May 17, 2016
Development
Development is a slogan nobody dares to doubt. But, what does it mean? We are usually in a spot of bother whenever we question what passes for common knowledge. I remember Finar discuss what an alkaloid is, leaving it inconclusive, even though people may never miss to identify an alkaloid.
Development takes place all the time whether one plans or not. We have come to assume by development a programme which will galvanise the factors of production creating employment and wealth. That much should be above dispute.
My problem arises when I look into the future from where we stand today. We live in overcrowded cities with pollution levels above tolerance and lack of basic necessities like water and power. Land is scarce too and what is attempted is redistribution with the concomitant social issues and political meddling. Can this game go on and on?
It is my guess that as technology advances, it guzzles up more and more resources to create fewer and fewer jobs, or automates cutting down jobs not really compensated by creation of jobs elsewhere as argued in the past. I wonder if any study has been made to see whether the change from agricultural to manufacturing has created or destroyed jobs. I visited a viscose rayon plant which was put up on a river bank cutting off water to the farmers. Even drinking water had become scarce to them. The state is reeling under drought today. There is of course no immediate connection between the two, but is it what we will be leading to in the not-so-distant future? Who can give a reliable answer?
Is the development model we have embarked on wise or is it a will-o-the –wisp?
Who is bothered? We destroy nature which supports life in the quest to make a living for a surging population and for increasing the comforts of a virtual world.
Is there an alternative? Maybe, but it will not be workable. We are holding on to the tail of a tiger.
September 02, 2015
Village
February 14, 2015
Freebies
The mentality for this may have its basis in our desiring something free, without working or paying for it. In Tamizh, we have a word ‘கொசுறு’ something extra. When a vendor measures out the demanded quantity, the buyer asks for a little more, kosuru. This is dubbed as ‘kosuru buddhi.’ The election promise exploits this expectation.
Can everything be free? Perhaps, it was so before man’s intervention with economics. But, even in the natural order, effort was required to get one’s wants. Economics only tried to intermediate through money for the price of efforts and goods. A few people, the old and infirm, the destitute and neglected, may qualify for free goods and services. That is not an aspect of economics, but an essential of social justice. It is a well thought out state policy. But, when across the board anything is offered free, it defies economic fundamentals and social fairness. It cannot be sustained without adverse consequences sooner or later.
I heard it said that in T.N. agricultural labour has become scarce as people were getting things free. A contractor in Bengaluru told me that building labour was difficult to source because people who used to come from the border villages had no compulsion to work.
The freebies are mainly offered by state governments and they look to the centre for resources. That is a potential field of conflict. With different parties in various places, partisan attitudes are possible and will be alleged anyway. Is there a way out?
I feel that the free component of any goods or services may be prescribed uniformly so that in one nation, all people are equal at least in eligibility for freebies. The free component must be moderate and any usage above it must be so priced as to make the provider of goods and services viable overall. That will give inducement for production or make state where it is the producer stay afloat with its own accruals.
In the absence of a sensible solution to this mad rush to garner votes at the expense of public finance, we may be headed for disaster, a failed state as an equal to our neighbour.
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Hindi
Hindi is not the sole language of India, nor is it the language of the majority. We can go back to a conglomerate of linguistic nations and avoid the conflict. Two nations among the conglomerate who do not share a common language may decide by mutual agreement how they should communicate. Maybe sign language can be tried. Just as Hinduism is not the sole religion of India, Hindi is not its sole language. We are a pluralistic society unlike Japan, Germany, France, etc. People from these countries do talk in English where it matters. No one is trying to say that all should know English. But, English serves a useful purpose and until such time the whole country is at ease with any other language, there is no sensible purpose in acting high-handedly, uppishly and provocatively. Let us attend to development, acche din, ridding of corruption, cleanliness, women safety, inflation, etc. We cannot eat literature or Hindi. Let us feed the people properly. Hindi can come by the bullet train when the whole country has connection by bullet trains.
I find conversing in Hindi as much a problem as any Indian finds English. I am comfortable in Tamizh, not English. I do not mean just me (so many non-Hindi speaking ordinary people, they are just not TN alone, but in 60% of the country at least; I have nothing to lose, I got everything by luck). The only viable is to continue with English as long as necessary, a solemn promise made by Nehru. Let Hindi people talk in Hindi, let them have everything English but English, who am I to object to it? But, let them not expect that I will be willing to be a second class citizen in the country in which I am born. I am proud of my language, and literature is being produced in Tamizh despite English dominance for more than 2 hundred years. It is a continuous stream running for several millenia. Tamizh is a classical language by global recognition. As for countries that are multilingual, I know of none that is as complex as India and which has forced its way to be unilingual. My arguments are sound and well-meaning. I want the real issues to be attacked and the country to make economic progress. Arts, literature, philosophy flourish in a prosperous country. Let us work for prosperity, let us feel our way through with concern and love not dogma and false call of patriotism.
To connect two people, desire and heart are needed. Thereafter, communication flows. Language arose from need to communicate, not the other way. My mother and a Bengali lady used to communicate with no common language in London. We will pick up. You are proficient in Hindi because of exposure and interest. So we have to create conditions of exposure and interest (applies to all learning). To make it compulsory is to stir a hornet's nest.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_countries_where....
June 21, 2014
How to end corruption
I have read that India was a nation and had a basic unity before the invaders. The notion that the British are responsible for the idea of India as a nation has been challenged. Let it be.
India as a nation or Hinduism as a religion has to be understood differently from other nations and religions.
India was one nation in belief mostly for a long while, the different beliefs appeared to share something common, but it was a collage of many states, 56 in literature, but much more in history. It may still be possible to think that we had several autonomous states, but one nation without the burden of common army, ruler, etc.
As to religion, the sects multiplied ironically with each reformer trying to unify it under some lofty banner and a single god.
The point that we should think as Indians and unite as Hindus remains a noble slogan, a destination that is as near as the horizon. The force of culture, differentiation being its basic trait, asserts itself over statement of intention. We think as a group within a group – region, language, caste, sub-sect, work, etc. forming the basis for grouping.
Let India roll on without our trying to check its course. Let there be threat to Hinduism. It will produce more great men. Its spiritual saga will continue under variety and adversity. Try to steamroller it into some homogeneity that is artificial and based on a unity that nature has not intended, it will lose its vitality.
Let us remember what Kunti prays: “May there be misfortunes to us so that you will remain in our hearts, O Krishna.”
The govt. must put in place a credible system of tracking the jobless. Everyone cannot be given a govt. or white collar or blue collar job. But everyone must be able to find an avocation to earn a decent living. The govt. must do something serious to keep people feel justified in their trust. It must also contemplate unemployment dole that is sustainable and leak-proof.
The security cover for all politicians must be reviewed and removed or reduced. When I was in service, V P Singh’s son would come as an employee of an investment bank accompanied by security guards. That was extravagant. There must be many such cases.
This theme is global. We are seeing a backlash to globalization everywhere. Trump is top of the chart. Ann Marie Harmony says that he is the man for the moment. We have to accept not because she is right, but because she is on the spot.
That theme came in Mumbai a long while ago and the protagonists have become a political force with more non-nationalist themes. We see it spreading.
The problem about reservations, and provincialism, stems from lack of enoughjobs. This is complicated by hierarchy in jobs. Most people converge to one type of jobs. General education produces clerical skills, and specialized education tended to produce engineers and doctors. Now, it is software. If dignity of labour were a reality and pay less discriminating, perhaps we would have a better situation. We need people for different types of jobs which must complement each other to let the society run well oiled. There is less glamour or no glamour for farm jobs and even planners and pundits feel that migration of rural people is the solution. That will create only more discontentment and garbage. The point is that there are not enough lucrative jobs.
The Economist brought forth the point that immigrants bring skills and contribute to the kitty much more than they draw. Even the development of Mumbai was due to talent moving in besides natural endowments. People from the south flocked to Kolkata, Mumbai and Delhi and now there is reverse migration for jobs. That may be proper nationalism and economic sense. But, we have no time for cool thinking.
As reservations will be part of life, we must take care to see that it does not become too oppressive. There are several central govt. undertakings in various places. Reservation in them for locals will be miscarriage of justice. Private sector may feel that it is a mill round its neck. It must look for fits and not go by sentiments. The reservation cannot be across the board. It must be for unskilled jobs. Such niceties must be factored in.
It may be worthwhile formulating a policy for all regions based on consensus as it will not be possible to hold out against such reservations.
Well, I have expressed my reservations which is more hot air in a tropical country.
I reacted, ‘An ill-advised step,’ a backstab by a ‘notorious bhakt’, and I keep my fingers crossed. There are hurdles to cross and the wisdom of the move will be known only with lapse of time, not days or months, but more. But, in a democracy, dissent cannot be converted to subversion and antinational propaganda based on hunches and fake reports, making it easy for the detractors to pull India down in international fora. Would Congress endorse its LS floor leader’s contention that Kashmir matters must be decided only in consultation with Pakistan?
All statements by Congressmen like Raul Sahib, PC, etc. are in perfect pitch alignment with Pakistan and they have openly acknowledged their indebtedness to Congress and NDTV. I have not heard the voice of Mani Shankar, who is the mole of Pakistan in India. He may be busy in Kashmir or Pakistan for helping the people there.
Right or wrong, no one is willing to part with Kashmir. The peace moves all these years have come unstuck. Right or wrong, the govt. has taken the bull by its horns. Let us not test the valour of the matador by exciting the bull.
Possibly, both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, two British citizens, got it wrong both in theory and in practice.
Nationalism
Nationalism is required to keep us
as one nation.
Nationalism is doing one’s dharma,
being fair in one’s dealings, standing by the country in any conflict created
by other countries and opposing all subversive and perfidious activities with
one’s might.
Nationalism is not
linguistic or regional chauvinism,
-
religious bigotry,
-
cultism,
-
absence of dissent on internal
issues, or
-
one way tolerance.
The lofty ideal that we all form
one humanity will not gain in practical terms.
Globalism vs Nationalism
Read in an article in AEON:
“Now, the global promise and plotline look shopworn. The nation is back.”
“Nations need an imagined past to connect their citizens to a shared experience; nation-builders create narrative foundations upon which to raise walls and roofs. In a drive to heal – some would say, to paper over – the fractures, a new breed of chronicler has scrambled to rebuild those foundations.”
“The economic crisis of 2008 ripped the halo off the idea of a borderless world. Since 2009, the national flag has been a worldwide emblem of resistance against cosmopolitan elites and inscrutable WTO trade-dispute panels and their technocrats.”
Politics was perhaps ever the same.
Reading history as story (Will Durant) I find that politicians always did immoral things to get to power and remain in power.
"Politics is the art of the possible." “Politics is art of gaining power and craft of retaining it.”
The rosy picture we read of Asoka, Akbar, Rajaraja Chozha, etc. is a generalization that may overlook their misdeeds. Even during the independence struggle which unified us for once, there were murky happenings. It is not as though MKG always acted nobly; he acted politically much of the time. A friend of mine always mentions his supporting the khilafat movement as a gross blunder. MKG supported JLN overlooking Bose, Patel, etc. which may be questionable. He did not derive personal advantage, but that does not make it apolitical.
Even in USA we see how a lot of dirt is thrown around by all politicians.
While there is no justification for the depravity that we see, it is not the end of the world. Slightly better times will dawn sooner or later. That is not reasoned optimism, but hope in cyclicity of good and bad.
I said this before and want to
say again that in my useless opinion, Lal Bahadur Sastri was the best PM and I
do not see anyone to be better. No one else has put the nation before self and
ego.
Some may say that he was there
briefly and that there are no achievements to recount. That does not matter. I
do not believe the credit given to a few for achievements. That is
exaggeration. A leader must stand for values and firmness.
People fault Talwar for not so
grand a show under his stewardship. An organisation must have steady growth and
stability, not some flamboyance and meteoric rise that is unsustainable.
A nation of 1.3 billion cannot
run a race, it must walk steadily. China is a nightmare, not an example. There
is no parallel to India in terms of size and variety.
We need a leadership that is
even-tempered and robust, not rhetorical.
Public sector
That is a creation, exclaimed the CM (credit) after
visiting a public sector unit, that was bleeding. It was in the Marxist land and
the CM too hailed from that land. Creation yes, at what cost and for what
return?
I used to visit TTCI office in the nineties as we were
doing an assignment for them. I saw the staff there sitting idly with hands on
the table and no work in sight. They were like a director drawing sitting fees!
BSNL – the telephone firm that did not listen to its
customers. Its staff used to charge for any service on site. The line will go
dead if their charge is ignored.
Indian Airlines – an airline that worked to serve its
staff and the ministers and babus. Once when I asked why they did not announce
the delay, the staff said that up to one hour, it was not considered delay.
Even the ‘please’ from the staff would be peremptory.
The purpose of a public enterprise is to create a
customer, nurture the customer and add value in terms of the economy and in the
context of the society. Whether it is public sector or private sector, that yardstick
must be applied to judge it.
Human beings, the most intelligent in the world, have devised ways to make the world a place fit for their joyous habitation. One way to look at it is as conquest of nature. But perhaps it would be in the fitness of things to view it as wise harnessing of the powers of nature to make it amenable to serve human needs. Nature is still powerful.
We have
created refrigerators and ACs., which work only in confined spaces. We are
still far from influencing the ambience open-ended.
To make
control and regulation feasible, the world was politically divided into many nation
states, which impart identity, shared aims, and fortification against
encroachment and subjugation. However the nation states warred bringing death
and misery for centuries. The devastating world war (largely European) with the
invention of nuclear bombs led good men to think of world govt. to save sapiens
from mutual destruction by nuclear war. The League of Nations, a post-WWI
child, floundered. UN, a post-WWII child, limps.
Instead of
world govt., opening up freer flow of capital and commodities caught the fancy
to make the entire world a single community for achieving prosperity. So it was
thought. It became a gospel. The west pioneered and propagated the idea till it
suited its economic suzerainty. Once it pinched them, protectionism in one form
or another cropped up. Nationalism is the flavour now.
Human beings
are still able to control only a confined space not the entire space.
It remains to
be seen whether we will overcome the impediments and usher in a global economy
and governance sans friction and debilitating wants in one part even as another
part is busy with the idea of colonizing other planets or exo-planets.
Nehru wrote in
Discovery of India how the priests of Somnath depended on prayer to
save them from Mahamud Gazni, but were ruthlessly beheaded by
Mahmud.
Poor priests! Prayer was
the only defence available to them. But he became the PM, a powerful one.
What did he do to defend the country which put the highest trust in him? He
tried to humour the enemy and it did a Gazni to him. He lost a third of
Kashmir and Aksai Chin.
Is it hindsight? No. Read
Guha on Rajaji: “In 1951, as Home Minister in Nehru’s cabinet, Rajaji warned
the Prime Minister of the expansionist designs of Communist China. He wrote to
Nehru that he felt ‘hurt whenever Pannikar [the Indian Ambassador in Beijing]
tells us with extreme satisfaction that China is very friendly to us yet has no
territorial ambitions. We do not want any patrons now, do we?’
Eleven years later, by
which time Rajaji and Nehru were in opposing political parties, India was
invaded by China.”
Why drag his name
long after his demise? He dragged the priests 200 years later. That is history
and the futility of history. History covers past periods by definition and
we cannot now imagine someone else as PM in those times. If we must learn from
history, let us put our trust in someone who can stand up and defend the
country, not those who are both disparate and desperate.
What Nehru did or did not
do is part of history. We cannot close our mind to it and its continuing
impact. It is as ridiculous to find fault with mentioning his name in the right
context as to mention him in the wrong context. The imbroglio in Kashmir and
the disaster in the battle with China are right recalls, but to blame him for
today's failures in economy or politics is wrong context.
One Nation theory:
Author: A Nut
1. Do not force any language on anyone. Let people choose as
they feel necessary.
2. Octroi was abolished and now single registration of
vehicles for all states has been partially introduced. Extend it universally.
3. Do not reserve any job. Let people be free to get a job
based on common criteria. If necessary, give preference to economically weaker
people on some authentic basis.
4. Do not insist on religion, caste, mother tongue (language
known may be asked for) in applications. Ban all news and ads that mention
caste in any way.
5. Forget history, which is a record of opinions and often
inflammatory,
6. Let everyone identify as Indian. Bharata Desam must be an
idea of independence movement. There is nothing sacrosanct about it. Most
people do not know why it is called Bharata Desam and when exactly it was
really called so. I also do not know.
7. Ban all calls for conversion. If individuals convert, it
is their choice. Marketing religion must be banned altogether.
8. Election speeches and pamphlets must talk policy and
programme, shortcomings and achievements, never personalities, religion. Ruling
party must file a self-appraisal and EC must be empowered to point out mistakes
and impose penalties for egregiously wrong claims. Freebies must be banned.
Politics was perhaps ever the same.
Reading history as story (Will Durant) I find that
politicians always did immoral things to get to power and remain in power.
"Politics is the art of the possible." “Politics
is art of gaining power and craft of retaining it.”
The rosy picture we read of Asoka, Akbar, Rajaraja Chozha,
etc. is a generalization that may overlook their misdeeds. Even during the
independence struggle which unified us for once, there were murky happenings.
It is not as though MKG always acted nobly; he acted politically much of the
time. A friend of mine always mentions his supporting the khilafat movement as
a gross blunder. MKG supported JLN overlooking Bose, Patel, etc. which may be
questionable. He did not derive personal advantage, but that does not make it
apolitical.
Even in USA we see how a lot of dirt is thrown around by
all politicians.
While there is no justification for the depravity that we
see, it is not the end of the world. Slightly better times will dawn sooner or
later. That is not reasoned optimism, but hope in cyclicity of good and bad.
Secession
TN was perhaps the first state to demand secession from
Indian union. Kashmir has been simmering, seething and boiling over for a long
time. NE has little to identify with the bulky part of India. Shiv Sena in
Mumbai was perhaps the first to stoke the fire of the ‘sons of the soil’
theory. Almost all states now make it a point that knowledge of the lingua
franca of the state is a must for surviving in the state economically. We have
this the latest: ‘1st in India: AP reserves 75% of pvt jobs for locals’. Hindi
dominance will further accentuate the divisions.
India is not a homogeneous nation. What works for Japan or
China may not work for us. We need to rethink the concept of union and debate
federal set-up. We are more like Europe or USA. The idea of uniting India under
one language or one faith will severely backfire. We should work within the
diversity and plurality giving a sense of control for various regions before
the situation gets out of control and we have many Kashmirs.
Will Durant about the decadence of Persian empire: “Nor is
it natural that nations diverse in language, religion, morals and traditions
should long remain united; there is nothing organic in such a union, and
compulsion must repeatedly be applied to maintain the artificial bond.”
It is about conquered nations, but has some relevance for
us.
