A Journey of Faith

Its really hard to believe how some of us can be non-believers.

Because when you think about it, logically, there must be more to life than randomness. Imagine our Universe's Big Bang as a press-factory that exploded. If one expects the result of this explosion to be a random production of highly-organized dictionaries in multiple languages, then, well, isn't something wrong with the programming of one's logic circuits?

Having said that, this post is not about the Big Bang Theory, or other atheistic facets of science. Instead, I'm going to blot out personal realizations from a recent spiritual odyssey; and leave you with another opinion to arrive at your respective conclusions.

I had an incredible journey of faith last week, in Puri, Orissa. In a beautiful last minute arrangement, I received an invitation to attend the original - and the largest - Rath Yatra. Descriptions of the essence of such holy festivals run into thousands of pages. I'm merely going to describe it in an undeserving paragraph. Please read what I share with an open heart and mind. For a certain disclaimer, I'm not pushing any sort of Hindu ideology.

Here, the deities of Jagannath, Baladev, and Subhadra, come out on their Raths (carts), for a 3-kilometer yatra (journey), giving their Darshan (blessings) to all those who're a part of this journey. All this without discrimination between men, women, or even animals. Almost three hundred thousand people attended this year's yatra, thronging into the main street of Puri. I had the blissful fortune to not just view this merciful spectacle from my own eyes, but to also pull the carts among crowds immersed in devotion. Have you ever imagined flinging yourself willingly into a number of stampedes and coming out with a thrill in your heart and a smile on your face? Despite bleeding legs and an obviously over-fatigued body? Even though it may sound insane, the joys were real. The ecstasy was real - and far greater than what material pleasures alone can offer. The tears in the eyes, that came naturally with the vibrations of the surroundings, were all real. Real, meaningful, intense, and lasting. I'm sure this is what believers of Allah experience in Mecca, or followers of Hashem experience in Jerusalem.

My point is this: there is a higher, a supreme, force. 

To begin with, look at the beauty of nature's creation. For all our technological advancement, scientific discoveries and innovations, we still are nothing compared to Mother Nature. For all our encyclopedias, and papers, and research, we cannot come close to creating life. Can we create even something as little as a straw of grass, or any one single specie of bacterium, that in all its humility, has the power to keep the entire natural world in balance? Have you ever wondered at the efficiency with which nature effortlessly creates and degenerates in cycles that last from seconds to millenniums?

An eye-opening fact: An amount of area of forest soil, roughly the size of an average middle class master bedroom, has a greater network of worms, insects and bacteria, than the entire internet and all its servers and wires and zeta-bytes of data. In this patch of top-soil, if one tree faces shortage of water, the network of microorganisms coordinate and transfer water from another tree that may have excess of water. What an unselfish way to achieve equilibrium. Mustn't there be a master plan, somewhere, for such existence? I mean its downright stupid - and even an ironical stab at science itself - to believe it all happened randomly.

Why don't we hear more on Spirituality through modern scientific perspectives? (Caution: I'm talking about spirituality, not religion, and there is a vast difference between the two) 

In its truest form, Science is a means to understand the ways spiritual forces nurture existence. Science itself is not factual. Some scientist comes up with a theory; if none can disprove it, it conveniently becomes scientific fact. Now just because we can't see something, doesn't mean that something does not exist, right? Consider, for instance, our blind spot. Just because we cannot see anything on our blind spot, does not mean that the 'anything' does not exist. Else, isn't it just an Ostrich mentality?

Science is powerful. It has helped us understand various laws of nature: gravity, karma, energy, etc. Unfortunately, modern day science has blinded itself to the core spiritual essence of life by, simply, discoveries on the surface.Truth is, Science will never be able to talk definitively on matters of spirituality. Because to understand spirituality, one requires faith. And modern day science is not equipped to deal in faith. 

To believe, we need Faith

While it may be hard to imagine, our intelligence is limited. Like, take for instance our own memory. Do you remember exactly each and every one of your experiences from your childhood to date? Realistically, do you even remember the exact chain of events and experiences from a week ago? I hardly even remember anything from what I learnt in Grade 12, leave alone anything in all of high school. 

I'm not saying we're not intelligent. We have the power to think. However, due to our own limitations, we cannot physically derive a higher evidence to prove God on paper. To be fair, faith is not illogical, as logic itself points out to a supreme force (as pointed out through nature, above). 
This may still be hard to accept, and perhaps be even the weakest point of my case. But, this is how faith really comes to test. We need faith, to forego the ego, to believe. . .

On a more practical note, spirituality does not mean you give up on the material joys of this world to become a full-time saint. Enjoy every moment of what you do, but alongside be grateful to That - Nature, God, Father, Allah, or even Krishna Bhagawan if you may - which provides the essence of your joys. That's all.

What I learnt from Stanford

Stanford University. One can say only so little about the richness of its history and its exceptional contributions to society at the global scale.  

It had been a dream of mine to be a part of its richness. The first time I tried, I got on to the waitlist. Then, over the course of the past year, I realized it was what I wanted to try for again. So I did, as a transfer applicant. Though, this time, my acceptance probability was reduced significantly: only 1-2%, about 20 students in number, of a 1800 strong applicant pool are admitted as transfers. 

I just received my admission decision yesterday. It wasn't the news one would like to hear.  

A rejection letter, even so with praise, is no consolation. The decision has been uneasy to swallow. 

At the same time I have had realizations that, even though obvious at first glance, come only with stark out of comfort zone experiences. Certainly, I have been fortunate to experience these early on, and it is only just of me to share this knowledge. Just, in hope that what I share is useful to you in your future decision making, or as another view point that may help broaden your horizons.

Before I begin, let me thank all those who have given support and loved me through this phase. :)

Have faith in yourself. Know that you are a champion. And don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Each and everyone of us has the potential to do the greatest of great things. Its only a matter of self-belief that takes us to materialize this stellar potential. 

I'm not the smartest one around here. But I know I can make big things happen. And that is all that is going to help me make those big things happen.

The problem is that by the time we realize this potential most of us are not young anymore; and have fixed, sometimes inflexible, world views and values. No, that doesn't mean there is no hope for the elderly. Look at Colonel Sanders' (of KFC), for instance. But, of course, the earlier you start, the better advantage you have at creating more value out of your realized self belief.

Most people rightfully cautioned me when I shared the decision of applying to Stanford, at such odds; while some were plain hopeless. Should have I been too? No. I'm proud that throughout these two months - of application and of wait - I never once lost self belief. In retrospect, it may not have even been wise to put most my eggs in such a small basket, but we are all learning, and have the room to take such risks.... 

Take risks. If you can, take big risks. If you can't, take smaller risks. But take risks.

Taking risks puts you ahead of most risk-averse people. And most people are risk-averse. This Stanford risk - risk by virtue of time, money and energy - was a good move despite the results. The potential upsides were much, much, larger than the downside. The downside? Opportunity costs. Time, and indirectly tuition money, I could have otherwise spent in other seemingly fruitful activities. 

It is essential not just to try, but to try by taking at least some amount of risk. That makes the results even more rewarding.  Listen to your heart as much as you would to your mind. Your inner self knows what direction is best for you. Your mind does the driving.

Now that I know for sure Stanford is not where I'm headed, I can progress with full focus on my present work without any provoking distractions. Something that will be more precious than gaining admission itself.

Sometimes, things don't go your way. Its alright. Keep trying. Try for the joy of trying. Not in expectancy of the result. The journey is much more enriching and enjoyable than the destination itself. You never know what, maybe another path, you like along the way. Another path might lead you to a place better suited for you. Thus, there is hope as long as you are moving along your path, and learning with each step. Keep going.

Have you heard the incredible story of Groupon? The company was offered $6 billion by Google, just 2 years after its founding. Its founders' story is very interesting. Andrew Mason started out with a company, The Point, that aimed at inspiring social change through collective action and fundraising. All on-line. Most reputable investors thought that this concept was an epic fail. Even Andrew did not expect it to yield returns from a commercial point of view. But only because he tried, was he able to evolve The Point into Groupon. Today Groupon, based on the same "social change" model, assists smaller businesses to compete with  the big daddy's of consumer society, and mints money as it does so. 

On the other hand, there are examples of those who always tried, and were never successful. Or those who tried, and took millenniums to achieve their targets. The bottom line? Sometimes, things don't go your way. Its alright. You keep trying. Try for the joy of trying. Not in expectancy of the result. 

Lastly, rejoice failure. Smile. And move on to the next challenge. The biggest take home through this experience has been dealing with the ego. There have been moments where I have been sucked into it, and there have been others where I have been stripped off it. And the biggest positive has been that I have realized to acknowledge mistakes, apologize, and move on. You win some, you lose some. But you win all, if you learn more each time. 

If you ever have the time, look at Lalit Modi's twitter feed. Here is a man who created billions of dollars in value. Created and sustained many thousands of livelihoods. And what is he doing now? Indulging in a derogatory war of words with rivals publicly. Mr. Modi may have been unfairly ousted by politicians at the Cricketing Board in India (BCCI), but irrespective, is this what great leaders are made of? Egoism? Shameful public degradation of each other? Even though I have great respects for Lalit Modi, his reaction to criticism is alarming. 


At the same time, even though some of you may not agree, Barack Obama epitomizes all that I have had to say. He believes that he is a true champion. He takes risks. He keeps trying. And he accepts defeat in smile, and moves on.

My  own future plans. Now that Stanford is out of the way, I will continue to build on the truly wonderful opportunities I have at the University of Maryland; pursuing entrepreneurial avenues of work wherever I go: Washington DC, Costa Rica, London, Copenhagen, Mumbai, or Beijing. There is a lot of good work, with potential high returns, that needs to be done with/in the environment. I hope to continue meeting great people, learning from my surroundings, and initiating/inspiring change at all scales possible.

Peace and Politics: an unlikely synergy

As I think, "What does peace mean to me?", the words, “A peaceful world is one where everyone has equity in access to opportunity and where every child has equity in access to education, nutrition, and love” ring in my head. But, the ringing of these very clichéd words stops as soon as it begins. I feel the realistic and practical need to question if peace comes from this need for equality or education and nutrition.


Considering the margin for imperfection: disparities, crimes, wars and violence will always exist in society.

So, what really determines peace? 

A good starting point to question the dynamics of peace in society should definitely be politics; after all, our leaders and their policies determine the environment of our surroundings. 

Let’s begin by looking at the three forms of governances – Monarchism, Communism and the (Western Capitalist) Democracy – and see whether peace prevailed in either of the three.

It is a well-known fact that the Maurya, Gupta, and Chola kingdoms of ancient India were considered the “Golden periods” of our history. People not only prospered, but were happy, peaceful and content with their lifestyles under their Kings – a reason why India was the envy of the entrepreneurial European sailors. In monarchies such as these, people never had an equitable access to opportunity. The caste system then in prevalence, assigned the Shudras, or in today's terminology the lower-class, the jobs of the farmers, cleaners and service-men. The business-folk and the warriors were Vaishyas and Kshatriyas respectively. The Brahmins, or teachers, imparted knowledge to the people as well as advised the Kings on how to rule their kingdoms. No one ever tried to switch their "career-paths"; everyone stuck to their duties. And back then, according to our government sponsored history books, things were good. 

So why didn't this sort of a system work? The power wielded by the monarchs most often ended up being misused by the lethal combination of corruption, influence and greed. Repetitive trends made mankind brand the system of monarchism as “un-progressive”. At the center of this unbalanced equation, lays the answer to the most recent Arab world uprisings: in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Libya.

Then, there were/are the communists of Eastern Europe, Russia and China, who believe(d) that a system of governmental control and dominance yield both, prosperity and peace. In theory, there is no reason not to believe that such a system would create a happy society. For instance, the Native Indian American society was built on the community-based model of living. There was no sense of ownership, yet the people lived peacefully content lives.
However, in recent communist regimes things have changed for the worse. Governmental oppression led to the human-induced Ukraini Holodomor famine. It also led to revolutions in the Soviet Union and its' post-Cold War collapse. Meanwhile China’s forceful centralization of everything - from farmlands, education, media, business, to the economy - shows nothing but a hazy picture of happiness in that society.

Fast forward to the 21^st century era – a small and globalized world dominated by democracy and capitalism. Today, people have the freedom of thought, speech, movement, and most importantly freedom to access every opportunity possible. 

However, today's vicious cycle of buy, throw and buy, is not only fostering the infamous greed is good principle, but is also hurting the middle and poor classes of people. Even though the absolute measure of poverty has improved (the percentage of people living under a $1/day, as per 1970 UN Metrics, has reduced), inflation-adjusted relative poverty has increased. Let’s not forget the damage tribal groups, and the repeated rape our environment and planet have undergone.

When one looks at a country that has excelled in providing all fair and democratic services to her citizens, the United States of America, the current speaker of her Congress, John Boehner, comes to mind. A janitor in his teens who lived the American Dream to become the top-boss of the World's most powerful democratic body. How more peaceful, according to those words that rang in my head, can a world get?

Not really much, right? 
But when we look at this piece from the average plane, we see that average Americans work all throughout the week on things that they dislike (according to a survey by Market Watch, 53% of Americans said “I hate my job”, even before the economic crises crippled the luxury of opportunities), and then, get drunk, drugged and wasted on Friday nights. As an indirect result of which, homicides, violent crimes, rape, assaults, robberies, have ensued into swollen American prisons. This somehow doesn't look more than an illusion of peace.

In all the three governing models, the end results are theorized to hover very closely around peace. The actual results are stark and diametric opposites of any such projections.

So how does one work around this? Do we lose hope in the harsh reality that a greedy race of men can just never create a peaceful environment?

There are no definitive solutions to this. Activities occur in our world in random, multifarious and incredulously large volumes. Integrating solutions and ideas into the invisible forces of activity would end up being a bigger problem than being the solution. 

Whom we need most today, for the most effective change, are social entrepreneurs; those entrepreneurs who are not driven by individualism. 'Cause while greed maybe good, its only so for the individual, not for the society in entirety. The greater the inequality, the greater the masses are disadvantaged. The greater the masses are disadvantaged, the greater the loss of peace. 

We need social entrepreneurs to change the current linear system of consumerism, which is nothing but out-of-control capitalism, of extract resources, produce, sell, and throw to a sustainable cycle that would repeat itself - Reduce, Reuse and Recycle. How we manage our resources is a critical factor that would influence the random order of activities that occur simultaneously in our world. This would ultimately influence peace.


We also need the more privileged people to adopt a socially responsible mindset. To help undo the damage done on our poor. Instead of having debt-laden governments' - except China's - try to organize education at the grass-roots level, which they anyway make a mess of, the educated urban folk should come out more often and help the lesser privileged sections of society as part of voluntary social service. With due credit, there are salutary examples of such existing groups of people: Teach for America, Times Group's Teach India, YUVA Unstoppable, The Joy of Giving Week, and so on. Such groups now need to expand, infect and reach out to as many members of society as possible.

Sounds simple, doesn't it? "Its all about converting the straight lines (that go to nowhere) into efficient cycles." But it requires heaps of effort and determination. With that, I leave you to the sound of your thoughts: are you doing your bit?

Why Chin-dia cannot be world superpowers

In today's post-recession scenario, China is out-innovating, out-building and out-educating the world. The question Barack Obama put forth to his fellow citizens at The State of the Union - can America out-innovate, out-build, and out-educate the world (or more precisely, China)? 

Maybe, maybe not. 
But thats irrelevant to who-ends-up-being-the-next-superpower.

To go a little deeper, lets have a look at a little bit of history.

Great Britain and her navy successfully ruled the world and its seas for almost two-hundred years. Her explorers dominated land in every direction, east, west, north and south. They opened the world for British markets - and therefore created one of the most robust economies in the time. Her armed forces (mainly, naval) were most feared and quite invincible.

Then came the wars. The Great War of 1914 (better known as World War I) and the World War II. Both of these events drained her economy; during the war of 1914, Great Britain spent as much as 45% of her GDP on military. Hardly recovered by that one big economical hole created by war, She spent another, this time 50% of her entire GDP, chunk on battling out during the second world war.

This severe drain of resources allowed the USA, fresh with surpluses off all the manufacturing and entrepreneurial innovation stirred by Franklin D Roosevelt's (the then American President) economic policies (The New Deal), to take over the baton as the World's leading superpower. 

The rest has been history. We know the might of the USA up until today. Dreams envisioned by American people have changed the way the world works...... up until today.

(Here comes a deja vu moment)

Today, the United States of America is in the same position as was the United Kingdom during the Great wars of 1914 and World War 2. The difference is that the US is plagued not only by wars in the Middle East against terrorists who seem to enjoy volunteering to die, but also by deficit-laden governmental spending that doesn't seem to be tamable - despite all the political will mustered.

Meanwhile China has all the economic surpluses in its kitty, courtesy its seemingly infinite capability to manufacture for the entire world. Also, her army, air force, naval and nuclear capabilities are well-feared world over. Whats best is, She has a billion hard-working, smart folks - which also makes them desirably cheap. Something like how the US felt before, during and after World War 2. 

Deja vu? 

.......Somehow, it is indeed difficult counting the US out to China already. The USA still has the largest purchasing power in the world, largest GDP, and most private wealth - numbers dwarfing those of China. It still attracts people from all the world to come and live the American dream. 


However, for assumptions' sake, assume that America loses its power on the World in the next decade - to China. Can China really take over the mantle? With all thats going behind Her, She possibly can. But the chances are bleak. Hypothetically, even if China does become the sole superpower, She won't be able to hold on to it for more than a decade. Here's why;

The Americans had a lot of things going for them when they took power over from the British. The most important was the language - English. The British, through all their global adventures in the past centuries, have made English The World's language. A South Korean randomly bumping into a Swede will try to converse with him/her in English, more than in Russian, French or even Arabic. All international business is done in English. Which didn't make it hard for the Americans to lead the world head on, as most of it understood their language - English.

Consider Cantonese and Mandarin, the two Chinese languages. Both have ancient histories, and an entirely alien script - as opposed to the Latin script followed by most languages including Spanish, English and a list of others. The grammar is absurd to an outsider. I find it hard for a Dutchman in Amsterdam, or an Argentine in Buenos Aires, to understand that the word, 'ma', in Mandarin can alone be pronounced in five different ways to mean five different things. 

Alas, the Chinese culture is very deep and complex as opposed to the western, easy-going, likable, American way of life. 

What makes things worse for China is her following communist principles. The Chinese government (run by the Communist Party of China) actively participates in human rights violations and a high degree of censorship. It is a well known warning, when in Beijing (or any other part of China) do not utter a word about the government in public. You'll most likely land in prison. Would such blind worship of the government be appreciated in mostly democratic nations around the globe? Uh uh, unsustainable form of world leadership.

Consider also the entrepreneurial nature of the two. However smart the Chinese folks are, they aren't natural entrepreneurs. It takes entrepreneurs, who build corporations, create jobs, innovate and build societies, to build a world-leader out of a nation. You would rarely find a Chinese businessman flashing a two-feet wide comforting smile as opposed to his American counterpart. At the end of the day, these seemingly small differences make all the big difference.

Coming back to Barack Obama's State of the Union speech. He also warned that America must compete against India. Indians who are smart and hard-working. Who are doing a better job for corporations (mainly American) around the world at an average of 1/8th the cost of American labor. 


But I find it hard for India to be a global leader. Credits to us for coming up so quick and rich. However, our politics is rotten and the civil situation gets worse at home by the day; for example in Kashmir, for example about Telangana, for example through the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, for example by the Gorkhas in the North East. Meanwhile our smart and efficient middle-class prefers staying out of politics, content with well-paying jobs and a great sense of (mostly Western) lifestyle. All this presents a sadly grim story that our politicians are decently incompetent to lead the world... at least for another two decades.

That being said, if there is a fall in the world power wielded by Washington D.C., it is assured that it won't go solely to one place - Beijing, Brasília or even New Delhi. The polarity of world power, most probably, will be evened out between the developed and the currently developing.

A two billion dollar stor(e)y

Antilla, a $2 billion home in downtown Mumbai. The richest residence in the world.

Its immodest stats have been flaunted all over the press; 600 working staff for maintenance, 6-floor parking for a capacity of 168 cars, three helipads, a movie theater, personal health-centers for each of the five family members, lush sprawling gardens on every level, over-stretched 27 floors (that in standard measurements would have resulted in 60 floors), and all the jazz one could ask only Alladin's genie for.

Obviously, this has led to heated debates. Some view Bill Gates' - and other Western billionaires' - philanthropic lifestyle as the modest comparison that should be adopted by India's rich. Others suggest the evident contrast between rich and poor in India is woeful: a $20 home next to a $2billion one. Having walked on Mumbai's Altamount road just a few months back, home of the Antilla, I can vouch for the bitter display of inequality.

Even India's Prime Minister has had something to say. He, politely, asked India's rich to "show moderation and to lead by example." Hmmmmmmmmm.....

. . . . .  This case holds an interesting argument. On one hand, there are social and environmental ethics involved, while on the other, its his money afterall. Frankly, who the hell are we to be potential financial advisers telling him how to spend his billions?

Lets give Mukesh Ambani a break. He hasn't done something unheard of. Historically, showing off money and power has been a hobby of the rich - Ancient Egyptians, Mughals, modern day Westerners, and Arab Sheikhs. Everyone has participated...everyone is guilty.

Shah Jahan, the great Mughal emperor, built the Taj Mahal as a tomb for his wife. The Taj Mahal was constructed using materials from all over India and Asia - at a time when the only form of inter regional transport was that of the foot. Over 22,000 laborers and 1,000 elephants were employed during the entire 22-year construction period. What made it worse was that all the 22,000 workers had their hands mutilated (so that building a replica of the Taj would be impossible.) The same can be said for Egyptian pyramids. The amount of money and resources spent on such structures, if calculated in today's denomination, has been an incredulously brutal waste.

Our response to the Taj Mahals and the Pyramids of Giza? The United Nations (UNESCO) names them World Heritage sites. 

Back to modern India. 2 billion dollar homes are not built everyday. Antilla must be given its due rather than be the topic of bitching at dinner tables, "Oh, Ambani is a crazy man." 

The prime concerns of lavish living, are these:  social inequality and environmental inefficiency.

Social Inequality: Had Mukesh Ambani had not spent his money the way he has, would India's social inequality woes have ceased to exist? Or, realistically, diminished even marginally? Social Inequality exists as it has since the times of ancient India thousands of years ago. It may not have been as stark as it is now, with Antilla in the frame. But the cover-page doesn't change the contents of the book.

On the contrary, Antilla is a brand ambassador of the new power rising in India. Else, all Mumbai had to offer was British era built infrastructure, overcrowded trains, and slums (as shown to the world in Slumdog Millionaire.)

To those suggesting Ambani should have given away $2 billion to poor instead,  I would like to ask: how much do you, Sir/Ma'am, give to the poor or social initiatives as percentage of your total wealth?

Meanwhile, $2 billion have trickled down the Indian economy. Laborers, manufacturers, engineers, consultants, drivers - there have been jobs created, and families have been given whole new livelihoods. I'm glad he spent his money this way; there are people who have been rewarded for their hard-work, tangibly.

The real downside of the whole episode is this: If one rich man has done it, it paves way for other rich men to do the same. People are inspired to lead such inefficient lifestyles, leading to inefficient consumption of society's limited resources. The environmental consequences can be troubling. Honestly, I can't defend this aspect of the argument with a fitting argument. But here's what we're doing, like we do all the time: on 9/11 2752 people were victimized. Over time, America has waged wars on the Middle East and plunked hundreds of billions of dollars; and the general American population is still haunted by that memory. But today itself, as you read this post, close to 30000 people have died all around the world from under nutrition related issues. Which one is more pressing in terms of lives lost? Where have we focused our energies instead?

Give Ambani his due, he's created a marvel.

The paradox of elections

Just the other day, I was watching this live telecast of the elections for the Governor of the State of Nevada in the United States of America.

One of the candidates, Mr. Rory Reid, gave a high-sounding speech deserving of an enthusiastic applause. I will do this. And I will do that.

Something we keep hearing during election campaigns, I will do this much more. And I will do this as well! I will bring change! I will, I will, I will.. Does this "I will" translate - in a few years - to "Yes, I have"? History tells us, most of time - no. 

Barack Obama, current president of the United States, had courageously promised a list of tough tasks during the 2008 presidential campaign. America emphatically gave him presidency. 500 days later, there is growing resentment to his ways. People have begun being critical of him. Where I personally admire him, I think his promises were too herculean to be realistically met. Whats amazing is, when speeches are being delivered, when applauses are deafening, the power of the word - not action - is given most importance. By the time it comes to action, the expectations were always too high. Bloop bloop.

Hasn't this been happening in India, too? Where politicians come in all melodramatic emotion swaying the masses with their melodious rhetorics - coupled with free blankets and country liquor. While action, is an agenda ignored and lost in the euphoria of promises and words.

Perhaps this image of politicians is what has even detracted the Indian middle class from exercising the most simple - yet most powerful - power vested with them, by the constitution, of voting.

We have, by experience, been skidded into the thinking that politics is a dirty business and nothing can - or will - change. Period. Let me do my own business. Period.

This is a gene common to all - most - politicians across races, countries, and I'm sure if they have elections in the  animal kingdom, the animals have it too. The lion for instance, has the loudest - powerful - roar. But he just simply lazes around in the fields, sleeping and staring blankly in the open! 

Imagine, would your attention be taken by a politician or someone desirous to bring change even if he/she did not speak with the greatest of charisma, and did not promise to bring you rocks from the moon?

Would we, as the people, be any moved by such a leader who is modest in his/her goals and aims. I don't think so. Which is why, we're fed what we want to eat, big promises. We like hearing big. And we forgive lack of action, in the next speech which is just another round of big promises.

Keep an eye out for any candidate who isn't promising the stars. If he has a good track record, he/she might well be a deserving candidate who should be given a chance! (But first, do you vote?)

The IPL, politics, and a little bit of drama

All this noise around the IPL, its commissioner Lalit Modi, and Dr. Shashi Tharoor has caught everyone’s fancy off late. For the wrong reasons. But maybe it was meant to....?

There is another proceeding taking place, simultaneously, which has been suppressed by the sheer popularity of the controversy surrounding the Indian Premier League. That of price rise and inflation. Inflation has jumped up to 10% from sub-zero levels a few months back. A silent volcano waiting to erupt.

It might also be interesting to note, that the opposition parties in the Parliament have called for a cut motion. If this cut motion is passed. Quite simply, the government will fall – disastrous for Congress' reputation. In the light of such high stakes, a mere four billion dollar brand (the league) hogging up precious time not only in the media, but also on the floor of the Lok Sabha, could just be a detour to shift the focus off imminent issues and the approaching cut motion.

Analysing this nexus, I would like to begin with Mr. Sharad Pawar, Union minister for agriculture. He might have to face the loudest music for the rising food prices if the cut motion is passed next week. I have never read or come across a single article in the damned media raising questions over his suspicious (and massive) hold on real estate/businesses/properties/even some of the biggest media houses/etc all over the country that, actually, amount to greater worth than that of the Ambani brothers combined.

His over-zealous participation in cricket politics, off-late, than in his ministry portfolio (of agriculture), in front of the media calls for something very clever. In very subtle ways the light has been thrown off of what holds potentially disastrous consequences for him and his government.

Secondly, the income tax raids on the IPL offices and broadcasting companies. What is the I-T department at the end of the day? A part of the finance ministry, and therefore; a part of the government. (Of course it isn’t a part of the day-to-day politics that take place in Delhi, it is an integral part nonetheless.)

The government, as per its fancy, can “influence” the I-T department to conduct raids. Which explains the hullabaloo surrounding the raids on the IPL. And come on, like everyone was so dumb that they didn’t know about the hanky-panky transactions and violations of investment laws that obviously took place in a fast-growing, billionaire fueled, business such as the IPL!

Thirdly, Dr. Tharoor. With my interactions with certain senior Congress Party members in Delhi last November, I concluded that there is a stark resentment against the ways of Dr. Tharoor. Giving him the boot because his ways are transparent, and he uses a little too much of Twitter would have called for serious flak from the international community (in which Dr. Tharoor impeccably served for 27 years on the trot!)

He seemed the perfect bait for the entire IPL story. So that fits well too.

Lastly, Mr. Lalit Modi. It is a well-known fact, that saving Mr. Pawar, everyone staunchly hates Mr. Modi in the Cricketing politics of India. Surely, for Sharadji, Mr. Modi wouldn’t be much of a sacrifice to save an entire government at the end of the day. Meanwhile, many other powerful people will be happy too. It will be interesting to see how that unfolds on April 26^th. What advantage he does have, is the unrelenting support from franchisee owners; India’s respectful throb, SRK and liquor billionaire Mallaya. This will be a real interesting battle to see.

There is nothing novel in this move, if at all it is one. This is what politics is. What started as an innocent little contemptuous tweet, turned into a potential juggernaut, that the Congress seems to have fired in the hole!

Mahatma Gandhi..... did he make India what she is?

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. The man who spread the message of honesty (satya) and peace (ahimsa). Yes, he is one of those rare gems that will keep shining brightly (for eternity perhaps) in India's history. But.... is he responsible for India's freedom? Has he rightfully been accredited as the Father of our nation?

It is a fallacy that Mahatma Gandhi's non-violent policies drove the British away. Far from it....

The British left our lands in 1947. Two years after the end of the IInd World War. The end of this war marked the re-alignment of world power from the British throne to the US and the USSR. Right... and of course it also marked the establishment of the United Nations. 

As per the United Nations charter signed in 1945, countries that previously held colonies had to begin decolonization. Which meant, a formerly dominating powerhouse like Britain had to let loose of all its colonized outfits. And therefore, not just India, but a string of thirty odd countries gained independence during the post-ww2 period. 

So, how come... we blasphemously accepted that it was Gandhiji's truthfulness that drove our colonizers out? Isn't that very docile? Yes, he must be remembered and his paths must be followed - but to the extent of blindfolded acceptance that he has made our country what she is, is.... well, thats not just very progressive now, is it?

Gandhiji, is an exemplary and a great teacher. But leader? I doubt there was any progress during the twenty-five odd years of his "moderate" freedom struggle. He was responsible for the execution of deserving brave-hearts; Bhagat Singh and co. His Dandi March, today, has been hailed for its good natured cause and peaceful effort. But back in 1930, its yield was poor. All that resulted was a dis-satisfactory and rhetorical truce between Gandhi and Irwin (rep. of the Britishers in India back then).. and that too a whole year later (in 1931).

To an extent, Gandhiji's humble persona and his soothing nexus with the poor made him the ideal face of a newly independent India. But you know what? It took crores of rupees (in those days!) to keep M.K.Gandhi in poverty! Hah :)

The principles of Gandhigiri, when followed, will definitely transform society into a more humble, humane abode. But... have our historians painted a colorful picture, as in a 256 million colors one, and have we, the independent India, blindly accepted it in the euphoria of being independent? 

Defaming Gandhiji of the honors bestowed is no solution. We have imminent problems to find solutions to, and will do much better to focus on them rather than revisit history that will have no possible effect on the progress of the country... That is not the point... However, as educated people, we can only try our best not to be victims of the blind-following the-blind system by letting the sound of our thoughts inspire some thinking....

Bureaucracy... - Bring change Man(mohan!)

"Come at 5pm. At 5 pm, Go to counter no. 3, after that, Go to counter no. 6, and then, Go to the head office five-hundred miles away. Or come in the morning, Madame is not here, Sir has not come today, come day after tomorrow. Come on monday, Sorry we can't do it, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!" In short, the lovely experience in any government-run office.

Literally all government employees (except those in the top commanding positions) have this very lax air about themselves. They don't seem to be bothered if there were people in need of urgent (rightful) help. The common man, suffering by their disrespectful procrastination and 'sit-back-and-relax' attitude, is the joker of the game at the end of the day. He pays all his tax, this tax goes into these employees' (are they even fit to be given that term?) bank balances and, yet, they provide service as if they are doing the country a big favor. Be it the BSNL guys, Air India hostesses, airport staff, govt. college peons, sports authorities, traffic mamas, food distributors, etc etc etc etc etc (phew)

They trouble, irritate the human mind to such an extent, where you are either forced to abuse them, or resort to unfairly stuffing their pockets. So, if you don't believe in bribing, or don't have any influence, then God help you. Cause you are going to be tormented severely.

So, moving away from what is the current story, to what is the cause of this story? I mean, why the hell are these 'babus' such snoozes? I believe, the job security factor is at fault here. These lackadaisical tarts  have no reason to compete for excellence nor do they have any pressures of performing under pressure. They're simply chilled out folks who come to attend a more mature version of kindergarten. Isn't that it? You don't do your job competitively, you don't perform, you don't respect clients, you sip your tea as if you were chilling out at a lounge when there are a hundred sweaty people waiting in queue desperate to get their work done, you openly take bribes, and yet, you do not lose your job. You have a retirement pension plan. You have insurance, rail tickets, and so many other incentives. Isn't this a faulty policy? Well, Home Ministry -Mr. Chidambaram- time you re-worked your policies and strategies. Cause the common man is simply getting suffocated! I can imagine.

At the bigger picture, this has held back the country's progress in many ways. Our governmental infrastructure and service is so pathetically poor! There needs to be serious revision of such frameworks and emphasis needs to be put on professionalism. For even if the bills, acts and provisions passed in the parliament are visionary, poor unprofessional implementing bodies just nullify the vision our politicians very miraculously show!

Brevity

The sun rises; the sun sets once again,
You blink the eye, another day is at end,
Did you solve an equation today; or discover gravity?
That’s what this is my friend; Life’s brevity.

You did sit-ups today, you even ran the mile,
But when you think about it, was it really worthwhile?
Did what you did today deserve a second thought?
Life is too short, my friend, life is too short.

Hungry? You went to you favourite restaurant,
There you fed upon delicious croissant,
Then came satisfaction and subsequent felicity,
That’s what this is my friend, Life’s brevity.

You look out the window-more constructions and pejoration,
This puts you in quiet noticeable contemplation,
There’s quite a bit to change, in fact quite a lot!
Life is too short my friend, life is too short.

You try hard to remember, what happened when you were ten,
Wishing you could live that age, that time once again,
What you’re blaming on life’s longevity,
It isn’t that my friend, it’s Life’s brevity.

You wonder if the man you love will leave your side,
Then one after the other in other women confide,
It won’t happen-chill out- he’ll manage to get caught,
Life is too short my friend, life is too short!

You spend your days studying all about the world,
Everyday to you, another mystery it unfurls,
But all in vain- you’ll never know details of reality,
That’s what this is my friend, Life’s brevity.

Finally, you try to leave your footprint before you go,
In hope, that you can lead others forward tomorrow,
So try not to make a CARBON footprint; it’s worth a shot,
COZ
Life is too short my friend, life is too short. (:

India & Pakistan..... peace?

Two brothers; India and Pakistan were not separated because Muslims hated Hindus or vice versa, or Muslims really needed and wanted land for themselves. It is a well known fact that there are more Muslims in India (content with their lifestyles) than are in Pakistan. Well, what happened, happened. Its History now...   

On a completely different track, since the 26/11 siege on Mumbai, the already sour Indo-Pak relationship has turned sourer. India is sending dossier after dossier, of concrete proof, so that Pakistan does justice to the perpetrators of the 2-day terroristic drama in Mumbai (who were, as we know, some citizens of Pakistan). To no avail. This is frustrating our Ministry, and of course, us.
However, the Indian Ministry is patiently waiting for its counter-part in Pakistan to show action.... in hope for a peaceful South-East Asia. 


But is it worth the wait? Or are we heading into an infinitesimal abyss of rhetorics? The current democratic government in Pakistan, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), is nothing but a dummy ruling body. Not that I have any authenticity or credibility to comment, but as an observer observing facts, I see a deteriorating neighbor. And for me and my country's sake, it is not good -who likes war? 


We have seen the Taliban take over Swat Valley. We read of bomb attacks happening everywhere. We know Pakistan is home to all, Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Toiba, and the Taliban (among millions of such other fancy militant outfits). We know that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan is involved in border laws violations and infiltration. Yet.... we patiently wait. Salute to our patience! While the United States of America has free access to drone suspicious parts of the country with missiles (of course, it has maintained Pakistan's integrity by not invading it yet). 


So, as we all know, at the end of it all -is there any hope to see action? any hope -not only to bring the perpetrators of 26/11 to justice but also -to control the exponential increase in the sprouting of militant-camps? While the common people of Pakistan are just as peace-loving as the ones in India, it is a certain group of these radical guys, who're stoned in their heads ... for life! They seem to be on a mission to make India, the Western World, and basically all infidels, fall. 


Coming back to the puppet, the PPP government; it is an unstable body, which visibly has no real powers over the land. It's just the leader on paper. Expecting a powerless body to do such powerful things (bring about effective positive change in militant and radicalism) is just a simple, wrong equation. Which is why, I appreciated India maintaining a positive diplomatic relationship with the Pervez-Musharraf-Army-Rule monarchy. At least, the dealings and relationship maintained had some credibility to it! 


I salute the Jang and Times Groups', from Pakistan and India respectively, for their "Aman-ki-aasha" peace project. But to me, it would seem to have only positive effects on the goodwill for these two groups (marketing strategy?). With the way things are shaping in the Pakistan, 'hum sirf aasha ki umeed leke baithe rahenge....'

The hypocrisy of debates...

We've all seen them in school, on news channels, in newspaper columns, and just about on every other intellectual property... but do debates actually yield action? Or are they puffs of twisted vocabulary and grammar that disappear into thin air? Exactly, what?

Debates happen when conflicting view-points prove obstacle to a consensus -a decisive deal-making consensus. But today, it is more a matter of pride than of making a deal. One side of the argument wins, the other accepts (or grudgingly so) defeat and everyone goes back to their cozy beds to enjoy a good night's sleep. The action part of the issue is lost.

We're living in an era of speeches. Everyone puts energies into drafting sophisticated multi-paged rants. Seldom are those spoken words converted into concrete, visible action. All the bling-blang spotlight shines on that very highly refined orator. Again, seldom does that orator show any signs of being an action-man. Which is why, I admire President Obama of the United States. He has been a man who has worked towards action rather than only deliver high sounding sentences. Although he may not have accomplished all what he has said, he has got things rolling significantly, and that itself is a rare spectacle.

26/11 happened. The whole of India debated. So many people were praised for their highly effective speeches and comments on the issue. What has happened at the end of it? More than a year later, Ajmal Kasab is still unpunished (forget about a capital punishment, there isn't any damned verdict yet), India is still sending dossiers to Pakistan, we are still porous to terrorist attacks, there isn't any significant infrastructural upgrade that has taken place as far as security is concerned, and the I could become another "all-words-no-action" guy if I went on to complete this seemingly endless list.

To quite an extent, our Indian mindset is at fault. All news channels highlight: "Today's big debate...", but never do they initiate any kind of action. Our focus is on words, words, and unfortunately,  more words. If someone's child goes debating on a high level, those parents beam with pride, make announcements amongst their friend circle, buy the kid a new laptop, or just keep harping about how proud they are of the kid. But when the same kid (of course, when he is eligible to do so in terms of age)  tries to bring change, tries to join and work the system, tries to challenge faulty policies, tries to initiate action -he is laughed at, called a stupid nut for going over-board and thinking too much for his little brain. Huh. This is what is wrong, and faulty...

We're happy and content with the saying: empty vessels (in this case, words) make the most noise.

Fine. Debates help develop personalities, generate awareness... but all that for what? Those personalities need to be agents of change. What is that awareness that is just mindless general knowledge. If our parents' don't even go out to vote, instead encourage the idea of an exotic holiday during voting day, what use is their education? what use is their personality development?

I am not saying that we all should become Obama. All I'm saying is, our society today has placed hollow-words ahead of solid-action. And that means an unfair, unjust and bleak future ahead for the general masses...

The second-last day of the COP15

Really, what the hell is happening?
There is a volatile tussle between hope and pessimism. At one point, everyone literally declares the negotiations staring at failure. Just now, Hillary Clinton opens the American purse, and we have everyone foxed. Confused about how to handle COP15 tomorrow, when 119 world leaders would be expected to convene.
Amidst all this political hullabaloo and drama, seriously, the humanitarian fight against climate change has been lost. 
Whilst China & India want the developed world to take greater, more fulfilling responsibility, the 100 billion dollar lollipop has surely brought about severe confusion. All this on the eve of the final day. However top climate-change economists welcome the move. Yet, the G-77 delegates spill blood when another of their delegates appreciates the American approach. A point though, if the Americans were so willing to bring about solution, why come up with this game-changing move on the last day? Had this been depicted a little earlier, the negotiations would have been sitting pretty! (also, there is no clear domestic framework on climate change in the US!)
Some reports suggest that President Obama will take the US-Russia nuclear deal up with his Russian counterpart on the last day. Jairam Ramesh, the minister leading the Indian delegation at COP15, says that one positive outcome from the COP15 has been the strengthening of Indo-Chinese ties. The G-77, on the other hand, is demanding a trillion dollars. Seriously, is this the work of our leaders? (We could go into another debate on this one. . .) And to top this all, observer organizations have been kicked out to another part of Copenhagen. Weird battles seem to be raging between protesters and the police. Yvo De Boer loses his cool while talking to the chosen people's committee at the Bella Center. 
This has long been predicted, that Copenhagen won't produce a legally binding treaty. But until recently, the mood with which the negotiations were carried out seemed to show that even reaching any sort of a political accord wouldn't be a possibility. That has, with the American move, changed. 
So essentially, as one of the reporters exclaimed on BBC, nothing is sure. 
Yet, if tomorrow goes well. All this criticism showered on negotiators will evaporate. All is well, that ends well. PS. the purpose of this note - to let out the pent up frustration on the confusion and shameful politicization of the whole issue!