A Political Sense

Part of my hobby, or my passion is to understand the relation between the Law of a state or a nation and the people (of the state or the nation) for which the law is made. In this process of understanding I came across a wonderful passage by a leading European philosopher of the 17th Century. Comments are welcome.
The passage is as follows:

"The last end of the state is not to dominate men, nor to restrain them by fear; rather it is so to free each man from fear that he may live and act with full security and without injury to himself or to his neighbor. The end of the state, I repeat, is not to make rational beings into brute beasts and machines. It is to enable their bodies and their minds to function safely. It is to lead men to live by, and to exercise, a free reason; that they may not waste their strength in hatred, anger and guile, nor act unfairly toward one another. Thus the end of the state is really liberty."

- Spinoza, Tractatus Politicus Ch. 6

Again, comments are welcome!

Miss the maturity: Chronicles of Cardiff

Everything has its limit!

I say this to myself and to others usually. When I first came here to the Cardiff city to do my post graduation, I didn't have the slightest idea that I would find such good company here. The company of friends. It took me, for the first time I suppose, almost no time to get along with people here so easily. Almost all of my friends are from the same country, and being away from respective home played its part, and we quickly became comfortable with one another. Sharing our stories with each others, cracking jokes at almost every sentence we spoke became the norm. However the speed has its repercussions as well. And it happened here too, for me at least.

A big part of my life during and after graduation had been filled with serious reading and contemplation, and discussion of issues that hardly any one of my age would have done at that stage. The friend circle that I've always had, especially after my graduation is the one I know I would cherish till my time comes. The intellectual atmosphere that I was in, the spiritual uplifting that I got was refreshing. Every time I felt like I was losing myself, I would seek the company, meet with those friends and then feel the rejuvenation. It was this friend circle, the reading and the discussions within it that actually and eventually brought me to this city for doing my MBA.

Now, as I'm here, I was supposed to do my work sincerely as I had taken a risk of leaving a good-earning job for it. Alas, I'm not doing that. I blame myself for it. I've let myself too much into the jokes and senseless discussions here. It's reaching the brink of insanity. My reading has gone to the lowest, my studies disrupted. And the worst, I now feel like I've even started losing my religion. It is just at the beginning stage, but I can sense the decline in the spirituality - the very force that keeps me ticking. Maturity is one thing I feel lacks so much in our talks. This I miss the most. And from my past 2-3 days it's actually making me feel like I've had enough of all these. I want to go back home as soon as I can... Miss the maturity, miss the touch with the reality. I don't wanna get trapped in the matrix of delusions!

God help!

P.S. (This was by no mean a critique of my friends here. No. They are my treasure! I'm simply turning over the coin and looking at the other side of it. It is a critique on myself.)

Is democracy failing?

I've been thinking a great deal on this question: what has become of the word so dear to everyone, 'democracy'? It strikes me at moments when I don't understand how people can be so blind to the injustices perpetrated on other human beings by individuals or political parties. I think it is the frailty of human mind: "self-interest". This thing in itself can't be a problem. It's a law of nature that allows an individual to grow, learn, adapt, innovate and even to contribute. The problem where I think starts is when the boundaries of this self-interest starts narrowing down, up to the point that an individual thinks of nothing but his/her personal interests, even if it comes at the expense of the other's interests!


When this happens, it becomes easy for the political parties to play with the public: to pit people against people while they enjoy the benefits that the current "democratic" system offers to those who are in power. And what about the people who are away from it? Who do not fall into this violence? Hardly is there any voice from these apolitical ones. And when they speak, they limit themselves to petty regional politics or to local-level administration only. They almost never discuss issues that really matter, the policies that the govt after Govt. follow. This becomes a major plus point for the powerful. They tend to exploit this situation.

We have such examples where the parties and individuals get away with crimes, murders and genocides. Improve the administration, make it more business-friendly, and there you go. Almost no one is interested in finding out about the crimes they had committed earlier. Some of the influential would even try not to get the truth out as it might disturb the stable environment so needed for the business. And many are simply happy with the "freedom" they think they are getting. This departure from the reality is partly due to the skewed and manipulated reporting of the main-stream media. The misrepresentation and outright lies about the different communities living in the country by movies has also played its part.


There are also those, the tiny minority, who understand what democracy means, who refuse to give in to the powerful and who refuse to accept every piece of news they get from the corporate media. What happens to them? Silenced! Killed! Raped! or simply Ignored! Still some are fighting. Some fight in the literal sense. They pick up arms to make their voices so loud that they cannot be ignored. Do they still get their right? As far as it can be seen, no! There is a major war taking place in the heartland of the country. Villages are being burnt, forests are being cleared, and people are being left homeless, their livelihoods destroyed.

What happens to such a "democracy"? Can it be called a democracy in the first place? If yes, then what is left of it today? Is democracy just about maintaining vote banks? Is it failing?? What is missing that is so essential to the very functioning of a democracy?

A must read for everyone

Following are a few extracts from a book I recently read. The book is “Muhammad: Prophet for our Time” written by Karen Armstrong. Armstrong is among the world’s most foremost commentators on religion and an important advocate for interfaith understanding. Her other books include A History of God, Muhammad: A biography of the Prophet, Buddha: A biography, Islam: A short history, and many other bestsellers. After I read the book, I must say that she’s a genius and truly honest to the subject. She tries to provide a ray of hope in this world overshadowed by the dark, gloomy clouds of wars, distrust, injustice and disharmony by focusing on one of the most important aspect of the Prophet’s life: the pluralism that Islam supports. She also tries to make the tenets of Islam (especially the difference between hilm and jahiliyyah) clear, very clear, and accessible for readers of all faiths. These are the extracts from the introduction part of the book:

The history of a religious tradition is a continuous dialogue between a transcendent reality and current events in the mundane sphere. The faithful scrutinize the sacred past, looking for lessons that speak directly to the conditions of their lives. Most religions have a figurehead, an individual who expresses the ideals of the faith in human form…. These paradigmatic personalities shed light on the often dark conditions in which most of us seek salvation in our flawed world. They tell us what a human being can be.

Muslims have always understood this. Their scripture, the Qur'an, gave them a mission: to create a just and decent society in which all members were treated with equal respect [emphasis mine]….

The life of the Prophet Muhammad was as crucial to the unfolding of Islamic ideal as it is today. His career revealed the inscrutable God’s activity in the world, and illustrated the perfect surrender (in Arabic, the word for “surrender” is Islam) that every human being should make to the divine…

The Qur’an is the holy word of God, and its authority remains absolute. But Muslims know that it is not always easy to interpret. Its laws were designed for a small community, but a century after the Prophet’s death, Muslims ruled a vast empire, stretching from a Himalayas to the Pyrenees. Their circumstances were entirely different from those of the Prophet and the first Muslims, and Islam had to change and adapt…. By understanding what had prompted a particular Qur’anic teaching, they could relate it to their own situation by means of a disciplined process of analogy…

As a paradigmatic personality, Muhammad has important lessons, not only Muslims, but also for Western people. His life was a jihad: as we shall see, this word does not mean “holy war,” it means “struggle.” Muhammad literally sweated with the effort to bring peace to war-torn Arabia, and we need people who are prepared to do this today. His life was a tireless campaign against greed, injustice, and arrogance…

Strangely, events that took place in seventh-century Arabia have much to teach us about the events of our time and their underlying significance – far more, in fact, than the facile sound bites of politicians.

Hope the above extracts entice you to read the book. It’s simply a Seerah (biography) of the Prophet but focusing on some of its very important aspects. It’s a page-turner. The language is very lucid and again the price is not much: around Rs. 290/-, available at any book store.

Critique on Indian Middle and Elite Class

Hi,

I have been out and busy with many a work. However, I still take time out and do my bit of reading, without which there are hardly any chances of my survival... lol :-)

Jokes apart, I recently read a book by the name "The Great Indian Middle Class" written by Pavan K. Verma. It's a very compelling book I must say.

Pavan K. Verma has been a member of IFS (Indian Foreign Services) and has worked at Romania, Bulgaria and also at New York at the United Nations. He's done his graduation in history and then obtained a law degree in Delhi.

Talking about the book: the central idea or the underlying idea of this book is a critique (quite insightful and powerful) on the attitudes and behaviors of the Indian middle class. In this critique, the author has shown how and when the contemporary middle class of India emerged, and how it evolved over time, especially during the 50 years after India's independence. (this book was written in 1998). He has shown how the middle class, guided by self-interest alone, has subverted the goal of an egalitarian society or say, a more just society where the gap between the rich and the poor is minimum; how, over the years, its commitment to democracy and the electoral process has declined; and how economic liberalization (after 1991) has only heightened its tendency to withdraw from anything that does not relate directly to its material well-being.

He hasn't talked about the size and structure of this middle and what kind of income-earning people constitute it. A general idea is that it is a class of people who are neither so poor that they can't have 3 times of meal a day or send their children to school nor are they so rich (like capitalists or business tycoons) who own large multinational corporations like Ambanis, Birlas, Tatas, or CEO's of top notch companies. They are somewhere in between these two extremes, but their aspirations are always to be with those few elites on the top.

Pavan Verma has divided his book into 5 chapters: The Relevance of beginnings, The Age of Hope, The End of Innocence, The Inner Landscape, and The Writing on the Wall. Each chapter depicts a major shift or phase in the evolution of this class.

Let me give you a brief extract from the book which I feel, sets the tone of the book. It's the first part of the very first chapter:

It was the night of 14th August 1947, hot, muggy and full of the dense moistness that comes with the rains at this time in New Delhi. It was not an ordinary night. For, at the stroke of midnight, India was to become a free country, putting an end to two centuries of British rule. All over the country, through its vast and sprawling plains, its verdant coastlines, and in the towns and villages nestled amidst its mountain ranges, ordinary people, largely illiterate, ill-clad, and mostly malnourished, waited with a sense of heightened anticipation for the fruition of an even long fought for and awaited. In the bigger cities, specially the capital, Delhi, animated crowds milled around, hugely excited by the imminent event. Again, these were ordinary people, aware of the momentousness of the event, but still a little fuzzy about what it would mean for them in real terms in the years to come. They were there to celebrate, and to hear their beloved leader Jawaharlal Nehru speak to them. And, at the stroke of midnight hour, Nehru spoke. In English. [emphasis mine]

'Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny,' Nehru said. ' And now the time has come to redeem our pledge...' He spoke with passion and feeling and a transparent sense of destiny. He was heard in rapt silence by the representatives of the Indian people.... Unfortunately, the elegance of his prose and the content of his speech inspired only a minuscule number of Indians, mostly from the middle class, who had access to a radio and, more importantly, could understand English. For, to the overwhelming majority of Indians... English and the way of life of which it was both a symbol and an instrument were incomprehensible and alien.

The question that arises then, quite logically, is why Nehru, who had spent a lifetime struggling against British colonialism, and who had, indeed, acquired the stature of an icon in the Indian freedom movement even in the estimation of the masses, choose to speak to them on such a momentous occasion in language they did not comprehend?

The answer to this question provides the key to understanding the nature of the impact of British colonialism on India, the genesis and content of the Indian national movement, and the emergence, as a result of the interaction of these processes in decades leading up to 1947, of the Indian middle class.

Perhaps, now you can get an idea of the kind of critique and analysis you can find in this book, and also understand its relevance and importance.

Finally, the author argues that the project of 'secession of the successful' is as dangerous as it is unrealistic in a country like India. For, if the middle class remains insensitive to the needs of the vast number of Indians who live in extreme poverty and not to mention, with the least opportunities, it does so at the risk of considerable political instability which will militate against the very prosperity that it desires.

I don't want to write much in this post. I hope people reading this post would take some time out and try to read the book. It's just 200 pages long and would cost around 250/-, available almost at every book store in any mall.

I will mention some important points in every chapter that the author has written to give you an overview of the book, but that would be in my next post.

Au revoir!

A Real Student

Who is a student? Who qualifies to be a real student? What are the qualities or rather say properties of a student? These are the few real questions, I think, a student or in general, a person ought to think about; look for the answers. Is it only the person who studies in an educational institution and completes a curriculum?

Simply, a student can be defined as one who studies. Let’s see what etymology (the study of the origin of a word) has to say:

The word student is etymologically derived through Middle English from the Latin second-type conjugation verb "studēre", meaning "to direct one's zeal at"; hence a student could be described as 'one who directs zeal at a subject'. In its widest use, "student" is used for anyone who is learning. (Wikipedia)

Let’s see what the dictionary has to say:

• A person formally engaged in learning, esp. one enrolled in a school or college; pupil: a student at Yale.
• Any person who studies, investigates, or examines thoughtfully: a student of human nature.

(dictionary.com)

We can see that it is not only a person formally engaged in learning but also the one who studies, investigates, or rather explores knowledge that can be called a student.

These are only general definitions, but if we look at the history we get a complete picture of what a student really is or what is he really meant to do. Accordingly, there are three basic and fundamental aims of a student which were propounded by my friend, Musab Iqbal.

One is thirst for and exploration of knowledge. A student does not feel satisfied by any amount of knowledge he/she gets. This thirst leads him/her to further the exploration. The knowledge, apart from books, can also be gained through our surroundings, our neighborhood, our society, towns, villages, our elders, peers and friends. This habit of digging for it is what makes a “student” the student.

Second aim of a student is to contribute to the advancement or prosperity of human civilization. He/she shares what he/she has learnt. A student works for the betterment of the world he/she lives in and is a part & parcel of. Contribution can be in various fields/disciplines – art, science, music, technology, social sciences, ecosystems, etc.

Third, he/she has to understand that a student is the link between knowledge and society. If he fails to do so, or if he is not there as a link, there will be none who can teach moral values, ethics, or guide society in the right direction.

Citizens Statement On The NHRC Clean Chit To Special Cell On Batla House

Citizens Statement On The NHRC Clean Chit To Special Cell On Batla House

Posted using ShareThis