Monday, 30 September 2013

photo

video

International day of non-violence

International Day of Non-Violence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
International Day of Non-Violence
Observed by All UN Member States
Date 2 October
The International Day of Non-Violence is observed on 2 October, the birthday of Mohandas Gandhi. This day is referred to in India as Gandhi Jayanti.
In January 2004, Iranian Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi had taken a proposal for an International Day of Non-Violence from a Hindi teacher in Paris teaching international students to the World Social Forum in Bombay. The idea gradually attracted the interest of some leaders of India's Congress Party ("Ahimsa Finds Teen Voice", The Telegraph, Calcutta) until a Satyagraha Conference resolution in New Delhi in January 2007 initiated by Sonia Gandhi and Archbishop Desmond Tutu called upon the United Nations to adopt the idea.[citation needed]
On 15 June 2007 the United Nations General Assembly voted to establish 2 October as the International Day of Non-Violence.[1] The resolution by the General Assembly asks all members of the UN system to commemorate 2 October in "an appropriate manner and disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness." [2]
The United Nations Postal Administration in New York City prepared a special cachet to commemorate this event, following a request from the Indian Ambassador at the Permanent Mission of India to the UN. The boxed pictorial cachet design was prepared by the UNPA and was limited to cancellation at UNPA's NY location (not Geneva and Vienna). The UNPA has indicated that all outgoing UNPA mail between October 2 and 31 carried the cachet. Information on various philatelic material carrying this cachet is summarized at a website dedicated to Gandhi philately and can be accessed here.

References

Gandhi jayanty.

Gandhi Jayanti

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Gandhi Jayanti
Observed by India
Significance Honours Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi's role in Indian Independence.
Date 2 October
Observances Community, historical celebrations.
Related to Republic Day
Independence Day
Gandhi Jayanti is a national holiday celebrated in India to mark the occasion of the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi, the "Father of the Nation".[1] The United Nations General Assembly announced on 15 June 2007 that it adopted a resolution which declared that October 2 will be celebrated as the International Day of Non-Violence.[2]

Background

Gandhi Jayanti is celebrated on October 2, every year and is one of the three official declared National Holidays of India and is observed in all its states and union territories. The other two are Independence Day (15 August) and Republic Day (26 January). The selling of alcohol is banned on all three days which are designated as Dry Days.[3]
Gandhi Jayanti is marked by prayer services and tributes all over India, especially at Raj Ghat, Gandhi's memorial in New Delhi where he was cremated. Popular celebration includes prayer meetings, commemorative ceremonies in different cities by colleges, local government institutions and socio-political institutions. Painting and essay competitions are conducted and best awards are awarded for projects in schools and the community,[4] on themes of glorifying peace, non-violence and Gandhi's effort in Indian Freedom Struggle. Usually, Gandhi's favourite devotional song, Raghupathi Raghava Rajaram is sung in memory of him.[5]
Gandhi Jayanti is referred to in the 2006 Bollywood film Lage Raho Munna Bhai as "Dry Day." [6]

Notes

0.All Quotes, SMS, Essays, Poems, Wishes On Mahatma Gandhi Jayanti

External links

Saturday, 28 September 2013

Corruption.



Corruption In India


“Corruption is Social Evil” “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
In its simplest sense, corruption may be defined as an act of bribery or misuse of public position or power for the fulfillment of selfish motives or to gain personal gratifications. It has also been defined as "Misuse of authority as a result of consideration of personal gain which need not be monetary".
In recent Centuries India has earned a place among the THREE most corrupt countries in the world. Corruption in India is a consequence of the nexus between Bureaucracy, politics and criminals. India is now no longer considered a soft state. It has now become a consideration state where everything can be had for a consideration. Today, the number of ministers with an honest image can be counted on fingers. At one time, bribe was paid for getting wrong things done but now bribe is paid for getting right things done at right time.
It is well established that politicians are extremely corrupt the world over. In fact, people are surprised to find an honest politician. These corrupt politicians go scot-free, unharmed and unpunished. Leaders like Lal Bahadur Shastri or Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel are a rare breed now who had very little bank balance at the time of death. The list of scams and scandals in the country is endless. Now Recently Before Start 2010 Commen Wealth Games Corruption is playing major role with commen wealth games. The Bofors payoff scandal of 1986 involved a total amount of Rs 1750 crore in purchase of guns from a Swedish firm for the Army. The Cement scandal of 1982 involved the Chief Minister of Maharashtra, the Sugar Scandal of 1994 involved a Union Minister of State for food, the Urea Scam and of course no one can forget Hawala Scandal of 1991, the Coffin-gate, fodder scam in Bihar or the Stamp scandal which shocked not only the political arena but the entire society.
Is it possible to contain corruption in our society? Corruption is a cancer, which every Indian must strive to cure. Many new leaders when come into power declare their determination to eradicate corruption but soon they themselves become corrupt and start amassing huge wealth.
There are many myths about corruption, which have to be exploded if we really want to combat it. Some of these myths are: Corruption is a way of life and nothing can be done about it. Only people from underdeveloped or developing countries are prone to corruption. We will have to guard against all these crude fallacies while planning measures to fight corruption.
It is not possible to kill or remove the corruption by improving the Social-economic conditions of the . Because we all know that the most of the people who are corrupted are not economically or socially backward, surely they will be having a notable social status.
"Despite a decade of progress in establishing anti-corruption laws and regulations, these results indicate that much remains to be done before we see meaningful improvements in the lives of the world's poorest citizens."
The following steps should be considered to eradicate corruption:
Greedy business people and unscrupulous investors should stop bribing the political elites.Don’t be either at the receiving or at the bribing end. Political elites should stop putting their private gains before the welfare of citizens and economic development of their regions. Government should include a chapter in text books related to corruption and its desire consequences.
We are all need to stop talking about Corruption but we right now start ourself take the initiative and be Brave ourself. Corruption is going to end only when people like us stand up and speak out.
If we do not take step forward to remove corruption from root, the word developing country will always be attached with our country INDIA . So we the common man are solution for removing corruption from our INDIA and hence we will be also helpful in making our country developed.
It is possible..today’s generation is willing to change this system. And soon corruption is gone out from India.Every person should have his own responsibility to avoid corruption
A strong youth movement in the country only can remove corruption and each student should take a vow to begin this exercise courageously within the family-Former President Dr.A.P.J.Abdul Kalam
Karthick Babu

Drama on Terrorisom

TO borrow an idea from sociologist Victor Burner, terrorism in Pakistan has become a social drama. Almost every passing day offers something new, dramatic and unusual.
Terrorists provide the lead by carrying out planned attacks in different parts of the country. Next follow the rituals and rhetoric. The authorities’ security briefs, political condemnations and citizens’ vigils are scenes from the same drama, which inadvertently keep terrorism intact.
The handling of militancy in this way by officialdom has added to the spectacle of violence, with the public imagination imbued with the thought of ‘more to come’.
This is enough for terrorism to become internalised, and therefore it is accepted as normal. This helps us understand why the KP information minister in his reaction to a bomb blast in Mardan that killed a number of people, including a parliamentarian, is reported to have said: “It’s not doomsday.”
Even though he retracted his statement, his denial does not make the issue less important.
Unfortunately, fear has pushed the entire civilian infrastructure into a state of confusion. If the opposition in KP blames the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf government for its lack of courage to pass an Assembly resolution against the killing of 10 foreign tourists, the statements of politicians at the centre see a conspiracy behind the attack.
There is political caution in not linking this drama to the logical perpetrators — the Taliban. The political and military solution lies in perpetuating the ritual, instead of ending it.
Some aspects of our national character are also at work here. Decades of exploitation have cultivated in us the seeds of self-denigration and self-pity. The standard comment on a road that is bumpy, a bureaucrat who is exploitative and load-shedding realities is ‘this is our country’.
Yet, there is the example of the Taliban in the same country whose performance is impeccable. In fact, it is hard to believe that somebody from this land can work so diligently to destabilise the country.
Let’s not get distracted. My focus is not on the argument that rhetoric (statements) and rituals (Assembly resolutions) can dent the militants’ strength. I want to elaborate on the absence of political resolve, which has left people complacent with the situation.
We should not ignore the fact that without political resolve, the official response through rhetoric and rituals can only lead to acceptance of terrorism. It is happening right now, where people feel the effects and see scenes of acts of terrorism, but they can’t find the way out.
Official confusion and lack of resolve is clearly translated in the public vision to understand the drama. So far people largely believe in what they are told by media, politicians and state officials.
They need to break away from this pre-determined path by avoiding an approach that understands terror only in a black and white form. They have to challenge the state apparatus for its role in not curbing terrorism, the way they need to hold accountable all those supportive of militancy.
Through provocative statements, the forces of status quo still interpret their jihadi vision while sitting in public ranks. They test the water from time to time by reinforcing their identity, ideas and ideology to ensure that they still are the guardians of the ruling militant discourse.
After a wave of violence in Quetta in which militants set alight the Quaid’s residence and killed several university students, the Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed reiterated his jihadi commitment.
While appealing to militant organisations to stop attacks inside Pakistan, he reiterated that ‘jihad’ would continue outside Pakistan. In plain words, he gave with one hand what he took away with the other.
Even in the midst of insane violence, provocative jihadi statements reflect that the archaic notion is still intact, which in the past had menaced the very continuity of the sway of the security institutions and their proxies.
Why then should we lament if one section of the proxies defies the strategic expectations of their mentors and falls back on us? The outcome is already reflected in whatever is happening all around.
Ten years of fighting against militancy should have helped us learn that terrorism is not going to end unless the state initiates steps to neutralise radical leaders. By serving as vital cogs in a predatory militant wheel, these leaders provide the youth with a reason to join militancy.
It does not need extra intelligence to understand that the jihadi enterprise of ‘bad’ Taliban is the reactionary outcome of the social process, which was adopted in the past to create the ‘good’ Taliban. The country has already paid a heavy price for this militant project, which was patronised by the state, exploited by politicians and recognised by society.
We have to understand that any discourse has other than purely intended consequences. Therefore, encouraging ‘jihad’ against others is not free from repercussions.
According to sociologist Wagner Pacific, “words build bridges to actions, and some people will choose to walk over those bridges”. We, therefore, cannot stop the ‘bad’ Taliban from using the same militant discourse to fight against us.
After all, militants of all stripes abhor democracy the way they detest peace and radically translate progress. With so much in common, what differentiation can we draw between the good or bad Taliban and ‘jihad’ here or there?
Pakistan already has reached a stage where its people cannot afford to let confusion rule their collective imagination. Change in the earlier jihadi worldview is vital for snatching the initiative from the forces of status quo, which set the agenda for the militant discourse.
In a situation which has become a matter of grave concern for peace-loving people all around the world, allowing the radical mindset to provide us with ideological and material initiatives means we all share a role in fomenting militancy.
The writer is a journalist and PhD student at the Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, US.

Comments are closed.

Comments (10)

Rao
July 8, 2013 11:52 pm
We need no to go to far to look for examples. Just Look at Sri Lanka and how it handled the LTTE. There was lot of hue and cry by human right activists and countries when LTTE was decimated but ultimately Sri Lanka as a country gained. Pakistan should ruthlessly act against all those who are posing danger to the social harmony and existence of Pakistan as a democratic country.
 
0
 
0
 
Naveed
July 8, 2013 11:23 pm
Very well written. The problem is the general public has a very superficial understanding of these realities. Through our media this ignorance is spread and any critical thinking is murdered. Pakistan needs to get out of the grip of Jehadi mind set.
 
0
 
0
 
G.A.
July 8, 2013 10:22 pm
There has been relentless bombings for years now and yet the biggest priority during elections was loadshedding. How much more internalized can it get? If we keep excusing it as 'God's Will' then soon there would be no one left.
 
0
 
0
 
Adil
July 8, 2013 10:01 pm
Only way is to detach religion from national politics and government, Banned the religious schools -madarasas --we can allow some 1 teaching subject under name of religions - including all religions and that too facts only ...not false -fake praise for our passionate religion only. allow to question our holy book and lets reform as rest of world already has....Its time to move on...
 
0
 
0
 
V. C. Bhutani
July 8, 2013 9:54 pm
@Hasan: I heartily agree with your observation. Someone in Pakistan has to have the courage to acknowledge and say that it was error for Pakistan to have supported terror all these years and that it will from now on use its power and resources to oppose terror both within and outside Pakistan. Will someone arise? V. C. Bhutani, Edinburgh, 8 Jul 2013, 1757 GMT
 
0
 
0
 
Maqbool Basha
July 8, 2013 7:18 pm
This best analysis of present turmoil in Pakistan by the author is appreciated and kudos to the Dawn which always stand by the truth.
 
0
 
0
 
Maqbool Basha
July 8, 2013 7:18 pm
This best analysis of present turmoil in Pakistan by the author is appreciated and kudos to the Dawn which always stand by the truth.
 
0
 
0
 
Prakash Rao
July 8, 2013 7:05 pm
(1) First starve Jehadi organisations of state sponsored funds. (2) Block all funding from other sources, like donations from within and outside Pakistan. (3) Crack down on their banks accounts, investments and immovable assets. (4) Go after them militarily like what Sri Lanka did to Tamil Tigers.
In short annihilate them and do not give them any quarter and then look forward to peaceful and prosperous sub continent.
 
0
 
0
 
gopal
July 8, 2013 3:00 pm
''After a wave of violence in Quetta in which militants set alight the Quaid’s residence and killed several university students, the Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed reiterated his jihadi commitment.
While appealing to militant organisations to stop attacks inside Pakistan, he reiterated that ‘jihad’ would continue outside Pakistan. In plain words, he gave with one hand what he took away with the other.''
The editor in today's edition blames the Indians not being friendly to Pakistan and wonders why. Forget friendship, keep on watching hindi films.
 
25
 
4
 
Hasan
July 8, 2013 2:38 pm
{The country has already paid a heavy price for this militant project, which was patronised by the state, exploited by politicians and recognised by society.
We have to understand that any discourse has other than purely intended consequences. Therefore, encouraging ‘jihad’ against others is not free from repercussions}
That is the gist of the article. The security establishment must be forced to admit their previous role in fostering non state actors. Then they must be forced to declare that they do not envision or plan for any present or future role for fulfillment of strategic objectives and irrespective of past services they now consider them Enemy of State. Once that is done, only then we can hope for dealing with religious militants with single minded focus and determination. How can you possibility eliminate these religiously motivated barbarians (with associated collateral damage and temporary loss of civil liberties), if the establishment, political parties, security agencies and media do not declare war against them with a single voice.
 
31
 
2
 

Madan lal dhingra.

Madan Lal Dhingra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Madan Lal Dhingra
Dhingra.jpg
Madan Lal Dhingra
Born 18 September 1883 as per his father's record
Punjab, British India
Died 17 August 1909
Pentonville Prison, London, Britain
Organization India House
Political movement Indian Independence movement
Madan Lal Dhingra (1883–1909) was an Indian revolutionary freedom fighter.[1] While studying in England, he assassinated Sir William Hutt Curzon Wyllie,[2] a British official, hailed as one of the first acts of revolution in the Indian independence movement in the 20th century.

Early life

Dhingra Studied at Amritsar in MB Intermediate college up-till 1900 and then went to Lahore to study in Government College Lahore. In 1904 he led a student protest against the principal's order to have college blazer made out of imported cloth from England. He was thrown out of college. At that time he was Student of Masters of Art. He was under the influence of Nationalist Movement of Swadeshi. He deeply studied the literature concerning the cause of Indian Poverty and famines, as solution to these problems Swaraj and Swadeshi became key issues. Then Dhingra had to work as a clerk, at Kalka in A Tonga Service being run for British family's transport to Shimla Tonga (horse-driven cart) puller, and a factory labourer. Dhingra attempted to organise a union there, but was sacked. He worked for sometime in Mumbai, before acting upon the advice of his elder brother Dr Bihari Lal and going to England for higher studies. In 1906, Madan Lal departed for England to enroll at University College, London, to study Mechanical Engineering. He was supported by his elder brother and some nationalist activists in England.

With Savarkar

Dhingra came into contact with noted Indian independence & political activists Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and Shyamji Krishna Varma, who were impressed by Dhingra's perseverance and intense patriotism which turned his focus to the freedom struggle. Savarkar believed in revolution by any means, and supposedly gave Dhingra arms training, apart from membership in a secretive society, the Abhinav Bharat Mandal. He was also a member of India House, the base for Indian student political activity.
During this period, Savarkar, Dhingra and other student activists were enraged by the execution of freedom fighters such as Khudiram Bose, Kanhai Lal Dutt, Satinder Pal and Pandit Kanshi Ram in India. It is this event that is attributed by many historians as having led Savarkar and Dhingra to exact direct revenge upon the British.

Curzon Wyllie's assassination

On the evening of 1 July 1909, a large number of Indians and Englishmen had gathered to attend the annual day function of the Indian National Association. When Sir Curzon Wyllie, political aide-de-camp to the Secretary of State for India, entered the hall with his wife, Dhingra fired five shots right at his face, four of which hit their target. Cowasji Lalkaka, a Parsee doctor who tried to save Sir Curzon, died of Madan Lal's sixth and seventh bullets, which the latter fired because Lalkaka caught hold of him.
later he stood without regretting for his action and was caught by the police.

Trial

Dhingra was tried in the Old Bailey on 23 July. He stated that he did not regret killing of Curzon Wyllie as he had played his part in order to set India free from the inhuman British rule. Also, that he had not intended to kill Cowasji Lalkaka. He was sentenced to death. After the judge announced his verdict, Dhingra's said to have stated, "I am proud to have the honour of laying down my life for my country. But remember we shall have our time in the days to come". Dhingra was hanged on 17 August 1909. Madan Lal also made a further statement which is rarely mentioned. According to John Laurence in A History of Capital Punishment on page 138, H. A. Pierrepoint, his executioner, gave him an unnecessarily and inhumanely cruel long drop of eight feet, three inches at the execution. The reasons behind this remain unknown and can only be speculated at.

Statement of Dhingra in the court

Dhigra had given the following statement[3] before the court:
"I do not want to say anything in defence of myself, but simply to prove the justice of my deed. As for myself, no English law court has got any authority to arrest and detain me in prison, or pass sentence of death on me. That is the reason I did not have any counsel to defend me." "And I maintain that if it is patriotic in an Englishman to fight against the Germans if they were to occupy this country, it is much more justifiable and patriotic in my case to fight against the English. I hold the English people responsible for the murder of 80 millions of Indian people in the last fifty years, and they are also responsible for taking away ₤100, 000, 000 every year from India to this country. I also hold them responsible for the hanging and deportation of my patriotic countrymen, who did just the same as the English people here are advising their countrymen to do. And the Englishman who goes out to India and gets, say, ₤100 a month, that simply means that he passes a sentence of death on a thousand of my poor countrymen, because these thousand people could easily live on this ₤100, which the Englishman spends mostly on his frivolities and pleasures. Just as the Germans have no right to occupy this country, so the English people have no right to occupy India, and it is perfectly justifiable on our part to kill the Englishman who is polluting our sacred land. I am surprised at the terrible hypocrisy, the farce, and the mockery of the English people. They pose as the champions of oppressed humanity—the peoples of the Congo and the people of Russia—when there is terrible oppression and horrible atrocities committed in India; for example, the killing of two millions of people every year and the outraging of our women. In case this country is occupied by Germans, and the Englishman, not bearing to see the Germans walking with the insolence of conquerors in the streets of London, goes and kills one or two Germans, and that Englishman is held as a patriot by the people of this country, then certainly I am prepared to work for the emancipation of my Motherland. Whatever else I have to say is in the paper before the Court I make this statement, not because I wish to plead for mercy or anything of that kind. I wish that English people should sentence me to death, for in that case the vengeance of my countrymen will be all the more keen. I put forward this statement to show the justice of my cause to the outside world, and especially to our sympathisers in America and Germany."
"I have told you over and over again that I do not acknowledge the authority of the Court, You can do whatever you like. I do not mind at all. You can pass sentence of death on me. I do not care. You white people are all-powerful now, but, remember, it shall have our turn in the time to come, when we can do what we like."

Verdict of court

While he was being removed from the court, he said to the Chief Justice- "Thank you, my Lord. I don't care. I am proud to have the honour of laying down my life for the cause of my motherland." [4]
In response, the Chief Justice said: I have been instructed to watch this case on behalf of the family of the man who has just been convicted. I here been instructed to say that they view this crime with the greatest, abhorrence, and they wish to repudiate in the most emphatic way the slightest sympathy with the views or motives which have led up to the crime. Further, I am instructed to say, on behalf of the father of this man and the rest of his family, that there are no more loyal subjects of the Empire than they are.
And then Dhingra replied: The Lord Chief Justice. Mr. Tindal Atkinson, although the course may have seemed somewhat unusual, having regard to the nature of this crime and the wicked attempt at justification in some quarters, I am very glad you should have said that on behalf of the members of the family.

Reactions

While most of the British press, and some liberal and moderate Indians condemned Dhingra's act, it nevertheless excited the Indian community in England and back in India.[citation needed] Guy Aldred, the printer of The Indian Sociologist was sentenced to twelve months hard labour. The August issue of The Indian Sociologist had carried a story sympathetic to Dhingra. Dhingra's actions also inspired some in the Irish, who were fighting their own struggle at the time.
Some modern historians claim that the trial was grossly unfair and biased. Dhingra was not given a defence counsel (though this was at his own request, in support of his contention that no British court had authority to try him), and the entire process was completed in a single day. Some legal experts claim that it was not the business of the court at the time to decide the time and location of execution.
Gandhiji condemned Dhingra's actions. To quote,
It is being said in defence of Sir Curzon Wyllie’s assassination that...just as the British would kill every German if Germany invaded Britain, so too it is the right of any Indian to kill any Englishman.... The analogy...is fallacious. If the Germans were to invade Britain, the British would kill only the invaders. They would not kill every German whom they met.... They would not kill an unsuspecting German, or Germans who are guests. Even should the British leave in consequence of such murderous acts, who will rule in their place? Is the Englishman bad because he is an Englishman? Is it that everyone with an Indian skin is good? If that is so, there should be [no] angry protest against oppression by Indian princes. India can gain nothing from the rule of murderers—no matter whether they are black or white. Under such a rule, India will be utterly ruined and laid waste.[5]
After Dhingra went to the gallows, the Times, London wrote an editorial (24 July 1909) titled "Conviction of Dhingra". The editorial said, "The nonchalance displayed by the assassin was of a character, which is happily unusual in such trials in this country. He asked no questions. He maintained a defiance of studied indifference. He walked smiling from the Dock."

Grudging admiration from the British Cabinet

Dhingra's martyrdom evoked the respect of some members of the Cabinet. This was disclosed later to Blunt by Winston Churchill. Blunt writes (My Diaries, Vol.2, p. 288, entry for 3 October 1909), "Again we sat up late. Among the many memorable things Churchill said was this. Talking of Dhingra, he said that there has been much discussion in the Cabinet about him. Lloyd George had expressed to him his highest admiration of Dhingra's attitude as a patriot, in which he shared…He will be remembered two thousand years hence, as we remember Regulus and Caractacus and Plutarch's heroes and Churchill quoted with admiration Dhingra's last words, as the finest, ever made in the name of patriotism…"

Last words from gallows

The following are said to be Madan Lal Dhingra's last words, just before he died at the gallows:
"I believe that a nation held down by foreign bayonets is in a perpetual state of war. Since open battle is rendered impossible to a disarmed race, I attacked by surprise. Since guns were denied to me I drew forth my pistol and fired. Poor in wealth and intellect, a son like myself has nothing else to offer to the mother but his own blood. And so I have sacrificed the same on her altar. The only lesson required in India at present is to learn how to die, and the only way to teach it is by dying ourselves. My only prayer to God is that I may be re-born of the same mother and I may re-die in the same sacred cause till the cause is successful. Vande Mataram!"

Remembrance

At the time, Dhingra's body was denied Hindu rites and was buried by British authorities. His family having disowned him, the authorities refused to turn over the body to Savarkar. Dhingra's body was accidentally found while authorities searched for the remains of Shaheed Udham Singh, and re-patriated to India on 13 December 1976. His remains are kept in one of the main squares of Akola city in Maharashtra, India, which has been named after him. Dhingra is widely remembered in India today, and was an inspiration at the time to revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh and Chandrasekhar Azad, and there is a demand to convert his ancestral home into a museum.[6]