, we launched the book The Emergency Diary, which talks about the struggle and resistance during the Emergency. When we talk about the Emergency, this is the right moment to remove its remaining impact, just like Prime Minister Modi is working to erase the legacy of colonial rule. Two major outcomes of the Emergency were the addition of the words secularism and socialism to our Constitution. I believe secularism goes against the Indian idea of Sarva Dharma Sambhava. Socialism was also never truly our economic vision, our focus has always been on Sarvodaya Antyodaya.'
'So, I request the Government of India to remove these two words, secularism and Socialism, from the Preamble, as they were not part of the original Constitution and were added later by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi,' Sarma said.
'The Emergency Diaries - Years that Forged a Leader' book published by BlueKraft is based on first-person anecdotes from associates who worked with young Narendra Modi, and using other archival material, the book is a first of its kind that creates new scholarship on the formative years of a young man who would give it his all in the fight against tyranny.
According to the release, Emergency Diaries - paints a vivid picture of PM Modi fighting for the ideals of democracy and how he has worked all his life to preserve and promote it. 'In the mid-1970s, as India was caught in the iron shackles of the Emergency, Narendra Modi, then a young pracharak of the RSS, found himself on the front lines of a covert resistance against the autocratic regime of Indira Gandhi.' (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Agriculture Minister triggered panic buying of urea, charges BJP chief
BJP Telangana president N. Ramchander Rao on Wednesday offered to resign from his post if Agriculture Minister Tummala Nageswara Rao can prove there is a fertilizer shortage in the State. He blamed the Minister for 'prematurely declaring' a lack of stock, which triggered panic buying among farmers leading to black market activity. He likened the situation to a financial panic, calling it a 'run on fertilizer'. At a press conference at the State office, he accused the Congress government of 'mismanagement' and 'inefficiency', alleging that it created an 'artificial scarcity' despite the Centre supplying sufficient quantities. Mr. Rao also challenged Mr. Nageswara Rao to resign if he fails to prove the shortage. Cautioning the State government against launching a campaign against the Centre over the issue, he urged farmers not to be misled by 'false statements'. According to Mr. Rao, 7,250 rakes of urea were supplied to Telangana by IFFCO, KRIBHCO and RCF, with an additional 10,000 metric tonnes allocated through imports at Karaikal Port. He noted that despite global challenges, including the Israel–Iran conflict and disruptions in the Red Sea, the Centre did not hold back on fertilizer supply. He reiterated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government remains committed to farmers' welfare. For the 2025 Rabi season (October 2024–March 2025), the Centre supplied 12.47 lakh metric tonnes of urea against the State's requirement of 9.87 lakh metric tonnes. Of this, the State government sold only 10.43 lakh metric tonnes, while 2.04 lakh metric tonnes remained as opening stock for the Kharif season. For the ongoing Kharif season (up to August 2025), the Centre has already supplied 5.18 lakh metric tonnes out of the required 8.3 lakh metric tonnes. As of now, 7.22 lakh metric tonnes of urea are available in the State. Mr. Rao said that in the Agriculture Minister's own district, 3,200 tonnes more urea were sold this August compared to last year, despite no change in crop area. He questioned whether this excess supply actually reached farmers or was diverted to the black market. He also noted that even when production at the Ramagundam factory was halted due to technical issues, the Centre ensured uninterrupted supply. Highlighting the Centre's support for farmers, Mr. Rao said the Modi government has allocated ₹1.40 lakh crore in fertilizer subsidies, making fertilizers available to farmers at just 10–20% of the actual cost. On the issue of the Vice Presidential candidate, Mr. Rao questioned why the Congress and its allies did not nominate a BC candidate, despite earlier lobbying for one. He urged Congress and INDIA bloc MPs to support NDA's MBC candidate C.P. Radhakrishnan to ensure justice for BCs. Mr. Rao also condemned divisive slogans like 'Marwari Go Back', calling them harmful and unconstitutional. 'We are all Indians, and anyone from any region has the right to live anywhere in the country,' he said, blaming 'Urban Naxal' forces and Congress leaders for encouraging such sentiments.
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Tunnel road will be another Yettinahole project: BJP
The Opposition BJP on Wednesday said the proposed 17-km tunnel road in the city will be 'another Yettinahole project' and urged the Congress government to withdraw it. Speaking on the debate initiated by the Opposition on the halting of development works in the State, Leader of the Opposition R. Ashok said the cost of the Yettinahole project has tripled from ₹8,000 crore in 2011 to ₹25,000 crore in 2025. The project was initiated during the tenure of D.V. Sadananda Gowda for catering to the drinking water needs of the drought-prone districts of the southern part of the State. Even after spending ₹25,000 crore on the project, the water has not reached Kolar and other districts, Mr. Ashok said. C.N. Ashwath Narayana (BJP) said that during the S.M. Krishna government, the civic body, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, mortgaged properties and buildings to raise loans. Now, the government has decided to raise ₹8,000 crore loans from Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited (HUDCO) by mortgaging government buildings and properties.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
22 minutes ago
- First Post
Brics rising: The unintended consequences of Trump's tariff strategy
In standing firm, India not only asserts its sovereignty but also signals a larger shift in the global order, where nations of the Global South are increasingly unwilling to be coerced into choosing sides in conflicts not of their making Donald Trump's return to the White House carried with it the grand promise of ending the war in Ukraine within days, a claim that was as theatrical as it was unrealistic. Seven months on, that promise has collided with the reality of international politics and the stubbornness of Vladimir Putin. Trump's failure to extract even a temporary pause in hostilities from Moscow is not merely a diplomatic shortcoming; it reflects his inability to distinguish between showmanship and statecraft. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Red-carpet receptions and personal overtures cannot substitute for hard-nosed negotiation and long-term strategy. The very idea that Putin—who has staked both his domestic legitimacy and Russia's global posture on the war—would simply concede ground because of Trump's famed 'art of the deal' was a misreading of history and power. The war in Ukraine is not a real estate transaction that can be clinched over a handshake; it is a geopolitical struggle with deep historical roots, and treating it as otherwise was bound to end in failure. This failure also highlights a consistent pattern in Trump's political praxis: the reduction of complex global problems into spectacles of personality and improvisation. His handling of trade wars, marked by a cavalcade of tariffs against adversaries and allies alike, displays the same misplaced faith in unilateral gestures. Tariffs were announced and withdrawn like a magician pulling rabbits from a hat, with little thought to the long-term economic consequences for America or its partners. In the same vein, his diplomacy with Putin rests on the assumption that intimidation mixed with personal charm can resolve conflicts that are, in fact, structural and historical. Such an approach not only undermines America's credibility but also erodes the very fabric of international cooperation. Trump's method of reducing diplomacy to impulsive theatrics has made foreign policy a stage, but one where the curtain rises to reveal more chaos than resolution. The ongoing strain in India-US trade relations only reinforces the hollowness of Trump's transactional approach to diplomacy. His willingness to dangle punitive tariffs on Indian exports—while casually offering to hold them back in exchange for India's supposed cessation of Russian oil imports—reveals not a strategy but a bargaining tactic better suited for a casino floor than a negotiation between sovereign nations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The irony, of course, is striking: while lecturing India on its trade with Moscow, Trump himself could not justify America's continued import of Russian uranium and fertilizers, dismissing the question with a characteristic shrug of ignorance. This double standard not only undermines Washington's moral high ground but also alienates a critical partner in Asia. For India, whose agricultural and dairy sectors remain the backbone of rural livelihoods, acquiescing to Washington's demands would not be ideal. Thus, what emerges is not the 'art of the deal' but the art of bluster—policies that neither secure American interests nor respect those of its allies. It is evident that Trump's displeasure with India stems from its outright refusal to endorse his unsolicited claim of brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, a rejection that undercut his self-fashioned image as a global dealmaker. In retaliation, the use of steep tariffs and selective economic pressures on New Delhi appears less like coherent policy and more like bullying tactics, designed to remind India of America's leverage. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It is quite telling that both economists and seasoned strategists in the United States have spoken with one voice in denouncing Trump's tariff gambit against India. Jeffrey Sachs, a renowned economist and professor at Columbia University, sharply criticised Trump's tariff decisions, calling them a mere pressure tactic against New Delhi and warning that such steps risk undoing years of progress in India–US relations. He went further to describe the duties as 'bizarre' and 'self-destructive,' highlighting how they damage America's own foreign policy interests. John Bolton, a veteran foreign policy hawk who served as National Security Adviser during Trump's first administration, also criticised Trump, arguing that penalising India for its oil trade with Russia—while sparing China for doing the same—was a serious strategic miscalculation. He warned that this selective targeting could push India closer toward the Beijing–Moscow axis, calling it an 'unforced error' that undermines America's broader geopolitical goals. Bolton's warning likely carries a deeper strategic charge: by punishing India over Russian oil while overlooking China's larger energy ties with Moscow, Washington signals that its ire is selective—and New Delhi reads selectivity as unreliability, not leverage. India's purchases of discounted Russian crude have reached or neared record levels and are central to its inflation management and refining exports; coercive tariffs would mean hardening India's resolve to keep that lifeline and to hedge more visibly with Moscow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In that light, Bolton's 'unforced error' critique is less a quip than a diagnosis: tariff theatrics that cancel talks and demand farm-sector concessions don't align with America's Indo-Pacific aims and could push India to double down on strategic autonomy in ways that tilt the balance toward a de facto Moscow–Beijing–Delhi accommodation. What emerges from these developments is an intriguing paradox: Trump, in his quest to arm-twist partners through tariffs and unilateral dictates, may be inadvertently contributing to the consolidation of a stronger Brics. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva recently declared in Brasília, 'I will not call Trump because he does not want to talk. I will call Xi Jinping, I will call Prime Minister Modi. I just won't call Putin, because Putin can't travel right now.' This statement, coming in the wake of Washington's sweeping 50 per cent tariff on Brazilian imports, reflects not only Lula's refusal to engage with Trump but also his intent to reaffirm Brazil's standing by strengthening ties with leaders of the Global South. Lula's words carry weight because they signal a deliberate pivot: choosing to prioritise dialogue with Beijing, New Delhi, and other power axes, while sidelining Washington. When placed against the backdrop of rising tariff disputes and diplomatic rifts, the remark suggests that Trump's approach may inadvertently be encouraging deeper solidarity within Brics, giving it not just economic heft but also fresh political significance as an alternative pole in global affairs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Chinese foreign ministry recently remarked that India and China, as 'major developing countries and important members of the Global South,' should embrace a 'cooperative pas de deux of the dragon and the elephant as partners helping each other succeed,' according to Global Times. In this context, and amid India's escalating tariff tensions with the United States, reports suggest that Prime Minister Narendra Modi may soon announce the resumption of direct flights between India and China, with a formal deal expected during his visit to Tianjin for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit at the end of August—his first trip to China in seven years. This combination of rhetorical warmth and concrete steps toward engagement reveals Beijing's desire to recalibrate its strained ties with New Delhi. For China, fostering a working relationship with India not only bolsters its standing in the Global South but also adds strategic depth to Brics at a time when US trade policies are alienating both nations. For India, the outreach presents both an opportunity and a dilemma: while closer economic ties with Beijing could strengthen its leverage against Washington, they also risk complicating its long-standing concerns over security and territorial disputes. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD South Africa, the only African member of Brics and a nation that counts the United States as its second-largest trading partner, has now been slapped with steep 30 per cent tariffs by the Trump administration—the highest imposed on any African country. This move not only strains Pretoria's economic ties with Washington but also risks accelerating its pivot toward the Brics framework, where it already finds solidarity with other economies similarly targeted by US trade measures. Instead of pulling South Africa closer, Trump's tariff offensive may well push it deeper into the Brics fold, reinforcing the bloc's cohesion against perceived US unilateralism. The warmth between Russia and India scarcely needs restating, given the long history of strategic trust between the two nations. Even amidst the current tariff struggle with the United States, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar's recent visit to Moscow underscored the resilience of the partnership, while National Security Adviser Ajit Doval hinted that President Vladimir Putin may soon travel to India. These developments reaffirm that New Delhi and Moscow continue to nurture their ties, regardless of shifting pressures from Washington. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The bottom line is clear: Washington must rethink its approach. First, tariffs are no panacea for America's economic woes. As Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz has pointed out, Trump's tariff proposals are a deeply flawed attempt to revive US manufacturing, hurting partners abroad while doing little to address the structural issues at home. Second, it need not play the role of an unsolicited arbitrator in regional disputes and then bristle when its efforts go unacknowledged. And third and finally, the era of bullying the Global South into compliance through the threat of tariffs is rapidly fading—India, like any sovereign nation, will pursue its own interests, and America's conflict with Russia cannot simply be imposed on others. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his Independence Day address, underlined this very resolve, declaring that India was prepared to bear the cost of US tariffs rather than compromise its autonomy. His message was clear: India's economic and strategic decisions will not be dictated by external pressures, no matter how formidable, but will be guided by its own vision of growth, security, and global engagement. In standing firm, India not only asserts its sovereignty but also signals a larger shift in the global order, where nations of the Global South are increasingly unwilling to be coerced into choosing sides in conflicts not of their making. The writer takes special interest in history, culture and geopolitics. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
