Sometimes, I do say good stuff

 This was posted on a reading group by the admin: 

My response: 

Book Summaries have been around since at least 2001. The issue is not that book summaries are available. 

It is with the core idea that authors and editors waste words. They don't. Everything that is in the book deserved to be there. 

So when you read a distillation, you get the essence the same way that tea leaves are the essence of tea. They are, but without the extras, they are quite... useless. 

Imagine Thomas Hardy without the description. Rashmirathi without the rhyming. Jane Austen without the love letters. Poirot without "Eh, Bien." Sherlock without 221B. Premchand without "Kisi prakaar koi heela na hua." 

******* 

In other news, mental health has some good days now. 

No feminist please, we are Indian

On social media, one encounters "No feminist please" more and more. 

Something like this ad: 

This got me thinking. What is it about trad wives that men want, and why are women not willing to be trad wives.

A good starting point, of course, was to just list what a traditional marriage looks like. 

In a traditional Indian marriage: 

What traditional Indian wives do: 

1. Cook (with help) 

2. Clean (oversee the help) 

3. Raise kids (with support from other women in the house or family) 

4. Ensure that all family celebrations are taken care of. Everyone has the gift that they deserve, all family equations are maintained. 

5. Host visiting relatives. 

6. Host friends of children. 

7. Organise children's birthday parties. 

8. Know the preferences of everyone in the family and ensure a fair balance between junk and healthy eating. 

9. Socialise with their friends or relatives after sending the kids and husband to their respective school/office. OR take a nap. 

10. Get up in the morning to ensure kids get to school, husband gets to work. 

11. Settle the house at night before going to bed. 

12. Give chai to the husband once he comes back from work. 

13. Attend all family functions and perform the work expected. Ensuring that the function goes off smoothly, assisting mother in law or the eldest daughter in law in doing the function. 

14. Teaching children all about our epics, our traditions, and performing the pooja in the family temple every day. 

15. Never drink or smoke in public. 

16. Manage the household and make the list of supplies that the husband must get every month from the ration shop. 

17. Wear only Indian clothes in the house. (nightie exempted) 

18. Touch the feet of visiting elders. 

19. On all matters of finance, defer to the husband. 

20. No work outside the house. Volunteer or something only when it doesn't interfere with family responsibilities. 

21. Learn the traditions of the marital family and perpetuate them. This includes their food habits, their religious observance, their family celebrations, and the way they communicate with each other. 

22. Bear children within 2 years of marriage. 

What traditional Indian husbands do: 

1. Be the sole breadwinner. Never taking a penny from the wife. 

2. Give their salary to the wife at the start of each month for her to manage the family's finances. 

3. Bring groceries on their way home from office. 

4. After freshening up and drinking his chai, sit with the kids to complete their homework while the wife cooks dinner for the family. 

5. Take wife along on all social events. Not being able to attend any social event without the wife. 

6. Participate in all functions on the in-laws side. 

7. During summers, when the wife visits her parents for a few weeks, go to drop her and then go to pick her up. Spending at least one night at the in-laws' place on both occasions. 

8. Take wife, parents, and kids to the doctor whenever the need arises. 

9. Perform routine repairs in the house or cause them to be done. 

10. Touch parents' feet every morning and night if they are in a joint family. 

11. Take wife and kids to an outing every Sunday, spending time with them and making memories. 

12. Take family to the kids' PTM, annual day function, school picnic etc. Drop the children and pick them up. 

13. Buy the monthly ration based on the list given by Shri mati ji. 

14. On all matters of how the house will be run, what will be bought, what gifts will be given, and how the house will be decorated, defer to the wife. 

15. Be home straight after office, no hobnobbing with male friends after work, and no working late into the night. 

16. No speaking to any bhabhiji without the wife being present. Absolutely no calls or messages from female colleagues on one's phone. 

17. With or without kids, never reaching home drunk. Ever. 

18. Gifting wife a piece of gold jewelry at all important occasions like birthday and anniversary. 

19. Making financial and investment decisions for the family's secure future. 

20. Ensuring that all family poojas are conducted by the couple jointly, as mandated by Hinduism (and most Indic religions). 

21. Have children within 2 years of marriage. 

Notice something? 

Many of the duties of a trad husband do not get done at all. 

The things on the wife's plate are more or less exactly as they were. 

Many things from the husband's plate are now on the wife's plate. 

2 lessons for me here: 

1. I understand why women are turning "feminist" 

2. When men ask for trad wives, are they also ready to be trad husbands? Because that is how that system works. 

What do you think? 

Goodbye to the Salim-Javed ideology - Once more

I was raised on the Salim-Javed brand of communist manifesto cinema in India - in which the poor are good just because they are poor and the rich are bad just because they are rich. Of course, if they are rich, they must be bloodsuckers and corrupt bribers because what other way is there to get rich? 

In 1991, India had to physically ship its gold just to retain its financial sovereignty. One of the lowest points any country could see. No one said it then, but I can say it now - THAT low point was the result of the communist policies of our government from 1947 - 1990. What started as a welfare state soon turned into a pseudo communist state, and under Indira, the cultural colonisation of India was completed. (Watch Tashkent Files for details). 

But as one grew up, one realised that not all rich people are bad. In fact, in India. most people - rich or poor - definitely donate a percentage of their earnings to "something good". Common sense states that 10% of a larger pie will lead to a greater impact. 

And that is when the narrative of Salim - Javed fell through for me. The rich are not blood suckers. They are silent philanthropists. Not all of them are good. Not all of them are bad. The poor are not good just by virtue of being poor. They are poor also because they spend their money on alcohol and beat up their wives and kids. Some of them are hardworking and caught in a whirlpool of circumstances. But for many, many of them, the Salim-Javed narrative created a mental exit barrier out of poverty. They were led to believe that the poor have a support system for each other. Exiting poverty would lead to the end of that support system. 

Unfortunately, we now have a country that believes that being poor is a free pass to doing illegal things and getting away with it. 

We also have generations that believe that being poor is not their fault. They have no obligation to create wealth, educate their children, and work towards a wealthier future. And a large chunk of the population that believes it is the government's responsibility to take care of their education, health, and employment. That it is their right to steal electricity, grab land, and generally take advantage of public infrastructure. 

The welfare state may have been a Utopian idea, but it was an idea worth pursuing - one in which the rich can be rich and the poor would be supported.  

But one thing it cannot discount - individual accountability. The state owes you an electricity and clean water connection. But you need to pay for your consumption. The state owes you subsidised medical facilities - but you need to ensure that you use them responsibly. The state owes you subsidised food, but one needs to have smaller families that strive to get out of the poverty whirlpool. 

Is education the panacea? Are small families the best solution? No. there is no one best solution. There cannot be a universal cure. But the INTENT to move out of poverty - the idea of individual responsibility - that has to be universal. 

 

North India vs South India

Since the CONgress got voted in Karnataka and Telangana, there has been hajaar debate in India on North and South Indian voters and how North and South Indians are inherently different. 

So, I thought I might as well list a comparison between north and south Indians. 

Here goes: 

*****************

North Indians depend on their sons to take care of them in old age. 

South Indians depend on their sons to take care of them in old age. 

*********** 

North Indians do not educate their daughters so they can be married off easily. 

South Indians educate their daughters so they can be married off easily. 

********** 

North Indian films have women doing pelvic thrusts and gyrations to bawdy lyrics. 

South Indian films have women doing pelvic thrusts and gyrations to bawdy lyrics. 

********* 

North Indians believe that South Indians are strange. 

South Indians believe that North Indians are strange. 

*********** 

North Indians give dowry to their daughters. 

South Indians give dowry to their daughters. 

******** 

North Indians follow the caste + religion system. 

South Indians follow the caste + religion system. 

***************** 

North Indians believe in Mother Goddess in many forms - Vaishno. Durga, Amba... 

South Indians believe in Mother Goddess in many forms - Minakshi Ammal, Chamudeshwari, Mariyamma...

********** 

North Indian dalits+ converted buddhists want reservations. 

South Indian dalits + converted christians + converted buddhists + converted muslims want reservations. 

************ 

North Indians believe South Indians are space scientists or IITians. 

South Indians believe North Indians are businessmen or crooks. 

************* 

North Indians know Hindi and want to learn English. 

South Indians know English but don't want to learn Hindi. 

************* 

North Indians want daughters-in-law to adjust to their family and culture. 

South Indians want daughters-in-law to adjust to their family and culture. 

********************

North Indians love South Indian food as a specialty. 

South Indians love North Indian food as a specialty. 

******************** 

North Indian women wear sarees. Men wear dhotis. 

South Indian women wear sarees. Men wear veshtis (also a wraparound lower garment like the dhoti, but the South Indians think it is somehow more dignified than the North Indian version of wraparound). 

********* 

North Indian parents get their self-concept from children being obedient and successful in life. 

South Indians parents get their self-concept from children being obedient and successful in life. 

***************** 

North Indians spend lavishly at weddings and funerals, but the bulk of the expense goes towards feeding others. 

South Indians spend lavishly at weddings and funerals, but the bulk of the expense goes towards gold necklaces that are longer than the bride and groom. 

*********** 

North Indians go to a wedding to eat and gossip. 

South Indians go to a wedding to eat and gossip. 

************* 

North Indians break traffic rules when they can. 

South Indians break traffic rules when they think they can. 

************** 

North Indians are loud because they think they are God's gift to mankind. 

South Indians are soft-spoken because they think they are God's gift to mankind. 

************* 

North Indian men beat their wives. 

South Indian men beat their wives. 

********* 

North Indians vote for 'people like us' 

South Indians vote ONLY for 'people like us'. 

(Regional parties are far stronger in the Southern states) 

***************** 

North Indians think South India is hostile for young adults and North Indian young people. 

South Indians think North India is unsafe for women. 

************ 

North Indians think South Indians are well-educated. 

South Indians think North Indians are illiterate. 

****************** 

In short, they are both hypocrites, shallow, and generally xenophobic, racist, and painful. 

Being an Indian, I have lived in both - North and South. 

And my experience of both has been good or bad, independent of location. It has always been about the people. 

On a more serious note, i think the fact that South Indians only read English media, which is funded extensively by George Soros, and they have a much higher religious conversion rate than North India, has a lot to do with the victory of the Congress than any real manifesto reading. No one put that education to use reading any manifestos. 

************ 

On relationships

हम किसी की आमद से पहले, उसकी रुखसती की तैयारी करते हैं। 

तुम्हारी आदत पड़ गई तो? 

हमारी लड़ाई हो गई तो? 

तुमने शहर छोड़ दिया तो? 

क्या फायदा? 

दुख की तैयारी करने से, दुख हल्का नहीं होता। तब भी उतना ही दुखी करता है। दुख की तैयारी करने से, आज का सुख कम होता है। 

याद आ रही है? जा कर मिल आओ। 

लतीफा सुनाना है? सुना दो। 

Congratulations, ISRO, and Chandrayaan III

 Dear ISRO, in every way, you have made us proud today. 

Today is the day to celebrate our strengths. 

Tomorrow will be the day to build on them. 

Congratulations, India! 

********* 

"I'm over the moon!" has a new meaning for all Indians today.

20 years from now, scores of young scientists will be out there - sitting with friends, and gently remembering - THAT was the evening I decided, I am going to be a space scientist some day.

Thank you, ISRO, for giving us this moment of immense national pride.

Vikram (Sarabhai) did not just land on the moon that night. He also landed in the hearts of hundreds of children of India.

***************

We need an accountable Judiciary

 National Tragedies at the moment:

New Zealand: Earthquake

Peru: Floods

Turkey: Floods

Pakistan: Solvency

India: Lord Moonpower

The CJI of India has changed the format of the selection of the Chief Election Commissioner.

However, he has remained tightlipped about changing the Collegium system of the selection of judges.

The CJI has also insisted on a long winter break and a break for Holi even though the number of cases in Indian courts, including his own Supreme Court, is inexcusably high.

The duration of each case is interminable. The judges have literally ZERO obligation to the society they are meant to serve. They work on no metrics of public service. No judge is ever appraised on:

A. Whether the case went to appeal. - Every case that goes to appeal is basically a judge's failure to explain how their judgement is fair. The onus of explaining the fairness of their judgement is on the judge.

B. The average time taken to rule on a cases in their court.

C. Number of cases closed in a year.

The Executive and the Legislature have a national feedback mechanism every 5 years. But the judiciary enjoys the unacceptable privilege of ZERO feedback from those they are meant to serve - their fellow countrymen, and the litigants who come to them seeking justice.

The textbook definition of democracy is - A government OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people.

Judiciary is one of the three pillars of governance.

How can one pillar of governance remain so unaccountable to the people?

We, The People, need an accountable judiciary. We want judges to report on how many cases they closed, what was the appeal rate, how long they took on each case.

We want the selection process to the judiciary to be through a national competitive assessment center so that every judge in every District Court of the state has an equal chance to become a High Court Judge, and every High Court Judge has an equal chance to become a SC judge, and the senior most SC judge (by tenure as Supreme Court judge) becomes the CJI. No Collegium, No recommendation.

We also want the simplification of the impeachment process for judges.

The judiciary needs to have an annual review just like all other wings of the government.

If a judge repeatedly gives judgements that favour a specific cause, community, region, then such a judge is clearly ineligible to hold the seat of justice.

On the Assam crackdown on child marriages

In recent weeks, Assam, a state of India, has made 3000 arrests of people who were involved in child marriage. 

BUT suddenly, the woke junta started putting out news articles like how cruel they are to punish people who did child marriages 2-8 years ago. 

Just like after squatting they say, oh, we have been squatting for over a decade, this is our home now. 

NO, if the original act is illegal, the subsequent persistence of the illegal act does not make the original act legal. That original act, and all subsequent acts are illegal and need to be punished cumulatively. 

That original squatting, and all subsequent years, come under squatting only. Its not "home for 10 years". it is "Persistent and malicious Illegal occupation" for 10 years. 

I didn't pay attention to the news reports because that is what woke junta does. 

Why was Assam doing this? 

Assam's Infant and Mortality rates are among the worst in the country. 

31% of all marriages in Assam are UNDERAGE. Some children are less than 14 years of age at the time of marriage. This leads to high IMR and MMR. 

The National Family health Survey - 5, whose report was released in May 2022, clearly mentioned that underage marriages lead to high rates of IMR and MMR. (Infant and maternal mortality rates). 

A neighboring state, Arunachal, was much worse at the end of NFHS -3 - over a decade ago. From there to NFHS - 5, Arunachal is now one of the country's best states on IMR and MMR. Both Arunachal and Rajasthan have done massive work on child marriage prohibition and both states have been successful in improving their public health and fertility metrics. The children are healthier. Not just IMR, but mortality <5 years is also better. 

The Case 

Today, apparently, the Guwahati HC Bench of Justice Suman Shyam gave a ruling in which it mentioned: 

What is the POCSO here? Merely because POCSO is added, does it mean the judges will not see what is there?

"What do you want to get by custodial interrogation? Either he (accused men) has married or he has not, either it's a case of child marriage or its not.. for that is it necessary to have custodial interrogation?" asked the bench as six people submitted their bail application.

"If there is a marriage taking place in violation of statutory provisions, law will take its own course...but the punishment is two years and these are matters that have been taking place for a long time." said the court.

"This (crackdown on child marriage) is causing havoc in the lives of the people. There are children, there are family members, there are old people... This (child marriage) may not be a good idea, obviously this may be a bad idea, but we will give our views when the right time comes." said the judge.

My humble submission to the judges: 

Not my place to teach you the law, BUT:

A. Sexual Intercourse with a child less than 14 years of age is the textbook definition of Childhood Sexual Abuse - POCSO.

B. POCSO defines a child as a person less than 18 years of age. Ergo, ALL cases of child marriage come under POCSO, not just those of children under 14. (Therefore, non bailable) - you cannot give bails to people who are charged under POCSO using your own discretion. 

C. It has not "always been happening". Marrying a child and having sex with a child is not a passive action. It is DONE. It is a conscious act. The perpetrator knows that the child is underage. People giving their tacit acceptance to an illegal act should introspect whether they are the right people for chairs that require them to uphold the law.

Also, thank you for making me read the full POCSO Act.

And now for my honest opinion: 

What is weird is not these arrests and the application of POCSO. What is weird is that a judge wants to give his tacit approval to an illegal act. It is disturbing family lives, therefore we must not arrest criminals who married children? Wow! I am sooo impressed. 

A judge has to uphold the law. 

Everytime i decide to not lose my cool over things that don't directly concern me, the judiciary drops to a new low. Now will the CJI amend the constitution to allow underage marriages? He has already spoken about the need to reduce the marriageable age of girls.

Here is my view on that - 18 means that a girl can be legally married off before she completes her graduation (at the age of 20). A boy's marriageable age at 21 ensures that a child has had the chance to complete their education at least up to the undergraduate level. 

The age of 18 should be raised to 20, not lowered. So that girls who are forced to marry early at least can tell their parents (as many girls in Rajasthan have done) that they can call the police to the wedding. 

Also, I have been the girl who had a marriage rishta at the age of 15 and had someone come see her at the age of 19. I was then in Undergrad 2nd year. I had to fight to complete my undergrad degree. The boy's side wanted the marriage immediately and didnt think a girl should complete her degree. 

The law was not on my side. 

Later, I saw many girls use the law to convince their parents to let them complete their education. 

If parents feel that women's safety is an issue, the way to deal with that is to give self-defence training to the girls, and to stand up to every smart ass demeaning women - including the smartass who just made 1000 crores showing women as objects. 

If you watch a woman getting demeaned on screen, look the other side when someone is troubling a girl in the bus or train, and think that marrying off your girl early will protect her from rape by strangers - I have no words. 

#StopChildMarriage

On Judicial Reform in India

 So, this is disturbing me a lot.

Yesterday, I was forced to encounter 2 pieces of news. I slept over them because usually, that which boils the blood in the evening doesn't even heat the water by morning. But not this time. The 2 things were:

A. A democratically elected government passes an Act on Judicial Appointments that make these appointments non-collegium based. The judiciary single handedly scraps this law. There is no check and balance on this action.

B. This:

https://www.opindia.com/2022/12/sc-stays-death-sentence-of-m-samivel-who-raped-and-brutally-killed-a-minor-girl-in-tamil-nadu-in-2020/

The death sentence was given by not one but TWO subordinate courts under the same Supreme Court. The crime was heinous and proved.

The trouble is, these are not isolated data points. Before this, the SC undermined the death threat to Nupur Sharma and also publicly humiliated her in court, making completely unjustified remarks. Then, they jumped into the CEC appointment, forgetting that they are themselves under a very nepotistic, subject-to-flattery collegium system.

Here are some things that I am not able to get over:

A. The Constitution provides for a system of checks and balances for the Legislature and the Executive, but NONE for the judiciary.

B. In a Brut video of the Hon. President Smt. Draupadi Murmu, she asks, very rightly, "You ask us to make more jails to house more undertrials. But what we need is speedy dispensation of justice, not more undertrials. Why are they under trial after years?"

C. In as much as I could read, there is no performance criteria for a judge other than being favoured by the senior judges. Their record of speedy dispensation of justice, ensuring that people do not abuse the judicial process, even the quality of their judgements, amounts to nothing - because of the Collegium system. These contractors of meritocracy still appoint the CJI on the basis of one thing only - seniority!

And all I can think of, as citizens, do we not have a right to ask for Judicial Reform? Isn't that the right of every litigant, and every citizen of India? To correct an institution that is not, and has not, been working effectively, for many decades now?

What judicial reforms, if any, would you like, as a citizen of India? I really would like more inputs and insights.

Two lessons i learnt today

The trigger was someone posting that we are in the stage of reverse victimisation of men. Many men are punished because they are men. 

Then, someone wrote: The same is true of caste issues too. 

I wrote: There is a movement called One Family, One Reservation. This movement says that once a family has availaed of reservation, they should not be able to apply under the quota again. it should pass to another family. 

To which someone wrote: 

sure, we can do that once people stop getting killed for drinking water from the wrong well or growing a moustache. A one time reservation sadly doesn’t solve the entire caste issue.

Now, because caste has not been a factor in my growing up, I remain quiet on these caste related discussions. 

But this comment totally triggered me. 

So, here is the response that I did not put there: 

1. Hate is an end unto itself. Hate just follows the path of least privilege. It can be blacks, women, Dalit. It is a function of power. To consider that you have been singled out for hate is not right. 

2. If reservation has not solved the problem of casteism in 75 years, then it is definitely not the right solution. 

On boycotting a film

It is very easy to say that a boycott is hurting a movie. But Bollywood has given 3 hits in 2 years. Were all those films affected by trolls? Is any amount of introspection in order? As many people have said, trolls cannot keep a good film down. So, maybe, instead of blaming everyone else, people could pay attention to the quality of their work? Has even a single Bollywood person come out and said, "Audience have been rejecting us for 2 years. Maybe we should sit and think about what we are doing wrong in our story telling, our execution?"

Very easy to sit and blame the audience for "not appreciating how much hard work goes into making a film."

Salman Khan answered that beautifully once. His quote - "Director ne bola public ko picture samajh hi nahi aayi. Arre tumko public nahi samajh aayi."

The last movie I saw in theater was Samrat Prithviraj. The storytelling was very different from what I expected from that director. But when the film bombed, at least he said, "If you do not like my version of the story, discuss with me, tell me what your view is. I want to listen." Contrast that with "People don't understand the hard work." 

We are not supposed to understand your hard work and pay you for that. We are supposed to get entertained and pay you for that. Where is the confusion? 

There are 2 movies being released now. Only Aamir Khan has gone to town like a cry baby. Akshay Kumar (Rakshabandhan) has put his head down and let his work do the talking. This might be that actor's third flop within the last 6 months, but he has not become a drama king even once. His promotion of the films has been dignified, and focused on the work.

For Bollywood, the tide will turn once they start making good cinema. And, after we have given justice to Sushant Singh Rajput. And, PVR stops charging the rate of gold for pop corn. 

Until then, cry on! No one is coming to the theaters. 

Checks and Balances for the judiciary?

On May 24th, an 18-year-old man opened fire at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, USA, killing 19 students and two teachers. That is a primary school. Young children. 

This was not an isolated incident. In addition to supplying arms to the world, the US guns lobby also ensures that its citizens are able to use firearms freely, irrespective of the use to which they are put. Whether it is the Dick Cheney hunting accident, or the mass shooting, nothing has been able to convince US lawmakers to control the easy access to firearms and ammunition. 

But the Texas shooting was the straw that broke the camel's back. There was a national outcry and the citizens made it clear that status quo cannot continue. Something would have to change at the policy level. 

And it did. On June 23rd, the US Supreme Court ruled that teachers can henceforth carry guns. 

Then, on June 24th, the American Supreme Court overturned Row vs Wade. This basically means that in most states in the US,  a woman can no longer get an abortion. For Any Reason. 

Abortion is banned in Christianity, but the US is a secular state - legally. 

************* 

India: 

April: Rapist and Murderer of a 4 year old is a sinner with a future. 

On 23rd April, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned (reversed) a death sentence given to a man who had raped and murdered a 4 year old. Their words in the judgement: 

Supreme Court Bench of Justices UU Lalit, S Ravindra Bhatt, and Bela Trivedi mention - every saint has a past and every sinner has a future. 

On 20th May, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and Justice Hima Kohli and including Justice L Nageswara Rao, decided on the Disha encounter case. What was the Disha encounter case? 

May: The Disha Encounter Case 

On Nov 27th, 2019, a 23 year old vet was returning home. On the way, her bike gave her trouble and she called her sister to inform her. She asked the sister to reach her soon because she was scared. When the sister reached, there was no trace of the doctor. 

The doctor had been raped, murdered, and then her body had been burnt. 

Her burnt body was subsequently recovered on November 28 morning from an underpass on National Highway 44. 

4 people were arrested by the police the very next day. By burning the body, the accused had basically obliterated all physical evidence like DNA, injury marks, post mortem, etc. 

Rape and murder arrests in India are abysmal and conviction rates are even lower. 

There was significant public anger after this crime. 

On Dec 6th, the 4 accused were encountered by the police. 

They were hailed as heroes by everyone, including the politicians of India. 

However, on 20th May, 2022, these 10 policemen were found guilty and the High Court was directed to take further action. That day, Indian Twitter trended with "We are with the police." 

July: The Nupur Sharma case 

An ASI (Archeological Survey of India) survey was going on to figure out if the Gyanvapi mosque was an erstwhile Hindu temple. A shivling had been found in the mosque complex. The Muslim community had then reached the Supreme Court and indicated that the structure was not a Shivlinga, but a fountain (in a place used to wash one's hands before offering namaaz). 

On a May 27 TV debate on the issue, Nupur Sharma, the spokesperson of the BJP, said to the representatives of Muslims that their religion is represented by the prophet marrying a 9 year old. 

Immediately, there was public uproar. The next day, she was suspended. 

The issue of the Gyanvapi mosque was immediately forgotten completely. 

After this, Nupur Sharma started getting death threats for her utterances. No one said that what she said was incorrect. But they objected to her saying it. "How dare she speak so disrespectfully?" 

On June 28th, a tailor named Kanhaiyalal, from Udaipur, who had received death threats because his son wrote a social media post supporting Nupur Sharma, was beheaded in public.

Nupur Sharma approached the Supreme Court to curb the FIRs being filed against her over remarks on Prophet Mohammed. She also mentioned that she has received threats. To which, on July 2nd,  a vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala said - "She faces a security threat or has become a threat to the security of the nation?" 

Further: 

“This lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country,” commented Justice Surya Kant, who was extremely critical during the 20-minute hearing.

And these incidents make one think: 

What is the system of checks and balances for the judiciary?

Like, where can Indians and Americans go and say, "Wait a minute.. this needs a review.. ?" 

These judgements make me ask a fundamental question - the system of checks and balances exists for every pillar of government, except one. 

Where is the check and balance for this branch of governance? Appointment of judges is done by the judiciary, the recommendation goes from the judiciary, the appeal against the decision of the lower court is to the higher court. And if such a system of checks and balances is not there, maybe its time to create it?

Impeachment of Judges in India 

While there is no procedural control over the judiciary, individual judges can be impeached. 
But the process is the same as the Amendment of the Constitution by a Special Majority of the Parliament, AND an enquiry committee before that parliament session can be convened. In short, it requires a quorum of 100 in the Lok Sabha and 50 in the Rajya Sabha. It must be ratified by 2/3rd of the members present and at least 50% of the total members of BOTH houses. 

Impeachment of Judges - Law Insider India

This means that, effectively, a political party must have 2/3rd majority in BOTH Houses of the Parliament to proceed with impeachment. 

Therefore, no. of judges that have been impeached in India: 0. 

************** 

Can the Supreme Court really trivialise the death threats to a person days after another person was brutally beheaded in the country? 

Can the Supreme Court really decide that she was single-handedly responsible for the violence, when the weapons had been lifted by someone else? Which weapon did she lift? Whom did she threaten? Is it ok to threaten someone on the basis of what they said? Or, Does the Court believe that Freedom of Speech is selectively applied?  

Her lawyer said - She responded to provocation.

If there is a misuse of the debate, the first thing she should have done was to file an FIR against the anchor", the bench commented.

However, the same Bench does not think that the people committing violence and setting the country on fire should have filed FIRs.

They can burn the country and Nupur Sharma is 'single-handedly' responsible for that.


So, in one case, the instigator is blameless, and in the other, the alleged instigator is single handedly responsible.

(I use the term alleged in the loosest possible manner. No one is saying what Nupur said was incorrect. Only that it hurt their sentiments. Even the Bench says - 

"We saw the debate on how she was incited. But the way she said all this and later says she was a lawyer it is shameful. She should apologise to the whole country," 

Ahem.. this is how I see these utterances. And, I am reminded of the classic Hillary Clinton quote - would you ask a man that question? 

Sigh!

In a world run by majoritarianism, where do people like us go? The ones who don't like what most people like? The ones who like the weird and the abnormal? Where do we go? The Youtube videos we like are hidden anywhere from 80th to 120th place. The page we are looking for doesn't pop up on Google search (Thank God for Duckduckgo), the images we want to use don't pop up on image search.. where do we, the abnormals, go? 

 

Genuine Question

So, if someone says that their only job around the house is to work and earn money, and lives that way. why do they then feel bad if the kids grow up to treat them as just an ATM machine? 

The Middle Class Indian's Demand Manifest from the politicians

 As Assembly Elections approach in many parts of the country, a few villagers from Uttarakhand submitted a "Maang Patra" - a list of demands, to their leaders. 

I have decided to do the same for our politicians too. Now the thing is, the poor give votes and the rich give money. What does the middle class give to the politician? NOTHING. Therefore, we are milked till there is no more left, to feed the other two. 

Nevertheless, the middle class Indian's Demand Letter is a start. If we want to stop paying 33% tax on income + up to 18% tax on all items of consumption while the other economic classes conveniently create companies or go to the Ration shops and get freebies, then we have to go from being keyboard warriors to vote warriors. 

With that assumption, we present: 

The Middle Class Indian's Demand Note 

1. Some recent political parties have made a habit of promising insane freebies and winning elections. That is the same as the Congress Model. The money given by the rich goes to party funds. So, is your father paying for the freebies? NO, we are. And we will not pay for them any more. Any party that offers freebies will NOT get middle class votes. 

2. In being a welfare state, India has made poverty a rather attractive career option for many. We need the introduction of a yellow Adhar card. This Adhar card will be issued to the third child. This Adhar card entitles the holder to vote and be counted as a citizen of India, but the card holder CANNOT use any welfare schemes of India. No free ration, no free Jan Dhan yojana, no MNREGA, no free treatment at govt centers, no reservation benefits. Not just that, the children of yellow card holders will also not be able to benefit from the welfare schemes of the government. If one parent already has two children, even if it is the first child of the other parent, the Adhar Card issued will be yellow. It won't matter to those who anyway pay for everything for their children through their nose - we pay for education, health, everything, But those who view poverty and reproduction as career options will have to rethink their strategy. 

3. One overarching assumption that decades of socialist mass media has drilled into our heads is that the poor are always hardworking and all of them want to improve their lot. My NGO did a research study on the knowledge needs of the knowledge have nots 2 years ago. It was an eye popping study, but it was unnecessary. The success of the mid day meal scheme should have told us that the average Indian child does not want education, they want freebies. Before the critics eat me out, tell me, why do these poor children only come to school at mid day meal time? Why do they repeatedly refuse food cooked by a Dalit cook? Therefore, welfare measures must provide a means for a family to climb out of poverty, not be the crutch that keeps them there forever. Welfare measures cannot continue ad infinitum for the same set of families. They should be used, rightfully, for families that need them on account of genuine misfortune like riots, war, natural calamities. After a flood, it takes decades to rebuild the house, yet the middle classes get no reprieve because in the books of the govt, they are not "POOR" . 

4. There should be no caste based reservations in urban areas. In rural areas, these reservations should be proportionate to their share in the population. Minority reservations should be at state level, not national level. Which means that in the states where the majority religion is not Hinduism, Hindus should be able to benefit from minority reservations and the majority communities of that state should not benefit from reservation that is meant to support minorities. 

5. The Economic Survey of India should also include a report on the previous year's budget. Did the government make the right allocations? What percentage of that allocation was actually spent? What was it spent on? Did we get the desired results? Is the entire detailed budgeting exercise doing anything for the macro planning of the country, or is it a cosmetic, PR exercise? 

6. Election day should be a holiday only for those who vote. I have asked for this earlier also. No ink mark, no paid leave. This should be true for all. 

7. A politician needs to be corrupt because the people need money for everything. Even to come to the rally they need biryani and money. Henceforth, rallies should be banned and prachar should only be in the localities of the voters. We, the middle classes get no Biryani benefits and no politician comes to explain their manifesto to us. Further, all manifestos should be freely available and all candidates should take questions from voters on their website. If you can go to the slums to meet the poor voters, come online also, where the middle class voters are :) 

On the repeal of farm laws

 Woke up to the news of repeal of farm laws. Either Punjab has made its second big mistake today, or Amrinder Singh has just secured the kingdom of Punjab.

Punjab's first big mistake was not making drugs a political issue. Both political parties in Punjab were making money from drugs and transport. That explains the suboptimal rail network in Punjab. 

Last year's govt procurement in Punjab sent a clear signal - Record procurement was done from the non-protesting regions of Punjab and minimal procurement from the protesting regions. 

Someone then told me that maybe this is part of a secret pact with Amrinder. That changes things completely. Because with this masterstroke, the Maharaja of Patiala (Amrinder Singh is the descendant of the Maharaja of Patiala and also would have been the holder of that title if the titles had not been legally abolished) has secured the kingdom of Punjab forever. 

Why does the development sector lie so much?

I have now been engaged with the development sector for more than 25 years. 

Yesterday, we found another overstated work that could not be verified. 

While complaining to a mentor, I said, 70% of the work in development sector is hogwash. 

He agreed. We both knew. 

But after the angst was over, i sat down to wonder why that is so. These millions of people who make it their life's work to change the lives of others -why do they overstate their impact? Why do they project that which we know, through experience, is not going to happen? 

Malafide motivation cannot be the answer, because development sector jobs don't pay that much. Even for large NGOs, getting honest grants on an ongoing basis is a real challenge. 

There is no easy answer. 

But the top 2-3 things that jump up are: 

A. The structure of the industry 

Everyone knows that human change is a slow and laborious job. Yet, funding agencies need to see numbers and impact within a finite time. If you want your mother to give up a habit (that is one person and one behaviour change), you do not know how long it will take. Yet, funding agencies want NGos to wave a magic wand and tell them that they will get 100x people to change 10x habits / beliefs / attitudes within  the next 2-3 years. 

B. The incorrect inherent assumption 

This is actually my realisation after 25 years in the sector. When we did गरीबी हटाओ, we assumed that that was an objective for everyone. That everyone wants to improve their lot by working hard and /or studying. If we just create the opportunities, those opportunities will be taken. 

Turns out, that is not true. People want to get rich, but not by working hard or studying hard. They want to get rich by getting doles that they can then sell at a profit and go back to being poor and underprivileged to get more doles. That is their personal revenue model. That is their chosen profession. 

Low income housing, MNREGA, PDS, and a host of other welfare measures, both state and private, have taught us that a small fraction of the population will indeed choose hard work or education as a means of upliftment. But that assumption cannot be applied to the entire population. 

Yet, 75 years and counting, neither the planners nor the funding agencies, nor the NGOs themselves, have started to factor in "beneficiary receptiveness" in their model. 

We created an employment model. The idea allowed a person to become financially self reliant. Out of over 100 people we presented the idea to, only TWO people wanted to try it out as a profession. 

In our other projects too, we have had a proportion of people who want to try it before not taking it up, and a much smaller population that then goes on to benefit from the opportunity. 

At first, we thought this was a case of poorly designed solutions. That if we created better solutions that actually do meet the need, that solution would be adopted by pull model and we won't have to push it. 

2 years and 2 research projects later, we learnt that we were wrong. It was not a case of a poorly designed solution. It was a case of poorly understood problem. We assumed that knowledge was an inherent need. It is not. People do not know because they do not want to know. This was a huge shock to us. 

But think of it from their perspective, and it makes perfect sense. 

We tend to think of life in terms of a single currency - money. Therefore, the more money we have, the better our lives will be. 

But they know instinctively that that is not true. Time, leisure, relationships, are all currencies. When we lift ourselves to a better financial position, we lose the social ties with our peer group. With our relatives. We have to fit into a new social circle which may or may not be as welcoming. When we devote time to hard work,  leisure is sacrificed. When we spend time in studying, we cannot use that time to earn, to help, to meet friends, to do other things that lead to more instant gratification. 

So, I end this day, not with complaint, but with understanding. 

On sexist jokes

कभी कभी मेरे दिल में ख्याल आता है, 

कभी कभी मेरे दिल में, ख्याल आता है 

कि अपने पिता से घृणा करने के बाद, 

हर पुरुष 

अपनी पत्नी को, 

ठीक वही दुख क्यूँ दिए जाता है? 

***** 

Well, if you call out a sexist joke, you are told to "take it light". 

So, I followed that advice and took it light. Here is my light hearted response to some of these sexist jokes. This is only one day's work. My creativity is on a roll! 

My updated meme: 

Joke on a group: 

My response: 

And the lines you read above are also in response to another sexist joke. 

Understanding Colonisation

Chach Nama is the record of the first (?) Arab invasion of Sindh - 710 AD. 

I read this book with great interest and for a very personal reason. The book is written by the Arab chronicler, who was in the employ of Mohd. Bin Kasim. 

After reading the really long account of the victory of the Arabs against the mighty King Dahar, i shook my head in disbelief. Raja Dahar was so powerful that not only was he the Lord and Master of all he surveyed, he ruled all the way from Kashmir in the North to Makran in the West, Rajputana in the South - East. It was a massive kingdom that included all of the 5 rivers we proudly call Punj-ab. 

The land was fertile and wealthy. The military and technical prowess was great and at the start of the book, though it is written by the victor, the record of the Indian king is such that one believes that it is not possible for the Arabs to defeat this much power. Yet, a few months later, the mighty Raja Dahir is dead. Not just that, the dynasty is not even mentioned anywhere in Indian history. Sindh was a mighty land to the West of Hind, but it took an expert historian friend to recommend this book. Its not in the public discourse at all! (1)

So, how did the mighty Raja Dahir fall? 

The reason i put that book away in pure shock was the parallels. 

It was not just Raja Dahir who fell. No Hindu king could, subsequently, rule over those parts of India for at least a few centuries after that. 

The exact same thing happened to Kashmir. Once lost, it was never regained. 

The elements of colonisation 

The Islamic invasion and subsequent control of large parts of India and the world, was, in my view, the first wave of colonisation in recorded history. I call it the first wave of colonisation because: 

A. It was not localised. Large parts of the known world were systematically taken over. 

B. The power was political. 

C. The power was vested in people who were not the same as the people being ruled. In other words, the welfare of the ruled was not the primary concern of the ruling. OR, there was no self-rule.  

The subsequent colonisation 

There was a second colonisation. We know this one to be the main colonial movement. This one was led by trading companies originating in Europe. Almost as a pattern, trade relations or missionary movements were converted to political power. Once again, the 3 elements of colonisation make their appearance: 

A. Global 

B. Political Power 

C. The agenda of the rulers was not the welfare of the ruled. OR, there was no self-rule. 

So, this post has two parts. In the first part, I will try to present the common themes that emerge in the victory of the colonisers. 

The second part will compare the elements of the first two waves of colonisation with the third colonisation wave, that, I truly believe, is almost upon us. 

Why did the colonisers succeed? 

A. The Surprise Element 

In my study of riots, colonisation, and other forms of organised, group violence, information asymmetry is perhaps the MOST important element. It is this information asymmetry that leaves one side completely unprepared. 

In the times of Islamic colonisation, no one expected people to combine religion and political power. In the employ of Raja Dahir and indeed, every Hindu Raja in the subcontinent even in the modern ages, the armies were secular, the selection was based on merit and capability, and mercenaries were a recognised branch of fighters. 

Not in the Islamic colonisation. All the soldiers were Muslims. The glue holding them together was religion. Their motivation was religious conversion of the vanquished. No one expected this. No one expected large armies to seek and win political power on the basis of religion. Political battles were region to region. Sindh fought with Makran, Markan fought with Pashtoons, Sindh also fought with Rajputana, Rajputana fought with plateau kings and Central Indian kings, and so on. It was regional. Not religious. So, Raja Dahir prepared himself to fight the Afghani/ Arab army. Not a religious army. 

Likewise, in the 1600s , no one thought traders could ever want political power. They were profiteering idiots who would create their own facilities, warehouses, hold a small force to protect their wares, and pay taxes to make us rich. What will they do with power? That was the surprise element of the second colonisation. 

The surprise element of the third colonisation is that we view political power in terms of physical countries and their leadership. No one envisages countries that are virtual. No one imagines that political power is, at the end of the day, control over the minds of people, making them behave in a way that the ruler wants them to behave. This can be achieved by being the entity that makes laws. It can also be achieved by being the entity that decides WHO will make the laws, until we make laws ourselves (remember British India and their advisors to Indian rajahs) 

 B. Only one side had a strategy 

This is a corollary to the first cause. Because only one side knew that it was doing something for a very long-term impact, only one side had a strategy. The other side, after realising that it was being had (in case of Raja Dahir, after losing some key battles before the main battle in which he lost his life. In case of Native India, the rulers coming together to try to stop some of the powers of the trading companies. In case of China, countries trying to create some local manufacturing capability after realising that it cannot survive without China). 

C. A belief in invincibility and resulting complacence 

In all three cases, the existing political leadership displays a marked complacence that almost borders on insolence. 

D. An important missing piece 

In the Islamic colonisation, it was lack of unity. In the British colonisation, it was lack of latest warfare technology. In the most recent one, it is the lack of manufacturing capability and lack of new age citizen engagement features. There is usually an important missing piece - a vulnerability that the coloniser exploits. The vulnerability may not be important in itself, but when exploited by a coloniser, proves to be the Achilles' heel. 

So, what are we saying? 

What we are saying is very simple. We are looking at a third colonisation. It will come from China OR Big Tech. They are both ripe colonisers waiting to pounce. Or perhaps, both. The Dutch and the French and the British all ruled at the same time. The Turks and the Arabs and the Afghans, all ruled, though under the same major umbrella. In this case, one will rule on the premise of mind control thru tech, and the other will rule because they have created enough global infra now to pounce and seize. 

End of Post 

**************************** 

(1)One reason could be that for some reason, Burma, Sindh, Punjab, and Afghanistan have been completely left out of India's history, as if they were never a part of a single political entity. Nothing is further from the truth. Burma was an integral part of India and formed our Eastern border. A lot of the talent for the Hindi film industry actually came from Burma.  People travelled to and from Burma - Bengal - Assam rather effortlessly. Sindh, of course, was part of India all the way till 1947. 

For Afghanistan: 

https://www.sidmartinbio.org/when-was-afghanistan-separated-from-india/.