Electoral Indifference

I am not sure if the generation of my mom and dad was as polarized as we are at this age. Were they as filled as we are with the juices of 20s – as spellbound as we are by the magic of youth? I cant go back in time and whatever the older generation remembers is bound to be wrong or not accurate enough to make any reasonable assessment, after all their juice is running out. Oh! Wait – They were in era of Indira Gandhi and they were in their “youthful” years when Mrs. Gandhi imposed emergency, they saw a political revolutionary in form of Jay Prakash Narayan, they and also saw rise and fall of Junta Party first hand. There were people who hated Indira and sought messiah in JP; there were those who reviled JP and worshiped Indira. Look where are your parents now? Look around and see where is our country now? I don’t know which side of aisle my mom and dad were. I only hope that they chose a side, and were not indifferent about India’s future – which I fear they were.
Elections, and the drama around it brings best and worst out of our politicians; mostly the worst. Elections also bring out best and worst among us those who have selected a side. What are we? Are we fans, followers, believers, or are we just empty earthen wares, eager to be filled and easy to be replaced, rolling around and finding ourselves at one side or the other. The sliver of Indian population that I observe while sitting on my desk, is not enough to infuse statistical confidence in anything that I might suggest or proclaim. But from what I see, I wonder if this very population is unaware about the difference between the meme and fact, media and news, information and knowledge and most importantly are they unaware that there is a big difference between standing behind a politician and standing behind principles. My observations suggest that many of us are picking memes over facts, media over news, information over knowledge and politicians over principles. Reason many are doing so is because at a deeper level – they are also indifferent.
We are the youth of India, and nothing is impossible for us besides accepting the challenge that our fragility poses before us. It is comforting to believe in what is easy to believe. It is easy to digest information and time consuming to process the knowledge. It is easy to view our world in black and white and forget what it takes to make black black and white white. It is easy to be on one side and not hear and see what other side has to say and show – as assuming deafness and blindness is our Gandhian right.
This drama, 2014 Lok Sabha election will soon end. I have seen your marked fingers, post coitus images of your vote-porn. It seems you have played your part in this drama. Well done. Till 16th of May, your assumed deafness and blindness will be towards things that are external, after 16th, slowly and slowly, this blindness and deafness will spread towards internal agencies. Once back in your cocoon you will resume what you we know best – total indifference. Some would be happy while they recede in their cocoons, some will be sad for the demigods that they worshiped or believed in would either be in the Parliament or not.
What about me? If I am one who is watching it all from the distance, where will it all leave me at the end? I think I will be left tired and pained, as the main actor according to me would have given a flaccid performance and yes, I will still be sitting on my desk. 

 

Disappointed in my friends

To be honest, I am seriously disappointed in some of my Indian friends because of the way they are indulging in political debates. My male friends stand as educated men, representing fine pedigree. Their education, pedigree or civility however exits to another dimension, when it comes to discuss politics of the country. When it comes to political debate, their tone is accusative at best and offensive at worst. They rationalize unrationalizables, and it seems that process of reasoning is something alien to them. They have picked sides, and now they prefer to be deaf. Devoid of thought and filled with empty rhetorics, there lies a legion of my friends who hold bricks that were to be used to build our nation. Same bricks, which they are now busy throwing at each other. Such are they, locked in their political camps, sounding angry, often pitiable and frequently obnoxious.
Then there are my female friends; quiet as ever. Opinionated but silent. Oh! they have a vision, probably brighter, but they prefer to keep it to themselves. They are waiting for a podium, right place to put their thoughts, for things like Facebook/Twitter does not deserve their vision or opinions. Therefore all that my prying eyes can see is a blind masculine version of politics in my country. Probably in a very Mahabarat-isque way, my female friends have assumed blindness.
So the overall political debate that is happening is overtly masculine in nature, devoid of civility, with copy-cat logic, and for me – Painful.

Relationship of social movements with politics

Social Movements happen/occur when, politics is infused with courage. Rationale or actions are seldom new, but courage is always new. Distancing it from the functional politics, by terming it as ‘warm-up before political action’ is akin to discrediting its importance. Social movements, are very much part of functional politics. Often, because social movements begin from the fringes of functional politics, we think of it as something alien, while terming it as reactionary or revolutionary. Rather in fact, they are as much as product of existing political structure as much as they are harbinger of new order. However, there is a difference between social movements and instituional politics. Both of them feed on each other, like two snakes eating each others tail, encircling the society.  

Women in Tech – Case of inherent insensitivity

I initially wanted to write a small post on Facebook. Darn, facebook does not allow for developing context with multiple links in a single post. So, if I have more than few things in mind then FB is not the best option.

This post is in reference to the Donglegate (as termed by Wired). The Wired article is a commentary on the things that happened in recently concluded PyCon and as reported (first hand) by Adria Richards on her blog. All of this is few weeks old. {Personal note: I cant trust my friends with sharing information on women in tech} and was also aptly reported on Jezebel.

Let me parse the events as pithily as possible so as to develop some context.

Location – PyCon (Conference of Python coders; men and women alike)

Few coder dudes decide to make a rude joke among themselves using terms – “Fork” and “Dongle“, listening to which Adria Richards takes their photo, share it on Twitter and call upon the conference host to complain about them. Guys were then escorted out of conference and Adria later wrote a blog post (referred earlier in this post).

Things didnt end there, and the dudes as well as Adria were reportedly fired from their respective companies, where they were working.

I generally do not conform to any “-isms” and neither I consider myself any kind of “-ist”. Case in point being feminism and feminist. This I do so to avoid being associated with any stereotyped caricature, which I think are fueled by those who are stereotyped and those who stereotype. But when it comes to women in technology, and more general women in workplace, I do prefer to err (if I have to) on giving advantage to women.

That said, tech to my experience is indeed insensitive when it comes to women. It is so very inherently; often so that people (mostly guys) dont even realize that they are being insensitive towards their female peers. Many a times, women in tech are so very ready to conform to the standards that are already established. When I am talking about women and men, then it is not just those who are in workplace and quite well known in their own rights. I am talking about women and men while they are learning, in colleges and in schools. Insensitivity towards women is deep rooted and stems from environment in colleges and universities. Being and electrical engineer, and having paltry sum of girls as class mates allows me to say so.

 

Our behavior is guided by historically low number of girls in tech. Hence the inherent sensitivity. Insensitivity breeds because of the numbers – majority defines the environment in its own way. Minority may thus feel marginalized knowingly or unknowingly. This can happen to guys too, in a workplace which is dominated by females (in terms of numbers and not behavioral domination).

 

I guess that is where the intervention is required for the majority. Intervention should kick in not when discretion occurs, but when the numbers start speaking.

If your workplace is having more males than females then get someone from outside to talk to your folks about how their behavior might be affecting their female colleagues. And also talk to women and tell them that there are things that are not ‘OK’ even though they might feel so. And this should also apply in rare scenarios where there are more females than males in workplace.

Said all that, tech definitely needs more women, not for the reason of equality but because tech as a field lacks ingenuity that comes because of gender defined experiences. And to have more parity, males in tech needs to be careful and and more considerate than they have historically been. Even if it comes at a cost of not cracking dick/fuck jokes.

Case of missing social network

There is vast literature on how people in society collate and form groups. Success of any democratic structure depends on this collation. It is for this reason, that autocratic regimes primarily attack on groups or group formation. In a group, 1+1 ≠ 2, it is always greater than two. 

If you have to appreciate the power of groups or social networks, then you may want to stand in a road side tea stall in India. Often, the average literacy will not cross high school at such places, but the discussion or at least the intensity, will match the talking heads in CNN or BBC. That is an example of a social network. 

My contention is that as a country, India could not develop enough social networks for youth, specially post high school. One will surely have a set of network generated because of how one is embedded in to the system. Say, if I am in college, I am bound (mostly) to have a social network because of the mere fact that I am there. I will make friends in college and hence I will have network. But what after that? Gym? Yes. Different academic coaching classes that people take will also provide another avenue to enlarge ones social network – which will overlap heavily with ones college based network. The overall diversity of network would be low. 

There is another major issue why I will shy from ranking these social networks highly. They are predominantly formed because of how one is embedded into the system (read society). Diversity in social network would be lower, and level of independent choice would be dismal. Since one does not have much choice in formulating such a social network, there are not many avenues for democratic experimentation. Hence, there are no democratic lessons learned and none is practiced. 

Please be mindful that democratic experiments or lessons that I am talking about need not just be those which involve voting; there are multiple lessons that very implicit in nature and are learned because of our experience. 

There is not a single ‘Meetup’ group in Bhopal. There is no event which ‘Eventbrite’ can show. And I found similar statistics on other similar sites – sites that help in organizing group activities. People are not forming groups that exposes them beyond their environment in which they are embedded. They are not organizing themselves. They are not interacting with people who are not from their immediate network but think like them. They are not exploring human connections – and hence doing nothing to strengthen democracy. 

During various discussions, people ask me how we as Indians can solve our problems, corruption being the primary one. The underpinnings of this problem are same in almost all the democracies. They ask me because, it is me who put two years of his life to soak in knowledge related to public policy, and they think I know the answers. It is often tough to tell them that I dont have the answer and hence I get into these discussions which soon convert into debates. Most of the times people (my friends) are asking for immediate solutions; a quick respite. I do fall into this trap and try to formulate some solutions, and often disown them because of some fault or other. I do tell them (most of the times) that solution to such devious problems cannot be quick. And the solution to problem like corruption cannot be direct. If direct then in context of India, that solution cannot be sustainable. One of the important steps to fight corruption is to strengthen democratic structure.

What makes democratic institutions strong? Groups. Networks. People. 

If people are meeting, discussing and interacting with wider set of people then they will inadvertently expose themselves to wider set of ideas. There would be wider appreciation of different views, and better understanding of ‘real issues’. Which God I believe in does not in any way affect my discussions on photography or the risks that one might face in street photography. But are there any avenues where I can be part of such a self organizing photography group, in Bhopal? I dont know. I havent seen any.

When groups form, they lead to multitude of positive externalities. It makes society more fertile for new ideas, and set it for innovation and development. I am emphasizing on this not because it is the solution to our social problems, but it sets the foundations for solving them. 

The social network which is beyond the one in which we are embedded is missing. Unless we create one or find it, till then I am not sure will be able to produce sustainable solution for our problems.

The Soul of India

The body became free on 15th of August, 1947. The soul got freedom only on 26th of January, 1950. ‘India’ as a concept is not about borders or being a nation state, it is more about being a part of the civilization. As a citizen of oldest living civilization, we have time and again performed the phoenix act, as we did post independence. In Geeta, Krishna emphasizes on the frailty of body and immortality of soul. As the citizen of India, it is our responsibility, or as Krishna would have said, “Karma” to keep this soul free.
As a civilization, the Indian civilization has never been about being supreme, but has been about the continous perseverance towards the ultimate truth. As esoteric as it may sound, thats the philosophy we have inheritted. We may be the oldest living civilization, which has evolved over the time, but we are still young as democracy. Therefore with what we have inheritted, we the present generation has to invest time in introspection, personally as well as collectively. This we have to determine to realize our potential not only as citizens of India but citizens of this planet.
Are we doing our job correctly in the home that we call world? Are we providing the thoughts that can drive the next generation of this world? How do we want to be known as? Are we steadfast enough in our path of “Karma”? Do I have an answer for any of these questions? No, I dont. But am I looking for answers? Yes, I am!
Why is it important? It is important because being the youth we carry the responsibility of 1.2 billion strong nation. Once 1.2 billion people reach their potential, the world will start taking care of itself.

AIDS Campaign

Simple, aesthetically pleasing and the ad campaign uses modern conventions.
Said that, I feel that ad fails to target any specific gender. I have a feeling that it is targeted towards women so that they can insist that men wear condoms. Simple said than done.

Towards literate politics

Indian politics is not that different from other democratic politics around the world. Even in terms of corruption, I dont think we are that different. I am not saying that to make myself feel good, and hide away from the perilous state of Indian politics. I am referring more towards the qualitative aspects of Indian politics. Democratic structures around the world tend to follow similar cues as does autocratic structures. 

India’s political path, though follows a slightly different path, it is right there between American capitalism and European socialism. It is not a choice of political class, it is a choice that public has been making since India freed itself. 

This begets a question. Are Indian political problems unique? Looking broadly, answer would be, ‘NO’. But if one tries to see bit more closely, then there is this unique difference, that sets Indian democracy apart from other successful democracies (while factoring in economic and geographic size) – literacy rate. 

Indian public has been smart, much smarter than what political-wonks give it the credit for. It has regularly changed ruling party across the structure, time and again – with dismal literacy rate. Currently it is around 75%, maybe a reality that political class does not realize. 

Why is literacy important for democracy? 

In words of Abraham Lincoln – 

“To immancipate the mind from this false and under estimate of itself is the great task which printing came into the world to perform. It is difficult for us, now and here, to conceive how strong this slavery of the mind was; and how long it did, of necessity, take, to break its shackles, and to get a habit of freedom of thought, established. It is, in this connection, a curious fact that a new country is most favorable — almost necessary — to the immancipation of thought, and the consequent advancement of civilization and the arts.”

In simpler words, literacy is important so that public can push political class to answer the most important questions. This might be over simplification, but it serves the purpose. “Important questions”, that is where the key lies, only a person with free thought can recognize a truly important question – even if that question is selfish. Democracy by its statistical nature will then bring forth the most important question of all. 

To summarize my thought – it is not necessary for the person sitting next to you to have same political views, but it is extremely important for him or her to have an informed political view. And literacy (think beyond lingual literacy), my dear friend is what helps in getting informed. 

 

Potato Politics

The political debate that happened in Lok Sabha on FDI highlighted few very interesting things. Primarily it showed lack of understanding of the topic by several politicians on both the sides of aisle. More interestingly it showed that middle class Indian is not in the picture of political calculations. That is why most of the politicians continued their jingoistic rhetorics without giving any thought (ref: potatoes). It is for this reason none of them bothered to illustrate the arithmetic behind FDI in multibrand retail.
Political flip-flopping does not bother me as I reckon that it has more advantages than disadvantages. What concerns me more is the fact that there is no one to voice middle class concerns in Indian politics. 

Argument on FDI became an argument around class divide, and since middle class is most loosely defined class, it didnt featured in the discussion. Leaders like Mulayam Singh, Lalu Prasad and few more didnt have much to bring to the table and yet were allotted big chunk of time, which Mulayam Singh surely wasted. 

It would be interesting to see how Indian middle class gets featured in forthcoming elections. Till then we can wonder over the size of our potatoes. 

Mission or Solution. The job seeker conundrum.

I got my writing mojo back and the proof is my last post, where I critiqued a movie vis-à-vis the social responsibility of the director and moviemakers. It was pretty long post, which I truly believe wont help me much to increase the readership of this blog. But then, that was the post that I wrote after coming out of my hibernation.

Currently I am working for Indiana Commission for Higher Education, and it is a wonderful job, in terms of challenges that it has to offer. Otherwise, I am also searching for a full time gig in consulting and analysis space. My search often takes me to websites of several organizations. Because of my academic background, I often find myself, sometimes subconsciously, on the websites of non-profit institutions, philanthropies and likes. Since I am still looking for jobs, I do graze their job section, sometimes I find something that is useful for me and sometimes not. There is one thing that I find every time, I look into any job description for jobs in socially minded organizations, which is, whether or not I feel for their mission.

Now this is a really tough question. Trust me, this may not bother many, but for me it is a very important question and is not a rhetoric. For instance, I am yet not able to decide whether I have to put health on top or education on top of the list of socially important issues. This disables me to commit my 100% to one particular mission, which may focus only on education. Because what I am seeing is that education is correlated with health and vice versa.

After earning my masters in public affairs (la public policy) from SPEA, I am still at loss when it comes to select a mission for which I can put my life. Agreed, that I am dramatizing a bit, but then that’s how these statements are put sometimes. They ask for blood and sweat. Somehow I find myself committed to the solution, rather than the mission. I would be happy to find the solution of the problem, if not find it all then contribute towards finding the solution. I would say, I am more of a solution oriented than a mission oriented person.

Now this may be more of a philosophical question, that what is more important, mission or the solution. Do I have an answer? No. Should I have an answer? I don’t know. I guess, it comes from my undergraduate background, which is in engineering. As an engineering student you cannot attach yourself to only one machine, say motor and not think about generator. Or, think only about machines but not think about electric distribution systems. If there is a problem, then you have to get a solution. There are principle that are there in front of you, there are tools that are there, you have use them and solve the problem. And if there are several problems, then solution is contingent upon the impact of the problem. One has to optimize even while approaching multiple problems.

Is this mode of thinking applicable to the social issues? I don’t have a one-word answer for that. Therefore I will answer it rather diplomatically. There is enough space for multiple approaches, as there are far too many problems for an organization or two to solve. And as far as my job is concerned, my employer hopefully would be able to hire people coming in with different approaches.