To Shashi Tharoor on Reparation Debate

Shashi Tharoor,

You are an eloquent speaker, no doubt. I cannot match you on that, but I am sure you are well aware that an articulate point of view isn’t necessarily right. Statistics and history can always be twisted, what matters is the present. So to ask British to atone for their past mistake is not going to make things right. This country still thinks that an English speaker is more intelligent and logical than someone speaking in any of the Indian languages. So the slow clap you have been receiving back home for your thickly anglicized speech, may not actually be an endorsement of your point of view. You may have just spoken for debate's sake, but suddenly that speech has stoked a patriotic fervor in pseudo patriots. Agreed British gave us and other colonies a raw deal. But if we reserve the right to rant about it and feel aggrieved, there is one question that remains unanswered. What have we done to come out of that adversity and build a better country. 70 years is a good enough time for us to rise above all the issues that plagued us and move in the right direction. Have we? And I am not challenging your debate, but merely pointing out that the issues that attributed to the British Rule, are still our own undoing. So whether or britons ruled us, we would have languished with similar issues. we were and are feudal system

The Bengal famine was unfortunate and Churchill’s comment deplorable. But what do you expect from an alien. There will be no empathy, whatsoever. But then why do you forget that as of 2010, finding showed that, 10,688 lakh tonnes of food grains were found damaged in FCI depots, enough to feed over six lakh people for over 10 years. Deplorable attitude of the authorities. is that You pointed out that there were many Indian soldiers in the British army fighting WW1 and WW2. Were they forced to fight for them? I don’t think so. But the soldiers who chose to fight the British occupation were treated as traitors, so much so their files remain classified. Remember INA or Subhash Chandra Bose? So when we didnt and dont treat our countrymen with respect, do you expect much from a snooty foreigner?

About racial, and ethnic and religious tensions being a byproduct of British colonialism. Let me tell you that the caste system was more than prevalent in India. Well before British set foot. Shudras, Vaishya and Kshatriyas were a product of our society. “Achoot” was a term your culture coined, not the British. Sati was a draconian ritual your culture brought about. The British actually put an end to it. The British merely saw an opportunity in creating a rift between the religious fanatics of this country. And chose to exploit it. And what did we do in response? The esteemed father of the nation embraced nepotism and favored his trusted lieutenant over keeping the country united. He let the country get divided on religious lines and the violence that ensued is written in millions of history books. And it is still something that simmers. You gave birth to a new country on religious lines so that you could enjoy absolute power in another one is downright disgusting Mr.Tharoor. And the ethnic cleansing was something that Mughals practiced well in advance.

Now about the infrastructure. Whether or not it was for the British’s own interest, it is serving the purpose of ferrying millions of Indians daily. They have gone from meter gauge to superfast trains. And it takes 10 years to lay a 7km metro line? Delhi being an exception. Because we are downright lazy and corrupt. Even the people at the helm of affairs are either a result of Reservation or Nepotism. And that is something we imbibed from the British, setting aside all the good things they possessed. So, if British had not laid the railways, we would have. But it would have taken years.India may have had 23% share in the world economy, but that was at a time the world was hardly industrialized. And by the time British left, other countries had come of age. So instead of talking about India’s economy, let us talk about countries who were pummeled during the world war 2 and yet rebuilt and became an economic powerhouse. Japan and Germany. What did India do? Sucked up to the Nehru’s and Gandhis. And let them fill their coffers.

Did you say we snatched democracy from the British? Or course we did, for it to be further pushed into non-existence. In a country where you cannot hoist a flag on top of your house, or speak openly about the ills of politics and high handedness of VIPs, democracy is just a glorified word. Oh wait, in-a-first a democratic country had state of emergency on the whim of an autocratic leader. Nehru himself issued a gag order on a poet for criticizing him. Hmm, that is a democracy with a pinch of nehruvian philosophy. So democracy is little or no meaning at all in this country. You may talk about democracy, but it is reserved for people who walk the powerful corridors of Lutyens Delhi. And remember, you stood in a country and spoke ill of it. Imagine talking ill about India in India, you would be lynched. You have Indians sitting in British Parliament. But well Sonia Gandhi was strongly opposed as a PM. So there my friend, you have the difference. Democracy indeed.

Gandhi didn’t die fighting for freedom but died for the price he made the country pay for the freedom. The bifurcation. So why is it that your party observes his death anniversary as a Martyr’s day but not the death anniversary of Bhaghat Singh and many others like him? And they actually fought for the country. Because they didn’t conform to your idea of fighting for freedom. So spare us the bullshit of what the British did to us, when you couldn’t honor your own countrymen and their sacrifices. Britons did what they did, and nothing will absolve them of their tyranny and past crimes. But it is absolutely disgusting that we didnt do anything to right the wrongs in the past 70 years.

Seeking Britain’s apology will amount to nothing. Reparations will amount to nothing. What the country needs is that all the wrongs committed by its own countrymen shouldn’t be repeated. If you reflect on your speech, you would realize most of our modern day problems are our own creation, much after British left. We could have learnt so much from the British, much like Hong Kong. But we chose to be governed by our own insecurities, diversity, narrow mindedness and whims. And that is why we are blaming a former ruler than our own self. An oppressor is only as guilty as the oppressed.

Why Changing a DP is not enough!!!

Sitting here in the US, I can see how excited people are about the landmark judgement of allowing the LGBT community to enter into a civil union. Last night there were fireworks in the LGBT colors at a park nearby. The colors reminds me of the Facebook display pictures of people back in India that are flooding my timeline. As heartening as it is to see people back home celebrating this judgement, I also feel something amiss. An opportunity to look cool is never something we will let slip. And if it garners you likes on Facebook or getting retweeted on twitter, why not? After all US is the gold standard for human rights amongst other things.

In India, the contempt or disregard for homosexuals was given life by our society and how it portrays these individuals. Our most staple ‘source of information’, Bollywood or Indian Cinema, has had a long standing role to play in creating such an image. For long the movies have portrayed these individuals as effeminate, sexually promiscuous and invariably having a floppy wrist. We laugh our asses off, and bring those assumptions to our everyday lives. So we are okay to ridicule them, but we won’t witness their humane sides. And it just not only about the gay community, but about transgender too. They have been ostracized and ridiculed in equal measure. So to the less-informed-social-media-addict Indian, here is a poser. Do you even know what the T in LGBT stands for?

Transgender. And that is exactly where my problem is. So while we are celebrating a law in the US, do we even a proper word to address the transgenders back home? We call them ‘Chakkas’, all because their genitalia didn’t turn out in a way god intended. How many of you even know that the Indian Supreme Court, in April 2014 recognized the transgender people as a 'third gender' in law. Now where was the support or euphoria, when this landmark judgement was made? Did we go around showing solidarity to the Hijras? Did we change our DPs to reflect that? No we didn’t because, Hijras aren’t as good looking as Matt Bomer or Luke Evans. Because Bollywood celebrities dint tweet about it or newspapers didn’t carry a column on “what the western media thinks of hijra community”? Because Hijras don’t have an Icon. They don’t have anyone who could champion their cause. They are just a footnote in the LGBT community.

I also saw people deriding the Indian system for not having a similar judgement to that in the US. First of all, we don’t even accept Transgenders as part of our society yet, in spite of a law in place. What is the guarantee that the Gay community will be allowed a place under the sun if their civil union is allowed? So unless we change our mindset about each letter in LGBT, we simply don’t have the right to celebrate the colors. We may, but we shouldn’t. Let me tell you, some of US laws are archaic and draconian too. Not so hunky dory now, is it?

And it is just not the US that we are fascinated with. We are in general fascinated with what the West does. Because if you are aware of what is happening in the west and not know what is happening in your own, you are perceived as cool. Remember Je Suis Charlie? How many of you know that 2 journalists were burnt alive in the last month and went completely un-noticed. Ice bucket Challenge was another. We went gaga over Malala Yousafzai’s so-called crusade on girl’s education, where she involuntarily took a bullet. But we didn’t know about a man who championed the same cause for years, and didn’t reward him until the foreign media did or the Norwegian Nobel Committee. Kailash Satyarthi.

We try to mimic everything the west does, but when they comment on the decadence in our society, we are up in arms and attack their culture and upbringing. Stop following the mad herd and look at the big picture. Everyone deserves a place under the sun. Not just Gay and Lesbians.

Is one rape more vicious than the other?

Not many knew there was a World Summit for Women in New York, last month. It took a 1.47s of retort/rebuttal from an eminent Indian journalist to bring crime against women back into focus, at least for Indians. More than concentrating on what the summit was about, the country was more embroiled in lacerating that foreign journalist for stereotyping India. But the same citizens were protesting the ban of India’s Daughter, when the right wing groups were this time lacerating Leslee Udwin, a foreigner, for potentially tarnishing India’s cultural fabric. Same issue but different views. However, my focus this time is not about the imminent journalist or Leslee Udwin, but about Suzette Jordan.

The country paid glowing tributes to Nirbhaya, rechristening her, naming a law after her, giving money, job and apartment to her family. Also her rapists were swiftly put behind the bar and she had the entire backing of the country and government alike. Though she didn’t live to see all this happening, but it was justice of sorts. What did Suzette Jordan, the victim in the park street rape case, get? Turned away by the police. Mamta Banerjee even labeled the rape as an attempt to tarnish her government’s squeaky clean image. But Suzette Jordan continued her lone battle, without any support. Reason for no support? She was a divorcee, was out partying that night and got into the car with strangers. All taboos in our archaic society and now-defunct culture. Is one rape more vicious than the other?

Three of her rapists were jailed but the 2 other remain at large, even now, 3 years after the rape. While she was called on to talk about crime against women on different forums, including Satyamev Jayate, she was still stigmatized enough not to land a job. Even as she continued fighting, she made a telling contribution. A contribution that the media didn’t find anything tragic, aesthetic, dramatic or melodramatic about. Hence escaped everyone’s attention. Suzette Jordan was instrumental in ensuring 2 finger test ceased to exist. This test on a rape victim was intrusive, agonizing and most importantly humiliating. The test has been banned since.

So why am I talking about Suzette Jordan? Because while we are thrilled about how Barkha Dutt shuts a foreign journalist for stereotyping India, and Deepika Padukone’s hair raising my choice video. Arnab's crass demand for answers Or even Leslee Udwin’s documentary.  But we did little to support Suzette or hail her contribution.  Unfortunately, Suzette died earlier this year. And left behind 2 daughters and a mother. While our government did a lot for Nirbhaya, sadly enough Suzette’s case wasn’t tragic or gory enough for the government to react. So much so it derided and stigmatized her.

As I write, there is another case of a girl dying in Moga, Punjab. Thrown off the bus and left to die. As much as our focus should be on the perpetrators, instead it is on the political family that operated the bus. The opposition demanded the resignation of the politicians, instead of offering relief to the family or ensuring a swifter apprehending of the offenders. The incident in Moga wouldn’t have received as much attention, if it were not for the similarities to the Nirbhaya case or the connection with the political family. Our priorities are so misplaced that we seek sensation over actual content. Nirbhaya got more attention because of the gore and tragic end the girl met with. It was a simmering issue and the events of December 2012 provided it with let out. If not, the case would still be dragging in the courts.

Crime against women is a global phenomenon and there is no shame in accepting that our archaic norms have only propagated and continued to label women as the one who deserves to be oppressed. Acid attacks, dowry, honor killings and female foeticide. Crime enough to cringe anyone. Rape is no bigger or smaller than any of these. A quick search of the word foeticide returns “Female Foeticide in India” as the first result. It is not stereotyping. It is the truth. So before we all raise up and pummel the foreign media for stereotyping us, let us think hard about our issues. No need to compare, because we ought to solve our own issues.

Let’s not change our focus from real issues. Let us recognize real people and their struggle. Let us rally behind the likes Suzette Jordan who fought for real issues.

Don’t have to put the women on the pedestal, put them right beside you. She is no less. 

India's Daughter

Every day, for the past week, I have just been waking up to why India’s Daughter shouldn’t be banned. There is also a counter argument on why it should be banned, albeit fades in numbers compared to the former. Excruciatingly disturbing, as it was to read about the outrage in the winter of 2012, it is equally painful to know that the case still drags on in the courts. I am not writing to state my allegiance if the documentary should be aired or not. But I would like to know the very thought behind why there exist these two warring factions, who have woken up from a slumber after the events of the December 2012.

The government, as soon as it learned about the airing of the documentary, decided to ban it. We may never know the real reason behind it. But they sure have cited legal breach as the reason. Any material written or screening of a sub judice case cannot be allowed, for it can influence the court’s decision. For example, the accused parties in the 1993 bomb blast case had appealed to the court to stop the screening of the movie Black Friday, while the case was still in the Bombay High Court. By that logic, it makes sense for the government to react the way it did. The government’s stand could also be based on trying to save its face after drawing flak for the deteriorating law and order situation. I won’t be surprised if it’s the latter, for I pretty much know the politicians could stoop to any level.

In the same vein, there are some supporting the ban for a completely different reason. These are the pseudo nationals who blame the external forces for trying to portray India in a poor light. These are the ostriches of the society, who think they uphold the cultural, moral fabric of the country. I think the documentary shows what the truth is. Whether it is produced by BBC or NDTV. It states the fact, and shows the convoluted and perverted men behind the ghastly act. So to ban the documentary because it shows the country in bad light is plain ludicrous. I think Indians have done enough damage to the country and its values, and it doesn't need a foreigner to come and do any further damage.  If these people can and have the balls, first gag Mulayam Singh, who called rape as a playful act for boys.

Now to the educated elite who have been crying hoarse the day the documentary was banned. Stating that every man should watch it to know how the girl was raped and left to die. I don’t believe in the argument, personally. The documentary though gut wrenching will not change the attitude of a rapist or a non-rapist, for lack of a better term. If it indeed did, the two lawyers wouldn't have spoken the way they did. They have been associated with the case in close quarters and know the gory details of the case. And at this point they are fighting for a reduced sentence for the convicts. And mind you these are educated men. Men rape on two accounts. Lack of respect for women and the sexual rage. Does the documentary address any of it? No. So to state that every man should watch it, for it would change their view about Rape is myopic. If a man harbors any of the above two reasons in his mind, he will rape. No matter what.

It is also cited that Jyoti’s parents agreed to participate in the making of the documentary. And hence the documentary should be allowed to go on air. The parents are fighting for justice, and they will go to any length, even if it is help from foreign media. The makers paid Mukesh Singh, the convict, to go on air to state what he did, was in bad taste. If the journo indeed believed in responsible journalism, she wouldn't have paid him for it. I have watched documentaries all my life, such gory details are often shown as texts. But then to gain viewership, one would stoop to any level. Mukesh Singh’s fate is sealed. There is no point in giving him a platform to state his reason behind the rape. Whatever his reason be, RAPE can never be justified. Some men who don’t hold women in high regard, will only feel vindicated with the lawyer and the convict’s view.

Rapes, unfortunately, are a universal phenomenon. Gender equality and respect for the women folk need to be taught from birth, and that to a large extent will reduce the instances of rape or violent crime against women. A deterrent would be swift and just punishment to the perpetrators. And since it cannot be completely eradicated, rape shouldn't be treated as a stigma. For then the scar of the act is bigger on the psyche of the victim than the perpetrator himself. Most women and their families, in fear of being stigmatized and vilified, don’t report these violent crimes, and that gives enough chutzpah for the rapist to commit the crime. And without a report, they would never be a conviction and the rapists are well aware of it. 

Gender equality, swift justice and non-vilifying. This women’s day, I hope these happen. Women need to be adored, not devoured.

Alan Turing

Watched 'The Imitation game' the other day. A really good watch, not exceptional but better than most biographies which focus solely on the melodrama and coming of age theme.

The movie had beautifully woven 3 phases of Turing's life which had a telling effect on him. To me the most endearing was the childhood, as it showed how he fell in love and how it ceased. Beautifully captured. His reticent nature felt a bit of a stretch as is the stereotype that nerds/scholars are condescending, but then seems like he truly was. The movie went through at a good pace, showing his genius and his failings. What left a lump was how he was treated by the law, after it came to light that he was a homosexual.

A man, who probably shortened the war by 2 years and saved over 18 million lives was chemically castrated for no fault of his. The authorities treated him for over a year to bring down his libido, in lieu of a prison sentence. If he did not do what he did, we would have had a completely different view of the world or the world itself would have been different. So a man's sexual preference took precedence over his act of saving Britain and the world. Say what you may, Britain owes him a big one. What's worse, her majesty granted Turing a posthumous royal pardon. wtf?

Who the heck are you to even give him a royal pardon, if anything you should be the one seeking pardon. The man saved your god forsaken, lame kingdom. You had no contribution to the war and no contribution whatsoever even after you became the queen. It just goes on to show, the world would go any distance to punish a social taboo over respecting someone for an act of humanity. The world may legalize same sex marriage, but the taboo will still remain. legalizing is not the solution, what is important is that recognizing it is as a natural phenomenon. Its not even a choice, it just happens. Because then, you wont have a reason to legalize it at all.

Peace Alan Turing. You inspired a generation, and it will remain indebted to your genius.

Peshawar and Paris.

I don’t know if I am angry or sad about what happened in Peshawar and now in Paris. One was violation of freedom to live and the other violation of freedom of speech/expression. But the common denominator remains the same. Religious Extremism. I won’t go on to say Islam is the religion of terrorists, but I would definitely say that the Muslim world is significantly more intolerant than other religions.

I understand the angst in killing in Paris, for the victims were ‘infidels’. The term, for those who are not Muslims or don’t believe in Islam, popularized by religious clerics at madrasas and by terrorists in camps. For the perpetrators believed that the cartoonists had desecrated the prophet. But what about Peshawar, the victims practiced the same religion, didn’t desecrate the prophet, probably prayed 5 times a day, loved their parents and most importantly were innocent. Why them? They weren’t ‘infidels’.

Paris

Though the act in Paris was carried out by terrorists, but it surely didn’t cringe most Muslims, for they too believed that the cartoonists erred and deserved to be punished. An Indian Muslim leader announced a reward to whoever killed the cartoonists. An Iranian cleric issued a fatwa against these cartoonists. But the entire Muslim world was cast in a pall of gloom after what happened in Peshawar. Because their own brethren had been massacred? Did the same Muslim leader or cleric offer any reward or issue a fatwa against the perpetrators of Peshawar? Because the perpetrators this time were of their own brethren and they were killing in the name of prophet and the fighting for a sharia law.

Is Islam so fundamentally unstable that couple of cartoons can destroy the status of their deity? Is it so unstable that it cannot brush aside these insults and move on with their 5 times a day prayer? Is it so unstable that to prove its point, it kills a Muslim security guard in cold blood and kills over a hundred innocent children? I sure believe it wasn’t, but the interpretations are so fatalist and hard lined. And there lies the problem. The self-proclaimed messengers of prophet’s diktat are killing a religion which probably was only created for prosperity of a certain section and instill discipline.

Even though west may have been insensitive to Islam, but the fact remains they have let Muslims live and prosper in their country and even offered refuge. There could be racist flavors in the west and that exists in every country, but the state has given them equal rights. They have let their land be used for masjids and madrassas. Be it Europe or the Americas. But demanding respect for their religion and specifically Allah is a matter of choice for people from other religion. If the Muslim community places their religious beliefs over quality of life, they should go to an absolute Islamic country and live a religious life, than demand respect for their religion in a Christian or Hindu state.

Would Saudi Arabia let non-Muslims carry religious texts into their country or even let a Church or Hindu temple be built on its land? I don’t think so. Then why do the Muslims demand such things on other’s land. The Muslim community creates a ruckus for the right to wear a hijab in schools in Europe but does object to a woman, from west, wearing a skirt in Saudi Arabia? So it goes on to say” you come to my country and you play by my draconian beliefs, but when I come to yours, I will throw all of your rules out of the window and practice my beliefs”. Classic, isn’t it?

Peshawar

Peshawar was a case of a state failing its citizen and snatching their right to live. For long Pakistan had harbored the fundamentalists, first for the mujahedeen war, then the 1996 toppling of Afghanistan by Taliban and then sheltering them after 9/11. And the same jihadis now targeted what was supposed to be the future of Pakistan. It was too late for Pakistan to differentiate between the good and bad terrorists after the attack. Apart from condemning, there was nothing done as terrorists in Pakistan still enjoy a safe haven.

In November, Adviser to the Prime Minister of Pakistan on National Security and Foreign Affairs, Sartaj Aziz said that Pakistan should not target militants who do not threaten the country's security." Why should America's enemies unnecessarily become our enemies," Sartaj Aziz said during an interview with BBC Urdu. I feel sad for any country that has leaders such as this one. This man is okay with militants using his country to launch attacks on other countries, but hates the tradeoff that comes with it. He begs for money from US, but does not want the trouble that the money was supposed to take care of.

Salman Taseer, who vehemently opposed the blasphemy law and pleaded for reforms, was killed in 2011 for his views. And the killer was not only showered with praise but his trial was obstructed too by clerics and their supporters. They don’t spare their own, for religion has the highest pedestal possible in Pakistan or in most Islamic countries. Pakistan would need to dismantle all types of terrorist infrastructure in their country if it hopes to keep its sovereignty intact and not be dictated by clerics and madrassas.