Understanding Hungry Politicians

I don’t get surprised by Political Corruption. Here’s the explanation:

One fine day, a fox (citizen of Jungle) and a lion (the king of the jungle) visited Ahmedabad. After taking ride of Ahmedabad- Darshan (site-seeing) Bus for the whole day, they went to Vishala, the famous Gujarati restaurant, for dinner.

The waiter asked the fox – “Two full Gujarati dishes for you two, right sir?”

“No, only one is fine” – replied the fox.

The waiter asked surprisingly - “Why? The lion is not hungry?”

“If he would have been so, I would have been his meal right then” - responded the fox with a gentle smile. And he added – “I have made sure, I remain with the king, who is well-fed”.

Moral of the story: Always have people, who are satiated, in power structure, else they’ll eat you out.

In the pre-independence era, people who were entering into the politics perceived it as a way of serving the nation and usually were successful in their respective careers (Tilak, Gokhale, Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Jinnah and almost all of them were fairly to significantly successful in their respective professions). Making money out of such service was just out of question for them. They entered into politics to give and not to take. In short, on personal level, they were satiated.

However, as the country became free and when our politicians gained power (and charge of lots of money), politics became a profession (rather a business). 

Today the system works more or less like this:

· Get in the circle of a political party of interest, and be very nice to the influential voices there

· Get funds from family, friends and relatives (society in-general). You also should have great potential of attracting funds from the businesses. Needless to say, the amount for contesting an election reaches crores. If you can make your party-heads believe that you are worth initial investment and will generate great returns for the party, you are likely to win a party-ticket to fight election.

· If you win election,

o You are expected to enrich party treasury

o All of your friends and relatives, who have invested in your political career must be benefitted (economically, at least)

o Satisfy demands of all business houses, who provide capital for your election campaign

o Make sure all grass-root workers of your party have improved life styles

Thus, before even resuming service to the people, the politicians have a huge list of hungry stake-holders today. The system is set up such that the people in power have to feed all major election-investors to remain in power, else they won’t reinvest in the future.

Politicians very well know that kick-backs, non-merit favour, and manipulation of lawful procedures are various forms of corruption, which is unlawful. But, this is the system that our society has cohesively created. We may hate our politicians from the bottom of our hearts, but they are there because they deserved to be there. Is there any alternative to this system? How can one become an influential political leader without going through the above inconvenient steps? How can we have well-fed politicians, who don't eat up public funds? How can we have givers?

You and I must come up with the answers of above questions and act for systematic improvements with persistence. Let’s not forget, we all have created the present system and we only can ameliorate it. 

My suggestions –

· we need to push for election reformations like: state funded election-campaign and complete transparency of accounts and of candidate selection procedures of political parties

· And, of course, we need more aware citizens

· last but not least, let’s elect satiated candidates, who are doing fine at personal level.

Image courtesy: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQuPiIUtQ1HME9IKXDmwd6nnlwghD6iv-VM7JSKzAHN88WOm8ea-ERbi4hl199Va5ZEMeUr90G59K_WnLJE33V2JSZLFu0f9WOD85mzVCfJmhV2QCQRAIWI7osJbHMTaqTq4CDoYEY6xTg/s1600/1_671615_1_34.jpg

I welcome your comments....

Critical analysis of the Idea of Pakistan and India

Idea of Pakistan: Hindus and Muslims of South Asia have completely separate history. Their heroes are different, their rituals are different, their behaviour patterns (tehzeeb) are different and they value different things. It would have been absolutely impossible for the Muslims to live and to secure basic socio-economic rights under a Hindu ruling country with over 70% of Hindu population. Thus, creation of Pakistan was inevitable for the wellbeing of the Muslims of South Asia and to escape from much likely Hindu domination. This ideology is also referred as a two-nation theory.

Idea of India: Since ancient time, people of various religion and race have come to the land of India. Not only Hindus and Muslims, but the people of all religion can live together because we share more commonalities than differences. India is for everyone. The people of South Asia share rich history, which dates back more than 5000 years. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism have evolved from here. In addition, throughout history, India has warmly welcomed other religions, mainly, Judaism, Zoroastrianism (Parsi), Islam, and Christianity. The root of this pluralist ideology seems to be the idea of Vasudhaiv kutumbkam (whole world is a single family) that originates in ancient Indian texts called the Upanishads and is considered an integral part of the Hindu Philosophy.

Both these ideas (of India & Pakistan) are incompatible with each other. If Hindus and Muslims are doing well together, the idea of India prevails but the idea of Pakistan becomes fallacious. And in the events of communal disharmony, the idea of India would be severely disturbed, while the idea of Pakistan would find concrete justification. Quite naturally, these ideas drive both countries to zero sum games. One’s triumph is the defeat for the other.

On a closer look, the idea of India seems more promising keeping a long-term perspective in mind. The pluralist nature of a country facilitates positive relationship with all kinds of nations. For example, India has warm ties with Palestine as well as Israel; however, Pakistan is unable to have relations with Israel. In addition, pluralist nature helps a nation strengthen internal social stability as every section of society owns the country on equal basis. And this could be the reason why Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, wanted Pakistan to be a modern secular democratic state, where the people of all religion would have equal rights (as per his speech on 11^th August, 1947). For years, he was demanding a separate country on religious bases and when the time had come, he was talking about creating a secular state. This message was indigestible for the masses as the people were romanticizing the idea of a new Muslim country. Sadly, he did not live long enough to implement his idea of plural Pakistan, which would have been more or less just another India, but with a Muslim majority. Today, Pakistan desperately needs a visionary leadership that builds a tolerant, secular and progressive welfare-state that their Quaid-E-Azam, Jinnah, had envisioned. Such a state would have all of the ingredients of becoming the best partner India can ever have.

On the other hand, India faces quite unique challenges. A section of its population, mainly Hindu, supports Pakistan’s two nation theory (i.e., Hindus and Muslims cannot live together). These people believe that the Muslims should not be allowed to live in India as they are already given a separate land to live on. These people regret the fact that India became a secular state and not a Hindu (theocratic) state. They romanticize the idea of a Hindu nation just as many Islamists did for Pakistan prior to the partition. Another challenge - a section of Muslim community keeps identifying itself with the Arabs or the Persians rather than the rest of the non-Muslim Indians. These elements must open their eyes and own up the Indian history instead of beginning stories from the 7th centrury Arabia. The recent genetic research unanimously suggests that the South Asian Muslims are genetically same as Hindus (mostly no observable difference between the genes of Hindus & Muslims of South Asia), not the Arabs, the central Asians or the Muslims of any other region of the world. All of these people, irrespective of their religion, ought to realize that they are strengthening the idea of Pakistan and hurting the idea of India. By doing so, they are disregarding their primary duty, which is to safe-guard and to nurture the idea of India.

The two nation theory is weak because it has generated from fear and bigotry, whereas the Vasudhaiv Kutumbkam theory is strong, very strong, because it expresses hope for a harmonized world. The true triumph of the idea of India will be evident when the individuals across the whole world would consider themselves as members of a global family. And the best place to begin this campaign is the neighbour on our left.

I welcome your comments....

Finally, Non-corrupts' Time has Come

If you select a class of 100 students randomly, you’ll find at least 5 students who would copy during a test, even if the punishment is ‘to be hanged by neck till death’. In the same class, you will also find at least 5 students who will never copy even if the test is of extreme high stake and there is neither supervision nor punishment. Now, the case of the other 90 students is very interesting. If the exam conditions are favourable to copying, they will copy. And if the supervisor is strict, they will mind their own business (and not copy). Their actions depend on the environment. They like to orient themselves to the favourable conditions. In short, the middle 90% flows with the flow.

Up till 5^th of April this year, the stories of corruption had been very loud in the news media as compared to the stories of fight against the corruption. Back to back scams from 2G, CWG, Adarsh society to black money laundering, fake pilot-license and cash for vote grabbed the national headlines. In the recent times, there was nothing new except the increase in the scale and frequency of scams. Such events had strongly reinforced the orientation of the middle 90% of population towards corruption. These people had adjusted their lives in a corrupt society and had accepted corruption as a way of living. Clearly, they were flowing with the flow. Corruption was considered as a pragmatic approach and an art of getting things done smoothly.

However, since 5^th of April 2011, the poles have started reversing. India witnessed something unprecedented. Anna Hazare, one of the social activists of India Against Corruption, sat on fast unto death at Jantar Mantar in Delhi, demanding formation of joint committee of parliament for Lokpal bill (ombudsman bill or anti-corruption bill). This was supported by many national social workers, including a star activist, Kiran Bedi. Maybe because the world cup was over and there was still time for IPL to begin, or perhaps because they saw something bigger than cricket or bollywood, the media started broadcasting the anti-corruption campaign nationwide. The 5% of population, whose voice was undermined for so long, who always lived a life with complete integrity and honesty, whom others called ‘misfits in today’s times’, who refused to compromise on ethics for having few rupees more, had finally found some resonance on national media. Now, this 5% of people, who otherwise lived in pockets of society in isolation, are synergizing and uniting and are raising their voice louder and louder. The flow is now gradually altering in the direction of anticorruption. For a long time the individuals of this minority had stood against the inundating forces of corrupt fellow citizens all alone. But now they have found an opportunity to unite and to change the orientation of the middle 90% population from corruption to anti-corruption.

The Lokpal bill has become an existential issue for this non-corrupt minority. If it does not get through, they will feel they are (and were always) misfits and there is no place for them in the present Indian society. On the other hand, if the bill gets through, this minority will strive even harder to make anti-corrupt behaviour a norm of the Indian society. The implementation of anti-corruption bill will make PM and his ministers directly accountable to the citizens of India. And perhaps someday, the trickledown effect will establish accountability in our bureaucracy and public officials.

Irrespective of its outcome, Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement has done a great service to the non-corrupt Indians, who, now, know for sure that they are not alone. In addition, the middle 90% now have a chance to listen to their conscience and to identify themselves as citizens of a non-corrupt country by altering their orientation to anti-corrupt behaviour.

The following video: Bhrashtachar - The street play by Asmita Theatre Group

Image courtesy: http://www.newsreporter.in/anna-hazare-starts-his-fast-until-death-again-corrpution

I welcome your comments....

How can we have a riot-proof Gujarat?

This year is celebrated as a Golden Jubilee year of Gujarat. We Gujaratis have developed a state which is the growth engine of India. However, despite our endless progress stories, we have not yet succeeded in creating a society which is free of riots, and systematic violence. Enough has been said, and written about the role of governments, media and various interest groups in riots. But, ‘how individual citizens, who are not victims, are related with mass-madness’ - is a less explored question. And the most important question remains unanswered- how can we have a riot-proof Gujarat? This article will explore the possibility of creating a riot-free Gujarat.

Last several decades of Gujarat’s history have been tainted by occasional communal riots, mainly between Hindus and Muslims. The most recent and one of the most tragic episodes of violence occurred in 2002, the Godhra massacre and the following riots. I was in 12th standard (science stream), preparing for a very high-stake state board examination, the result of which was going to determine my undergraduate college as well as field of studies and my career. Unlike thousands of victims and people who witnessed violence during the state-wide communal riots, I was not exposed to violence. However, like the whole of Gujarat, I was constantly exposed to the sensationalizing media, and an overwhelmingly polarizing social atmosphere. It took three months for the cycles of violence to end. Each and every moment in these three months, I was burning from inside in search of peace. Based on my personal experiences and observations, I can say that such social scenario stimulated the following feelings in individuals like me (not victims of violence):

1. Fear and insecurity: We all want our loved ones to be safe. The thought of ‘hundreds of armed people attacking our home and family’ is a horror for everyone.

2. Anger: Quite obviously, one would detest living in a terrorizing social atmosphere. As a consequence, every individual rationalizes a ‘villain’ (individual or group) responsible for the mishap and seeks justice. In addition, the politicians, the media and the religious extremists nurture such rationalization. And if the justice is not done instantaneously, an individual may feel that it is his/her duty to punish that ‘villain’ by hook or crook (doesn’t matter if s/he may have to break the law).

3. Helplessness and frustration: When the city is under curfew and one has to keep his/her-self safe, s/he may do absolutely nothing to alleviate the sufferings of the victims. It is deeply frustrating to watch live on television the atrocities going on in your city.

4. Guilt: When we see others in pain, while we are absolutely fine, we feel a sort of guilt. Why s/he suffered and not I? Moreover, if we are part of a stronger section or a majority, or a privileged class of the society, this feeling can be even more intense. One may rationalize that s/he is part of a majority/group that is victimizing others.

It is possible that the people in Gujarat in-general experienced the first two types of feelings (i.e., fear & insecurity and anger) more strongly than the second two types of feelings (i.e., helplessness & frustration and guilt) because of their direct exposure of events. The first two types of feelings are more likely to trigger right-wing mindset, as the majority strongly unites to secure its interests. This was evident in 2002 state elections, as BJP enjoyed a sweeping victory. On the other hand, the people outside Gujarat were more likely to experience the later two types of feelings (i.e., helplessness & frustration and guilt). And this could stimulate sympathy towards minorities and a leftist mindset. Interestingly, the Congress party did win in the centre in 2004 loksabha (general) elections and formed a government in coalition with the leftist parties.

The time has healed wounds of many; and many believe that Gujarat has moved on. However, we have seen any cohesive effort which can ensure communal harmony neither by the state nor by the centre. After 2002, BJP has won elections on merit bases, and the congress has never recovered. One party hold is a worrying scenario for Gujarat, because BJP is very sluggish in moving to the centrist perspective from the far right. And the weak opposition party (congress) is unable to exert any pressure on the Modi government. Moreover, it seems the congress has still not realized that the majority of people in Gujarat perceive it as sub-servant of the minorities; and this is hurting it the most. Thus, I am extremely concerned about the social cohesion and stability of Gujarat. There are three options that we have:

1. The Modi-government should adopt a more centrist view publicly to take every section of community on board for an inclusive progress. There are positive developments in this direction, but there is no pressure-group in direct action.

2. The congress (or any other party) should immediately find visionary leaders having high credibility, competency & centrist-views (not over-focus on minorities); and should strengthen itself to provide a serious fight in the next election.

3. We, the Gujaratis, should become pluralists and teach our children pluralist values.

The first two options are out of hands of common Gujaratis. But, the last option is worth implementing. Gujarat has overlooked the unique contribution of its very own son, Gandhi, to the field of education. In all of his educational experiments, Gandhi always emphasized on teaching children the basic values of all of the major religions. The reason behind such educational practices was to nurture pluralist values in children, in order to have tolerant citizens who respect diversity. Most of the biases and bigotry have roots in ignorance and lack of empathy towards the other group of people. If an individual is well aware of the way of living, set of beliefs, and the hardships and day to day challenges of the other set of people, s/he will be more likely to see commonalities rather than differences. And these common elements will prevent compartmentalization and segregation and ensure social cohesion.

Today our schools have forgotten the idea of sarva-dharma prarthana (prayer of all religions). In addition, Hindus and Muslims are increasingly living in separate areas in almost every city. Because of this geographical segregation, our schools have hardly remained multi-religious in nature. As a consequence, the younger Hindus are losing contact with their Muslim counterparts and vice-versa. This, to me, is a very dangerous scenario. It is like waiting for a failure. Unless we Gujaratis identify this and act accordingly, it would take a small event, attack or accident for anti-social elements to instigate riots and to trap Gujarat in the cycle of violence.

Lastly, I would like to provide five simple steps for nurturing pluralist values in ourselves as well as in our children:

1. Study your religion and cultural ethos.

2. Analyze yourself if you are biased against any religious communities.

3. Make friends of different religions (begin with the one you hate the most).

4. Learn about his/her religious literature and rituals, and identify common elements.

5. Stay with your friend (of other religion) for seven consecutive days.

These ordinary steps have an extraordinary empirical value. The choice is ours. Do we want to ignore fault lines and fight internally when there is friction? Or do we want to create an ironclad social cohesiveness, which is riot-proof? Always remember, a pluralist country is built by pluralist states; and a pluralist state is built by pluralist individuals.

Image courtesy: http://changemakers123.blogspot.com/2011/04/religion-and-culture.html

I welcome your comments....