Arundhati Roy spoke and the media exploded. This time she adopted another pet and called it Kashmir. She said she was speaking what “millions of people in Kashmir have been saying everyday for years". To quote her: “Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds. Pity the nation that needs to jail those who ask for justice while communal killers, mass murderers, corporate scamsters, looters, rapists, and those who prey on the poorest of the poor, roam free."
The government is now contemplating sedition charges against her and hard line Hurriyat leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani, with whom she shared the dais at the seminar, 'Whither Kashmir? Freedom or Enslavement'. The media lapped up the debris left behind her explosive call for supporting those who want ‘azadi’ for Kashmir.
There is no doubt about the fact that India by itself is a post-colonial construct, the concept of Hindustan arising out of the imperial ashes. History is testimony to the fact that in the span of a century from Robert Clive-led Battle of Plassey in 1757 to the Sepoy Mutiny (or the patriotic term "first war of independence"), the colony called India more or less took shape as it is today, sealed to a large extent by Dalhousie's final nails of annexation. The 1940s saw an impatient British empire rushing through partition of a non-nation and marking ambivalent boundaries. The empire was in a hurry to leave the country. It left, but in shreds after its loot of our resources to fund its industrial revolution and its rape of our conscience with its seditious designs of divide and rule. Left to fend for itself, the country gifted itself Kashmir, again in a hurry before their people could realise the pact with their Maharaja. But after the accession, like other princely states, Kashmir remains a part of our democratic fabric, though its politicians retained their feudal colour. The Indian government's promises got buried under the Valley's political and military snowstorm.
That Geelani shrewdly used star activist Arundhati Roy to add glamour to the separatists' call for azadi is a natural marketing gimmick. But Arundhati Roy romanticising Kashmir militancy is dangerous. A writer-activist adopting the cause of Maoists and displaced tribals is understandable. That is an internal question. But calling the Indian government's acquisition of Kashmir foul is a serious cause for security concern. It is at best an open invitation to destablilise the volatile sub-continent. By espousing the cause of separatists, she is questioning India as an entity and that is outrageous.
Agreed that Kashmir is an Indian question mark, but instead of solving the question, Roy, as an Indian, could help democratic forces resume a healthy dialogue and inspire sincerity among government and security forces. And, the Indian government, instead of contemplating to arrest Roy, could begin taking sincere political and economic steps in the Valley to win back people's confidence.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Monday, October 18, 2010
Merkel's silent bomb
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has dropped a silent bomb. “Multikulti, the concept that we are living side by side and are happy about it, does not work,” she said. She is echoing the political climate in Germany that seems to be “committed to a dominant German culture and opposed to a multi-cultural one”. A study showed that more than 35.6 per cent of those surveyed believed Germany is being “over-run by foreigners” and more than one in 10 called for a “Fuehrer” to run the country with a strong hand.
This is disturbing trend and reminds us of Nazi Germany’s political slogan: Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer, which means One people, one nation and one leader.
Jingoism and jobs have become the two sides of the coin. Remember, the job riots in France? Or American President Barak Obama’s call to American companies to look at Buffalo instead of Bangalore for talent, his striking tax incentives for such patriotic gestures and the hiking of H1B visa rates for Indian companies’ offshore pursuits.
Globalisation, according to Thomas Friedman, has helped flatten our world and fade the countries’ borders. It has given an opportunity to multiple talents crisscross our planet, throwing boundary politics to the wind. The goal was larger now, going beyond self and country. This was a healthy trend, till recession dented the resilience. The anomaly of globalisation is taking wings in the form of jingoistic politics. Economic reforms and tax restructuring have become ways to poke the “immigrant” the wrong way.
While India and China are taking giant strides, the economy has dipped significantly in Europe. Jobs are getting scarce, and hence insecurity has crept in. Political leaders across Europe are more or less talking the same language. Spain, Greece, France, Britain or Italy might not have been as blatant as Chancellor Merkel, but have thrown subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle gauntlet at the immigrant population that brought them there because of globalisation. To add to the contamination of the economic waters is the slow-poison of international terrorism.
The pangs of insecurity are probably making the developed nations turn inwards for native talent. But more than that, it is leading to a dangerous trend of political leaders pandering to local sentiments for short-term gains. And they are coming out with insignificant policies like the burqa ban that have no bearing on economic uplift. I am no advocate of the regressive burqa. But the fact is going strong on such measures deflects the attention on serious economic reforms and turns the immigrant into a potential victim.
A narrow economic vision guided by ethnocentricity is the most potent venom that guarantees the demise of humanity first and globalisation later.
This is disturbing trend and reminds us of Nazi Germany’s political slogan: Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer, which means One people, one nation and one leader.
Jingoism and jobs have become the two sides of the coin. Remember, the job riots in France? Or American President Barak Obama’s call to American companies to look at Buffalo instead of Bangalore for talent, his striking tax incentives for such patriotic gestures and the hiking of H1B visa rates for Indian companies’ offshore pursuits.
Globalisation, according to Thomas Friedman, has helped flatten our world and fade the countries’ borders. It has given an opportunity to multiple talents crisscross our planet, throwing boundary politics to the wind. The goal was larger now, going beyond self and country. This was a healthy trend, till recession dented the resilience. The anomaly of globalisation is taking wings in the form of jingoistic politics. Economic reforms and tax restructuring have become ways to poke the “immigrant” the wrong way.
While India and China are taking giant strides, the economy has dipped significantly in Europe. Jobs are getting scarce, and hence insecurity has crept in. Political leaders across Europe are more or less talking the same language. Spain, Greece, France, Britain or Italy might not have been as blatant as Chancellor Merkel, but have thrown subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle gauntlet at the immigrant population that brought them there because of globalisation. To add to the contamination of the economic waters is the slow-poison of international terrorism.
The pangs of insecurity are probably making the developed nations turn inwards for native talent. But more than that, it is leading to a dangerous trend of political leaders pandering to local sentiments for short-term gains. And they are coming out with insignificant policies like the burqa ban that have no bearing on economic uplift. I am no advocate of the regressive burqa. But the fact is going strong on such measures deflects the attention on serious economic reforms and turns the immigrant into a potential victim.
A narrow economic vision guided by ethnocentricity is the most potent venom that guarantees the demise of humanity first and globalisation later.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
No nano gesture..
Corporate India did it again. In one of the biggest contributions by an Indian business house to the cause of elite education, Tata Group chairman Ratan Tata has donated a whopping $50 million to Harvard Business School. The Ivy League, known for its academic excellence and selective admissions, will return the expensive gesture by getting Mr Tata’s surname embossed on an academic and residential building that is scheduled to be completed for the fall of 2013 and naming it Tata Hall.
Mr Tata’s words after bestowing the wealthiest gift to the business school’s 102-year history: “It is a privilege and pleasure to give back to Harvard a little bit of what it gave to me.”
“A little bit” is just so humble, sir. “This little bit” is aimed at “supporting the school’s educational mission to mould the next generation of global business leaders”.
That is indeed a “little bit” sir towards moulding the business leaders of tomorrow who will faithfully carry out the global corporate strategy of wringing dry the planet’s resources and pushing the agenda of corporate colonisation. Indeed a little bit, considering that they will be getting back very rich returns by impoverishing the planet, its land, water, and resources. So investing $50 million is indeed a lucrative business tactic.
Mr Tata’s “little” gift surpasses the $10 million donated by Mahindra Group chairman Anand Mahindra to Harvard for its Humanities Centre made a few years ago.
I just wondered why these corporate super powers run to these exotic business schools and make such “humble” contributions. What if they could look inwards, turn towards our primary school education or any level of education of their choice and help build a foundation strong enough for nation building. After all, they made their fortunes using this land, labour, power and water.
The Indian education system is falling abysmally behind other nations. A plethora of government initiatives to provide accesses to primary education notwithstanding, there are glaring gaps in the system owing to lack of committed teachers, textbooks, teaching materials, and drop-out rates. Free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14 is a constitutional commitment in India, with the Right to Education Act. But we still see children bringing us tea and wiping tables in dhabas.
If such corporate giants could come forward and extend even their little finger in this direction, we could probably achieve a lot more.
Mr Tata created a middle class dream car and named it Nano. Nano means something very small. It comes from a Greek word nanos which means dwarf. If Mr Tata had understood the meaning well enough and extended his nano gesture towards our country’s education, it would have been morally more valuable than his Rs 1 lakh car. Instead of pouring $50 million into the ocean, it would have been appreciated had Mr Tata sprinkled a few drops into the parched education system in India, especially in the rural reaches.
Mr Tata’s words after bestowing the wealthiest gift to the business school’s 102-year history: “It is a privilege and pleasure to give back to Harvard a little bit of what it gave to me.”
“A little bit” is just so humble, sir. “This little bit” is aimed at “supporting the school’s educational mission to mould the next generation of global business leaders”.
That is indeed a “little bit” sir towards moulding the business leaders of tomorrow who will faithfully carry out the global corporate strategy of wringing dry the planet’s resources and pushing the agenda of corporate colonisation. Indeed a little bit, considering that they will be getting back very rich returns by impoverishing the planet, its land, water, and resources. So investing $50 million is indeed a lucrative business tactic.
Mr Tata’s “little” gift surpasses the $10 million donated by Mahindra Group chairman Anand Mahindra to Harvard for its Humanities Centre made a few years ago.
I just wondered why these corporate super powers run to these exotic business schools and make such “humble” contributions. What if they could look inwards, turn towards our primary school education or any level of education of their choice and help build a foundation strong enough for nation building. After all, they made their fortunes using this land, labour, power and water.
The Indian education system is falling abysmally behind other nations. A plethora of government initiatives to provide accesses to primary education notwithstanding, there are glaring gaps in the system owing to lack of committed teachers, textbooks, teaching materials, and drop-out rates. Free and compulsory education to all children up to the age of 14 is a constitutional commitment in India, with the Right to Education Act. But we still see children bringing us tea and wiping tables in dhabas.
If such corporate giants could come forward and extend even their little finger in this direction, we could probably achieve a lot more.
Mr Tata created a middle class dream car and named it Nano. Nano means something very small. It comes from a Greek word nanos which means dwarf. If Mr Tata had understood the meaning well enough and extended his nano gesture towards our country’s education, it would have been morally more valuable than his Rs 1 lakh car. Instead of pouring $50 million into the ocean, it would have been appreciated had Mr Tata sprinkled a few drops into the parched education system in India, especially in the rural reaches.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Need and want
The front page of today's Times of India (October 13, 2001) is dripping with ads for that festive fervour, gold raining at the Commonwealth , Sachin Tendulkar topping popularity chart in Don’s own land and Mukesh Ambani adding diamonds to this glittery India shining crown with his ready-to-move-in 27-storeyed mansion.
The festive zeal picked up as I turned to the inside pages, with colourful display of creative advertising, smartly infusing consumerism with religious sentiments. Even news stories were advertorials, goading consumers to shop for the best ghagra -cholis for the Devi pujan and pop dandia raas. Coming to Page 13, Narendra Modi’s picture showed him flashing the victory sign as his party swept all six municipal corporations in Gujarat. But just below Modi’s successful cocktail of communal polarisation and industrialisation with a generous sprinkling of urban shine was buried a story on food insecurity in India. It said that India had dropped two ranks to reach 67th among the 84 developing countries in the International Food Policy Research Institute’s annual Global Food Index for 2010. Even Sudan, North Korea and Pakistan ranked higher than India.
India is home to 42 per cent of the underweight children under the age of five in the world. The report said the food insecurity is so rampant in the country that India is clubbed with minor economies like Bangladesh and Yemen, recording the highest prevalence of underweight in children under five.
The Commonwealth muck has now been pushed under the debris of the broken foot bridge as was evident in the glitter of the opening ceremony. Now, the government is pulling out all stops to showcase the plush Indian drawing room at the international fora. Never mind the hungry children stashed away into the empty kitchens inside or the sick dying of dengue, malaria or malnutrition in dirty-dingy interiors. Even the media chooses to push hunger inside and yield to the salability of glamour and glitz.
Coming back to the man who made it to the Forbes’ billionaire list, Mr Ambani. He has devoted six levels of his multi-million-dollar castle to park his 160-plus cars. Back in Delhi, the government had “rinsed” the urban space and made it squeaky clean by driving out the homeless a day before the Commonwealth Games contingents began arriving. And in forests, far into the interiors of Chattisgarh or Orissa, native tribals go to sleep with the Damocles’ sword of displacement hanging over their heads.
This is a dangerous but inevitable cliché: Our drawing rooms are bright and shiny. But when are we going to generate light to the insides of our house?
My nine-year-old daughter, to whom we read and explain the papers every morning, asked us a question: Why does God give some people too much money and some nothing? Do people ‘need’ so many cars? Why can’t God give food to those who are hungry?
Poor creature! She still thinks God up there is responsible for feeding the hungry and clothing the poor. Having been brought up in the ‘need’ and ‘want’ theory diet, it might take a few more years for her to understand it is the ‘want’ , not ‘need’, that is driving our nation’s consumerist economy.
The festive zeal picked up as I turned to the inside pages, with colourful display of creative advertising, smartly infusing consumerism with religious sentiments. Even news stories were advertorials, goading consumers to shop for the best ghagra -cholis for the Devi pujan and pop dandia raas. Coming to Page 13, Narendra Modi’s picture showed him flashing the victory sign as his party swept all six municipal corporations in Gujarat. But just below Modi’s successful cocktail of communal polarisation and industrialisation with a generous sprinkling of urban shine was buried a story on food insecurity in India. It said that India had dropped two ranks to reach 67th among the 84 developing countries in the International Food Policy Research Institute’s annual Global Food Index for 2010. Even Sudan, North Korea and Pakistan ranked higher than India.
India is home to 42 per cent of the underweight children under the age of five in the world. The report said the food insecurity is so rampant in the country that India is clubbed with minor economies like Bangladesh and Yemen, recording the highest prevalence of underweight in children under five.
The Commonwealth muck has now been pushed under the debris of the broken foot bridge as was evident in the glitter of the opening ceremony. Now, the government is pulling out all stops to showcase the plush Indian drawing room at the international fora. Never mind the hungry children stashed away into the empty kitchens inside or the sick dying of dengue, malaria or malnutrition in dirty-dingy interiors. Even the media chooses to push hunger inside and yield to the salability of glamour and glitz.
Coming back to the man who made it to the Forbes’ billionaire list, Mr Ambani. He has devoted six levels of his multi-million-dollar castle to park his 160-plus cars. Back in Delhi, the government had “rinsed” the urban space and made it squeaky clean by driving out the homeless a day before the Commonwealth Games contingents began arriving. And in forests, far into the interiors of Chattisgarh or Orissa, native tribals go to sleep with the Damocles’ sword of displacement hanging over their heads.
This is a dangerous but inevitable cliché: Our drawing rooms are bright and shiny. But when are we going to generate light to the insides of our house?
My nine-year-old daughter, to whom we read and explain the papers every morning, asked us a question: Why does God give some people too much money and some nothing? Do people ‘need’ so many cars? Why can’t God give food to those who are hungry?
Poor creature! She still thinks God up there is responsible for feeding the hungry and clothing the poor. Having been brought up in the ‘need’ and ‘want’ theory diet, it might take a few more years for her to understand it is the ‘want’ , not ‘need’, that is driving our nation’s consumerist economy.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Ram and Robot
Ram was everywhere, in the media, on the streets, even in school buses. My daughter was eager to know what happened to Ayodhya because she was keen on knowing whether she will get a Friday off. But Ram had to make way for Rajnikant that Friday. Ram might fail, but Rajni ‘kant’. The prayers, aartis and milk abhishegam (offerings) went to the King of Kollywood, not the prince of Ayodhya that morning. Poor Ram, he had to make way for Rajni despite being proved in the court of law that he was indeed born on the disputed site. Rajni was in every news channel holding a million guns, and running sideways on the train. Damn gravity, Newton. Rewrite your theories.
But both Ram and Robot got the money spinning during the Gandhi Jayanti weekend. What Ram could do, Rajni could do better. Ram added wealth to the coffers of television channels and mobile service providers who shared the spoils of the revenue from patriotic and secular messages that rained throughout the week leading to the Ayodhya judgment. And, Rajni’s Robot raked in an obscene fortune on the first day of its release.
The previous day, the High Court verdict was out and the Mc Donald’s generation loved it, the champagne-clinkers in their drawing room discussions were happy with the “sensible” verdict on a sensitive subject. The media added to the spirited discussions with their “India has moved on” and India First campaigns. So everyone was happy, everyone had "moved on". Now, the nation has to focus on its economy. Yes, yes, all of this, and more.
Just thinking aloud: would the same majority be on a high if the verdict was different? The court has corroborated the faith of the people. Is our judicial system supposed to use faith to crush fact? The court has behaved like a benevolent despot, spelling out Birbal-like wisdom to aggrieved parties. The decision seemed to be aiming at soothing nerves, rather than settling a hard core legal dispute. Devotion, not documents, held the key to the Ram janmasthan. Title deeds made way for good or bad deeds, and our Ram’s vanar sena begged, borrowed and stole the contentious area to please their dear Ram. (Stole because they smuggled in the idols inside the Babri masjid in December 1949). The courts then validated the theft by cloaking it with the argument of faith. Isn’t that a dangerous legal trend? Shouldn’t the court take cognizance of evidence, rather than fall back on faith, even if millions of Hindu hearts are involved?
Does the court’s recognition of Ram’s birthplace despite the 1949 illegal break-in then inadvertently give credence to the saffron brigade that prepared the janmabhoomi pitch culminating in the insanity of 1992? Does it then mutely agree on its aftermath, when our much-abused secular fabric was torn asunder and stained with blood again?
Robot, too, fails on logic, if trailers are anything to go by. The spectacular special effects seem to have camouflaged reason, just like the spectacular efforts of our judicial, political and media players to bury reason and make people feel “all izz well”.
In contemporary India, reason certainly does not sell. Ram and Robot triumphed because of loyalty, not logic. Ram stays put right under the now-demolished Babri dome, and Rajni stays put among his frenzied fans.
But both Ram and Robot got the money spinning during the Gandhi Jayanti weekend. What Ram could do, Rajni could do better. Ram added wealth to the coffers of television channels and mobile service providers who shared the spoils of the revenue from patriotic and secular messages that rained throughout the week leading to the Ayodhya judgment. And, Rajni’s Robot raked in an obscene fortune on the first day of its release.
The previous day, the High Court verdict was out and the Mc Donald’s generation loved it, the champagne-clinkers in their drawing room discussions were happy with the “sensible” verdict on a sensitive subject. The media added to the spirited discussions with their “India has moved on” and India First campaigns. So everyone was happy, everyone had "moved on". Now, the nation has to focus on its economy. Yes, yes, all of this, and more.
Just thinking aloud: would the same majority be on a high if the verdict was different? The court has corroborated the faith of the people. Is our judicial system supposed to use faith to crush fact? The court has behaved like a benevolent despot, spelling out Birbal-like wisdom to aggrieved parties. The decision seemed to be aiming at soothing nerves, rather than settling a hard core legal dispute. Devotion, not documents, held the key to the Ram janmasthan. Title deeds made way for good or bad deeds, and our Ram’s vanar sena begged, borrowed and stole the contentious area to please their dear Ram. (Stole because they smuggled in the idols inside the Babri masjid in December 1949). The courts then validated the theft by cloaking it with the argument of faith. Isn’t that a dangerous legal trend? Shouldn’t the court take cognizance of evidence, rather than fall back on faith, even if millions of Hindu hearts are involved?
Does the court’s recognition of Ram’s birthplace despite the 1949 illegal break-in then inadvertently give credence to the saffron brigade that prepared the janmabhoomi pitch culminating in the insanity of 1992? Does it then mutely agree on its aftermath, when our much-abused secular fabric was torn asunder and stained with blood again?
Robot, too, fails on logic, if trailers are anything to go by. The spectacular special effects seem to have camouflaged reason, just like the spectacular efforts of our judicial, political and media players to bury reason and make people feel “all izz well”.
In contemporary India, reason certainly does not sell. Ram and Robot triumphed because of loyalty, not logic. Ram stays put right under the now-demolished Babri dome, and Rajni stays put among his frenzied fans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)