God - a mathematical equation?

Just stumbled on Shiva's cosmic dance statue at CERN . An eloquent term that captures the mood of religion and science. While most religions have degenerated into a thought of clash with science, at a deeper philosophical level, spirituality is one of the paths to searching for truth, science in another. Alas religion is often a matter of faith that precludes a rational analysis.
The most ancient Indian/Hindu philosophy text "Rig Veda" has a "Creation Hymn (Nāsadīya)" a rather powerful deliberation on God. You can read the translated hymn on boloji.com; and read more at Google books searching for "The Rig Veda: An Anthology : One Hundred and Eight Hymns".
The essence of it, if we take a somewhat literal meaning is a question of what/Who was before everything was created? There was no mind nor matter, no life nor death. Then something triggered it all and we do not know what. Lets worship as the (unnamed) God (that created it). Extremely powerful concept.
Modern physics is hovering around to theories that among others talk about how particles and antiparticles were created from nothingness. Time begins with creation. Similarly there are branches of Quantum theory that layout mathematical models to explain the birth of Universe. (read Physorg.com). Geneticists are talking of creating life from fabricated organic molecules someday (read at Harvard.edu).
If such a physical model exists that can explain how thing created out of nothing and then particles interacted in ways leading finally to life. Such a model might even explain how the matter and antimatter may one day combine and again end in nothing. And the cycle continues. Then such a model with its equation(s) be worth worshiping.

Will God in the end, turn out to be a mathematical equation?

Language - a barrier to communication?

I read the Theory of Deconstruction by Jacques Derrida some years back. OK confession, I tried reading it but gave up after like 30/40 pages, philosophy is not my cup of tea. He made an interesting point that language is a barrier to communication. The rate at which we think is lot higher than what we talk and hence verbalizing slows it down. Which leads to the question, we think in language and hence our thinking is limited by the speed we can use the language (I got this thought on my own but probably Jacques would have made the same point later in the book. So no idea what was his analysis of it).
I remember the Newspeak of 1984. The same idea was propounded there. By removing words that had association with dissent, critical thinking, the big brother insured that after a while people lost the ability to have dissent since they had no word to really think it in! This thinking in language is so hardwired that when i try to think without language I draw a blank!
A quick search on internet reveals papers, some say that you cant really think outside of language. One posed a very interesting question - how do deaf think, but no answers. Maybe some thinking is hard wired into brain. thinks like flight for birds etc which probably require some specialized thinking that is sort of programmed into our biological beings. This sets me thinking.
If we take the computing systems analogy further maybe there might turn up interesting ideas. The compiler theory works the same way. there is a certain pattern to a language. By defining a small set of tokens and the rules that follow a pattern, a new computer language can be developed which is almost a mathematical translation. Can the same rules be applied to human thinking?
Can we internalize a basic set of symbols, maybe pictures, develop some mental rule to associate various such symbols into patterns that can be recognized as having a new meaning? Pictorial memory is lot faster than thinking in verbal language where a lot of overhead of arranging words into predictable and hence coherent sentence is too time wasting. Such a symbol based system will greatly speed up thinking by extension.
I was reading this paper The Role of Language in Intelligence which made an interesting point that language and intelligence reinforce each other. The more intelligent u get, the more concepts you add to your language and the more concepts you add the more intelligent you (the society as a whole) gets since it now has greater tools (language) to use. If we take a look at two ancient civilizations of India and China maybe we can draw further understanding of this. India had Sanskrit, held by many to be the natural language most suited for a computer since the rules of grammar are very well defined. Chinese has a pictorial language with lots of symbols and meaning depending on usage. Indians were masters of theoretical areas like maths and astronomy while Chinese were brilliant engineers (think rocketry, printing, paper etc). Maybe the more mathematical Sanskrit lead to more structured thinking while the more usage dependent Chinese lead to better engineers (application - usage).
Still I am not convinced that the only way to think is to first have a word, since in order to have a word you need to think of the association first. So can we only create a new word by extending an existing theme? Or is it possible to come up with something totally different?
I have often found some of the more intelligent people are also good at languages, maybe because language by its variations in concepts and usage actually fuel creative and critical thinking? is there a case to expanding the realms of language by introducing new concepts from other world languages?

Bistromathic

I've noticed a rather interesting lack of co-relation between cost and selling prices of stuff in our typical markets. Take the case of juice. One would assume that a firm selling packed normal juice will price it at some level, and the same firm takes normal juice, add some sugar to it and sells that too will price the 2nd one a bit higher due to added cost of sugar.
That is at a logical guy would think. However not so in practice dear. The leading juice brand prices the non-sugar version a lot higher.
Similarly if I buy normal plain white polished rice I assume it will have some price lower than the same rice, not polished and all. after all polishing u have to remove a part of each rice grain and few other things which cost time and money. So one fine day i decided that unpolished rice is healthier so I'll try that.
Now I'm a guy fond of good things in life and an used to buying top of line stuff. So I thought yippy, since I am now buying something that has lot less work being done on it, should be reducing my expenditure too. Healthy body and healthy bank balance.
At least that's what I thought. But this lousy rice costs more double than the exceedingly premium priced polished rice! Reminds me again of that "Bistromathematics. The most powerful computational force know to para-science." concept!
Indeed the guy was prescient. The price of goods in store depends not on costs but on perceived demographic. It seems in India, someone who want to eat healthy must be someone willing to live longer and hence must be stinking rich! So if you want just x- you have to pay more than to have x+y.
Soon I see the emergence of a new entrepreneur who buys polished rice, painstakingly colors each grain brown and sells it for only 50% markup. Color manufacturer happy, the entrepreneur happy, and I get to eat tastier rice!

Thoughts at the begining of the Year.

What a week. First we have the the party with less than 4% of popular votes holding up the nuclear deal, subverting critical reforms in pension, insurance sector in parliament, perpetuating violence on citizens of their own state (see Red cadres beat central forces ) for over 6 months now. Many peaceful protesters at Kolkata Film festivals were arrested, following which the 'intellectuals of the city then heart warmingly stormed the police headquarters and freed them all. The first act was legal, the 2nd (technically) not. The first act saw arrests, the 2nd will not.
On the other hand we have the UP government which gave up on key reforms on agricultural sectors after some protests that turned midly violent and which ironically forced spectators entering a cricket match between India and Pakistan in Kanpur to remove any black items of clothing including socks! Apparently this was to prevent any black cloth waving as a sign of protest during the match, protest against the UP government. So peaceful protest (assuming there were such plans - none that i heard of) is banned but if you are violent the government will be willing to harm 600 million poor farmers to save 10 million of you - just remember looting and arson are your friends in Indian politics.
Witness what happened in Gujrat and the number of orchestrators punished as yet ( no I am not talking of low level arsonists here but the planners)? Think how many of 1984 riots have been punished? How many of Mumbai train blast, Hyderabad bomb blast, Coimbatore blast perpetrators have been brought to book? What about the Kashmir victims? The victims in Northeast?
I recently read about the stories that won the Ramnath Goenka awards for journalism 2006. Some of the pieces coupled with my own observations recounted above and earlier posts are frighteningly leading me to conclusion that the nation of Gandhi actually listens to only violence which the political classes and executive reward while peaceful protesters are arrested, raped, killed.
I remember a friend who was in one of India's top civil services resigning and leaving for abroad. What he said than was that we Indians are a nation of the savage. I then thought that it was the reaction of a poetical mind to harsh realities. As I am realizing now, he just had seen much more of the system.
Its a sombre thought to start the Indian new year.

Updated 16 Nov 2007 : In the end all are equally bad. I agreed with Budhadeb's argument that population must move away from agriculture into industry. To that extent what happened in Nandigram (West Bengal) - probably a legitimate protest against land being acquired too cheap was turned by politicians into a movement against industrialization.
Instead of explaining to people why industrialization is necessary the ruling party decided to send its armed cadres to kill the opposition - not the argument, but the arguer itself! And the CM justifies the killing saying that its fair to retaliate against opposition! How is this different from the argument toted out for the Gujrat riots which we all condemn none so harsh as the left. How is it different from argument of terrorists - someone harmed me/my faith so i'll kill the next school gathering?
And how can a ruling party send its own people to "rescue" a locality and ask police to sit out for weeks while people are killed/maimed/raped? No doubt both sides of the divide were armed but how can the 'state' sit out? And if it does, how can one not then understand groups who say to hell with the state - lets get on our own and if it means killing few or many its OK. Is it not the same argument that the CM is making?

Pakistan Crises - An opportunity for peace?

"A crises is a terrible thing to waste". Pakistan as we all know is in deep crises. Reports indicate that the Pakistani army positions on Indian border is at its lowest level ever . Pakistan state is battling the hydra headed monster of fanaticism it so carefully cultivated as a matter of state and to an extent social policy, and from the looks of it, the fight is not very favorable to the state at the moment.
My estimate in around 2004 was that Pakistan in its current form may not survive till 2050. It seems I was too sanguine about its longevity. But can we in India really feel happy about it? Paradoxically for India, it may be our best interest to ensure that a state that keeps hatred for India as its raison de etre, survives as a state. Do we really want to govern NWFP on our own. Given our own problems with Minorities do we want to add to it? Do we want to be fighting this monsters on the Hindukush range on our own?
My guess would be not. So how can we help Pakistan survive. If we offer support directly, the social conditioning of the nation will ensure that the Jehadis get more popular support! My take would be - offer a deal to the Pakistani army. In return for lower deployment of troops on Pakistan's eastern border, India reduces its troops on India's western border. That will give a much needed rest to the Indian Army. At the same time, strengthen civil policing in the border states, especially J&K. As the example of Punjab shows a determined, well training civil police can tackle insurgency better. Army is a sledgehammer - indispensables to break down iron but not very fine to chisel. We will also lower our own operational costs due to troops reduction.
Concentrate on purging the ISI cells in India while the Pakistani state battles on its western border. My own experience is the Indian and Pakistanis are very friendly to each other in foreign streets. There is a genuine warmth in our social interactions. But when it comes to the same people in subcontinent, daggers are drawn. A large portion of blame must be taken to the cultural conditioning that ingrains hatred of India in average Pakistani. The school textbooks there perpetuate the same litany. Pakistan will do well to realize that hatred always comes back to haunt those who profess by it. As a part of lowering of tensions with India- which they must if Pakistani army is to survive the current crises, such institutional hatred needs to be gotten rid of.
India meanwhile can contribute by offering better trade terms to Pakistan. Both our countries are large agricultural producers. There is no reason why we cannot trade to mutual advantage. Once trade links are better average Pakistani will get to cultivate a more friendly image of India. Peace in the reason can transform our nations. But will we take the opportunity?

Appeal to the Indian Prime Minister

You have served the country to the best of the abilities and I believe with its best interest at heart. Now that you know that something that you worked very hard for and know is in India's best interest, is being killed by ignorance, malice and incompetence. You also know that the same chance may never come again to allow gaining fuel, technology and strategic ties with those who matter.
Then is it worth to be remembered by posterity as someone who oversaw and tolerated the murder of a one in many lifetimes chance? Resign and retire gracefully. Let those who snatched defeat from jaws of victory to quote a cliche be the ones burdened by it in history.
After all national interest cannot be smaller than short term political interest, or is it?

Moments taken in

Buckling steel, sparks flying inches away from your face, countours of the road, maniac screaches of brake on wheels, the snap of muscles, rebounds of helmet off the road, horror on the face of the lady on sidewalk, dazzling circles of traffic lights.
Moments away from death, you feel so alive.

Getting books to pupil

Recently watched a debate on CNN-IBN about effectiveness of government programs on the state of social sector in India. In the midst of all the usual politicians calling for caste based quotas in private sector, Industry complaining about governmental restrictions, government quoting %age increases in budget as proof of progress came something that I think is one step that can actually help
Sunil Mittal of Bharti was mentioning that his firm is opening 200000 schools across India in mostly villages. While our SUV riding poor politicians might claim otherwise the fact is that most of the caste related distinctions are real issues in villages where group have to fight for meager resources. What can lift people out of the misery called villages is good educations and as survey after surveys indicate, government schools are simply not delivering.
If private firms can ensure that they have quality schools at village levels we can see that in another 10 years a lot more trained talent is available to industry. Agriculture simply cannot provide living to 60% of our billion strong population so this is an urgent demand of times. What can put a spanner is if government insists on quotas in teacher recruitments. If the argument of quota demanding segment is correct that the lower castes are not getting education because of bias or whatever we evidently cannot have enough trained teachers from the disadvantaged sections (if we don't have students from those sections how will we have teachers? ).
So if we don't get so shortsighted to put such spanners I can see maybe a million schools opening that provide quality education where the real disadvantaged sections of population lives and is denied opportunities. Modern education will not only provide job skills but can transform attitudes. I suggest the government gives incentives to industry to set up such schools. Something like if you spend 5% of your income to setup and operate schools you can deduct 5% from your taxes. Since the government will have to spend money on schools anyway and money comes from taxes, such an arrangement will not lead to any net revenue loss in long term. However what will happen is that instead of government directly running schools where as per an earlier PM's own admission only a meager portion of actual spend reaches the intended poor, the private sector can be held to a lot more stringent criteria.
Let their be a committee of educationists/NGOs/private sector participants who can evaluate the schools as some sort of a board. Only those schools which pass a certain level of quality accredition can claim tax exemption. Industry will have a stake in ensuring that the output of schools is good because we do have a severe talent crunch. The courses can be more vocational which should work for a large majority of rural families.
Its only by such direct action that we can achieve our potential. Let the work begin.

Murdering Mahatma?

I wanted the sesquicentennial post to be some light/frothy piece but alas no inspiration. Meanwhile the theme of increasing violence as a social phenomena has been making rounds to TV too. CNN IBN recently did a feature called "Murdering Mahatma". Since its the month of Mahatma Gandhi's birthday, I thought it appropriate to blog on the same.
First I think the program got it wrong. While Gandhian nonviolence credo I think refers more to non violence as a political tool i.e. the political approach should be non-violent and I do not think its really that much on the crime side which is what the program focussed on. Sure there should not be any crime and Mahatma emphasized on virtuous living. But surely a rape victim taking a knife and attacking the rapist in the act cannot be termed as Murdering the Mahatma which I thought the program argued!
So is non-violence really a philosophy when faced with a violent crime? Sure, when British army fired on peaceful assembly in a stadium (after sealing on exit routes) as far as I know, no one really turned and attacked the soldiers. Its a crime but again the soldiers were really following orders howsoever wrong. I think its again political violence countered with non-violence. But should I follow the same philosophy if a gang of dacoits enter my house, brandishing weapons with intent to hurt. If I have a loaded gun in hand and decide to use it, is it really murdering Mahatma?
While there might not be easy answers, I believe non violence is not about not offering violent resistance in face of hostile bodily harm. It is about not making violence a tool to achieve political or personal goals. And to a large extent Indians have followed the logic. Many of our protests while not being completely free from violence by and large do not make violence the center piece of policy.
What then explains the rise of violence which I paradoxically agree to in the beginning paragraph? I again come back to the theory of a failing state. The program interviews people who said that if they catch a thief they will beat him up. The reason was in the interview itself. Many said they will resort to violence because the culprit will not be otherwise punished. And its a very valid fear. As an ex Supreme court chief justice said once - justice late is justice denied. We had this case where an IAS official was killed by a mob supposedly incited by the sitting MP of the area. The court recently pronounced death verdict on the MP for the crime. And it came after 13 years of the act. 13 years when life imprisonment in India is of 14 years duration! When such a high profile, widely covered in media case takes 13 years to settle just think of a poor helpless person trying to get justice.
I've heard opinions that sometimes lawyers decided among themselves to drag a case longer since that gets more fees. And its not hard to imagine. So we can easily assume that if its a poor person, justice will not come easily to him or her within the span of a life sentence! Is it wonder that the people will want to settle scores on streets at the moment of crime itself. Combine the delay with so many cases (I covered em in some earlier posts) where the courts have pulled up prosecution agencies for botched probes - often deliberately botched posts and its even easier to assume that justice may not always come and when it comes its usually very late.
For me, the fundamental reason for a state to exist is that it provides guarantee of life and liberty. So if the same is not being made available to all, then is state really relevant? If not then why should i play by its rules? That I think is what is prompting so many cases of public taking law into its own hands. Its a telling point that most of such cases occur in places where its generally acknowledged that the state has not done well to keep its promises of crime control and safe life.
What then is the solution? One which come to my mind is to set up more courts. But merely setting courts will not help if the mechanism to administer justice is not improved and is perceived to have improved. And a key to improving the trust is to restore confidence in authorities. It doesnt help when sitting or ex MPs and sometimes cabinet ministers are convicted by courts for extremely serious crimes. Therefore I suggest we have special fast track courts specifically setup to handle cases against senior government official and all elected/nominated members of various legislative bodies. There should also be a separate investigative and prosecuting agency not under direct control of executive but maybe under a parliamentary committee along with maybe some public citizens (a judge/bar council/press council/ etc). Make it mandatory to wrap up a case within 6 months. All cases against such people and found to be prima facie admissible by a magistrate be mandatory referred to these.
All it proceedings should be in public domain and not hidden behind officials secrecy acts.
Once the custodians of public trusts are swiftly punished for any shortcomings public confidence will trickle back.
Next step, reform of criminal justice system for all. Only once the justice becomes really impartial and very swift will the state again become relevant. Only once that happens will public stop acting its own judge, jury and executioner.

Forging PAN Indian identity thru soft power

Another run of Indian Idols comes to an end with a victor crowned. While many lamented the rather limited talent of singers coming to the fore, this particular series will be known for another reason.
For a change the 2 finalists were not from main stream India and seen by most - which is essentially the North/West and South of India. Rather both of them were from East - One from Darjeeling which a part of Bengal still has its own identity and the other from very East Meghalaya. TV news channels were reporting a lot on how it has fired up the people of North east to finally see one of their own occupying national centre stage. There were reports that the usually very estranged Garo and Khasi tribes of Meghalaya for once united in supporting a guy from the state. This is a very healthy sign.
I personally watched Indian Idols rather very infrequently. From what I heard from most was that the candidate from Meghalaya was the most talented of the lot though I personally preferred the voice of the Darjeeling hero (and mind you I say the voice not the singing talent). Well one show is not fair to pronounce judgement on someone but most of friends were holding the Meghalaya guy as the winner for many weeks now.
What might have happened is that the usual bane of such shows strike and maybe people voted on ethnic lines and Bengal is a very large state. On the other hand, winning a show is also about preparation and lets face it, when its just two finalists, both of them will have great talents. So a song selection and that one day can make fortunes. Lets hope that indeed that was the case in which case Meghalaya will not be disappointed.
It was good to see politicians for one realizing something. The final had clips showing the prime minister and the chairperson of the ruling coalition meeting the two finalists to wish them well. This is something I saw for the first time and I think it was significant. For both the finalists to come from North East (and lets face it the favorite was the Meghalaya guy) it was as much an endorsement of the fact that india is slowing coming into its own.
Many say that the unifying factor in India are cricket and Bollywood. Its a thought I can readily agree with. There might be a lot of hostility between ethnic groups within India but Hindi movies and Cricket does fire imagination across India. It is this soft power that is often neglected by most Indian policy makers. Thus it was heartening to see the top policitos realizing this importance and were seem to wish the two. I only hope this will encourage other NE Indians to come forward for such. If we look at it, i remember no cricketer from Northeast. There is Bhaichung Bhootia who is quite a superstar but in football, a game not that main stream in India. The only noteworthy actor from NE India has been Danny Denzopa and he too is old now.
By encouraging more people to come, especially into mass media from NE (cricket takes too many facilities to begin showing results) we can ensure that not only NE guys start seeing them as a part of a PAN Indian identity, it will also make them more familiar to the rest of India. Ignorance of our own brethren from East is a blot on the rest and it can only augur well for the future of India if the same is rectified early.

Surreal Moments in Life

A friend answering a buzz on his mobile
F:Hello
Stranger on the other end: Who are you?
F: Whom have you called?
S: My daughter gave me this as her number a week or so ago
F: Well she gave you a wrong number, I've had it for ages.
S: Can you hunt for her in Pune?

Another that happened to me once.
* Phone buzzing *
Me: Hello
S: Sir are you looking for a job change
M:Only if its good.
S: Thank you.
- end of call-

Some Laws of nature

1. The moment you get to a song you really like, either the phone will ring or some urgent work land up.
2. Finish the work and replay the song and 1. will happen again
3. The most diligence demanding mail clarifications always land up on Friday around 5.
4. The only time in the day you'll open comic.com is the time the boss's boss decides to pay you a visit.
5. Come out of the door in undies to drop the trash and the auto lock on the door will mysteriously engage behind your bare back.
6. The moment that hot babe in the hangout joint look at you with a smile, it will turn to laughter as you slip on spilled coffee and then get up to realize the trouser seams are off.
7. Give a girl a fish and u feed her for a day.Teach her how to fish and she forms a worker's union
8. Traditional dress day is only celebrated in firms which have no employee hailing from some primitive tribe. (I wouldn't mind attending one in some Brazilian firm )
9. Hit delete by accident and it NEVER fails to execute successfully.
   

Crisis is a Terrible thing to Waste

"a crisis is a terrible thing to waste. It makes unthinkable changes suddenly possible." from “For the Soul of Mankind” by "Melvyn Leffler" as reviewed in the Economist. What a beautiful way to sum it up.
Indeed all this current fracas about the nuclear deal, the Adam's bridge (Ram Setu in popular lingo), the globalization issues, the mess in education sector. All these are an excellent opening to debate our thinking, break free from the shackles of mindset evolved over 1000 years of war fare and conquest by foreign invaders.
The current resurgence of national confidence has a lot to do with liberalization ushered in, in response to balance of Payment crises of 90s. A crises that changed the course of modern India. We had an erudite philosopher Prime Minister than. Not always the most clean of our politician, Mr Rao must be given credited for putting right people on job and shielding them from interference. Always a mark of a great manager. I personally appreciate what he did for our economy.
Where he failed in the same vein was in handling the Ayodhya Babari masjid crises. The events of 93 were a crises, they were also a great opportunity to solve the issue once and for all. And he failed miserably.
I think the same crises -opportunity stares in the face of the current government. Will Rao's protege - the current prime minister and more importantly the real power behind the ruling party seize the issue and act in real national interest is any body's guess. Thinking long term I'd say even lose the next election but if you act in India's real interest ( and the government knows it better than I, being privy to much more facts and opinions than I a mere private citizen), the people will elect them in the next round or so.
The growth momentum is there and as more and more people are lifted out of poverty and ignorance they will realize the consequences of actions sooner than later. So in long term, an informed practical approach should pay well.
There are real risks though. While most Indians proudly proclaim that Indians are the most philosophical, most liberal thinkers in reality we are rarely so. Look at the modern times where the protests are almost always violent involving forced 'bandhs' or actual violence. So the opportunity will not be seized without making hard choices. But then we need to overcome adversary by force of will.

small things all

Some string, a cardboard box, a ball, a puppy
endless joy

Making Government Footprint more Welcome

Continuing from the last blog post idea, I feel one way to citizens feeling more empowered is to reduce the government arms to people contact. Remember its the attitudes which set the tone of the interaction and we are a nation have severe attitude problems.
Recently I paid by municipal taxes thru an online bill pay facility of a bank. I never received the tax demand but thankfully Pune municipal corporation has a website that allows you to search and view taxes to be paid by you. Assuming that was not the case I would have had to go to the municipal office. Find out where to go (interaction 1), find out my outstanding taxes (interaction 2), go and pay the taxes (interaction 3). Any of these 3 places could have exasperated me. However the online governance ensured that I do not have to waste a leave and saved a lot of time for me. That makes me feel better about Pune Municipal corporation.
Now many people - especially in government employee unions will complaint that if we make everything online where will the employees go. An argument that makes me as a tax payer angry. Does the government feed me if i get unemployed? As for municipal facilities? well half the city doesn't get municipal water (tho it pays local taxes), my housing society has its own security, if I get ill chances are I'll go to a private hospital because i do not 'trust' the government hospital to always treat me well and yes I can afford to pay for private hospital so maybe its good cause the 'sarkari doctor' has 1 less patient to see so (s)he can see another poor patient. But lets take the union's argument and assume that it is every tax payer's duty to sustain living for those who cleared a government employee recruitment exam. Can we than reduce government and still not unemploy them?
I think we can. The problem is that the government is missing from areas it should be in and is too much into areas it should not be in. Do we need a thousand tax collectors when by automating system we can do with hundred? While Pune traffic police complaints that the traffic is a mess because they have too few people? Why not take those 900 tax collectors and make them traffic policemen?
Villages don't have medical facilities because medical graduates don't want to live in a village which has no worthy school, no electricity and what not. Government still posts them and most of them go to villages only on paper. Why not take the biology graduates in government and below 25 years of age and give them an offer. Government will train them on its own expense to be a medical practitioner (RMP) provided they spend 10 years living in a village. After 10 years they are free to do private practice. Now the question is 1) what will keep them in villages and 2) do we have enough colleges to train them?
My answer to 2) is, do we really want to make them an MBBS doctor? Really how much treatment can a village dispensary do? Better idea is to open maybe 20 colleges across India that trains them to give medicine for common stuff like malaria, dysentery, family planning, taking blood samples and all, preserving them well and sending them to district laboratories for tests. Also to identify when things are beyond their competence and send them to city hospitals.
For 1) Make the village panchayats responsible for ensuring the RMP is actually in the village. If not they must report it to the district. And make Panchayats answerable for any issues arising out of non-reporting.
This is a short term solution. In longer term, a real issue is that village kids can't compete with most city kids and become doctors or engineers because the village schools are terrible. Instead of trying to get them into medical/engineering colleges through quota when they do not have the skills to compete with fellow classmates during course and bring the overall interaction quality down, why not have special schools. Do we really need MBBS in every village? Have colleges that take them for 3 years and train them to handle normal medical/engineering needs. Have PG courses that can make some of the more promising ones MBBS should they care to after doing maybe 10 years in villages. Since these are not MBBS they are not allowed to practise in private merely in dispensaries. Some will argue this is a class distinction. My answer is that given a choice between being unemployed and becoming a looked up to member of a village many village kids will jump at this opportunity. And it will raise standard of living in villages.
Similarly involve private sector. Have electricity bills/municipal bills available online. Whats stopping a bank from sending an officer to a village once a month with a laptop and a mobile net connection, collecting money and paying the bills online given the payer a receipt then and there. The villagers don't have to come over to some place, stand in line to pay and there is no additional charge. The bank can charge 2 % to the tax authorities for this service. The man power reduction in tax collection will be more than 2% in costs so net collection goes up. Meanwhile the tax collector becomes a teacher/police/doctor or some such more skilled guy.
True some will crib at having to leave a cushy job in a city with a lot of potential to harass and earn illegal money. But government jobs are not about that right? They are so that people can serve people.
Its a win win.

Is India relevant for Indians

I have often wondered what makes us so full or road rage, so ready to slash and burn at the slightest opportunity when in a mob. The key thing is that we do so when we are in a group. While I have no answers I will make a guess!
I think its the 'system'. It makes people feel so impotent in normal life that given an vent, they all erupt. Look at our government offices. A visit to any is a soul wrenching experience. Pan stains on walls, rude staff. It does not matter to the clerk (or the corner constable of police - the lowest rung) that the person he is talking as if the other is some lowly life form is probably talented enough to be his boss' boss' boss had he or she wanted.
It does not matter that the staff gets his salary from what the visitor pay as taxes. In short, the 'babudom' makes citizens feel 2nd class. We are a flawed democracy. so given an oppurtunity we descent into mobocracy. Common man knows that he can't really fight against the system and win. For the simple fact that given everything else, it will take 15 years for the court process to end. Who wants to spent 15 best years of life in courts? This leads to apathy and that in itself is a root of many ills.
Now I understand that any solution short of a revolution will be tough to get. After all in order to reform babudom and politics, the initiative will have to come from the top as well. But the top has lot more to loose in reforms than the bottom. Power is the most powerful aphrodisiac.
Courts in India are perceived to be free. But then even if free, in order to fight the system in courts you need a powerful prosecution arm. But the police have probably the worst public image among all government arms. And the reason are not hard to see. Just observe how a policeman (any policeman) talks to a common man - alone on a street. It will give you an impression of a ruler to a serf. But thats only the tip. Its a reflection merely of an institutional behaviour. What is our conviction rate? How many perpetrator of high visibility terrorist acts have been punished. When they have been - the top rung is almost entirely never caught, the middle and lower run get convicted in like 15 years. And as a recent columnist in Outlook pointed out, that too happens only when a Hindu- Muslim thing happens!
Take the well publicized case of a son of an IAS officer in Central government being killed. The accused are some family members of a sitting Member of Parliament. The case is dragging on for so many years. This when the person killed has a family who is a member of the power elite. If the accused are guilty the family of the dead has been denied justice as yet. If the accused are not, they have been denied justice for so long, living under shadow.
If such a high profile, under the media glare, case takes over 10 years to come to a logical conclusion just image what happens when a common man is involved. Assuming the police investigate with talent and impartiality ( both of which at least in public perception are extremely rare) it will still be longer than a decade wait! So the common man looses faith.
This is probably why terrorism is spreading roots. Why Naxalites are gaining control over such a large portion of India. Because for so many people the state has ceased to exist. When that happens what stops a person from defying the state? While I hate civilians being harmed (that is after all the definition of terrorism) for those which no help from state in defending life and liberty, it will cease to matter. And that is what seems to be happening.
An attack on police will cease to awaken people because for them its merely an armed wing of a state that just extorts taxes from them and does nothing in return except oppression.
Its a danger sign and we stop to look at it thinking that the problem will go away. The only way to fight this menace is by making state relevant. Improve the police, improve the governance. Make people proud of being an Indian. I once read that when US celebrates its 4th of July- the citizens celebrate not the state. In India, its the state that celebrates and not the citizens. If we are to stay as a nation, we have to correct this.

Language as a Weapon

Language as a weapon? of mass subjugation? Language is one of the crowing glory of human kind. A unifying force for communities, it also is one of the more divisive factors in our cultural life. Look at the French - English rivalry. or closer home the hostility to Hindi in south? Why does mere choice of language strike such emotional chords? Maybe it has to do with language being the ultimate symbol of cultural heritage. Where language is not merely the communication tool for cultural ideas, it IS a cultural expression itself.

Language serves to stratify societies. Listen to Prof Higgins expostulate the same in "My Fair Lady". Or more recent times read 1984. An interesting idea there. When we think, we think in a language. So What if certain words (symbolic of ideas) are simply not there in a language? What if state ( or society) prevents us from introducing such ideas in language terms. Will over a period of time we see a gradual withering of such ideas?

Forms of language serve to differentiate people. English court had French as the official language for quite a while. Mughal Durbar in Delhi had Persian as the court language for long. It took an Amir Khusro to evolve Urdu - a mix of Persian and Hindustani (the language of the masses) to bridge the gap. Hindi Channels today strive to maintain the Allahabadi Hindi as the standard bearer. It took an AajTak to popularize a much more eastern Bihari style to Hindi to differentiate itself from the traditional elites and posture itself as a channel for the masses. So its obvious that linguistic abilities can serve to stratify societies even where the language is otherwise common.

Jacques Derrida in his theory of Deconstruction mentions how language is a barrier to communication. When communicating through words we are slowing our thoughts down to the flow of the words. Mind which is so much more capable of faster action is essentially slowing down. Hence language itself is sometimes problematic. If we extend the same to inner thoughts - While we may not be saying anything, is the mind slowing down while thinking because we 'think' in a language. Will thinking in way devoid of language be much faster?

Reasons Reasons

Just heard about this job application where the dude mentions - I wanna search for a girlfriend in ur country as a reason for applying to the job.
Cool. Wonder how many such offbeat reasons can be quoted for applying.
Common ones I can think of it -

1. Commuting to this place is so much easier.
   
2. Ah my favorite eating place is right across the street from you
3. Mmmm the receptionist!

More esoteric ones could be

1. God spoke to me and told me to go forth and make common cause with "your firm"
2. Numerologically my name and yours just match
3. Boy you are an incompetent bunch. My rapid rise to top is assured.
4. My girlfriend is banned from entering your country. Hallelujah
   
5. Doctors have prescribed complete break from work
   

... I'm thinking of more

Help - WMD proliferate

Meetings, it almost enlightened me as to why the typical nerd was also supposed to be perpetually high on some or the other substance. How else could one survive the ordeal unless semi in Nirvana land?
Given the rapid proliferation of these ways of mass discomfort - WMD in corporate culture we the sanity lovers need to come up with ways to hit back. Having been in places where sometimes meetings were scheduled for over 8 hours and no this was not a sales department but the hardcore tech one, and even now where WMDs often demand over 5 hours on many working day per day, I've been thinking-(that too on a Monday. Yeah I know its not something that I have done in many years but frankly this is a crises scenario. As a result of moving those massive brain levers here are some caffeine empowered techniques that a (non PH)-B should implement to reduce the WMD quest of lessor minions.

1. Auction of meeting times. People are given certain amount of 'currency' to buy meeting minutes. A 10 minute meeting of 10 people? Sure that'll be 10*10=100/- currency. You can do without 5 or your original list, thought so too, hand out 5*10=50/-. You can do it in 5 min? sure that'll be 25/- plz.
2. And yeah, your last meeting overshot by 20 min. The attendees have had half the person rate times 20min deducted for spending time in meetings. System is auto-claiming their deduction from you. so you need to hand in that currency too.

Such an approach I'm sure will see a significant reduction in WMD proliferation. Then it may be possible for folks to actually get some time in the day to get the work they were supposed to get done done.

My beloved Mr Yechuri discussed Nucleared deal

I thought enough of nuclear energy discussion but then when an argument is being stopped by quoting motives, I got into a debate mode. My favorite handler of words Mr Sitaram Yechuri in his column in Hindustan Times gives his own views on how Lefts opposition is being decried not because of reasons but because of prejudice. Point taken, a rational debate should be based on reasons so lets take his arguments and discuss.

"any attempt to cap India’s nuclear strategic capabilities will immensely benefit both China and Pakistan. Who, may we ask, is vigorously pursuing this Indo-US nuclear deal which, we are told, will limit India’s strategic capacities...". Interesting argument. "We are told" by whom? The very same Left. You make an assumption, prove a premise on the basis of that assumption and conclude that the assumption is right! As per my earlier writeup, the deal enhances our strategic capabilities by 1. allowing for nuclear technology know how. While this should not be transferring bomb technology, there are other engineering capabilities, safety training that will help. By creating opportunities for nuclear scientists to get jobs we'll get more talented people taking up such studies. Currently most end up being code monkeys in IT.

He rightly mentions that India is electricity starved. He also makes the oft quoted argument that our current nuclear electricity percentage is 3 percent of total which will go upto mere 6 percent in 20 years due to this deal. What the argument leaves out is why its only 3% today. I can think of 3 reasons.

1. We do not have the technology to build bigger/better plants and not enough engineers to maintain a lot of small plants.
2. We do not have access to enough fuel to generate more
3. We made a conscious decision not to build plants

Evidently its not 3, and Mr Yechuri does not say that it is. For if it was the whole deal needn't be signed. Which means its some combination of 1) and 2). And both imply we need to import technology And import fuel. Alas both cannot be imported unless India signs up NPT and gives up the very loved strategic option or by signing the deal. If opponents of the deal can get us both without either, lets welcome that option.

"Further, is nuclear power cost-effective? On the contrary, it is the most expensive option.". Agreed. But there is also an economy of scale. France gets most of its electricity from nuclear plants. Which brings down costs. That however is a part of the story. Even with scale the nuclear power option is the more expensive option in short term. In short term. Fossil fuels are limited and especially oil, gas only a little less and prices are continuously rising. Further more, oil supply is nearly at peak and so its not that we can increase our consumption to 5 times and get adequete supply. I do not have the link right now but I read that already some gas based plants in India are running at sub optimal generation level because gas supply is not adequate. Further any reliance on unstable Mideast for oil is a strategic dependence on an unstable region. We depend on others for oil or for uranium its still a dependence.

Other thing is environmental impact. "This year’s floods according to the United Nations, are ‘unprecedented’ in human memory.". Most climate scientists blame global warming for sudden climatic changes and fossil fuel usage is the biggest culprit. Mr Yechuri's solution to a problem is the solution that is creating the problem in the first go.

"Huge commercial orders running into thousands of crores of rupees for the purchase of nuclear reactors would be placed on the US." .... "Is India then actually going in for this deal to bolster US economic interests?". So is this the real reason for Left's opposition if not 'instructions from abroad'? Well the logical argument is that you buy technologies from whoever has it. I'd say if the government is smart it will diversify sources. France is an obvious choice. As is Indian private sector which can soon learn the ropes.

"If the same amount of resources were to be spent on generating power through hydro, thermal, gas, clean non-renewable and solar electricity, India’s energy augmentation would be many times higher.". Admirable. Dams require a lot of land and displacement of people. Is Left recommending that such massive forcible land acquisition happens? Solar is great but is it commercially viable as a regular source of power? Where in the world has it happened. And how does the cost compare to the nuclear energy generation cost. Ah no figures there because they'll contradict his earlier arguments about cost reasons for avoiding nuclear energy. Thermal energy we tried once in south, alas our power plant sunk in the sea!

The rest of the argument gets into joint exercises and multipolar world and what not. I'm too sleepy to talk about it now but its already discussed in earlier posts.

"Any alignment with US imperialism to impose unipolarity will dissolve India’s distinctiveness in world politics. This is precisely what the Left seeks to prevent in the interests of India and its people.". So is the opposition to the deal because its with US and we cannot align with them to ensure multi polarity or is it because the deal is bad?

In short I find again Mr Yechuri's reasoning contradictory. Given my very high regards for his intellectual calibre, I can only speculate on reasons. But I for once am not convinced that the deal is not in our national interest.

Updated: Sept 20th.
Hindustan Times has this rather good analysis on need for Fuel supply diversification. It always gets my goat that our self serving politicians want India to live by their ideals (assuming that the arguments are really born of ideology). How I wish they work to make India live on its self interests rather than some arcane or popular ideology. Reminds me of all those years where we fought wars in ways that ensured an honorable defeat rather than a dishonourable win. The kings won their glory, the people had they women raped, wealth looted and liberty crying in chains.

Rich and Vengeful.

Last few days were all full of angst at the politics happening. This week is for a change cool and Sunny. In keeping with the theme, here is another rather interesting item on ABC news chronicling the wills of the rich and vengeful. I even love the heading. Good read for a slow day.

Sample a few gems of wills from the article:

"To my son, I leave the pleasure of earning a living, which he had not done in 35 years."

Or: "To my daughter, I leave $1,000. She will need it. The only good piece of business her husband ever did was to marry her."

It proves that the rich and sometimes famous can also have a sense of humor even if it rebounds as a Greek Tragedy on some of the people in their lives.

What was that?

Chinese government bans reincarnations screamed a headline on MSNBC. Closer reading revealed that the law prohibits spirits from choosing a new body only if the spirit and bodies are both outside China!
Talk about extraterritorial jurisdictions. This goes beyond even carnal world. Behind the farce is a serious issue of decimation of an entire civilization at the hands of totalitarian politics. Reminds me often of those Calvin and Hobbes strip that often bemoan our behaviour.
"The surest sign that intelligent life exists in this Universe is that none has tried to contact us"
--- Bill Waterson in Calvin and Hobbes.

Office Tea

Office tea ends up being like those girls next door or do I mean failed relationships?
It is
not as hot as u want
not as delicious as u prefer
in short like an unfulfilled promise

Friends...

Why do we so often take friends for granted? Often so times I have observed that friends ask us to do something and we refuse - sorry no time, nah not mood. Basically we can tell them what we really feel like.
On the other hand same kind of questions coming from say colleagues, casual acquaintances, bosses, seniors and we play along, sometimes even enjoy doing it.
So which is right? Being true to self and denying friends the company while maybe being polite and letting those we do not care about that deeply have the company? I would expect that close friends should by definition get more of us than the rest. But does it always happen in real life?
We also use close friends to steam off. Poor folks who care enough to suffer us in all moods are those who actually bear the brunt of our ill humor while the acquaintances merely get a coldish shrug.
I wonder if we haven't got it all wrong? Shouldn't the ones we love be the ones we always give the happiest us and the enemies get to bear the steam?

Whats left? Reference to context

Thanks to Mudit in Bus Yun Hi blog for giving me a link to that other master misguider Prakash Karat making some points on the Nuclear deal. As usual what he quotes and how he quotes are not the same things. Let us try and analyze the workings of this great patriot.
"Prior to the joint statement of July 2005, the UPA government signed a 10-year Defence Framework Agreement with the Untied States. It is evident that without the defence agreement, the Americans would not have agreed for the nuclear cooperation. This is part of a quid pro quo."
No references here as to how the 10-year Defence Framework Agreement is a bad thing? the "quid pro quo" that makes it out as some sell out of national interest may/may not be so. For all that is not said, it may have meant USA guarantying India that they will always be on sides of India in case of an armed conflict with any 3rd party. Since Mr Karat conveniently does not spell out the issue with it, merely hinting that its evil are we to take him on face value?

"The first serious conflict with the Left arose when the UPA government did a volte-face on the Iran nuclear issue. The government voted along with the US and the Western countries in September 2005 and was not even prepared to go along with the position adopted by the bloc of Non-Aligned Movement countries."

Again we go into unfamiliar territory. It again implicitly assumes that Iran issue had only 1 moral choice and that was to vote for Iran. While I can agree that US often does not play by fair, we have to remember that this is an NPT signing nation that went against some of the commitments made in that treaty. In short an explicit violation of an accepted treaty. India voted against it.
While I can see the logic of having nuclear power plants and Iran wanting that. In this specific case though it seems that there was something more than mere power plants happening. Mr Karat may say India should not have nukes but he wants Iran to have it. I and any rational Indian without any vested political agenda would say it is bad. For one India maintains that nukes are bad and the only reason we want to have them is because Pakistan and China, both nations claiming Indian territory for its own have nukes and probably directed at India.
Also India does have a lot of terrorism problems often from Muslim fundamentalist organizations mostly outside India. Iran for all its other good points will probably claim the bomb to be an Islamic bomb. India should get alarmed especially since Iran belongs to a rather volatile area with often such considerations coming into force. For all our support to Palestinians on their struggles (often just) I find that those nations do not criticize the fundamentalist groups when they strike against India. Iran for all our support still went back on some of the agreements on the gas pipeline. Given their fickle stand on issues pertaining India why should India not take the sensible decision and stick its neck out to support Iran on this issue given that we do not want a nuke armed Iran. let me rephrase, given that rational Indians do not want nuke armed Iran, Mr karat though probably has a different opinion.

"The Left parties have been watching with diOk squiet the way the UPA government has gone about forging close strategic and military ties with the United States. The Left came out in strong opposition to the Defence Framework Agreement."

All said and done, we are proudly the world's biggest democracy while USA is often held as the world's most functioning democracy, certainly the most powerful one. USA is often held to be the national which brought the idea of individual liberty as supreme, codified the right to free speech and is called the land of the free. On the other hand communist China treated unarmed students clamoring for democracy to tank fire in Tienanmen's Square, still controls access to media and generally has less freedom than any democracy for common citizens. same for other communist countries. Left does not protest against our alliance with any communist country but an alliance with a democracy is bad? Funny that the same democracy that allows Left to protest in India (and would get them killed in most communist countries) is what the Left hates the most.
As discussed earlier in a blog post of mine, the strategic tie-up with US and consequently Europe/Japan/Israel is the need of hour. We probably already have enough nukes for deterrent. What we lack is the multi lateral delivery capacity. This is where we need technology help and this is where the real importance of Strategic tie-up with US help. It allows us not only access to US technology, it also allows us to get France, Germany, UK, Sweden, Japan, Australia, Israel to also share technology. Lets face it, we currently only have Russia as somewhat of an important ally that can give us technology and as the cryogenic engine fiasco proves, its not good to place all eggs in 1 basket. Do we expect China to help us develop such military projection capacity? Give me a break!

"The Left has been vehemently opposed to the joint military exercises as the one that took place in the Kalaikunda air base in West Bengal. These exercises were held despite the strong protests of the Left parties and the Left Front government of West Bengal."

So Indian government must do everything as per Left's sensibilities? Why only left? Should then logically they not also take opposition BJP's all sensibilities in mind? No not opposition merely allies? then how about Laloo's RJD also which is pro deal? Apparently not allies either, merely Left.
Or will he now say anytime there is a street protest? I remember In West Bengal which as correctly claimed by Mr Karat is under the Left front government, there is a huge protest against some land acquisition which the Left wants. Paradoxically in this case I think the the Chief Minister is right. Relying merely on agriculture for a living will ensure people at starvation level. Our land holdings are too small for farmers to survive. the way out is to industrialize. But in this case the principled Left did not merely handle the protest in government way. Its cadre (and lot of media has given very strong proofs of this) murdered protesting men and boys raped and murder the protesting women and girls, in all over 300 people dead! And still Mr Karat expects the government to stop alliances because left does not like democracies!

"UPA government has been deepening collaboration with Israel in the military and security spheres which violates our long-held policy of support to the Palestinian cause and friendship with the Arab countries."

Its ok for Egypt - an Arab country to have normal relations with Israel? Its ok for Pakistan to start normalizing its relationships with Israel but not India! if you draw an arch across Asia, Israel at its beginning, India at its middle and Japan at its end are probably the 3 most (and maybe the only real) democracies in Asia. By definition that same democracy that allows Left to function well in India and have a voice makes these nations pariah? Agreed Israel's policies may not always have been more benign but as Nandigram proves nor are the Left's? And how has friendship with Israel bad. I remember Arafat of PLO agreeing that India needs to improve relations with Israel. We get great military hardware and technologies from them. Their counter terrorism skills are the best in the world, we need those badly, And as mentioned before, Arab countries by and large have not helped India against state sponsored terrorism in the name of Islam. Have not seen any Arab country coming out strongly in support of our Permanent seat in UN security council, have not seen them sending cheap oil to India (rates of oil sold to the evil empire USA are paradoxically lot lower for USA than for Asian countries). I'd say Arab world needs to give more to India for the support we have shown them than they do. Statecraft is about getting the best deal for your nation, not some dumb ideals that enslave your nation.
"The Hyde Act expects India to have a foreign policy 'congruent' to the United States."
True its a loaded statement. But the language of diplomacy is not straight. making it non binding is the nearest USA can do to say - dude don't worry about it. You can say what if another administration decides its binding? I'd say all the more reason to close the deal while the current administration is there! then once the deal with NSG is signed where does it say all our reactors will come only from USA? I do remember the deal making it clear that the USA will help create a strategic reserve of fuel. even if fresh supplies stop this reserve can be used. Further the same defense co-operation that so threats Mr Karat makes unilateral action by US so tough on them. We can simply say sorry, you pinch us there and we don't give you that billion dollar aircraft order. Our airlines too will only get Airbus from now on and so on.
Lets face it, USA and India are natural allies. And given the Chinese presence of listening posts in Pakistan, Tibet, Myanmar, Bangladesh and their intent in Sri Lanka, India will be fool of highest degree not to try alliance with other important Asian nations. Negotiations happen between equals, not between a lame beggar and a King. If India is to have good relations with China based on mutual respect, India has to show that it is equal to meet Chinese challenge should the need ever arise. The same reason why Left wants a multi-polar world, we need a multi-polar Asia. Its not some power trip, its the best chance for a healthy peaceful co-existence.
It a lay person like me can understand this but an erudite leader like Mr Karat pretends not to, do I take it for incompetence or do I look for designs. I refuse to believe that he is incompetent hence the conclusion is obvious.

Updated: Apr 21, 2008
If proof of the "design" is needed, read this and draw your own conclusions.

Midst of Gloom, flowers may still bloom

Amidst all the gloom of the party with less than 5% of popular vote trying to set country's agenda and the stock market worries comes some good news.
Mayawati, the Chief Minister of UP - our most populous state makes some steps towards privatization in agriculture. Essentially she is going to allow private parties (above a certain net worth ) to directly buy from the farmers should the farmer wish to sell. Eminently sensible since now the farmer can choose to sell to govt or to any pvt player depending on who is paying more. But alas sensible policies are an exception in India and that is why its only happening now in a tentative way. Upto now farmers could only sell in Mandis and in case that cost to transporting to Mandis is high compared to prices, or other things like non availability of trucks for perishables, the farmer was forced to destroy standing crops!

I guess Mayawati being politically strong and very savvy and right caste may just carry it off in spite of trenchant criticism that the established interests may heap. What i hope is that private players will invest in air conditioned goods trucks and help farmers with scientific inputs as often happens in contract farming. From what I have read upto 40% of our produce is lost to improper storage and all. Hopefully the private buyers will invest in cold storages also which ofcourse depends if Left and BJP not manage to set the agenda and ensure Indians go back to the glorious Hindu age of Diyas. After all Electric power has lot to do with Edison - an American and since America is imperialist any American invention will make us their slaves for all times to come.

Also the Japanese premier is coming to India. Japan and India have so much to gain from mutual partnership. Japan has surplus capital, India needs capital. Japan has cutting edge technology especially in manufacturing/electronics and space. India needs it. Japan lacks resources and young folks, India has plenty. If our politics doesn't wreck it I see the start of a beautiful relationship there. We can build the industrial corridor, have really high speed trains which will further bring forwards a bigger market for perishables nearer. It will also help decongest. Imagine if a train running at 300 km/hour were running between Mumbai and say Ahmedabad/ Delhi that will bring an area of 600 km within commuting reach.
In short there is so much of opportunity to bridge the gap between our potential and reality. If only we don't squander our chance away. It may never again come.

Updated 24/08
The Hindu and other newspaper report that the idea is put on hold after traders protested. Amusingly The UP government said that to protect the interests of farmers the policy needs be reviewed. I thought the farmers were the gainers since Reliance Fresh pays more to farmers and charges consumers less. They make real margin by cutting off middle men. So why not be honest and say that the in the interest of traders the policy is being reviewed rather than a rather inaccurate word called farmer?
This also brings another issue in mind. I thought that all Indians are free to profess any trade they want to (Except some that require special training like medicine where anybody who is trained then can undertake). So isn't this whole business of no vegetable seller is allowed to open a large show a bit unfair?

Updated: Sept 3
Express reports that finally farmers have woken up to the fact that this review is not in "farmer's interest" and are protesting in Lucknow. The farmers hold that Retail stores are paying the them- the producers more than the current middlemen riddled system. Flowers may still bloom for the countless farmers.

Nuke deal: Nuked or Left?

What a comedy over the Nuke deal! For once MM showed spine and said take the deal or withdraw support. Three cheers to Dr for finally choosing national interest over politics.
Left meanwhile makes its issue clear. They claim its both the deal and the strategic tie up with the USA that they resent. Strategic tie up with a 'democratic' sole super power is bad? lets face it, we've been beggars most of our modern life. finally that we are waking up to potential it makes sense to make ties. Its time we realize that a nation is truly independent only when it feed all its citizen, ensure full life and liberty and is powerful enough to stand up to any nation militarily and economically. We can harp on non-alignment for all we want but who gives a hoot to it? Do we matter to any nation. Heck we can't even fix a small nation on our side and we dream of being leaders of the world.

I won't be surprised if left is getting instructions on this from China. After all the nation that lays claim to a fair bit of our territory, is most steadfast ally of the nation that has make death by thousand cuts of India its raison de etre, and aims to be the power in Asia has genuine reasons to fear India and USA coming closer. Left being a client party of China CPA may actually have got word to oppose it on this big an issue.

BJP is of course opposing it while the deal that they were negotiating had much less to India (Talbot in his book mentions that Jaswant was willing to sign CBDT to get the deal), but in India opposition is not about working for interest of India if government goes wrong. Its about power even at the cost of India and Indians. But i wonder a mid term poll is such a good idea for BJP. They are in a hopeless disarray and their recent acts will make any rational Indian wince at the thought of voting them back to power.

Pity that Karan Thapar on CNBC made such a hash of interviewing Sitaram Yechuri. for once I agreed with S Y that Karan came with an agenda and tried to impose it besides monopolizing conversation. He just made one good point of the agreement text circumventing a US law which SY said is denying India its rights. While I have strong views on SY's misrepresentations of reality, this encounter left SY with moral upper ground. Such a pity or was it a part of the agenda too?

One question I would like to ask Left is whats the net gain if we do not have this deal? We don't have uranium fuel to run our power reactors. While jingoistic pride leads one to say we are the leaders in fast breeder using thorium, I doubt. if thats true why ain't we generating more electricity? Exporting nuke reactors? Have more nuclear science university programs? As for weapons we probably have enough to deter any body.

What we might lack might be the delivery systems where a strategic tie up with US might help more. After all, Pakistan is imploding. Where we might need a triad of delivery system might be to deter China, not so much Pak. Of course given that, Left very conveniently is dead set against any strategic, military and technology tie up with USA and Israel the two countries that can actually help develop a reach capability (reach within the immediate and near neighborhood).

In this case the deal actually allows us to import fuel for our reactors. Which means that our own meager supply of Uranium is actually available for military purposes. This is an argument often quoted correctly by Nonproliferation ayatollahs and is essentially true. Left of course very conveniently forgets to comment on this. Currently we have a severe shortage of fuel for our reactors and hence have to eat into our military use reserves. The deal also allows us to build a strategic reserve of fuel for our reactors. Assuming that Left fears are true and USA does demand a recall after say a nuclear test by India. It has to buy out our reactors and fuel which means that the financial impact is less on India than on US.
Besides I doubt if India will really test anymore at least in near future. Even without the deal the cost of a fresh test will be steep, a percentage more or less after the deal ain't all that different. Besides an underlying assumption is the we need more nuclear weapons. Do we? Aren't say 50 bombs enough to deter any nuke power from nuking us? As for non nuke warfare which is what the world usually sees, having great allies helps in preventing war and helps in upgrade of military. Of course Left opposes military games with countries who can be our natural allies.

Is it really that far fetched if some smart congressmen tie up with BJP. lets face it, ideologically they are not too far apart. If Vajpayee is brought around, Advani, Narendra M marginalized, Both may gain. I'll say tie up for the next elections. that will give both 7 years. Eliminate left from Bengal (if they can't after Nandigram they are really too incompetent), Shiv Sena from Maharashtra, Mulayam from UP, Dev Gowda from Karnataka can all be gotten rid if we just allow the law to take its own course. and 7 years is long enough for law to take its own course. That leaves the two to slog out in subsequent elections on real issues.

History shows that Indians are their own worst enemies. Cong and BJP of course will not come together. And Left will ensure that any chances of India becoming a real important power are fizzled out at first opportunities. What the deal and its strategic implications give us is high technology, access to top civilian nuclear tech which is all the more important given the scarcity and politics of oil based economy. Our engineers may train with the best university world wide (in civilian tech areas), all of which is so important with future. The reason why left is so anti is because its coming from US.

They probably want us to sign space technology kind agreements with Papua New Guinea's to improve our capabilities. The sheer duplicity of left which opposes Indian nuclear progress which vehemently championing Iranian program is staggering. and to think we elected 59 of these folks to stab us in heart, back and eyes just proves we get what we deserve.
I fear that even if the crises blows over and there is some compromise put in place which it may given the lust for power in Delhi, our negotiators may have their hands severely weakened after all this visible circus. That may be the biggest loss of them all.

Neemhakim Prescribes....

1. The key to success is ...temptation
2. Money can buy most things but not happiness ... say those who don't really know how to spend money
3. You can be anybody if you try hard ... thanks but I'm happy being me
4. There are some things money can't buy, for everything else there is ... dad
5. When sh@#t hits the fan, its time to ... run out
6. If you never succeed in first attempt... charge your patients before the operation
7. Nothing succeeds like... procrastination

Army:Talent:Pension

I once read - I think it was in the Art of War by Sun Tzu- that it takes a 100 villagers to support 1 army man in war. Our armed forces are in similar quandary. The money just can't keep up with expenses. Most of the money goes in supporting salaries and pensions leaving rather little for modernization. There is already a lot of debate on how much money is wasted in hiring people for non essential jobs and unoptimized logistics operations.
In other news corporate India is facing a talent crunch because well most of our university graduates are unemployable the univs being nothing more than mugging shops and rather terrible ones at that too. So there is this line of thought that says that since most soldiers and junior officers retire rather early why not train em to take up jobs in corporate sector. They already have plenty useful skills in some areas, train em in some more functional stuff and there you have ready material to fuel our economic engines.
The idea does have its merits. While its true that many of these guys our in their 30s and 40s (thing soldiers and JCOs) and corporate are seem to prefer young blood; it should work because these folks after a life of moving about may actually be interested in a stable life and may therefore stick with the same firm on a longer term.
What i want to talk about is how it can benefit the army. As we already know that getting people to join army is becoming tough. This is more true for senior officers but the argument I hold for soldiers hold for senior positions also. One many of the army recruits come from poor families. Unless you are brilliant, chances of making it to top institutes (or sports team or whatever) is rather remote. If they don't join army and go for corporate sector as workers chances of their being employable is remote. On the other hand army gives them a great lifestyle for a while and then when u settle down, a nice decent job with training done on maybe govt or corporate+govt money. But then maybe if they managed to join someplace as a worker which trains them and pays them peanuts for years because well they started useless 15-20 years is a long time to catch up.
What the army needs to do is 2 fold. It can actually train the soldier in skill, over years, that may have required maybe a few years in various schools. Then army has canteens and pension and the glamour of its lifestyle. What can really sweeten the deal for the army is that if it says that ok we'll train u well. In return if you start earning maybe say 20k per month in corporate I do not pay u pension. If if income falls below certain limit I start paying pension. If the payout is such that soldier gets partial pension depending on how much is the total earnings and pension reduces as a proportion to the outside earnings which is not linear. Since there is a guarantee that the pension is not stopped permanently, only till the soldier can earn more. And my reducing proportionally those who can work outside will make more money by taking up jobs as opposed to those who decide to live on pension only. This will reduce army's wage bill.
By tying up with corporates for trainings army can reduce its training costs too. Corporate sector can prepare targeted trainings. Army bears the salary bill while the soldier trains and corporate bears the training preparation and may administrating costs. Again a win win.

Monk and Abbot in conversation 5/M&A talks 5:What organised religion can teach corporates

Abbot: A guest here had a query on how he can reconcile his quest for corporate glory with his deep religious moorings?
Monk: Master is the two related?
A: Child how many years have the major religions you know of thriving?
M: Master most of them for 1000 years or more!
A: How many firms you know of that are even 200 years old?
M: *thinking*
M: Not any master though there are some - a bank here, a shop there that might be 300-400 years old, but maybe only 1 or 2 I might have read about.
A: Assuming that there are even 100s of these they obviously are not thriving too much since we would otherwise know of them?
M: True master but can we really equate the 2?
A: Patience child.
Now do you think that the organized religions have a large base of followers and the base keeps increasing?
M: Yes master
A: And that is probably the purpose of the religionists- to increase their ranks?
M: Yes master
A: Also look at one of the most potent org. rel. concepts. You are usually born into faith if your parents were in it. Thought most have some ceremony to confirm your initiations. See the power?
M: Master can you shed more light?
A: The idea for corporate is that form such a bond that the children of consumers are born into the brand. Kids use it automatically because parents use it too. Hence a brand should follow similar concept. If it’s a product that can be used only say after a certain age, try being in segment where kids form an emotional bond with it seeing their parents use it. If selling shaving cream make it an aspiration to have the kid look forward to using the same cream as the father. Better still don’t just do shaving cream, do toothpaste.
A: So in short organized religions have very good marketing?
M: Now that you point me in the direction yes
A: Can you have mere evangelist succeeding if they have no backing? Without the means and souls/bodies?
M: Yes master, being an evangelist converting heather requires money, lots of money, free schools, hospitals, buildings, people
A: And we get others to contribute?
M: Yes master but we often have own resources too - villages attached to old monasteries, fees and so on. Some of the monasteries are very wealthy master.
A: So let’s look at corporate - they want people to know the brand and spend premium to buy the brand? Can we say that premium for a brand is similar to charity money in religion? Same idea of pay for satisfaction? It works even better for service industries.
M: Yes, yes and yes
A: So we already agree that the mode of operations of corporate and religions are same even if the intentions may differ.
M: Master but is mode of operation reason enough to count them similar?
A: Child that is not what I mean though I am not saying if they are similar or not. But organized religion is an example of very powerful organization practices that corporate can follow.
M: Enlighten me master.
A: Religion succeeds because they possess the target as well as employee segment. Which is more important to them is another question but by and large both segments need to be fired up for them to succeed. Which corporate will not give an arm and a leg to do that? That’s lesson number 1, both are important in order to move up the food chain- the consumer and the producer.
A: Now religions can be of two types - those that have an incontestable vision. It makes it easy for employees to adhere to it and u can force out non believers. One an organization makes it a policy to either fire or kill those who question the top management's vision it makes for very little employee turnover.
M: Master how will those who merely fire have high retention?
A: Child humans like their snug cocoon, given a threat most will prefer to like the directions than to be out in the rains naked? And what if most of what you learnt is being done by only your ex-organization which denounces you? Your chances of another job are low. So we see such org. rel. already lowers its training costs.
On a deeper psychology level once people start believing the vision they see it everywhere so we can now make them work overtime.
A: Other religions are those who do not believe in vision but prefer to think of new products depending on needs or same product customized. These are often better at engineering skills but suffer from a rather fickle employee base. Advantage that they get is that great innovators may want to become a part, but ordinary employees do not have the same level of commitment base.
M: So master what lessons are there for corporate? Vision is all powerful?
A: It seems yes vision makes things easier but do not underestimate the versatility of the other. If you are playing the innovation game or are in a market of people willing to try new things - it pays not to get wedded to a single vision. However the mass market is in vision thing. So most organizations should go in for 1st kind of approach.
M: Yes master.
A: So we looked at the supply side, lets see what the demand side offers. Organized religion plays on emotions or they play to spiritual. Similarly corporate marketing need to play on emotions or serve basic needs.
M: Is not spiritual and basic opposites
A: Not really child. Spiritual quest for humans is the basic quest. its about the what and whys of life- stuff that becomes 'necessary' once the basic needs are filled.
So corporate need to project their goods in such a way that an emotional bond develops. If your child does not use this toothpaste, his/her social life will be hellish and (s)he’ll end up in asylum/ if you don't buy our TV not only will u not know the latest happenings but you are forcing my workers to starve and their children to beg. No other brand of medicine can keep your loved one alive, in fact others will kill them and ours will make them do salsa within a week. That is the kind of image marketing need to convey.
M: Master apart from marketing?
A: Marketing is the mantra. Look at how most organized religions try to control life for consumers. Corporate can use similar techniques. Make products (this works very well for technology) that work with only your own products. Tie them in to your platform and make migration prohibitive. Once your emotive/spiritual marketing does its initial job just take over their life.
M: Master what once all our consumers have all our products, how do we earn more?
A: that is why organized religions have festivals, period meetings that are supposed to be mandatory. And mandatory charity- force people to keep paying you more.
Corporate should aim for subscription services. Consumers are tied to their products and they pay a period fee to you to keep them alive.
M: Master I never saw such possibilities
A: Corporate are new kids on the block, organized religions have perfected techniques over years. it helps that organized religions were also started and led by some of the sharpest minds of their time and beyond.
There are more learning
M: I'm all ears Master.
A: Most of organized religions aimed to convert the nobility to their cause. Corporate similarly should target the mind share leaders or those in power. it was not always easy to convert kings because they fight back. So org rel shed plenty of their blood too. Once the nobility was converted they either forced the serfs to convert or made it attractive to wannabes to convert. Who doesn't want to be on king's side? It’s the same for corporate. Get the mind readers. Make government/military your clients. The big business houses. Then they in turn force suppliers to use same products. Remember it pays to keep products incompatible to others. Sometimes corporate have to bleed in order to get the leaders (or even masses). The idea is that the enemy bleeds more. So if corporate is the one with most staying power, let there be blood bath all around.

M: Master why then has corporate not taken these lessons to heart?
A: Child they often lack courage. Org. rel. has often been cruel to extreme in order to win market share and then they turn benign. Corporate if they start ruthless can become big enough where the need to be ruthless vanishes.
M: Master but ultimately the aim of all religions is to find God?
A: No child, the aim of all religions is to find 'truth' but even then most espouse the vision as truth in the beginning! So that means that most org. rel. basically is aiming to be a monopoly. There is a lesson even here. Most corporate should aim to be monopoly.
M: Master what is the single biggest thing that org. rel. should teach corporate?
A: That I is the only 'true' one. Once you believe in that it makes it very easy to practice all other.

The linguistic frailities

This 'lie' word in English is kinky.
same word for lie - (veracity un-inclined) and lie (merely inclined). If I tell someone the only place I lie is in bed they give all sorts of mischievous winks while i wonder why do they find it funny?

What am I?

I somehow have this notion that religion in particular and a lot of philosophy in general is trying to find out what is death and what happens to us when it happens. There is this whole new arena opening up as a result of medical researches and as already been seen a lot of it is challenging our beliefs in life, soul and so on. Newsweek has this interesting article on reviving the dead. The article argues how death is not an event but a process (itself a rather interesting notion) and its a complex biochemical process.
We have talked of some of these earlier in a couple of posts, so here i talk about some deeper issues and in keeping with the random sanity theme a couple of more frivolous but immediate ideas.
Religion is a mess and theologians will have a lot more thinking to do. I did read an interesting comment on Slashdot that talked of an ego-less state mentioned in some Hindu and Buddhist philosophies. The ideas of mind and body living but the "I" having died. Interesting indeed. But its not something I have heard before (and I cannot by any stretch claim to be an informed source on these philosophies) so if its there it indeed is an interesting idea.
So maybe the next great career is going to be in philosophy. Poor flock distressed at the whole unravellings of thousands of years of life-death- back to God rigmarole suddenly trying to fathom the implications of dead not being an event. So are the last rites really a way to ensure that the "dead" are not able to come back to life? Imagine that, its rare enough not to make it practical for most to wait days on end before the hope is gone but happens so that there is this thought that the loved one may not be dead even tho it looks like it? lets not even get into the resurrection theme.
So philosophy will again be in demand with a whole new era opening with its fresh fodder for thought. On a more deeper level what really happens to the whole idea of "I". Where am I while I am frozen - dead but not dead waiting to come alive. Now we are arguing that the person is not dead because death is not an event. But then what if its a process (maybe reversible) and I am 30% dead. What am I then? If I came back to life and maybe 100% life not just 70% am I the same "I". If not who am I? Or what am I? Its a shift in cultural notions of the Quantum types. Like in physics - Newtonian which is easy to understand and now quantum and relativistic which baffles almost all of us. Well its only a matter of time before the same happens to other branches.
Then there are the whole host of associated issues. What is consciousness? If all life is essentially a result of coding of genes, and so is our information, can we really put it all in some computer and have the consciousness live forever? Will such a consciousness be as "real" as in a person? When I talk of "I" do I mean this consciousness? Most fundamentally what is "I"? Is there life after death? When does it begin? The near death experiences documented have sometimes people saying they saw light or something? But were they alive at a cellular level (which they should right) then is life not really cellular? If it is not, then how come I can revive before or during cellular death? Can I force soul back in the same body? Can a soul be forced? If yes is it really that important?

In other news scientists have cured fear it seems. I thought death was the greatest fear. It couldn't have come any later :).

Thats it, the last straw?

We often said fondly to our friends abroad should talks come to terror attacks how India while being one of the biggest sufferers does not contribute to the poor of people carrying out this shame across the globe.
Last week truth or change hit home. Among the perpetrators of failed attempts in UK, a few Indians were at forefront it seems. While lets not presume the guilt till the courts hold them to after due diligence, the impact already hits.
I remember when I was in US a few years ago, well after 9/11 the "random" airlines extra scrutiny will unfailingly select almost all Indian (actually all Asians). The randomness looks a bit uncanny once u realize that almost 90% of the sample chosen looked like I did at-least in terms of skin colors or alien names. To be fair, I did see Caucasians also being selected and an occasional Indian not selected, nearly everyone selected was young. And maybe it was a case of all young men (sometimes women too) traveling alone was the biggest factor. Also the security was usually very polite and at least once I had this gentlemen actually helping me pack back my stuff carefully while we discussed my collection of camera lenses.
A big grouse was why all "browns" seem to be selected? Aren't we all highly educated, traveling frequently abroad, working for good firms? That is what worries me. The ones accused this time fit the bill. All highly educated in some of the toughest fields in academic terms, lived abroad and were by all accounts doing good in professional life. I wonder if now Indians (other Asians too probably but I know more about Indians so will use this as a specific example) will not spend in-ordinate time in security checks? Visa could also be an issue. A large chunk of forex is earned by Indians doing small jobs in Gulf sending money back home. Money which sustains the rest of the family, see kids go to school, pick more valuable skills. In short money that uplifted a whole family out of poverty. There is a talk of nursing services being the next boom and this time to Europe already suffering from bad demographic ratios. What if suddenly this avenue dries up?
I wonder what if this was a target as much as the airport in question? What better way to destroy lives than making all suspected in the eyes of the rest of the world. While I'll wager that this probably is a long shot but the fact is that it could have a tangible economic impact on especially poor strata trying to move to higher wage areas. People poor enough or not in that high wage category where they or the employer can afford to pay for greater security scrutiny?
And this is where our apathy towards such criminals is such shocking. I have this grouse against most of Muslim leadership in India. They almost never condemn any attack linked to Islamic terrorists without trying to Justify it on some level. Yup this is a barbaric act but they were provoked! Whats the need for but? Gandhi has shown that violence is not the only way. Even when our own freedom fighter fought with arms the targets were invariably military/police almost never the families. And remember that once during Quit India movement there were civilian casualties Gandhi did stop the movement as a protest against our violence.
Its time we woke up to the fact that terrorism is against innocent civilians and must be unequivocally fought against. True powers often act against innocent victims but then two wrong acts do not make a right.

Why don't we lose sleep?

Tavleen Singh In Indian Express makes an interesting point Why didn't PM lose sleep over 7/11?
The fact of the matter is that we Indian simply cannot overcome our lust for petty gains over longer term good. Its a story repeated time after time. Any outrageous act (not just terrorism, it can be local rivalry, political point scoring, regionalism in cricket team selection of all things, and its the same story.
The PM otherwise an honest man from what i gather hastily gives a clean chit to a minister who is forced to resign after a couple of days on the same issue and is blamed by the ruling party as guilty! Why was the PM not sacked for giving a "clean chit" without checking on facts? He is after all the Prime Minister. Or are we saying that the PM of India actually make statements he expected to be taken seriously without checking on facts? If not so then obviously he makes statements while knowing that he is being at best economical with truth?
The ruling coalition's Presidential nominee is accused of political and moral crimes and the spokesman says all political folks have these kinds of charges including the opposition candidate. How does the unsuitability of opposite candidate makes the choice of someone with serious credential issues right? Let both be declared unsuitable. Reminds me of that argument in movies where a criminal caught for an act says first catch all those who get away before catching me. What makes this so sad is that audience will happily clap if this criminal in the movie is a favorite star. We condone turpitude if it comes from our favorite people.
Somewhere I think we are ourselves to be blamed because we within our democracy refuse to punish leaders for their sins. Until that starts happening expecting those wielding power to be holy in thoughts is naiveté of tallest order.