Name, Blame...Puppy Shame!

To say I’m hopping mad at the blatant name changing spree we’re witnessing in this country of ours is an understatement. And what’s worse is the absolute lack of a political discourse about it! Rewriting history to score political mileage is absolutely unacceptable. And to counter the action in the lame defence that hitherto political parties in power also engaged in it at different points in time doesn’t help score points. Isn’t that the one of the reasons they were voted out of power in the first place? So why even imitate those actions?

But then we don’t seem to learn, do we?

And so when economics fail, we take to renaming cities on a war-footing. (Agra to Agrawal, Faizabad to Ayodhya, Allahabad to Prayagraj, Ahmedabad to Karnavati...)

As if the plethora of real-time issues screaming to be addressed in this country were not enough at hand already!

And now that the madness has been unleashed, time  they also rename the ‘samosa’, 'paranthas' 'kebabs', 'biriyani', 'pilaf', 'tikkas' 'kurma', 'falooda', 'gulab-jamun', 'jalebis', 'phirni' - them all. After all, all of these dishes originated in Mughal kitchens across the Indian sub-continent now, didn’t they? 

Do away with kurta-pyjamas, churidars, sufi music as well!

Also, boycott zaffran, onions. potatoes, tomatoes and   tea, coffee, paper, silk - all of which are not indigenous to India!

Finally, BAN CRICKET as a sport too. It's an English game. And yeah...time they realised that the national game Hockey is originally a Canadian export; time to change that to gilli-danda too.

Cultural integration and assimilation - now what the hell is that? We’re Indians - our culture, agriculture! That must explain our political preoccupation with conveniently  uprooting, re-seeding established cultural constructs, re-engineering culture/social mores seasonally into the fertile soil of time, all in the hope that such tilling efforts will reap a rich harvest of votes. 

Mera Bharat mahan.

Troll to Control

Given the current political environment, I am not at all surprised at the belligerent attacks being made on Rahul Gandhi for his comments, that attempt to draw Indian parallels, with the beginnings of Coco-Cola and Mac Donalds. However, RaGa is on point here.

Fact is that many trolling him have barely any idea of the origins of both! But then, who cares about underlying facts in these days of over-the-top drum-beating to make a point, even it meant overseeing the truth for what it is. 

As someone who’s studied both these brands at B-School, case for case, I should know. It is common knowledge that Coca-Cola began its journey selling at a soda fountain (the ‘shikanjiwalla’ equivalent) while Mac Donald’s had its humble beginnings at an airport food-stand (the ‘dhaba’ equivalent)

Interestingly, this whole shenanigan of portraying RaGa as a “dolt” , also brings to fore another keen observation about Human  Behaviour - perception (fed by ideology - right or wrong immaterial) drives acceptance and impacts credibility. 

And once that has been established in the mind, facts barely seem to matter anymore; the focus then on shifts to selectively viewing events from a lens that only validates this perception, leaving little if no scope for making change.

Perception is a dangerous beast, only because once created, it organically assumes life and a character of its own - for better or for worse - allowing its victims only enough room to play to its written script. 

Interestingly, from an Indian political standpoint, we seem to have gotten that behavioural algorithm bang-on alright.

Is Socio-Capitalism the way forward?

My economic leanings aside, here’s a brilliant dissemination on why Socialism isn’t the panacea to equality and poverty alleviation and yet Capitalism isn’t the answer to Socialism as it does not fairly address the equality principle.

The conversation also explains the exploitative links between socialism and crony capitalism - one eventually leading to the other - an example we’re only too well acquainted with in India, some parts of Europe and most parts of LatAm. 

How then do we protect capitalist principles while also nurturing an environment that maximizes opportunity for all?  Should we as a society seek equal access or equal outcomes? 

Pure capitalism is heartless and leaves too many behind unequally favouring a prized few, while overregulated markets and industries stifle productivity and growth for the majority. 

What the world is increasing beginning to seek is a sense of ‘fair-play’ balance between the two or who knows, maybe a new economic order altogether! 

Make some time to watch this clip at length. It’s compelling! And I must say, her accent only adds to the quality and impact of her delivery. 😉

 

Roy-ter Speak

Quite frankly, I'm amused and a tad beleaguered at the recent press coverage and political outcry over Arundhati's Roy's remarks on Kashmir. 'Seditious' and 'anti Indian' howled the media and the political class. How smugly self-serving and convenient indeed!

While, Roy may have overstated her case in suggesting that India is an occupying power that imposes its rule on Kashmir through torture, brutality and rape, she can't be labelled a traitor by any far measure. Her concern in connection with the state resorting to violence to kill violence, at the cost of violating fundamental rights and basic human dignity in the valley, is valid and, holds good in India as it would in any other democracy across th globe. Roy may have chosen strong words, in keeping with her characteristic style, but worrying about her remarks having serious consequences on the socio-political fabric of Indian society, is taking it too far.

A regional right wing political party head, known to have moulded his career in politics based on incitingly fiery speeches, even today continues to unabashedly provoke his partymen to not just take the law into their hands, but more often than not define the law for the land and forcibly play it out too. His speeches, partisan for the most part, are hard hitting, below the belt and slanderously libellous against individuals and religious minorities to say the least.  Indoctrinated by an ideology whose time has long since past, the party head has constantly encouraged the politics of caste and religious genocide, only to gain political mileage and votes.

All this is very 'Indian' by no means seditious I suppose, since at no point in time then or now have I once heard the media or political class even blinker about curtailing the right to this individual's right to freedom of speech. Strange no? If a curtailment, as is being mandated against Roy by these very folks, was ever warranted, it would first have to be mandated against this man. There is strong justification and documented evidence for it too. But no! Nothing of the sort has ever happened this far and the man continues to roar as and when it pleases him. It happens all the time, where politics is concerned, especially that of caste. So why now then, when there is absolutely no reason to believe that Roy's statements will have any such larger consequences, or fuel public outrage are these folks crying hoarse about curtailing the right to an individual's freedom of speech? Beats me, really. A case of different strokes for different folks, I'm guessing or, pure double standards, if you please.

To quote Vir Sanghvi, from his though provoking Op-Ed, in the Hindustan Times, last Sunday: while the principal of freedom of expression of speech can be curtailed on grounds of sedition, the principal of freedom of expresssion is far more important than any individual. Such curtailment should only be restricted to those times when there is real threat to the unity and integrity of the country. Point to be noted Tiger.

Bollywood calling...

‘Beauty with a purpose,’ we’ve all heard that one before; and Bollywood - that’s how purported it would ever get. But ‘Celebrity with a purpose,’ now that’s a first. And Mama Mia what a purpose this one has turned out to be! One that has the government and the nation sit up and take notice overnight.

It’s been almost close to a decade now that the Narmada Bachao Aandolan (NBA) has been in existence. Countless peaceful protests, rallies and fasts later the issue continued to course its way through a rocky terrain of apathy and hopelessness. Like a mannequin in a window display prompting customers to come and buy, the issue was seen in every possible light by all but heard by none. There simply was just no buy-in from the government.

Tirelessly and with unflinching dedication team Medha Patkar put up a tough fight in realizing their cause – that of rehabilitation of the project affected farmers due to the increased height of the dam. And YET all their pleas fell on deaf ears and their efforts, like pollen, scattered by the wind of inaction onto unyielding barren land.

And then one day, just when about almost everybody had begun to accept the status-quo on the issues that were, something changed.

The issue was the same, but this time around there had been an addition to the numbers of those that had until now supported it vociferously. Support came from entirely unexpected quarters - a Bollywood superstar! Needless to say, things haven’t quite been the same again with the NBA.

With Aamir Khan lending his name to the NBA, the issue has now suddenly become the cynosure of national attention. Not surprisingly it has found its way back to making headlines on page one of the national dailies.

To say that Aamir has brought back the spotlight squarely on brass-tacks of the issue, would be to undermine the efforts of Medha Patkar. Medha Patkar is an essential and inseparable part of the NBA. A fine example she is of character and purpose in relentlessly pursuing this cause. But the fact remains that star-power outshines the brilliance of character and the steadfastness of purpose radiated by socially-conscious individuals who’re out to make a difference. In deciding to throw his lot-in with those championing the NBA struggle, Aamir has unequivocally pledged to seek answers from the powers that be, in his right as a citizen of India first and a star only later. Eulogized as a well-read ‘thinking-actor,’ candid yet media shy and doggedly possessive about his personal life, he has steered clear of controversies even given his forthright manner of speech; traits that give him instantaneous credibility and buy-in, especially whilst espousing the NBA cause.

Much as I believe that this is no cheap publicity generating gimmick (as some have critiquingly insinuated) on Aamir’s part – an actor of his caliber and showing doesn’t need to stoop to such levels, it’s a telling observation however, that in today’s times it’s not about the issue, rather it’s about who is espousing it that could make all the difference. And that is why an actor of the status of Aamir Khan lending his name to the NBA means so much to those campaigning for it. The fame, public affection and recognition afforded to these personalities make each of them powerful beyond reason in ways even they themselves can ever fathom. And it is this power that speaks when the personality behind it decides to champion a cause; a power with a voice so powerful that one cannot but sit alert and take note of what is being said as is now happening with the NBA and as did happen with the passage of the 1993 ‘Oprah Bill’ into law on the National Child Protection Act, initiated by Oprah Winfrey.

What matters here is not just the final outcome but also the decisions that led to it, for it is these that would eventually ratify its unanimous acceptance or widespread rejection.

…which brings me to state that each of us have the power to make a difference but what differentiates us is the way we echo that power. With celebrities, it’s a trifle more easy as the echo gets sounded over a wider latitude and a million times louder. And therein lies the magic of stardom – that of having the power to alter accepted mindsets and mould opinions by playing God in creating that which seems unthinkable.

Here’s then to Aamir. Kudos to him for picking up the gauntlet. May his tribe increase!!!