The Burden of Tradition and History...

A few days ago, while writing a shopping list in Hindi, I found out, not only have I degraded my calligraphy skills in Hindi (as if it were even possible in the first place), 6 years after I last wrote a sentence in Hindi in my board exams, I can barely write anything in my native language. My Hindi teacher at school had predicted this long ago. Of course, he meant it in a degrading manner. It is significant, that Hindi is the only Indian language I know of, so it is kind of scary that when the need arrives, I won't be able to communicate my ideas in writing through this language. Maybe, I am not a language person after all. It surprises even me that after having lived the whole of my life in Gujarat, I can barely speak Gujarati to this day, and can read it to a certain extent due to its proximity with Hindi.

But, during the same period, my English language skills have improved vastly. So, from where I see it, I have just evolved to get better connected to the Global community.

As the world gets even more globalized; tradition, heritage, and language will eventually become a burden passed on to the youth by their myopic elders. After all, India has more than 2500 years of history and culture; at some point we will have to let go of a few unnecessary things, get our culture in sync with the modern times. If we keep falling back on the excuse of conserving our age-old traditions, the Indian culture will stagnate overtime. Moreover, it is the open-minded questioning, and revolting attitude of the youth that can usher in new innovations both in science and life in general.

Why cling on to diversity and identity, when we all can unite under the umbrella of a global culture? Most of us here may not remember the song Vande Mataram, but if just a song were a yardstick of patriotism, then it would have been a cheap commodity. In an increasingly inter-connected world, we are required to know about the cultures and traditions of other countries too. So, it does seem selfish of our elders to make us remember and value all of their traditions in addition to everything else.

So, a day may come, when like Sanskrit, Hindi may also be lost at the altar of Globalization. It is also possible, that with our sheer numbers and hopefully strong economy we force a diminished version of Hinglish on the world. Either way, life and tradition as we know them now will definitely change over the course of our lives. That does not make us or our descendants any less "Indian" than the freedom fighters who fought for our independence. India, does not live in its languages and culture, it thrives inside its people and the spirit will always remain the same even if their mode of expression changes. That spirit is of humanity.

So, the next time you are degraded by the elders for alienating from the traditions, you can give a logical explanation, that of evolution. We have not forgotten the traditions, we just happen to know their latest evolved version.

I hope I become a believer again…

The following discussion may seem a bit odd to some of you. It is because I generally shy away from such deep and serious matters at college and try to be light hearted. But as I have been told, blogs are meant to show your inner self, to express what you truly believe in. So, here I go, giving up all pretensions, writing straight from the heart.

If any of you has been close enough to me in my personal life, you must be under the pretension that I am a very religious person, in that, I never, throughout the year, eat breakfast or anything for that matter, before taking a bath, and offering prayers. Some of you might even have seen me going to temple many times. What you don't know is that this is only what you think you see me doing. Though the habit started years ago when I was still at school, when I was indeed a staunch believer, and offered prayers sincerely, I realized along the way, that it becomes difficult to be a true student of science, and be a theist at the same time. As a result, what you see me doing today, is justified by my mind as a healthy way of living, so as to clear my conscience that I am still faithful to my true passion—that of science. The essence of science is to question long-held beliefs with hard-facts. If you, regardless of being a disciple of science, are blinded by unsubstantiated beliefs, then, you really can't understand science in its most basic form. At best you can be agnostic, looking tirelessly for some sort of symmetry between the laws of physics and the unexplained.

Even though people like me question its very foundation, religion truly is one of the greatest concepts, one that defines the whole mankind, just like science does. It gives hope to some, living in acute poverty, from the sub-Saharan Africa, to various parts of Asia, while making other millions to sacrifice their lives in the name of holy war, to save and secure something, that they have never seen in their lives, and probably may never see; that has simply been hammered down over generations.

So, what is so attractive about believing in God? Why hand over the reins of your destiny in the hands of an invisible entity that might not even exist? Perhaps it is the only solace for the destitute, who after working for 18 hours, still live on the edge, without shelter, clothes, or food, that some almighty power shall take pity, and improve their lives, in a world full of selfishness and distrust. Perhaps, one feels, that may be after suffering so much, they could satisfy the almighty with their prayers, to secure a better life the next time. OR maybe, for the powerless, it seems like an attractive idea, that there is some great, ultimate power out there that can set every thing in order, with just a thought, what they would never be able to achieve on their own.

Of course, a desperate man will believe almost anything. Can Science help such people? No. And it might never be able to. Unlike religion, science cannot provide hope or spiritual satisfaction, it can only provide material comforts to those who can pay for it and work to obtain it.

Had there not been the concept of religion; the destitute, knowing that this is the only chance at a life that they have, would have eventually worked up a civil unrest. So, religion makes people behave in a certain humane way, which we call as Morality. Religion drives inside the minds of everyone, a conscience and feelings of guilt for something interpreted as to be wrong.

And that is why, I never discourage people who believe. Perhaps, they are the only reason, that us, the followers of Science are able to work in a comparatively peaceful world today.

When I look at the sadhus thronging Kumbhs, or moving around the country praising God, living at the bare minimum, but still satisfied and happy, I find that with science comes the restlessness, which though, is necessary for the continuity of a civilization by constant innovation, robs us of internal peace. We live away our whole lives in our constant pursuit of true knowledge, while these men of God live off, blissfully ignorant.

What attracts me the most towards religion though, is the concept of immortality. May be it is a consequence of youth, but it is difficult for me to come to terms with the only scientifically logical explanation of death, that of an end of existence. Somehow, the idea to linger on seems way too attractive than the absolute end of consciousness. Unlike the villainous way in which it is mostly portrayed in literature, the idea of being able to see the generations change, the world develop, and may be one day perish, only to be reborn again, does seem attractive. The idea of Moksha, as described in Buddhism and my own religion, however, does not appeal to me. May be it is because I have mostly lived a comfortable and well-off life, but nevertheless even the constant circle of life and death sounds more attractive.

As the long tug-of-war comes to an end, as always, Logic triumphs, but still somewhere inside me, a part hopes, that I become a believer again...

IPL--The most explicit exercise in consumerism in India

The yearly celebration of cricket in India is finally over, but IPL continues to be in headlines courtesy those disgruntled politicians and ex-cricketers, who weren't able to profit from this cash-spinning extravaganza.

But these people, along with the media have failed to recognise the true nature of IPL. It was never about cricket. Had it been, then they could have as easily changed the name of the Ranji trophy and be done with. It is about the rise of Capitalism in India. While the early intentions of Lalit Modi and co. might have been towards betterment of cricket and domestic ranji players, they were quick and smart to realise that, had IPL been promoted on the lines of the Ranji trophy it would never have worked. The support and ownership of Bollywood as well as corporates lended not only the much-needed glamour, but a large infinite market to the advertisers, not to mention huge money.

Unlike many of my friends, when I watch an IPL match, I do not care who is playing and who is winning. There is no point in spoiling my day over something that at the end of the day is still domestic cricket. I instead see giant hoardings and an MRF airship floating over the stadium. I see how every decision of the third umpire is preceded and succeeded by the Kingfisher ad. I notice how, almost every match completes its full quota of 40 overs even if initially the batting team was in tatters and how the bowler seems to wait for the ad on the scoreboard to end before bowling the fourth bowl of every over. I can cite many more such instances.

In a nutshell, IPL is about the rise of consumerism in India. It tells you that there is such a large domestic market out there that Pepsi, Coca-cola, Sprite and Maaza, all can sponsor the same match and get more eyeballs and publicity than all of Ekta Kapur's soaps combined.

Governments around the world including India, took various measures to increase domestic demand in order to sustain growth in view of depreciating global demand during the recession; If IPL is fueling domestic demand, thus helping our economy expand, then why cry over morality, as was witnessed in the Indian parliament which is convened by ancient(both in age and their outlook) ministers who have redefined morality and decency in their political lives. Needless to say, almost all parties and senior leaders were in favour of scrapping IPL on the grounds of morality and explicity, and sacking Lalit Modi for causing financial irregularities. Wherever huge money is involved, irregularities are bound to happen, and sometimes, such irregularities even make for good business sense; and the kind of financial irregularities our leaders have shown in whatever they do over the past 60 years, they do not qualify to comment on the IPL or Modi.

So, my message to our leaders and the media would be--By all means, sack Modi for whatever rigging he has done, but recognise his invaluable contribution to the rise of Consumerism in our country and don't even in your wildest dreams, think of scrapping or modifying IPL for the sake of morality.

Where Capitalism wins...Part-III

The Concept of Horizontal development:

Highly industrialised and urbanised states like Maharashtra and Gujarat do not get sufficient funds from the centre because of the stupid (at least I think so) ideology of the UPA --that of horizontal development (If some region or some set of demographics are somehow benefitting more, from the existing policies or by virtue of their skill or profession, or availability of resources, then no more resources need be allocated for their further development, and the money meant for these affluent regions be diverted to the unprivileged regions, whose standard of living has been stagnant, be it due to lack of skills among the workforce, poor policies or poor implemetation, non-availability of resources, etc. Mostly, such a policy is backed by stating the chances of social unrest in the poor sections due to lack of resources).

So they siphon off the money from higher GDP and well developed states like Gujarat and Maharashtra, and fund the inefficient states like U.P., orissa, etc. In essence, we are being punished both for the inefficiency of the bimaru states and being a well developed state. Such problems do not arise in a capitalist society, where the development of the developed is not sacrificed for the needs of the under-developed. As Capitalism provides equal development opportunities to all, it comes down to the regional governments of the undeveloped states to be more efficient, and the industry in that region to be more competitive. Instead, the government should find ways to better frame and implement its policies. It will be better to plug the holes before pumping huge amounts of cash down the drain.

Where Capitalism wins...Part-II

Disinvestment/Privatisation:

For all kinds of development that a government undertakes, money comes out to be the main motive force. Now, how do they get this money? They may of course increase the taxes, or lower subsidies, both of which cannot be implemented in a major way because of round-the-year elections in our country for fear of facing the public's ire. The government has some Public Sector undertakings, whose revenues and dividends can partly fuel the country's development needs. But the performance of PSUs is often found to be less than satisfactory than their private sector counterparts. So, as we enter a more globalised world with our age-old static institutions, who have never been competitive due to support from government, we end up loosing precious business to the more efficient private players of other countries. For example, in the private sector, bankruptcy is taken seriously. In contrast, public sector managers tend to be relatively relaxed about the prospect. Drastic adjustments do not take place, as the managers know that there is no real danger of extinction. The answer to these problems is Privatisation, where government gives up the majority stake to a private enterprise. This is a win-win situation for both the parties involved as it provides the government with huge funds, that may be used to build critical infrastructure ( in India's case) for accelerating growth while enhancing the performance of the formar PSU. The best example is of Maruti whose privatisation brought more than 2000 crores to the government kitty while visibly improving its performance after privatisation. Privatisation, however, cannot be implemented everywhere. There is afterall a chance of greed coming over national interest. So, the best course is Disinvestment, where the government sells some equity to private stakeholders, while retaining the majority share, to maintain its hold over the industries that are critical for the country.

To give you a better idea, while the sale of 25% stake in Maruti fetched the government 2000 crores back then, a miniscule disinvestment of 5% in NTPC (from 89.5% to 84.5%) will fetch a handsome 8100 crores, and there is scope for at least 10-15% more divestment!

Though it was claimed to be a victim of coalition politics in the UPA's previous term, there is no such compulsion now, with Left no longer a stakeholder in the government. Still, the process of disinvestment has been slow and dismal, compared to the time of NDA 10 years ago, when there was a separate disinvestment ministry for this purpose, which more than anything else shows the difference in econmic policies of the BJP and Congress.

Where Capitalism wins...Part-I

The western world (which by extension refers to the whole world) classifies politics as left and right (curiously based on the sitting tendencies of certain leaders with communist beliefs to the left of the French president). Of course, there are sub-divisions like center-left, far-left, center-right, far-right, etc.

The politics on the left of the spectrum generally opposes the forces of globalisation, capitalism, and root for public and government control over most or critical installations in the country. They hope for equitable and horizontal development of the society.

The politics on the right generally, favours limited state control, and greater liberalization as regards the businesses in the country. They instead of going for horizontal development believe in the trickle-down effect which basically means, that even if the rich do get richer, the benefits of any sort of development will eventually trickle down to the poorest sections of the society.

By now, you must have understood that both the systems have there own advantages and disadvantages. While, under socialism or communism the rich and the middle class is made to suffer or for want of a more polite description made to shoulder the burden of the predominantly rural and pro-poor reforms, a right wing political party's ideology though favouring equal development opportunities to all, has mostly been found to be negligent towards the poor in the society.

So, logically, India, being a mixed economy must be the best and most balanced case for development with the best of both worlds approach. Alas, we have a tendency to screw up even the best scenarios.

For the past 6 years we have had a center-left government at the center.

It is an irony that the country that is most set to gain from globalisation is having a center-left government at the center. Now, in the next few articles, I will share a few examples that I can think of where right wing politics would have made a better case for both governance and development.

Not so excited about Hockey...

When India won a hockey match against Pakistan recently, everyone was very gung-ho about hockey's renewed prospects in India. The news was everywhere on TV, people had started updating their status messages on facebook, orkut and the new Buzz.

Though I am not very expectant when it comes to news channels, even they had conjured Hockey experts out of nowhere! There were endless discussions about the state of Indian Hockey, how in spite of being the national game, it doesn't get the same eyeballs and the same enthusiasm as cricket. The anchors and TV experts alike proclaimed that this victory has signaled a new beginning for hockey in our country.

I hardly think so!

First of all, I would confess that I am perhaps the most anti-sports kind of guy you will ever come across. Not because I think that it is worthless, I am a hardcore cricket fan, but for me gaming and sports will always be a secondary activity, a hobby at the most. I am not fiercely competitive, so it is really difficult for me to get excited about any game. Add to that my priority about the well-being of my bones and limbs, the idea of playing even cricket with anything harder than a rubber ball is out of question.

I don't even understand the fuss about excelling in sports, getting Olympic medals, etc. I mean do we have any justification for starting a new programme for the development of sporting skills in the country, when we have a very high percentage of children dropping out of schools, and even those, who do complete their studies, are not good enough to be employed. Whenever, India performs miserably in some International games, everyone from media to politicians to eminent personalities, ask the same question "Why can't a country of a billion people not secure a single Gold medal?" I ask them, wouldn't it be better, if we educate these billion people to become good engineers and managers, and outsource them to those countries (like Australia) where people happily grow up to become sportsmen. Afterall, for all our investment on infrastructure and coaching, only 10-11 people who go on to become international sportsmen will have an actual chance to improve their lifestyle. I believe that sports can become a valid career option only in a financially secure society; otherwise, even the great Dhyan Chand was impoverished in his last days!

And lastly, I think that the golden days of hockey are long gone, now we should let this burden of history slip away from our already over-burdened shoulders and let future take its course.

Instead, we know we are very good at cricket, so we should go all out and publicize it in other countries, provide more options and opportunities to domestic cricketers. If we are not good at something, why lament about it, just publicize aggressively what we are good at. Make cricket so big that hockey dies a slow death elsewhere in the world too.

Note: This article has been betaed by agamemnon