Jobs in the times of terrorism

42 is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything – according to the book Hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy. I could well argue the answer is economics. I could mount a very successful case that every single thing we do in life has an economic angle to it; if we pay close attention we will see it. In this article I wish to address the scourge of terrorism through the prism of economics. I do understand and appreciate that the word terrorism invokes strong emotions and responses. I would like to state upfront that the purpose of this article to give a perspective and not to belittle the many sacrifices made by our armed soldiers to keep us safe from terrorism every single day. So, here goes.

Ajmal Kasab, the 26/11 attacker captured by India in Mumbai was facing a trial in India for waging a war against the country, a crime for which he was executed in 2012. I was reading up on the trial arguments, with intension to understand what goes in the mind of a terrorist that he/she takes up a task to kill people in cold blood even at the personal risk of being captured and punished or getting killed. If we could identify and remedy the motivation, maybe we can have a shot at addressing this ever growing menace. I will list down a few points I took away from the deposition of Ajmal Kasab and make my case for economic solutions to the problem. I am very aware that there can be more than one motivation for individuals to take up arms and I am not trying to trivialize the issue to mere economic one. I am making the limited case that in absence of economic strife, it would become difficult to radicalize masses easily.

During the course of his deposition, Ajmal Kasab mentioned a lot of things; for the purpose of this article I am listing the relevant ones. Kasab came from a poor household in Faridkot, Pakistan and was always bickering with his family as they did not have the money to buy him clothes or other stuff. On one such instance, when his father could not buy him clothes for Eid, he had an argument with his parents and left home. He got involved in petty theft to satisfy his immediate needs and was identified by “scouts” of Pakistani terrorist organizations as suitable target for indoctrination and to be employed as a weapon against India. Kasab gave a lot of details about how he was trained for using arms and was indoctrinated by his handlers who used to show him videos of atrocities on Muslims by India and convince him how he was a “jihadi” fighting the good fight on behalf of Islam. At this point, it is obvious to wonder if Kasab would have been as easily targeted by the scouts if he were from a well to do family. Would it have been easy to indoctrinate Kasab if he or his parents had good job prospects – something to look forward to in their life? Human psyche is difficult to fathom. If you take away the hope people behave in erratic ways.

I know I am at the risk of trivializing the issue but I can prove with facts that it is not as easy to sway a well fed, nicely clothed, well-educated boy as it is to indoctrinate a poor child who is ignorant due to lack of education.  Around the world, we have come to understand that the terrorist handlers are wealthy people who are motivated by hate / xenophobia / racism or other psychological infirmities to wreak havoc of terrorism on the world.  Some handlers have wealthy benefactors who have a wrested interest in destabilizing the economy via terrorism so they could make undue profits. In either case, these handlers do not have the courage to carry out terrorist attacks; they employ foot soldiers, at a nominal cost and promise to pay lots of money to their family in case he/she dies while performing the task. Often times, there is a societal push received by these foot soldiers in form of riots / crimes against family members or a general sense of victimhood.  Now we have a potential breeding ground for terrorist foot soldiers. It is not my case that each person who undergoes economic strife or societal indifference gets indoctrinated; I am saying that most terrorists who are apprehended by the authorities have this story to narrate. Obviously, this rule is not a gold standard but it is observed that if we take away the economic side of the equation, the potential of young children getting ensnared in this mess can be greatly reduced. Every local authority stores information on vulnerable sections of society, with adequate and targeted support via good jobs / micro finance  and counselling, the Government can prevent our vulnerable children from being way led into the world of terror and destruction. If terrorist handlers can employ scouts to identify targets, surely a Government with all the agencies at its disposal can do a better job of targeting economic help, provide job opportunities to vulnerable families and use its schemes to keep their children in schools where they can receive good education and be counselled to make them good citizens. It is not an easy task but if it is possible for terrorists to identify them, we should be doing a better job.

Finally, my heart goes out to all those who have lost their loved ones to mindless violence / terrorism and I cannot imagine what it is to be a survivor of such incidents. I am doing my bit to help by attempting  to analyze the psyche of a terrorist and suggest possible solution to stop mass indoctrination of children by terrorist handlers.

India's "Trump"

   Demagogue: a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather  than by using rational argument.

      

        Racist: a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another

        Dog whistle: political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one                             thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more                                   specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. 

On September 20^th 2001, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, President George W Bush addressed the joint session of the Congress where he spoke the words, which became a legend for demagogues all over the world “If you are not with us, you are against us!” . I do not imagine POTUS would have seen the utility beyond making a forceful argument to clamp down on personal freedoms for the security of the nation, but leaders around the world found many a racist utility for these magical words. There are several instances where these words were repeated – mostly during election stumps to vilify a community / race which are co-incidentally a minority and by a person who is co-incidentally from a majority community/ race. Not long, before this became a code to browbeat minorities into submission to the will of the majority.  Today, when Donald Trump wants to “Make America Great Again” by deporting Mexican immigrants and banning Muslims, we hear the underlying spirit as – “If you are not with us, you are against us”.

In India, we are not foreign to demagogues. In the past, we used to hear political leaders speak in euphemisms which were a dog whistle. Today, in Modi-fied India, all pretenses are dropped and there is open call to target individuals from minority communities – esp. Muslims and Dalits. Demagogue racism is the new flavor in India. Hindus in India have long been wary of Muslims because foreign Muslim leaders plundered India for long and more recently becasue Pakistan was formed on the theory that Muslims didn’t wish to live in Hindu-India. Today, leaders like Modi openly fan these hidden –yet deep seated fears and make a case that voting a Hindu strongman is an effective way to thwart Muslim designs to take over India again. Modi has won 2 terms as a Chief Minister (head of Government at State level) of Gujarat (western state of India) and one term (thus far) as the Prime Minister of India. India has seen the worst racist demagoguery over the past 2 years, sadly there has been only a little governance.

“Make America Great Again” is very similar to “Secularism means India first” as used by Modi in 2014. Its classic demagoguery because nobody would openly challenge these polemic statements, however, it is a dog whistle to supporters to brand people / races / communities who can be termed as trying to stop the nation from being great by their mere existence. So then, the self-style moral police are let loose to curb sale and consumption of beef (a source of sustenance for many poor Dailt and Muslim families) by randomly equating cow as sacred animal to the nation. Dalit scholars pursuing PhD on fellowships are targeted as anti-nationals because now Government is the nation state and anyone critical of it are anti-nationals. Fake cases are foisted on individuals / organizations (Teesta Setalvad / Ford foundation) to make them run from pillar to post defending themselves so that they have little time left to do their jobs effectively. NGOs get banned for receiving foreign funds while political parties do it openly and stay functional.

In India, development has become a code word for targeting communities and spreading communal discord with a single notion – Hindu supremacy. The fact that Donald Trump and Narendra Modi use the same playbook with so many similar plays would have been horrifying had people been listening. The other thing about demagogues is that they have a knack to be fork tongued. They always speak what you like to hear and when elected, pursue their own agenda because they know for sure you have been lulled into a coma of feeling safe in the hands of a strong leader. One last play, tarnish the opposition to you as corrupt and dangerous and more importantly as someone who does not have the nation’s best interests in the mind. This is a heady cocktail which lulls you into inaction and euphoria but has a serious hangover once you sober up. So the choice for America is simple, do you want to make the choice India made  2 years ago? If yes, soon your media will be like ours and North Korea’s – paying glowing tributes to the supreme leader and hanging on to his every word. If not, you would have dodged a bullet for now, but demagogues don’t go away, they just find a different dog whistle the next time around.

The solution is simple, be alert all the time. An age old adage said “If something is too good to be true, it probably isn’t “. Demagoguery has a rule – it is always good to hear. Beware!     

So long…..

Challenge to my idea of a nation

"What is a nation?" ; "Am I a part of this nation or is it only represented by the land and the symbols?" asked two students from Jawaharlal Nehru University on a late night talk show. I had never thought I would say this, but it shook my 32 year old belief of what "respect to nation" constitutes. "Whom does the armed forces of India protect? Is it the land mass or the way of life professed by our liberal Constitution?". This guy was questioning the basis of my entire equation with my nation and bringing a question mark over my understanding of what a citizen is how does she/he relate to the nation and its symbols. At first, I laughed at the questions raised as possible diversion sought by these "kids" in order to get away from answering on the substantive points raised on "nationalism" or lack of it as depicted on the University campus in the days leading up this talk show.  

That night, I took a second pass at the aforementioned questions and it still did not make sense to me. I somehow could to shake off the feeling that there was some issue I was not understanding. There is some aspect of this debate that I am unaware of which if known would help me contextualize this entire episode with a fresh perspective. I went online and spent a few hours reading up on literature written by authors who were self professed Marxists. As a capitalist who believes in a welfare state to some extent, I have always scoffed at the ideological left as "ideas of the past" and never has the time or inclination to read any left leaning authors. Free market economy is all I ever believed in. Upon reading several articles by very famed authors, it began to dawn upon me that the assumptions that I have always had regarding a nation and its citizen is open to alternative interpretations. I took a third pass at the statements I had heard the student raise earlier and then it slowly began to sink in. 

It is an accepted notion that the flag / emblem / national anthem / Government represent the nation and it is expected that every citizen shown his respect towards the nation by respecting these symbols. It is a commonly heard that the "armed forces fight for our flag" and it somehow is assumed that our citizenry is evaluated by how respectfully we treat these symbols that are revered by our armed forces. Well, until now. Today, I ask this question. Our constitution says "We the people of India are the sovereign" and it means that the group of people as a collective make what we call a nation. It also brings into focus the point that student wanted to make- " harming your fellow citizen amounts to harming the nation" for each one of us are contributing as a part of it. This was a very novel way, an alternative way of thought process that helps understand the left ideology of investing in people as a means of nation building. I must say it helps me understand and put a fresh perspective to a lot of noise around the University. 

If only, we could let these students fight each other using alternative ideas which will help build the future nation. Instead of clamping down upon ideas and calling those opposing your views as "anti national", it would be useful to understand the alternative point of view and then debate it with your point of view. The act of sedition comes into picture when it is my nation versus them. Modern democracies must do away with such archaic colonial laws that make no sense in today's world except to act as a tool in hands of Governments to impede the flow of free ideas - revolutionary ideas. 

I want to sign off with couple of points: 

1. The United States allows its citizens free speech as a constitutional right  with no limits. They can burn their flag, desecrate any holy book or even the constitution and yet no Government could ever jail them.

2. The United states allows its citizen to bear arms and attempt to overthrow its Government in an armed struggle and it would not constitute as a crime under law.

Look how far away we stand in terms of being liberal and being a democracy.

Signing off.

The Alien

“Do not let the student within you die”, said the Prime Minister of India at the convocation ceremony of Banaras Hindu University (BHU) (coinciding with the centenary celebration of the University). Sage words from the honorable Prime Minister to a large gathering of students. “Your convocation should mean the end of your course and not your education, which must be continuous” he said. Again, unexceptionable words by the PM while addressing these bright young minds.  I asked myself, does he really understand who a student is? The surrounding noise seemed to suggest that he is rather unaware of what a student is and is delivering polemics that suits the occasion. A student is not a conformist, he /she is a rebel standing for all causes - small and large, a person questioning the faith, beliefs and traditions and someone who will never accept any sentence that ends with “because, I said so”. Does this Government (or any other) have the wherewithal to deal with such “ignited minds”?

In the movie P.K. – there is an alien who lands on this earth – in India and is forced to interact with the locals. It is a hilarious interplay of situations/events that are part of daily life seen through the eyes of someone who has no knowledge of these whatsoever. I guess through the innocence of a person alien to our culture, the film makers wanted us to question everything around us and to not accept anything as a given tradition. Using religious faith as a subject, the story makes a very compelling case for revisiting many of our traditions and superstitions. In many ways, being a student is like being an alien. Innocence to cultural practice is utmost importance and equally importance is the zest to learn and question everything. Debates, discussions on any and all topics should be part of student life. Unless you question and debate, you will never know anything completely. Questioning old traditions help create newer ones and debates lead to solutions that were not thought of thus far.

“You shall respect your elders” / “you shall pray to God daily”/ “you shall follow this faith”/ “you shall obey these rules”. It is always – you shall. A student should hate these words and oppose anything that follows- as a rule of thumb. The moment we accept a ‘You shall’, the scope for debate is over and a tradition sets in. That’s how our previous generations did it and the ones before. Accepting things at face value is the anathema for education and growth. Can you imagine if Sir Isaac Newton had “accepted” the fact that an apple falls to the ground and never asked “WHY?” Can you imagine if scientists accepted the notion “An atom cannot be split” and not asked “Why not”? A true student must question everything and not accept anything until they are convinced of the case presented by the promoter of the idea. A student should be like a child, willing to learn everything from scratch without any previous hang-ups or preconceived notions or prejudices.  Try any and all ideals – often radical and untraveled territories, for you have the benefits of being an alien to this civilization and it should be OUR JOB to convince you of our way of life and traditions. 

So long...

Reparation

"Why should those f**king people of lower caste get reservation in higher education and people like me suffer because I am part of General category", I bemoaned after looking at my average marks and the realization sunk in that I would not make the cut off for the school I intended to join. I must have ranted for a couple of days because a girl whose marks were much lesser than I got the seat (which was meant for me) owing to her caste reservation. I hated this act of reservation which effectively meant that certain scheduled caste / tribe students got preferential seats over us students of the general merit.


"Its enough, stop you complaining. You could still have got admission if you had tried harder and got in the top 5 percentile" said my father, clearly tired of my constant cribbing. He also told me that I was more depressed that I did not get in the school I wanted, and my complain should not be about who got in. "You knew the rules before the exam. So don't complain now. Don't be a sore loser" he said. Was that true? In some measures probably, but I still felt strongly that caste based reservation was a bad idea that was encouraging mediocrity in what should have been meritocracy. Us students used to secretly hate these "special category" students and few of us used to be vocal about it to their face. I am sure we didn't mean to, but we did end up making the caste barrier more visible during the school days.


Few years ago, I saw a speech made by my favorite politician Mr. Shashi Tharoor on youtube, where he was making very cogent arguments in favor of reparation owed to us by Britain - our colonial master for over 2 centuries that came to an end in 1947. Mr. Tharoor pointed out that the colonial rule was not meant for emancipation of Indians but rather for the colonial masters to make wealth off its colonies, often at the cost of lives, here in India and across other colonies. It got me thinking, wow! I would not have imagined that even after 60 years of independence we could feel so strongly about the tragedies of the colonial rule and could make a case for reparations owed to us.


Then it got me thinking about another book I had read about the life of Dr Ambedkar (a founding father of India) and the hardships he faced in his life because he belonged to a lower caste. I realize how empty the phrase sounds - "Lower caste", I am only using it for emphasis. Dr Ambedkar goes into details of how certain communities in India have been ill treated for centuries now because of our rigid caste structures and prevalent medieval mindsets. Today, after the Constitution declares us all as equal citizen of India, there are still vast segments which are governed by medieval mindsets. Emancipation of these lower castes is still not complete. Today, if my fellow citizen looks up to me and says, "I know you don't like me getting benefits of reservation policy, but don't you owe me any reparation for centuries worth of deprivation faced by my ancestors at the hands of yours".


Honestly, I feel we got off the hook easy. If we actually calculate the reparation we owe to dalits for almost 2000 years worth of deprivation of their rightful place /share, we would never be able to pay it off. The next time we feel "why reservation", remember you are just trying to make right for 2000 years worth of wrongs committed by your forefathers. While I agree, its not your fault, but you do owe the society this much due.

So long......  

This has got to stop at some point of time

“I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight for your right to say it” – a famous quote from Voltaire that has been used by liberals like myself while fighting for absolute freedom of speech with no restriction whatsoever. I am very clear in my mind, rather than making efforts to stop a person from expressing him/herself, we must invest energies into how best can we choose to ignore or turn a deaf ear towards unpalatable sound bytes. The solution as well the choice is personal. I often hear people protesting some book, movie or joke citing reasons that it hurt their regional / religious and other sentiments. This does not make sense to me as there is absolutely nothing in this world which will be loved and accepted universally. Isn’t the best response then to choose to ignore things that hurt sentiments rather than try and enforce bans?


But, I digress. Today the topic is media itself. How many of us agree that news channels should not be showing entertainment segments nor should they be beaming spots where some “tantric/ baba” – quack is giving spiritual / medicinal advice to people in the audience. There is a healthy respect for the trade of journalism but in the name of television ratings and advertising money the news media has lost its JQ – journalistic quotient. Editors no longer take the time and employ their deep insights to find a position on the main story which best suits the audience. Today, more often the editorial is looking to find an angle to the story which is most controversial and hence will grab eye balls and in turn bring in more advertising money. Consequently, the 9 PM news becomes a slanging match between political and ideological opponents often not adding any value to the audience who are often frustrated with this nonsense sans news value. Every new item is being made larger than life and projected based on its ability to be controversial and eye catching. In the times when there is agrarian crisis throughout the country more time was spent in discussing about the holiday destination of the vice president of a political outfit and conjectures on how a certain son-in-law made million by finding loop holes in the law.


I ask, apart for voyeuristic pleasure, what benefit do such moronic news items provide to the viewers? We provide a service and there is a demand for it – is often the argument for such abomination. I ask again, there is a huge demand for pornography too so does that mean news channels should be beaming porn clips during the 9 PM “prime time” slots ? Can any news media get away with tabloidization of news because there is a demand for it? There many such pressing issues haunting Indian media today and hence I took the liberty of checking the program listing of BBC and CNN, two international news organizations which have become a brand in the field of news reporting. I found BBC and CNN have so many slots dedicated to human interest stories; issues faced within the country and internationally. They have journalist on the field in distant locations bringing to us the tears, joys, sorrows and accomplishments of people around the world. Compare this to the coverage of Indian media when the PM was travelling to the US or Japan. Instead of utilizing the opportunity to get some human interest story, our media was pandering to lowest common denominator by wall to wall coverage of the PM and his cultural programs. Every shit and every fart was being covered. There were embarrassing moments when the NY times and WSJ wrote an article on how the Indian media was gushing like a teenage girl meeting the movie star. The only reason why BBC and CNN gave 5 minutes each for this story was to report the “coverage style” of Indian media. Almost like saying, we get it!! Now please tone it down.


As embarrassing as the coverage of the “PM travels” was, nothing can make the case more strongly about news media tabloidization as the recent natural disasters – Kashmir floods and Nepal earthquake. In the month of October 2014, Kashmir faced a surprise flood on the banks of Jhelum which brought the capital and the government to a halt. Most government offices were flooded and help had to arrive from outside for rescue and rehabilitation. Given the fact that Jhelum laid siege on the capital, it was obvious the Centre had to help the state fight the disaster and the PM did admirably well. The rescue mission was taken up on war footing and the PM even spent “Diwali” in Kashmir to show solidarity with Kashmiris. There was a major problem despite the admirable work of the armed forces on the orders of the PM, his friends who own media channels either saw this as an opportunity to advertise “Government efficiency” or were advised to do so. Somehow, the narrative in the news media was of a larger than life savior (read the PM) saving people (Kashmiris) from natural disaster and hence they should now be beholden to the savior. Conjectures were being made on foreign policy and how the PM won over Kashmir from Pakistan etc. All this focus on Kashmir, while Assam was facing floods where no help arrived. If you remember Kashmir was to go to polls in December of 2014 and all of sudden it became plainly clear that media was talking at behest of the master for electoral benefits. While rest of India remembers the floods as a case of swift and decisive governance, Kashmiris remember this as cynical move by central government to use a disaster for electoral benefits. Again, I am not sure if the PM meant to put this message across but nevertheless that was the message put across by our tabloid news media.


In April 2015, just couple of days after floods hit Bihar, a 7.9 earth quake hit Nepal and Bihar. Once again, the PM with the help of Army and NDRF started a rescue mission on war footing. This time help was provided to an Indian state and a neighboring nation simultaneously and I must mention that this was the best response to a calamity of this nature, until the media came in. In order to cover a human impact story, the media channels sent 600 media persons to Nepal (ignoring Bihar) for a wall to wall coverage of the calamity. Media persons took too much space in the rescue helicopters – space that could be used for ferrying the injured or for supplying food and medicines. The air force had to run additional sorties for rescue because of space taken up by media persons in each helicopter sent for rescue work. Again, the same old narrative of a savior (PM) coming in Rambo like fashion to save the world was being projected. In addition, reporters were seen asking leading questions to those being rescued – asking if they wanted to thank the Indian PM –something that will haunt the PM for now. Soon, the Nepalese people were nauseated watching the PR exercise of a politician on the backs of their loss and tears. #GoHomeIndianMedia and #GoBackIndianMedia started appearing on Nepalese twitter trends and the Government of Nepal politely asked the media and NDRF to return home as they felt the rescue was completed and Nepal could take care of the rehabilitation by itself. It was a major embarrassment to India in a world forum where 11 other countries worked as tirelessly as India without this PR exercise. Indian media managed to covert a humanitarian aid which could have won us goodwill into a debacle that earned us the ire of Nepalese people and its government.


So is there a solution to this? First things first, media must stop going after advertising money at cost of journalistic ethics. The media must stop being beholden to the administration or the corporate honchos who own the parent company and the editorial integrity must be maintained. Media must be allowed to take ideological positions but must do so openly by declaring allegiance to a party or ideology. Audience must be aware of the intention before they see the content. Finally, human interest stories must be given precedence over sensationalisation and entertainment.


So long.....

And you think she owns her body

And then He made woman – the best of his creation and He poured into her his beauty and sensuality. We all have read this (not verbatim but the gist) from each of our ancient scriptures. It describes woman as the perfect creation of God and since she was created after man, by inference she is much superior to him. We often quote the scriptures to make gender based laws that more often than not decide what women can or cannot do in our society but me thinks this is more in awe of the super being that seems uncontrollable and unfathomable to men. So we hear, “purdah” / hijaab laws for women; we hear of lack of inheritance rights to women; we also hear of not having a choice whether to / when to conceive. I often ask myself, who are these people who made these laws and it seems to me that whoever it was, should have been a man for there is a deep misogynistic agenda in all these laws. I wish to bring to fore two disturbing trend that is bucking the evolution of men and is becoming more prevalent now than ever.


Female genital mutilation (FGM) a term that was alien to me till very recently, until it started making headlines in The Economist magazine. The details would horrify you. Apparently there is a custom in Africa of using a knife to cut a girl’s clitoris before she hits puberty (around the age 9-12) and then in extreme cases sowing the vagina shut. This is an exercise to ensure purity of a woman to her husband who then performs a sort of surgery to remove the sutures on the wedding night. Imagine the horror a girl’s body is put through because a few men back in the day thought it was impure for a woman to have sex before marriage or outside marriage. It amazes me nobody thought of sowing shut a penis or chemically castrating men until they are married to ensure they do not have sex…..but, I digress. Women in Africa have associated this procedure with Islam (being prevalent religion) and have for generations accepted this to be a ritual similar to “khatna” – where the foreskin of the penis is removed for all male children. While khatna seems to have medical backing and is in fact a ritual mentioned in the Quaran, FGM is not mentioned anywhere. There is simply a notion that the practice is linked to Islam and is blindly followed not just in Africa but even in Pakistan and Afghanistan.


The consequence of FGM is terrible for women. To begin with women permanently experience pain near the vaginal area from a wound that never heals. Since FGM is performed by quacks rather than trained surgeons the scar never heals and bleeds very often. One must also understand that women who have undergone FGM never enjoy sexual relationship due to unbearable pain and women whose vaginas were sown shut suffer from infections due to unhygienic menstruation. Imagine a lifelong worth of pain for ensuring “purity” of a woman’s body. Who among us feels this was a ritual made by a woman for fellow women? It almost certainly is the thought work of a man who could not bear the fact that women are superior in sexuality and can in fact enjoy a healthier sex life than men. The best way to stop it is to destroy the genitals or mutilate them so much that sex becomes an unenjoyable task. It also ensures “loyalty” in women to their spouses. This to me is destroying beauty of nature because you cannot fathom the depth of it. Each of us has to fight these customs and rituals which harm a woman’s body so that men can feel better about themselves.


The second “ritual” I want to address can be called as marital rape for lack of a better or more suitable word. Now, I know it is not a ritual as such but we have for generations been told that sex is a duty a wife performs for her husband that we have come to think of sex as an enjoyable act that is provided by women grudgingly who in fact don’t like it at all. Movies and television serials always depict a woman as virtuous, who are incapable of liking carnal pleasures and hence are merely shown as a service provider for the husband. We celebrate these women and in many cases this depiction of woman stays in our subconscious mind. Then we try to practice the learnings in our own marriages / relationships where we force/ coerce the woman to provide the service at our beck and call. If God forbid she says “she is not in the mood” we start to feel “women are not supposed to be in mood and are supposed to do their duty to men”. Even in the movies the lady refusing sex to her husband or lover is doing to spite him rather than not being in the mood. So a woman’s mood is thought to be of no consequence to the act of physical love. This has dangerous consequences.


Very often we hear horrid stories of women having to face the brunt of insatiable male lust. Whether it is in a relationship or a marriage, she is often told that love equates sex and the only way she can prove her love for the man is to lay with him anytime he wishes. Failing to comply is often met with one of the two consequences. Either the man emotionally blackmails her to comply, which makes her feel low self-esteem and dirty about herself or the man resorts to violence and beats her up and shoves objects up her vagina to show his dominance. The horrid part of it all is that this is not a crime in the eyes of Indian law as it stands today where rape is not recognized between a husband and wife. Sure, she can press charges of cruelty but I think we can agree this is a lot more than just cruelty; it amounts to physical and emotional torture that simply is not covered enough in the definition of cruelty.


So how do we tackle marital rape? Surely a first step is to recognize it as an offense. But then the immediate question is how you say “consent for sex was given”. Well, if there is love in a relationship and not merely the transaction between a subscriber and a service provider the consent thing will take care of itself. Educating men on female sexuality is a second important task. Men should be able to wrap in around their heads that women are human and are capable of enjoying sex much more than men and even without the help of men. If we all learn to recognize and respect the woman as a superior being we would not have to resort to disgusting rituals and practices to control her body and sexuality.


So long..

All-out attack

In May 2014 – after three decades of ‘policy paralysis’ due to compulsions of coalition politics, India gave an outright mandate for a new administration. There was cheer all around and the hope was palpable in every voice. It did not matter so much as to who the victor was but the fact that we overcame a three decade old curse was reason enough to celebrate. The business sector was happy as many tough decisions could now be taken easily and the man on the street was happy hoping the economic indicators would improve under the new regime and the trickle down benefits would make life much better for all. I must make a quick side note: Elections in democracy is one of the most potent drug, it enables the governed to vote out the Government and at same time help them erase past memories and make a clean cut to new tomorrow. It almost breaks my heart to see how often this goes wrong.


The new administration in Delhi marked a change in ways we think and work with the PM laying emphasis on fast and efficient government. Once again, we cheered that we finally are a country of doers than speakers. I was not too hopeful of the new government doing much fruitful because I am forever wary of the PM. I am very aware of things he is capable of and his legendary loathe towards any criticism. To me, power – when mixed with narcissistic tendencies makes a heady cocktail that sweeps most people off their feet and here we were dealing with Narcissist himself. I was very sure that sooner than later the PM will run roughshod over contradicting views and it would be a hoot and half to see how he handles it from the seat of power. To his credit, he had two successful terms as a CM but being in Delhi under constant gaze of media is a whole different game than being a CM of a state. Round one was won by the PM when he managed to get his corporate friends buy large stake in national media and through them control the media narrative. The media had a dictat to not speak against the PM and the government and hence we had a good long run of 8 months of sycophancy in the media. This was broken by the Delhi elections of 2015.


The thing that scared me the most of these 8 months was how easy it was for an elected Government to use levers of power or influence with the corporates to effectively muzzle all criticism. Now, I know most of what Indian media does is noise; but even so, the response to wrong news is right news but here the Government was encouraging the approach of “no news is good news”. Access to all information about the administration was cut and the media had to depend on heresy to report on any happenings in the corridor of power. Contrast this to the position of media advisor equivalent to a press secretary - that existed not so long ago who effectively liaised between the media and administration. If you thought it was bad that the administration was blocking the access to media, it went a lot further.


Right to information act was modelled on the US Freedom of information act which ensured that the working of the administration would be open to public gaze and any information that is not a national security issue could be sought by a citizen by filing a RTI. In cases where information was not forthcoming, the chief information commissioner would release the information or order the administration to comply. The new administration has not appointed a chief information commissioner for the last one year, since the incumbent retired. So the administration is effectively starving the media and the citizen of any information of the happenings within the corridors of power. The question that begs to be asked – Why, exactly is the administration wary of sharing any information of its actions? Is there something worth hiding? Does it bode well for a democracy if the administration is going all out to muzzle voices of all possible opposing views and is wary of its own citizen. Why is the current administration going out of the way to hide its tracks and wipe its finger prints off its deeds.


While all this was going on, non-governmental organizations (NGO) were petitioning the courts to force the hand of the administration into being more open and transparent in its dealings. Several such petitions ended up as litigations which embarrassed the administration and hence, in a pure vindictive and ham handed way, the administration has cracked down on NGOs for violation of FCRA norms and is trying hard to out maneuver the NGOs by piling counter litigations so that they don’t have time to look into dealings of the administration. By this one act, the administration has proved convincingly that it does not appreciate criticism from any quarters and will fight with all its might to muzzle these contrarian voices by drowning them in litigations. How much this bodes well for our democracy is a question we need to ask ourselves the next time we step out to vote.


So long....

Land wars and agrarian crisis – arguments

“The next war will be fought for water and food grains”, prophetic words already haunting India. A country, which in 67 years, failed to provide adequate irrigation to its farmers, is now hitting the final nail into their coffin by resorting to land grab as a means to “wean away” the farmers from agriculture towards skilled labor. Talk to any spokesperson of the present day administration and they will tell you that farming is no longer profitable as it used to be back in the day because the land holdings have reduced over the years due to land area being split between siblings as a share to the property they were entitled to as heirs. So a land owner has smaller land holding which is not profitable enough to sustain a family and hence the farmers are committing suicide day after day. Several newspapers are carrying this story without stopping to check for facts. Frankly, no political party cares why a farmer is killing himself all they care is the political fallout of the suicides should not harm them during elections. It is this short term vision that is hampering proper analysis of the problem and subsequent finding of a long term solution to it.


I am neither a farmer, land owner nor an economist but I have my own theory on why such stark agrarian crisis has hit India. I would like to articulate a few points and hope to initiate a discussion on its merits / short comings. Firstly, the administration has to overcome a large deficit of lack of irrigation facilities accumulated over past 60 years and for this they have to come up with innovative plans to set up small scale irrigation projects (bunds etc.) in fertile areas so that farmers do not have to depend on rains for sustained farming. The land will be provided by farmers and capital can be provided by the administration. There will be easy land acquiring as farmers desperately need irrigation. This is a perfect win-win solution with long term benefits. This will also sustain the water table as farmers will be weaned away from using ground water. I am not saying nobody has thought about this solution but maybe this is common sense solution and hence not always sought out.


The second argument for weaning away farmers from agriculture is the argument “60% of work force producing 15% of GDP”. I am flabbergasted that the administration can even say such a thing. The main reason why 60% of farmers cannot product 60% of GDP is because of lack of adequate irrigation, supply of proper fertilizers and pesticides and lack of scientific farming. Instead of making agriculture more profitable by fixing raw material issues the administration is fixing this with trying to reduce number of people employed in agriculture by snatching away their land using “land acquisition bill”. This is equivalent to saying if there is not enough food; tell your family to go eat elsewhere instead of striving to get more food to the table. Again, this is a common sense solution but the administration has set its eyes on some other aims. There is also an option to encourage farmers to employ co-operative farming – wherein contiguous farmlands could be irrigated by farmers on cost / profit sharing basis and gain from the benefits of economies of scale. Not so long ago, individual dairy farmers were not making much money but co-operative dairy farming has led to “while revolution” in India and today it is the largest producer and exporter of dairy products. Why cannot we replicate this in agriculture and horticulture? Again, common sense is not so common.


There is one last bit in this puzzle. The rich folks don’t want the poor to be able to afford good food so that the demand can be controlled and prices remain stable. The administration is trying to tackle the inflation by killing the demand rather than fixing the supply side issues listed above. This has become a classic battle of the haves v the have nots because the powers that be are unwilling if not unable, to think straight and address the right issues instead of fighting the losing battles. In closing, the agrarian crisis has been in the making for last 3 decades but the simmer is provided by attempts of present administration to tackle the issue in a way detrimental to the farming community. Unless a rethink is done almost immediately, this crisis will blow in to a full scale class war – that much can be guaranteed.


So long….

The wife

“Dr. Amita was a bright young doctor and surgeon working at Father Mueller hospital in the department of general surgery. Over the last several years the hospital and her patients have benefitted from her skill in surgery and knowledge of medicine. In her passing, the hospital has lost a talented doctor and the nation has lost a bright young mind. In the times of grief, the hospital stands firmly with the family.” The morning bulletin of Father Mueller hospital was used to make an official statement on the sudden and untimely death of Dr. Amita the previous night. It was too soon to be speaking about the cause of death but prima facie the death looked unnatural.


Dr. Amita Purohit (maiden name) was a young and talented doctor. She had graduated from top tier university in the UK in the field of general medicine and surgery. Dr. Purohit was a class topper and her Chief was Medicine had written a glowing reference letter for her when she was seeking a job in India. It was mentioned on more than one occasion about the keen bent of mind Dr. Purohit had shown for research in medicine despite being a major in surgery. The Chief had also offered her an on campus job in the research department and a chance to pursue PhD in medicine. Unfortunately, Dr. Purohit had to leave for personal reasons and could not take up the job. In the year 2013, Dr. Purohit returned to India and joined Father Mueller hospital in the capital.


Dr. Anish Agarwal was a graduate of Father Agnel School of medicine and is a trained dermatologist working at Father Mueller hospital serving as a resident doctor in the department of Dermatology. Dr. Agarwal is mild in his manners, has a great rapport with his patients and seniors, and is also easy on the eyes. The entire hospital was invited for his wedding with Dr. Amita Purohit in the January of 2014. They looked so happy, deeply in love that one could not make they had met just weeks ago in an arranged marriage setup by their parents. Being doctors, it seemed a perfect match as they would understand the pressures of the job and cut each other some slack. The match was just too meant to be by logical standards and also by the standards of “religious / caste match making”. The pundit (astrologer) had claimed this was a match made in heaven.


Coming back to present day, the autopsy of Dr. Amita confirmed that she died due to an overdose of sleeping pills possibly ingested by her due to suicidal thoughts. It was hard to fathom what had gone wrong from “happily ever after”, a year ago. Many theories were doing the rounds about possible causes for the suicide and most of them were the usual- mental torture, dowry harassment, possible extra marital affair and so on. However, the people who knew Dr. Anish and the people who worked with him vouched that the doctor was an upright person with good manners, no roving eye or ever a harsh tone with his staff or patients. To be fair, Dr. Anish was visibly shaken with the suicide and was taking it hard upon him. It would be very hard to pin the blame on Dr. Anish for he was genuinely unaware why his wife took this extreme step. After forensic analysis of the house, her belongings and after a thorough analysis of her email accounts and text messages, it was assessed that Dr. Amita committed suicide because her husband Dr. Anish was a homosexual.


From her various email conversations with her friends, it could be gathered that Dr. Anish’s parents were aware of their son’s sexual preference but wanted to cure him of homosexuality. Some family advisor or spiritual guru had advised that a heterosexual marriage along with a diet regiment would cure Dr. Anish of his depravity. The parents were convinced that homosexuality is a disease borne out of western influence and could be easily cured by “babaji’s” blessings. Marriage to Dr. Amita was part of this regiment and over a period of time the parents were happy that they had successfully cured the son. Dr. Amita also wrote of her conversations with her parents and in-laws about the lack of physical intimacy between the couple even after a year of marriage and were always advised that some guys are shy and take some time to develop amorous love. Lack of support from parents and some plain speaking by the husband had convinced Dr. Amita that there was no hope as her husband had different sexual preferences. Dr. Amita tried to file a divorce but was constantly dissuaded by her parents and in-laws, many times blaming her for lacking feminine qualities to entice a man. There was also advice to make “adjustments” as marriage was basically a compromise. All these negatives had taken a toll on her and Dr. Amita, in a weak moment consumed high dosage of sleeping pills to end her misery.


Dr. Amita’s parents and in laws are facing prosecution on charges of abetment of suicide. Dr. Anish has moved to another city as it became difficult living and working in a city after being identified as a gay man and a “wife killer”. We could all take a deep breath and analyze if societal prejudices and lack of empathy towards LGBT preferences are driving people to end lives as it is becoming impossible to live in a hostile society. There is a need to understand LGBT preferences are not mental sickness that needs a cure but is a preference like that of food or clothing. Live and let live should be the learning here. #DownWithArticle377 #HomosexualityIsNotSickness

So long...