Local versus Regional Conflicts

One of the remarks very often received by me is why bother reading the newspaper, why bother discussing about issues in our country and why waste our time when we have other things to do which can make money. The same people will complain about how unfair this country is, how corruption is a cancer and how the middle class has to carry the burden of high prices all the while using their blackberry or iphone or driving their cars running on subsidised diesel or petrol.

Whatever structures for accountability and participatory governance established by the government, it will work only when people use them. This is true whether it is voting, RTI, panchayats or NGOs. In the book 'Illicit Happiness of Other People', there is struck me - an idea that overrates human character is bound to fail. Democracy is based on the belief that people will choose the best person to represent them and not consider communal or short term gains. It is based on the belief that those who seek to represent people will be honest. Communalism believed in the collective spirit of mankind, but it did not consider much about how some individuals can exploit this for their own benefit and how it overrates the fact that we are social animals. We are social as long as it fits into our personal freedoms.

Socialism in India distrusted industrialists and put its faith in the bureaucracy and labourers who were assumed to be patriotic enough to give it their best. All we have from that era is a Hindu rate of growth and the balance of payment crisis which lead to reforms in 1991. The road to hell is paved with good intentions as far as national policy is concerned because all these policies overrates human character. It is impossible to frame policies that suit everyone. Bigger the population of the country, more will be the population that stand against a policy. I am not advocating balkanisation or separatism, but perhaps more decentralisation and self-government.

But with greater localisation or decentralisation, there is bound to be conflict of interest and opposition to larger interests of the nation. For example, there is a conflict between local and regional interest- the attempts to construct an fly-over at Edappally junction, one of the busiest in Kerala, is facing stiff opposition from local traders whereas the cost of fuel wasted while waiting for green light at the signal is certain to be in hundreds of crores each year. I agree with the policy of reducing our demand on fossil fuels and individual transport, but this is an urgent matter- the city's jugular vein is being constricted and needs circulation urgently. In the long term interest, it is better to build the fly-over. Therefore, a regional will is required to overcome vested local interests in the greater common good.

Another example is the issue of waste disposal in Trivandrum. The Municipal Corporation of Trivandrum set up a garbage treatment plant OUTSIDE its limits at Vilappilsala while the residents and office bearers of the Panchayat in the area resisted and blocked the efforts because it was affecting their health and the place was becoming inhospitable. This is the result of dereliction of duty by the Municipal Corporation since the purpose of devolution and decentralisation is to find local solutions to local problems, not export them or in this case dump them outside.

Right now garbage is rotting on the streets at many places and the imminent monsoon rains will make matters worse. The solution is more decentralisation, setting up multiple small waste handling units in the neighbourhoods that generate them. If they resist, then they better stop generating waste. This is where more localisation holds the solution and community ownership is required.

What is the right mix then?

1) Greater devolution of powers to the local bodies

2) This must be used by the people and not just left to civil society activists and politicians to seek solutions to local problems, ensuring their accountability and scrutinising their work. This is the local answer

3) The regional or national solution is in meeting needs of the local community while meeting regional/national interest too.

A Response to Mr.Panagiriya

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/comments-analysis/no-use-in-blaming-multinational-retailers-for-industrial-tragedies-in-bangladesh/articleshow/20282015.cms


In the sourcing relationship between a clothing brand, contractor and the labourer, the brand outsources production not out of philanthropic intention but merely to get the product at the lowest possible price. By using clever manipulations, Mr.Panagiriya says that implementing better prices will mean exodus of contracts to other countries. The arrogant mindset of those advocating unbridled capitalism and globalisation is revealed here. First, he implicitly accepts a race to bottom where owners do anything to cut down cost of production. Secondly, by saying that I have other cheap places to produce from, he means these nations will also not demand better contract prices but never says that it should be done by all nations. Market is a better way to price discovery, but this happens between unequal systems with huge disparities in economic conditions and power. Corporates like Walmart are more powerful, not just financially but by lobbying with foreign governments, forcing them to accept unfair deals through pressure from US government and most recently  a  than most other 3rd world nations to which they outsource production contracts. Such a market is obviously lopsided and so price discovery is obviously a scam.

By comparing a apartment owner-real estate builder-labourer, he forgets several things-
1) There is always a transfer of adversities by the contractor/builder but never a transfer of benefits. He implicitly accepts this by saying that we need government regulations to ensure better workplace safety and ensuring better payment to contractors is not enough. The builder has a benefit in the real estate deal, but in the case of the garment factory, unless there is a benefit, it cannot be transferred

2) there is no real estate regulator in India as of now. The consumer is duped through lack of promised facilities, inordinate delays, need for regular maintenance and repair and hidden costs. The builder has benefits, which is clearly not transferred

The new age of globalisation and capitalism can lead to loss of lives if not regulated in the interest of the public, but when there are sound regulations and a fair deal- in this case, better payments to the contractor who transfers the benefits to the workers- it will benefit the labourer, contractor, brand owner and the consumer.

The Place for Religion

I have read some of the arguments raised by Atheists, I agree with some of them and there are perplexing questions regarding religion. I cannot reconcile the beliefs that there is a heaven and hell and yet our actions are guided by fate. Although at first look these do look unfair and even ridiculous, there could be a deeper meaning. How can there be heaven and hell and how can we be held responsible for our actions if what we are supposed to do, what we have done and what we are doing have already been decided? It may be because who and what we are ordained to meet are already determined, but how we react to these are under our own control and that makes a lot of difference. It is in decision making that we might have the freedom to do as we wish based on our morals or lack thereof, priorities and interests.

Just like I inherited property, genes and character from my parents, I also inherited religion. No one is blamed for being born in one country or for not declaring oneself to be free of the man-made notion of nationality. Similarly, I was born into one religion and unlike nationality, it does not confer on me any special rights or powers. It is a path, a way to handle crises and success, a way to reconcile with many of the contradictions in life. I am not proud of it or do not believe my religion to be the only true religion or in its superiority. If you ask me, religion is a far less harmful concept than nationality- after the crusades, Indo-Pak partition and sporadic but localised incidents of communal violence, the hysteria and arms race promoted by nations have quite evidently prioritised weapons over meeting urgent needs of health and hunger. Globalisation of weapons trade happened much before the idea entered the minds of multi-national corporations in search of monopolies. AK-47s are found in the US and Latin America, in Europe as well as in the Middle-east.

One could point to religion-encouraged terrorism, but we should also realise that the base of this was definitely exploitation of religion to further national aims- US funding of mujahideen during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, US support for Israel to maintain stability in the middle-east and intentional British suppression of Palestine immediately after WW2, US intervention that ousted democratic rule in Iran to set-up a puppet regime which was overthrown by a revolution that still runs the country, petro-dollars propping up a regime that uses hostile religious ideas to shore up support for itself in Saudi Arabia, divide and rule in India by the British are the obvious examples. The seeds of discord between religions were sown by nations with a vested interest in keeping the people busy fighting each other while they exploited resources. Therefore, intense patriotism by the powerful is what has lead to religious conflict across the world.

As to my religious beliefs, I believe in a god and since I inherited a religion, I give the same names, forms, methods and ideas to religion that my parents inherited. But just like I can sell of property and move to another place or build a new and better home in the same property or buy more property, I can change my beliefs, reinterpret them or have alternate beliefs. This is called humanism, a religion based on our own interpretation of ideas and one which does the follower good rather than restricting access to god or enforcing an idea of a god that is meant to punish and keep individuals from being free under the threat of punishments- an idea well exploited by India's caste system.

I believe in a god to make sense of factors like butterfly effect which I consider as another form of luck because science maybe able to explain how the flutter of a butterfly's wings can cause a tornado thousands of miles away, but it cannot explain the why. Similarly, many of the mysteries of quantum mechanics are observations, we do not know how it happens and why(like how an electron wave can exist on either side of a node without crossing the node). The seemingly impossible connection between various events and some inexplicable answers I have been able to come up with in quizzes all prompt me to believe in god which balances out good and evil in the world and makes sure that those who deserve and desire something actually get it. Religion and god is a provider of hope.

It does not matter to me whether god exists or not, all that matters is I believe and it is a comfort to believe. Atheism has a role to play so that this belief does not take us to violence, prevent us from being preyed on by unscrupulous elements claiming divine sanction and to prevent exploitation in the name of religion. It is a very personal concept and it should never matter in our dealings with the world and it is the duty of the atheists to remind us that too much of a good thing can be bad.

I was prompted to write this by the Supreme Court's ruling that interpreted our Right to Freedom Religion under article 25 and 26 to provide Dongria Kodh tribe in Orissa the power to decide, through constitutionally mandated Gram Sabhas, whether they want to allow an MNC to mine bauxite from Niyamgiri hill. Although the ostensible reason for such a decision is the fundamental right of the tribe to worship the Niyam Raja deity that resides on the Niyamgiri hills, the belief itself is rooted in the fact that this is ecologically important for the rivers that originate from the hills and for the livelihood of the tribe. Kerala has thousands of sacred groves where environment is preserved only because they are related to religion. This perhaps was not an unintentional consequence, the very purpose of divine sanction could have been to protect environment and livelihood, to preserve natural habitats essential for our survival and make sure they are not diverted for other purposes. Religion does have a purpose when used well and it is a force that can create a lot of good or destroy when not used carefully. 

Acceptance, Tolerance and Universalism

Truth is not absolute, it is relative. What is good and what is bad is also relative. I had spend large parts of my day reading wikipedia while in college and my friends asked me why I did it. I have been poring over newspapers for years and many have asked me 'what is the point'. I have engaged in discussions on many topics ranging from energy conservation to random topics like "Has mankind become less intelligent with the passing of time" and foreign affairs, it may or not have lead to a final conclusion or anyone changing their stance, but I have always emerged the wiser and this too was pointless according to many.

I am not going to elaborate on why I did those things, but I would like to consider the difference in views here. I felt this was good for me, this is what made me happy and I did what I wanted to do. Many have made the decision to enjoy the present and let the future worry about itself using the statement that 'if I die tomorrow, I want it to happen only after I have enjoyed myself fully'. Many pursue and focus on short term gains and happiness without even looking at long term impact of their actions. It is true that many do not even have a long term view.

There are traditional ways to have fun and relax, then there are the popular ways of doing it and then there are the emerging ways to do the same. Although this could be the stated or ostensible purpose, the real aim could be to escape, put up a brave front or could be an imitation or playing to a crowd for acceptance and praise. Those who do not fall under the accepted and popular norms are considered sad and stupid.

I do not wish to get get into the rights and wrongs, good and bad aspects of it. But to each of us, what we are doing is right and will rarely consider the alternative whatever the circumstances. We are all safe under the illusion that our beliefs, what we think is good and bad, what we have and we are doing, are all right. Any threat or challenge to it is unacceptable. "They are wrong, I am right" is what leads to "My faith is right, theirs is wrong" and communal violence. This is what lead to "My culture is superior, they are savages" and wiping out of entire cultures and civilisations in Latin America, North America, Australia and in India during colonial rule. In India it is still happening as tribal cultures are threatened by government enforced eviction and cultural destitution in the name of development. The belief leads to "My land is superior, this is mine and you are not welcome" attitude exploited in Mumbai by self-serving politicians.

These are arrogant, bigoted, selfish, divisive views. I have held many views similar to this, when first exposed to multiple cultures during the first days of college,  when the pride of having made it to a top college in the country had gone to my head etc. The reasons for holding these views could range from misplaced pride to defensiveness or vulnerability, but one this for certain- such views will only narrow us down. As long as your belief does not affect me, I have no issues with what you believe in- irrespective of whether it opposes, ridicules, agrees or is indifferent to mine. They are all right and they can all co-exist and the difference in beliefs is partly a matter of choice, partly forced by circumstances and partly an involuntary response by who we are in reality.

It is about accepting other beliefs and ideologies, living with them in harmony and accepting it is all true while we have our own beliefs and ideologies which are modified, sharpened and made better in light of what we have learned from other beliefs and ideologies. It is high time we all, including me, learned this for a better world.

Surely you are joking Mr.Tharoor

I had respect for this guy. His books are brilliant, funny and enjoyable, his insights into foreign policy are awesome and his academic credentials are something to envy (PhD at 22??OMG!). But his antics on twitter these days have been nothing short of trying to gain a fan following, perhaps even shades of a "cult of personality" with twitterati clamouring for retweets. Many of the requests for RTs are genuine (blood donation, support for causes and some about his work in Tvm and I also realised that Al Jazeera website was banned in India or is it that only I cannot access it??), but some are just sycophantic paeans.

This latest article was the nail in the coffin. How can anyone interpret Congress victory in Karnataka as a resurgence? Was there an increase in vote share? Yes, a phenomenal 2%! All the perfumes of arabia won't wash of the soot from the Coal scam let alone 2G, Commonwealth, Adarsh, Riots in Assam and recently, genuflecting before China, editing the CBI report and the railway appointments scandal. I am no fan of the BJP in Karnataka, they ruined the environment, resulted in revenue loss to the state, exported raw material cheap to China (when we should be using the high quality ore for our own needs and not be a colony for supplying raw materials and dumping manufactured products) and then the attacks in coastal Karnataka by fundamentalist elements. Infighting in the party was just a byproduct of these accomplishments and no one would argue against outing the BJP in Karnataka.

The BJP's vote share fell 10% and these votes went to KJP and JD(S). The BJP lost votes, the Congress didn't gain much and it does not take a psephologist to understand that it was merely an anti-BJP vote. This is not a resurgence, if anything, it is a sign of things to come. Surely Mr.Tharoor knows this and then why is he coming up with inanities? In your books I have read about how those who speak out about the big powers are suppressed while some are co-opted. Initially with the cattle class comment and the resignation over IPL nonsense, I was disappointed that your fate would be the former, but now it seems you have unfortunately permitted the latter.

If there is anything about the choice of the persona for my bashing and why I haven't said anything about corruption in BJP or among the Left in Kerala or about Mamata Banerji's suppression of dissent, it is because we do not expect anything better from them. Enough has been written about it and finally, perhaps most importantly, it is my choice and I have the right to freedom of speech. If the question is "why don't you do something about it rather than being an armchair activist", I am trying to and been working hard for that.

For almost a decade I admired Lance Armstrong, his story was amazing, inspirational and it gave me the courage to keep going no matter whatever my disappointment and I wished I had some of the same grit and courage. Last year when he confessed of being a dope-cheat, I was robbed of a role model. It hurt in some sense and a similar feeling (not so much in magnitude) engulfs me now.

Coming from a person of such impeccable credentials, it is shocking and what I am worried about is the undue influence credible voices may have on public opinion. His columns are not going to be widely read by the crores of Indians going to polls, but it will influence the ideas framed abroad of what is actually happening in India.

PS- The pic shows an example of some of the retweets- a genuine cause and another one blindly publicising a news without any real analysis. The personal opinion on Kieran Pollard's innings against Hyderabad in the IPL is something I agree with- 66 of 27 balls? 8 sixes and 2 boundaries? INHUMAN is what I call the punishment on SRH bowlers. About the biggest grid- firstly, what use is a national grid if there is not adequate power to transmit? Power stations are lying idle because of lack of fuel- gas and coal because those allotted coal blocks in the illegal way decided to hold on to these assets rather than mine coal since prices were booming or they had no idea how to get the coal out of the earth since they were not in the mining business in the first place! I am merely pointing at the flawed policy and not talking about any presumptive losses. Being the biggest grid is again insignificant, USA chose for three separate grids in three zones. Russia does not need to set up grids to Siberia and China does not need to do that in the western non-industrialised part and for Canada it would be stupid and impossible to send electricity to hundreds of islands, inhabited and uninhabited. The engineering, building and laying work must be appreciated but the policy making (which is what the government does) requires no big pat on the back, if anything, this was only too late in coming. Maybe not, since the south was saved from the black-out last year since it was not integrated with the national grid :P

Ramblings and Government Bashing

Firstly on CBI- the superintendance on corruption cases lie with CVC. CBI was started as Delhi Special Police during world war 2 to prevent corruption in government procurement at that time since officials had a lot of discretion and were using it to make a lot of money for themselves. It was established under the Viceroy's control to protect the queen's money, since it was the British government in India at that time, and this money was being protected from Indians misusing it.It was truly an independent authority at that time since it was attached to an entity that wanted to prevent swindling of money and not under an authority which was embezzling money. All the real powers of the Viceroy went to the Prime Minister in some, the Viceregal Palace but became the Presidential residence and he also became head of the state. So, keeping the CBI under Prime Minister who actually heads the government against which there are charges of corruption simply because of a historical oversight while transferring power is unreasonable.

Article 75 of the Constitution of India says, inter alia, that the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This collective responsibility is the bedrock of Parliamentary democracy and it means that whatever the internal differences between the council of ministers, they should act as one and in one voice under the leadership of the Prime Minister. The Council of Ministers are appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister and it says nothing about coalition compulsions or the need to satisfy the party leader of a coalition member and so the acts of the coalition party's minister is also an action of the Cabinet which it cannot dismiss or distance itself from in Parliament. Swiftly correcting any mistake by removing the minister and reversing the decisions is essential if the minister has gone against the Council Of Minister's judgement or has acted unilaterally. This is to enforce decisions within the cabinet and is the principle of individual responsibility. This also enforces discipline and collective decision making. These are basic principles of parliamentary democracy and the current government has observed these principles only in breach- hiding behind coalision dharma, a very childish mastermind of mischief excuse of "he did it, I didn't know anything about" used by the squeeky clean goody goody boy in class and bursts of activity to prove it has life while manipulating parliamentary politics by forcing abstentions are all an insult to democracy

Sometime in early 2011(during the debate on 2G I think), Manmohan Singh had made a statement that the people had given them a mandate and so they can continue with the government. In India, the parliament is not supreme, the government is not supreme but it is the constitution that is Supreme. Parliament cannot make amendments that alter basic structure of the constitution and laws that take away fundamental rights or goes against the constitution. Parliament that has the mandate of the people there are not supreme and the government has to be responsible to the Lok Sabha. Institutions like the CAG and Supreme court are meant to uphold the constitution and act as checks against transgressions by the executive. So clamouring about people's mandate is a sad excuse- it was a people's government that imposed emergency and made a mockery of the same mandate.



The trigger for this post is this http://www.indianexpress.com/news/phantom-democracy/1113222/0 and some ideas that have been lying around in my mind.

I Miss Science

Science is based on laws and these laws are universal. It works everywhere, anywhere, everytime and anytime. But for civil services, I am only concerned about humanities subjects right now and there are hardly any rules and it is almost impossible to predict how things will turn out to be. Consider policy making and marketing - one can gather all the data, analyse it and build models and make predictions but it will all depend on how people react. No two people are the same and they will react in widely different ways and that is because no two persons grew up in the same way, had the same experiences which influenced their thinking and hence they don't think alike. Finally, even if we can group individuals according to similarities- age groups, income, gender, profession, education, region, religion- expecting them to act in their own interest or according to obvious common sense and logic (a) too will only make us realise that we can only approximate and make estimates. Sometimes we act in short term interest, sometimes we act considering the long term future- even we do not know how we will react until the situation comes.

How do people react to a stock market crash? It is silly to sell right now because the prices are falling, but if people have the common sense to wait it out and hold on to these stocks which will eventually have to return to their normal prices, they will not lose everything. But then there are the really smart individuals who try to short sell stocks or buy up when prices are dirt cheap. Make hay while the sun shines or just follow the croud and take a jump from the cliff? If we say that the smart ones will make hay, then I guess Lehmann Brothers were not that intelligent at all. We know that we shouldn't be polluting our environment and burning more fossil fuels, we know that wars are a waste and yet the defence industry is world's biggest employer. We are still not sure whether it is more important to feed millions of our hungry brothers and sisters or to splurge on fighter planes, we are not remotely guilty on spending on pleasures and complain about our own misfortunes and not value the things we have in life ,while millions suffer from worse fates.

It is not just human beings, but results of our actions, weather phenomenon and geography too that defies our comprehension and prediction. A tsunami may or may not happen and an earthquake can happen anytime. We cannot predict how exactly climate change will affect us (we do not even agree on climate change), we are not sure how the monsoon will be and how GM crops will affect us and how to handle antibiotic resistant bacteria. We cannot comprehend or measure how one action will have a lot of complex domino effect on sometimes unrelated issues, we cannot quantify everything all the time- the benefits of literacy can hardly be measured, nor can we say with certainty the benefits of job guarantee schemes- they go far beyond the income generated as they prevent distress migration that leaves people vulnerable to exploitation by mediators and employers, it does not break their children's education, immunisation and health and protects them from child labour and the elderly are not left behind to fend for themselves in their homes and many more positive outcomes that we cannot predict and generalise.

Thus, there are thus two issues with all humanity subjects- our inability to comprehend and understand our own nature and exact workings of the physical world we live in. The most confounding is when unpredictability of nature meets our own strange nature. Rain, drought and floods- we do not know what may happen and how it will specifically affect and we do not know how we will react to them. Sometimes we might have the science in place, but our nature and unpredictability means that we cannot do the right thing- we are not implementing renewable energy to the extent we need, we do not deal with issues like malnutrition and child deaths properly. We can only approximate, make rules as we go along and constantly adapt without sticking only to scientific facts since there is a lot that is not amenable to laws and facts.

The scientific answer to these problems are very simple, that is how we frame policy too. But then, in implementation we fail. There are too many dynamics at work- selfishness, greed, lazyness, ignorance, short-termism, religious beliefs and superstitions and complacency. Most of the development schemes in India fail due to corruption or poor design based on poor input into the decision making, as individuals making these decisions have the wrong priorities or incomplete ideas about the real problems- both point to our inability to understand ourselves and how things work in this world. There are no scientific explanations to these, each individual and situation is unique in the real world and perhaps that is why the civil service examinations are more about humanities subjects and there is a real bias against science and engineering subjects. There is no direct relationship between input and output- one cannot measure the success of a literacy campaign comparing the cost and income generated to government or even using the number of people benefited- the benefits could multiply since they will decide to teach their children and parents and siblings, read newspapers to become aware and responsible citizens, learn more about healthy practices or unfortunately some of the could drop out due to financial or health pressures.

In order to improve sanitation facilities, simply constructing a toilet will not do. The scientific solution will include adequate water, lighting and waste disposal facilities. Thrown in economics and you get low cost of building and maintaining it, ergonomics gives us adequate lighting leading to the toilet for common toilets and common sense will make us design it to be theft-free. But then no one could have seen this coming b nor would science explain the reasons for vandalism. As I said before, I have realised that science has a limit, it does not have answers to all our problems but it can point us to a solution, but getting there is a challenge in itself. Using the comparison from the movie Lincoln, Science can show us true north to reach our solution, but humanities is required to tackle all the swamps and forests and rivers that come in our path.

The job of a civil servant is to give the right input and to implement policies and this requires a clear and as complete as possible understanding of ground realities and then implementing them in spite of the obstacles and constantly changing and beyond apprehension circumstances. A scientific approach can only say one has to adapt to survive, it is by learning subjects that do not have specific laws and constants that a civil servant can realise that only thing one can do is give it our best, use our hardwork, patience, intelligence and all the skills we can muster and face the situation. The emphasis on humanities subjects for the exam is perhaps the apt training and selection method.

As for me, I learnt Chemistry and Electronics and I miss those days. It was simple and solvable, an equation will give us all the information we need, a circuit or a code can simply do the job and at the right conditions and catalyst, we can prepare the compound we need. A bit of lateral thinking and deep subject knowledge is enough and I miss those days.