20th Century

The death toll in 20^th Century is listed below. Bulk of these casualties can be directly attributed to the ‘peace-loving’, ‘liberator’ and ‘democratic’ nations of western hemisphere.

1) First World War - (1914-18): 1,50,00,000

2) Russian Civil War – (1917-22): 90,00,000

3) Soviet Union, Stalin's regime (1924-53): 2,00,00,000

4) Second World War (1937-45): 5,50,00,000

5) Post-War Expulsion of Germans from East Europe (1945-47): 21,00,000

6) Chinese Civil War (1945-49): 25,00,000

7) People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975):4,00,00,000

8) Tibet (1950 et seq.): 600 000

9) Mexican Revolution (1910-20): 1 000 000

10) Armenian Massacres (1915-23): 1 500 000

11) China War-lord era (1917-28): 800 000

12) China, Nationalist Era (1928-37): 3 100 000

13) Korean War (1950-53): 2 800 000

14) Rwanda and Burundi (1959-95): 1 350 000

15) Second Indochina War (1960-75): 3 500 000

(It includes Vietnam war, Vietnam Civil war, Cambodian war)

16) Ethiopia (1962-92): 1 400 000

17) Nigeria (1966-70): 1 000 000

18) Bangladesh (1971): 1 250 000

19) Cambodia, Khmer Rouge (1975-1978): 1 650 000

20) Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1 800 000

21) Iran Iraq War (1980-88): 1 000 000

22) Sudan (1983 et seq.): 1 900 000

23) Kinshasa Congo (1998 et seq.): 3 300 000

Source: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

Mr. Manmohan Singh and Oxford

I had a very long discussion with my friend J.B. about the statement made by Mr. Manmohan Singh at Oxford. I wrote a blog denouncing him for making, what I considered as a brash statement. I thought he was indirectly eulogizing the British rule. But apparently he was not. I still stand by my statements in that particular blog, even I though I am ready apologies for misunderstanding Mr. Singhs’ statement. I agree with him (if he indeed said that! ) when he said that the infrastructure or bureaucracy British people created in India, for plundering country more systematically, helped in India in post-independence period.

British rule was worst in most of the sense than previous invaders India witnessed. Even though the damage was not visible as in case of previous invasions, the mentality that British people created is still hurting India.

Ram Janmabhumi

Less crudely, such questions are partly answered everyday by things like the city of Ayodhya, in Thailand. The Thai Ayodhya is not only sacred; it is unlikely to concede that Madurai is only a derivative of Mathura. Once however you historicize Rama, once you locate his birthplace at a particular Ayodhya at a particular point of time, either to territorialize his claim to a temple or to oppose it, you atutomatically deny or diminish the sacrednessof the other Ayodhya and, while you may serve the purpose of those who view Rama as a national leader, a historical figure and a cultural hero, you cannot sustain his stuuatus as a god who, as a god, has to exist today. If Rama is, only then is he Rama. If Rama was, he is no Rama. This is the paradox in which one gets caught when one accepts the language of either the Hindutva-hawkers or the secular fundamentalist.

- Ashis Nandy

Secularism

Whenever someone tries to write about the Islamic destruction in Medieval India, the secularists are up in arms. I really don’t care about the secularist because they are useless and they twisted the secularism in such a way that unity of different faiths, which they sought to do, is almost impossible to achieve now. But I don’t intend to write about secularism; that would be digression.

The Islamic invaders coming from Arabia were barbaric and religious fanatics. They wanted to spread their faith and kill who refuse to obey them. The destruction is real. The obliterated civilization of Zoroastrians in Iran is perfect example of annihilation and so is the Gandhar. (Present day Afghanistan)

But that was the way it used to happen in those times. Christians did the same thing in North and South America, as religious zealotry was a norm and secularism was rare, rather unacceptable. But that does not mean that we should not even talk about the destruction. Millions and millions of people lost their lives so at least we can do today is to evaluate the past and build the future in such a way that such genocides won’t happen again.

The Islamic marauders too were marauded; by Genghis Khan in 12^th century. And, even though both the victims and victors were of same religion, the genocide and annihilation done by Genghis Khan is unparallel in history. The genocide done by Hitler needed modern technologies but Genghis Khan did that with bare swords and hatchets. The sacking of Baghdad was so inhuman and barbaric that even today Baghdad grieves for its destruction.

Alas, that is not everybody thinks. Secularist made it impossible to discuss anything related to religion. We can not discuss the achievements of religion of majority nor can we discuss shortcomings of religion of minorities. Without open discussion society is increasingly becoming like stagnant water, full of dirt and mosquitoes. And, then everybody (media and “intellectuals”) show surprise at Gujrat riots, at Ayodhya riots. Where as the Ahamadabad riots in 1967 were worst than Ayodhya riots and Godhra was under curfew for six months in 1947.

Considering the media bias and intellectual blindness in India there is little chance that situation will change in near future. And, it will continue to affect the future growth of India adversely.

Invasion Theory II

Recently, Mr. Manmohan Singh babbled that British rule actually helped India. I thought I will be shocked to hear India’s prime minister saying that, but I wasn’t. It will be too naive to be shocked with this statement. The reason behind such a statement is not that Mr. Singh is Britain educated but the reason is total lack of historical perspective among the society. The problem is two pronged; first we do not take our history seriously, mostly brushing it of as ‘history’ and second, few people who take history seriously usually have no real sense of history.

As V. S. Naipaul correctly observed that, Indians need to face their wounds; the wounds of a defeated and plundered civilization. We say that we have ancient civilization. But if we ask ourselves what exactly do we know about our ancient civilization then very few people can actually answer the question. We no longer have our old universities, medicine, engineering and we are fast loosing our philosophy. We do not even speak, write or even understand Sanskrit anymore. (The way we are going, I doubt after fifty years we will be speaking even Hindi) There is no question that our civilization is old, already an antique when western civilization rose in Rome but it happened thousands of years ago. But this false sense of superiority seems to me like a poor attempt to conceal the deep wounds we had in last thousand years. The Islamic invaders followed by British crooks beheaded us so badly that we are still trying to find the logic explanation to our defeat. All of our values that lead us to dazzling heights proved completely useless against the marauding and barbaric invaders from west. Unfortunately we are still trying to pick up those values and boast the greatness of our civilization.

Out of this apathy towards our own history rose the attitude which is reflected in our Prime ministers statement. He is not to be blamed as he is mare reflection of our society. Lot of Indians do think that British rule was good. But was it really good or it was better than Islamic invaders we had for 500 years? Actually, both of them were equally bad. Both of them tried to destroy what we stand for and what we strive for. Our religion, tradition, custom, language, history, even geography is muddled because of them. They left us with no sense of direction and with no sense of ourselves..

Within 60 years of Independence if Indian prime minister states that British rule was good then I am scared of the future. I am just hoping that Mr. Singh statement was politically motivated and he did not meant that. But even in this hope lies a defeat which I am not ready to face.

Peshawe

The Peshawe dynasty is vastly misunderstood among other dynasties in India. Instead of counting them among the best administered and bravest (They are the one who officially overthrown Delhi sultanate and won area up to Attock in Pakistan.) they are blamed for numerous things. Particularly, Marathas sulked endlessly, as they had to fight under Peshawe’s (Brahmins) supervision in post-Shivaji period.

Strong navy was ultimate dream of Shivaji and he worked relentlessly for this dream and succeeded up to great extent. He halted British businessman from establishing strong base in Kokan area and stunted the growth of Portuguese outside Goa. His ships used to wreck havoc up to Arabian Peninsula. Among the other things, Peshawe’s are blamed for not building maintaining Navy in Arabian seas. Even if we accept this blame, we should consider the reasons behind it. It was almost impossible for them to keep eye on Navy’s growth because they were concentrating mainly on expanding empire on the west and northern front. They won area up to Gwalior, and virtually stopped further invasions from west and central Asia. Plus, they were fighting with their own brethren. Holkar, Shinde, Bhosle (Nagpur) were not co-operating with them at best and fighting against them at worst. .

An important thing to note is, British established their firm base in Calcutta first as they realized that it is impossible to expand their empire from Western Ghats. So, considering Peshawe’s did grave mistake by neglecting Navy, they were fairly successful in keeping sea enemies at bay as even Portuguese remained confined to Goa and there by serving the purpose of Navy.

It is a fashion to criticize the Peshawe’s because, first, there no more Peshwe’s left and second, Maratha’s still wield power in Maharashtra. But, I don’t think that Peshwe’s were Brahmins nor Shivaji was Maratha. They were great people who worked selflessly with grand aim in mind and they worked incessantly to achieve that goal. It’s because their bravery that we still boast name of our country as Bharat and still follow our religion and our tradition. Blaming someone because of caste politics is not only an attempt to trivialize their life but also an insult to their achievements.

Thomas L. Friedman

Apparently, Thomas Friedman, a New York Times columnist is increasingly becoming popular in India and among Indian Diaspora. His columns now appear regularly on Indian express website and he is getting quoted everywhere, particularly with respect to his views about India. But, I am increasingly getting frustrated with him, I mean with his views. Sure, he meets with all the important people, he travels around the world, but, instead he becoming rationalist and clear thinker, he is becoming naïve and his solutions to the problem, particularly about Islamic terrorism are childish.

He always carries a sense of superiority because he is American (though, he does criticizes America) and talks as if he stands on morally high ground. He sincerely believes that America is the only savior of the world and last hope for world redemption. He thinks America is beacon of democracy and believes that only hardcore capitalism is the only answer to all the world problems.

His solution for Islamic militancy is absolutely rubbish. He seems to believe that peaceful approach will do magic with militancy, at the same though, he thinks that Iraq invasion was necessary. In his talk about terrorism, he fails to mention Pakistan and that makes me wonder whether this person is biased or plainly stupid.

His views about India are definitely positive but he believes that India is lucky country, at least in terms of its software business. And, he thinks that it was America that helped India immensely. It is truth that Indian companies earn bulk of their money from U.S. but at the same time it is hard to discern whether India needs America or America needs India more. Mr. Friedman seems to see India as if a child growing under proper care and care is provided by America.

He try to simplify every problem and there nothing wrong in projecting a problem in simplified manner but that does not mean the problem itself is simple. He almost always fails to see the complexity behind most of the issues, be it Islamic terrorism or super power status of the America.

Capitalism II

Capitalism is defined as economic system based on private ownership of the means of production, in which personal profit can be acquired through investment of capital and employment of labor. Capitalism is grounded in the concept of free enterprise, which argues that government intervention in the economy should be restricted and that a free market, based on supply and demand, will ultimately maximize consumer welfare.

Basically, it is an economic system by people and for people. But increasingly, the word people is getting replaced by corporations. And, instead of satisfying the demands of the society these corporations are creating demand for their products, at the expense of community welfare. The strategies employed by fast food companies are fine example of demand generating tactics.

I do not claim to be a master economist and there is fair amount of
probability that I am completely wrong here. The tactics employed by
fast food companies (Americans spend $110 billions on fast food
annually, more than they spend on education!) that augmented their
sales to colossus level in comparison with their business in 1980's,
should be thoroughly scrutinized. These companies did not pay any
attention to the healthy diet, in the name of cost cutting; they pay
extremely low to their employees. They add artificial flavors for some
kind of addictive taste. Also, these companies focus themselves to
children. If a child is addicted to fast food then the fast food
company earns a life time customer. In the book Fast Food Nation, the
authors made a valid point; generally a child associates particular
taste of food to a particular incidence. That is the reason; we always
have nostalgic feeling about mom's food. So, with proper
advertisement, if a child is enticed to fast food outlet and if he
spends happy time there with his or her family then the child will
associate that particular taste with happy family time.

The scary part is, this research is done by fast food companies and not by
author. Manipulating communities demand is probably rampant in every
industry. I quoted fast food industry because I read the book about
it. But cosmetic industry is probably, another fine example of such
tactics. Such kind of capitalism is certainly harmful to the society. Ironically, the cure of this problem is hard to find as society is itself generating the perpetrator.

Capitalism

Being an economic major I am supposed to believe in capitalism and free market economics. But I am increasingly getting skeptical about these policies. I am not turning communist or socialist, but any thing in excess is bane. So, capitalism in excess is harmful to the society. The monotonous way with which U.S. and western powers continue to advocate capitalism scares me. One thing, in last two hundred years or so Europeans have created havoc across the world, so it is hard to believe in them now. Second thing, the guiding principal of current of form capitalism; greed is good, if followed, will lead to systematic destruction of the societies across the globe and not to tell, of environment too.

If the resources of the globe are constant, that means supply is constant and demand for these resources is forced to increase continuously then the strain on the supply will cross the threshold at some point and at that point, either strongest (that is western countries) will seize those resources and rest of the world will be left in lurch or quest to fulfill the demand will lead to total destruction of environment. The logging of rainforest, disappearance of coral reefs, more and more species are joining the extinct list, (at least one specie vanishes every day) over fishing in seas and in rivers, increase in barren land due to excessive crops, tremendous strain on fresh water supply, decrease in ozone layer, decrease in Ice shield in North and South pole etc. The list is long and new things keep on adding.

Apart from these obvious environment degradation, the living standard of most of the people is decreasing rapidly (I have listed few facts in a prior blog.) and wealth is getting accumulated in few hands.

I am not completely against capitalism. The effects of communism are horrendous and we can not allow communism to take hold again. But I strongly believe that, models of capitalism should change according to countries, societies and people. The form of capitalism in US does not guarantee success in other countries. Extremities always meet at the end. Communism tried to use same economic model for all situation and forced such policies on all kind of people. U.S. and western countries are doing same thing albeit, with capitalism.

Biased History

I like history, I should have been history major but I really doubt I would have learned more in history classes than what I am learning or understanding now. Not to chide the history stream but I am rather skeptical of streams like history, political science etc, as I am very puzzled by consistent rift between the ‘liberal’ outlook of the curriculum and actual outcome it, generated through student.

Discussing history with anyone invariably ends with the sentence that interpretation of history changes according to the person. And I refuse to buy this argument. History is like a fact book. Facts can not be interpreted because that is why they are called as facts. Interpretation may be considered as a best mean to reach the end or decipher the reality when historical data is not completely collected. But when complete data is available, interpreting history is nothing short of criminal act. Sadly that is what we usually witness and, explain it with the argument that winners write the history. Of course, winners definitely write the history but fortunately they almost never succeed to wipe off the real history and it is up to the current generation to find the facts and learn it.

Such examples, where history is not only miss-represented history but also miss-understood history are numerous. I can understand the presenting history that suits the invader or ruler but conveniently misunderstanding history is a crime. I think such a behavior stems from either sheer dumbness and laziness to understanding the reality or incapability of facing the deep wounds suffered by society as a whole.

History is extremely important for any society. History actually defines who we are; it tells us what we aim at and shows the pitfalls in our quest to attain the aim. It is utterly foolish to ‘live’ in history but reaching opposite spectrum by completely denying or denigrating history is foolish too. Polluting the history or accepting the polluted history will make our quest more arduous or in worst case completely throw us off the track, forcing us to live like a headless body.

A good Chemistry Question

A good question for Organic Chemistry students –:
State the constituents of Burger King strawberry milk shake?

Answer –
A typical artificial strawberry flavor, like the kind found in a Burger King strawberry milk shake, contains the following ingredients: Amyl Acetate, Benzyl Isobutyrte, butyric acid, cinnamyl isobutyrate, cinnamyl valerate, cognac essential oil, diacetyl, dipropyl ketone, ethyl acetate, ethyl amylketone, ethyl butyrate, ethyl cinnamate, ethyl heptanoate, ethyl heptylate, ethyl lactate, ethyl methylphenylglycidate, ethyl nitrate, ethyl propionate, ethyl valerate, heliotropin, hydroxyphenyl-2-butanone, isobutyl anthranilate, isobutyl butyrate, lemon essential oil, maltol, 4 methylacetophenone, methyl anthranilate, methyl benzoate, methyl cinnamate, methyl heptine carbonate, methyl naphtyhl ketone, methyl salicylate, mint essential oil, neroli essential oil, nerolin, neryl isobutyrate, orris butter, phenethyl alcohol, rose, rum ether, vanillin and solvent…

Michael Jackson

1) I do not know his name but I saw his case on Spike TV. This guy was already a suspect for Marijuana dealings. He was caught by cop for speed limit violation. He resisted arrest and can you guess how long he was sent to jail? Any guess……well 60 years with little or no chance of parole.

2) I saw this case again on Spike TV. This guy was a cop himself. Off duty, he was detained by cops for an extremely trivial traffic violation. Supposedly, this guy did not give indicator while changing lane. Obviously, he was furious for his detainment and refused to show his license. The cop on duty tried to arrest him and this guy resisted arrest. Verdict, lower court sentenced him for 7 years, he went further to Supreme Court, citing racist treatment. (The cop on duty was white and the state was Florida) the case is pending but in the mean time he was suspended from his police department.

3) The third story is of another black person who was a child prodigy. A pop icon of 80’s who attained the star hood in his early teens. In 1992 ( or 93?) Michael Jackson was charged first time for sexually molesting a young male child. The case was settled out of court, with molested child getting undisclosed amount as compensation. He continued to share his bed with young male children. But according to him there is no molestation, whatsoever. He had a bad childhood so he wanted these children to enjoy as much as possible. Indeed, a saintly objective. He was charged again in 2005 on 10 counts, ranging from sexual molestation to intoxicating young children. Government prosecutors provided all possible testimonies and evidenes to jurors. In spite of that Michael Jackson was acquitted on all charges. Reason, evidence wasn’t enough. Yeh ,right !

Oh by the way in all three cases the suspects (or victims, at least in first two cases) were blacks.

Michael Jackson’s lawyers played the race card well. They made jurors guilty of punishing a black person but at the same time made them reluctant to convict a white person.

- Jay Leno in Tonight Show.

( This quote does not make any sense with respect to the blog but I still quoted it, because, its funny!)

Invasion Theory

The passivity with which foreign invasions are studied makes me sick and angry. Particularly in India, where Islamic invasions since 8th century and Christian proselytizing invasions since 17th century had profound and destabilizing effect on the society. Invasions are not easy business. One king trying to win more kingdoms or one religion trying to proselytize more people is some of the childish explanation to invasions that conceals the barbaric and disastrous effect of the reality.

My point is that, irrespective of the time of invasion and invaders, the basic pattern of destruction remains relatively same. There seems to be certain common thread that runs through all mayhems. There are two basic ways of destructions; ironically in this age of categorization and choices, even destructions can be categorized.

One of kind of destruction is complete annihilation of the civilization like Spanish Inquisition or Arab Muslims wiping out Zoroastrian civilization. In both cases the invaders not only changed the language, religion, customs, myths & legends of conquered people but they virtually changed the race by marrying them or by other means. The Incas Maya’s and etc of south and Central America are museumised, and Zoroastrians are dwelling in a tiny population in India after loosing their land and heritage in 7th century.

The second type of invasion, though similar to first type of invasion on the onset, but is subtler in numerous ways to conquering the society. Good example is British rule in India. With huge land and huge population under their control, their (Britishers) standard methods of changing race (the way they did in Scotland) or native populations genocide (like in North America and Australia) were useless. So, they adopted different method. First they tried to change the language and they were successful up to certain extent. Second they changed the way Indians used to work. With constantly referring Indians as “lazy natives” etc, (Obviously, lot of other methods were used but I am just giving you an example.) they induced a sense of inferiority complex among the society. They divided the society on the basis of caste, clans and most importantly on the basis of religion. Rest of the destruction is left to native to do. The natives themselves start disliking what their heritage, their history even their skin color and they do everything that is possible to distance themselves from their own culture.

What Britishers couldn’t achieve in 100 years of rule, is now, frantically attained by Indians themselves. It is a fashion, a status symbol to talk in English. A person is considered almost an illiterate if he can’t understand English. Among the Hindus’, it is necessary to distance oneself from religion, in order to be seen as progressive. Imitation of western culture is best possible innovation. From, the way to dress to the way to soap operas and films are made, replication of western ideas is paramount in order to succeed.

In post WW-II world, the role of religion in obscuring diverse cultural identities declined considerably as globalization and capitalism is doing that role in much slicker way and with considerably less resistance. It is up to the native people again to defend themselves and save their heritage and culture. The odds are against them but the battle is worth a fighting.

Partition

India-Pakistan partition always puzzles me. There are numerous theories behind this largest ever human migration, but each and every theory seems to be wrapped in the dark mist of mystery. Even after 50 years the blame game continues and it still has potential to create substantial commotion across the borders. Thinking about this painful historical event, I stumble upon couple of questions and facts that are hard to ignore and yet never correctly answered or quoted in media or remembered by general populace.

First, I strongly believe that Jinnah was the sole architect of the partition. Gandhi strongly opposed to partition; one, because partitioning country is exactly what Britishers always wanted and second, partitioning means Gandhi’s extensive Muslim appeasement policies failed to bridge the gap between Hindus and Muslim. Though, Mr. Nehru’s role seems to be ambiguous, British politicians had stated goal of creating India, Pakistan and Princestan. Though their efforts to create Princestan failed due to Sardar Patel, Britishers were more than happy in dividing country in two parts (or three parts) and they rightly gauged that Jinnah was the right card, perhaps a card of ace.

Second, with this blame game seems to be continue for eternity, I always think of Britishers as happiest people and laughing at India and Pakistan, because no one seems to blame British crooks for partition. British government is not only responsible for this partition but also for horrendous human rights violation and thousands of deaths during and after partition. Even though in power, it seems like a purposeful effort not stop the Razakar’s in Hydrabad, Kolkata and in North West Frontier and in Lahore.

Third, Gandhi was killed by a “Hindu fanatic” because the killer thought that Gandhi was responsible for partition. Though, it is hard to believe that Gandhi was responsible for partition but at the same time Gandhi can’t cleanse himself of partition either. If he was most revered and influential person during that period and indeed, a leader of whole nation and if he is hailed as a person who single handedly brought British empire down then he should owe the responsibility of partition too. For example, Mr. Nehru was responsible for early development of India at the same time he was also responsible for China debacle. Similarly Gandhi may not be directly responsible for partition but as a leader he should owe the responsibility as he clearly failed to grasp the reality behind the partition and even though he was greatly pained by incessant killing, his pain would not bring back those lost lives.

Partition can not be blamed on a single person nor can it be pin pointed on single incident. That event was waiting to happen and host of things can be cited as reasons. The recent ruckus over Mr. Advani’s comments on Jinnah, forces us to ask; is it still worth to create controversies about Partition? The answer is yes. I believe it is actually imperative for us to further explore the issue as partition was not only large forced human migration in human history but it irrevocably altered the geography, history and future of Indian subcontinent. Partition is not a history and it will be criminal to forget it by saying let bygones be bygones. The implications of partition are visible even after 60 years. We ought to explore issue of partition further till we find out the truth.

Some coool facts

1) The personal assets of Bill Gates, Paul Allen and Warren Buffet exceed the combined GDP of world’s 41 poorest nations.

2) Each of the 400 richest Americans saw their wealth increase by an average of $940 millions each year over the period of 1998-99, while the net wealth of the bottom 40% diminished by 80 percent between 1983 to 95.

3) Off the US’s total assets, 1% of Americans own 95% and 80% of the households take home a proportionately smaller amount of the national wealth than they did 20 years ago.

4) “Between” 1960 to 1993 the gap in per capita income between the developing and developed world tripled, from $5,700 to $15,400.

5) In 1900 the per capita income of America was nine times more than Ethiopia, today it is 45 times.

6) In 1960 the income gap between the top 20% of the people living in the richest countries and the bottom 20% of the poor worldwide was 30-1, in 1990 it was 60-1 and in 1995 it was 75-1

7) In 1993 the poorest 10% of the world’s people had only 1.6% of the wealth of the richest 10 % of the people, the poorest 57% of the worlds’ people had about the same income as the richest 1% and richest 10% of the US population, which is 25 million people had combined income than poorest 43% of the world’s people or about 2 billion people

Freakonomics

It will be amazing, if it is true. I do not have any data to support my argument; still I will put forth my idea. My idea stems from the book I am reading and the name of the book is Freakonomics. According to the author, the Roe vs. Wade case had a very drastic impact on the sudden drop in the crime rate in mid-90. That seems either too naive to liberals or offensive to conservatives. The argument is that the children born to single or poor or teenager mother have more probability of having un-happy life. These children are more prone to crime and uneducated life. Now, as these children were not born, the whole new generation of underprivileged children did not come to existence. As the generation born in mid-70’s entered late teens in 90’s, the crime rate fell as this generation was born to more educated, responsible and well to do parents.

The debate here is not whether abortion should be legalized or not, but it is a factual academic research.

I am trying to apply same logic to the effect of aggressive affirmative or reservation policies that were enforced in 1990’s in India. These affirmative policies irrevocably altered the landscape of Indian politics. The society stand divided as the genie of affirmative action became tool for politicians to create vote banks. I am completely anti-affirmative policies. I do believe that the backward communities need a help to come with rest of the society but when the quota system crosses the 50% or 60% limit then it defeats the very purpose of its inaction and becomes crutches.

But, there is silver lining to this policy. Intelligent people, who couldn’t get admissions in good colleges, only because they are upper caste, started working harder. The admission benchmark went up and best started coming out of the students. Plus, students started in different states where there is either less stringent affirmative policy or there are more colleges. Most importantly students started migrating to US for higher education. The boom in Indian economy, that made middle class to afford higher education abroad came hand in hand with computer boom in US, that created insatiable appetite for computer educated and English speaking engineers. Result; sudden spurt in Indian software industry.

There are host of other reasons for growth in software industry, like complete non-interference of Indian government. But this negatively positive impact of affirmative action should not be overlooked. May be the number of people by their caste will be good statistics to prove or disapprove this theory.

B.S.

What is this fuss about Quran discretion? It is ridiculous. Duh! Those people are freaking terrorists, murderers and they are not in Guantanamo beach for holidays. How come one should treat those animals humanly? I mean, these people are not even animals they are beyond that; they are savages like saitans’. They do not think twice about killing innocent people but when in jail, they expect to be treated according to Geneva Convention and need their human rights to be protected, simply outrageous. And the funny part is that these terrorists and their brethren in host of the Islamic countries get agitated over the supposed discretion of their holy book. Excuse me, but when Sunnis bomb the Shia mosques then Quran get burnt too. (One minor point, bunch of people usually get killed in such attacks too!) But, that is not a sin, such a disrespect of Quran is understandable because it is done by Muslims.

All this politically correct crap makes me sick. It does not solve any problem but actually complicates already complicated situation. But I do not any see discontinuation of such bullshit in foreseeable future. It ain’t going to stop in no way!

The Real Butchers.

During the recent controversy over Saddam’s semi-nude photos getting published in tabloids, one thing that stuck me was constant reference of Saddam as butcher of Baghdad. I am not exactly a Saddam fan but I certainly do believe that he was much better than some of the past and present ‘friendly’ and ‘allied’ members of US. My point is not to list the names here, it requires a separate column, but I want to raise a valid and a very point about US and UK’s direct participation in actually butchering hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people during last ten years of war and sanctions and during Iraq’s eight years war with Iran. It makes me wonder whether the whole world is really blind or just dumb. We are living like parasites, just sucking our way through life, oblivious to the surrounding.

Iraq was one of the most advanced nation in the middle-east in 1979 when Saddam came to power. Secular in nature, Saddam’s Baath party had roots in Syria and was founded by a Christian named Michel Aflyak. With Iran revolution on the horizon, US backed Saddam’s party in Iraq. Though there was no direct support of US to Saddam’s power seizure, the intricate web of defense deals became backbone of US-Iraq relations during later years. In eight years war between Iran and Iraq, which killed almost a million people on both side, US actively participated by supplying all kinds of weapons including chemical weapons (remember WMD) to Iraq. This unholy nexus of US-Iraq is well documented and within the knowledge of public hemisphere. But then, Saddam was a friend, ally and business partner of US and thus a pure and a holy person.

Fast-forward the scenario to 1991, when Saddam suddenly become a Satan and his nation became an empire of evil. During 1991 gulf war, US used all the weapons in the arsenal barring nuclear weapons. They killed almost 200,000 Iraqi civilians. The ‘allies’ taught lesson to Saddam for his mischief but the real losers were civilians. The newly coined term ‘collateral damage’ can not explain such colossal civilian loss that can be only being rivaled with wholesome destruction of Tokyo or Munich during onset of WW-II. But the real story begins after the ‘resounding’ US victory over Iraq. The sanctions imposed by US and UK (oh yes! By UN too.) killed far more people than the actual war. According to UNICEF one million children in Iraq under the age of five are chronically malnourished. Also, according to same organization the infant mortality increased drastically from 56/1000 in 1989 to 131/1000. Also, the sanctions led to death of nearly half a million children.

When asked on US television if she [Madeline Albright, US Secretary of State] thought that the death of half a million Iraqi children [from sanctions in Iraq] was a price worth paying, Albright replied: “This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it.”

All these sanctions, wars and millions of civilian deaths make Saddam a street crook compared with US and UK. I am not supporting Saddam in any way. He was a despot and he is guilty of killing his own people for the lust of power, but the measures taken by US and UK are equally reprehensible. Bestowing the title of Baghdad butcher to Saddam is epitome of hypocrisy and such efforts of painting world black and white show the lack of knowledge and insensitivity towards the reality.

The Ultimate Matrix !

American society is no different than their meat industry. People are reared to be consumers and they are forced to spend more and more money so that corporations will get more and more profit.

When a child is born then corporate America is more jubilant than that baby’s parents. The holy union of a man and a woman is bonanza for corporations. With no investment (remember its union of man and a woman!) they (corporations) are blessed with a consumer.

I am no expert of baby need and there is more probability of me going wrong here, but somehow I feel that the child rearing is structured in such a way that a baby becomes a voracious consumer. Clothes, diapers, toys, more clothes, more diapers, diaper dispenser, (I am going to refer to it as M.C. and M.D.) tiny seating chairs, seating chairs for cars, seating chair holders for cars, M.C. and M.D. milk bottles, more toys, baby food, tonics, medicines, M.C. and M.D. Plus, mind boggling choice for each of the above product makes it impossible to avoid anything. And yes ! there is always sale There is even speculation that, with lobbying and proper advertisements the baby food industry imbibed on the young mothers that if they do not breast feed for long time then they can maintain their body figures. As the child grows, the appetite grows and reaches maximum after age of 18. (I don’t know why age 18, but 18 to 49 is most sought after age group by advertisers)

I am reiterating that I am no baby expert. And I am pretty sure that if anybody questions any of the above mentioned needs then, the argument goes like; these products are paramount for proper growth of a child. May be I am completely wrong here and making unnecessary fuss. But, I do have strange feeling about society is slowly becoming a society depicted in The Matrix – I, but corporations rather than machines taking over the world and harvesting humans for profits.

Or may be I just pessimistic, cynical, incredulous and skeptical. (I know all have same meaning but I am just giving you choice to pick!)

American Meat Industry

America is a bacon of capitalism (and freedom, so they say!) and epitome of professionalism. And this profit oriented mindset blossom most in their meat industry. Americans have voracious appetite for all kinds of meat, particularly red meat. Obviously the meat industry is multi-billion dollar industry. Under the banner of cost effectiveness the production methods have scant respect for life. I am not against eating meat but I believe that life of an animal should be valued. Animals are considered not as a living being but living ‘meat’ or piece of meat.

Injecting hormones, excessive feeding etc are some of the methods employed to produce more and more meat out one animal. The procedure of making tender veal is illustrative. Right after its birth the calf is separated from its mother and confined to few inches of space. If the calf is allowed to move then, its meat is less tender. Injected with hormones for growth the calf is slaughtered after few months.

There is saying in Marathi, “Ati tethey Mati”. It means that anything in excess is not good. The meat industry under the guise of professionalism is doing excess and using brutal methods to produce meat. Systematic destruction of live stock will have adverse impact not only on the society but also on the environment. Obesity and mad cow disease is prelude to what is coming. The future looks scary.

There is nothing new in this blog. But this topic was in my mind for so long that I was feeling itchy. I am quite relieved now.