The collective xenophobia of Us v/s Them

I was 21 when I saw the fervour and madness of Advani and his Rath Yatra to build the Ram Temple on the Babri Masjid site. Post this unmitigated disaster, I was stuck in Kala Chowkie (near Lalbaug) for 3 days during the subsequent Mumbai riots. There was a curfew in Mumbai. My cousin sister was puking out of fear and we did not manage to eat or sleep under the fear that we will be attacked by Muslims from Mohammad Ali road. I saw a Muslim family's house ransacked and all things thrown out from their 4th floor apartment, on to the ground. The family walked out of their house, holding each other's hands, with nothing in their pockets. 

Many months later, I was at Marico in their Masjid Bunder office when the bomb blasts happened in Mumbai. I went up on the terrace only to see a bomb go off in front of our street and people with broken hands and feet running scared. I have silently witnessed the futility of Advani and BJP's religious misadventure to get votes at the cost of innocent lives, while they were comfortably living off in their high security residences. My senior colleague carelessly said that this is called collateral damage. I realised very early in life that religious extremism is a useless pursuit that solves nothing and achieves nothing - except collateral damage.

With maturity, I also realised that there is no real religion left in this world. Every religion has been transformed itself into an organised cult - which means it is not what the religious books state but what the religious leaders interpret and preach that is considered the truth. The wrong is right, because the devil wearing the facade of god, says so. And all of us are brainwashed suckers who are taught to visualise the world not as it is, but as it could be. The problem between Hindus and Muslims in India is that we have a history which we cannot change and we have to live with it. However systematic indoctrination, from politicians and religious heads on either side, makes us treat this history not as our past, but as our destiny - all which is merely a figment of our collective xenophobia.

I am supposed to be a Hindu by birth and I was a part of the RSS Shakha for 2 years. My dad never believed in them and their ideology because he felt RSS Shakhas were changing from character development to religious brainwashing. But I must admit that never once they spoke about Hinduism nor did they speak ill about any other religion. Though I enjoyed the atmosphere, I discontinued it because my friends use to tease me for wearing the khaki chaddis which looked really uncool in the times of bell-bottoms. But RSS is different today. It openly aligns with the BJP and talks about a Hindu awakening (through political might). This was never their agenda but they have changed it for reasons best known to them. While RSS is still covert in their approach, organisations like Bajrang Dal, VHP and Sri Ram Sene have been vocal about their hate against Islam and Muslims.

The Muslim leadership is not far behind. Their myopic and mostly uncouth leaders have fundamentalist views about generally everything around them - women, children, education, violence, terrorism, etc. They brainwash common muslims into believing that they are being victimised in India and that revenge is the only option. The reckless behaviour coming out of this frustration, especially amongst the youth and local politicians, only complicates the matters for their community. The image of a Muslim youth furiously kicking the Jai Jawan memorial in Mumbai will forever stay in my mind. I wondered as to what kind of a generation their leadership is wanting to create in India? For the fault of a few indoctrinated idiots, it is the common Muslim who bears the brunt of all sarcasm, prejudices and criticism from the Hindu community.

One of the issues is the lack of a strong representation of Muslim leadership in politics. The current leadership does not have any long term vision for their community that is beyond religion. Also there are no leaders in Muslim community who can galvanise common Muslims to unite for larger causes like economic development, education, modernisation, and so on. These leaders only tend to polarise their people against religious issues, that really don't matter. Since Muslims are a divided vote across regions and constituencies, they never get to send the right candidates from their community into the Parliament and Assembly. Like BJP or Shiv Sena for Hindus, there is not a single strong Muslim party who they can look up to. Every elections, the Muslim leadership across States is seen haggling with leading political parties and trying to manage some favours and promises out of them so that they can win brownie points in their voter community. Change takes a backseat in all this horse trading. In the process, the common Muslim suffers.

The Muslim leadership itself is a curious mix of politicians and religious heads. Infact most Muslim politicians with mass support talk like religious heads, and vice versa. You can never differentiate one from the other. This is a dangerous combination for politics. Hindu leadership like BJP and Shiv Sena, while espousing the cause of Hindus, studiously keep the religious leaders away from meddling in their political decision making process. While a Shahi Imam sends a clear message to his community to vote against certain parties, rarely do Hindu religious leaders say so openly to their people. This is an important differentiator between the politics of the two communities. If development has to happen, religion has to take a backseat.

The problem is that leaders from either side do not want to talk. Since Congress is "secular" they do not want to have such discussions at all. With regards BJP, they are under constant pressure from RSS, etc. to not have anything to do with Muslims. Both these parties want the problem to continue so that they can position themselves as saviours. Politicians like Amit Shah, Iqbal Masood, Akbaruddin Owaisi, and their ilk, spread lies, hate, half truths and make people believe that their religion and their lives are under threat. They are the B2C heads of their political parties. The B2B heads are the senior party leaders who spread fear of religious extremism amongst the rich and wealthy and get them to fund their election campaigns. People fund and vote for them due to this fear psychosis, carefully constructed around false perceptions.

But in real life I have had exactly opposite experiences. When I meet common Muslims - like auto and taxi drivers, my own office team members and friends, I don't find anything wrong with their behaviour. I don't feel my life is under threat. Even when I am in a predominantly Muslim locality like Muhammad Ali Road, I feel different, but I don't feel scared. The same is the case, I am sure, amongst Muslims, when they deal with Hindus. So I am not sure where is the threat to each other? Is the threat from common Muslims and Hindus, or anti-social elements in these communities like our politicians, religious leaders and their followers? If it is the anti-social elements, then why can't we demand that the law deal with them rather than hating the entire community?

Here is another example of such prejudices and fears - My driver lives in Dharavi. Dharavi is divided on language and religious lines. So Hindus and Muslims live separately. Between Hindus - Marathis, Tamilians and North Indians live in separate ghettos. My driver is ok with that, but criticises Muslims for their ghetto culture. In his own building people keep buying and selling their apartments, But my driver is bothered when a Muslim buys an apartment. He thinks its a conspiracy to usurp their locality. When I ask him why he does not chide the Hindu family who sold the apartment to a Muslim, he has no answer. So he does not want to solve the problem, he wants to continue with his rants. That's what he loves - the story of an invisible enemy lurking around somewhere and how he is trying to battle it out. This is what most of us do.

If we dig deeply, collect data and study our behaviours and thought processes, we will realise that these are mere perceptions, not reality. Since I am a Hindu, I am listing down a few of these perceptions, half-truths and lies against Muslims which I have heard over the years -

1. India is a Hindu country and Muslims and Christians came as outsiders due to Mughal and British rule. We need to become a Hindu country again by changing our Constitution.

2. Muslims are multiplying in India since they do not believe in birth control and soon they will be a majority and drive Hindus out of India

3. Muslims are involved in terror activities and want to destabilise India and its sovereignty. Those not involved, silently support these activities.

4. Muslims live in ghettos, they wear weird clothes, they follow different customs, they build illegal mosques and use them to undertake anti-national activities.

India is a secular country, not a Hindu country by Constitution. Being a Hindu myself, I know that had here been no Muslims, we would have been fighting amongst themselves on issues of castes and reservations. There are more Brahmins, Thakurs and other self-proclaimed higher castes in India who look down upon the rest of the Hindus than there are Muslims who hate Hindus in this country. We have 300+ castes, who more or less don't like each other. Hindus don't really need Muslims to make them insecure. More people die due to the carelessness of Railways in Mumbai every year than in Hindu Muslims riots across India. But we are not worried about that as much as we are worried about this. This is a fact. Moreover, barring a select few, all Muslims in India have a Hindu origin. If Hindus were so concerned about being a Hindu country, they should not have been a divided lot and allowed the Mughals to undertake religious conversions. That aspect is conveniently ignored in the hate campaign.

For those who are concerned about unchecked Muslim growth, statistics show that it has fallen in the past 2 decades. It is lesser than the Hindu growth rate. Over 2 million Muslims are actively using family planning techniques as per Sachar Committee Report. Moreover, Muslims have low representation in the key decision making areas like politics, administrative services, police, judiciary, etc. So logically, the fear that Muslims will multiply and drive Hindus out is unwarranted and irrational. Hinduism cannot be wiped out by Islam and vice versa. There are close to 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and 1 billion Hindus. It is realistically impossible that either of us can be wiped out from the face of this earth. But we continue to harbour such fear against each other.

Regards terror activities, I believe the law should take its course not only in terms of arresting the perpetrators but also the people and organisations behind them. I don't care if they are Muslims or any other religion. They should be banned, hanged and whatever else that can be done with them. There should be no "religious discounts" given for the sake of votes, as has been the system followed for many decades.

As for ghettoes, the entire India lives is ghettos, not just Muslims. Look at a cosmopolitan city like Mumbai - Dadar and Lalbag is Marathi, Bandra is Christians, Khar to Andheri is Punjabis, Vile Parle is Marathi and Gujaratis, And similarly, Byculla to Masjid Bunder is Muslims. But we say that only Muslims live in ghettos. Regards, clothes and customs, these are individual choices and as long as they don't impact me, I am absolutely ok. I have seen 3 Arab women swimming in a hijab in our club's swimming pool. That was the only time I was awestruck about their insistence of dresscode, especially for women. If Masjid or Temple activities are disturbing my sleep or safety, I would call the police. For every illegal mosque, there could be atleast 10 illegal religious structures in India belonging to other faiths. But we ignore these as aberrations. If a mosque or any religious structure is used for unlawful activities, the law should take care of it, why religion? The fact is that our politicians appease religion so much that it has made certain anti social elements in our country lackadaisical and fearless about law.

I really don't think this Hindu v/s Muslims is a clash of religions or cultures as it has been made out to be. It is a clash of egos of the Hindus who think they are a majority in India and Muslims who think they are a majority worldwide. But we are humans and we need to build the human connect, not religious disconnect in our society. The world has changed but organised religion promises nothing in this changed world - neither development, nor jobs, nor prosperity. It is a vocation, tool, weapon in the hands of our morally bankrupt politicians. If we can firm up our laws and policies, many of these problems can be resolved without any hitch, and in no time. TN banned religious conversions, but none of the other States have. So there is no political will.

There are a lot of areas that could improve the perception of Muslims in India. It begins with a strong and non-religious leadership. Educated Muslims are all over the place - in movies, cricket, corporate world, journalism, art, etc. but there are not even a handful in leadership areas like politics, administrative services, etc. I am not sure why this disconnect. If someone like MJ Akbar thinks of aligning with BJP rather than starting his own political party, its shows the lack of vision and confidence in Muslim leadership.

I also believe speaking up against ills of their own religion is something Hindus do routinely in India. They sue politicians and go after their own religious leaders. There were more Hindus, inside and outside Gujarat, who legally fought against Modi for 2002 riots, than Muslims. This is the sad truth and needs deeper introspection amongst Muslims.

Education is the weapon that will reform religious outlooks in this country. So focus on education, whether Hindu or Muslim is a must. In one of my visits in a poor school in Hyderabad city, the founder told me that across Hyderabad, there are more Muslims who want their children to get good education than Hindus. They never haggle about fees or any other expense. They just expect their children to be educated well, that's their only demand. So things are changing, but we need to accelerate this.

I believe that for all of us who speak the language of Us v/s Them about each other's religions need to sit with each other to share and clarify our perceptions. We will soon realise that all the perceived threats do not exist in reality. It is a carefully cultivated hype. Mochi and Ansari, the two icons of Gujarat riots met 10 years later in Kerala last year and publicly accepted the futility of their hate against each other's religion. Zaheera Sheikh, the Gujarat riot victim whose entire family was wiped out in front of her own eyes by rampaging Hindus and who was threatened by Hindu politicians to turn hostile, said this after the court's verdict against her - "I don't believe Hindus everywhere are like this."

I agree with her. We all do. Not all Hindus and not Muslims "are like this". I know that. I know we all know that. But for that we need to face our fears through openness and dialogue, not by the weight of history on our shoulders and distrust in our minds. We need not be swayed by what our leaders tell us. Let us go and check the facts for ourselves. Go to a Hindu house or eat biryani at a Muslim house and see it for yourself. We are all the same. Nobody wants to kill each other, even the staunchest Hindus and Muslims. We just hate because we just want to feel victimised, not because there is any real threat. For things to change, people from both communities need to leave their prejudices aside and start talking openly to each other. If the reality matches our perceptions, we can go ahead and continue our tirades and discrimination; but if it doesn't, let's refuse to associate with the lies and hate propaganda of our political parties. There surely are more beautiful things to do in life than hating each other in the name of religion.

It is our inaction to disprove our perception which is the cause of the problem, not the perception itself. For all of you who are still unconvinced which my arguments here's a simplistic version of what I am saying. Its naive, simple, yet very very powerful. 

http://youtu.be/YysMV51vL2w

Can God Save Us from Religion?

“Religion has convinced people that there's an invisible man ... living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn't want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money.” Stand-up comedian George Carlin said this many years ago. I would just change religion to Organized Religion. Otherwise he is absolutely and unconditionally right.

For centuries, organized religion has been the basis of hate, wars, strife, conflict and killings. It has been used as an excuse to divide innocent people, living harmoniously, against each other. It has been the most potent, lethal and effective tool in the hands of the religious bigots of the world to carry on their hate agendas against each other. Organized Religion can do what it wants. It not only kills people, it mercilessly kills animals too – just to please gods. America v/s Iraq was not oil, it was a conflict of 2 religious beliefs. So is Palestine and Israel. So is India and Pakistan. Or Syria, or Bosnia... 
World over, religious associations and their incomes are not taxed. How can you tax god? They do not disclose their accounts. Most religious bodies are headed by people with questionable credentials. These are the people who devise creative resource mobilisation ideas - like the 50 rupee or the 100 rupee queue in temples. Or the varied rates for darshan of the almighty. Here is a rate card for your reference - http://www.tirumala.org/Advance%20Booking.htm .

When everyone is equal to the almighty, then who are they to decide the preferential treatment, based on a rate card? We know this is wrong, but we do not question them because we fear god will get back to us. Even the most elitist in the world believe in this moral code. Infact, the richer you get the more fearful and insecure you become about god and religion. Religious places are the most insensitive to women. Women go all over the place protesting against gender bias, but never against religious places. Why? It’s the fear of God.

I have gone to schools run by religious bodies. Many heads of the school chains asked for monetary favors - be it Christian, Muslim or Hindu religion. All these guys with long beards, white and orange robes were suckers in disguise. And think of this, they are heading schools that will train our next generation to become better citizens. Once, one religious priest was drunk in the school premises, when we met up with him. His room smelled with alcohol, and he sat under his god's photograph discussing education! Another guy plainly asked for a 15% cut on every unit that was sold through him. He said the religious organization he works for does not pay him enough to enjoy a decent lifestyle. When he saw the perplexed look on my face, he said he has made peace with 

god on this issue!

Religions use schools as indoctrination centers. At an age when children should learn geography, biology, physics and math, they are shut in a school that teaches them to protect their god against unknown enemies. No wonder, these kids grow up doubting everything around them and then resorting to violence to protect their so-called religion. Kasab repented his actions later, but what is the use? He was hanged anyways. And what happened to the ones who indoctrinated him? They live in peace in Pakistan. Helen Keller once remarked, “It is wonderful how much time good people spend fighting the devil. If they would only expend the same amount of energy loving their fellow men, the devil would die in his own tracks of ennui.” – this philosophy applies to all those religions that propound hate.

For centuries, religious bodies have been funding religious conversions. Poor people need food and shelter. These so called messengers of god take advantage of their helplessness to convert them into their own religion. You have to be morally corrupt to do this selfish act under the name of god. No god will allow such activity. If every religion says that god is one, then why would he take different avatars and set contradictory rules of living life?

“I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong.” – John Lennon on God.
 
These days religion is being surreptitiously advertised on TV and newspapers. Art of Living and Baba Ramdev are one of the biggest advertisers. Babaji even owns a TV channel. Religious heads are like the fashion mafia, they decide every year what will sell, and then go aggressively on with their selfish agenda. My ex-boss who headed a leading religious channel, told me horror stories of how these gurus used to bargain for top slots and TRPs. Every religious guru is competing with the other for higher revenue share!!

Swami Vivekananda says, "Are you unselfish? That is the question. If you are, you will be perfect without reading a single religious book, without going into a single church or temple."
 
Organized religion works because of their loyal (actually blind) followers. Look at the religious followers. They are most confusing and complicated, when they talk about “their” god and “their” religion. Religion and God is always “us” v/s “them”. Their religion is good, only in comparison with some other religion. They justify all the idiosyncrasies of their god and their religious beliefs through convoluted explanations. But does god really have a religion? Mahatma Gandhi said no. And I second that.

On the other hand, people who believe in god, but not in organized religion, tend to be spiritual. They are the most easy going, simple and selfless. I think selflessness is far more important to mankind than all religions combined in the world. I think it is time to create a Religion of Selflessness. Imagine a selfless world. The moment it becomes selfless, there will be peace, happiness and prosperity.  I would be happy to see the religious heads coming together on a single platform and announcing the 2 commandments of the new religion:

1. God is one.       
2. Not rituals, donations or prayers, but Selflessness is the only way to salvation

I hope God can do this for us someday.

Why reducing the age of consensual sex to 16 is a bad idea for India...

Age for consensual sex to be reduced from 18 to 16. Ask 16 year olds the spelling of "consensual" and 50% would misspell it. Ask them its meaning and 80% would get it wrong.

In India, voting age is 18, drinking age is 25, driving licenses are issued after 18, credits cards are not issued below 21. Most importantly, you cannot marry until you are 18. So whats the hurry in lowering the age of consensual sex at such immature age?

Some of our legal eagles say that since anyway girls are being married off before 18 and that girls and boys in rural areas are sexually active before 18, we cannot criminalize their actions - so change the law. By this rule, why then restrict our kids to vote or drink or marry before 18?

The reason we do so is because we believe that our kids are not educated enough to do these activities with maturity. But this rule changes when it comes to having sex. Unacceptable.

In India, Sex is a four lettered word. Talking about sex is a taboo. Osho once said that he wrote one book on Sex and 398 other books on spiritualism. But in India, people referred to him as a Sex Guru all his life. That is all that stayed in their mind. I agree with him.

While we want to legalize consensual sex at 16, sex education is either officially disallowed or unofficially neglected in 100% of our schools and colleges. Our censors do not allow our film makers to show explicit sexual scenes in even A rated movies. I have personally done research on sex education while launching sex education service on mobile phones. Research shows that 100% of 16 year olds all over the world do not even know how their bodies work at that age, leave alone the bodies of opposite sex. Look at the chaos consensual sex has done in first world countries. I have seen several 16 year old pregnant girls in the US. I am sure they had consensual sex as per US laws. So who suffers because of this liberal law? It is our innocent children. If you ask a 40 year old, how he/she felt at having sex at 16, they would surely say that it would have not mattered if they had waited for a few more years. At an age when kids should be focusing building a solid foundation for their future without any distractions; we are making laws to prevent them from doing so. When adults in our country behave irresponsibly against well-meaning and responsible laws, how do we expect 16 year olds to behave responsibly with a reckless law like this on their side?

Look at the state of education in India - a legal right of every child in this country. A majority of our schools perform poorly in training our kids to live a life with passion, values and integrity. Millions of our kids are out of school and only 4% reach college. These should be statistics of a third world country, not a developed country. We do not respect our children's right to education, and wash off our hands by passing a RTE bill. But we are eager to protect their sexual rights. In a country where our kids have to fight for their basic rights of food, health, education and gender equality, sex is the least important activity they need to learn at 16. For an underdeveloped and morally bankrupt educational system like India's, the latter the legal age of consensual sex, the better it is for our children. So I am not really sure what chappartod revolution we plan to achieve by passing such a pointless, senseless and regressive law?

Leave the rights of our children - we live in a country where our politicians do not want to firmly fight against non-consensual sex. They must first learn to do so, before being so liberal about consensual sex.

The New Agenda for Education

A year back, I went to an “English medium” school in a small town in India. During my interaction with students, I asked them as to how many wanted to become engineers and doctors. A majority of the hands went up immediately. Then I asked as to how many wanted to become cricketers, musicians or film stars. A few more hands enthusiastically went up. Finally I asked as to how many would like to become Anna Hazare? There was a silence in the classroom. Students kept looking at each other. I said, “Ok, let me explain. Look, Anna Hazare is famous man. Infact, he is an international celebrity. He is always on the front pages of national newspapers, TV Channels and social media. He is a youth icon. He has an entire nation that cares for him. He does not have to worry about his next meal, nor does he have to worry about his healthcare and neither does he have to think about travelling across India. Everything that he does is sponsored. So now how many amongst you would like to become like him?”. There was a small buzz in the classroom. Students started murmuring amongst themselves. So I randomly pointed at a kid and asked him what she was discussing about. “Sir, we wanted to know how does Anna Hazare make money?” – she asked me. “Why does he have to make money? Everything that he wants is taken care of. Moreover, he is also famous. He does things that are of national interest. So he is serving the nation too. Zero money, 100% sponsorship, and world famous! Isn’t that a great career to be in?” – I asked. As I was about to further exhort the students to think about this concept, the school’s Principal nudged me to leave the classroom for having some tea. I realized that he wanted this interaction to go no further. My conversation was against everything that he was preparing his students for in the school.

While having tea with his team, not once did he wanted to speak to me about what happened in the class. He kept talking about how he has created a great system in the school that ensures that students turn up on time, do their homework well, focus on their studies, score well in the exams and in their spare time, also participate in sports, and cultural activities, etc. He proudly showed me a set of 3-4 boards that listed the toppers in Class X over the past 20 years. He even spoke about the school alumni that was doing well in life. When asked who these people were? He rattled designations in top companies, and other qualifications like doctors, as well as the number of students who got into IIT or went to the US to work for software companies. No names, just designations! I did not dare to ask him how many musicians or theatre personalities or social workers his schools produced. I am sure, there would have been some, but he would not have cared to keep this data.

Swami Vivekananda had said that the aim of education is man-making. There is no rocket science in what he said. It is a well-accepted fact. We all talk about it. There cannot be any other goal of education in the world than man-making. Education has to create empowered human beings that contribute to nation building through economic, cultural, and spiritual means. 

Unfortunately what majority of our schools focus on is to build a compliance-based environment that ensures that students gain all-round expertise to score well in exams. The skills taught to score marks actually helps children get into the best institutions, who in turn perfect the same skill to get them into the best jobs in corporate world. Basically all efforts of our schools are towards building a platform for economic upliftment of the self for its students. We want our schools to develop students who are good at earning dimes through degrees and designations. Institutions that do this well are sought after in our country. These days, educational institutions proudly proclaim the salaries offered to their students on graduation. Schools and tuition classes put up hoardings and newspaper ads to announce student academic scores. No wonder, education sector spends the highest amounts on advertising in India, higher than even the FMCG sector. Most schools are operating on the principles of capitalism and they are furthering the agenda of capitalists. This agenda requires a student to get qualified to relentlessly earn all his life to acquire wealth and improve his economic and social status. That’s it. That’s education in India.

As our education becomes a tradable commodity for economic gains, more and more students are aspiring to get into careers that guarantee a basic minimum status in terms of monetary returns. So careers in engineering, medicine, and smanagement are preferred over teaching, scientific research, theatre and liberal arts.  The other day I was in a small town in Karnataka and the Block Education Officer was telling me how teacher-training colleges in their district are closing down for lack of interest from youngsters attracted by IT and BPO careers. In recent times, I have rarely heard educationists launching liberal arts colleges or art schools or institutions in the field of economics, theatre, dance or music. India does not have single world-class institution for Educational research and training. We have thousands of schools that train students to get into Engineering and Management, but if someone aspires to become a photographer or get into theatre, the only choice they have is to learn on their own or on the job. Most importantly, none of these careers offer any economic security or status in the society. In India, if you tell someone that you are a photographer, they would smile and say,  “That’s good. But what do you do for a living? Where do you work?” 

India was never like this. Our education was different. It was based on integrating values and improving the spiritual quotient of students. Sadly, that has now been replaced with the economics of self-interest.

It was during the industrialization era of 1920s that led to the creation of the theory of “self-interest”. The industrialization happened due to the extraordinary vision of the Robber Barons or Capitalists, who lead the economic revival of America through a combination of products, profits and productivity. Large production units were set up that needed cheap and compliant labor in huge numbers. The Capitalists, in order to promote their self-interest (i.e. profits) built world-class businesses and created millions of employment opportunities in America. This led to an increase in consumer spending and thereby furthered the demand for various goods and services. So more industries came up and the cycle continued and the GDP of America drastically improved. It was during this time, the western economists theorized that greater the self-interest of the capitalists, the higher the profits, higher the salaries and better is the well being of the society. They believed that good economics demands that every individual should pursue his self-interest. They proposed that only when an individual diligently pursues his self-interest can he be able to add economic value to the society.  Adam Smith wrote -"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest." 

This simplistic theory was then applied to every human being in general - and also to schools. Infact, the idea of organized schooling was scaled up during this period. The entire design and functioning of school was designed to fulfill the industrialized society - the benches, the closed classrooms, the attendance, the bell, the time table, the teacher as the ultimate authority and the Principal as the super authority, the parents with no powers, the assessments and tests, the grading of students, the selection of students based on marks – basically a closely monitored assembly line that would develop workers for a typical manufacturing unit. The British, who ruled us during that time, replicated this model successfully in India. The Indians adopted it with gusto because everyone aspired to be a “Gentleman”.

Look at what this assembly line education, purely based on enhancing ones economic status, has done to our children. A majority in India aim to become engineers, doctors or management graduates. But their success depends on how much money they make. Many others become entrepreneurs and earn millions or may be billions by selling products and services to people for a profit. It does not matter whether the products are irrelevant or irrational – like colas or cigarettes – as long as they make money. Many of the successful enterprises list such businesses in stock markets. Millions others, who believe in this capitalist agenda, invest in their enterprises. Buoyed by the support, these enterprises focus on creating more and more irrational products and services, this time taking the support of the advertising agencies that create deplorable advertising campaigns and bombard the consumers with messages and visuals that glorify these products. 

Some others join politics. But public service takes a backseat since there was no money there. Corruption through power broking has become the norm, since that pays well. A few become sportsmen, actors, musicians, film and TV technicians, win awards and end up becoming cultural icons. They attract corporate sponsorships and use their persuasion powers to sell products that have no real value to a consumer’s well being. A handful go into social work, spirituality, etc. But even here, once they become famous, they further their economic interests by forming organizations and associations and make millions through charity. 

Amongst all these plunderers, people who believe in issues like social welfare, environmental protection, responsible journalism, human rights, women’s empowerment, anti-corruption, rights of the poor and needy, etc. have lost their voice to the majority. They either win awards, or face jail, threats or even death, or are ridiculed and ignored. Only those who have mastered to further their self-interest can survive in today’s world. The rest cannot. 

The economics of self interest is harmful to tomorrow's world. The problem is that economists had then wrongly assumed that an individual was aware of his self-interest - hence the “butcher” and “baker” theory. Over the years, once organized capitalists took over the world, the self-interest was slowly converted into selfishness. Today, I am not sure if anyone of us is aware of our real self-interest. According to me, most of us are not.  We have come from a generation where our schools and our society have systematically (and sometimes forcibly) brainwashed us to believe that our only self-interest is to make money – whatever it takes.

We can observe what uninhibited economic self-interest has done to the world in the post-industrialization era of 100 years - we have cut trees, destroyed farms and mountains for housing and industrialization, we have mechanized farming to speed up food production, we convert fresh food into processed food by adding chemicals to provide cheap and faster alternatives to eat, we buy big fuel guzzling cars to elevate our economic status, we provide neglect the poor and provide subsidies to the rich, we displace villages, their culture and their identity for building roads, dams, nuclear reactors, power plants, we divert rivers for supplying water to parched cities, we create innovative IT solutions to reduce jobs, we kill fish for food….basically we **** the world in order to protect our economic self interest. Because that is all we believe we are here to do.

Focusing on economic self interest looked like a great idea when natural resources were in abundance, life was simple, needs were limited, families were intact and the world was a safer place to live in.  Training students to practice the economics of self-interest today, without balancing it with cultural and spiritual skills is precarious and risky. Unchecked self-interest is killing economies, degenerating environment, collapsing markets and tormenting the common man. Education based on such goals is suicidal.

In the current scenario, schools need to build a new formula of imparting economic skills along with equal focus on cultural and spiritual skills. Let me add here that cultural skills do not mean participation in Annual Social functions and Spiritual skills do not mean Yoga. That’s too simplistic. Spiritual skills should enable an individual to be mentally calm and peaceful in all situations. Cultural skills should enable him to appreciate the world and the people around him. All these skills should be bound by a deep understanding of values like Integrity, Passion, Forgiveness, Hope, Humility, Character, Perseverance, Compassion, Grace, Equality, Kindness, Love, Loyalty, Purpose, Charity, Vision, Courage, Sacrifice, Volunteering, and many more. What schools end up doing are History, Geography, Trigonometry, Biology, Physics, Algebra and so on. Academic skills are important, but spiritual and cultural skills are more important than ever. We, as a society, need to re-look at what we raise our children to become. Do we need them to be rustlers or do we need them to be considerate about the world around them? If we want them to be the latter, then education needs to replace the economics of “self-interest” with education of “passion and integrity”. 

Since education is driven by economics, therefore, the agenda of economics also needs to change. Every individual in a school needs to be trained to pursue his passion. Only when an individual diligently pursues his passion, with integrity, can he be able to add economic value to the society of the future. That should be the new theory of economics and the new goal of education.

I am not saying this for preaching purposes. This is the need of the hour. For millions of wrongs committed everyday, there are a handful of people who want to set it right. But they are in such a negligible minority that they can't do much. This has created an imbalance in the world that we live in. We need to also raise kids who will balance this imbalance with their activism, charity, compassion and passion.

The world I see around me, is not the world I want my kids to grow up in. So we - as parents of our children - need to start initiating this change.

It was never about the bike, Mr. Armstrong.

Lance Armstrong’s public admission about doping during Tour de France will go down as one of the biggest moral frauds ever committed in the history of this world. The fraud is not a one-off mistake, committed in the heat of the moment. This is a mistake that was knowingly committed, with careful planning, in consultation with top doctors, in connivance with fellow athletes and most shameful of all, in tacit consent with his own family. While doing this clandestinely, Armstrong won 7 Tour de France titles, wrote books, launched Livestrong, got sponsorships, was hailed as a poster boy for cancer survivors, and made millions of dollars to become one of the most inspiring sporting icons ever.

And all this while, he steadfastly denied doping, successfully planned his escape through stringent anti-doping tests and investigations, regularly threatened and sued his colleagues, officials as well as journalists, and did whatever it takes to bury his biggest lie, forever. But one lie led to another, and then another. To counter this, Armstrong systematically positioned himself as a socially conscious celebrity and drummed up support from millions of followers across the world who treated him as an iconic superstar and who believed that he can do no wrong.

And then, one day, God said, “Enough is enough.”

People may say that Armstrong was a liar and a cheat and a bully. But beyond all this was the real Lance Armstrong, even more dangerous than all the above. Lance Armstrong was a man without Integrity. That is what he really was, and is.

What is integrity?
Integrity means doing what is morally right, under all circumstances – during day or night, whether in a group or alone, if someone is watching or not, whether it benefits self or not and no matter what the consequences will be. Its an unimpaired, unadulterated, or genuine state of being. It is not to be confused with honesty. As someone said, honesty is the truth that you tell others. Integrity is the truth that you tell yourself.

I attended a Leadership Training Program recently and the trainer asked us what integrity meant to us. Everything from honesty, trust, faith, etc. was shot down. Then he gave us an example of 2 Trapeze Artists in Circus. He said, “Imagine these 2 guys are standing on their trapeze bars about to start their performance. And imagine that both of them hate each other. So when their performance starts, what do you expect to happen?" We all laughed at that situation. The trainer went on to say, "Nothing happens. Even if one guy has an affair with the other's wife, nothing will happen. When the performance starts, the trapeze artiste will blindly leap into mid-air with outstretched hands because he is sure to find his partner's outstretched arms awaiting him at the other end." Thats integrity.

"Couldn't fix it. Refused Money." Thats integrity.

Here's what Walter Isaacson writes about Paul Jobs, the father of Steve Jobs - "Fifty years after the fence was constructed, Jobs showed it to me, still standing and recalled a lesson about making things of quality that he learned from his father. Touching the boards of inside of the fence, he said that “He loved doing things right. He even cared about the look of the parts you couldn’t see.” He said that his father refused to use poor wood for the back of cabinets, or to build a fence that wasn’t constructed as well on the back side as it was the front. Jobs likened it to using a piece of plywood on the back of a beautiful chest of drawers. “For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.”"

Thats integrity.

Lance Armstrong had none of it. And that is what he is paying for. He looked so poor and pathetic in his interview with Oprah. He won all and he lost all. And he believes its because of his maniac desire to win at all costs. But that it is not. It was his lack of integrity. Had he had a bit of it, he would not have waited until all his colleagues testified against him and made it an open and shut case. He was the first one to dope amongst his team mates and the last one to accept it. This is not what great leaders do. But he did. Because he had no integrity. So all his discipline, fitness, hard work, social service, iconic status, sponsorships, hi-profile connections, etc. etc. had no meaning with zero integrity in his thoughts and actions.

While he spoke of his misdemeanors, his cat eyes, that looked so purposeful and determined earlier now seemed so fierce, cruel and perilous. It was Oprah who looked saddened and shocked with Armstrong's confessions, more than Armstrong himself. Maybe because, for the first time in her life, she must have come face to face with an iconic man without an ounce of integrity within him.

I feel dejected today. Many of us are. He was someone we looked up to. I just tried to re-read a few lines from his book, and I felt so overwhelmed with anger. The book deserves to be burnt. And it will be burned. If possible, I shall post a video.

The Pretense of Bollywood

Of all the protests that happened for the girl over the past 10 days, I was most amazed to see leading Bollywood personalities protesting against gender violence and rape. Bollywood should first protest the way their own community views and treats their women.

I was a part of the movie world for 5 years (1995-2000) and I can tell you with utmost conviction that a majority of men in Bollywood used to treat the women in their industry as objects of lust and desire. Women, on the other hand, routinely took advantage of such desperate men to further their careers to make money and become famous.

These "creative" men were so obsessed with objectifying women that they ended up creating superficial women characters that did everything that these men wanted their women to do in real world, but could not. These directors, scriptwriters, choreographers, songwriters, music directors, action directors, costume designers, etc. conspired together to create their woman characters as the ultimate object of submissiveness, lust and desire. I would call them the Gangs of Bollywood. They hunted in groups and the women in Bollywood had to give in to their demands.

Look at the imagery created by the members of these gang for characters like wives, mothers, sisters, girlfriends, and even side characters like sister in laws, mother-in-laws friends, vamps, maids, etc. The wives, sisters and mothers were always docile, obedient, accommodating. They would hold their husband's feet if they were being driven out of the house. The mothers would only be shown supporting their sons in all their misdemeanors or making "gajar ka halwa". The sister characters were either beaten up by her in-laws/husband or raped by the villain. Guys like Ranjeet and Shakti Kapoor spend their entire career in Bollywood molesting and raping women characters. I remember a particular scene from a movie where Anita Raaj is being raped by Shakti Kapoor. She cries, "Bhagwan ke liye mujhe choad do." Shakti Kapoor replies, "Bhagwan ke liye tumhe choad doon aur main kya khau? Prashad?" The entire cinema hall clapped and whistled at this scene. Mother-in-laws were scheming and cunning. Vamps were willing to do whatever their men wanted of them. No questions asked. I have never seen a fully clothed Padma Khanna. For us, in those days, Padma Khanna = Big Cleavage. Sad to see that while these Gangs of Bollywood men conspired, the women in Bollywood silently participated in this nonsense for years.

This was in the movies. Outside it, women in Bollywood were regularly exploited, especially the lower rung women like extras, dancers, etc. I have seen a well known action director sexually molesting an "extra" on a set while make her practice an action sequence. The entire set, including the film's leading lady was watching this, but never said a word. I have known male choreographers seeking sexual favors from female background dancers to make them stand alongside the lead actor in the dance sequence. Once a colleague of mine had been to a meeting with a leading film director, who happened to be drunk and tapped his leading lady on her backside. When he looked at him with a shock, the director remarked, "You want to try it?"

Some years back in a daring sting operation a reputed news channel had provided the proof of this appalling techniques of sexual favors and molestation undertaken in Bollywood. Actors like Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma were caught on camera brazenly molesting new starlets. But all this was so routine in Bollywood that not one woman in Bollywood raised her voice against this molestation. They practiced the conspiracy of silence. Even when Shiney Ahuja was caught for raping a maid, some of these actresses agreed to work with him saying that he cannot be pronounced guilty since the matter is in courts. The guy is still dreaming of making a comeback in Bollywood.

So whether it is inside movies or outside is, Bollywood exploited its women. Maybe things might have changed now. Maybe women in Bollywood are now being treated with more respect outside movies. I do not know. I am no more a part of this business. But as far as movies are concerned, little has changed. Even today, our 47 year old superstars of Bollywood romance 22 year olds. A Vidya Balan has to combine a Kahaani with a Dirty Picture, or a Katrina Kaif has to do a ZNMD along with a Chikni Chameli, to stay in the race. Even a nobody like Poonam Pandey can aspire to be famous by announcing to drop her clothes for something as irrelevant as India winning World Cup. So if you bare, you are in the race. Tabu, who resisted such nonsense, has no work in Bollywood. Super actresses like Seema Biswas are given inconsequential roles in Bollywood. It is sad to see when our actresses shamelessly say - "Filmein sirf teen cheezon ki wajah se chalti hain... entertainment, entertainment aur entertainment."

The reason why women in Bollywood continue to bear this shit year after year is because of the powerful lobbies operated by these Gangs of Bollywood. They can make or mar their career. And women, who seek fame and success at any cost, are willing to compromise their ethics.

Bollywood was never like this until the 1960s. Women characters were strong and were never trivialized - if there were aberrations it was because of the innocence of that era. Cinema needs to evolve with time, but a majority of Bollywood refuses to do so under the excuse of audience preferences and demand. A hit is what they want, come what may. But hits existed even before the 60s, so what is Bollywood talking about? Audience tastes have not changed, it is Bollywood that does not want to get out of their habit of making carefree, careless and sub-standard cinema. That is the problem.

Therefore I was surprised to see people like Mahesh Bhatt and Anupam Kher protesting against the recent Delhi gang rape. Mahesh Bhatt represents a production house that creates some of the most sickening and vulgar women characters in Bollywood. In 2012, his production house produced Jism 2 with a pornographic star - Sunny Leone. When asked, he conveniently justifies his actions by saying - “films are a mere reflection of what is happening in the society.” How lame can that be? On the other hand, Anupam Kher, who has been actively speaking against rape, should not forget the rape scenes he enacted in several movies as a villain. Here's one of his filmi rape you can watch in a movie called Bhrastachar. This is supposedly toned down version which was censored by the authorities. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlxlTMRuLHo). What shocked me about Bollywood's hypocrisy is the presence of singer Mika, a man who had publicly molested Rakhi Sawant on TV. He was busy giving his opinions about gender violence to media!

So before Bollywood protests against sexual molestation or violence against women, they need to first put their own house in order. A Jaya Bachchan, Hema Malini or a Shabana Azmi is powerful enough to do so, rather than publicly sobbing or participating in morchas and holding placards. They need to make women in Bollywood take a pledge against participation in roles and characters that objectify them. They need to protest against these invisible yet organized Gangs of Bollywood. These efforts should also be extended to TV, where women are equally regressively projected.

Women in Bollywood know the power of their medium. Movies and Media impact the way we think about the world around us. So women in Bollywood need to re-think about their portrayals and stop justifying them as harmless “entertainment”. They know it is not, and they need to show it through their actions and deeds in the future.

Here are some of my own suggestions, whatever they are worth:
1. Form a Committee of Ethics representing women in Bollywood.
2. Decide on criteria on which films should be accepted by leading women in Bollywood.
3. Ban directors/Cameramen/Choreographers, etc. who ill-treat or molest women in their professional and personal life.
4. Put a blanket ban on “Item Numbers”
5. Refuse to dance on lyrics that objectify women
6. Refuse to wear revealing outfits that are intended to unnecessarily sex up the character.
7. Promote more women directors
8. Train newcomers to adequately protect themselves from being taken advantage of in Bollywood.

Bollywood has tackled the problem piracy admirably. They have used the power of the medium as well as their contacts at the highest levels in the country to cut it down to size. I know, if they decide, they can do the same for the women in their industry. Until then, they have no moral right to protest against gender violence or rape. This is what I believe.

Beyond Item Numbers - Time to Rethink the Portrayal of Women in Media

Originally posted on Facebook on December 19, 2012. Pic courtesy: idiva.com 

Himanshu Sharma, 20, is a resident of Rohini. A placard hanging from his neck demands justice for the victim. Sharma's story is most interesting -Himanshu lives in Begampur, a village near Rohini, and is currently looking for a job. Himanshu confesses that he had been an eve teaser until yesterday. "I was an eve teaser, and I accept it. Mein aaj yahan apne paap dhone aaya hun." But he swears that he has never touched a girl. "I have passed comments at girls on the road. I was the leader of my gang," he adds. But something that happened a few nights ago changed him. "There was no power in our locality and my elder sister had not come home. It was a day after I had heard about this incident. I was so scared for my sister," he says."I decided then that I'd never indulge in eve teasing again and I will also not let anyone else do it," he says. - Rediff.com

The Delhi gang rape has been so horrifying for men, that for the first time I saw more men protesting on roads for women, than women themselves. For the first time, men have been genuinely rattled by this mindless and shocking assault on that girl. For the first time, men can see the face of their sisters and wives in that girl who is courageously battling for her life in Safdarjung Hospital. I have spoken to a lot of my male friends and they are not only shocked but ashamed by this act. It just make me believe that this gang-rape will change Indian men forever.

As much as men, this is also a time for women to ponder about a few areas which otherwise are never debated in an open and forthright manner.  While we all agree that these rapists need to be punished, jailed, castrated and hanged, we also need to re-look at how women allow themselves to be portrayed in mass media. The growing exploitation of women as a object of sex and desire to sell products and services is a matter of grave concern.

Everyday, viewers (read 'men') are bombarded with item songs, sex chats, online pornography, reality shows, advertising, etc. where women perform erotic acts to attract eyeballs, TRPs and subscription revenues. Unfortunately, in the pursuit of money, the lines of decency between eroticism and vulgarity have blurred. This content is systematically channeled to predominantly young male viewers who are forming opinions about the world around them. These men form a lucrative market as customers, and as the competition for eyeballs hots up, women in movies, TV, web and advertising are getting more and more risque and raunchy in this sexual jamboree.

Bollywood, specially, has not only been quite crass about this depiction, they have even aptly termed these sequences as "item numbers". Top bollywood heroines are vying to be called "item queens". Not only do they perform to vulgar songs and moves in the movie, but also repeat it at awards, private functions and events for hefty fees.

Unfortunately, amongst these viewers are millions of uneducated and mentally sick men who are incapable to comprehend the difference between fiction and reality. The unrestrained portrayal of women as seductive, submissive, vulnerable and buyable commodity across media is creating dangerous perceptions about them amongst such men in the society. Sadly, while these women earn money through organized titillation and live a protected life, it is the common women on the streets that bear the brunt of sexual harassment and rape.

We can argue that these men are wrong to behave the way they do and they should be punished. No questions about that. But to change the attitudes of millions of such 'sick' men or punish them for their misdemeanors looks like an impossible task for law and order in this country. While we do that, it is time women need to debate with some of their own folks about the impact of carelessly allowing themselves to be promoted in vulgar ways for monetary benefits. This needs to be curbed and controlled. I believe some of these women need be trained to control their own exploitation as a mere sexual object of desire and men should be trained to understand the difference between reality and fiction. Laws and punishment can deter men, but cannot stop them. Even if this logic does not hold good, I still feel that women need to rethink the way they allow themselves to be projected in mass media.

No woman goes out of her house with the intention of provoking men to rape her. Not even prostitutes do that. But men who rape are not provoked by women on the streets - they are already provoked by the vulgarity they see on TV, in films, on the web and over the phone. Women on the streets fall easy prey to this media-led provocation. While rape can happen to any woman irrespective of her economic status, most rapists tend to come from economically and educationally poorer backgrounds. Therefore, levels of decency and prevention need to be defined by women themselves and fiercely protected and implemented. A self-censorship mechanism is essential in a world where it is becoming dangerous for a common, working woman, to live and move around fearlessly.

There is a need for an honest debate about this aspect which has been conveniently side-tracked by one and all, mainly due to fear of angry and volatile rebuke from the women community. It is time women in India also question some of their own community's actions and crack the whip.

Check this presentation by Jean Killbourne on objectification of women in media: https://www.youtube.com/watch?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSTg_6N0G7w
  

The idea of a No Man's Land

Death penalty for rape is a good idea. Rapists will be hanged everyday and hangmen across some States would become millionaires. So hangmen will hang men. All men here.

But what about our anti-death penalty lobbyists? They would feel unhappy about these rapists being hanged. They would protest at India Gate and harass the Government by going to the media. Some pseudo magazines and newspapers and TV channels (mostly owned by men) would even allow them to rant their intellectual views on this subject. That would derail the entire hanging process.

In that case, I think castration would be a better solution. Its immediate and  everlasting. But there is a small problem here too. How can our politicians pass such a law? Many of their own brethren (all men again) are routinely accused of such crimes.

May be then we should stop all moviemakers (99% men), advertisers (mostly men), television channels (almost all owned by men) to stop showcasing women in titillating avatars. A law should be passed by the Parliament (70% men) that only fully clothed women can be allowed to be showcased in media. But then how will viewers and customers (read - men) fall for their movies, TV shows and products?

Lets shut down the internet. So no access to adult content for men. But then men being men, they will find a way out of this problem too. All these adult sites are mostly run by men - and so is the internet.

Basically, I pity our women. They are so isolated in this world. Its time they unite against men and banish them from this earth. Thats their only hope. And trust me they can do it. All they have to do is to stop conceiving men. If women find men in their wombs, abort them.

Soon there will be fewer and fewer men on this earth. In some decades, the world will be full of women. When the last man on earth dies, women across the world will celebrate. That would be the day. Earth will then be aptly called The No Man's Land.

On this No Man's Land, finally, the last batch of lucky few women can live in peace. Because after a few more decades, there will be no women too on this earth.  So no men and no women. Nobody. No one.

Earth will then patiently wait for Adam and Eve to appear on her soil - for one last time. This time on, earth will sincerely hope that she will be a better place for women to live in.

In an increasingly intolerant India, freedom of speech needs to go hand-in -hand with fearlessness. Instead social media platforms have made it go hand-in-hand with carelessness.

There was no freedom of speech during the British Raj. But freedom fighters and writers still spoke their mind and got beaten up and arrested. Literature was published and distributed secretly. And through such literatur

e, without PCs, internet and TV, a nation rose against the might of the British.

That was then and this is now.

Social media has made freedom of speech a brainless activity. The moment a thought comes to your mind, the next moment you can publish it online. There is no need think. (So research is out of question.) You can publish a casual thought and you start getting equally casual Likes and Comments. This gives the writer a quick, yet false sense of achievement. Moreover, when all this comes without any responsibility or accountability, the combination is irresistible. As a result popular writing takes precedence over responsible writing.

Carelessness is an outcome of extreme laziness and breeds mediocrity. Social Media promotes this by design. That is why we see too much of mediocre writing around us.

The recent cases of violence and arrests against FB posts by some youngsters is a case in point. The posts have been carelessly written without any clear objective whatsoever. Violent reactions to such posts is equally dumb. But the writers are no less at fault. First they write something that can be potentially damaging. Which is absolutely ok, if they believe so. But when they are threatened, they not only backtrack but reverse their statements. And all this is done online. So where is the issue of obstructing freedom of speech here?

Infact what these guys have done is a mockery of the concept of freedom of speech and expression. I am not sure why India's social media supported their right to speak their mind. I have serious doubts whether they actually have a mind of their own. Instead, there is a need to focus on training young users to use social media effectively and responsibly to share their angst, and protest against injustice. We need to inculcate the understanding in them that the world does not work online. You need to roll up your sleeves and get to work offline to effect a change. Signing online petitions and lighting candles is a great way to participate and support a cause. But somebody needs to go out there in the real world and fight it out to change it. Needless to say, only people who do this achieve greatness. The rest move on to a new online pastime.

Here's a interesting anecdote I would like to share.

When Mumbai Police issued a advisory to Mumbaikars to stay indoors during Bal Thackeray's funeral, Rama Bijapurkar smsed a DCP protesting the inconvenience caused to people. The DCP smsed back saying, "Conviction is a luxury of those who occupy the sidelines."

Rama Bijapurkar disagreed with the cop. I tend to agree with him in the context of the above discussion. Staying sidelines is the new luxury in the online world.

 " My wife was so pious, so devoted, so religious. But it came to nothing. After she went to a Ganesh Chaturthi function in Bombay, we forgot the emergency bottle of her medicine and went to Karjat. Here was a test for gods and goddesses. It was the duty of God to remind her of the emergency bottle. If not, then you and your faith are led astray. When she needed it, the medicine was not there and w

e lost her. If the gods do not come to your help when you need them, then what's the use. I have removed all pictures of Ganesh from my house. But her picture will be there."

I thought this is the Bal Thackeray very few people knew. But with around 20 lakh people attending his funeral procession, this was the Balasaheb Thackeray everyone knew. Not since Mahatma Gandhi have so many people congregated together for a politician's funeral. There are people from all communities, religions, castes and political parties.

I know Bal Thackeray as an amazing orator and an artist. Someone who could connect with the common man as well as the rich and famous.

When Thackeray launched his political party, he fought for issues related to identity of the local population like job reservation for Marathi youth. When you get a guy a job, you end up with 5 votes of the family. And thus, for the not-so-educated Marathi youth born in 1950s and 60s, he became the undisputed god of "Marathi Asmita" (Marathi Ego/Pride). Some from this generation rose from being "rasta chaap" nobody's to political bigwigs in Maharashtra. Chagan Bhujbal, Narayan Rane, Manohar Joshi, Sanjay Nirupam, Sanjay Raut, Late Anand Dighe - the list is endless. Their example ensured that millions others were impacted by his ideology, his largesse in terms of guaranteed jobs in government sector through well orchestrated Labor Unions and his strategically polarized views (first for Marathis, then Hindus and then Mumbaikars). For this generation, this is an end of their era. They have lost their identity. If you watched TV, this was the generation that openly wept upon hearing the news of his demise. They will miss him the most.

As a politician, Thackeray always spoke either for or against something or someone. He unabashedly took sides and changed his stance when it suited his political ambitions. But he did with great conviction and always got away due to his strong oratory. Most importantly, he was never a fence-sitter like most other politicians in his generation. This is one quality which even his greatest detractors found to be endearing (but difficult to emulate). The "Marathi Manoos" in Maharashtra too fell for this quality.

What is surprising is that while on one side he spoke his mind on political issues, he had a circle of friends who were completely out of sync with his political ideologies. They loved him for what he was, inside the closed doors of Matoshree - a genial man who smoked pipes and cigars, drank beer and wine, cracked jokes, and most importantly kept his word, irrespective of his political calculations. Then there was another Bal Thackeray who publicly spoke ill when some of his closest friends who became State leaders under Shiv Sena left his party - like Bhujbal, Rane, Nirupam and Raj Thackeray. But rarely did they rebut him in public. So strong was his hold on even his fiercest opponents.

But beyond all this, as a political leader with a huge following amongst common man as well as other political parties, Thackeray and his Shiv Sena did little to address the real challenges Marathi Manoos faced. Shiv Sena on BMC did nothing spectacular to change the face of Mumbai into an international financial/business hub. The strong cultural heritage of Maharashtra in terms of Marathi language, art, theatre, poetry, movies, folk songs, music, etc. was never systematically promoted by Shiv Sena. The only culture they promoted was the "Culture of Bandhs". There was no clear agenda or plan to promote Marathi entrepreneurs. There was no clear plan or strategy for poverty alleviation of the poor in Maharashtra. Marathi Farmers never found strong support from the Shiv Sena for their cause, until Uddhav Thackeray started visiting them a few years ago. The only cause that Shiv Sena propagated was the "Marathi Asmita", which really meant nothing more than a halo.

Strategically, Bal Thackeray never took any official position and throughout stayed anti-establishment. He loved doing that. Even during his own regime, he was anti-establishment and criticized his own leaders for policies that went against the common man. People loved this as they thought he was on their side. And which he was. So maybe the outpour was for this sense of loss the "Marathi Manoos" felt after his death. Who will now speak for them and their rights? Who will fight for their cause?

Looking at the number of people at his funeral he could be one of the most popular "Marathi Manoos" ever born in post-independence India. So the more important question will be about what legacy he has left behind for the State.

I would like to believe that the genuine concern that Balasaheb Thackeray had for the common Marathi Manoos needs to be converted into a solid action plan for development of the State. That would be the most fitting tribute to this charismatic politician by Shiv Sena.

Since the 1980s, the Shiv Sena won elections because of the connect Balasaheb had with the common maharashtrian. With this connect now gone out of Shiv Sena (and into MNS), the only option the party has is to show some real action on the ground. I hope they do. Else they would cease to exist in the State.

Maybe they could begin this process by not announcing a State Bandh tomorrow. Jai Maharashtra.

(Written on November 18, 2012)

The Disappearing Handcarts

The Handcart - one of the most environmentally sound modes of freight carriers is fast disappearing from city's landscape. I saw this man, at Ballardpier, sitting on a handcart between some of the popular modes of transport.