Beyond the pale...

Marcus Aurelius, the great Roman Emperor, and perhaps the last Philosopher King to grace the earth, says in his Meditations,

“He who fears death either fears the loss of sensation or a different kind of sensation. But if you shall have no sensation, neither will you feel any harm; and if you shall acquire another kind of sensation, you will be a different kind of living being and you will not cease to live.”

Indeed, death, in its most raw form, is something that mystifies, yet terrifies, all who should bother to think of it. To be mystified, that is an admirable quality, for Descartes has said “I think, so I exist”, so evidently illustrating that the ability to think, to imagine, to question why things were the way they were, is the supreme mark of a living and sentient being. The two words, though seemingly related, and in truth very synonymous, are yet very distinct in each other. We all live, we live amongst the billions of insects, animals, birds, fishes, etc., and yet what is it that distinguishes us from them? To those who would retort a brain that can think and distinguish between right and wrong, I would gainsay, for even these beings possess this ability, and often they are seen to use it better than what most humans can be credited with. I feel, and this remains my own opinion, that the real strength that humanity possesses within it that makes it so different from the rest is its ability to think and ponder over why the pattern of life is just so.

Descartes says that if you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things. If you do not care to query, then God denies you the right to call yourself a sentient being, although you are alive. A few may demur, that after all to live is to sense, and if I am to be deemed alive, it is but obvious that I am sentient. It isn’t so. Just to breathe isn’t the same as to celebrate the wonder that is the human respiratory system, to feel the sense of touch isn’t the same as to stand in awe at the miracle that is the nervous structure, to see isn’t the same as to bow down before the great marvel that transforms mere sight to the grandeur that is vision. Most of us take our lives so much for granted, that we simply forget to honour the spectacles that we see everyday. Only when a marvel is blemished by doubt, and I use the word here very specifically, does its wondrous nature become even more evident.

I started out with Marcus Aurelius and his thoughts on death, and have throughout the last few paragraphs, stated why being sentient is more important than just being alive. And yet, Marcus Aurelius was dismissive of death being viewed as a possible conqueror of the senses or the giver of new sensations. For, in Marcus’s words, if death is to take away your senses, then what is pain to you? Whence your senses desert you in life, whilst you still breathe, if you feel no compassion, no fear, no emotion, then why the morbid fear of death, which grants you the same “feeling”?

The beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning....?

So the cookie finally crumbled. A most excellent opportunity for the Indian National Congress to demonstrate once and for all that they are a people who will gladly give up power for the sake of their principles, has been whittled away into another episode of the Congress’s spinelessness. I have no regard for the Communist bloc; frankly, they may have good ideas, but their manner of presenting them just puts me off. That they have secured their highest-ever quanta of seats in Parliament shouldn’t have lead them to start believing that the country is ready for a Communist Revolution; rather, it is more like a swansong now.

Energy and development have never before been as closely related as now. While I am not exactly a die-hard fan of nuclear energy, it is an option that is available, which is somewhat cleaner than thermal energy (which forms the mainstay of India’s energy policy till date), and offers plenty of scope for sustainable development. The Indian State has frankly not been very proactive in investigating clean sources of energy, as also energy options which will enable us to become independent of blocs of crazed tyrants. It would seem that we are still stuck in an age when oil, gas, and coal are the core of the nation’s energy policy, and thinking otherwise is cause for institutionalization. That the nuclear deal is as good as dead is not so much a matter of concern for me, because frankly, deals come and deals go; what remains is the will of the people to better their lives.

And that is where the Union Government will find itself paralyzed. The Left, embittered after the nuclear deal fiasco, will not be ready to support any of the Government’s recommendations and legislations as readily as before, and would want to extract their pound of flesh more often than not. Crucial reforms in the areas of labor relations, infrastructure, education, healthcare, retail etc. will now be subject to political grandstanding.

A fine statement made by a BJP politico last week was that a marriage based on the hatred for a common enemy cannot hope to be stable for too long. The Left has now started complaining that the Sethusamudram (forgive my atrocious spellings) project is being delayed because of the Union Government’s 'pandering to communal interests'. I find that an amusing thought. I mean, they found it expedient to delay finding a solution to our energy problems on their own interests, and now when someone else tries out their tactics, they yell blue murder.

We may have avoided mid-term polls for now, but the matter really hasn’t completely ended here. Quo vadis, India?

An Ode to Books....

Thomas Carlyle once said, “After all manner of professors have done their best for us, the place we are to get knowledge is in books. The true university of these days is a collection of books.” No matter if Mr. Carlyle said these words during the Victorian era, but they still ring true in this age as well.

To my mind, there is no greater joy, no more divine bliss, than to have a book to read. There are good books, there are great books, and there are books which simply are unmentionable except as expletives. And yet, despite all this, each and every book has a story to tell, no matter how drab or dull it may seem. In this respect, books are like people; you have interesting people, beautiful people, charming people, boring people, obnoxious people, dull people et al. You deal with each one of them in a different manner, but you deal with every one of them, sine prejudice.

I have a habit of buying the books that I read. I find it most cumbersome to read a book and then return it to a library. The joy of reading a book is not so much in breaking the freshness of the print, as in revisiting the text, like one goes back to an old friend. One cannot take such liberties with borrowed books; it’s somewhat scandalous to think so.

Of late, I have spending a lot of money on books, to the extent that my parents are wont to boast that my salary seems dedicated to buying books and no more. I don’t find it a distressing thought; come to think of it, I recollect having read that when a habit begins to cost money, it’s called a hobby. So, buying books would be my hobby, though not one which I can list down in my curriculum vitae.

It is said that people don’t find the time to read books nowadays. I don’t know where the statisticians quoting these ‘facts’ are finding their data, but looking at the crowds in the local book stores and the bags of books that they buy, I wonder why they must buy them, if not to read them. Bibliophiles are, or rather have never been an endangered species. Au contraire, they are a flourishing breed; if not more overt, they are certainly more discriminating in their choices.

Whatever this may mean, I only see a good future for books, irrespective of distractions like television, the computer (read the Internet and e-books) and video games. After all, In the end, you can’t take a computer to bed, or snuggle into a comfy chair with a cup of hot chocolate on a rainy day with a television in hand.

Market business....

Finally, it happened. Crawford Market, once (and perhaps still) the heart of Mumbai’s shopping needs, where generations of Mumbaikars would trek to buy the precious mangoes of summer and the sweet grapes of winter, will go under the scalpel of the developer. While it is true that something needed to be done to salvage the Market from the morass it had fallen into, my worry is whether this was what the doctor had in mind?

Crawford Market and its precincts isn’t some far-flung suburban area, which could be played around with (and this is a rather strong usage here…) and then forgotten. Why, I say, such cavalier behaviour should not be tolerable for any area.

Imagine, the ‘honourable’ corporator proposing the redevelopment had no idea of the proposal. His excuse: The market’s name, post-independence, is Mahatma Jotirao Phule Market, and he respects the Mahatma a lot, hence his support for the proposal. One could hand him a decree, under similar conditions, sentencing the entire Corporation to death, and the chap would probably announce it with equal aplomb and glee.

The Mayor of the Corporation refused to permit any debate on the proposal, stating that the Corporation had debated the same ‘last’ year and doing so again would be a ‘wastage’ of public time and money. I say, madam, how considerate of you! I couldn’t have imagined that politicians gave a damn about saving public resources; I always was under the impression that politicians are like leeches, sucking away at the health of the people. But just a query from a naïve layman: wouldn’t a debate at this juncture assist the Corporation in evaluating the proposal with a fresh perspective? Maybe, a better scheme could have been thrashed out. But then, you are the ‘best’ judge of how things ‘should’ be done.

It is reported that the bureaucracy was keen on redevelopment, but not along the lines of the current proposal. It seems they wanted the precinct to be redeveloped as a heritage quarter, sort of like the Leadenhall Market in London. I say, aren’t bureaucrats a thick bunch? Do they really think the ‘people’ of Mumbai really give a damn about heritage? Hell, demolish all the fine buildings in South Mumbai and make towering skyscrapers! After all, we aren’t modelling our city on cities like London, Prague, Paris, Vienna, San Francisco, or even New York; we have Shanghai to catch up with. Who cares about history anyways?

What? You say that I am too harsh on the people of Mumbai? Well, if I am wrong in analysing my people, let me see some strong reactions from someplace, and not just reactions which seek to caution, but reactions which change the course of events. Then, I will take back my casks of vinegar; till then, suffer its acidic taste in the mouth!

We, the People...

When one speaks of ‘democracy’, one means ‘rule of the people’. How beautiful this concept sounds! For it implies that unlike in monarchies or plutocracies, the power to change or influence the course of history, of their own destiny, lies not in the hands of one singular person or a group of individuals, but in the hands of the people who live this destiny. Lincoln’s “government of the people, by the people, for the people” not only binds a democracy to the people but also implores the people to adhere to the values of democracy.

But then Acton has said “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Has this come to be true in India, a nation that prides itself on its ‘democratic’ traditions? Has our democracy lost its vitality, its zeal to work for the better of the people? And in truth, have the people of India lost their enthusiasm for democracy, for its institutions and for its mechanisms?

Two incidents stand out of the plethora of news flooding the television screen, incidents which serve to remind us that no matter how much we may tom-tom our democratic values, we remain a nation which has perhaps never really comprehended the true meaning of what it means to be a democracy. Two incidents, which may not seem out of the ordinary, and that they aren’t so isn’t a matter of pride or an excuse for their occurrence, but all the more reason for us to ponder over where we are headed as a nation.

At Bhagalpur, two policemen assaulted and dragged a criminal from a motorcycle till such time that he should become unconscious. And this was all done at the prodding of the crowd. That this occurred in a state notorious with the law being broken is no justification; that this occurred at the hands of the police, an institution already demonised as an unruly arm of the State, isn’t any defence. What is shocking, perhaps even more so, is that the people stood watching, encouraging the officials concerned to perform their dastardly act a little longer.

At Agra, famed city of love, an angry mob torched vehicles and brought the entire city to a standstill, all supposedly in the act of grieving for four young men killed by an errant truck-driver. And when the police went in to try and control the mob, the mass turned on them and proceeded to show them just who’s the ‘boss’.

Both incidents serve to illustrate that the people have perhaps lost their faith in the ability of the democracy that we have come to take for granted to deliver justice to them. They have decided that if justice will not come to them of its own, they will force it to come, but ‘justice’ will be done.

The two policemen have been suspended, which is a positive sign implying that no breach of the law will be permitted, especially by those entrusted with the responsibility of protecting it, but what about the mob? We are well aware that whenever we have the State committing atrocities, we have exact details on who did what. But when it comes to the masses, why is it that we choose to hide behind the illusion of the ‘faceless’ crowd?

That these incidents are but a mere footnote in our history is no reason not to wake up and smell the coffee. It is time that we decided the course of this nation, of how we will allow this nation to progress here on. And in this, we find ourselves bearing a most onerous responsibility. It will not be easy; it will certainly not be fast. But one thing’s for sure: the rule of the people must not be permitted to deteriorate into the rule of the jungle.

A deal to die for..or to die for a deal...?

The ongoing imbroglio between the Government and the Politburo is amusing, and yet at the same time, distressing.

Amusing because once again, the Left will do what it does the best: oppose the government in whatever it does. I mean, these blokes don’t have a hope in hell of ever forming the government at the Centre; their ‘appeal’ isn’t spreading beyond their strongholds (and from what I have read and understood, the term ‘stronghold’ is also becoming fast redundant in their case), and their performance in the current Lok Sabha is their best ever (and they don’t seem confident that they will ever repeat it either). So, who cares whether the Government is seen to be inept because of our interruptions and objections? We aren’t going to get this moment again, so we may as well enjoy it to the fullest.

Distressing because once again, an opportunity that might just solve our problems for generations will be thrown away by the needless posturing of politicians. Nuclear energy may have its disadvantages, but frankly tell me, is there anything on this earth, or for that matter in this universe, without its pros and cons?

The Left would have us believe, and ‘surprisingly’ (or perhaps not) so does the NDA and the rest of the ‘opposition’, that the 123 Agreement between India and the United States of America is inimical to India’s sovereign interests, that the Agreement places India firmly in the control of the United States, and does not give us any scope to demonstrate our freedom, that the agreement prevents India from ever pursuing the option of a nuclear weapon test.

First things first, are the mandarins in South and North Block bottle-suckling babies that they can be expected to take whatever their counterparts in the State Department serve them? And if the agreement places India in the U.S.’s control, then why on earth is there a lobby of Senators and Representatives eager to see this deal being scuttled? Why on earth are American citizens alleging that this deal gives India all that it wants and gets nothing in return (or at least nothing substantially) for the U.S.? (Maybe the Americans are mad, but surely not this mad?) As regards the prospects of a nuclear test, I seriously doubt anyone takes a nation which has conducted thousands of such exercises seriously when it tries to stop someone else from doing so.

All those who now accuse the government of playing into the hands of foreign interests and mortgaging the family silver have at some time or the other done the same. The Left Front suffered its greatest schism so far in 1962 during the Indo-China war over whether to support the Indian war effort or to be seen as receptive to Chinese overtures. The BJP-led NDA was seen as the party who ended India’s exile from Capitol Hill with its aggressive attempts to ingratiate with the U.S., especially with its offer to host the anti-Taliban forces during the Afghan offensive post 9/11. Hence, stop this holier-than-thou nonsense; we all know “kaun kitne paani mein hain”, as the adage goes.

That there may be some substance in the opposition to the agreement is undeniable. Sheer politics alone cannot threaten to bring down elected governments; they need a cause célèbre to do that, like the Jain Commission report in 1996 et al. The Government cannot be seen to be deaf to the objections being raised, for in such a stance lies the danger that we may not hear a conscientious voice, a valid point. The opposition must not try to scuttle the entire agreement, for in this agreement is not just the pride of the incumbent administration, but also the pride and honour of the entire nation. Clauses could be worked upon, words could be clarified, but don’t tear the entire sheet, for God’s sake!

It is clear that all the wrinkles in the deal must be ironed out not by grandstanding, but by explaining what is being entailed, in what is unclear, for things can be resolved in a much more dignified manner. Posterity will judge us for how we dealt with this opportunity; we cannot afford being seen to have let it go without due reason or cause.