EK DUM BASIC
TH_17_May_2022.pdf
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 17th MAY
Each for all: On India’s men badminton team win in Thomas Cup
Sport is not just about individual excellence; it is also about the collective joy gleaned from a team’s success when different individuals offer their varied skills and win together for the larger cause as representatives of a nation. India has always had iconic athletes with their fabulous milestones, but when it comes to team success in global events, the examples dwindle. To that limited cupboard displaying Olympic gold winning hockey squads featuring Dhyan Chand, the triumphant 1975 World Cup hockey team, the victorious 1983 cricket World Cup outfit led by Kapil Dev and the 2011 champion unit under M.S. Dhoni, Indian badminton added its golden chapter when the men’s team won the Thomas Cup at Bangkok on Sunday. This was a feather touch that would be felt all through India’s sporting history. Besides winning its maiden title, India also stunned fancied opponents Malaysia and Denmark, and defeated 14-time champion Indonesia in the summit clash. Previously, Indian badminton had offered sporadic joy starting from Prakash Padukone’s magnificent All England victory in 1980. P. Gopichand emulated Padukone in 2001 and just as another drought loomed, first Saina Nehwal and then P.V. Sindhu proved that they could do far better than their male counterparts, winning titles and medals. Finally, the men joined the winning bandwagon with their blend of aesthetics, control and athleticism on the courts.
Be it 20-year-old Lakshya Sen, the seasoned Kidambi Srikanth, the combative H.S. Prannoy and the doubles team of Chirag Shetty and Satwiksairaj Rankireddy, India had men who believed that winning the title was in the realm of possibility. In the final, both Lakshya and the doubles duo lost the opening games, and yet they dug deep to hoodwink the Indonesians. Once a 2-0 lead was secured, history beckoned and with remarkable fluency, former world number one Srikanth got past Jonatan Christie at 21-15, 23-21 as India clinched a team triumph for the ages. It was not easy, Lakshya had a stomach bug, and he and others had to cope with the constant pressure of expectations at every hurdle. The coaching staff deserve credit and so do the inspiring footprints left by Padukone and Gopichand, through their achievements and their inputs to their successors. When the Indians infused magic into the feathery shuttlecock, they also gifted an enduring memory to a country forever yearning for collective wins. In the past, Indian tennis had its moments in the Davis Cup but team achievements were often linked to cricketers and hockey stars of a distant era. Srikanth and company have ensured that Dhyan Chand, Kapil and Dhoni’s units will not remain lonely at the top. This surreal win could truly alter the badminton landscape across India.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Dwindle (V)- to become less in number or smaller.
2. Sporadic (Adj)- happening sometimes; not regular or continuous.
3. Emulate (V)- match or surpass (a person or achievement), typically by imitation.
4. Bandwagon (N)- an activity or idea that has become very popular.
5. Aesthetics (N)- the set of principles on which an artist’s work is based.
6. Combative (Adj)- ready or eager to fight or argue. जुझारू
7. Dig Deep (Phrase)- to manage to find a lot of money for something.
8. Hoodwink (V)- to deceive or trick someone.
Each for all: On India’s men badminton team win in Thomas Cup
Sport is not just about individual excellence; it is also about the collective joy gleaned from a team’s success when different individuals offer their varied skills and win together for the larger cause as representatives of a nation. India has always had iconic athletes with their fabulous milestones, but when it comes to team success in global events, the examples dwindle. To that limited cupboard displaying Olympic gold winning hockey squads featuring Dhyan Chand, the triumphant 1975 World Cup hockey team, the victorious 1983 cricket World Cup outfit led by Kapil Dev and the 2011 champion unit under M.S. Dhoni, Indian badminton added its golden chapter when the men’s team won the Thomas Cup at Bangkok on Sunday. This was a feather touch that would be felt all through India’s sporting history. Besides winning its maiden title, India also stunned fancied opponents Malaysia and Denmark, and defeated 14-time champion Indonesia in the summit clash. Previously, Indian badminton had offered sporadic joy starting from Prakash Padukone’s magnificent All England victory in 1980. P. Gopichand emulated Padukone in 2001 and just as another drought loomed, first Saina Nehwal and then P.V. Sindhu proved that they could do far better than their male counterparts, winning titles and medals. Finally, the men joined the winning bandwagon with their blend of aesthetics, control and athleticism on the courts.
Be it 20-year-old Lakshya Sen, the seasoned Kidambi Srikanth, the combative H.S. Prannoy and the doubles team of Chirag Shetty and Satwiksairaj Rankireddy, India had men who believed that winning the title was in the realm of possibility. In the final, both Lakshya and the doubles duo lost the opening games, and yet they dug deep to hoodwink the Indonesians. Once a 2-0 lead was secured, history beckoned and with remarkable fluency, former world number one Srikanth got past Jonatan Christie at 21-15, 23-21 as India clinched a team triumph for the ages. It was not easy, Lakshya had a stomach bug, and he and others had to cope with the constant pressure of expectations at every hurdle. The coaching staff deserve credit and so do the inspiring footprints left by Padukone and Gopichand, through their achievements and their inputs to their successors. When the Indians infused magic into the feathery shuttlecock, they also gifted an enduring memory to a country forever yearning for collective wins. In the past, Indian tennis had its moments in the Davis Cup but team achievements were often linked to cricketers and hockey stars of a distant era. Srikanth and company have ensured that Dhyan Chand, Kapil and Dhoni’s units will not remain lonely at the top. This surreal win could truly alter the badminton landscape across India.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Dwindle (V)- to become less in number or smaller.
2. Sporadic (Adj)- happening sometimes; not regular or continuous.
3. Emulate (V)- match or surpass (a person or achievement), typically by imitation.
4. Bandwagon (N)- an activity or idea that has become very popular.
5. Aesthetics (N)- the set of principles on which an artist’s work is based.
6. Combative (Adj)- ready or eager to fight or argue. जुझारू
7. Dig Deep (Phrase)- to manage to find a lot of money for something.
8. Hoodwink (V)- to deceive or trick someone.
👍1
EK DUM BASIC
TH-Delhi_18_May_2022.pdf
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 18th MAY
Symbolism and beyond: On PM Modi’s visit to Lumbini
India’s current regime has a penchant for symbolism and optics, a tendency that becomes more pronounced when the symbolism is religious. So it was not a surprise that Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a short visit to Lumbini in Nepal on Buddha Jayanti. Lumbini, in Buddhist tradition, is the birthplace of Gautama Buddha and Mr. Modi along with his Nepali counterpart laid the foundation stone for the India International Centre for Buddhist Culture and Heritage in the Lumbini Monastic Zone. The Centre will play a role in challenging the preponderance of the Chinese sponsorship and patronage of the Buddhist festivals and institutions in the area. It could also be a harbinger of a focused development of the area into a tourist and cultural hub for pilgrims and other visitors. To that end, the PM’s visit would have been welcomed by his Nepali counterpart. With the PM also unequivocally asserting that Lumbini was the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, who was born as Siddhartha, this should put to rest a needless irritant in the India-Nepal relations, with some hyper-nationalist Nepalis claiming that the Indian government had a different belief on the Buddha’s origins. The visit also coincided with the signing of a few MoUs, the most prominent being the development and implementation of the Arun-4 hydropower project. The PM’s visit followed his counterpart Sher Bahadur Deuba’s trip to India in April, which thawed relations after a series of controversial steps (during the tenure of Mr. Deuba’s predecessor, K.P. Oli) on the Kalapani dispute.
Mr. Modi’s speech in Lumbini sought to highlight the strong cultural ties between the two countries, which already share a special relationship, cemented by the Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed in 1950. There are several irritants that have developed, straining this relationship, and for now there seems to be a concerted attempt by both regimes to return to bonhomie, with the Indian government seeking to utilise “religious diplomacy” as a means to emphasise the special relationship. But there have been significant changes in Nepal’s political-economy, in particular a substantial reduction in the Nepali youths’ dependence on the Indian economy as compared to the past. Beyond a soft power emphasis on cultural ties, India-Nepal relations need to graduate to a more meaningful partnership on economic and geopolitical issues, with the Indian government continuing to retain a substantial role in partnering the Nepali regime in development projects. The challenge is to utilise the return of bonhomie in ties to refocus on work related to infrastructure development in Nepal, which includes hydropower projects, transportation and connectivity, and which could benefit the citizens of the adjoining States in India as well. Symbolism, after all, is useful only to a certain extent.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Penchant(N): a strong or habitual liking for something or tendency to do something.
2. Patronage(N): the support given by a patron. संरक्षण, सहायता
3. Harbinger (N): Sign, Indicator , signal;
4. Prominent(adj): important; famous.
5. Thaw (v): unpleasant relationship with someone
6. Bonhomie(N): cheerful friendliness; geniality. खुशमिजाजी
Symbolism and beyond: On PM Modi’s visit to Lumbini
India’s current regime has a penchant for symbolism and optics, a tendency that becomes more pronounced when the symbolism is religious. So it was not a surprise that Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a short visit to Lumbini in Nepal on Buddha Jayanti. Lumbini, in Buddhist tradition, is the birthplace of Gautama Buddha and Mr. Modi along with his Nepali counterpart laid the foundation stone for the India International Centre for Buddhist Culture and Heritage in the Lumbini Monastic Zone. The Centre will play a role in challenging the preponderance of the Chinese sponsorship and patronage of the Buddhist festivals and institutions in the area. It could also be a harbinger of a focused development of the area into a tourist and cultural hub for pilgrims and other visitors. To that end, the PM’s visit would have been welcomed by his Nepali counterpart. With the PM also unequivocally asserting that Lumbini was the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, who was born as Siddhartha, this should put to rest a needless irritant in the India-Nepal relations, with some hyper-nationalist Nepalis claiming that the Indian government had a different belief on the Buddha’s origins. The visit also coincided with the signing of a few MoUs, the most prominent being the development and implementation of the Arun-4 hydropower project. The PM’s visit followed his counterpart Sher Bahadur Deuba’s trip to India in April, which thawed relations after a series of controversial steps (during the tenure of Mr. Deuba’s predecessor, K.P. Oli) on the Kalapani dispute.
Mr. Modi’s speech in Lumbini sought to highlight the strong cultural ties between the two countries, which already share a special relationship, cemented by the Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed in 1950. There are several irritants that have developed, straining this relationship, and for now there seems to be a concerted attempt by both regimes to return to bonhomie, with the Indian government seeking to utilise “religious diplomacy” as a means to emphasise the special relationship. But there have been significant changes in Nepal’s political-economy, in particular a substantial reduction in the Nepali youths’ dependence on the Indian economy as compared to the past. Beyond a soft power emphasis on cultural ties, India-Nepal relations need to graduate to a more meaningful partnership on economic and geopolitical issues, with the Indian government continuing to retain a substantial role in partnering the Nepali regime in development projects. The challenge is to utilise the return of bonhomie in ties to refocus on work related to infrastructure development in Nepal, which includes hydropower projects, transportation and connectivity, and which could benefit the citizens of the adjoining States in India as well. Symbolism, after all, is useful only to a certain extent.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Penchant(N): a strong or habitual liking for something or tendency to do something.
2. Patronage(N): the support given by a patron. संरक्षण, सहायता
3. Harbinger (N): Sign, Indicator , signal;
4. Prominent(adj): important; famous.
5. Thaw (v): unpleasant relationship with someone
6. Bonhomie(N): cheerful friendliness; geniality. खुशमिजाजी
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 20th MAY
Law and public opinion: On Perarivalan release
The Supreme Court has invoked its extraordinary power to order the release of A.G. Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, for whose freedom his mother, many political parties and vast sections of public opinion have been campaigning for years. The suicide bombing that took the life of Rajiv Gandhi, along with that of 15 others, including nine police personnel, on “Tamil soil” caused a great deal of revulsion in the State, but this sentiment abated with the passage of time. Perarivalan drew much public sympathy, largely due to the fact that he was only 19 when he got embroiled in the assassination plot and later revelations that a portion of his confessional statement was improved by a police officer to link his purchase of a battery to the one used in the belt bomb that was used in the suicide bombing. But essentially, the verdict of the three-member Bench is an indictment of the disregard for federal norms in the deliberate inaction that Raj Bhavan displayed when presented with a Cabinet advice to release them in 2018. Going by the Union government’s arguments, one can discern that it was the Centre’s guiding hand that was responsible for the delay. The then Governor had referred the Cabinet advice to the President for a decision. The Centre, too, argued, that cases involving murder under the IPC came under the President’s exclusive jurisdiction in matters of remission of life sentences. The Court has put an end to all doubts by holding that the Governor is bound by the State Cabinet’s advice when acting under Article 161 of the Constitution, that his reference to the President was “inimical to the scheme of the Constitution” and that remission remains firmly under the State’s jurisdiction in this case.
Even when a Constitution Bench, while resolving legal questions over the statutory power of remission under the Cr.P.C., held that the release of these convicts would require the Centre’s concurrence, it had made it clear that the constitutional powers of the President (Article 72) and the Governor (Article 161) “remain untouched”. In the light of this, and the position that remission powers are exercised solely on Cabinet advice, there was no infirmity in the State’s recommendation to the Governor in 2018 for their release. While the Bench has done well to put an end to doubts about the Governor’s remission power and the manner of its exercise, a sticking point remains. Nothing has been said on what should be done when the absence of any time-frame for the President or the Governor is cynically exploited to indefinitely delay executive decisions. It is impractical for every matter to be escalated to the point that the Supreme Court needs to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142. However, the judgment should not be seen as any endorsement of the claims of innocence of the convicts in the dastardly conspiracy. And whether governments should recommend remission on the basis of public opinion remains a question to ponder.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Convict(v): declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
2. Personnel(N): staff, employees, workers;
3. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
4. Abate(v): (of something unpleasant or severe) become less intense or widespread.
5. Embroil(v): involve (someone) deeply in an argument, conflict, or difficult situation. उलझाना, व्याकुल करना
6. Revelation(N): a surprising and previously unknown fact that has been disclosed to others.
7. Indictment(N): a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime.
8. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
9. Deliberate(adj): careful and unhurried.
10. Inimical(adj): tending to obstruct or harm.
11. Dastardly(adjective): wicked and cruel.
12. Ponder(v): think about (something) carefully, especially before making a decision or reaching a conclusion.
Law and public opinion: On Perarivalan release
The Supreme Court has invoked its extraordinary power to order the release of A.G. Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, for whose freedom his mother, many political parties and vast sections of public opinion have been campaigning for years. The suicide bombing that took the life of Rajiv Gandhi, along with that of 15 others, including nine police personnel, on “Tamil soil” caused a great deal of revulsion in the State, but this sentiment abated with the passage of time. Perarivalan drew much public sympathy, largely due to the fact that he was only 19 when he got embroiled in the assassination plot and later revelations that a portion of his confessional statement was improved by a police officer to link his purchase of a battery to the one used in the belt bomb that was used in the suicide bombing. But essentially, the verdict of the three-member Bench is an indictment of the disregard for federal norms in the deliberate inaction that Raj Bhavan displayed when presented with a Cabinet advice to release them in 2018. Going by the Union government’s arguments, one can discern that it was the Centre’s guiding hand that was responsible for the delay. The then Governor had referred the Cabinet advice to the President for a decision. The Centre, too, argued, that cases involving murder under the IPC came under the President’s exclusive jurisdiction in matters of remission of life sentences. The Court has put an end to all doubts by holding that the Governor is bound by the State Cabinet’s advice when acting under Article 161 of the Constitution, that his reference to the President was “inimical to the scheme of the Constitution” and that remission remains firmly under the State’s jurisdiction in this case.
Even when a Constitution Bench, while resolving legal questions over the statutory power of remission under the Cr.P.C., held that the release of these convicts would require the Centre’s concurrence, it had made it clear that the constitutional powers of the President (Article 72) and the Governor (Article 161) “remain untouched”. In the light of this, and the position that remission powers are exercised solely on Cabinet advice, there was no infirmity in the State’s recommendation to the Governor in 2018 for their release. While the Bench has done well to put an end to doubts about the Governor’s remission power and the manner of its exercise, a sticking point remains. Nothing has been said on what should be done when the absence of any time-frame for the President or the Governor is cynically exploited to indefinitely delay executive decisions. It is impractical for every matter to be escalated to the point that the Supreme Court needs to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142. However, the judgment should not be seen as any endorsement of the claims of innocence of the convicts in the dastardly conspiracy. And whether governments should recommend remission on the basis of public opinion remains a question to ponder.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Convict(v): declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
2. Personnel(N): staff, employees, workers;
3. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
4. Abate(v): (of something unpleasant or severe) become less intense or widespread.
5. Embroil(v): involve (someone) deeply in an argument, conflict, or difficult situation. उलझाना, व्याकुल करना
6. Revelation(N): a surprising and previously unknown fact that has been disclosed to others.
7. Indictment(N): a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime.
8. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
9. Deliberate(adj): careful and unhurried.
10. Inimical(adj): tending to obstruct or harm.
11. Dastardly(adjective): wicked and cruel.
12. Ponder(v): think about (something) carefully, especially before making a decision or reaching a conclusion.
👍1