A political victory or a lost Cause?

The result of Hisar by-election is being read in many ways by the political pundits. The event kick-started the anti-Congress campaign of Team Anna. It seems as if Team Anna has taken it to itself to be the panacea of all ills in Indian political landscape. Its first detour from the basic objective of getting the Jan Lokpal Bill legislated came when it called for electoral reforms. It included introduction of negative voting and the recalling of sitting legislators. In this context, campaigning in Hisar should have been about making the voters aware about the credentials of all the candidates. The choice of candidate should have been left to the ‘informed’ citizenry.

Fight against corruption should not be limited to the political party in power at the centre. It is endemic to the whole political system. It is questionable if Team Anna’s intervention had any role to play in the defeat of Congress candidate and the forfeiture of his security deposit. However, the way Team Anna is meddling in the actual political process puts a big question mark on its often claimed apolitical overtures. With the eyes now set on the UP assembly elections, it may do further disservice to its own cause. Anna, himself has been vacillating between the stands of giving Congress a breather till the Winter session of Parliament on one hand and personally entering the anti-Congress campaign in UP on the other. Focus needs to be shifted back to the Jan Lokpal Bill. The support that Team Anna garnered was for this basic agenda. It cannot keep stacking newer agendas on it, hoping that all its wishes will be fulfilled within the ambit of this single movement.

It is true that Congress has been making many political manoeuvrings inside and outside the Parliament to stall the passing of a meaningful Jan Lokpal Bill. However, Anna should continue using the civil society route to bring to light such practices. He might have testified it many a times that he is having no political ambitions. But this might not be true for his foot-soldiers. It is a known fact that one of the Team Anna members resigned from the police services on being bypassed for a coveted office. So to claim that the people behind this movement are above such power motives will be naïve. In this context, taking the fight to political arena will only make things more complex. Moreover, the movement may also lose a considerable chunk of sympathisers if it gets reduced to anti-Congress from anti-Corruption.

The movement is already being negatively affected by the incoherent statements coming out of the Team Anna camp. While Anna and other members have distanced themselves from Prashant Bhushan’s statement on Kashmir, Santosh Hegde has openly shown his displeasure over Kejriwal’s move to meddle in the Hisar by-elections. As Anna sits on a week-long vow of silence for ‘peace of soul’, two prominent activists P V Rajagopal and 'Waterman' Rajinder Singh quit its core committee over the latter issue of ‘political turn’ of movement. Democracy within the movement should definitely be appreciated. All the members should have a right to voice their personal opinions on different issues. However, for the sake of Jan Lokpal Bill, some coherence is needed. Any such incoherent statements and infighting give the detractors an opportunity to make a mountain out of a molehill. Therefore, it is important for Anna to bring together his foot-soldiers and unify the camp. This is a prerequisite to sustain the battle against the indifference of the political honchos towards an effective Jan Lokpal Bill.

P.S. This is the first draft of my editorial for our Lab Journal in ACJ to be published this Saturday

Image Courtesy:

Designed by me

My third published article

Its 4 in 4 months. Of course, as I mentioned in the previous post, the actual third article I wrote for Tribune was not published in its totality but only some of the sound-bytes I had gathered were used. So here is my third published Op-Ed in which I have compiled the whole page including my own write up, the photograph (of my students in Bulls Eye), the counter argument (by my colleague) and the opinions of the students.

You can read the article here - Coaching Industry - A Parallel Education System

However, the article got pruned down a bit due to space constraints and the end result seems a bit incoherent. Somehow, I feel this particular line from the original draft should not have been removed by the editors -

Many academic trainers in this industry have emerged as the role models for the students and work hard under very stressful schedules in helping them to crack the tough examinations.

Do give your feedback and suggest what other issues I can take up for my future Op-Eds.

Here are links to my previous articles -

• GenNext Can Help Banish Corruption (The Tribune; Apr 9, 2011)
• The Myth and Reality About The Global Indian (The Tribune; May 17, 2011)
• The 'World-Class' Debate (The Tribune; Jun 1, 2011 and The Viewspaper; Jun 26, 2011)

Image Courtesy:
My dad and his cell phone :)

The 'World Class' Debate

Here I am reproducing an article originally written for The Tribune but finally published on a web portal The Viewspaper sometime back.

The Union Minister for Environment, Jairam Ramesh has the knack to remain in the news with his proactive but sometimes provocative take on environmental issues. However, this time he chose an unrelated issue to make the headlines once again. According to this IIT Bombay graduate; the most coveted and sought after seats of learning in India, i.e., IIT’s and IIM’s, lack the world-class faculty as well as research facilities. He believes that these institutes have been able to survive due to the world class students who take admission into these institutions after a grueling selection process.

Before one starts taking sides, it’s important to define the term ‘World Class.’ Going by its dictionary meaning it is to rank amongst the foremost in the world and to meet the international standards of excellence. If one adopts this definition, then Jairam Ramesh is not that wide of the mark as it’s true that in most of the world rankings, these institutes fail to reach the top-notch positions.

However, is it justified to use such objective parameters given the grand divide between the West and the East? To create a world-class research institute, the foremost requirement is a world-class policy formulation and world-class funding for the same. With the meager amount of resources made available to these institutes, how can one expect them to compete with the best in the business?

To add to this, the fact is that these institutes were incepted with the objective of developing a skilled workforce to support the social and economic development of India. Research and development was started much later. Hence, to compare the amount of research done by these institutes with that done by the MIT’s or Harvard’s is again unfair.

Rajesh Behera, an IIT Bombay alumnus, unequivocally attributes his success to the guidance he got from his teachers. According to him, it was their experience and exposure to the international environment that enabled them to find the true potential of the students like him and instilled in them confidence to become world-class.

Taking the example of the Civil Engineering Department of his alma mater, he shows how all the major infrastructural development taking place around Mumbai, in one form or the other, has inputs from the IIT Bombay faculty, from consultancy to actual implementation.

One cannot deny that the faculty of these institutes have to work in a much harder environment than their counterparts in the West. Take the example of the student to teacher ratio which according to an internal study of Union Human Resource Development Ministry is as high as 15:1 in the leading institutes of India as compared to around 5:1 to 7:1 in the leading technical institutes of US, West Europe and even Singapore or Hong Kong for that matter. Moreover, funding at both the project level and at the level of personal compensation to teachers make the situation graver.

The whole issue gathers more importance in the context of the new IIMs and IITs that have opened recently to cater to the ever growing demand for the world-class education in India, a prerequisite to tap India’s demographic dividend.

Swati Gupta, an IIM Indore alumna feels that there is a dearth of world-class faculty in the new IIMs. However, she considers Jairam Ramesh’s statement pretty harsh and feels it’s naive to tag all the professors under the same umbrella.

To quote her, “There is no doubt that there is a visible gap in the style and understanding of the newer faculty as compared to the old professors. While the latter make sure that there is a conceptual clarity before teaching the contextual application, the former at times tend to focus too much on the case method.”

This perspective shatters the belief that the older professors are too rigid and averse to adopt newer world-class methodologies as there is still substance left in the older teaching methodologies.

Overall, it’s important to take into consideration all these contingencies before coming to any concrete conclusion. However, one cannot deny the fact that there is a lot that needs to be done to make the Indian premiere institutes, globally more competitive and this statement of Jairam Ramesh might act as a stimulant for the same.

Click here to see the article in The Viewspaper.

The following sound-bytes taken from IIT Mumbai faculty members, however, were published in Tribune and attributed to me.

Two senior members of IIT, Bombay, on the condition that their names would be withheld had this to say:

Make it attractive for the best

The profession of teaching and research is not an attractive profession for most young students due to financial reasons. The top talent is not opting for a career in teaching and research. There are perhaps only 25 per cent of faculty members who do research that can be termed “of international standards”. The IITs are far ahead of any university in India in terms of research quantity and quality. The socio-economic conditions must improve in order to create world class universities and institutes. World class institutes did not become world class in 50 years. The top universities in the world have a long tradition and attract talent from all over the world.

The Government must provide autonomy to institutions of higher learning. The UGC and AICTE have failed in managing higher education. There is a lot of corruption in these bodies. Every minister in charge of the Ministry of Human Resource Development tries to change something in IITs to get public attention. They will serve the country better by improving schools and colleges which are in a pathetic condition. Once these improve, there will be better people going in for higher education.

The Chinese invest heavily in higher education and elementary education. They offered 50 per cent of the American salary to the Chinese who were teaching in developed countries. As a result, hundreds of Chinese came back and enriched their universities. There are talented Indians abroad, the MHRD should devise a strategy to encourage good researchers to come back. In developed countries, teaching is a respected profession but in India it is not. One may ask any class in a school and verify this. Hardly any one wants to go in for teaching and research. Creation of world class institutions requires full autonomy, a good pay and a large proportion of people going in for higher education. Until this happens, we cannot have world class institutes.

No roadmap for higher education in the country

In my opinion, the decision to open new IITs without having an adequate number of skilled scientific/technology manpower in the country was, by itself, a wrong decision. It was only motivated by considerations that were non-professional and had to do more with realpolitik in the then ruling class that took the decision. It is slightly irresponsible on the part of the minister to make such statements, instead of helping out the IITs that are already facing far too many difficulties due to the government’s decision of opening IITs in a thoughtless manner.

The IITs have a better faculty than most state universities but that is hardly any consolation given that they have larger funding and better facilities. The entire thing boils down to one moot question.: It is not this government (to which Jairam Ramesh belongs) or that government, but no government in India has the desire to work out a well thought out roadmap for higher education in the country. The late Rajiv Gandhi made an attempt to start something in that direction but it was all lost later. (As told to Vipul Grover)

Click here to see the article in The Tribune

Image Courtesy:

Star News

My first published article

Hello friends, I mean all those who are still lingering around this nearly dead blog :)

I just came over to share with you my article which got published today in the Op-Ed section of The Tribune, Chandigarh.

Here is the link to the online edition - http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20110409/edit.htm#6 - where you can read it without straining your eyes on this low-resolution image.

Image Courtesy 

WTF.. It's my own article ;)

Let the Gay be Gay!

Saurav	How shameful!
Gaurav	Why? What happened?
Saurav	These people. All these homos.
Gaurav	Homos? You mean LGBT right?
Saurav	What LG.. TD..?
Gaurav	I said LGBT, i.e. lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders.
Saurav	Yeah, whatever. Just see them hugging each other, making merry after the Delhi High Court verdict. How could H.C. legalise their preposterous acts.
Gaurav	Preposterous acts? Why preposterous?
Saurav	Because they are against the order of the nature, against the Will of God.
Gaurav	Well, I believe in that case we are acting preposterously 24X7.
Saurav	What do you mean?
Gaurav	God sent us on this earth naked, you see. Don't you think He must be willing to see us in that condition only. By wearing clothes, my dear friend, aren't you going against his Will?
Saurav	What rubbish. Don't draw stupid comparisons for God's sake.
Gaurav	Ohkey! For God's sake let it be. But how do you know what was the God's Will?
Saurav	Well, he made a man and he made a woman. He gave them the power to recreate. Hence, in a sense, he delegated them, 'not' him, 'not' her, he delegated 'them', his power to create a new life. That was the God's Will. And that shall remain his Will.
Gaurav	Well said Dude. I agree. Even if I am not clear with this whole concept of God and his Will, I agree that life can be generated by only a Man and a Woman in unison. And that is a beautiful power the two possess, meaningless without the other.
Saurav	So you see, these gays and lesbians are making a mockery of this power they possess. They are abdicating from their duty.
Gaurav	Well, they can adopt if they want. That will solve a big social problem. Give a family and a home to so many orphans.
Saurav	Yeah, sure. And these poor orphans will be made fun of when they grow up, right. For they won't have a mother and a father but just one of them but in a pair.
Gaurav	Who'll make fun? At least I won't. The ignorant might. That's why there is need to remove this ignorance and bring the LGBT's from the periphery to the core of society.
Saurav	Which core? You know, actually there are very few such queer people. Its all this media hype and movies that make normal people try the preposterous stuff.
Gaurav	C'mon man. Now don't pull media into this. The reality is that such people exist in our society but we are not ready to accept it. There are so many who are leading the life of heterosexual out of the fear of this very society.
Saurav	So it is good, right. Everyone should be afraid of society.
Gaurav	Where does this fear go, my dear friend when you watch that porno stuff on your lappie or talk dirty to girls on your cell?
Saurav	That is just harmless stuff man. And that is my personal life. Again you are drawing irrelevant comparisons.
Gaurav	Personal Life? These stupid conventions of society are destroying the personal lives of so many LGBT's, you know. They have disastrous married life, putting up with a falsehood everyday of their life. Their partner can not reveal it out of associated taboo and both keep on carrying their daily chores without any zeal, without any love.
Saurav	Whatever!
Gaurav	No wait. And harmless you said. What harm have they done to you or society.
Saurav	AIDS, my dear friend AIDS. Do you know, how high is the prevalence of AIDS amongst gays? They carry out their preposterous acts using no protection whatsoever. To top it, they maintain multiple relationships unlike heterosexuals. All this breed AIDS and that is the biggest possible harm they are doing, you see.
Gaurav	Ohkey! I agree. That is a valid point you have made though only in parts. But remember, there is need to educate them about this harm. After all, the biggest harm is theirs, don't you think.
Saurav	Yeah, that's what i said. Educate them, tell them to lead a normal, healthy life of a heterosexual.
Gaurav	No, you are taking me wrong. I mean, educate them about AIDS and ways to protect themselves against it. It will be possible if medical professionals and relevant organisations clearly know what and where their target group is. And they will know it only if, homosexuality is legalised.
Saurav	What crap. All of them are so well organised carrying out stupid rallies every other day. How can you say it is difficult to target them.
Gaurav	I agree. And I believe, people must be making efforts through such mediums but still there are many who do not reveal their sexual orientation. Such cases must be far higher than those who openly lead the life of LGBT.
Saurav	But legalising won't remove the social taboo. The covert one's will continue to lead their lives as they do right now.
Gaurav	Another valid point. See, legalising will have two-pronged effect. Firstly, it will stop the harassment of LGBT's at the hands of unscrupulous police officials. The Section 377 of IPC is against an unnatural sexual act. Unnatural in the sense we discussed earlier. However, all this is done behind doors. So how can a homosexual be arrested when there is no evidence or witness to this act, unless there is a valid complaint.
Saurav	So, you mean the police officials who take undue advantage of the knowledge of someone's queerness, won't be able to harass them for bribe.
Gaurav	Or maybe sexual gratification. Don't you have gays in the police department!
Saurav	Well, I think all of them are!
Gaurav	Hey, do not use the word 'gay' as an abuse.
Saurav	Whatever! Anyways, what is the second point.
Gaurav	That's coming to the point which you raised about law being ineffective in presence of social pressure. At least a start has to be made somewhere. Yesterday's editorial of 'Hindu' carried a beautiful thought. It said that in non-negotiable social issues, government must lead the public opinion and not tail its least enlightened strands or go for the lowest common denominator.
Saurav	Nice thought indeed.
Gaurav	Yup. So the verdict of H.C. is a welcome move on the part of judicial wing of the government. Now it is the time for the legislative and executive wings to act. I believe former Union Health Minister Ramadoss took a great initiative by bringing this issue into limelight.
Saurav	He was just a masquerading populist politician. Wasn't he? Went overboard with that ban on smoking issue of his, reducing the Health Ministry to a one-point agenda.
Gaurav	Yeah, I agree to some extent. But still, by initiating the discussion on Gay rights, he did what Bill Clinton did in USA back in 1992. Gay rights was a very important platform on which he fought and won that election against Bush Senior.
Saurav	But did he do anything after that?
Gaurav	No, just put it under the carpets after winning. Our government should not do so at this opportune moment. There is a need to welcome the High Court's verdict and as soon as possible amend or if need be repeal the Section as recommended by the judge. For time being, it shall be read down, i.e. will be applicable for cases like paedophilia or rape of a homosexual but will be ignored for cases of consensual intercourse between an adult couple of same sex.
Saurav	What other option do the Government have?
Gaurav	Nothing. So better do it. The H.C. has regarded the gay rights as falling under the Article 21 of Indian Constitution that guarantees that every citizen has equal protection of life and personal liberty. Moreover, H.C. finds Section 377 violative of Articles 14 and 15 which gaurantee equality before law and prohibits the State from discriminating against anyone on the grounds of sex.
Saurav	Article 21? Wow, that has been the most potent tool in the hands of judiciary, right? They have added so many provisions under it like those relating to ecology, education, police brutality, legal aid and so on.
Gaurav	Right. And even if the case goes further to Supreme Court, I have no doubt, the acme of justice in India will uphold the H.C.'s verdict. Moreover, this initiative has to be taken to its logical conclusion.
Saurav	And what is it?
Gaurav	Its legalising the same sex marriages.
Saurav	Wow! What's left anyway.
Gaurav	My friend, when the Constitution can guarantee everyone the right to choose one's religion, then why not, one's sexual orientation too? Everyone fail to understand this particular point, calling LGBT's by weird names, calling them psychologically imbalanced and what not. Such, so called believers of God don't realise that God has created this world with abundant marvels, human beings being one of them. We see perfection as the way we want to perceive it. Just because a large majority happen to be heterosexual does not make the others queer. They are normal human beings, not imperfect but just with a different taste.
Saurav	Yup, even I happened to be one such 'so called' God believer just few moments ago.
Gaurav	Its great, you finally understood. Having said all this, I must confess that even I sometimes wonder what a gay sees in another guy when such a beautiful creation of God is there to marvel.
Saurav	Right, the hot chicks!
Gaurav	Hmmm.. the girls, i mean. But that is their choice and i respect it.
Saurav	For us only a girl will do.
Gaurav	Not 'a' girl, but two girls my dear friend.
Saurav	Right. Lets get ready for the geri. Time to find those two!

Update (July 3, 2009)

Also read my discussion with Dhiman in the Comments section where he has raised some intelligent concerns. This discussion takes the Saurav-Gaurav discussion towards its logical conclusion.

Image Courtesy:

http://tarmojuristo.files.wordpress.com

Sarko vs. Burqa

An ELian view

I was in no mood of writing a post right now. However, I am writing it as a response to one of my friend's post where he has supported French President Nicholas Sarkozy's stand on banning of burqas for Muslim women within the 'territory of the French Republic'.
First of all, I'll give my personal view which is in conformity to Sarkozy's view. To make my job easier, I'll just borrow his words.
"[W]e cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity... The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement — I want to say it solemnly..."
Well said Monsieur Sarkozy as long as this is your personal view. However, as the President Sarkozy, you should have shown some more restraint and responsibility.
I firmly believe that any kind of social reforms should be endogenetic in nature, i.e. from within the community. Only then can it be acceptable to the community at large. Exogenetic reforms, i.e. those enforced from outside can only lead to resistance.
Burqa or no burqa should be decided by the Muslim world. As I already said that personally, I do not favour it. However being a non-muslim, I can only criticise it and that too in a polite manner only.
What should Sarkozy do?
However, being the incumbent of the position of ultimate responsibility in France, Sarkozy has no right to air his criticisms in a high profile speech (He was speaking to the lawmakers in the historic chateau at Versailles, somewhat analogous to Indian President's address to the Parliament). At best, he can get together the Muslim community leaders and discuss the issue with them. If he thinks he has the ability to convince his fellow Frenchmen on the other side of the faith, he should talk directly to them; not enforcing any reforms from above but generating such conditions that those from within strive for necessary reforms.
This can be done by nurturing the moderates within the community and supporting them to come forward against any ills within the practices and beliefs of their community. However, utmost care should be given to the fact that such an initiative does not turn into yet another propaganda which further fuels the 'clash of the civilizations', hence having both domestic and international ramifications. Moreover, while doing so, the orthodox sections should not be totally ignored but kept in a good humour. However, if they show 'illegal' resistance against the initiatives of their moderate brethren, then legal machinery of the sate can be used against them.
Let us talk of India.
Who abolished Sati in India?
Officially it was William Bentick, the first Governer General of India, in 1829.
Does that mean this reform was exogenetic?
No, it was not. British were never interested in alienating Indians by disturbing their social structure. Their interest was only economic in nature.
It was Raja Ram Mohan Roy who forced the British Raj to bring these reforms by his continued efforts since 1812.
Same goes for all other social reforms (maybe with an exception or two) that took place in British India. Britishers only gave the legal seal to issues which were brought forward by the Indian Reformers.
I am not against reforms. However, being a self-proclaimed Empathic Libertarian, I am against their 'unempathic' implementation.
Hence, when a person like Sarkozy questions the Islamic practices in public, he alienates his Muslim citizens, even some moderate ones. Being the President of the Republic which gave the world (and India) the ideals of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, he should be careful in interpreting these ideals in the right context.

Image Courtesy
http://www.tibettoons.com/ and http://heyhijabi.com/ (edited)

Going back to the masses

A new democratic experiment in U.K.

It was Mahatma Gandhi who realized the importance of masses and engaged them in the fight against discrimination in South Africa. On returning to his homeland, he successfully replicated the model on a much larger scale, which played a decisive role in helping India attain freedom. However, once the job was done, the masses chose to disengage with the politics and allow their representatives do the dirty work. It was quarter a century hence, when Jayaprakash Narayan decided to bring the masses back to the center stage from the wilderness. JP must have succeeded for that made those in power act irresponsibly and plunge the country into the darkest years of Indian democracy, the Emergency.
The politicians still need the masses to get into power but they have learnt all the tricks to deceive and exploit them for their own good. So while the poorer lot still oblige these men by attending their rallies and turning up at the polling booths to vote for them, the not-so-poorer lot prefer voting for reality shows and television surveys, rather than at the general, assembly or local elections.
A new model of engaging the masses has been developed in U.S. by Barack Obama. He made the best use of information technology and communication to form a decisive democratic force of masses which heralded him to the post of the most powerful man in the world.
Taking a cue from all this, a new democratic exercise is being experimented in U.K. I read about it just now in an article by Hasan Suroor in 'The Hindu' and I could not wait but share it with others. If you remember the recent 'Lead India' Campaign of Times of India, then this new experiment in U.K. is just taking such an initiative to its logical conclusion.
A campaign has been launched in the name of 'The Jury Team', which according to its website is a political movement created with the goal of making politics more accessible, politicians more accountable and political institutions more transparent. According to their mission statement, this campaign is against the current political parties that have turned the Government into an Oligarchic institution, a small and increasingly distant group.
This is how the campaign operates- Anyone interested in a political career can put themselves forward through The Jury Team’s website but they must agree not to support any policies that discriminate on the basis of race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, disability or religious or other belief. The general public will be able to vote for their favourite candidate by texting the code of that person to a “unique” text number. The selected candidates will then be fielded as Independents. Moreover, these candidates once elected, would be free of the party whip, i.e., they won't be obliged to follow the dictats of their party but will be independent to vote for the proposals for legislations as they wish to.
This campaign has been launched and funded by millionaire Sir Paul Judge, however as mentioned on their website, they rely on donations to keep running.
The question is for how long can such a non-party party, a term devised by Sir Paul, can remain a non-party. Isn't there every chance of egoism of such people coming in way of high principles set initially. On the first thought, such an experiment will have a chance to survive only if such an individual distants himself from it with time, to allow the masses take it forward, but on a second thought, wont this campaign just wither away if it doesnt get the support and direction of a strong personality.
Moreover, in a country like India which finds itself divided on the lines of religion, caste, region and ethnicity, where the so-called National Parties are being dictated terms by the regional ones, where still the majority doesnt vote for an ideology but for a bottle of country made liquor, where still only a small minority find access to modern technologies, can such an experiment even survive one election. These are the questions that spring once the reality dawns. However, they can be answered only when the experiment has been conducted.
As for the initiative, the best source seems the Indian media. They were so active post-Mumbai carnage, driving their individual campaigns against politicians. It will be interesting to see if they have it in them to do what they preach. As for the initial funding, the media houses can oblige their 'high class' chatterati to donate some bucks, who love to come on the discussion shows and spank the Indian politics and the politicians and then share a glass of wine with the same politicos at their evening parties.
Recently, in India new initiatives are being taken as we see a number of unconventional political parties springing up. There was a technocrats based Lok Paritran and recently an IIM-IIT graduates based political outfit. In a Punjab district recently, the members of the Market Association decided to field their own candidates as they felt, the political parties always forget them after taking donations for their election campaigns. However, rather than coming together to obtain a critical mass, such parties prefer to do it alone. Maybe, with time they realize the importance of united action.
India which has adopted the parliamentary democracy and many of its conventions from U.K. might also give a try to this latest experiment though its still to be seen if it makes any mark in the country of its origin itself being in nascent stages there too.

Image Courtesy
http://www.trekearth.com by Ramesh Lalwani (edited)

My 'de-reservations' about the Reservation

An ELian view

The memories of anti-reservation protests haven't faded yet. We might have stopped talking about it as there are other issues to discuss about but to think the matter is over is too naive a view. Say, one fine morning Government decides to introduce reservation for religious minorities or any other disadvantaged group for that matter, the agenda will be back in limelight. There will be angry protests by the sections being negatively affected by this policy of positive discrimination, then there will be protests against the aforesaid protests by the sections being covered in the ambit of the new policy and there will be every possibility of these antagonist protests taking an ugly turn.

Meanwhile the media will have a field day. Everyone from a rickshaw-wala to a business tycoon will be seen pouring out their staggered and half baked views on the tube. Some looser might decide to light himself on fire to show his devotion to either cause. The scenes will be bad, the time will be bad. However, as it always happens, the present will become the past and the past is best forgotten to prepare for the future. We tend to make this mistake believing that future will bring something new, never realizing that clues of the future lie in the past itself.

I remember taking part in an anti-reservation rally back in 2006. How angry I was, how cheated I felt and now I realise how narrow my view was. It's not that now I am in perfect consonance with this variant of Affirmative Action but certainly now, I am able to see it as an essential tactic in the larger national strategy of achieving redistributive justice. However, the problem arises when it becomes 'an end in itself'. The policy makers at the high echelons forget the other tactical policy initiatives and hence everything gets eclipsed by the reservation policy.

Talking of reservation in educational institutes, it may be a strong pillar of affirmative action but foundation of such an affirmative action lies in universal reach of effective primary and secondary education. However, as the latter reaps fruits only in a long term, its sincere implementation gets neglected by the political class for whom quick returns matter the most to maintain their parliamentary strength. What can be a better option for them than the reservation policy! Hence, 'displacement of goals' takes place as reservation policy becomes a means to satisfy a different end altogether, i.e., amassing votes at the elections. Vote-bank politics leads to innovations to include more and more sections of the society within the reservation ambit rather than clipping down the list.

If we look into our caste history, we witness a phenomena known as Sanskritization wherein the so called lower castes strive to move up the caste hierarchy by adopting 'cleaner' habits, to achieve a higher status in the society. However, in present scenario, we see people fighting to move down the hierarchy, the recent Gujjar agitation its apt example. So some sort of 'de-sanskritization' is taking place in contemporary Hindu society. The reason behind it is not far-fetched. With lower status comes better reservation provisions. Better the provisions, better the chance to rise the class and political hierarchy. The money and power provide a parallel means to attain a higher status in the society. Hence, diminution in the import of the caste based hierarchy as a means to attain the same takes place.

With this background to ponder over, I'll now be addressing those anti-reservationists who discard this policy in totality, i.e., in both letter and spirit. I must say they are making a grave mistake. By doing so, they are alienating the marginal sections of the society. The need is to accept the reservation policy in principle but oppose its misuse vehemently. India has a long history of caste system. To uproot all the associated ills, affirmative action is a must. As mentioned earlier, reservation is a strong pillar of the same. However, it should only be used if its right implementation is guaranteed or at least sincere efforts are made by the administration for the same.

Those opposing the misuse, should foremost take the marginal sections into confidence. These sections must be shown, how those in power want to keep them marginal to reap their votes by making false promises year after year. In a number of cases, the real enemies of the marginalized sections tend to be those from amongst their own ranks only, who have successfully attained power over the years. Till yesterday the two were equals but today one is the 'mai-baap' of the other. Hence, they will try their best to keep this equation in their own favour by perpetuating the miseries of their brethren. They'll make promises but tactfully keep them unfulfilled and put the blame on the 'others'.

Hence, the breed of anti-reservationists, I am addressing here, help such manipulators by distinguishing themselves as a pool of 'others' against whom the wrath of the marginal sections can be directed by the dominant ones amongst them.

Things are not always black or white. Its important to identify the different shades of grey that lie within. Think about it.

Image Courtesy
Not traceable. Kindly Intimate me for due credits.

Look who's talking

One-upmanship in Indian Media and other issues

Manmohan Singh, our honorable Prime Minister had asked the Leader of opposition to accompany him to Mumbai to take the stock, post-terrorist attack. However, Advaniji could not wait for a couple of hours or so and decided to venture out himself, hence deliberately missing a chance to show a much needed united political front to the world and people at home at such an hour. Siege was not yet over but how could the opposition miss such a golden opportunity. So we had advertisements by the BJP in the newspapers in the run up to the Delhi Assembly elections asking the people to vote the 'soft on terror' Congress government out of power.
All these developments were keenly reported by our electronic media accusing the political parties of trying to reap the benefit even out of such a grave situation.
Well politics is politics. It was nothing new. However, I believe that the political parties showed a lot of restraint this time around as there was very little if any blame game. It might have happened because the whole political system, rather any particular political outfit was put under a big question mark this time by the media and the public. I'll come back to this later on.
Those accusing the political parties were not able to reflect upon themselves, the way they went about doing their duty. In their pursuit to one-upmanship, the different news agencies tried to gather information from only God-knows, what all sources and those which lacked such sources cooked up information, rather disinformation by themselves. We had these channels showing the same video footage, serving the same news reports but claiming their exclusive access to them. It was an amusing but disturbing scenario too. After seeing the initial reaction by the different channels, I was expecting them to set an example for our political classes by coming forward in a unison and maybe initiating a concerted campaign for accountability and reforms. But as the time passed, none of them took an initiative in this direction and even if someone did take, as far as we can see nothing materialized in that case. Moreover, Admiral Mehta also questioned their integrity while reporting minute to minute operation details. Through satellite phones, the masters of the terrorists could have, rather might have passed on these crucial information bytes to them. Its high time our media behave in a matured manner.
Listening to various public opinions on these channels, I was really amused(and again disturbed) by most of them. People believe war is the solution to everything. Haven't they seen what a war has done to people of Iraq and Afghanistan. The idea of our country going on a war to teach the lesson to other belligerent nations does fill me with a zeal too. I am proud of our victories in 1962, 1971 and 1999. However, can we forget those who perished in these wars and could never ring the victory bells. As I have said earlier, War is not a solution. Limited war and precision strikes can be of tactical significance, part of an overall strategy but an all-out war is a big no-no. Terrorism can not be contained by targeting nations. Non-state actors(LeT) might have received help from certain section(Intelligence Services, Military Establishment or the Democratic Government) of a State(Pakistan) as might have happened this time. However, its important to engage that state in negotiations and try and build international pressure on it so that it yields and cooperate. If nothing happens, some illegitimate means can be employed. For that purpose RAW has to be strengthened. Talking in crude terms, if we know where Dawood is, then why not just shoot him at his home. What good will it serve to extradite him to India and waste the time of our over-burdened courts in bringing him to justice. Let him face the 'natural' justice. However, to do this we must have the capabilities to match with CIA, MI-6 or Mossad. Even if we have to target terrorist camps within Pakistan or PoK territory, we have to comprehend a lot of variables as we can't afford it if such an action escalates the tensions beyond the saturation point. Do not forget, both the countries are nuclear-enabled.
For a common man to understand these intricacies is difficult, hence media should not fan such emotions. Barkha Dutt rightly objected to the comments of one of the yester-year actress and a TV show host, who was all praises for U.S. action post-9/11 and wanted an all-out war with Pakistan.
Moreover, as said in the earlier post, we have to work on our internal security. If we keep our boundaries porous and our home vulnerable, we are doing a disservice to ourselves. That should be the first priority. It was pathetic to see the way our men had to fight 59 hours to free the Taj of the 4 terrorists. We are spending money in developing Defense capabilities, then why not internal security. G.P.S. system, spy robots, etc could have been employed to track their exact positions but where were all these technologies and gadgets. Kapil Sibbal debating (not as a politician but a common man, as per his assertion) on a NDTV Profit show, himself admitted that our establishment never thought of developing such capabilities. Now that's abysmal. Even more shocking is to see our vulnerable policemen with lathis or outdated ammunition and with no protective bullet proof jackets fighting those desperadoes who carried AK-47's and grenades. Where are the police reforms. We have been hearing about them since time immemorial. Manmohan Singh has promised a Federal Agency but as rightly said by the BJP, it should also be given the teeth through proper legislation.
Another thing which disturbed me was people questioning our democracy. As far as political system is concerned there are many shortcomings in it which made me ask the question 'why should i vote' in an earlier post. However, i could ask such a question only because i have the right to vote. Seeing the bravery of our NSG, Army and Marine commandos, some people started flirting with the idea of having an Army rule. Just see in your neighbourhood on both east and west that what havoc such a system has brought to the liberties of their people.
So to sum it up, we all should have faith in our democracy and make the best use of it to pressurize the Government to take concrete steps to ensure our fundamental right to live without any fear. As much as our political parties, our media should refrain from one-upmanship and play their important roles in strengthening our democracy which will enable us to thwart any danger from without or within.

Image Courtesy
http://iamsumeet.com (original)

A week since Mumbai Siege

What options does India have?

A week has passed since ten desperadoes, allegedly from across the border, took a billion Indians by surprise. For 59 hours they kept us on our toes leaving behind a trail of physical and emotional agony. Terror attacks had been occurring at an alarming frequency this year but this turned out to be the 'Father of All'. We saw the western media covering it extensively while the Indian media made the best of it, their TRP's indeed soaring high. People wanted the government to hold someone accountable within its fraternity who could not prevent this abhorable act from occurring. Top ministers had to loose their job and well, rightly so. Now with all this commotion over, its the time to bring the culprits to justice. Accusations are intensifying across the border and with India receiving substantial international support this time around, the hitherto 'soft' government of ours is finally 'hardening' its stand.
War is what many Indians want as evident from the media coverage. However, is War the solution to this problem or in itself harbinger of a much bigger problem. I believe its time this War rhetoric ends and the Indian media act responsibly(definitely a tall task for them) refraining from fuelling these sentiments of the people. People are angry, its true. But this anger should be diverted towards forcing the government to first set our house right. There are abundant lacunaes in our intelligence and internal security establishment which need to be filled. By engaging in war-mongering, we are deviating from our priorities and allowing the government to get off lightly. The government will engage in brinkmanship and then apply the reverse gear(they will be having no better option- we might just see another Operation Parakaram). The clouds of war will pass by and we'll eventually forget that there is a lot of work to be done at home too. Don't waste this opportunity.
To prevent another 26/11, we have to strengthen our country from within. We need a Federal Investigation Agency, laws to strengthen its capabilities, better internal security arrangements in form of more NSG battalions stationed in all metropolitans, securing our hotels, cinemas, market places and other public places and most importantly not allowing our land to crop up terrorism in name of religion. Mumbai attack may have diverted our attention from Delhi and Malegaon blasts which were orchestrated by Indian fundamentalists. Lets first uproot them from our soil and when all of us are integrated(in practical and not utopian sense), then march towards those who dare to raise their eyes on our motherland.

Image Courtesy
http://www.iconocast.com (original)

Dilemma of a first time voter

Is the Right to Vote really empowering?

As May, 2009 approaches, the suspense with regards to “who’ll be the next?” must be killing those who are fighting it out. But there is another suspense which is intriguing me these days. I am about to exercise my franchise for the first time in my life. The question is not ‘who should I choose’ but rather ‘why should I choose anyone’! Is this Right to Vote really empowering for me or my compatriots. My heart wants to reply in affirmative but my mind stops me from doing it.
The ‘Right to Vote’ will become an empowering notion-cum-action for us, the masses, when we can see that by exercising it, we are not making or breaking the fortune of any political elite but rather we are making or breaking the fortune of our society at large and within it, ofcourse our own.
Political parties may lie on the left, right or at the center of the political spectrum but when they come to power; all those divergences tend to converge into a similar course of action as was being followed by their predecessors. There might be some modifications in the means employed, for in words of Pareto some tend to be ‘lions’ using coercion while others tend to be ‘foxes’ using their wiliness; but they all tend to move towards a common end, hence offering us more or less the same.
So when by exercising our franchise- the coveted privilege for the attainment of which thousands had to sacrifice- we bring a certain lot to power, we are actually just handing over to them the golden key to their personal fortunes. Those who loose, wait for the next time, doing nothing constructive but just hatching one plot after the other, of how to reduce their wait. Meanwhile, those in power carry on those same developmental and ‘non-developmental’ works, albeit changing the names of all the projects to honor their respective leaders, dead or alive. Everything else is the same, just the new packaging!
The ‘Right to Vote’ can become empowering only when we have a genuine pluralistic polity, plural, not in terms of quantity, as everyday with intrigues and splits occurring within the political set-up many new parties are coming up. Some may call this plurality as the sign of maturing of our democracy but of what use is it to an ordinary man. Plurality is needed in terms of quality. Only when there exist qualitative differences within the polity, which we can measure objectively, we will also start taking qualitative interest in choosing one over the other, for we will know that by making the wrong choice, we ourselves will end up on the loosing side.
It may seem to some that with such qualitative differences, political bickering will tend to increase. To the contrary, I believe an opposite phenomena will occur. When the parties are similar, they fight more to prove to their vote banks that they are different. With no such point to prove, they will find it easier to carry out bipartisan actions- denoting joint action of all the parties across the line, grouped broadly under conservative and liberal ideology, hence bipartisan and not 'multipartisan'- for the welfare of the masses.
Only when our polity evolves to such a state and is able to ‘brittle’ the ‘Iron Law of Oligarchy’ of Robert Michels, the ‘Right to Vote’ will become empowering and all my apprehensions will vanish away.

Image Courtesy
http://lh3.ggpht.com (original)