Choices

As we watch the most recent fracas in our most ‘august’ Parliament, watching our ‘distinguished’ legislators battle out the issues that matter to India’s present and future, one is baffled as to how we could have been so remiss in our duties. The country needs structural economic reforms like a fat man needing to go on a diet. The problem is that quite like the fat man, our nation and our people are resistant to making the deep and necessarily painful sacrifices so that our future can be more secure. But then, looking at our peers abroad who perhaps need to make just as painful and urgent decisions to safeguard their fates but who would rather demonize and fight amongst themselves to decide who must sacrifice the most, perhaps we are not alone in our absurdity.

 

 

What are the choices before us? And do we have it in us, as a nation, to recognize the problems that bedevil us and to solve them as a nation? It is convenient to blame our political class for the morass we are in at present, but quagmires aren’t created overnight. Our polity, our attitude to our governing classes, which in turn influences their attitudes towards us, has been to demand the most while giving up the least. “I am a farmer and I produce the grain that you eat and the cotton that you wear. So you must bear the cost of giving me free electric and water supply and exempt me from taxation.” Or “I am a small business owner. Rather than providing me incentives and the facilities to grow my business, I want you to protect me from bigger competitors by erecting barriers to entry and mollycoddling me.” Where is the intellectual debate, the discourse that drives great nations to frenzies of progress? Have we, the nation that bore the great Buddha, the man who advised humanity to give up, for the sake of salvation, the notion of the personal ego, become a nation of egotistic maniacs? Did a nation that, when burdened by the shackles of colonialism, was selfless become selfish the moment the flag of independence was raised? Or were we always this way – concerned solely with our personal ambition and welfare, the rest of the world be damned?

We often and repeatedly repeat for the sake of our foreign peers the cliché that despite the diversity of ethnicity, language, culture, and creed, India has survived as a unified nation for over 65 years now. I say it’s a cliché but really it’s a fallacy. Vast swathes in the heart of our territory are in a state of quasi-civil war between our armed forces and Maoist insurgents. Our North-eastern brethren are dissatisfied with our lack of attention and our cow-belt-centric polity, and have expressed their dissatisfaction with violence on and off ever since they became a part of our Union. Kashmir remains a carbuncle on our arse, one that will neither heal on its own nor let us sit down and relish our general health otherwise. These pressures have always existed, but that we should have let them both fester and become so noxious is our failing as a people. We may say that we elect our leaders to make the difficult decisions for us – alas, when they do make them (once in a blue moon), we are prone to booting them out to Hades. We may say that how does my life in Mumbai/Delhi/Bangalore/Chennai/Kolkata/etc. Impact the Naxalite struggle, but the fact of the matter is that until we recognize that we as a collective have a problem, we have no way of trying to figure out a solution to it as a collective.

We Indians (and while I say that, I recognize that perhaps every country’s natives, but I am concerned solely with India, so that’s that) are prone to taking umbrage to any non-native making disparaging or even critical remarks about our economy, our political system, our social structure, our urban malaise, our infrastructure deficit, etc. We resent them for saying that we aren’t as good as them, for pulling rank on us. To some extent, we have yet to recover from our colonial hangover; we still feel that the world owes us preferential treatment of some kind to recompense for all the horrors and tortures it inflicted on us while we were being colonised. And yet, we clamour for a seat at the high table as an equal, as a nation that will be the superpower of the future. These two attitudes are fundamentally contradictory and the sooner we realize that basic fact, the better it will be for all of us. Sure, we have the right to be offended by criticism, but when it’s constructive criticism, we have no right to be an ostrich with its head in the sand.

We were a great nation; were, because we have a long way to regaining that stature again. We have to comprehend that fundamental change will come not from the barrel of a gun or the throngs of the mob, but from the citadel of the mind. We, the people of this nation, have to work together to identify the problems, understand how best we can solve them, and then get down to solving them. For some of this, we may need to be inside the system, but for some of it, we can very well work alongside the system. The solution to solving corruption or inefficiency in our public lives isn’t to dismantle or uproot the existing system or to create a Russian-doll structure with overlapping bureaucracies and hierarchies regulating the activities of one another. We must understand the fundamental motivations behind such malaises, understand the incentives that will propel people to do the right thing and disincentives which will discourage the wrong sort of behaviours and apply a mixture of both. We cannot expect our government to be an omnipotent enforcer of public morality when we as a society are content to tolerate immorality so long as it benefits us.

We were a nation of reformers, visionaries, educators, and pioneers, who understood that solving problems means sometimes getting into the muck ourselves rather than always petitioning the government to solve them for us. Sure, the government and the opposition parties/coalitions are clueless about what they should be doing and what they should be focusing on – but what are we, the people, for then? The act of voting, of delegating them to the legislatures to be our representatives, is in no way a carte blanche pass for us to abdicate our nation-building responsibilities. If they are clueless, shake them out of their complacency and remind them of what they are supposed to be representing – the will of the people – and not some twisted Machiavellian fantasy of power and influence.

 

 

Political parties vie for our attention in their pretence, in their clamour, to be called our ‘servants’. They call each other enemies of our welfare, while at the same time pursuing the very same policies which they decry. And that we do not call them out on their obvious hypocrisy, that we continue to fall prey to their bait, is surely as much our own failure as much as their perfidy. They will not do what we need them to do, and then conveniently excuse their inaction or even their misguided policies by pointing the finger to our wants and our resistance to change. Like Juvenal would say, “The people who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions, everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses.” If they think of us as simpletons who are content with their theatrics, remind them that they have got another thing coming.

 

 

We are a nation that has embraced the notion of capitalism but cannot shake off its adherence to socialism. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem lies when the belief in both ideologies starts interfering with our ability to move along the path of progress. For example, can we have FDI in retail while protecting our small business owners and our farmers from being exploited? Yes, we can, if we are willing to put in the time and effort to create a coherent policy which addresses all concerns, safeguards all stakeholders, and still offers a roadmap to innovation and enterprise. Are we capable of such genius? Any nation that can boast of the IITs, of having created one of the finest planned cities of our age (Chandigarh), a nation that is now creating a digital repository of its populace to streamline welfare and ID provisos, is capable of such and even greater genius. For sure, we have a myriad set of concerns, and while we may want to address all of them in the end, we also have to prioritize, i.e. choose. The twist lies in whether we are willing to do it, and whether we are willing to be content with simplistic notions or whether we will be patient enough to thrash out a robust framework? This in the end is the most basic (at the risk of being simplistic) choice before us. The fork has always been in there in the road – dare we make a decision and choose one path for good?

Going down under....

The crisis in Australia with regards to racist attacks on Indian students has now blown over into a full-scale evaluation of whether Australia as a nation is racist. While it is unfair to judge an entire country for the misdeeds of a few demented individuals, one must bear in mind that a country is made up of its people, no matter what be their ideology, and the country must in effect take some of the brickbats for their views and opinions. 

Australia is not new to accusations that it is racist, perhaps more because of the White Australia policy followed till the mid-1970's. While Australia wasn't alone at that time in trying to limit the numbers of non-Caucasian and non-European immigrants, 

it certainly was the most determined of the lot, perhaps following South Africa in its zeal. While the architects of the policy stated that it had been justified by fears of a potential deterioration of living standards with the influx of such immigrants, their own views at other fora spelt things otherwise. The chief architect, Alfred Deakin, stated then, and I quote, "It is not the bad qualities, but the good qualities of these alien races that make them so dangerous to us. It is their inexhaustible energy, their power of applying themselves to new tasks, their endurance and low standard of living that make them such competitors." A fine reason to exclude people from your land...

The current financial crisis and the fact that India and China remain amongst the few economies that were relatively unscathed and are finding it comparitively easier to tide over the storm means that an already uneasy local populace has even more to fear from Indians and Chinese. Racism, to my mind, is a manifestation of the innermost fears and anxieties of the locals about the security of their livelihood, about their ability to compete with the immigrant population and their belief that even if they are unsuited for the job in question, they ought to receive the job, merely because they are the locals. This policy is akin to the sons-of-the-soil policy in India, and is no less deplorable. 

In a globalised world, no nation can maintain its exclusivity. Australian mines served during the good times the industries of India and China, illustrating the link between the nations. But if, when the going gets tough, people wish to look inwards and cut off their links to the world, there is no greater tragedy in progress. If there is one nation that akin to the United States has welcomed those whom their homelands forsook or threw out, it is Australia. 

Just as the US has benefited from the toils of its immigrants, so also has Australia. And they continue to do so. That in these times one's race makes one susceptible to hate crimes is not only tragic; it's fundamentally stupid and reprehensible.

The financial crisis has served to underline that the veins of the global economy run deep in every nation and every part of the globe. Tremors felt in one part are equally felt somewhere right across the planet, underlining the fact that there is no such thing as a localised issue anymore, at least not one that concerns trade, commerce and the exchange of ideas and opinions. We must be prepared to welcome people of all colours and hues, of all backgrounds, so long as they consent and submit themselves to the rule of law and do nothing to subvert the safety of our nations. Their ideas combined with ours could yield better results; that they are darker in skin tone doesn't lessen in any manner the value of their opinion nor does our being fair-skinned increase our ideas' worth.

One could look sympathetically at the concerns of common Australians and perhaps explain away these acts of madness, but somewhere one knows that this approach is not enough. That these concerns exist is true, but then they exist everywhere. Such acts haven't taken place there with such ferocity, have they? Though this is madness, there is a certain method to it, and failure to recognize the patterns could prove very dangerous for everyone concerned. The callousness and reluctance on the part of the local authorities to accept that there is something wrong makes matters worse. One wishes that those perpetrating these crimes remember that hate injures the hater more than the hated. The authorities would also do well to remember Mary Shelley's words where she says that it isn't charity but justice that is wanting in the world. If there are noxious weeds that are poisoning the crop of Australians, the authorities must be swift in uprooting them. Till such time, as Marcellus said, something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

A new beginning

The Congress' win, and in such an emphatic manner, is perhaps the best news that could have emerged from what was otherwise a most 

disturbing and uninspiring election in my memory (which isn't much, but it's a damn figure of speech, so get on with it!). I will not credit the electorate with much; after all, if they were so keen on the Congress, why not a repeat performance of the 1984 elections? Then the Congress possessed around half the vote share and nearly three quarters of the seats in the Lok Sabha; that they failed to do much with such a huge mandate is a different thing. But I think the real reason the Congress managed to do so well now is that the Congress has no real alternatives, for once. 

It is baffling to see how a potential alternative, the BJP, succumbed to hubri

s and has now reached a point wherein its future seems bleak. I was and remain a supporter of some of the BJP's stands, such as the introduction of a Uniform Civil Code, the abrogation of Article 370, and perhaps even the introduction of a directly elected president into our polity. While the last may not be entirely practical, given India's fractured and divided political sphere, the remaining made sense to me. But of late, the BJP and its chief allies were behaving as if they were the sole guardians of the Indian nation and that their opponents were out to sell 

the nation. 

Patriotism is the last resort of the scoundrel and especially more so of a politician. The issue of Afzal Guru's execution, the retri

eval of illegally siphoned off monies from international tax havens, and the supposed lack of strength in our Executive are issues that somewhere hurt the BJP more than they could ever have hurt the Congress. You were in office; why didn't you do something about these issues then? (To be fair to the BJP, Afzal Guru's death sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court only in 2005, a year after they had handed over office to the Congress.) On the other issues, you are just as guilty of omission of duty as could be the Congress.

The best thing that has come about as a result of this election has been the decimation or at least near-decimation of the most divisive and retrograde regional forces in this country. Laloo, Paswan, Mulayam, and to some extent Mayawati are the scourge of this political class, the worst of the worst and what has come to be their fate is immensely enjoyable and pleasurable. The Left too has received their comeuppance for behaving in so high-handed a manner 

regarding the nuclear deal and for having endangered the political stability of the country over what many would term childish tantrums. 

The Congress' re-emergence in Uttar Pradesh also heralds a new beginning for the party, and perhaps for India's political system. Rahul Gandhi's role in this miracle of sorts cannot be overstated even if that is one's intention; it simply wasn't an idea whose time had come, it was an idea who was made to come now, nevermind when it was supposed to come. 

If this pattern continues, we could look forward to a time when national parties would truly matter more than regional outfits, and where a more cohesive national policy on many important issues can be thrashed out for the betterment of every Indian. Stability is desired by everyone and this election's result reflects this desire. The BSE Sensex couldn't have been more vocal in its approval when it breached the upper circuit limits twice in a single day and registered a rise of 2100 points. A sign of good times to come? I sure hope so.

The Circus is in town!

So ends our five-yearly circus of democracy. Today, we will get to see which bunch of clowns will wear the high hat and which bunch gets to sit moaning about how it would have fit them better. To be frank, there's no sense blaming the clowns for their antics; we, the supposed ringmasters of this circus, have abdicated our posts, so who's to stop the jesters from running amock?

Initiatives like Jaago Re seem to have been like the proverbial hot air balloon, running of steam at the very moment it's needed the most. People registered themselves, got all furious and excited about exercising their franchise, but when it mattered, very few bothered to turn up. In a city that was afflicted by a terrible terrorist attack, whose sole surviving culprit is now facing justice, that the turnout was below 45% is not just shameful; it's downright hypocritical. These very same people came out in hordes after 26/11 and said that enough was enough; they cursed and berated the political class for 'their' apathy towards Mumbai. I wonder who will remind them that those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others' dwellings. Celebrities who exhorted people to go out and vote simply didn't bother to turn up; serious credibility check required, if you ask me!

Disilllusionment is something we would rather live with than do something about it. People who didn't go out to vote in Mumbai attribute their lethargy to the fact that the Election Commission very unwisely kept the voting date in Mumbai on the eve of a long weekend. SO WHAT? You could have spent 5-10 minutes standing in a queue, exercised your franchise, and then gone to whichever hill-station or holiday spot you went! 

In recent times, the ideological differences between almost every party in the fray have diminished to nothing, except for maybe a few so-called purists like the Communists. Basically, where Mammon directs, there shall his slaves proceed. It's rather uncomplimentary, but what the heck, I am not standing for the post of Prime Minister; not that I would do any worse than any of the cuckoos who are offering themselves for the opportunity! Is anyone listening?

P.S. at last view, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance seems to be leading by quite a good number and could be headed for a simple majority on their own. So, Doctorsaab will get one more chance to make a difference.

Morality and us.....

The Delhi High Court's judgement on the case of the 'obscene' kiss (makes it sound like a Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes novel....) is a bold way of taking the mickey of all these xenophobic and patently narrow-minded monkeys living in God knows which century and which country.

That a married couple should be arrested and subjected to such mental trauma over a period of nearly six months for a simple kiss or even for overtly displaying their mutual affections puzzles me. Don't the police have better things to do than watch out for couples kissing or holding each others' hands in parks and public places? Whatever happened to the good old days when the police had actual criminals to apprehend and punish? Surely not everyone of the delinquents is in jail? Or have all of them reformed, trembling in their pants at the 'machismo' of the Indian police who will arrest a couple over a mere kiss? I can't even think what they will do to someone who perpetrates a murder!

Morality is a highly subjective and personal issue, especially more so in a country like India where cultural influences and beliefs differ in every locality. What may seem unacceptable to one section of the populace may be perfectly normal to another; so how do our lawmakers decide what is best for the entire society? A good option would be to leave the morals to the people themselves; if they are mature enough to decide who's good enough to represent them in legislative bodies, surely they ought to have the sense to decide what is moral and what is immoral in their lives.

But no, we have these self-appointed guardians of morality, of a Indian culture that frowns upon kissing, holding hands and drinking in pubs. Bravo! So may we presume that the titans of Bollywood would now be expected to scale down on all the modernism that they are wont to show, because even if it's the reality in our society, it simply isn't 'right'? No more singing and dancing, eh? What next, the purdah? Dressing and grooming regulations for males? Shouldn't the pant be deplored as a foreign garment, meant to enslave poor Indian males into a sense of bondage, as opposed to the grand dhoti which is the very essence of liberty and freedom?

In conclusion, I am reminded of George Bernard Shaw, who very succintly put it, "When you prevent me from doing anything I want to do, that is persecution; but when I prevent you from doing anything you want to do, that law, order and morals." The Sri Ram Sena and all their brethren should bear this in mind.

Our Moment in the Dark.....

The Satyam affair is perhaps not so much surprising with regards to scale as with regards to where it has occurred. The IT industry was so far held as the brightest symbol of a new India, an India that had given up on wheeling and dealing and on corrupt business practices, an India which was prepared to match the world when it came to the best practices in managing companies and delivering value to one's stakeholders. Names like Infosys, TCS and Wipro would always seem to be synonymous with integrity, honesty, and success achieved by sheer talent. In many parts of India, a bridegroom with a job in the IT industry would be valued (cheap process, but fact of life) almost as much as a regnant king.

But now, the mirror is showing cracks. Even before, Indian IT companies like Pentafour and DSQ revealed that all was not all that shiny in the new industry and that behind the glamour of the biggies, small timers were indulging in the same notorious practices that give businessmen a bad name everywhere. But it was always imagined that the big giants like Satyam were impervious to such allures. After all, after having achieved so much in such little time, surely they did not need to stoop to such depths for mere profits. Perhaps it was wishful thinking, perhaps we were trying to deify a specific breed of people, despite being fully aware that they were, in the end, humans and prone to human errors.

Satyam's treachery with its stakeholders, be they its shareholders or its employees or its clients, will undoubtedly raise questions about how changed is Indian industry from the days of the license raj. Our regulatory authorities will be challenged to meet this fiasco head-on and learn valuable lessons, and not just learn but also ensure that such learning is applied to make sure that such incidents do not recur. Most of all, Indian companies across the length and breadth of the country will be hard-pressed to demonstrate to a greater extent their commitment to ethical corporate governance. The fourth estate can be trusted to be vigilant about any impropriety being committed by companies on a similar scale and of a similar nature.

However what about the present? The fate of Satyam's employees and its shareholders needs to be top priority now. As it were, class actions by ADR shareholders in the US seem to imperil the already tottering edifice even further. Legal liabilities, both domestic and international are expected to be huge. The sacking of the board and the Union Government's resolve to appoint a new board would mean some uncertainty about who's in charge for some time. Mergers and acquisitions are a risky business anyways, and with such baggage in stow, Satyam will find suitors hard to find. There is need for some quick action; only the coming days will tell what it portends for India's image in the world.

A desire to change....?

Yesterday's blasts in the heart of Delhi perhaps once again served to lull us out of what is increasingly seeming like a sense of security and complacency. Whatever may be the cause célèbre behind this and all other related incidents is perhaps beyond the point now; this isn't the act of rational people, so reason isn't exactly what we need to comprehend here.

That those who plan such dastardly acts care neither for the lives of innocents nor even for the tenets of their own faith is reflected in the fact that this incident has taken place in the middle of what is regarded as the holiest month in the entire Muslim calendar, a time for fasting, penitence and penance. Surely a true believer would not have resorted to such extreme means at a time when the Lord seeks him to be most forgiving? And perhaps this again is the wrong question addressed to the wrong people, because no person who truly believes in a Divinity could be so barbaric, so heartless.

While we heap opprobrium on the assailants, we must also realize that it is high time that we safeguard ourselves from such attacks in the future. While it is impossible to completely neutralize the threat of such incidents, it is always good to be able to and to minimize them as far as possible. Newspapers and the television media have discovered that Indian intelligence agencies had knowledge of the potential threat, and have insinuated that despite having such 'knowledge', the agencies chose to sit quietly. I wonder whether these agencies knew anything about these incidents beyond the fact that they could occur, something that even a common man could know. And this shouldn't be construed as a criticism of the agencies, because I doubt terrorist organizations publish a list of coming events for the next month for the perusal of the public.

What hampers the intelligence agencies the most in India is the lack of a pan-India policing agency or a federal law and order body. Intelligence gathering, being a preserve of defence and law and order, is a centralized activity, but acting on intelligence, when gathered, is left to different state police agencies, which do not necessarily collaborate with each other. Internal rivalries, Himalayan egos, and a tendency towards blowing one's trumpet at the cost of the greater good have time and again hampered what should have been seamless investigations. In this year alone, four different cities have been afflicted by the venom of terrorism. With one federal agency, it could have been possible to investigate all these crimes more effectively, as often where the same organization is behind such crimes, crucial evidence is left behind, something that can enable creating a chain of responsibility back to the organization itself.

Perhaps it is too much to ask of our political class to give up their regional loyalties in favour of a national spirit. Perhaps we may as well go on dying, because in the end, we are the people who create the political class who is wont to let us die and do nothing about it. And if we aren't prepared to die, perhaps next year when we have the chance, we may vote for a change. Platitudes to the dead and consoling the injured may work for a month or so, but the wounds that these incidents inflict on the soul of our society are festering, and it is the need of the hour that we, the people who ultimately matter, do something about this. It is not just our duty to our society; it is our duty to our families, to ourselves.

Quo vadis....?

So ends the great Indian tamasha. Or maybe it hasn’t; one can really never be sure. But if there’s one thing that one can be sure of, it is this that there is no depth in Hades that can be surpassed, no threshold in Hell that can be bettered by our political class.

We are wont to claim that we are the world’s biggest democracy, and that this alone should be cause to welcome us with open arms into the corridors of global power. But the fact remains that irrespective of our size as a democratic system, it still remains suspect as to whether we have truly comprehended the full import of the responsibilities that being a democracy entails.

Democracy is a word (pardon my lesson on linguistics J) formed from the Greek word for popular government ‘dimokratia’, itself derived from the words ‘demos’ (people) and ‘kratos’ (rule). It is therefore expected that the will of the people would be considered sacrosanct by a democratic system. So where lies the will of the people?

One must admit that the quality of the debate in Parliament has significantly improved, considering that for the first time in independent India’s history a government was being questioned on a matter of foreign policy. It’s true that this matter had greater domestic implications, but essentially the objections to the policy decision were mainly on concerns of sovereignty, surely not a domestic concern.

The nuclear deal is the need of the hour, if not in its form, but at least in spirit and essence. India cannot meet the growing energy requirements of a progressing populace with conventional and non-nuclear non-conventional sources of energy. The conventional sources are too polluting and given the concerns on global warming, we would be better off trying to reduce our reliance on such sources. The non-nuclear non-conventional sources of energy (wind, tidal, solar, hydro) are too expensive and too untested to deliver the concrete results that we need.

The opponents of the deal have stated that this deal would make us beholden to a certain foreign power and to its ‘undesirable’ influence. What they seem to have failed to comprehend, or at least wish not to comprehend, is that the due process being followed to go through with the deal would enable us to get the nuclear technology and fuel from all the current members of the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group), and not just from one or two selected members. And then again, those who accuse the government of selling out to a particular power are themselves ‘guilty’, by their own standards, of having ‘sold out’ the nation to the very same power. A case of the pot calling the kettle black, perhaps?

The government now has 9 months to get the deal through. Its task wouldn’t be any easier, what with its motley team of allies, all of whom are as temperamental as a baby with a soiled diaper. History will show us whether this vote was just; posterity will judge us for our commitment to our principles.

Fuelling woes....

This was a dismal week as far as the Union Government was concerned. Suddenly, the ‘achievements’ of the last four years have become meaningless. All those guarantees for rural employment, and loan waivers, and still people go ticking you off for being compelled to pay a ‘wee’ bit more for the groceries……one wonders what would one have to do to impress these blokes! If the fuel price crisis wasn’t enough, what with the state petroleum companies literally on the deathbed, global crude prices at an all time high, and food prices zooming up faster than a ISRO satellite in space, the loss of Karnataka was the proverbial last straw. I bet that the boffins in the AICC must be scratching their heads or pulling their hair out (depending on whether they have a shiny pate or not), wondering aloud, “Can we possibly do any worse?”

Prices, and more particularly fuel prices, have always been a sensitive issue with governments; they could and have been seen to cause the downfall of many a government over the world. And in India, with our populist political class, which simply frowns on pragmatism and long-term vision (and that isn’t because nearly half of them are geriatrics who are more suited for a nursing home than for Parliament…), price hike considerations simply mean that you are left with two options: one, raise prices and commit political suicide, or let prices stay the way they are and compel the nation to undertake financial and economic suicide.

Surely suicide is a strong term here, you say? Hardly so. Let us evaluate each option more closely.

Fuel prices don’t just affect your ability to go for long drives along the Bandra Reclamation or Palm Beach Road (depending on which part of Mumbai you stay); they influence the logistics costs of transporting right about everything from tomatoes to horses to automobiles, and of course the tykes commonly known as ‘humans’. So, even an infinitesimally minute raise of just 0.000001% in the prices of automobile fuels would mean that the ‘crooked capitalists’, those ‘slaves of Mammon’, (to quote the Communists), would get yet another opportunity to raise prices for just about everything.

And we aren’t even looking at cooking fuels yet. Raise the prices for those, and you will have the populace marching to the Legislature, demanding that someone be scalped, guillotined, hung, drawn, quartered, and just for a thrill, cooked on a low flame using some expensive cooking fuel paid for from the bloke’s own pockets. And considering the propensity of our legislators to be ever so enterprising, those pockets are bound to be pretty deep, and the cooking ever so slow and tortuous (if not the cooking, the expense certainly would be…).

So let fuel prices be as they are. I mean, who on this earth wants things to be more expensive (other than those pesky capitalists, bourgeois rascals, out to make a buck at the proletariat’s expense)? So what if the state petroleum companies are going bankrupt? How dare they go broke? They have mismanaged themselves, that’s for sure……and now they want us to raise fuel prices to cover up their ineptitude? NO SIR! We may be stupid and impractical, buffoons and idiots of the highest order, conniving and snivelling rats, but we would be damned if we were to allow you to do what is right for you.

On a more serious note (and I want to end this blog with this), the energy crisis is finally looking the world in the face. Oil producers may be profiting from this sudden increase in global prices, but in the end, resentment against them is also increasing manifold. And where there is resentment, there is a sense of being betrayed, a modern day Dolchstoßlegende, and the last time such sentiments arose, calamity (read war) struck the land. Oil importers need to comprehend the fragile nature of their existence, being wholly dependent on the fuel being brought in. The time to face the energy crisis is now.

We need to understand that a government of the people does not seek to mollycoddle its people; it seeks to protect them, yes, but even a mother sometimes feels the need to punish her children. She doesn’t love them any less, but the beating is for their own good. So it is with fuel prices.

If we do not raise these prices now (or do something to ensure that we aren’t too way off the global price mark), we may end up endangering the health of the very enterprises that are meant to safeguard our future. Oil prices may drop in the near future, and consequently domestic prices also will drop. It is time we evaluated whether we will bear the prick of the injection now, or suffer the agony of an amputation later on. The choice is ours and ours alone to make. So choose wisely.

Tum Chalo To Hindustan Chale....

The Lead India initiative (the title is their tag line) of the Times of India group is perhaps just the thing that India needed in these turbulent times. Our political system, never the most reliable and credible of alternatives, has denigrated even further to unimaginable depths. The administrative systems continue to trudge along at their own pace, unmindful of the actual needs and requirements of the nation.

And somewhere in all this, the common man, the individual is stuck. He wants change, he wants improvement in the way he leads his life. But he is unwilling to do anything about it on his own. He is content to just wipe the sweat of his brow, to complain about the sad state of affairs, and if things are really bad, then even curse and condemn the nation.

The Indian polity was never about the individual. Society always has been at the crux of everything. To say the truth, this is the case with every society, so why condemn India? I do not condemn India as much as I fault Indians for her sad plight.

We won our freedom not because the masses were behind the idea. We won it because there were individuals who felt that their lives were unbearable and that something needed to be done about it.

In the post-independence period, with its heavy emphasis on socialism, which was good in one way, I feel individualism was stifled. Society matters, but what matters more is the leadership that guides society, and that doesn't come from the mass; it comes from individuals, from single people, who have a dream, who have a will, and most of all, who have the courage to bring that vision to fruition. Our single minded attention to the public good without care or concern for the leaders who are to create that good has brought us to this stage.

And so this initiative is commendable. The video below is the official anthem of the initiative and exemplifies the angst of the Indian people, and yet tells the people, "Enough of your sighing and crying, stop your endless complaining and whining. Get up and do something about whatever it is that bothers you. Don't worry; the world will follow you if you are in the right."

So when are you doing something to change this country's perception of itself?

Where is the will of the commune....?

The Nandigram incident just doesn’t seem like it’s ever going to get over. More than eight months have passed, but the flames are just as hot, and the violence simply refuses to abate. The cadres of the ruling Communist Front government in West Bengal and the resisting Nandigram locals have been involved in a horrific ‘war’, to use the term in its most deplorable manner, which has caused the deaths of countless innocents, deprivation of the most basic forms of justice and law, and more than anything, has perhaps demonstrated the high-handed approach of the State towards its denizens.

The SEZ at Nandigram may be a harbinger of development, of the progress that has so far eluded the state of West Bengal, is all fine, but the people responsible for this sad state of affairs are not the common people of the state, who stand the risk of being asked to surrender productive agricultural land to industrialists; rather the ruling Communists, who have held the reins of power for the last 30 years are the worst culprits in this entire drama. They, by their intransigence, ensured that West Bengal was never perceived as a region of stable industrial growth, and in the process, ensured that the people remained poor and deprived, and hence dependent on the mindless political machinations of the Communists.

I have never found the Communists to be a reasonable crowd, and to those who should read this blog, this may appear to cloud or even prejudice my views on this issue. But the point is that the Communists could not have made a bigger mess of what was essentially a simple case to handle. The Communists often vaunt themselves as the guardians of the people, as the protectors of the weak and the downtrodden. I fail to see how compelling a group of individuals to surrender their livelihood is equivalent to protecting their rights. But then the Communists believe in the creed of ‘the commune before the individual’. And perhaps that creed has now been extended to ‘the party before the commune, the commune before the individual, and the individual before no one’.

Which in itself won't be a new thing, considering the forced migrations of Stalin's time, and the other expulsions in other Communist establishments. It isn't as if non-communist governments do not indulge in these acts, but then they don't parade themselves as the establishment of the proletariat, do they?

That CPI (M) cadres prevented the entry of the CRPF forces dispatched to maintain peace in Nandigram is a most deplorable and most reprehensible act, and surely warrants censuring the party concerned. Don’t tell us that this was a simultaneous act of expression; the Communists often have had us believe that nothing in their organization is ever simultaneous; they think out everything, discuss everything and only then act. So if the CPI(M) cadres are out, rampaging on the streets of Nandigram, then I hold the CPI(M) to be responsible, and by extension, the incumbent government of West Bengal.

The Congress curses and heaps with opprobrium the government of Gujarat, and only their lack of a significantly large majority in Parliament prevents them from dismissing it. But I am shocked at their silence at the carnage of Nandigram. Perhaps, the faults of an ally are permissible, but that of an enemy never so, no matter even if the faults of both are comparable. I am not an apologist for Mr. Modi, for I find his brand of politics to be equally reprehensible and abominable. But I implore upon people: at least, be unequivocal on what constitutes an abomination.

The Communists are losing their grip over what they had come to believe was their personal fiefdom. These acts of wanton disregard for the people will ultimately serve as their swansong, their last futile attempts at snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.

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?

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.

Is this the right way.....?

Intolerance goes deep in our ethos. And there’s nothing that we are doing to ensure that our children are not affected by this malaise. Or perhaps we do not wish to. Whatever the reason may be, it is a sad day when thoughts and ideas are sought to be stifled at the point of a dagger, at the barrel of a gun, at the edge of a fist, and no one wants to do anything about it.

When the Faculty of Fine Arts at Baroda got embroiled in the most controversial act of permitting outsiders to enter the Faculty’s premises and beating up a student for his allegedly ‘disrespectful’ works, liberals and ‘moderates’ throughout the country rose to deplore the act. And very rightly so, for even if the student concerned was being disrespectful, that wasn’t justification enough for someone to go up to him and bash him up.

That the perpetrators belonged to an organization supposedly espousing the aspirations of the Hindu community should really have had no effect on the volume of the deprecations. After all, a fanatic anywhere is a fanatic, irrespective of his/her faith or lack of it thereof. The denunciations were heartening, because they illustrated that while the aggrieved had the right to be so, there was a ‘right’ way to resolve such conflicts, a more sophisticated and cultivated manner, if you please.

And yet, the silence when concerning Ms. Nasreen is simply shocking, nay, deplorable. Ms. Nasreen may be a controversial writer, or rather a writer who survives on courting controversy. Her writings involving her faith may verge on the edge of blasphemy and irreverence.

Nonetheless, to barge on her person, to threaten to kill her are neither reverent nor justifiable acts for anyone, no matter how sacrilegious her words may seem to anyone. Does Islam permit any man to injure or harm an unarmed woman on the mere pretext that she has dared to insult his faith? Is Islam so weak on its feet that mere words would shake its very foundations? I think not.

Frankly, politics and faith are two completely different things, and ought to be maintained so. That they have not been so far is distressing, but definitely no cause for the same being propagated through the ages. No faith teaches the path of violence, and if it does, then it is unworthy of being venerated.

Those who perpetrated these offences weren't ignorant buffoons. They were legislators, expected to know the law, and yet that they chose to break it should not be reason for letting them off easily. In fact, they should be prosecuted even more harshly. A threat to murder someone is no laughing matter, and a murderer must not be permitted to hide behind the authority of the Legislature.

There is a legal recourse that can be relied upon. It may be slow, it may be arduous, but it is the right thing. Fanaticism must not be accepted, if not for our sake, then for our children, lest they find themselves in a world where speaking itself offends someone.

Right to abstain.....?

By this time tomorrow, India will have a new President. It might seem on the basis of sheer numbers that Ms. Patil will be the next occupant of Raisina Hill, but then politics and politicians revel in being as unpredictable as possible. The incumbent UPA government will gloat over how it managed to ensure that its ‘nominee’ becomes the Head of State. I used the quotation marks because no candidate in the Presidential elections is ever a representative of a particular political outfit or coalition; rather, each candidate is an Independent, whose nomination simply receives support from a cross-section of the electors.

Speaking of electors, the so-called Third Front, or as they would prefer themselves called now, the UNPA, have asked their MPs and MLAs to abstain from voting from either of the two candidates in the fray. Their reason for abstention stems from their reluctance to be seen to support either the ruling UPA’s ‘nominee’ or the opposing NDA’s ‘nominee’, for purely ‘ideological’ reasons. So rather than just allow its electors to vote as per their mind, the heads of the various outfits in the Front ordered their electors to stay away.

And in that is a distressing event. Can a political outfit be permitted to order public representatives from performing their duties? Can anyone presume so much authority as to command someone beholden to the will of the people that he/she may not exercise his mental faculties to perform responsibilities expected of him/her?

The Presidential elections may not be as important to the common people as they may be made out to be. And undoubtedly our Founding Fathers never intended to make them so either, for had so been their intention, they would have incorporated the proviso in the Constitution then itself. A popularly elected President and a popularly elected Legislative are somehow too explosive a mixture without proper safeguards.

But that’s beside the point. That some electors would not be voting in these elections doesn’t bother me as much as the fact that representatives can get away with not voting on matters of state, on important legislations affecting the people, people whose ‘will’ they claim to represent. The various state and the central legislatures are replete with examples wherein member attendance is sometimes as low as 30 percent. In recent times, important policies such as the Annual Budgets have been passed without much, or rather any, debate. Are we losing our touch at democracy?

I had written earlier this month about some electoral reforms that we should look at seriously. There is need for reforms here as well.

• Representatives incapable of maintaining an attendance record of more than 60 percent should be denied their pay, as is accorded to them.
• Walkouts being so common an occurrence nowadays, every time a representative takes part in a walkout, the pay for the said day should be denied, irrespective of when the walkout occurred in the course of the day.
• Whips issued to the effect of asking representatives to abstain from voting should be deemed as extra-constitutional and void; a representative cannot be permitted to be forced or coerced into abjuring his/her right to exercise his/her responsibilities towards his constituents in particular and the nation in general.
• The said right is not inviolable. If the said representative should be found to have violated parliamentary norms and regulations regarding conduct, both within and without the legislature, he/she may be debarred from voting.
• The period of debarment would also be applicable for the denial of pay.

As always, I would appreciate your comments on these suggestions of mine.

Voting for change or changing the vote....?

The recent statement made by Parliamentarians during the reservation debates and now the Presidential elections about them representing the ‘will of the people’ had sparked off a blog previously, and guess this would be just a continuation of the same.

The current political scenario and especially the incumbent administration is a consequence of a post-poll alliance. I feel that this in itself is a mockery of the ‘will of the people’. Individual parties and pre-poll alliances, at best, can be deemed worthy of the will of the people, as the people willfully vote in a said party or a certain alliance. But post-poll alliances are a backhanded way of getting power, come what may. That a certain party or alliance does not have the mandate to rule on its own should be sufficient enough to comprehend that it does not in truth represent the will of the majority of the people.

As it is, the ‘first-by-the-poll’ system of Indian elections allows for someone securing as low as 20 percent to be elected as the people’s ‘representative’. I find this a laughable prospect, and sometimes even disturbing. I mean, let’s say out of a total population of 100, 10 don’t come out to vote. So 90 people vote. Let’s say there are 10 candidates. Even if 18 people decide to vote for a single candidate A, and the rest vote for the remaining 9, such that neither candidate has more votes than A, A would be declared a winner. 18 people out of 100 voted for a candidate, and he becomes a representative of the will of the entire 100? And what about the choice of the remaining 82 people? Scary!

So, electoral reform is perhaps needed, whether urgently or maybe slowly is a matter of implementation, but it is sure that some reform is needed. I have some suggestions, and some possible fallout, as follows:

• Prohibit parties from forming any post-poll coalitions. Only those formations which were formed before the polls took place should be permitted to stake a claim for the government.
• This may lead to a minority government, but essentially if the largest formation has to come in power, then this will ensure that.
• Also, the proviso of a confidence vote can ensure that parties other than the claimant can certify whether the claimant has their confidence.
• This will also reduce the risks of horse-trading and defections, as no longer can legislators split their parties after the election on the basis of who wins the polls.
• The minority government continues till such time that it enjoys the support of the Parliament, both de jure and de facto.
• Discard the ‘first by the poll’ system, and adopt the runoff system, as in France. If no candidate secures a simple majority in a specific election, then the two candidates with the most votes proceed to a second round, from which all others are excluded.
• This may prolong the election process, and may increase costs.
• But, eventually, this might ensure that at least 51 people out of 100 have voted for a certain candidate.

These suggestions are neither infallible nor perfect; I am willing to accept that. There could be some measure which could be better placed to deal with my concerns. Therefore, I would appreciate your comments on my suggestions.

Reading:

• Two Round System
• Plurality Voting System