Visits

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Why politicians cannot be honest?

The dictionary definition of the word "politics" is: sum total of activities undertaken to remain in power - I hope you have noted the absence of any moral or ethical tinge to this definition.

I vividly remember how sad I had felt [I was only about 14 years old then] one afternoon when we received news of President Kennedy's assassination at Dallas. From his debonair looks - an ideal family - beautiful & rich wife, he appeared to be an honest person & a role model, at least to a young teenager like me - thousands of miles away. Some years ago I read in Reader's Digest [the report was based on declassified information - apparently USA has an endearing rule which compulsorily declassifes all information after 30 years] that President Kennedy's family was deep into bootlegging and running brothels - in fact his Presidential election was financed mainly from this income; that he himself was a womaniser [though this last one isn't particularly deplorable by moral standards prevalent in that country]. I was reminded of a saying in Marathi : दिसत तस् नसत (things aren't as they appear) and realised that this is absolutely true for politicians everywhere in the world.

Politicians do not have an opinion of their own: They do not like to be painted into a corner because one never knows when one will have to come out in support of something that is diametrically opposite (remember everything is justified to remain in power - let principles go to hell). By nature therefore they have to be "chameleons" - changing colours and pretending as if they were on the winning side all along. So we have Congress aligning with Jayalalita once and with Karunanidhi immediately thereafter only to talk again to Jayalalita, if the situation so demands. LK Advani's support to Pragya who is an accused in the Malegaon blasts was also finalised by the BJP think tank after a market research indicated that there is a groundswell of sympathy for her amongst Hindus in the country. The acid test for a political party before finalising its stand on any issue is to ask itself "Will I get more votes if I say so?" and never "What is the truth?" It is absolutely true that politicians make strange bedfellows. In a lighter vein somebody has hit the nail on the head by saying that "a politician shakes your hand before elections and your confidence thereafter.

Politicians are dishonest when it comes to MONEY: They are after all "human" and like मेनका enticed विश्वामित्र they too are surrounded by so many monetarily corrupting opportunities, that they would need to be super humans, not to succumb to these temptations. The vicious circle is perennial because laws reducing corruption need to be passed by these very politicians - who will ever agree to kill the golden goose? Those who appear "honest" have carefully cultivated that image and ensured that they never got caught. Approving illegal things to be carried out by ones henchmen does not absolve any senior leader from the blame. Political parties in a coalition government routinely demand certain ministries based on their estimate of how much unaccounted money they could generate. There is no end in sight to remove this malaise unless we fully empower departments like Central Vigilance Commission and remove "crime investigation" arm of the police from under a political appointee like the home minister.

Power corrupts: Unless we have fast track courts to settle all cases of corruption against politicians (realising that they indeed are the fountainheads of corruption) , they will continue to live in the safety of their self given immunities and mock the laws of the land. The immense power that resides in them due to the public offices they enjoy must be accompanied with maximum accountability. So intoxicated with power they sometimes are that all opposition is sought to be silenced -the nexus with criminal elements is a natural offshoot. An apolitical judiciary outside the influence of these politicians together with quick disposal of cases should be able to mitigate this problem considerably. However as recent exposures suggest, the judiciary itself is falling prey to this malaise.

Politicians forget that they have been appointed and not anointed: The immense political and monetary power is addictive. Soon politicians think they are Gods. It is aptly said that diapers and politicians need to be changed often and for the same reason. Experts in political science call this "anti incumbency" factor. Raj Thackeray has amply demonstrated that to be on the front page of all leading dailies of the country, you do not have to buy advertisements like corporates do. The easier method would be to smash taxis (belonging to someone else) and beat up others. I think he has shown sharp business skills in cornering costly newspaper space by creating news rather than buying ads.

Friends, I sincerely feel that politics is a universal vocation where success demands intellectual and monetary dishonesty - don't ever think corruption in politics is restricted only to India. Do send me your innovative suggestions on how to tackle this rot and also your ideas about how to motivate honest people to enter politics so that the "average honesty" of this group creeps upwards??

Monday, November 17, 2008

Should same - gender marriages be allowed in India?

On Saturday 15th November, over one lac people in USA demonstrated by holding public rallies all over that country to pressurise state and federal governments into passing clear laws that would allow gays and lesbians to have full rights to choose their life partners (of the same gender, obviously) and enjoy the same rights as married - heterosexual - couples. I guess if a similar event was to take place in India, the rally would have demanded quotas for gays and lesbians in IITs / IIMs / government jobs and so on.

Leave alone marriages, Indian law does not even sanction homosexuality - as if sexual habits are controllable by promulgating GRs (government resolutions). Same gender sexual acts are considered illegal and hence punishable by imprisonment. Imagine the government telling everyone tomorrow that it is compulsory to derive pleasure only by eating Shrikhand (श्रीखंड ) and anyone eating रबडी will be summarily arrested. How can anyone, least of all the government, dictate what the sexual preferences of an individual should be - unless this leads to some kind of a law and order problem?

Do we realise that if we allow same - gender marriages, adoptions will increase & that's a crying need today. I am not suggesting that such marriages should be thought of as a "solution" to the problem of orphans (who ironically are mostly unwanted and abandoned children of heterosexual couples) but surely increased "adoptions" would be a welcome offshoot.

The supreme court has recently opined that a man and a woman "living together" will enjoy (along with their children) the same privileges that traditionally married couples do. I guess we will just have to tweak our present laws a little more to cover same gender couples.

Will same gender marriages or live in relationships be sanctioned by religion? Since there is so much hypocrisy in religion, I don't think this will ever happen. In recent years, the church has found it extremely difficult to justify the child abusers amongst its clergy and has reportedly settled many cases, "out of court". Most religions give great importance to celibacy knowing fully well that they are going against natural human inclinations that have been ordained by their own GOD. There is no evidence to suggest that celibacy leads to higher spirituality. Religions will therefore always condemn same gender marriages as something "satanic".

For once, I must support our health minister in his crusade for gays and lesbians - Dr Ramadoss otherwise gives us very few occasions to root for. Let us live and let live....instead of persecuting fellow human beings for something which is really none of our business and over which they have no control.

Sunday, November 9, 2008

Can you figure this out?

There are certain things which I have never been able to figure out and am actively seeking your help to understand. Please feel free to post your comments - these would go a long way in clearing my muddled mind.

Do you know how old Ravana was, when he was killed by Lord Rama?According to Valmiki, Ravana was 20,000 years old when he died. Being a scholar and a great devotee of Shiva, he is supposed to have done penance (तपश्चर्या ) for 10,000 years before being granted the boon of "near - immortality" [At the end of every 1000 years, Ravana would cut off one of his 10 heads. GOD finally relented at the end of 10,000 years, just before the last head would have been cut off. Ravana would otherwise have surely died and this would have given a wrong signal to other devotees]. Can anyone really live this long? Was Ravana then an actual person or a character in a story??


Why don't Life Insurance companies consult astrologers before selling a policy?For times immemorial, astrologers have claimed that they can predict the future of an individual from his horoscope (जन्मपत्रिका) [which incidentally is a very scientific document showing positions of various planets in different constellations, at the time of birth of that person]. A company that sells life - covers would be extremely keen to know the approximate date of death (मृत्युयोग) of the client - doesn't it ask us to go through all kinds of medical tests to assess if we are fit enough to be sold a policy and to reassure itself that we won't conk off after paying just a premium or two, putting the insurance company to a big loss? Why doesn't LIC, take the help of astrology, to save itself from potentially crippling losses?


How can a ghost (अतृप्त आत्मा ) return to haunt?It is popular folklore that if a person dies with some desires unfulfilled or some injustice un-avenged during his lifetime, his ghost comes back to haunt that location or somebody, until those desires are quenched. Now when a person dies, his brain, which is the depository of his entire life-time memory, also dies. Let us presume for the time being that his "spirit" (आत्मा ) does escape! I can never figure out how that spirit can remember details of what it was before death. The spirit cannot have a memory of its own since all memory of life before death has already been destroyed along with the brain.


Was Kansa (कंस मामा ), Lord Krishna's uncle, a fool? If you or I had known that our sisters' eighth child was going to be our nemesis, wouldn't we have killed the sister [am presuming that we possess the necessary cruelty like कंस did] instead of waiting for her to deliver eight children? To make matters worse, if कंस did not have the guts to kill his own sister, why should he have gone out of his way to house her with her husband ( देवकी and वसुदेव ) in the same prison cell? Did Kansa, who was a king, have an IQ much below average?


Why did prominent Kauravas (कौरव ) have foul names? Did their parents (धृतराष्ट्र and गांधारी ) know that these children were going to grow up into scoundrels. Which mother would name her sons दुर्योधन or दुह्शासन - words which basically have negative meanings?

How do Jain families keep their homes, free of pests? Now we all know that Jains have a fetish when it comes to killing any form of life. They go to great lengths to achieve this (by being strict vegetarians, eating dinner before 7 pm, going around with a cloth around their mouth and nose - even sweeping the street lightly before taking the next step). How do they keep their homes free of pests - do they never use 'Baygon' for cocroaches, 'Mortein' or 'All out' for mosquitoes? Do they never sweep out the cobwebs?

If GOD (परमात्मा ) is निर्गुण and निराकार ( a spirit without any desires or form) then how come HE has his favourite vehicle (वाहन ) - food - flowers - days? If all this is indeed symbolic then how come we are unwilling to deviate even an inch from the prescribed rituals (मोदक and red flowers for Shri Ganesh, for example). If GOD is the creator of the entire human race, why does HE have to marry in order to beget his own children (Shri Ganesh and Kartikeya to Shiva and Parvati, for example)? Or is it really the other way around - have human beings created GOD and ascribed to them, these "human" qualities?

There are other queries but I will stop here. I keenly await your reply.