Putting things in perspective

Women empowerment has become a major theme of contemporary India owing both to government and civil society efforts. The recent vogue India video starring Deepika Padukone is one such initiative which keeps the spotlight on women empowerment, even while differing where exactly that light falls  (For some its education, for some its family life, for some its dowry issues).

So criticism for such campaign, for any campaign actually, is only natural and beneficial in that it provides for a better understanding about the whole issue by putting things in certain perspective. But I feel there is a lack of certain perspective on the internet, which I will try to write about by addressing some of the criticism that the video has faced.

On being Elitist:

Of course it is elitist. It is produced by Vogue India (A corporate fashion powerhouse) and starred by Deepika Padukone. But I don’t see why a campaign should not be elitist, especially when there are various aspects of the whole women empowerment ,all of which needs to be addressed, some through education, some through positive rights such as reservation and some by giving women the right over their bodies.

Besides, the video actually acts as a kind of instant empowerment for elite women (Whether it is the empowerment you wish the women to have is other issue). Bold initiatives such as these, which are mostly symbolic, provide for physiological power. Remember Barack Obama and Guard of honour led by women?

On being Hypocritical:

Sure, the video is hypocritical for every guy who looks at women as an equal partner both in personal and public life. But such is not the case in majority of elite India. Women are still to larger extent are seen as inferior and when SEBI mandated the corporate houses to have at least one woman on board of directors, they did that at the very end, like the very very end.

So you should be proud of yourself but you should also realize that you are still in a minority.

On being amoralistic:

This is perhaps is the most intriguing of all the criticism. Are you using reasons such as the morality that the video teaches to kids, cherry pick words like adultery  as a cover to advance your idea that women should not have the that kind of right over their body (Simply put, sex before marriage)? Would you not want to have sex before marriage, would you not want your son to have many girlfriends and be a macho while hoping your girl to be conservative (Not rural conservative but elite conservative)?

But for everyone who is genuinely concerned about moral aspects of the campaign, you are right to criticize it and keep doing it for as long as you hold that views. But just know that your support base is not as moralistic as you are.

Concluding, the  video makes perfect sense when seen in the context of the mentality of majority of Indian men . What makes more sense is the criticism that it faces.

Pragmatism Pays

Everybody who attended the Rakesh Sharma talk would have more than taken note of the bleak picture that he had painted for the future of our Earth, whose air we all are breathing. Now keeping aside the debate about how accurate or right his prediction is, it is nonetheless clear to everyone that the system is unsustainable and needs to be changed.

But a similar status-quo has existed for quite some time now (“Only one earth”, “Limits to growth” both were published in 70’s). Action taken to tackle this in form of summits such as Rio and Rio + were not much of a success. Even the climate change negotiations are going nowhere, owing mainly to nations turning the negotiations into an economic fight essentially commercializing the climate change talks and the general acceptance of Public for such a stand.

This failure of various governments makes it important that Civil society play a major role in changing the Public opinion which in turn would turn the policies of various governments. Thus the SNET (Sustainability Network) or the Green revolution Club are important instruments even if it succeeds in just creating a sustainability environment (Both physical and intellectual) in IIT Madras.

But I think it is important for such institutions to follow certain principles and come up with an ideology if they were to have wider acceptance. These can be

1)      It is important that they put humans at the centre of the whole exercise. This is because we have   come a long way in our materialistic pursuits and going back to a society in which environment is viewed equally to humans is not pragmatic, at least for a 21^st century human. So this requires that the word “Revolution” from the name be changed to something more” reforming”. Also such an Idea based on sustainability would allow the green movement to take along with them other sustainability movements (Such as Feminism, LGBT movement) and organizations.

2)      Science has been credited with bringing of creative destruction which replaces the old with newer, better institutions that will benefit the human race. This is how capitalism thrived. While pointing out the flaws in the theory of creative destruction, it is important that we realise that science can play an integral role in sustainability and this becomes even more of a prudent idea to follow in a scientific institution such as IIT Madras.

3)      Perhaps the biggest achievement of the Organization would be to internalise the Greenism (A much more reformist one which people can accept, at least for the time being). Much like capitalism or Communism, propaganda has to play a major role in achieving this. This is to be achieved through active political collaborations both at hostel and institute level, EML’s by famous personalities such as Rakesh Sharma which would further require collaboration with EML team, working with Shaastra, Saarang, departmental festivals and many other creative platforms.

The reformist attitude above is not in any way a critique of the revolutionary attitude (Which perhaps is the ideal solution to many problems of our times) but is a realization that, much like the 21^st century socialism, ideologies need to adapt themselves to the existing political realities. And through these slow reforms one can slowly but surely bring about a change in people attitude (Asking people to not play Holi is not going to help anyone). The battle might get longer but it will definitely yield some long lasting results.

                                                                         "Kill them already"

Did you see the interview of the Delhi rapist yet? If not you should. It pretty much sums up the major reason for the sorrow state of Indian women. But accompanying that article are the comments demanding his death in different possible means.

Let me state right here that I am in no way going to argue that he be released or should not be given death penalty. But I would like for us to go to his last statements in the article

Before, they would rape and say, 'Leave her, she won't tell anyone'. Now when they rape, especially the criminal types, they will just kill the girl,"

Sure his statement is wrong on many levels. But does it not make you think of consequences of the actions taken by us as a society? And if so are these consequences always good?

Imagine yourself in 19^th and 20^th century India, which is under colonial repression. Now suppose we won our independence through an armed struggle, much like 1857 revolt. While the reason for such revolt is justifiable, would we have remained as people of one nation in such an independent struggle.

Now go to 1960 USA. Imagine if Martin Luther king advocated armed struggle. Would USA have remained an economic superpower after such struggle? Would blacks have achieved their civil rights?

Too much history? Maybe.

Let me simplify a bit. Imagine yourself in a break up that happened because the girl/boy was from “higher caste”. Even while experiencing pain, we understand the necessity for such. We understand what would happen to our parents in case we defied them and so we choose to keep them happy and leave a better place for next generation.

Above are the examples where leaders showed restraint and thought to tackle the problem even while possibly prolonging the struggle. Much like the modern girl in India. This is because violence/direct confrontation might not always lead to best possible result.

So for everyone who is advocating that the rapist be killed through the meanest possible way, much like by our NTR in Temper, I suggest they take a deep breath and think how such things will affect society on a whole and if he/she is doing their part to change things for the best.

In case you are looking for a historical reference when things done in good intentions turned horribly wrong. I would point out to the Jacobin government that came to power after the French revolution. It happened to be more brutal and repressive than the aristocracy and finally led to Napoleon Bonaparte who ravaged Europe through war.

Blinking red light and a flashing safety jacket.This i could see from a very long distance. As I got closer I could see a security guard who seemed young.I started talking to that 19 year Assamese, who apparently ran away from his home, albeit with his friends help.

He could only finish his 9th class before he ran away and in 2 months he is going to go back and face his parents. More than that, he wanted to enroll back into school and aims at obtaining a graduation. He knows its going to be tough,perhaps humiliating for a 19 year old to join school. but he is determined to make it.May be his runaway stint taught him something in life,for he had deep smile i could quite not understand.

Thank you bhayya, for showing me that even worst things are lessons in life and to learn that lesson needs courage and determination.I hope you achieve your dreams.

                                                               Politics of Condemnation.

Communal violence is one which should be eradicated from our country at all cost and finding the reasons for such violence would help us to solve the problem. This is definitely clearer for Mrs. Teesta Setalvad  than me, one which everyone could see in her outright condemnation of political factor which help perpetuate such violence. Although she has not been able to present her case in the lecture clearly, owing I think to the lack of time, one could clearly see her determination to change what most, if not all, consider very ill.

Starting from this noble cause she has lost the trust I had on her when she, like some politicians condemned political reasons that perpetuate violence for obvious political reasons and leanings. This I do not expect from an upright social activist who wants to change the society. I pretty sure that she had created more hatred through her comments such as poisonous RSS and fascist Modi that that have been present before her lecture. So I can’t understand why she, drawing from writings of Ambedkar and Gandhi, had not realized that we can’t change people by coercing their opinions and perhaps logic and love are the only ways that can get us close to that target.

Secondly, please don’t brand a person supporting Modi as a right wing extremist. One does so because of the opportunity of change that he provides us with and not because of any of his alleged communal credentials. For all the people who pitch Modi’s communal credentials, we know he is not the ideal person but we believe he is the best in the present scenario. Finally please stop to think if the the propagations of the  Anti-communalist political parties  is probably for political reasons and would perhaps not hesitate to do otherwise under mounting political pressures. History would help validate the point.

Concluding if Modi turns out to become our own Hitler, our constitutional mechanism and most of the people who are voting for him would not let him reign over us. After all it is these values of justice and rights, that the speaker so proudly embraces, that had paved way for more than 100 convictions in Gujarat riots.

                                       Give them a Chance

Corruption is one of the hottest topic in our country right now and I have seen very harsh reactions towards it.But are we as a nation so moralistic, so as to condemn our politicians and bureaucrats to that severe extent. Wouldn't we like to just get off a parking or violation by just paying 50 illegally rather than paying a legal fine of 100?Would we not like to call an uncle working in the railways to book tickets for us in “Emergency” quota when we fail to obtain tatkal ticket? I think you understand what I'm saying and I'm probably very wrong to compare such small corrupt activities with huge scandals. Also  I should also agree to the fact that following rules might be tough in our country especially while watching others get away with small things, either by calling his uncle or dad.

But the fact remains that we as humans have hard time resisting our needs even if accomplished by immoral/illegal practices especially in an environment where people are aspiring to come into public services, not “only” because they want to serve but also because it provides them with an opportunity to earn money. Here I emphasize “only” because, I believe, that our politicians and bureaucrats want to serve our country but that was not enough reason for them not to commit corrupt practices. This for me, ideologically, seems same as our reason to get an emergency quota ticket, but of course the magnitude is much bigger.

So I would like to convey to my fellow Indians one thing, please don’t get carried away by your anger and disgust over large scale corrupt. We are right to be angry but shouldn't our bureaucrats, who by the way might have served our country, get a second chance. May be they would like another chance, may be some would come forward with the corrupt wealth acquired, if given some sort of pardon for what they have committed in the past, a past which was so dominated and perhaps possible only to live by corruption. May be they would like to start a new chapter in our newly emerging "tough on corruption" country and in the process we could also avail their very valuable service.

I just would like to conclude that yes, fear might be a deterrent but not the solution. Let’s show them that we are willing to understand their perspective if they wish to start a new life. Let’s prove ourselves to be not just tough but kind and just. Let’s not in our quest for a corruption free country forget the morality that we need to forge in us and our future generation, not just to tackle corruption but numerical more issues. Let’s be ready to forgive their past and make them a part of quest. A  stronger lokpal is not the only thing we need.