Two news items in today's papers sound identical. The Bharatiya Janata Party on Tuesday decided to be practical and keep moral considerations at bay on the issue of getting Karnataka Chief Minister B.S. Yeddyurappa to resign. The Congress Party decides that tentatively no disciplinary action will be taken against Jagan.
It is pathetic to see the state to which these two main political parties of India have been reduced to. In both the cases, regional satraps are roaring and the central leadership is pussy-footing.
Open defiance, one behind the cameras (airing program criticizing the coterie surrounding the throne) and the other in front of the cameras (I am my own successor), has gone unchallenged. Pragmatism has prevailed over posturing. Are the two main parties in collusion, one may wonder, seeing Parliament not functioning effectively blanking any business. Small parties like Communists, TDP and JD(S) are making token noise. Vridha Naari Pativrata!
Small issues like alleged loss of 1.6 lakh crores to the exchequer and tiny issues like CWG scams have already paled into insignificance. Parliament is stalled. What is Adarsh? Sounds familiar but can't recollect.
Life goes on like this. New news elbows out old scams. Public memory is not short but too small to store so much data. The hard disc has to crash.
…ponder
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Demoralising the opponent
Each evening at the Wagah border, spectators from both India and Pakistan are treated to a comic opera performed in dead seriousness. The lowering the flags and closing the border (symbolic) gates is a ritual of one-upmanship to the glee of the innocent bystanders who treat this as a patriotic display.
BSF and Pakistan Rangers, in their ceremonial best, conduct an aggressive drill which include, high steps, stomping, thumb snooking and eye-ball-to-eye-ball glare. This pantomime, while ensures jingling of tills of hotels and restaurants there, also keeps up the temperatures high, albeit symbolically and psychology is a part of warfare.
However, there appears to be a move from the Indian Indian side to make the spectacle more moderate which Pakistan has promptly rejected. But as long as one side remains committed to aggressive display, the other has no option but to keep up its end.
However peace-willing we are and however committed we are to Gandhism, we should not water down the military's resolve to maintain highest morale of its men. Simply, since our military is subordinate to constitutional scheme of things, we should not meddle with its traditions and day-to-day affairs.
Military is meant to be aggressive even in posturing. Also we should recognise and respect the sacrifices made by our gallant men time and again. If we can demoralise the enemy in the process, it will be an added bonus. India's move in including occasional women soldiers in this ceremony is a good move in that while showcasing the achievements of our daughters, we also announce from roof tops to Pakistan that its men are no match to Indians in this culturally progressive world.
In fact I would earnestly suggest to those in decision-making to prominently display the photograph of Gen.Niazi surrendering to Gen.Aurora in 1971 as the backdrop on our side. No amount of posturing can equal this in either raising our morale or lowering that of the enemy - Pakistani army is definitely enemy of India, one should concede irrespective of what Kuldeep Nayyars and Khushwant Sings may think.
...ponder
BSF and Pakistan Rangers, in their ceremonial best, conduct an aggressive drill which include, high steps, stomping, thumb snooking and eye-ball-to-eye-ball glare. This pantomime, while ensures jingling of tills of hotels and restaurants there, also keeps up the temperatures high, albeit symbolically and psychology is a part of warfare.
However, there appears to be a move from the Indian Indian side to make the spectacle more moderate which Pakistan has promptly rejected. But as long as one side remains committed to aggressive display, the other has no option but to keep up its end.
However peace-willing we are and however committed we are to Gandhism, we should not water down the military's resolve to maintain highest morale of its men. Simply, since our military is subordinate to constitutional scheme of things, we should not meddle with its traditions and day-to-day affairs.
Military is meant to be aggressive even in posturing. Also we should recognise and respect the sacrifices made by our gallant men time and again. If we can demoralise the enemy in the process, it will be an added bonus. India's move in including occasional women soldiers in this ceremony is a good move in that while showcasing the achievements of our daughters, we also announce from roof tops to Pakistan that its men are no match to Indians in this culturally progressive world.
In fact I would earnestly suggest to those in decision-making to prominently display the photograph of Gen.Niazi surrendering to Gen.Aurora in 1971 as the backdrop on our side. No amount of posturing can equal this in either raising our morale or lowering that of the enemy - Pakistani army is definitely enemy of India, one should concede irrespective of what Kuldeep Nayyars and Khushwant Sings may think.
...ponder
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Cultural Dimension to Unemployment
It is not news that countries considered rich with favorable population numbers vis-a-vis resources also suffer from unemployment. But what strikes strange is these countries have substantial expatriates (both legal and illegal) working there and most of their consumables manufactured elsewhere even after decades of experiencing unemployment. And even more strange is that decades of such experience has hardly brought any ripple of change.
US and Saudi Arabia are classic examples though their backgrounds and reasons differ.
In US one theory going round is Americans should not accept employment at competitive wages at which for example Indians work there. It is felt that the American economy, which is dependent on higher spending by its population, will suffer if low wages are accepted resulting in lower spending habits. Another reason is the social security which provides dole for the unemployed. A third is the disinterest of the substantial lower middle class for higher and technical education (which is quite expensive) leaving high-end jobs to those from other countries. It is also ironic that the sense of dignity of labor inhibits ambition to climb the social ladder. I wonder whether there is a social ladder.
In Saudi Arabia the case is different. Women are prohibited from accepting many employments. There is a recent fatwa against women employed as cashiers. They just cant accept mixing of gender. Even if a Saudi wants to open shop hiring women, he has to have operations at two locations segregating men and women. This is not a sound business proposition obviously. Meanwhile thousands of girls are churned out by Universities only to twiddle their thumbs. Hard work is looked down upon by men. Hence jobs that call for strenuous working have to go elsewhere. Thirdly Saudis will not accept the wages, working hours, discipline and living conditions acceptable to say Indians, Pakistanis, Philipos, etc.
Such being the scenario and the prospects of change remaining bleak unemployment will steadily climb along with out-sourcing and employing expatriates. Not withstanding the stridency and rhetoric from those who matter. The remedies will differ suiting the peculiarity of each culture. Americans will have to shed a bit on dignity of labor while Saudis will have to cultivate it, for example.
In the meantime (while the sun shines), China and India can make hay.
…ponder
US and Saudi Arabia are classic examples though their backgrounds and reasons differ.
In US one theory going round is Americans should not accept employment at competitive wages at which for example Indians work there. It is felt that the American economy, which is dependent on higher spending by its population, will suffer if low wages are accepted resulting in lower spending habits. Another reason is the social security which provides dole for the unemployed. A third is the disinterest of the substantial lower middle class for higher and technical education (which is quite expensive) leaving high-end jobs to those from other countries. It is also ironic that the sense of dignity of labor inhibits ambition to climb the social ladder. I wonder whether there is a social ladder.
In Saudi Arabia the case is different. Women are prohibited from accepting many employments. There is a recent fatwa against women employed as cashiers. They just cant accept mixing of gender. Even if a Saudi wants to open shop hiring women, he has to have operations at two locations segregating men and women. This is not a sound business proposition obviously. Meanwhile thousands of girls are churned out by Universities only to twiddle their thumbs. Hard work is looked down upon by men. Hence jobs that call for strenuous working have to go elsewhere. Thirdly Saudis will not accept the wages, working hours, discipline and living conditions acceptable to say Indians, Pakistanis, Philipos, etc.
Such being the scenario and the prospects of change remaining bleak unemployment will steadily climb along with out-sourcing and employing expatriates. Not withstanding the stridency and rhetoric from those who matter. The remedies will differ suiting the peculiarity of each culture. Americans will have to shed a bit on dignity of labor while Saudis will have to cultivate it, for example.
In the meantime (while the sun shines), China and India can make hay.
…ponder
Monday, November 1, 2010
Kashmir
Arundhati Roy is convinced that Jammu & Kashmir was never a part of India. Why state the obvious that too in isolation. Why is she mired in the past? What about the present? My question is, was Sikkim ever a part of India? Were Hyderabad and Junagadh parts of India? Where does she draw the line? Can't she treat 1947 as the cut off date and count those princely states which acceded to India as parts of this country? How J&K is different from the rest of these princely states except for a few constitutional exceptions. DMK in its early avatar was for secession and creation of Dravidastan. If this demand is revived, will she support? Does she believe in the Constituion? If so, how come she does not feel J&K part of India today. If not, in what type of rule she believes instead of constitutional rule? Anarchy?
Regarding her accusation against certain TV channels that they are pumping for TRP ratings, while I don't disagree with her, I also feel she is also no less striving for her own TRP rating. Will she deign to boycott these channels in future? Will she file cases against them for being accessories to criminal acts as alleged by her?
Regarding our Home Minister's statement that no action is also action, I am happy that he chose to quote P V Narasimha Rao who is a person non grata with the First Family and its camp followers. Madam must really squirming and may administer a private dressing down.
As to not file sedition case against her, it is the prerogative of the Executive to file or not file or file and soft pedal cases. There are any number of examples. Given the huge backlog of cases and the tenacity with which political cases are pursued, it is a wise action or a inaction as PVR would certify from heavens with a hearty chuckle.
…ponder
Regarding her accusation against certain TV channels that they are pumping for TRP ratings, while I don't disagree with her, I also feel she is also no less striving for her own TRP rating. Will she deign to boycott these channels in future? Will she file cases against them for being accessories to criminal acts as alleged by her?
Regarding our Home Minister's statement that no action is also action, I am happy that he chose to quote P V Narasimha Rao who is a person non grata with the First Family and its camp followers. Madam must really squirming and may administer a private dressing down.
As to not file sedition case against her, it is the prerogative of the Executive to file or not file or file and soft pedal cases. There are any number of examples. Given the huge backlog of cases and the tenacity with which political cases are pursued, it is a wise action or a inaction as PVR would certify from heavens with a hearty chuckle.
…ponder
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)