1947 Britishers left us, Indians captured. [3]
"Recently there was a news item in TOI (Kolkata) in the headlines that Gorkhaland supporters have put up posters where they have declared that if their demands are not met they will shoot Bengalis in the heart. And the posters were in Nepali language, coincidentally on pink chart papers!"
I am not against giving a separate state for better growth prospects but the basis given here is not correct. Because It's very easy for people to get divided on the basis of small things such as language and region (check this). "Lack of attitude of sharing" is the root cause of all the problems. Unfortunately, rich are not sharing wealth with poor and poor in turn do not want to share their resources(land, their hard work, etc....) with rich. What is more important is that people should not try to find out why they are different from each other but instead they should try to explore why are they similar to each other. If it happens an environment of friendliness will develop and people even across other states would like to make each other part of their success and growth.
Unfortunately this kind of spirit among people usually doesn't come by itself. This is usually imbibed by great leaders. Leaders like "Mahatma Gandhi". Didn't he unite Hindus and Muslims to some extent? Which i think was certainly more challenging problem than uniting Bengalis and Gorkhas today. We are not fortunate enough to have those kind of leaders today[1].
On the contrary side, people are usually misled by their local leaders. Local leaders make the issues similar to as of demand for separate state with the motive to give a boost to their political career or to bring themselves into limelight. Agreed, that development is boosted when areas to be managed are smaller[2], but granularity of such separation is also a questionable thing. If country again gets divided into large number of states, based on one reason or another, we will be undoing the great work done by Sardar Patel[5] in combining all the riyasats post independence. Which may ultimately invite more attacks from our neighboring countries.
Having said that, it is also true that such demands are not unjustified all the times. As per some of my north eastern friends( and I fully agree to them ), north east India was largely neglected for development before protests started in pre-ULFA formation era. Now usually what happens, forces like ULFA are may be born with right motives. But to achieve them they have to take help[4] from unethical organizations like ISI. And hence over the period of time their motives also get corrupt. Our own countrymen writing their demands/slogans in Nepali language is in itself a reflection of it.
I believe the solution to all these problem is the continuous growth and development in all the parts of country and for all the people. If people are blooming, they will never feel a need to be separate from each other. Ensuring the growth in each and every part of country is the responsibility of both state and central governments. Yes, the ground reality is that it is not happening and governments in most of the states are very irresponsible. This is the actual problem which needs to be dealt with. But certainly demanding a separate state just based on language or ethnicity conflict is like treating a patient for fever who is actually suffering from cancer.
-- vipin
[1] It's not that we do not have leaders of that potential at all. I guess Atal Bihari Vajpayee is one of them. In my little perception, Omar Abdullah is another one who can do it. P. Chidambaram is another example. And I wish Chiranjeevi also turns out to be a similar one. But even if their intentions are good, their hands are tied because of one reason or another. And that is why I count them as good but not great leader. A great will break all these debacles himself and will fight with all these bad forces.
[2] Case of Chhatisgarh ( out of M. P.) and Uttranchal (out of U.P.) is different. They came out of really large states. Large states are difficult to handle. But demanding that a separate state should come out of delhi ( Yamuna Par, again relatively an underdeveloped part of Delhi) doesn't seem logical to me.
[3] As per my friend, this was the feeling among the people of north east India when they started protests. They felt that they have been neglected for larger part of time after independence. Choose it as a name of the post to signify that main problem is the lack of the shared growth. And it is that which has turned most peace loving part of India to one of the most violent one. I hope initiatives of HRD ministry to open IIT Guwahati and IIM will bridge this gap.
[4] Sometimes I imagine in a funny way that ISI must be saying to ULFA chief. Okie, we will give you machine guns at discounted price but you will have to blow out one additional bridge, railway line for us. Or you will not only have to demand a separate state but also ask all the bengalis to leave the state.
[5]. Shame on me. In the initial post I wrote "Lal Bahadur Shastri" here. But shame on you too :-) you didn't point it out.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Anything Veg
"Anything veg" - I saw it in one of my friend's orkut profile when looking for cuisines. I liked it for many reasons but still couldn't change my viewpoint on non-veg food. I always have been a kind of person who believes in "live and let live" philosophy. I always believe in why one should make the choice for others. I mean, everyone must be set free to live on his own terms, to follow his own preferences unless until it is causing any harm to society. And for this reason, though being myself a complete vegetarian ( + occasional egg taker), I never could criticize non-veg food. But that was then. After seeing this video, initially I thought if are those preferences of non vegetarians really not causing any harm to society. I felt they certainly are but after digging a little more about it further, I am still not completely against consumption of non-veg food. There are some interesting observations, I wanted to share with you.
Are we really loosing consciousness ??
Yes. And the reason is easy availability. Earlier when human would have started taking meat as a food, he really had to struggle hard to get it. Think of the times when man used to hunt with the mere help of bows and arrows. He had to run for hours in forest silently and still had to rely on his luck for making a single kill of Black deer or any "dear animal" for that matter. Later on when our this very man civilized, he made an [intelligent] choice of shifting his dependency of meat onto soft targets. No more deers, no more rabbits, no more pigeons but chickens, pigs, goats and all. They breed fast and don't have those extraordinary capabilities of making a jump of 20 metres like "Samba deer" in jungles used to do. But even in those ages people had to earn it and not just buy it. He had to visit the fields to get food for cattles or take them for grazing. And it was not a business too. Everybody(~99%) used to do it for himself. Today as we all have civilized (as they call it) even further one just needs to swipe a VISA/MASTER card for these things. Demand is increasing like ever but concern towards poor animals is vanishing. We certainly are loosing consciousness about it because end-availability of meat is so easy. I don;t completely blame it on consumers too because it is in human nature that we never think of what might be happening behind the doors. There are some organizations like PETA which are trying to bring this concern back. Which is not only a very nice thing but an essential one to have. People need to be more and more conscious. By the way being conscious doesn't mean joining PETA. I believe Pamela Anderson and Mallika Sherawat do it for the reason very similar to reason of those social workers who associate with NGOs to just to speak about it in IIM Ahemdabad interview.
Is it just the meat ??
Is it limited just to meat products? I don't think so. Even the cows in dairy farms live in almost similar horrible conditions. I have myself seen the villagers, in North India at least, giving steroid injections to buffaloes for higher milk production. And if you think of the problem at more abstract and generic level. One person will be living in a hotel in Abu Dhabi at a cost of somewhere around $2500 per night and at the same time there will be more than 50 people vying for a single bed in a hospital. Or at worst more than 5 people will be starving in a single room room somewhere in a slum in Asia. There doesn't seem to be a perfect solution for these kind of problems. But yes we really need to think before wasting anything. Be it milk or chicken or electricity or water or whatever. Recently at one of our friend's birthday party we spent around Rs. 12000 on a single dinner [1]. I don't say we should not celebrate birthday parties but yes we can celebrate probably in 6K in Pizza Hut instead of for 12K in Indijoes and then give the remaining amount to poor people. But again it is a controversial remark. Don't know how many of you will agree.
Can't it be stopped?
Nothing is impossible. But I don't think we can or even should ask people to stop taking milk or taking meat on similar grounds. I am just thinking how will it be to make a rule like this. You will get one KG of chicken only if you bring another alive hen. You will get one KG of mutton only if you bring 4 KG of grass. You will get one litre of milk only if you bring 20 pounds of straw. Sounds foolish. Yes to me too. But that's where it exposes the hypocrisy of human being. Because that's exactly what he does when it comes to things which can come from another human only. Go to hospitals and if you need blood, you not only have to pay for it but also have to return the same quantity and type of blood. If you need to get heart/liver/kidney/bone marrow transplant done, you have to wait for the donor. There is no farming being done for these things, at least legally. I know many of you will say this analogy is insane. But it think it is for very much this reason that human cloning has been banned. Human mind is very sharp. It is capable of thinking a lot about consequences. But It's just that human prefers to be ignorant for some things. Today it is animals who are on the receiving side but tomorrow it can be he himself. Don't believe me? Even I don't but watch this movie "The Island" and may be you will come back to me. By the way, rule of bringing a hen alive to get a dead one is certainly a joke. But yes solutions can be found. It's not that tough.
-- We Pin
[1] We were thirteen in number and It was more of an accident. None of us had expected that the check will be that much. Had we anticipated that it will be anything beyond 7~8K, we never would have gone there..
Are we really loosing consciousness ??
Yes. And the reason is easy availability. Earlier when human would have started taking meat as a food, he really had to struggle hard to get it. Think of the times when man used to hunt with the mere help of bows and arrows. He had to run for hours in forest silently and still had to rely on his luck for making a single kill of Black deer or any "dear animal" for that matter. Later on when our this very man civilized, he made an [intelligent] choice of shifting his dependency of meat onto soft targets. No more deers, no more rabbits, no more pigeons but chickens, pigs, goats and all. They breed fast and don't have those extraordinary capabilities of making a jump of 20 metres like "Samba deer" in jungles used to do. But even in those ages people had to earn it and not just buy it. He had to visit the fields to get food for cattles or take them for grazing. And it was not a business too. Everybody(~99%) used to do it for himself. Today as we all have civilized (as they call it) even further one just needs to swipe a VISA/MASTER card for these things. Demand is increasing like ever but concern towards poor animals is vanishing. We certainly are loosing consciousness about it because end-availability of meat is so easy. I don;t completely blame it on consumers too because it is in human nature that we never think of what might be happening behind the doors. There are some organizations like PETA which are trying to bring this concern back. Which is not only a very nice thing but an essential one to have. People need to be more and more conscious. By the way being conscious doesn't mean joining PETA. I believe Pamela Anderson and Mallika Sherawat do it for the reason very similar to reason of those social workers who associate with NGOs to just to speak about it in IIM Ahemdabad interview.
Is it just the meat ??
Is it limited just to meat products? I don't think so. Even the cows in dairy farms live in almost similar horrible conditions. I have myself seen the villagers, in North India at least, giving steroid injections to buffaloes for higher milk production. And if you think of the problem at more abstract and generic level. One person will be living in a hotel in Abu Dhabi at a cost of somewhere around $2500 per night and at the same time there will be more than 50 people vying for a single bed in a hospital. Or at worst more than 5 people will be starving in a single room room somewhere in a slum in Asia. There doesn't seem to be a perfect solution for these kind of problems. But yes we really need to think before wasting anything. Be it milk or chicken or electricity or water or whatever. Recently at one of our friend's birthday party we spent around Rs. 12000 on a single dinner [1]. I don't say we should not celebrate birthday parties but yes we can celebrate probably in 6K in Pizza Hut instead of for 12K in Indijoes and then give the remaining amount to poor people. But again it is a controversial remark. Don't know how many of you will agree.
Can't it be stopped?
Nothing is impossible. But I don't think we can or even should ask people to stop taking milk or taking meat on similar grounds. I am just thinking how will it be to make a rule like this. You will get one KG of chicken only if you bring another alive hen. You will get one KG of mutton only if you bring 4 KG of grass. You will get one litre of milk only if you bring 20 pounds of straw. Sounds foolish. Yes to me too. But that's where it exposes the hypocrisy of human being. Because that's exactly what he does when it comes to things which can come from another human only. Go to hospitals and if you need blood, you not only have to pay for it but also have to return the same quantity and type of blood. If you need to get heart/liver/kidney/bone marrow transplant done, you have to wait for the donor. There is no farming being done for these things, at least legally. I know many of you will say this analogy is insane. But it think it is for very much this reason that human cloning has been banned. Human mind is very sharp. It is capable of thinking a lot about consequences. But It's just that human prefers to be ignorant for some things. Today it is animals who are on the receiving side but tomorrow it can be he himself. Don't believe me? Even I don't but watch this movie "The Island" and may be you will come back to me. By the way, rule of bringing a hen alive to get a dead one is certainly a joke. But yes solutions can be found. It's not that tough.
-- We Pin
[1] We were thirteen in number and It was more of an accident. None of us had expected that the check will be that much. Had we anticipated that it will be anything beyond 7~8K, we never would have gone there..
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Walk the Talk.....
On the other day, while doing the channel surfing I stopped for a while on the NDTV news channel. There was a show called "Walk the Talk" going on. SO this show goes like - there is one guest and the guest & host roam around in an open space and that's where the chat between the two goes on. As such the concept is new and I just somehow do not hate the idea but I have observed the same problem with this show which is prominent among other TV channels as well. The guest of the day was Mr. Kamal Nath. To me it looked like as if interviewer was trying more to be friend with the Kamal Nath rather than discussing any important things.I didn't follow the show completely but for the time I watched it both were discussing more about Kamal Nath's friendship among congress party leaders at earlier times, his current friends and his opponents. What looked worst to me was that when kamal Nath mentioned the name of Sitaram Kesari as a person with some ideology difference, host even went on to reveal one sensitive comment on Chinese people by Sitaram kesari. Not just he made this derogatory comment on Chinese countrymen public, but also the way and at time he spoke about it made an impression that show was crafted to do mutual pleasing to each other.
Well, if you see, as such there is nothing wrong in to befriend with the guest. Because sometimes you do so to make the guest comfortable. But then there is a subtle difference between flattery and making someone comfortable. In my opinion, intevriews must be to the point, very focussed and with a certain objective or agenda. And if doing so requires the host to be ruthelss, let be it. Karan Thapar is a good example. He does a good amount of study about the topic and the guest, comes with the facts about the issue and also has the records of any contradictory remarks made by the person in the past. His interviews with Ram Jeth malani, Shah rukh khan, Prakash karat were quite good. Moreover he doesn't look biased to me to any party. Neither to UPA nor to NDA. But yes by being ruthless doesn't mean to be rude. Many other people, like Prabhu Chawla, go on to become rude in an unsuccessful attempt to be noticed as a tough interviewer. But overall I feel all the nonsense interview programs which don't have any agenda or which are not focussed on the issues to be discussed should be banned.
I have had this discussion with my friends in the past and more often than not they have asked me if Why should I even bother about this? Why don't I just skip the channel and see what I like. Question is very much logical but today i would like to share my perception on this. And Probably a right one.
It is correct that why should I even bother? I should not get uncomfortable with such things and should not waste my time over these issues. Well it is ture and in fact I don't do bother abouyt these things much. But it is not a question of my time or your time. It is more of a question of time alloted to the TV programs. TV channels must use this time in a good way. Goverment spends a lots of money on technology for making the broadcast and netowrks work. To the least, as a matter of concern, all this money comes from the pocket oof poor tax payers. Secondly it is more of a moral responsibility also of channels that they use the facillities offered to them in doing good for the country and its people. When news channels are covering useless talks and other junk news, a more deserving news is missing the coverage. And that is what the real loss for all of us is. The same time can probably be used to cover ths issues of Naxalites, farmers in andhra pradesh, tehri Dam issue or may be even the slow progress of Namma Metro of Bangalore. I believe, presenting some useful information on any of these issues is far better than just discussing the friendship of Kamal Nath with Sitaram Kesari. And if these channels have to invite high profile people only like kamal Nath or Lalu Prasad then It's more important to discuss their report card rather than asking them how good relations are they maintaining with other colleagues in parliament.
Well, if you see, as such there is nothing wrong in to befriend with the guest. Because sometimes you do so to make the guest comfortable. But then there is a subtle difference between flattery and making someone comfortable. In my opinion, intevriews must be to the point, very focussed and with a certain objective or agenda. And if doing so requires the host to be ruthelss, let be it. Karan Thapar is a good example. He does a good amount of study about the topic and the guest, comes with the facts about the issue and also has the records of any contradictory remarks made by the person in the past. His interviews with Ram Jeth malani, Shah rukh khan, Prakash karat were quite good. Moreover he doesn't look biased to me to any party. Neither to UPA nor to NDA. But yes by being ruthless doesn't mean to be rude. Many other people, like Prabhu Chawla, go on to become rude in an unsuccessful attempt to be noticed as a tough interviewer. But overall I feel all the nonsense interview programs which don't have any agenda or which are not focussed on the issues to be discussed should be banned.
I have had this discussion with my friends in the past and more often than not they have asked me if Why should I even bother about this? Why don't I just skip the channel and see what I like. Question is very much logical but today i would like to share my perception on this. And Probably a right one.
It is correct that why should I even bother? I should not get uncomfortable with such things and should not waste my time over these issues. Well it is ture and in fact I don't do bother abouyt these things much. But it is not a question of my time or your time. It is more of a question of time alloted to the TV programs. TV channels must use this time in a good way. Goverment spends a lots of money on technology for making the broadcast and netowrks work. To the least, as a matter of concern, all this money comes from the pocket oof poor tax payers. Secondly it is more of a moral responsibility also of channels that they use the facillities offered to them in doing good for the country and its people. When news channels are covering useless talks and other junk news, a more deserving news is missing the coverage. And that is what the real loss for all of us is. The same time can probably be used to cover ths issues of Naxalites, farmers in andhra pradesh, tehri Dam issue or may be even the slow progress of Namma Metro of Bangalore. I believe, presenting some useful information on any of these issues is far better than just discussing the friendship of Kamal Nath with Sitaram Kesari. And if these channels have to invite high profile people only like kamal Nath or Lalu Prasad then It's more important to discuss their report card rather than asking them how good relations are they maintaining with other colleagues in parliament.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Discrimination
Discrimination.....
“I know there are localities and building societies that won't sell real estate to anyone who's a Muslim. I didn't want to get involved in that problem. I went to a Muslim builder to avoid complications.” – Saif Ali han.
I will not try to look overly sophisticated by saying “sorry” to Saif Ali Khan on the behalf of those who have made him feel so, but if it can make him feel even a bit better I am ever ready to do so anywhere, any day, anytime. However I have a perspective to share on such incidents in this post, rather than just say “sorry”.
About discrimination, developing a like or dislike about a particular thing is in human nature. The concept of communities is not just limited to Hindu-Muslim, Black-White, or Asian-American. It is much more than that. Orkut is a best example. There are thousands of communities on orkut, facebook and other social networking sites. People have created the communities based on movies, writers, books, celebrities, schools, colleges and much more. Its little funny to see that people can get divided into groups based on as small things as “I love Himesh Reshamiya” or “I hate Reshamiya”. Insensible (and only insensible) people in these groups develop a notion similar to “I am superior” or “Others are inferior or bad”. That’s where the discrimination starts. There are two major problems with this situation. First, unfortunately most of the people are insensible. You hardly get to see sensible people like “Akbar”, “Rahim” and “Mahatma Gandhi”. Secondly, it seems hardly controllable. People first fight/discriminate in the name of Hindu-Muslim but when they are in their own space they fight again in the name of “Jat-Meena”, “Brahmin-Dalit” or “Shia Sunni”. In all, it seems really difficult to completely stop such issues unless people stop being selfish and start respecting the others opinion too.
Obviously it doesn’t mean that what happened with Saif Ali Khan is a known thing and should be ignored. Such issues must be brought into the notice of law and those who do such acts should be punished. But an equally important thing is that a right response be given to such incidents. In this case, Javed Akhtar made an irresponsible remark by saying that life for minority community in India is horrible. Comments of Shabana Azami made it looked like whole of the non minority community in India is devil and loves such things to happen. On the other hand there was no Hindu leader also who should have come forward and said that such an act is highly condemned and strict action will be taken against those responsible.
In his book, Dr. A.P.J. Abul Kalaam has mentioned the name of hundreds of Hindu professors who helped him throughout his career. He mentions the name of Vikram Sarabhai specially for recognizing his willingness to work on challenging projects. It seems highly improbable that he never would have faced any communal discrimination in his life but it is just that he doesn’t prefer to discuss that And that is what I mean by saying a right response, a right perspective to the problem.
During my four years of graduation in Aligarh Muslim University, I have found some really great friends (Nadir, Faiz, Afham bhai, Tabish Bhai, Zahid, Shamshir and so many others). These people have always treated me like their brother – elder or younger. It doesn’t mean that I didn’t face any discrimination but it is just that I prefer not to discuss. This in no way should be taken as I want myself to be compared to Dr. A.P.J. Abul Kalaam. But yes I think, I share a perspective with him and probably a right one.
“I've been brought up to believe in the oneness of God. In some places He is known as Jesus. In other places He is known as Bhagwan or Allah. And in some places He is known as Shah Rukh Khan.” - Saif Again.
-An R Eye
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
