On Sunday 21st August in the Economic times an article came from someone called Alok Kejriwal titled "Why Anna does not impress me".You can go through this article here. I am writing here against this and I'll do point by point refutation.I call him 'He' or 'You' as I like , please bear with me.
Intent -
He says that the intent of Anna confuses him. If you are confused by a simple person like Anna and his simple mission then I doubt your mental capacity.What will happen to your fragile mind if you hear statements of Kapil Sibal and Manish Tiwari of Congress. One day they say they respect Anna Hazare Jiiii, next day they call him the most corrupt person. I suggest you do not follow congress spokespersons.The question is how such a low standard article appeared in Economic times, can we doubt the mental capability of Economic times Editors ? No, we can not. I think they are sold out to Govt. dictates same way they did at the time of emergency and recently our beloved Vir Sanghvi, Barkha Dutt etc. were involved with A. Raja. I am observing for past 2-3 days suddenly the tone of many English news channels have turned very critical of Anna's movement. But then again a huge credit goes to media for making this movement a success.We can say entire media is not Vir Sanghvi or Barkha dutt. Congress wants to remove Judiciary from the purview of Lokpal bill, I say include media also.What is the accountability there ? Barkha Dutt still shamelessly continues anchoring her TV shows. And our intelligentsia graces her shows with their presence.
He says "Ending corruption is like ending prostitution". This is the most intelligent line in the entire article(surprise). Yes this is true. Corruption can not be removed 100%.You know, Aung San Su Ki said same thing. She said that you can not eradicate corruption because it is human nature, but we should always try to control it. And she said that she supports Anna's movement. She did not say that Anna did not impress her, you know why because she is a great leader and a sensible person. And you, you are a joker. You have made good jokes in your article. He says there are other more serious issues like poverty and illiteracy. So Anna should consult this guy before taking an issue. Can one person solve all issues.Every leader takes a cause for which he feels strongly. Chandi Prasad Bhatt took the cause of trees and started the Chipko Movement. Shall I say that I am not impressed with Chandi Prasad Bhatt because he did not chose poverty for his movement ? Anna has been fighting corruption his entire life. Just few lines below he writes the same thing and contradicts himself "Shouldn't the approach be to solve one tangible issue at one time". He says corruption sometimes hurts but does not kill. How naive you are.First I'll recommend you to see Kamal Hasan starer 'Hindustani'. Then I give you one actual example. In 1993 Mumbai blasts around 250 people died. There was a corruption angle how a truck loaded with explosives was allowed into Mumbai, which was used in the Blasts. Here I want to mention that I strongly disagree with the cure of corruption suggested in 'Hidustani', Kill the corrupt. Disproportionate punishment for a crime is not part of civilized societies, it is part of Talibani socities. For theft your hands could be chopped off.
Method -
He says he does not appreciate mass agitation. Obviously it will need some mental capacity to appreciate such things. But this is wrong to say that it has paralysed the everyday life of people. The movement has be very peaceful and there have been no reported disruptions.
Promise -
Again he says what we get from this at the end. My boy if we can prevent even a single blast because of this then it is worth it. Moreover calculate the money you and your father has paid in bribes, if you get 10% back with interst how will you feel ?
End Goal -
nothing worth mention.
Scalable - Of course the law is always scalable. That's why we have amendments. We learn and do corrections.How the writer thinks the movement is not scalable.
Sociality -
He says the movement is like a social rock concert. First of all what is the problem with a rock concert. There is Indian version also full night Jaagaran or Jagraata. And music, bhajan, Kirtan has always been used to in movements in India.What is his real problem he has not mentioned. He bets that hardly 10% of youngsters would know about the Lokpal bill. This is again good joke. Why does it matter ? When I was kid I went into the rallies against Mandal commission. I heard the word 'Aarakshan' then first time and I could not understand it. All I could get was that it will be difficult for educated people to find jobs. The point here is that every youngster would surely know that this is something against corruption and they want to support it. It is such an amazing view to see such huge support for a cause by youngsters. More commendable is the fact that it has been completely peaceful. Their blood boils when they face corruption but they are protesting against it in a non violent manner. Wow! I salute all the youngsters of this country and their leader Anna Hazare.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Treatment of corruption
Rs. 1.76 lakh Crores. I don't know a word which can signify the enormity of this number. I think Jayalalitha put it aptly as the biggest scam in the history of Mankind. Yes in the history of Mankind. It is unimaginable but there is not one Micron of shame or guilt in the face of A. Spectrum Raja. Even if we believe that the Spectrum Raja has not taken a single rupee out of this 1.76 lakh Crores, still he should be ashamed of his leadership, his efficiency as administrator that under his control the people of this country lost Rs. 1.76 lakh crores. This money is enough to instantly uplift at least 1 crore people from poverty. The enormity of this corruption is enough for a person of conscience to die in shame even if he has not benefited personally from it. At least there should be an admission of mistake, that I am sorry that I caused this much loss and I resign. But not for A. Spectrum Raja. He resigned because his beloved leader asked him to facilitate the proper functioning of the parliament. I have only one word for A. Spectrum Raja. He is "Sick". The entire media, the MPs in parliament are asking for action against scam after scam CWG, Adarsh society, 2G Spectrum and now this builder who has caused the death of 66 people in Delhi. I am not here to repeat these things because neither this corruption is new nor this media rhetoric. They have been screaming same things for decades but corruption is going on. I am here to point out a bigger issue which no one is paying attention to. Of course the guilty must be punished with strong action, but my question is will it deter future Spectrum Rajas from doing this again ? Even if Suresh Kalmadi and A. Spectrum Raja are given 100 yrs. rigorous imprisonment, it will deter only few future super scamsters because the malaise is far more deeper. Look at the defiance and unashamed faces of Suresh Kalmadi and A. Spectrum Raja you will understand what I am trying to say. The amount of corruption and no guilt, no shame accompanied with it indicates that the malaise is far deeper. You can recall T.R.Baalu(of same DMK) in the last UPA Govt. He openly admitted favouring his relatives by using his powers as minister. If T.R. Balu had been punished with 50yrs of imprisonment, would that have deterred A. Spectrum Raja from doing 2G scam. I don't think so, he does not seem to be scared of punishment, something else is driving Spectrum Raja. What is that ? I have already answered this question but it is not easy to spot .
There is another curious dimension to A. Spectrum Raja. He is a Dalit. Being a dalit in India and then succeeding in life is lot more difficult than being an upper caste. He is immediately a hero and an inspiration to many people. Democracy empowers people from such humble backgrounds to the corridors of power. And it is a reasonable to expect that they will understand the poor and the down trodden better. Why Raja's dalit background has not deterred him from causing this enormous cruelty ? And this A. Spectrum Raja is not alone. Recently there was a Madhu Koda. He comes from most backward tribal cast but he was purchasing real estates in Africa and depositing crores in foreign banks when he was Cheif Minister of Jharkhand. We have dalit Chief Minister of UP, Mayawati, whose personal wealth increasing in crores and she has nothing to hide about it. There are many more examples, but the question is - why people like these loose concern for the fellow poor and backward , when they get power and money ? There are no caste barriers, or poor rich barriers, or north-south barriers to corruption. Reddy brothers of Karnataka were ordinary people just a decade ago and today they are the wealthiest Ministers. Scamsters are using the name of Kargil martyrs to grab a prime land and our Army Generals are participating in that. Built in the name of Kargil martyrs and out of more than 300 flats, 4 were allotted to Kargil martyrs. It makes you feel sick, what kind of a society we are living in. Our leftist media keep on shouting that our politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt as if they have descended from another planet here. I challenge, take up a random sample of 100 Indian people and make them ministers and bureaucrats, you will get same amount of corruption.
What is it that makes us so inclined towards corruption irrespective of our caste, creed or religion or financial background ? The answer is very simple, lack of emphasis on love, affection, truth, honesty and integrity. Let me explain. According to some survey, 70 percent of child sex abusers are themselves victims of child sex abuse. This is very startling observation but very important to understand the sickness of our society. If you read psychology you will come to know that a troubled childhood, without love and affection can lead people towards narcissism, which is not a healthy mental state psychologically. Narcissists can be very dangerous in extreme cases like Hitler. We all know what a great monster he was. He had a terrible childhood, his father used to beat him and his mother cruelly. CIA did psychological profiling or Hitler after WW2 and concluded that his troubled childhood made him mentally sick. The unashamed and unperturbed looks of A. Spectrum Raja and Suresh Kalmadi give you a hint of narcissism in them. They may not be an extreme case like Hitler but they are certainly not in good mental health. And as I told earlier that even if you pick up a random sample of people, you will find a significant number of them towards poor mental health. And the reason is same troubled childhood. In India attitude towards children and youngs is seriously very bad. They are abused verbally, physically, sexually and emotionally in family and outside family. The troubled childhood leads to mentally sick person and sick people make a sick society in which we are all living. In our society the verbal, physical and emotional abuse of children is not even considered abuse. It is OK to beat a child if he is not obeying the orders of elders, if he is arguing with elders, if he is creating nuisance for something, if he is shouting unnecessarily, if he has dropped something, if he has made fun of elders or teachers. There are numerous silly reasons to abuse a child. I addition sometime children have to fulfill household or external work. None of these are considered child abuse.
If we want to make our society corruption free we will have to take care of mental health of its people. As a long term measure there must be policies which will ensure - no child abuse. For people with troubled childhood, it is like a psychological wound and that must be healed. Unlike physical wounds it does not heal automatically. To make our Govt. and politics corruption free we must do psychological treatment of every individual in high offices. The moment a person is elected to parliament/assembly or selected for high profile job like IAS, there should be a psychological profiling of him. There should be specialist doctors for it. If they find some problem they should also provide treatment. But unless he is fully fit mentally he should not be given a responsible post like Minister. Psychological profiling is the only out of the mess we have created. It may be costly but it will only be a fraction of 1.76 lakh crores.
There is another curious dimension to A. Spectrum Raja. He is a Dalit. Being a dalit in India and then succeeding in life is lot more difficult than being an upper caste. He is immediately a hero and an inspiration to many people. Democracy empowers people from such humble backgrounds to the corridors of power. And it is a reasonable to expect that they will understand the poor and the down trodden better. Why Raja's dalit background has not deterred him from causing this enormous cruelty ? And this A. Spectrum Raja is not alone. Recently there was a Madhu Koda. He comes from most backward tribal cast but he was purchasing real estates in Africa and depositing crores in foreign banks when he was Cheif Minister of Jharkhand. We have dalit Chief Minister of UP, Mayawati, whose personal wealth increasing in crores and she has nothing to hide about it. There are many more examples, but the question is - why people like these loose concern for the fellow poor and backward , when they get power and money ? There are no caste barriers, or poor rich barriers, or north-south barriers to corruption. Reddy brothers of Karnataka were ordinary people just a decade ago and today they are the wealthiest Ministers. Scamsters are using the name of Kargil martyrs to grab a prime land and our Army Generals are participating in that. Built in the name of Kargil martyrs and out of more than 300 flats, 4 were allotted to Kargil martyrs. It makes you feel sick, what kind of a society we are living in. Our leftist media keep on shouting that our politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt as if they have descended from another planet here. I challenge, take up a random sample of 100 Indian people and make them ministers and bureaucrats, you will get same amount of corruption.
What is it that makes us so inclined towards corruption irrespective of our caste, creed or religion or financial background ? The answer is very simple, lack of emphasis on love, affection, truth, honesty and integrity. Let me explain. According to some survey, 70 percent of child sex abusers are themselves victims of child sex abuse. This is very startling observation but very important to understand the sickness of our society. If you read psychology you will come to know that a troubled childhood, without love and affection can lead people towards narcissism, which is not a healthy mental state psychologically. Narcissists can be very dangerous in extreme cases like Hitler. We all know what a great monster he was. He had a terrible childhood, his father used to beat him and his mother cruelly. CIA did psychological profiling or Hitler after WW2 and concluded that his troubled childhood made him mentally sick. The unashamed and unperturbed looks of A. Spectrum Raja and Suresh Kalmadi give you a hint of narcissism in them. They may not be an extreme case like Hitler but they are certainly not in good mental health. And as I told earlier that even if you pick up a random sample of people, you will find a significant number of them towards poor mental health. And the reason is same troubled childhood. In India attitude towards children and youngs is seriously very bad. They are abused verbally, physically, sexually and emotionally in family and outside family. The troubled childhood leads to mentally sick person and sick people make a sick society in which we are all living. In our society the verbal, physical and emotional abuse of children is not even considered abuse. It is OK to beat a child if he is not obeying the orders of elders, if he is arguing with elders, if he is creating nuisance for something, if he is shouting unnecessarily, if he has dropped something, if he has made fun of elders or teachers. There are numerous silly reasons to abuse a child. I addition sometime children have to fulfill household or external work. None of these are considered child abuse.
If we want to make our society corruption free we will have to take care of mental health of its people. As a long term measure there must be policies which will ensure - no child abuse. For people with troubled childhood, it is like a psychological wound and that must be healed. Unlike physical wounds it does not heal automatically. To make our Govt. and politics corruption free we must do psychological treatment of every individual in high offices. The moment a person is elected to parliament/assembly or selected for high profile job like IAS, there should be a psychological profiling of him. There should be specialist doctors for it. If they find some problem they should also provide treatment. But unless he is fully fit mentally he should not be given a responsible post like Minister. Psychological profiling is the only out of the mess we have created. It may be costly but it will only be a fraction of 1.76 lakh crores.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Monotheism is an unnatural concept
Anything more aligned towards nature is better than less aligned, because otherwise it can break our ecological system. Naturally team work is better than one man. All the biggest human achievements are result of team work e.g Rockets, satellites, airplanes, movies etc. Every monotheistic religion claims that it is better than polytheism and better than any other. monotheistic religions were created by one man. Christianity by Jesus, Islam by Mohammad, Judaism by Moses, etc. Whereas polytheism came into being by natural evolution when human beings started living together e.g. our Hinduism. So, polytheism is a result of team work and thats why monotheism can never be better than polytheism. In fact polytheism proposes many Gods, so obviously many Gods are better than just one God. So the idea of polytheism is more aligned towards team work. Team work is better because it reduces the risk of going wrong. Why democracy is better than monarchy, simple team work. Why capitalism is better than communism, simple because the idea of communism came from one man Karl Marx whereas capitalism came into picture as natural progression of humans.
In the earlier stages of development the human was in awe of nature and was not able to control its fury. Sometime he faced floods sometimes famine, epidemic etc. He came up with the idea of Gods related to nature like Sun, Rain, or some tree. This naturally culminated towards polytheism. Since women do the miracle of giving birth to a child there were women Goddesses. With time these religions acquired bad customs like sacrificing humans or animals for God. This is also a natural process because if you don't maintain something properly it deteriorates. Then came a reformist who awakened people towards the bad customs of their religion. Like Jesus changed the behaviour of people towards ill, weak and physically challenged. In the western and Arab world monotheism completely took over polytheism. But because of their principle of one God and insistence on that my God is the only true God, all of them came into conflict with each other. This is a major drawback of monotheism. At the same time we can see that reforms mitigate these drawbacks. Despite the historical presence of very strong anti-semitism in Christianity, today Jews and Christians are partners in their development. This is quite remarkable achievement for both and the credit goes to modernism, liberalism and reforms.
In India we got religions like Buddhism or Sikhism as reform measures. These religions are not strictly monotheistic and they do not insist upon that theirs is only true God. So we do not see any conflict between these religions or with Hinduism.
Monotheistic people despise Hinduism and thereby polytheism for the existence of casteism and other social issues in our society. First thing is bad customs has nothing to do with polytheism and any religion without maintenance will acquire them e.g. Racism in western society.
Western religions got further reforms during the time of cultural renaissance. They came up with the idea of democracy and today they have controlled issues like racism in their society. In Islam reforms happened in the form of Sufism. But with the advent of Wahhabism these reforms were negated. Wahhab said that people are not following Islam properly and he attacked and killed liberals and sufis. Today this Wahhabism has manifested itself in the form of Talibanism and global terrorism. Islam came to India in the form of violent crusaders like Ghori, Ghajini and Babur. Here also it got reforms in the form of Akbar and Sufism. Akbar in fact started a new religion Din-e-elahi and removed Ziziya tax imposed on non Muslims. (If you don't know what ziziya is then just google it, in fact Talibanis are imposing and extracting this from Sikhs, Hindus and Christians in Pakistan, many people have been killed too). But all reforms became null and void with the Indian Wahhab named Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb reimposed the ziziya on Hindus and insisted on going back to original ways of Islam like Wahhab(Aurangzeb came earlier than Wahhab). Overall reforms are unsustainable in Islam. In fact there are many modern day examples of this recurring phenomenon in Islam. Before 1979, Iran used to be a progressive country and quite liberal, at least more than India at that time. I have seen some photographs on Internet where women can be spotted in skirt on road or in a college campus. Today it is hard to find women without burqas after the Islamic revolution in 1979 led by Ayatollah Khomeini. Now what was the motivation of Khomeini to start revolution. He said that people are going away from Islam and we should bring them back to original Islam. This revolution is well known but during the same period another very important event happened in Islamic world which many people don't know. (me too, I came to know about it very recently) and that is the seize of Mecca Masjid, the holiest place in Islam by an armed group led by Juhayman al-Otaibi. (again you can find details online). You can imagine the seize of Golden Temple in Amritsar by Bhinderanwale. Juhayman appealed to the army men to revolt against the king and support him. The army attacked them and the leader was arrested. Later he and his other aides were beheaded publicly as punishment. But why Juhayman seized the Mecca Masjid ? He said that the King of Saudi Arabia is corrupt and people are going away from Islam, too much westernisation is happening, so lets bring people back to original Islam. His seize of Mecca masjid failed but he succeeded in scaring the King. To prevent any such event in future the King announced lots of pro Islam measures. So that no one can blame the King for not following proper Islam. We all know how Afghanistan was under Shah in 70's and what it became under Taliban. What is the aim of Taliban and Osama bin Laden. They want pure Islam rule in Afghanistan and all over the World. All these examples prove the point that reforms are unsustainable in Islam. There is another very important feature to be noted. All these terrorists Aurangzeb, Abdul Wahhab, Juhayman, Mulla Umar, Osama etc. are very pious and religious Muslims.
In Hinduism further reforms could not take place as we became subject to foreign rule first by Mughals and then by Britishers. Now the focus shifted from reforms to survival. We got some reforms under Britishers in the form of Raja Rammohan Rai, Swami Dayanad Sarswati, Swami Vivekanand, Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar etc. Because of foreign rule and because of narrow minded communist leadership after independence we have still not resolved issues like casteism.
Today as we all know a very significant change has happened and that is liberalisation and Information technology. Today we are not intellectually slave of our government because we can get the information from around the world. Today I am not forced to hear that boring and pathetic speeches of Rajiv Gandhi on National channel doordarshan news rather I can choose to hear inspiring Barack Obama presidential campaign. I think this liberal and information age has the power to start the cultural renaissance in India and we will be able to contain the social ills of our society.
The other good aspect of polytheism is its flexibility and more scope of reform because of its inherent flexible idea of many Gods with different shapes and views. Overall Polytheism gives more freedom to it followers and freedom is natural.
In the earlier stages of development the human was in awe of nature and was not able to control its fury. Sometime he faced floods sometimes famine, epidemic etc. He came up with the idea of Gods related to nature like Sun, Rain, or some tree. This naturally culminated towards polytheism. Since women do the miracle of giving birth to a child there were women Goddesses. With time these religions acquired bad customs like sacrificing humans or animals for God. This is also a natural process because if you don't maintain something properly it deteriorates. Then came a reformist who awakened people towards the bad customs of their religion. Like Jesus changed the behaviour of people towards ill, weak and physically challenged. In the western and Arab world monotheism completely took over polytheism. But because of their principle of one God and insistence on that my God is the only true God, all of them came into conflict with each other. This is a major drawback of monotheism. At the same time we can see that reforms mitigate these drawbacks. Despite the historical presence of very strong anti-semitism in Christianity, today Jews and Christians are partners in their development. This is quite remarkable achievement for both and the credit goes to modernism, liberalism and reforms.
In India we got religions like Buddhism or Sikhism as reform measures. These religions are not strictly monotheistic and they do not insist upon that theirs is only true God. So we do not see any conflict between these religions or with Hinduism.
Monotheistic people despise Hinduism and thereby polytheism for the existence of casteism and other social issues in our society. First thing is bad customs has nothing to do with polytheism and any religion without maintenance will acquire them e.g. Racism in western society.
Western religions got further reforms during the time of cultural renaissance. They came up with the idea of democracy and today they have controlled issues like racism in their society. In Islam reforms happened in the form of Sufism. But with the advent of Wahhabism these reforms were negated. Wahhab said that people are not following Islam properly and he attacked and killed liberals and sufis. Today this Wahhabism has manifested itself in the form of Talibanism and global terrorism. Islam came to India in the form of violent crusaders like Ghori, Ghajini and Babur. Here also it got reforms in the form of Akbar and Sufism. Akbar in fact started a new religion Din-e-elahi and removed Ziziya tax imposed on non Muslims. (If you don't know what ziziya is then just google it, in fact Talibanis are imposing and extracting this from Sikhs, Hindus and Christians in Pakistan, many people have been killed too). But all reforms became null and void with the Indian Wahhab named Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb reimposed the ziziya on Hindus and insisted on going back to original ways of Islam like Wahhab(Aurangzeb came earlier than Wahhab). Overall reforms are unsustainable in Islam. In fact there are many modern day examples of this recurring phenomenon in Islam. Before 1979, Iran used to be a progressive country and quite liberal, at least more than India at that time. I have seen some photographs on Internet where women can be spotted in skirt on road or in a college campus. Today it is hard to find women without burqas after the Islamic revolution in 1979 led by Ayatollah Khomeini. Now what was the motivation of Khomeini to start revolution. He said that people are going away from Islam and we should bring them back to original Islam. This revolution is well known but during the same period another very important event happened in Islamic world which many people don't know. (me too, I came to know about it very recently) and that is the seize of Mecca Masjid, the holiest place in Islam by an armed group led by Juhayman al-Otaibi. (again you can find details online). You can imagine the seize of Golden Temple in Amritsar by Bhinderanwale. Juhayman appealed to the army men to revolt against the king and support him. The army attacked them and the leader was arrested. Later he and his other aides were beheaded publicly as punishment. But why Juhayman seized the Mecca Masjid ? He said that the King of Saudi Arabia is corrupt and people are going away from Islam, too much westernisation is happening, so lets bring people back to original Islam. His seize of Mecca masjid failed but he succeeded in scaring the King. To prevent any such event in future the King announced lots of pro Islam measures. So that no one can blame the King for not following proper Islam. We all know how Afghanistan was under Shah in 70's and what it became under Taliban. What is the aim of Taliban and Osama bin Laden. They want pure Islam rule in Afghanistan and all over the World. All these examples prove the point that reforms are unsustainable in Islam. There is another very important feature to be noted. All these terrorists Aurangzeb, Abdul Wahhab, Juhayman, Mulla Umar, Osama etc. are very pious and religious Muslims.
In Hinduism further reforms could not take place as we became subject to foreign rule first by Mughals and then by Britishers. Now the focus shifted from reforms to survival. We got some reforms under Britishers in the form of Raja Rammohan Rai, Swami Dayanad Sarswati, Swami Vivekanand, Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar etc. Because of foreign rule and because of narrow minded communist leadership after independence we have still not resolved issues like casteism.
Today as we all know a very significant change has happened and that is liberalisation and Information technology. Today we are not intellectually slave of our government because we can get the information from around the world. Today I am not forced to hear that boring and pathetic speeches of Rajiv Gandhi on National channel doordarshan news rather I can choose to hear inspiring Barack Obama presidential campaign. I think this liberal and information age has the power to start the cultural renaissance in India and we will be able to contain the social ills of our society.
The other good aspect of polytheism is its flexibility and more scope of reform because of its inherent flexible idea of many Gods with different shapes and views. Overall Polytheism gives more freedom to it followers and freedom is natural.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Widespread wrong beliefs of our society
At the root of a character or personality lies the beliefs. When we look around in our society we find corruption, hypocrisy, inefficiency, lack of respect to another human being and above all the suppression of women and children. So there must be something wrong with the people of society and hence there must be something wrong with their beliefs. I am trying to enlist some of them. I am sure you can add more here.
1. Sharm aurat ka gahana hai.(Shyness is jewel of woman)
Shyness is low self confidence, shyness is hypocrisy, and ultimately a negative feeling because you can't say what you want. Elders of society fool the young girls when they say that shyness is a jewel. They say it because they don't want young girls talking back at them, they don't want them wearing provocative clothes (e.g. Skirts). They want the girls to remain in a cocoon, so that they can impose their will on them, can commit any cruelty to them(can even kill) without having to face retaliation. So girls please throw this jewel in the gutter and be outspoken.
2. Pati parmeshwar hota hai, etc (Husband is like God, Parents are like God, Children are like God)
I am assuming that God is incorruptible. But neither husbands nor parents are incorruptible. Even children are corruptible. Come on, don't go so far this just means that we should respect elders, or husband or children. I do not have much objection to the children being treated like God but we should never forget their individuality. I have no problem if this means just respect, But that is not the case, these words are taken literally and thats where the problem starts . As religious preachers say if you believe in God then surrender to him, similarly husbands expect slavery from wife and parents expect obedience form their children. A husband wants dowry, household work and sexual favours when he desires(not when she desires) from his wife and then he wants n-number of children from her without taking care of her or children(If she dies in the process he will get another woman). Wife should also be ready for beatings from time to time. All this is not possible if women raises her voice or if she do not surrender to her husband like God. When the NRI heroine of a Yash Chopra movie says that "We have not forgotten our values even after living in foreign land", she means exactly the items mentioned here. Particularly the item 1, 2 and 3.
Parents are different God than husband. They think that they are the destiny writers of their children. And when they are scripting the destiny, they don't tolerate any objection, refusal or incompetence. They will choose the career path(or no career if girl child) or spouse for their baby. This is also possible only if child is suppressed throughout his/her life and forced to respect parents unquestionably.
3. Teen cheezon ko dhak kar rakhna chahiye dhan, bhojan, aurat(Three things should be covered money, food, and women)
This is a very shrewd statement. See how cunningly they have mixed women with food and money. They have itemized the woman and thereby dehumanized her. Young people are most vulnerable to such cunning logic. They think yes food and money must be kept safe and like that women also must be confined. I myself believed in such absurd logics for most of my life. Yes money should be covered or hidden if it is black, otherwise it is anyway open to public scrutiny. The best food is cooked and consumed immediately and not the tinned or packaged junk food. For covering the women there are two variants available in India. One is Ghoonghat and other is Burqa and I don't need to explain here that both are enforced by society wherever they are present. Our president Pratibha Patil told a gathering of women in Rajasthan to throw away their ghoonghat but she shied away from saying the same thing about burqa. Don't worry we got French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Ghoonghat and burqa both are symbols of women oppression and must be done away with. Today burqa is banned in two countries Belgium and France. World is awakening, but we don't seem to be. Our intellectuals (who are mostly leftists) want us to believe that this is a matter of choice. But then, an upside down logic coming from leftists is quite expected.
Covering of women goes beyond this, it also confines her as I mentioned above in item 1. With so much importance attached to covering a woman, uncovering becomes a huge insult. If a woman uncovers herself (wear small clothes) and goes out she is termed characterless. John Abraham and Salman Khan are not termed characterless when they go out just in trunks. When our male wrestlers can fight with each other wearing only a 'langot' (nappy) then why can't our women play beach volleyball in bikinis ? (I can only imagine what a beautiful scene it would be). Why so much fuss about it ? Now, What happens if a woman completely uncovers herself ? Oh, my God ! The whole family will not be able to show its face in the society. But, how come the honour of family is directly proportional to the amount of covering of its women ? When Kate Winslet appears in Titanic, wearing only a necklace, her reputation worldwide or her family's reputation remains unchanged or grows big. We too appreciated her then why can't we accept and appreciate our mothers, sisters or daughters similarly ? I have been able to understand Nonlinear differential equations in Mathematics but I have not been able to understand this. I salute all the Mallika Sherawats and Pooja Bedis for their courage and conviction.
4. Agar tumko khona ho apna londa, to dila do usko hero honda, agar barbad karna ho apna parivar, to le aao maruti car(If you want to loose your son then get him a bike, if you want to destroy your family then bring a car)
The meaning of this dialog may not be immediately clear but this wants to say that prosperity is sin. You can hear this in many variations like "Paisa haath ka mail hai"(money is just dirtiness of the hand) or Kadar Khan says "Paise se gadda khareed sakte ho, neend nahin". (With money you can buy mattress but not sleep). Ultimately they all want you to believe that prosperity is sin. Since the time of Independence and till date the mentality of Indian leaders and people had been affected by the communism. Communism tries to tell you that a person becomes rich only by snatching money from many people. But this is true only for the set of people like criminals and communists themselves. What about industrialism, what about generating wealth by hard work, creativity and innovation ? What about me ? I am making relatively good money, I own a car but my whole salary comes form USA because I am a billed software professional. I have not even snatched the job of a US citizen because there is dearth of qualified professionals in USA. If prosperity is sin then many many people like me who aim for prosperity in life (including Shah Rukh Khan) will loose interest in life. Prosperity is such a big motivation and we need motivated people rather than dejected. I also believed in this communist mentality but one fine day (around 2003 in IISc, Bangalore) I attended a lecture from Dr. K. Anji Reddy, Founder of Dr. Reddys Lab, and he told that money making is not vulgar. That day he broke my belief and today I want to break yours and I want to say to each and every young mind out there that there is no need to feel any guilt about your hard earned money.
5. Jeevan hai agar jahar to peena hi padega(Life is suffering)
This is a religious belief. We are told that the purpose of life is to attain 'Moksha' or a place in heaven, we have to go through the sufferings of life to achieve good after life, reason of sufferings is lust and desire etc. etc. Till date, no trace of after life has been found. With a negative feeling like this, life can really become a suffering. The main problem with this belief is that it kills hope in the life. Lust and desire can not be banned completely. Lust can also lead you to Love. Everyone in life goes through struggles that does not mean that life is pain only.
6. Insaan bura hota hai uska Dharam nahin (Human being is vicious rather than his religion)
With the history of partition based on religion, with the history of so many communal riots and killings in the name of religion, how can we say that there is nothing wrong with the religion ? An ideology can be far more vicious than a man can possibly be. Look at Nazism, Maoism, Talibanism , all have have one thing common 'Ideology of hate'. It is this ideology of hate that is responsible for millions of killings. So, there must be something wrong with the ideology of religions. We must question our religions rather than the viciousness of a human being.
When a society is built upon wrong beliefs it creates confusion in the minds of its people. Because what they believe is different from what they observe or what they practically go through in life. They can even doubt the correct values like speaking truth, honesty, compassion, respect for life and other human beings, positive thinking etc. With this confused mindset they go on to become corrupt personalities. A man like this has no respect for other lesser mortals, he beats women, beats children and then he justifies all his actions. If we see deeply this is not actually his fault, we as a society are reaping what we are sowing. We must break the wrong beliefs and emphasize the correct ones.
So, girls and boys next time when you hear any such beliefs from any source, be it elders of society or NRI heroine of Yash Chopra film, then despise it, ridicule it, spit on it and then trash it but never get emotionally fooled by it.
1. Sharm aurat ka gahana hai.(Shyness is jewel of woman)
Shyness is low self confidence, shyness is hypocrisy, and ultimately a negative feeling because you can't say what you want. Elders of society fool the young girls when they say that shyness is a jewel. They say it because they don't want young girls talking back at them, they don't want them wearing provocative clothes (e.g. Skirts). They want the girls to remain in a cocoon, so that they can impose their will on them, can commit any cruelty to them(can even kill) without having to face retaliation. So girls please throw this jewel in the gutter and be outspoken.
2. Pati parmeshwar hota hai, etc (Husband is like God, Parents are like God, Children are like God)
I am assuming that God is incorruptible. But neither husbands nor parents are incorruptible. Even children are corruptible. Come on, don't go so far this just means that we should respect elders, or husband or children. I do not have much objection to the children being treated like God but we should never forget their individuality. I have no problem if this means just respect, But that is not the case, these words are taken literally and thats where the problem starts . As religious preachers say if you believe in God then surrender to him, similarly husbands expect slavery from wife and parents expect obedience form their children. A husband wants dowry, household work and sexual favours when he desires(not when she desires) from his wife and then he wants n-number of children from her without taking care of her or children(If she dies in the process he will get another woman). Wife should also be ready for beatings from time to time. All this is not possible if women raises her voice or if she do not surrender to her husband like God. When the NRI heroine of a Yash Chopra movie says that "We have not forgotten our values even after living in foreign land", she means exactly the items mentioned here. Particularly the item 1, 2 and 3.
Parents are different God than husband. They think that they are the destiny writers of their children. And when they are scripting the destiny, they don't tolerate any objection, refusal or incompetence. They will choose the career path(or no career if girl child) or spouse for their baby. This is also possible only if child is suppressed throughout his/her life and forced to respect parents unquestionably.
3. Teen cheezon ko dhak kar rakhna chahiye dhan, bhojan, aurat(Three things should be covered money, food, and women)
This is a very shrewd statement. See how cunningly they have mixed women with food and money. They have itemized the woman and thereby dehumanized her. Young people are most vulnerable to such cunning logic. They think yes food and money must be kept safe and like that women also must be confined. I myself believed in such absurd logics for most of my life. Yes money should be covered or hidden if it is black, otherwise it is anyway open to public scrutiny. The best food is cooked and consumed immediately and not the tinned or packaged junk food. For covering the women there are two variants available in India. One is Ghoonghat and other is Burqa and I don't need to explain here that both are enforced by society wherever they are present. Our president Pratibha Patil told a gathering of women in Rajasthan to throw away their ghoonghat but she shied away from saying the same thing about burqa. Don't worry we got French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Ghoonghat and burqa both are symbols of women oppression and must be done away with. Today burqa is banned in two countries Belgium and France. World is awakening, but we don't seem to be. Our intellectuals (who are mostly leftists) want us to believe that this is a matter of choice. But then, an upside down logic coming from leftists is quite expected.
Covering of women goes beyond this, it also confines her as I mentioned above in item 1. With so much importance attached to covering a woman, uncovering becomes a huge insult. If a woman uncovers herself (wear small clothes) and goes out she is termed characterless. John Abraham and Salman Khan are not termed characterless when they go out just in trunks. When our male wrestlers can fight with each other wearing only a 'langot' (nappy) then why can't our women play beach volleyball in bikinis ? (I can only imagine what a beautiful scene it would be). Why so much fuss about it ? Now, What happens if a woman completely uncovers herself ? Oh, my God ! The whole family will not be able to show its face in the society. But, how come the honour of family is directly proportional to the amount of covering of its women ? When Kate Winslet appears in Titanic, wearing only a necklace, her reputation worldwide or her family's reputation remains unchanged or grows big. We too appreciated her then why can't we accept and appreciate our mothers, sisters or daughters similarly ? I have been able to understand Nonlinear differential equations in Mathematics but I have not been able to understand this. I salute all the Mallika Sherawats and Pooja Bedis for their courage and conviction.
4. Agar tumko khona ho apna londa, to dila do usko hero honda, agar barbad karna ho apna parivar, to le aao maruti car(If you want to loose your son then get him a bike, if you want to destroy your family then bring a car)
The meaning of this dialog may not be immediately clear but this wants to say that prosperity is sin. You can hear this in many variations like "Paisa haath ka mail hai"(money is just dirtiness of the hand) or Kadar Khan says "Paise se gadda khareed sakte ho, neend nahin". (With money you can buy mattress but not sleep). Ultimately they all want you to believe that prosperity is sin. Since the time of Independence and till date the mentality of Indian leaders and people had been affected by the communism. Communism tries to tell you that a person becomes rich only by snatching money from many people. But this is true only for the set of people like criminals and communists themselves. What about industrialism, what about generating wealth by hard work, creativity and innovation ? What about me ? I am making relatively good money, I own a car but my whole salary comes form USA because I am a billed software professional. I have not even snatched the job of a US citizen because there is dearth of qualified professionals in USA. If prosperity is sin then many many people like me who aim for prosperity in life (including Shah Rukh Khan) will loose interest in life. Prosperity is such a big motivation and we need motivated people rather than dejected. I also believed in this communist mentality but one fine day (around 2003 in IISc, Bangalore) I attended a lecture from Dr. K. Anji Reddy, Founder of Dr. Reddys Lab, and he told that money making is not vulgar. That day he broke my belief and today I want to break yours and I want to say to each and every young mind out there that there is no need to feel any guilt about your hard earned money.
5. Jeevan hai agar jahar to peena hi padega(Life is suffering)
This is a religious belief. We are told that the purpose of life is to attain 'Moksha' or a place in heaven, we have to go through the sufferings of life to achieve good after life, reason of sufferings is lust and desire etc. etc. Till date, no trace of after life has been found. With a negative feeling like this, life can really become a suffering. The main problem with this belief is that it kills hope in the life. Lust and desire can not be banned completely. Lust can also lead you to Love. Everyone in life goes through struggles that does not mean that life is pain only.
6. Insaan bura hota hai uska Dharam nahin (Human being is vicious rather than his religion)
With the history of partition based on religion, with the history of so many communal riots and killings in the name of religion, how can we say that there is nothing wrong with the religion ? An ideology can be far more vicious than a man can possibly be. Look at Nazism, Maoism, Talibanism , all have have one thing common 'Ideology of hate'. It is this ideology of hate that is responsible for millions of killings. So, there must be something wrong with the ideology of religions. We must question our religions rather than the viciousness of a human being.
When a society is built upon wrong beliefs it creates confusion in the minds of its people. Because what they believe is different from what they observe or what they practically go through in life. They can even doubt the correct values like speaking truth, honesty, compassion, respect for life and other human beings, positive thinking etc. With this confused mindset they go on to become corrupt personalities. A man like this has no respect for other lesser mortals, he beats women, beats children and then he justifies all his actions. If we see deeply this is not actually his fault, we as a society are reaping what we are sowing. We must break the wrong beliefs and emphasize the correct ones.
So, girls and boys next time when you hear any such beliefs from any source, be it elders of society or NRI heroine of Yash Chopra film, then despise it, ridicule it, spit on it and then trash it but never get emotionally fooled by it.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Poor Farmer and Rich Gardener
As such there are no big differences between a farmer and gardener, both grow plants, but there can be some. I am concerned about a very important difference which is there sometimes and that is the difference of purpose. A farmer sows the seeds and waters it. When plant comes out of the soil he is overjoyed. He nurtures it throughout with all the things needed for the growth of the plant. His joy reaches its culmination when he sees the plant is grown up and filled with fruits. He takes the fruits and sells them in the market and that is how he lives on. A gardener also goes through the same process. He also enjoys immensely this growth of a seed into a plant. But he is not at all bothered about selling the fruits. He just enjoys the beauty of the plant and its fruits, he enjoys the taste of fruit but not concerned about making money from it. You may be thinking why am I telling you this well known, boring stuff. Here I come. For many many years I had a question in my mind. Why we bring children to this big bad world ?
There are well known answers to this question. First one is religious that "It is God's will". Once upon a time this answer was OK but after the invention of condoms and other family planning stuff this has become absolutely ridicules. Even earlier (and today also) it is more of human will rather than God's will. If it is God's will then I think Chinese communist government is more powerful than God because they have successfully enforced one child policy over a billion people. Second is "children continue your name in future". This is a casteist and racist answer, so not good for todays time. Third is "children support us in our old age". Now this is most problematic I think because with the spread of education and information many people have figured out what I said for the first two answers but not this. To refute this answer only I gave the example of farmer and gardener. Now I think you may have figured out what I am trying to say. The problem with this answer is that it is very selfish. If you need something desperately and you be selfish then it is OK but if you have everything and still be selfish then it is not OK.
Like a poor farmer and a rich gardener there are two ways to raise our children one is to use them for our support as much as we can and the other is to support them as much as we can and enjoy in their glory. When a poor man wants his kids to help him in his daily hard work it is understandable but when a well to do businessman forces his school going kids to take care of his business , it is poor farming mentality. When a middle class government employee puts pressure on his kids to become IAS, or Engineer or Doctor or Tendulkar , it is again poor farming mentality. Now why I call this farming mentality 'poor', because it kills the freedom of children thereby killing their creativity, their confidence, their growth and their chance of achieving great heights. For their selfish gain or their convenience parents apply many restrictions on their kids, but the saddest part is that they genuinely believe that they are doing it for the betterment of the kids. They believe so because they have gone through the same treatment and they have been taught same throughout their life.
We are a country of more than a billion people with 60 years of independence and how many world class business products we have created, how many Nobel winner scientists we have, how many Oscar winner movies we have, how many world class artists, musician, actors, sportsmen, writers, philosophers we have since independence ? The answer to all these questions is either zero or tends to zero. I know some will say that we have so many good cricketers. To all of them I want to say that we are world champions in Kabbaddi also and if whole world starts playing Kabbaddi then rest assured that we will be in the bottom 5. Many people argue that we are a poor country, they are giving this argument for ages. I don't buy this argument because there are and there have always been since independence a significant number of rich people in this country. Why these people are as third class as a common man ? The reason is the poor farming mentality. The rich gardeners are rarest of rare. That is why we have only one Abhinav Bindra because Dr. A. S. Bindra did not forced his son to expand his business empire. Rather, when his son faced the problem of poor infrastructure for Shooting practice he used his wealth to provide him a private shooting yard. He even assured him that if you are not successful then my business is always there for you.
Greatness is not born it needs harnessing, nurturing and freedom. To become great a child needs all of them and not the imposition of the will of parents. I became father ten months ago and my wife and I have decided to be a rich gardener as much as we can. Skeptics will ask me "Is your son going to be the next Bindra or someone like that ?". There is no guarantee, he may or may not. But, if I use the farmer approach then it is guaranteed that he will not become a world class achiever. At best he will end up like me a cringing software professional, writing blogs. Taking care of parents is responsibility and not duty of an individual. If someone fulfills his responsibility then parents should feel proud about it and if he does not take this responsibility then they should feel "Oh, Its normal". On the other hand taking care of children is duty of parents because they bring the children into this big, bad world. Parents do not fulfill their duty properly, they do not support and empower enough their children and then they expect their kids to be responsible for them. Now comes the most interesting part. When kids behave badly with parents or do not take their responsibility, then who is blamed by parents ? Hold your breath, they blame "America", westernization of our society, modern age and technology. What a logic. The whole society, media and intellectuals stand behind the parents in this logic. Poor America. God save us and our children from these pathetic logics and these pathetic intellectuals and God bless America.
There are well known answers to this question. First one is religious that "It is God's will". Once upon a time this answer was OK but after the invention of condoms and other family planning stuff this has become absolutely ridicules. Even earlier (and today also) it is more of human will rather than God's will. If it is God's will then I think Chinese communist government is more powerful than God because they have successfully enforced one child policy over a billion people. Second is "children continue your name in future". This is a casteist and racist answer, so not good for todays time. Third is "children support us in our old age". Now this is most problematic I think because with the spread of education and information many people have figured out what I said for the first two answers but not this. To refute this answer only I gave the example of farmer and gardener. Now I think you may have figured out what I am trying to say. The problem with this answer is that it is very selfish. If you need something desperately and you be selfish then it is OK but if you have everything and still be selfish then it is not OK.
Like a poor farmer and a rich gardener there are two ways to raise our children one is to use them for our support as much as we can and the other is to support them as much as we can and enjoy in their glory. When a poor man wants his kids to help him in his daily hard work it is understandable but when a well to do businessman forces his school going kids to take care of his business , it is poor farming mentality. When a middle class government employee puts pressure on his kids to become IAS, or Engineer or Doctor or Tendulkar , it is again poor farming mentality. Now why I call this farming mentality 'poor', because it kills the freedom of children thereby killing their creativity, their confidence, their growth and their chance of achieving great heights. For their selfish gain or their convenience parents apply many restrictions on their kids, but the saddest part is that they genuinely believe that they are doing it for the betterment of the kids. They believe so because they have gone through the same treatment and they have been taught same throughout their life.
We are a country of more than a billion people with 60 years of independence and how many world class business products we have created, how many Nobel winner scientists we have, how many Oscar winner movies we have, how many world class artists, musician, actors, sportsmen, writers, philosophers we have since independence ? The answer to all these questions is either zero or tends to zero. I know some will say that we have so many good cricketers. To all of them I want to say that we are world champions in Kabbaddi also and if whole world starts playing Kabbaddi then rest assured that we will be in the bottom 5. Many people argue that we are a poor country, they are giving this argument for ages. I don't buy this argument because there are and there have always been since independence a significant number of rich people in this country. Why these people are as third class as a common man ? The reason is the poor farming mentality. The rich gardeners are rarest of rare. That is why we have only one Abhinav Bindra because Dr. A. S. Bindra did not forced his son to expand his business empire. Rather, when his son faced the problem of poor infrastructure for Shooting practice he used his wealth to provide him a private shooting yard. He even assured him that if you are not successful then my business is always there for you.
Greatness is not born it needs harnessing, nurturing and freedom. To become great a child needs all of them and not the imposition of the will of parents. I became father ten months ago and my wife and I have decided to be a rich gardener as much as we can. Skeptics will ask me "Is your son going to be the next Bindra or someone like that ?". There is no guarantee, he may or may not. But, if I use the farmer approach then it is guaranteed that he will not become a world class achiever. At best he will end up like me a cringing software professional, writing blogs. Taking care of parents is responsibility and not duty of an individual. If someone fulfills his responsibility then parents should feel proud about it and if he does not take this responsibility then they should feel "Oh, Its normal". On the other hand taking care of children is duty of parents because they bring the children into this big, bad world. Parents do not fulfill their duty properly, they do not support and empower enough their children and then they expect their kids to be responsible for them. Now comes the most interesting part. When kids behave badly with parents or do not take their responsibility, then who is blamed by parents ? Hold your breath, they blame "America", westernization of our society, modern age and technology. What a logic. The whole society, media and intellectuals stand behind the parents in this logic. Poor America. God save us and our children from these pathetic logics and these pathetic intellectuals and God bless America.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
In response to S. Gurumurthy's "Free sex ? Or free speech ?"
Last Saturday the article "Free sex ? Or free speech ?" from S. Gurumurthy came in the Indian express. Here is the link. I wrote a response to this and sent to the writer. I must say that he is a generous person because he did not take my attacks as offense. Here goes my response-
Today 3rd April 2010, an article came in the editorial page by S. Gurumurthy, titled "Free sex or free speech". I have always appreciated his articles about any topic be it political or economic. But off late when he talks about Indian morality and Indian culture he sounds more like Pramod Mutalik and same thing is happening in this article too. Sorry sir, old age is catching up with you. In old age a person becomes more and more rigid and less & less flexible about his beliefs he has acquired through his life. He mentions "moral values" and "country's ethos" but not at all elaborates what are these values. One thing is pretty much clear is that he is not happy with the Supreme court's observation about premarital sex and he somehow wants to oppose it without sounding contrary to Supreme court. From the first two columns of his article this is the only outcome. Now the first question is Which Indian culture he is talking about ? Ancient Indian culture or present day ? I am sure he is talking present day because this Supreme court observation came in response to a present day issue. Now what is present day Indian culture ?
Killing your daughters in the womb itself. (please note that this is exclusively Indian culture), Denying the women and the young most basic freedom.
Killing women in the name of dowry. Caste prejudice throughout the society. Honour killing of the young lovers. Rampant child abuse in the society.
We are fully covered in dirty, filthy mud and he is attacking US. Our own culture is very similar to Talibani society but he is finding faults with the west. Do I sound radical ? How can I compare our culture with Taliban ? Oh I can. A Taliban mullah lashes a young women publicly for talking to a man and that is not the saddest part. The saddest part is her own brother was holding her by her hands while she was being beaten. Similarly in Mangalore Pramod Mutalik and his goons beat young women for going to pub and this is not the saddest part, the saddest part is that not a single brother or father of those women came out to register an FIR against those goons. Not a single brother's or father's blood boiled by seeing the images of their sister or daughter being beaten brutally. Till date no one has come out to thrash the face of Pramod Mutalik (and his goons) or crack his bones. Is Gurumurthy trying to defend this culture ? At least I do not feel proud of this culture and this is not the culture I have learnt. I have learnt from lord Krishna that no matter what I will protect my sister even if it is against any social norms. Thats why he came to help Draupadi when she was being disgraced. I have also learnt from him that follow your heart and your love. Thats why he kidnapped Rukmani against the will of her brother and her father and then married her. What is happening today ? In Haryana the young couples are being shot by their own father or brother in the name of social norms for following their heart. There are two most important decisions for a young man or woman, first one is career and second is life partner. Indian youngs are denied of both these choices, both the decisions are taken by family or society. Gurumurthy says that laws can not reform society then how come we have controlled Sati pratha and child marriage.
Now let us come to premarital sex, for which Gurumurthy is bothering so much. This issue don't deserve this much attention. Yes premarital sex is against our present day culture but it was not earlier. "Gandharv Vivah", I can easily say that this is synonym to premarital sex and it was part of our society. We all know that Danveer Karn, is product of Gandharv Vivah between Kunti and Surya. Now everybody, including her family and her sons knew about it, but did they hound Kunti ? Did they call her "kulta" or "Chhinar" or characterless ? Did Pandavs do any disrespect to her ? No, not at all , nothing of that sort happened. A person can not be judged by his sexual orientation. A person can be sexually promiscuous but at the same time can be truthful and honest and great leader like Bill Clinton. He is leading the rebuild effort in Haiti. I have seen many people in my life who have no reservations about taking a bribe but none had premarital sex. I wonder why old age people are too concerned about such issues. Sometimes I think it is what Amitabh Bachchan said in "Cheeni Kum". He said to the father of his would be bride "You are jealous". With a life of unfulfilled sexual fantasies and now to justify the way they have lived they impose sexual restrictions on their kids. I am sure this is indeed a reason for many oldies.
Gurumurthy says that first problem with premarital sex is that it is creating more number of single mothers in US. Again he is making issue of a non issue. What is the need of a father for a child if he is not the provider of the bread and butter ? To beat the child. Let me put it this way, what is the harm if a child is fatherless ? I do not see any, because I know that Lav and Kush were also raised fatherless and they went on to defeat the army of their own father Lord Ram. Bravo, Three cheers to them. Cakravarti Samrat Bharat, was also raised by a single mother Shakuntala and today our country is named after him as "Bharat". Second problem he mentions because of premarital sex there are big number of divorces. Again I see the the divorce as the manifestation of women empowerment rather than a problem. In US women are empowered so they kick off the unsuitable guy. But in India women have nowhere to go so they continue to sleep with the enemy. Then he enumerates several problems of US without giving any supportive arguments. As I told earlier we as a society are fully covered with filthy mud so Gurumurthy attacks US to throw some mud on them and then prove that they are also ugly, so lets remain ugly our way why follow their way. I just want to tell him that despite all the problems US continues to be the best and will remain best because they are not narrow minded like us. They learn good things form anywhere in the world but Gurumurthy finds only problems with them. Today "Yoga" is popular in India and world because Americans made it fashionable. Rather then finding problems with US we should concentrate on our problems and learn good things from US. One of them is individual freedom.
Monday, February 8, 2010
My comments on an article in "Indian Express"
On Saturday 6/2/2010 a thought provoking article about family came in the Indian express by Ashley Tellis. Click here for this article.
In response to this, there came an article from Sushil K. (Asst. Editor). Click here for article.
In response to this, there came an article from Sushil K. (Asst. Editor). Click here for article.
I did not like this response much so I wrote him a mail (cc to Ashley Tellis). You will like it more if you go through the above articles first. Here goes my email-
Hello Sir,
I am a regular reader of Indian express and I also read the Ashley Tellis article about family on 6/2/2010and your take on that today 7/2/2010. I am in much more agreement with Tellis rather than you.Moreover your response to his article is very weak. Tellis has raised many questions about the family but you have responded to only one or two of his points, and that too not very convincing. You think that Tellis lives in a perpetual state of hate(you even generalised this to all gays but on what basis ?)but I can tell you he do not. He not even hates his parents. He is actually"Living in a greater state of awareness than you and most of the people in this country". I have no personal access to Tellis, I have never emailed him earlier, I am saying this based on my opinion formed by reading his articles every weak, and I am great fan of him.Because he is among the very few truth speaking people in this country, unlike you the "Politically correct" lot. Your only argument is that when a family comes to know about a gay member, it is equally shocking to them as well so their rejection of this is understandable. Tellis has written in his first line that "My family did not value Love ..."Now what is the meaning of Love for you. Love means 'unconditional Love', and that is not the case with most of the Indian families.The amount of love you receive in a family is directly proportional to your capabilities(e.g. your earnings) and your submission to family orders.Have you seen "Taare zameen par" ? Do I need to tell you why Eeshan awasthi did not receive as much love as his elder brother from his family ? Do I need to tell you why he faced rejection everywhere in family and school ? Do I need to tell you why lots and lots of people have cried after watching the movie including Aamir Khan ?Do I need to tell you this is the scenario in most of the families ?You may be part of an unconditional love family , but most people are not. You are an editor of national newspaper but you have very poor observation of your surroundings. I have lived in Chennai, in comparison to north India, far more women go out and do jobs, but the way a man treats his wife or daughter is as pathetic as all over India. In today's paper there is a survey about women in Kerela(on front page).They are all suffering because of this "Great family Love". In yesterday's paper (6/2/2010) there is a news about a 16 year old girl in Turkey, buried alive by her family. Her father and grand father are in custody now. Now I don't need to tell you that this kind of great show of love by family happens in India also. Tellis has raised this issue by saying "Heterosexual children are not allowed to choose their own partners, taken to court on habeas corpus, beaten, imprisoned, killed, accused of abduction and kidnapping, hung in the town square by their family". But you do not say anything about it. I think you don't even read the paper properly.I give you one example. If a young girl in any part of this country declares to her parents that she is in love with a lower cast man and want to marry him(say a tamil brahmin girl in love with a north India SC). Now what will be the response of her family. Obviously it will be rejection first. There will be very few families who will ultimately give in for the sake of love of their daughter and accept the relationship but most of the families will never accept this and may even kill their daughter. The first category of the family is the "unconditional love".Unfortunately they are very few. You say about Tellis that "He forgets that not just 'he' but his very 'gayness' is a product of that "private ownership" of sexual reproducibility inherent in the family". Are you trying to suggest that you have no right to criticize your family values ?If someone is born in a terrorist family then should he not criticize terrorism ?Overall, I just want to say that you should come up with stronger stuff, because I like Indian Express and you write in that. -
Regards
Jitendra
As expected I have not received any response from Sushil K. , surprisingly I got response from
Ashley Tellis(In fact I should not be surprised. Truthful people have nothing to hide). Here goes the response -
Dear Mr. Dimri,
Thank you for your email.Thank you for being able to see that the point is not about individual families but the family as an institution.You are right to point out that the family is not base on unconditional love even when it claims to be and that is assesses and values people in crass terms. Think also of how families treat the girl child in relation to the boy. The other gender realities you point out yourself.Your Taare Zameen Par example is a good one in relation to how the family treats him but also, in the long run, a problematic one. The only problem with that film is that in the end, after claiming that ‘every child is special’, it recuperates the dyslexic child into the grand narrative of success and achievement, after which the family (and the school) accept him. I found the film anti-child and anti-disability.When Mr. sushil says I am a product of the family, he may b facually wrong and there are many millions of people born outside the family. Because people are born in the family, that makes the family okay? Your terrorism example is a good one and I think the family is a terrorist institution, actually. It terrorises people, especially women and children. The family is the real terrorist in our country and the world.Thank you once again for your letter and I hope you think of writing for the NIE.
BestAshley
PS: I’m sending you a copy of the response I sent to the paper to Mr. Sushil. I am not sure if they will carry it so I wanted you to read it
And here is what Tellis(Thank you for sending this to me) wrote as response to Sushil K. for his article -
Sushil K T’s response to my article was so naïve as perhaps not to deserve a response. He spends the first almost half of it speculating mindlessly on my biography when the whole point of my article was that one can multiply examples of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ families ad infinitum but the basic structural critique of the family remains. He has no answer to that structural critique so instead he offers cheap biographical accounts of reverse family trauma when he knows nothing about my family.
But let us try and make some axiomatic sense of what he is saying. So, he is saying that we must understand the ‘horror’ and the ‘trauma’ of parents of have gay children. Why? What is this understanding based on if not the implicit assumption that heterosexual is right and homosexual is wrong? With what authority does Mr Sushil speak for “everyone on the planet”? My article was in response to one that appeared the previous week (by Aniruddh Vasudevan) who portrayed an extraordinary family (his own) accepting love of all its members as a basic principle. So, Sushil is, simply, first and foremost, factually incorrect and making a universal principle out of a personal prejudice.
Suresh is intellectually incapable of seeing that the point is not about his family or mine but about the institution of family. He also knows nothing about the gay movement if he thinks what we want is to be accepted as normal. What we are, in fact, saying, is that the very concept of normal is to be questioned and done away with.
By not seeing the family as an institution, Suresh shows his mind is full of wet mud and no clarity at all. His last eugenic fantasy only shows the utterly dangerous stupidity of the man. As for hatred, I am proud to be full of hatred. Hatred can be very productive and useful. As B. R Ambedkar put it: “I want to tell my critics that I regard my feelings of hatred as a real force. They are the only reflex of the love I bear for the causes I believe in and I am in no way ashamed of it.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
