Rigid constitutions to unwritten norms...

Why is no one talking about ‘india shining’or india equalling developed countries nowadays? Why does corruption seem to be an everyday normal occurance in the country with the biggest constitution in the world? How can basic human rights be provided to 1.2 billion people of the world? Are we working in a negative way – i.e. focusing on addressing our insecurities and not on developmental pathways ahead?

Ever since independence, formation of policies doesn’t seem to work – but Indians seem hell bent on this as the method to all problems... how will a policy will be implemented seem to be the last thought.  How can India as well as other countries of the world benefit from an analysis on the above?

A rigidly written constitution to unwritten constitutions, or norms – It’s all to run systems smoothly.  Basically, to encourage what should be done and to stop what shouldn’t be done, that is the key to any system. 

What we want to do – v/s what we don’t want – these 2 polar opposites...  often an individual might have such a policy for themselves.  Sometimes families, small groups, (or big groups based on religion), and a whole country, create such systems to make them function at their best.

In india, sonography to determine sex of a child is illegal.  Female foeticide is also illegal and second step to sex determination test. Abortion is illegal in some countries. The war against drugs all over the world (drugs like cocaine, meth) is ongoing since many years.  Lying, stealing, killing, and a huge list of things which are un-wanted / to be stopped behaviour.  But despite a ton of rules & regulations nothing really seem to stop these things.

Cooperation, ethical behaviour, honesty in financial transactions, respect for each other and so on are expected / wanted behaviour.  And with or without rules, these desired behaviours don’t seem to increase. 

So, is there any point in trying to improve the world through any kind of regulations? Or should there be different types of regulations in place? Will a rule which cannot be implemented will be a blade of grass in heavy wind? Or is that the first step anyway? But then, if a rule fails to be implemented – should it be discarded or removed as s rule? What should be the time frame for evaluating whether a rule is democratic or not?

Law of a court, an appealing advertisement, traditional culture, religious ritual, instincts...  so many ways to modify human behaviour... but not 1 perfect way for it.  Maybe that’s the fun of being a human, being a thinking entity!