I saw an interesting blog on cnnibn about sons and fathers
http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sagarikaghose/223/61517/the-dhritarashtra-syndrome.html
- actually it was daughters and fathers as well and the sad state of family domination in indian politics. It is one of those things which is not talked about a lot nowadays especially with the media's fascination of rahulbaba and the other babalog. even in this posting sagarika is more interested in the other non-sophisticated heirs before making a passing mention of rahulbaba.
This is a real problem in India across professions - the legal profession from which i come from is replete with examples of children getting favorable treatment. Maybe we are a country with this for culture . when we talk about India - we don't call it the land of opporunity or hardworking people. Maybe we should call this the land of babalog and the land of the inheritors.
Wednesday, 10 February 2010
Sunday, 31 January 2010
Anti-corruption laws hurting India?
I think that anti-corruption laws are actually hurting India at a macro-level.
My argument goes this way - corruption is endemic in India due to which the Government has put in place very strict anti-corruption laws. However, as with everything else in our criminal justice system nobody ever gets convicted except at the lower level or if they have pissed off people who are more powerful and corrupt than them. A consequence of this has been that the only real punishment that corrupt officers/politicians undergo is the shame of being caught and/or the seizure of assets. Usually they can get away even when caught by bribing their way out. The media in its enthusiasm has also taken to calling everything corruption - so if somebody takes a decision which in hindsight turns out to be wrong then immediately allegations of corruption are thrown around and since nobody ever gets convicted they undergo the same consequences of people who are corrupt.
One of the effects of this situation is the refusal of officers and politicians to take any decisions which could potentially turn out to be wrong in hindsight or an accusation of corruption can be made. I am sure anybody who has had to deal with the Government at a senior level has come across this situation. So now we have a situation where nobody takes any decisions. So an honest person does not take any decisions because he does not want to be accused of corruption. A dishonest person will also not take any decisions for which he/she is not being bribed because they have no incentive to take a decision -because the last thing u want to do when corrupt is to get caught for taking an honest decision. So the only incentive to take decisions is actually when you are being bribed to do so because you have now an incentive to take the risk of being accused of corruption because you are actually corrupt and when you get caught you have the money to bribe the people who caught you.
Weird situation!
My argument goes this way - corruption is endemic in India due to which the Government has put in place very strict anti-corruption laws. However, as with everything else in our criminal justice system nobody ever gets convicted except at the lower level or if they have pissed off people who are more powerful and corrupt than them. A consequence of this has been that the only real punishment that corrupt officers/politicians undergo is the shame of being caught and/or the seizure of assets. Usually they can get away even when caught by bribing their way out. The media in its enthusiasm has also taken to calling everything corruption - so if somebody takes a decision which in hindsight turns out to be wrong then immediately allegations of corruption are thrown around and since nobody ever gets convicted they undergo the same consequences of people who are corrupt.
One of the effects of this situation is the refusal of officers and politicians to take any decisions which could potentially turn out to be wrong in hindsight or an accusation of corruption can be made. I am sure anybody who has had to deal with the Government at a senior level has come across this situation. So now we have a situation where nobody takes any decisions. So an honest person does not take any decisions because he does not want to be accused of corruption. A dishonest person will also not take any decisions for which he/she is not being bribed because they have no incentive to take a decision -because the last thing u want to do when corrupt is to get caught for taking an honest decision. So the only incentive to take decisions is actually when you are being bribed to do so because you have now an incentive to take the risk of being accused of corruption because you are actually corrupt and when you get caught you have the money to bribe the people who caught you.
Weird situation!
Friday, 29 January 2010
What is a man if not the sum of his prejudices.
What is a man if not the sum of his prejudices.
Can’t remember where I read this line but it has been going around in my head for many years now. I sometimes like to imagine that I made it up – mostly because I think it would by far be the most beautiful thing I have ever created. I can’t think of a single thing that I have created which is likely to have given joy to someone. My writing is laborious – I have many ideas – some original most inspired - but really struggle to put in down in words in any meaningful way -- forget about in beautiful words. Hell – I can’t even spell and think the spell check on Microsoft word is a modern day great invention.
Every time I am shocked at prejudice of any kind – or what I call irrationality since I can’t understand how rational people can have strong prejudices especially since it is not rational to be so, and have finished railing against it, I think of this line and realise that it is these very prejudices that makes each individual what he/she is. That is what makes them function, create, react and distinctive.
I have actually run out of anything else to say on this topic – explains why I am such a bad writer and awful at creating anything. However, if anybody has ever come across this line before –please let me know so that I can shatter the myth I have built that I created this line and prove to myself that I can never have created anything that is so original and beautiful or maybe I think it is so beautiful and original because I think I created it.
Can’t remember where I read this line but it has been going around in my head for many years now. I sometimes like to imagine that I made it up – mostly because I think it would by far be the most beautiful thing I have ever created. I can’t think of a single thing that I have created which is likely to have given joy to someone. My writing is laborious – I have many ideas – some original most inspired - but really struggle to put in down in words in any meaningful way -- forget about in beautiful words. Hell – I can’t even spell and think the spell check on Microsoft word is a modern day great invention.
Every time I am shocked at prejudice of any kind – or what I call irrationality since I can’t understand how rational people can have strong prejudices especially since it is not rational to be so, and have finished railing against it, I think of this line and realise that it is these very prejudices that makes each individual what he/she is. That is what makes them function, create, react and distinctive.
I have actually run out of anything else to say on this topic – explains why I am such a bad writer and awful at creating anything. However, if anybody has ever come across this line before –please let me know so that I can shatter the myth I have built that I created this line and prove to myself that I can never have created anything that is so original and beautiful or maybe I think it is so beautiful and original because I think I created it.
Thursday, 28 January 2010
William Darlymple - Nine Lives
I just finished reading Nine Lives from William Dalrymple. I was very dissappointed by the book. I have been a big fan of his ever since I read City of Djinns - one of the finest books I have read with an indian theme. I do feel delhi is a lucky city - it has two great books written about it Kushwant Singh's book which I read almost 15 years ago - think it was called Delhi and then City of Djinns. I also loved Dalrymple's The age of kali - especially the the chapter about Sati. I felt like somebody had taken my thoughts and views on the subject and put in words better than I would have ever been able to.
I even hated the topic of Nine Lives because it was another non-Indian author selling Indian spirituality. I expected better from one of my favorite non-Indian authors on India. Also the attempt at focussing on the subjects and speaking in their words did not work - I was actually bored of the book and was skipping paras to see if it becomes more interesting but it did not. Maybe this book would be of interest to non-Indian readers who will read it and love Indian spirituality or feel what a ridiculous set of people and feel superior to us. It was that kind of book - i.e., the very worst kind of book on India.
I even hated the topic of Nine Lives because it was another non-Indian author selling Indian spirituality. I expected better from one of my favorite non-Indian authors on India. Also the attempt at focussing on the subjects and speaking in their words did not work - I was actually bored of the book and was skipping paras to see if it becomes more interesting but it did not. Maybe this book would be of interest to non-Indian readers who will read it and love Indian spirituality or feel what a ridiculous set of people and feel superior to us. It was that kind of book - i.e., the very worst kind of book on India.
Indian TV serials
I was watching my west wing DVDs again recently and realised what a great TV series it is. Great story, awesome acting and very educational as well. Then I remembered all the great american TV - Sopranos, Entourage, John Adams and my favorites like House and Law & Order. Made me wonder if these series are better because american TV has more money to spend on TV series or is it more talent. I sometimes think it is just some TV channels who have taken the decision to make high quality TV - some people with a vision for quality - to set the benchmark by which others the industry measure up - HBO or Warner in TV. It seems to work with the NY times in journalism.
The UK just has the BBC to do it but I guess it helps that they are funded by the tax payer.
I wonder why Indian TV channels can't make such serials. Commercial competition has maybe hurt the quality of TV in India. In many ways when DD was the only channel they had some great stuff on TV - I still remember how good something like Thamas was. Now most TV series seem to cater to the lowest common denominator because I guess they need to make money. I wonder if any of channels in India will ever go the HBO way. Maybe it needs a visionary - or maybe somebody very rich who takes the decision that he/she wants to create something that they and others can be proud of.
Was wondering if anybody thinks there are any Indian channels which can some day measure up to the high standards or at least seems to making effort to do so.
The UK just has the BBC to do it but I guess it helps that they are funded by the tax payer.
I wonder why Indian TV channels can't make such serials. Commercial competition has maybe hurt the quality of TV in India. In many ways when DD was the only channel they had some great stuff on TV - I still remember how good something like Thamas was. Now most TV series seem to cater to the lowest common denominator because I guess they need to make money. I wonder if any of channels in India will ever go the HBO way. Maybe it needs a visionary - or maybe somebody very rich who takes the decision that he/she wants to create something that they and others can be proud of.
Was wondering if anybody thinks there are any Indian channels which can some day measure up to the high standards or at least seems to making effort to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)