It Happens only in India

2007-03-25T10:19:00.000-07:00

'PARTRIOTISM' - A THING THAT I NEVER UNDERSTOOD

I once won the first prize in a elocuation competition about patriotism. People said that my speech was furious and they could see the patriotism in me. Well, I should admit that even in that competition I didn't mention a word about what patriotism is. The reason: even today I don't understand what patriotism means.

People, in general state that patriotism means a love towards your country. However, I really don't know what do people refer as a country. Do they refer the geographical boundry of a country, or do they talk about the culture, language etc. that is prevailing in the country. I am in Chennai and both Srinagar and Muzzafarabad (Pakistan) are really far off and I certainly cannot identify myself with culture or language in those regions. However if I am a patriot then I am suppose to love those in Srinagar and I don't need to love those in Muzzafarabad.

In the ancient days, the geographical region of India were ruled by different rulers and patriotism meant that you fight to save the geographical region covered by the ruler under whom you lived. India then grew bigger. Before the partition, to be a patriot you need to love not just those in the present states of India but all those who were living in Lahore or Islamabad or Dakha. Today after partition, all those in Lahore or Islamabad have become our enemies and if I support those residing outside the political boundry of India, I am crticised for my lack of patriotism.

As such, I think the meaning that people give for patriotism is not a love for a nation but just a loyalty towards your ruler. Be loyal to those who rule you and give your best to save the gegraphical location undert the ruler and you will be called a patriot and will be praised for it.

To be polite, I would call this ridiculous. I was born in India by chance and not by choice and merely because the political power of the nation in which I was born by chance covers only the territories upto Jammu and Kashmir and not Muzafarrabad, I am suppose to love those in Jammu & Kashmir even though their culture or practice doesn't match to any extent with me. Ofcourse, as a human I love everybody in the globe and as such I love everybody in Indian geographical region but how can my patriotism extend only upto a certain geographical region.

I do agree, that it is the ruler who subsidised my food, education and almost everthing. If do you think that patriotism is the way that I should reciprocate the ruler for all that then I would confine my patriotism to just paying the taxes properly. Why should one be ready to sacrifice his life just because the ruler payed for his food and education bills.

I can identify myself with those in Jaffna - atleast we speak the same language but there is very littile similarity between me and a Punjabi except the fact that we both are ruled by the same person. However, the traditional school of Patriotism requires me to sacrifice my life for a Punjabi and not for those in Jaffna.

I am certainly not trying to spread hatred. But what I am trying to state is that patriotism is the one that creates hatred. Why are we so desperate to defeat Pakistan in a cricket match but doesn't feel that desperate to defeat Australia or South Africa? People say that it is because they are patriotic and doesn't want to loose a sporting event in the hands of a political enemy. As such, isn't patriotism kindling an enemity towards those in Pakistan. As some one in some part of India, how does it make a difference to me if the opponent is a Pakistani or an African? Shouldn't I be more willing to loose in the hands of Pakistani than an African. Atleast part of my nation can associate themselves with the culture of Pakistan.

As such I think that patriotism is one major hurdle in the way towards universal brotherhood. Patriotism forces a person to love only those in the geographical region covered by his ruler in which he was born by chance than by choice.

The only true patriot I know is the man of the 20th Century - Mahathma Gandhi. He loved every body and didn't hate even the Brits who he wanted to leave the nation. However, I certainly won't consider anyone else to be a patriot if he is going to hate the enemies. Who knows, tomorrow due to some odd reason the region in which I stay might become an independent nation and as such I might become an enemy to those who love me today just because we both are under the same ruler.

To conclude 'Patriotism' is a vaguely defined term. The term propagates loyalty towards a ruler but disguises itself as a term representing national spirit. Being confined to a ruler and the geographical location falling under him, this trait causes enemity and stands as a huge hindrance to the path of Universal Brotherhood. Let us incucate the practice of treating everybody in the world as our friends than confining ourselves to a geographical boundry just because we were born in it and that to because of chance and not by choice.

2007-03-10T09:59:00.000-08:00

MASLOW REWRITTEN

When I was a student of organisational behaviour, Maslow’s theory of hierarchical needs appealed to me the most than any other theory. I could really feel the theory in my pulse and was able to relate me to itself too much. Even though the intention of Maslow wasn’t to provide a guideline for workplace motivation, I really thought that perhaps it was among the best guideline that an employer could use to motivate his employees. I really do not want to discuss the theory here. However, for the sake of the starters, I am just providing one of the pictorial representation of the theory as found in wikipedia

The needs in the base of the Pyramid are supposed to be the most basic and the most important needs of a human and as each needs are satisfied men would advance to the next level of needs until they finally reach the fifth level which is a never ending quest for self actualisation.

However, off late, I have started to believe that this theory isn’t making any sense in the way the Gen X graduates and professionals select their job. Passion or core competency doesn’t seem to be driving the decisions of the modern day graduates. IITians are more eager to take up roles in Investment Banking notwithstanding the fact that it has got very little to do with all those science and engineering that they learnt. I personally heard from the mouth of few top B-school grads that their decision to take up job was driven by the remuneration awarded. Even, my career choice was driven by the remuneration but atleast I had my mind fixed that I am going to be in finance. Money just drove my decision to pick the sub sector. But modern day IITians and B-school grads seems to be purely driven by money. I really don’t know if they are really going to be happy spending close to 50% of the day doing things that neither was their passion nor their area of specialisation.

The most alarming thing than the money is the reasons for which people get bugged up in an office. While people do complain about non-challenging work, I guess most of the complaints are certainly quite strange. Of course, I should admit that those factors even make me crib.

While I do not contradict Maslow’s, I think there is an internal loop inside the pyramid which is not looking so evident in Maslow’s pyramid. In short, I see a pyramid inside maslow’s pyramid and the internal pyramid in my view looks like this

To conclude, the needs in the second pyramid are certainly driving the decisions of young Gen X employees atlease in their initial stages. However I certainly do not understand as to where does these needs fit into Maslow's pyramid.

Note:

I am certainly not conflicting Maslow. I wanted to give a mega entry to the topic and therfore I had to pull Maslow inn.

2006-10-02T09:47:00.000-07:00

A TRUE EXPERIENCE WITH THE TRUTH

"I like to obey the rule so people call me a fool"

Its been quite a while since I thought I would be loyal, law abiding and straigh forward. But now I've felt that being honest is far from being called easy. One thing I felt is that if you are honest you then got to spend a lot than earlier. For instance, a genuine software, VCD or anything is much costlier than the pirated ones. Driving a long distance to take a 'U' turn is oil ineffecient than driving in the wrong way.

Actually these are pretty fine with me. I can afford it and I don't mind spending for the sake of remaining loyal and law abiding. But the actual test lies in how others react to you remaining honest. My experience is in no way lesser than the experience of 'Anninyan Ambi'.

In my experience I found that in our nation when you obey the rule, people call you a 'fool'. I never thought that following the rules properly would be embarassing.

I really can't remember the number of times I've heard from 'Foreign returns' and the 'Foreign aspirants' about the way they admire the law and order situation and the traffic regulations in foreign. I've encountered atleast five nutty coconuts (brown outside but white inside) who keep criticising the Indians for not following rules properly. It was really happy for me in the initial stages to see someone supporting my views. But ironically none of those 'Coconuts' or 'Foreign returns' even attempted to follow the rules and were infact once making fun of me for following the rules. I guess these coconuts who spoil the country on one hand and then curse the nation are dangerous than the terrorists and should get ridden of immediately.

The most commonest of rules that is violated in India is crossing the railway level crossing when the gates are closed. Once I attempted to set an example for others by abstaining from the crossing the track. But I turned out to be nusance for all those who wanted to go below, above and by the side of the closed gate. People give all reasons for not following the law but in this case I had to explain the reasons (or rather gave excuses) for following the rules properly.

To be blamed to some extent are also our own traffic regulators who some time have signal posts in places where they themselves wouldn't have any reason to place it. However, I believed that I had to stop if the signal is red irrespective of the fact that violating it wouldn't harm any body. When I stopped my vehicle in one such signal, I once again ended up at the receiving end of the passerby's anger. One of the passerby started giving me advice that there is no need to follow the rules strictly and couple of girls commented that I am a coward. I really do not understand when did violating signals became an act of bravery (Perhaps then there is no other country in the world that has got as many brave men and women as in India)

Well, at the moment I just pray the lord to save the nation and give the courage(?) in me to keep following the rules. Afterall in real life scenario you don't get to see Anniyans.

2006-09-01T04:56:00.000-07:00

HONESTY BUGS

I hardly listen to western music. But once it so happened that I listened to one album of Michael Jackson. The music was really good but I was carried away a lot by its lyric "If you want to make the world a better place just look at yourself and make the change". I don't know if that song became a bible to me but it just so happened at that moment that I decided to be as honest and law abiding as possible.

Now comes scene 2. A month ago I bought a computer. There were few indegenious vendors who offered me computer with pirated softwares as freebies. However I went and denied all those offers and took a original windows XP Pro 2002 edition. Really felt great to remain honest despite great opportunities to be otherwise.

I uncovered my new bride, the computer that I had bought, and logged in just to explore her. She first wanted me to register our relationship and all that she brought with her from her father's home. So I went into the microsfot.com and registered our relationship and the precious possession, the operating system. The authority duly registered it and I thought that now I have my bride with absolute legal right. She was more like a human and wasn't satisfied with what she was wearing and wanted more update which to my surprise was available for free. I just got so fascinated thinking that my new bridedwould become more beautiful and adoresome after wearing this new update.

The shock came the next morning. My new mechanical bride once again turned human. Once I started to interact with her she said that the operating system that she wears is not genuine. I thought, "OK its normal for women to keep complaining". I then approached Microsoft asking whether her contention is right. They also upheld her view and said it wasn't genuine. But when I asked why this wasn't brought to light when the OS was registered and they had no answers. Now, I am running between Microsoft and my in-laws, the vendor, to resolve the problem. I don't know if I should divorce my bride and marry her sibling.

(Ok my creativity is dwindling so I'll keep it plain text from here)

I know several others using the pirated version who do not face any such irritation at all.

Now is the flash back. Few years ago one of our audit client bought a licenced version of an accounting software. It was a widely used software and which was also largely pirated. Those using the pirated software encountered no problems whatsoever. However our poor clients were asked to updated some important PIN no. in an hardware installed in their computer by the vendor. This updation required that these guys travel once every month from their office to the vendors premises.

Now the only question that I have in my mind is, if these vendors want to prevent piracy then aren't they supposed to make life easier for the users of genuine software. I understand the things that they do in the name of security. But is it solving any purpose for them. The pirated user would obviously not even dare to validate his OS. Whereas users like me who have bought the genuine one are the one who suffer. I think they should try some innovative ways which are more important, from consumer's perspective, than introducing Vista.

When I opted to buy the OS and MS Office I thought honesty comes at a price. But now I've realised that Honesty bugs and it takes a lot to remain loyal.

2006-07-28T14:42:00.000-07:00

As is the people So is the King

A cricketer when fails to perform well the entire nation criticises. But hardly 1% of those critics could really play as good as the player. When a movie maker makes an error in his script again the entire audience criticise but hardly 1% of them could make a movie as good as the movie maker. I believe that its the same thing happening with all those criticisms against politicians.

Politicians are the easy scape goat. They are criticised for every thing and any thing. But do we really deserve a right to criticise them? I wonder like this because of the following three reasons

- Are we first of all remunerating them enough so as to make them accountable to us?

- Are we putting any efforts whatsoever to get to their place?

- Finally are we standing as an example for the way in which we want them to be?

I have put more than adequate arguments, on my first question, in the past and it remains highly a controversial issue and therefore let me better skip that.

But coming to point no.2, it is ridiculous how we argue against the politicians without even posessing the skill to do what they've done. This is something like a wife sitting in the pillion and criticising husband for crossing a dent fast. Most of us here even struggle to handle ordinary domestic problems involving our own wife and children but none of us hesitate to stand first to criticise a politician for his inability to handle properly a macro level strategic issue. We all want to lead a luxurious life but want our politicians to sacrifice every such thing and work purely to serve us. I have only one word to say and to be polite I would say "Ridiculous".

The worst thing is yet to come. Every body feels sick about the corruption in the political system. We complain on every body in the politics for corruption. But have you ever thought as to how much you are a part to that corruption. Not more 2% of the population, I bet, would abstain from corruption given an opportunity. Every one of us wherever we get an opportunity we try to exploit it even if it is illegitimate. Given a chance to evade a tax we evade. Given a chance to drive the vehicle in the wrong way we drive. Given a chance to bribe a government guy to get better favour we bribe. You travel in a train, put three or four kerchieves to reserve the seat for your friends and relatives but you grin against a politician trying to give his relative a job using his power. As such, if we continue to be corrupt your ruler will also be corrupt, after all he's also one among us. In a dictatorship or under the king rule you could say "As is the King and so is the people" but in a democracy "As is the people So is the King"

So, the next time when you feel that the Government is not doing the right things just tell to yourself that you deserve only this government.

2006-07-20T10:01:00.000-07:00

THE LOST PURPOSE OF EDUCATION

I am basically, born and brought up in Chennai. I had my education in a very ordinary State Board school. I was only a very mediocre or for that matter even a very bad student who some how managed to pass the annual examination (alone) every year.

But still I was in "Goodie" list of my school teachers. The reason - they thought I was among those who avoided playing pranks and using abusive words at school. Only once though I sprayed the ink on my class mate and I still remember how my class incharge spared her stick on me. Evey time shew blew my hand with her stick she kept saying that "Discipline is most important". But for that incident I generally was known as a well disciplined boy at my school. Though, my neighbours thought differently. They thought that the level of discipline that is thought in State Board and Government schools are pretty bad and that the guys from Matriculation Schools and the Central Board schools are much more disciplined than their counter parts in a Government school.

As such, when I grew up I always was made to believe by my school that those who are more disciplined will definitely be liked by others and that discipline is the most important thing. But, today having crossed my school, my college and at a time when I am in Industry I really wonder whether the education which thought us discipline, ethics, civic sense etc. has really served its purpose.

I once thought that the lesser educated are more indiscipline, uncultured and that they lack civic sense. But not any more. Today, I see an IIM guy travelling in the wrong way, spitting on the roads, using highly abusive words, involving in adultery, throwing plastics in a eco-friendly zone and what not. May be I am not referring to IIM alone, an engineer from IIT, a medial professional, a lawyer or a Chartered Accountant - no one is an exception.

The only difference I see between an uneducated and an educated is that the former when abuses uses his mother tongue and the latter uses English. All those from all kinds of matriculation and CBSC schools who were thought to be more disciplined are today acting more badly than their counter parts.

I always analysed as to what could be the reason? Perhaps, the reason is that people in our country are involved in a kind of a rat race to beat the rest and in the process they really over look the ends. Their objective shifts to the mean from the ends. Perhaps, the boy at his school scored 100% in his moral science not because he could follow the morals preached but perhaps he tried to get it so as to better his scores. Perhaps, even the most obedient guy acted obediently not because he felt that to be a better principle but rather wanted to win the "Most Obedient Boy" award.

The problem is spread across the society and nobody wants to care about it. People really embarass a guy if he finds it difficult to use his knife and fork at a party or if he miss pronounces a word but they hardly even utter an adverse remark if a guy in his Toyota Corolla travels in the wrong way. Instead they just keep thinking the day they would be travelling in the corolla.

Another problem is that we rate an act not based on what the act is but based on who does it. When a Mason comes into your office with his half trousers people say that he doesn't have dignity. But when a business tycoon comes into the same office with his shorts those same people that it is trendy.

It is unbelievable but interesting to note that the lesser educated people still try to be conservative when it comes to the cultural front. Because for them the respect comes only thru the principles they hold or with their muscle power which is less common. Whereas, those who have learnt a lot about the best cultural practices at the schools hardly value it. Adultery has become more common among the techie guys and those in BPOs but it is at a very negligible level and lower middle classes though.

Don't know if things would change and I don't see even any chances in the near future which could put the things on right track. The bigger questions here is Whether the people first of all want things to get into the right track? Will our educational institutions emphasis more on value education and try to create more disciplined and cultured citizens instead of just look at their pass percentages? May be I think only the god could save the world now.

2006-07-17T23:43:00.000-07:00

DRVIDA KAZHAGAM

Do they really preach what they believe

Recently, the TN government passed an order/law providing for persons belonging to any caste to become a priest in the Temple. I whole heartedly welcomed this move as this would lead to communal harmony.

I am a theist and a brahman by birth (and I don't think I am brahman by conduct) but still do not go to the temples. The reason is that in most of the temples I went I wasn't really happy the way the Brahmin priests conducted themselves. I thought they were certainly not following the generally acceptable code of conduct which a priest should be following. I observed in few cases the preists themselves spitting in the temple premises.

Not many Brahmins have opposed the move. Perhaps the reason that I believe is that every body would've experienced the same thing. However the priests are opposing it which I believe is purely a voice to protect their jobs.

However, I would prefer a moral code of conduct in place to regulate the priests and their activities in the temple which unfortunately has not been there so far. Perhaps people unfortunately believed that Brahmans would conduct themselves in a proper manner which wasn't the case in most places unfortunately.

But the point which really surprised me is that the Dravid Kazhagam has welcomed this move. Aren't they the preachers of Atheism. Every body know what periyar meant by saying "Kadavulai Mara Manidhanai Ninai" (Forget the god and think about ur people).

As such, their belief is that the god in the sanctrum is merely a statue with no powers. For them worshipping is certainly not an act which they would endorse. But recently in a program in Vijay TV the 'Men in Black' argued that they must be allowed to work as priest. Now, I really don't understand why on earth are these atheists seeking a right to do rituals to the god which according to them is only a sculpture.

I think this act clearly unveils the mask of the Dravida Kazhagam who are basically 'Anti-Brahmins' who instead call them as Aethists. They call them Aethist just to protect themselves from being called as a communal party.

The Dravida Kazhagam when they show their true Aetheism they strongly speak against the Hindu temples and gods. I love all the religion undoubtedly. But, just want to know if these same guys would say that Jesus is not a god or a messenger of god or if these guys would say that there is no 'Allah'

Let me again state that I love all the religions and I really welcome the move to allow people belonging to all castes to be a priest in the temple. However my big question is why on earth are the Dravida Kazhagam seeking such a move when they were not supposed to even accept the system of worship and temples and gods.

Well, we have nothing to balme them alone after all this is the kind of double standards that all the politicians of the day take.

2006-05-08T01:45:00.000-07:00

STATE FUNDING OF ELECTIONS

Recently Mr.Birla gave a proposal to the government that election expenditures of the candidate should be borne by the government. The intention of this very short piece of writing is to make an inquiry on what kind of a positive effect would such a move might have on Indian politics.

CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE - THE ROOT OF CORRUPTION

Have you ever wondered why almost all the politicians are corrupt? May be there could be several reasons. But I believe that the amount spent on elections by a candidate is one important factor that would not allow any one to abstain from corruption. Campaign expenditures are inevitable to win election and it is evident from the fact that even leaders with huge public patronage like Jawaharlal Nehru spend quite some money on it and a candidate today spends several lakhs on it. However, the remuneration and other perks that he gets his lesser than 10% of such expenditure and they are not allowed to engage themselves in any other business. This being the case even a person with the best of the social intentions would be a corrupt after all at the end of the day he and his family need to have their bread.

A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD

Most of us are not satisfied with the kind of politicians we have. Few of us even want to get into politics and show them how to be a good politician. But we don’t even make the first step towards it. Why?. Once again there can be several reasons but one most important reason is that we know for sure that we cannot spend that much on campaign as the politicians of the day do and unless we do that no one would even recognise our candidature.

HIGHLY REGULATED CAMPAIGNS

The election commission has made regulations on election campaigns but these are far from being called adequate. Most of the campaigns merely abuse the opponent or gives fancy promises with or without proper basis or grounds. But when the expenditures are meant by government it can even impose regulation on the kind of campaigns and many other things.

CONCLUSIONS

Requiring the Government to spend on campaigns might on papers seem to increase the public expenditure its benefit would far exceed that cost. This measure by reducing corruption the corruption would directly reduce the public expenditure and would far exceed the amount spent on campaigns. Besides this measure will provide a level playing field for all the deserving candidates and would be able to regulate the campaigns. However one major draw back is that this measure would influence many not so deserving candidates to contest the election and no need to state what kind of an impact would this have.

2006-04-27T06:08:00.000-07:00

Have been following the elections in India (especially TN) for a while.

Always feel ridculous about the way the campaigns are conducted. Its pretty OK in parliament elections but could never digest the campaigners for the assembly polls.

They either abuse the opponent or throw fancy promises with little or no road map on how it could be fulfilled.

Hardly ever I have heard the campaigners speaking about their achievements. If at all they do, they speak about what happened during Anna, Kamarajar or MGR days (These are perhaps atleast two decades old and hardly there are any one with good memories to verify their claims)

I feel that campaigns should be made more interactive. Parties should be having a debate where the contesting parties question each others. This would not only avoid the 'Bull shits' but would also enable people to understand clearly as to who speaks sense and who speaks non-sense.