Matrimonial Madness

Reading up the Matrimonial Columns under the Classifieds Section of daily newspapers has long been considered a fun activity, especially in South India. I recall that fad, when people used to joke about these matrimonial advertisements. “The Hindu” newspaper was famous for this widely followed section (and I am sure it is, even today).

I live in Mumbai and do not get “The Hindu” newspaper. The most widely read newspaper in this metro is of course, “The Times of India”, which I read every morning, spending barely 10 minutes on most mornings before I leave for office.

Today, being a Sunday, lent itself to some leisurely browsing of the newspaper, and for the first time I happened to see (!) the “Sunday Times Matrimonials” column, which even carried some article on Indian wedding rituals. It was funny reading that, and one could not miss the fact that rituals are widely different in different regions of this vast country.

Previously, the ads would always be based on castes – the insane division of people according to the castes they belong to, or sometimes on religions. Most people will be looking for brides or bridegrooms belonging to their own castes, which was only understandable in the context of the cultural mores of that time.

But a reading in the current time leads to a completely different interpretation of the market demand. Yes, the castes are there, no doubt. But more space was taken up some unique categories with headlines as follows:

* Doctors
* Engineers
* NRI/Green Card (shrinking category)
* Nepali (people from Nepal, which is an adjacent country)
* MBA/CA
* Bengali (people from the State of West Bengal, not on caste)
* Punjabi (people from the State of Punjab, not on caste)
* Hindu (in general)
* Muslim (in general)
* Christian (in general)
* Caste No Bar (a new one where the advertiser does not care about the caste)
* Cosmopolitan (the most intriguing classification)
* Others (free thinkers, I would guess)

and so on, and so forth.

India is changing, do you agree ?

Surely. People are thinking differently.

If as a people, we can accept our own people irrespective of where they came from, based on the value (not money for Gods’ sake) that each one brings to the table to ensure a lasting partnership, then we would have arrived in the Twenty-First Century.

In any case, it has been interesting spending some time grasping this change, which I seem to have missed till now. I do not know what is the situation of the ads in “The Hindu” in the Southern part of India, or in “Hindustan Times” newspaper in the Northern part of India, but I think we are seeing an increasingly modernistic trend, which can only bode good for India.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
29th January 2012
Mumbai

Essay on Socialism

It is rather funny that I should be writing about Socialism.

I have written earlier on about the importance of Capitalism and the necessary free movement of capital and labour to the best possible location so as to derive maximum economic return. In fact, I think there should be totally free movement of qualified capital and labour across the world.

Well, I have not abandoned those principles, I still believe that free Capitalism is the best form of economic model out there and we have seen how even a socialistic country like India could transform by adopting capitalism. There is no doubt in my mind that entrepreneurs and established industrialists would not be driven by patriotism only, they would rather be driven by demand and economic returns on invested capital and labour.

However, this might be a good occasion to relook at some fundamental principles from a government and governance perspective. It is critical to ensure that no person is left to die on the streets for want of medical care or food. The State (government) is responsible for ensuring that poverty and restricted access to government or private resources should not stand in the way of providing essential items or care to people below the poverty line.

I am not talking about subsidies here. The subsidies that the Indian government provides to various sectors of the economy are untenable even in the medium term, and I believe these will disappear soon. Imagine if those subsidies are used to fund the healthcare and education needs of the poor people at the bottom of the society. Given that the bottom part of the Indian society is probably more than 200 million people, a significant 18 to 20% of the overall population, there is an urgent need for the government to ensure their well being.

I am writing this piece, as I was impacted by published stories by news media on the plight of very poor “street” people who were turned away from government hospitals in Kolkata. This really hurts any decent person’s sentiments and one tends to think “what is this government doing – do they even care ?”. It was pathetic to see the husband of the lady who died for want of medical care, carrying two just-born kids who would now be left without their mother in this cruel world of insensitive Indians (and Indian government).

Please see the news item in Times of India “Two hospitals ‘refuse’ admission, woman dies after delivering twins”

Actions have to be immediately taken to ensure that such scenarios do not repeat in any part of the country. The administrator of the hospital should be summarily dismissed, sending a very strong message to the medical community that they have to live by their motto of service to mankind and Hippocratic Oath. Of all people, medical administrators and doctors in India cannot behave as though they are disconnected from the problems of the poor people on the street without any resources. In fact, they should go out of their way for ensuring delivery of immediate medical attention without any consideration.

Teaching our children about socialism and empathy is now becoming very critical in this extremely materialistic world of India. How do we ensure that our children are not insensitive to the sufferings around them ? How do we involve them in difficult community service, wherein they would come face to face with the human sufferings of the very poor people of India ? What can the government do to ensure that no one dies on our streets for lack of food or health care ?

Instead of tackling such huge problems, our government is embroiled in scandal after scandal and frittering away our scarce resources on funding Air India type of companies which should have gone away long time ago. Let us worry about the poor people of this country who are poorer than the folks in sub-Saharan Africa and ensure that the benefits of a growing economy trickle down to them as well. This might require “start-up” thinking.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
15th January 2012
Mumbai

Home Guards

There must be at least 10 to 15 “watchmen” or home guards in the condo complex that I live in at Mumbai. In India, they call the security folks as watchmen in the home environment. In corporate environments, they are called security guards. It is a bit funny sounding as “watchmen” but that is the way it is.

Most of them know me and I am sure they know most of the folks living in the complex. While they are strict, they also show respect while sometimes diluting their watch if someone comes in a big car as “bigness” matters a lot in India. They always note the vehicle numbers entering and leaving the complex – the ones that do not have a permit to use their car parking facility.

The purpose of this post is to mention how little we care about these important folks who guard our homes and offices. While this may not be as important in the Western world, in the Indian security situation, the security guards are probably the most important people in ensuring the safety and security of the people, but are also the lowest paid and poorly trained in most cases.

So, I make it a point to wish them every time I see them, reinforcing the familiarity quotient and conveying respect for the important work that they are delivering, day in and day out.

I meet the same security guard or “watchman” in uniform every morning (almost religiously, while in town and not travelling) who opens the gym for me before 6 AM. He warmly wishes me “Good Morning, Sir” without a frown on his face though I go before the gym opening time every day. And, I smile and wish him back.

I also notice that most people do not wish the guards or smile at them. Not that such behaviour is going to affect their personal safety in any way, but it is clearly important to wish others who play a key role in ensuring our well-being and safety.

I was indeed touched a bit this morning when I went to the gym at the same time, and found the same security guard at the lobby of the gym. When I wished him and then signed in, he remarked “Sir, we were wondering why you did not come yesterday, worried what happened to you”. I smiled and told him that I was busy (though I did work out yesterday in the evening time and he was not the designated guard at that time, having gone through a shift change). He smiled back.

One thing we have to learn from the Western countries is how to show respect to all below our social status and treat them as almost equals or at least warmly every day. It might look funny when one wishes a newspaper vendor or a milkman or a security guard in India, but that is normal practice in the West. There is no difference based on religion, caste, race, social status or colour in the West. But we Indians still pay attention to all these outdated social customs and continue to suffer ostracism, whether we are up or down in the pecking order. We cannot claim to be one of the oldest and most polished civilizations if we still do not even attempt to fix this greatest anomaly in our lives.

Let us smile and wish everyone who we come across every day in our lives. It is not only important, it is required practice and it would make everyone feel good. I do this to the lift operator in my office and feel good when I see the smile and glow in his face, because no one else does it to him.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
11th December 2011
Mumbai

Net Control by India

Fascinating, isn’t it ?

I thought only autocratic regimes will impose free speech controls on their citizens, but last week India tried to do so and in the process created lot of turmoil amongst the educated netizens of India.

But, I thought about the matter in some depth instead of quickly jumping in to attack the censorship kind of self-regulation proposed by the Indian Government’s Telecom Minister, Mr Kapil Sibal.

I also read what was written about in various newspapers and saw the attack in the TV media. I did not see one positive remark.

Not surprising, isn’t it ?

But thinking more incisively, what the Minister was trying to communicate was quite reasonable. The internet should be used responsibly and not used to attack or defame people. While such attacks cannot be censored, expressing anguish in itself is no cause for a reverse attack on the Government. The Minister was asking Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo and Google to take care and ensure that racially or religiously divisive comments are not thrown at the unsuspecting population via the internet medium. The respective companies of course refused.

The Minister concluded that the Government has to introduce its own mechanisms to control the divisive and dangerous expressions being aired on the internet so freely.

I do not completely disagree with him.

In many developed countries, child pornography and incitement to terrorism are punishable, and there have been many cases in which the respective governments have won cases in Courts of Law. India does not unfortunately have advanced laws, such as laws to control the abuse of free expression. I do not think it is out of the way to start thinking about the damage caused by free, uncontrolled, insensitive, irresponsible and harmful comments on the internet and TV/print media. In fact, the Harvard University showed their hand when the faculty council decided to disallow Mr Subramanian Swamy to teach two of his economics courses in summer due to the vituperative article he wrote in the DNA newspaper a few months ago against Muslims.

So, what are we trying to do here ? It is critically important to respect race, religion, community and colour in all communications. Internet cannot be an exception. I have been running a blog for more than 5 years now, and have I ever been tempted to do anything of that sort ? No and it will never be done. We cannot allow the harmful impact of one blogger to affect an otherwise peaceful population. There is no individual judgement call here. This is an important matter requiring considered discussion and we need to provide space for that discussion instead of trying to banish the whole thought outright.

Let us think carefully regarding what the Minister said. He is not propagating the idea of censorship. Some self regulation is called for, and if that is not forthcoming, it is important to take some kind of action. We cannot just site there and accept whatever is written to harm an entire community.

Let us not lose our sense of proportion and magnanimity. Let us respect each other. Let us not harm each other. Are these things too much to ask ?

I fully support the Minister’s views and if he has an impending action plan, I would like to see and comment on that.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
10th December 2011
Mumbai

A Chinese Moral Story

Courtesy: Anu, my IIM-B Classmate

Once upon a time a big monk and a little monk were traveling together. They came to the bank of a river and found the bridge was damaged. They had to wade across the river.

There was a pretty lady who was stuck at the damaged bridge and couldn’t cross the river. The big monk offered to carry her across the river on his back to which the lady accepted.

The little monk was shocked by the move of the big monk and was thinking “How can big brother carry a lady when we are supposed to avoid all intimacy with females?” But he kept quiet. The big monk carried the lady across the river and the small monk followed unhappily. When they crossed the river, the big monk let the lady down and they parted ways with her.

All along the way for several miles, the little monk was very unhappy with the act of the big monk. He was making up all kinds of accusations about big monk in his head. This got him madder and madder. But he still kept quiet. And the big monk had no inclination to explain his situation.

Finally, at a rest point many hours later, the little monk could not stand it any further, he burst out angrily at the big monk. “How can you claim yourself a devout monk, when you seize the first opportunity to touch a female, especially when she is very pretty?”

All your teachings to me make you a big hypocrite.

The big monk looked surprised and said, “I had put down the pretty lady at the river bank many hours ago, how come you are still carrying her along?”

Moral: This very old Chinese Zen story reflects the thinking of many people today. We encounter many unpleasant things in our life, they irritate us and they make us angry. But like the little monk, we are not willing to let them go away. There is no point in remaining hurt by the unpleasant event after it is over. Learn to move on in life!

Courtesy: Anu, my IIM-B Classmate

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
20th November 2011
Mumbai

Mahatma Gandhi’s Impact

Today, 2nd October, is Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday. He was born 142 years ago, and led the freedom struggle for India. He was assassinated in January 1948, soon after India gained its independence from the British.

Considering his commitment to communal peace and purity in public life, what would he think of today’s India ?

He would be quite negative on the state of affairs, and if living today, might launch an agitation to bring back probity in public life. He would be devastated when he finds that communal peace has gone for a six, with further incendiary divisions between communities even within India. He would find that whatever he fought for during his life, has been decimated by the politicians. He might even want to return India to the British !

I often think what would have been the state of India if we had been forced to shed blood in our war of independence. Would we have become a different country ? Would we be like a Germany or a Japan ?

Mahatma Gandhi led a battle against the occupying British in a manner and using a methodology which the British could not fathom. The British would have further subjugated the Indians if India had fought back with rifles, because they had a superior army and a formidable navy. And, they had the cooperation of foolish kings and warlords who surrendered for their protection. The British effectively brought some powerful kings and their fighters into their fold and waged a battle against Indians for a couple of hundred years.

Mahatma Gandhi could see all that, and decided that the best way would be for him to fight on a platform of non-violence, eschewing armed struggle. He ultimately succeeded, but had to forego Pakistan in the interest of overall independence and communal harmony.

Had India won independence using an armed struggle (which would have been extremely difficult if not impossible), then the passion for Indians to become the predominant nation in Asia Pacific would have been strengthened in the 1940s and 1950s. This was not to be, as Indians realized that their government would forever be weak, incapacitated by indecisive prime ministers and a corrupt bureaucracy which took the people for a ride for too long. An armed struggle would have taught Indians the value of life (which is now worth nothing), and the need to fight for what they believe in during all phases of their lives.

Indians never realized the value and importance of Mahatma Gandhi. They missed the critical significance of his war against the British and especially his focus on self-purity to immunize himself from unwanted distractions. I do not believe that today’s young India has felt Mahatma Gandhi’s impact. Neither does the ruling class though most of them were born in pre-independence time and should have strongly felt Mahatma Gandhi’s influence.

When one goes to the Property Registration Office in India (any one of the thousands of offices) to register his property purchase or sale, can he come out without paying a bribe (the payment happens rather publicly) ? Indians have sacrificed their personal value systems in the altar of getting personal things done at a price. This shows they do not have any confidence of getting things done in today’s India. This is just one example.

Let us think through carefully on Mahatma Gandhi’s impact – we should make his writings compulsory education in our schools. He seems to be having more influence on Egyptians than on Indians.

We cannot change history, but we can learn from history-makers on what we should be doing to ensure a future that they only dreamed of. THINK !

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
02 October 2011
Mumbai

Defined by Differences

As global citizens inhabiting this planet, all human beings should have more similarities than differences, right ? But that is a naive assumption, to say the least.

Even within a country, we are more defined by our differences. I am not referring here to skin colour or race, or even religion. The challenges we face today in a diverse country such as India are numerous, but these can be handled but for the differences we impose on ourselves and others. Same problem or issue appears to be different in the South as compared to North or West. An example is the imposition of punishment on young couples who marry out of their respective races, meted out by gram panchayats (village councils) in the Northern and North-Western regions of India. Such a treatment would be considered barbaric in the Western and Eastern parts of India.

In some parts of India, corruption is not an accepted practice to get things done. In most parts, it might be required practice. Similarities are eclipsed when it comes to comparison of behaviours and attitudes between different communities of India, and it becomes easier to point out the differences.

Why should people be defined by differences ? Are we all not the same ?

Difficult to answer, even for a single country, single race of people. Forget cross-cultural differences and cross-religious differences. Forget ideological differences. What is considered to be right in a particular community, religion or a country is sometimes totally unacceptable in another community, religion or country. Bridging cultures is possible, but argumentative positions on “required” differences can hardly be reconciled.

Take the example of Jammu & Kashmir, parts of which are disputed between India and Pakistan. Differences over the fate of Kashmir cannot be reconciled despite any amount of negotiations between the two countries, and diplomatic positions get hardened when one country takes a very public posture against the other. Indians and Pakistanis came from the same womb, but they are more defined by their differences than anything else. Similarly, the Koreas (South and North) are defined by their stark differences, than by the similarities of their race, colour and religion.

This is the unfortunate situation of the human race, and the only solution is to replace all humans by aliens as we have seen in some Hollywood movies and then obliterating all boundaries between countries. But that is just Hollywood, not really the reality.

In personal interactions and in business interactions, we sometimes consciously look for differences as we might try to complement each other. That is not wrong, and it might help two people to actually work together well. Imagine if everyone in a family or a company think and act the same !

Something to think about during the weekend, I guess.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
01 October 2011
Mumbai

The Challenge of Stability

Most people want to have stability in their lives.

Most citizens want their government to be stable for the duration it was elected.

The notion of stability is ingrained in our lives and minds. We understand the need for a stable inflation (no rapid increases, the figure stays more or less the same for a fairly decent length of time), a stable currency (no wild swings indicating instability and reducing the ability to plan even travels overseas), a stable oil price leading to stability at the petrol pumps (not possible anymore), and a stable leadership team governing our country and the state in which we live.

However, people are not at their productive best when there is stability all around. Complacency sets in. Expectations are met. There are no surprises anywhere or in anything. Or, for that matter, in anyone. Things seem to be too smooth to believe that it is in fact, the reality. People take things for granted, and start trusting their service providers and the government. Everything goes along too well.

Well, that sounds like the United States in the mid- to late-nineties. Not really, of course. During that period, things were actually going up, like the stock market and the valuations of brand new startups which had no notion of a balance sheet or a profit & loss statement.

Europe has had several periods of stability in its history, especially during the decades following the second world war. Seventies and Eighties were quite good. People enjoyed a growing economy which was spewing opportunities and the excellent living style.

But, the inability to deal with long periods of stability, resulted from such long periods of stability when things seemed to be too good for real. How does a population and a government deal with oil or inflationary shocks, when they have really not encountered bad economic times ? When their prosperity allowed them the cushion not to really prepare for adversity ? When the competition from South East Asian “Tiger” economies and later China hit them, they were not prepared adequately. The emergence of these economies in late Eighties and the Nineties took time to fructify, so it is impossible not to have predicted their emergence at least as manufacturing power houses.

But adequate preparation of the population was not in place. Nobody thought that their jobs will disappear one day, their economies will stutter, their governments will be thrown out and replaced with more aggressive cost-cutting governments, that oil will cross USD 100 per barrel, etc.,

So, the conclusion that we can derive is that too much stability is not a good thing after all. There has to be a bit of chaos in lives of people, for them to be adequately prepared to weather the storms even before these gather to hit them one day. It is better to go through some adversity of sorts, and who else is better prepared to do that than a “strategic government” ? I mean, governments need to prepare “strategic” plans and do intense scenario planning, and take actions much before the real problems surface in their economies. Governments cannot just be “doers”, they need to be “strategic planners”, and create ripples in their countries to simulate “instability” when none really exists.

Such planning and advance actions would help and train the citizens to get ready to countenance adversities. There must be some instability in lives, otherwise we will not know how to deal with problems. The problems could be big ones like unemployment, runaway inflation, or fast depreciating assets like currency or real estate.

My derivation at this point in time is that Indians in India are probably best equipped to deal with instability, they are surrounded by a sea of unstable factors and environment. I do not need to expound on this fact, if one can survive a day in Mumbai City for instance, then he or she qualifies as a “trader” in instability quotient !

This is not the case in other countries. May be China is close to India on this count.

Something to think about, right ? Enjoy the rest of the weekend !

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
4th Sep 2011
Mumbai

Charity and its Necessity

In our hectic lives, we do not think about the need for donating to better the lives of orphans. Life is so hard and busy for most everyone, that nowadays it has become almost impossible to think of anything but survival for most people around the world.

One thing which keeps coming back to my mind is the generosity of Americans. They donate for community upliftment and to the poor in a consistent manner, all through their lives. It appears to me that charity is part and parcel of the American culture – a culture of giving back to the society. Richer Americans donate more and even the average American gives donations.

What about India and Indians ?

We donate hardly. In proportion to the wealth of the country, the donations do not measure up. Richer people donate less, and average people do not donate. The situation is in stark contrast to the U.S. Why do Indians ignore charity ?

There are many reasons – one big reason is the doubt in most people’s minds if their donations would ever reach the needy, rightfully so. India is a corrupt society, so it is reasonable to derive a conclusion that the poor people for whom donations are meant for, may not in fact receive the benefit of charity. The other reason is the virtual lack of knowledge – hardly any advertisements – on public charities and the tax benefits that come along with donations to notified charities. Most people just ignore or do not have the time to investigate charities and make up their minds whether to donate or not.

Ofcourse, a donation mindset is important before one can bring himself / herself to make the donation. India being a poor country (whatever we see in economic statistics has not yet percolated to the poorest of the poor people in the country, despite whatever the economists say), it is critical to identify social institutions (preferably privately managed) which have a good track record in the society that they serve and a solid financial reputation. Look at the directors on the boards of such institutions, look at their website, ask around, check their credentials, ensure they have Income Tax exemption as a designated charity, and if possible, visit their office or their orphanage or their school. It is important to verify that the money that you ultimately decide to donate does not go waste, and it does reach the poor people served by that institution.

Well, it is hard to do all this in our hectic lives, no doubt. But it is important to select one or two charities and consistently donate every year. May be it is on the occasion of an important milestone or anniversary in your life, so that you do not forget. Do this every year. May be it is just INR 5,000 or INR 10,000 – it does not really matter. The key thing is that you develop a charity mindset, and you encourage your children to do so likewise.

You should never advertise what you donate. I cringe from seeing my name anywhere at the place that I donate to – it is not what I am expecting. The money that we donate is really meant for the very poor orphans who have suffered in their lives and have not had the luxury of having their parents in charge of their care. There is no need for them to know who donates the money that they need – suffice for them to know that there are good hearts and minds out there in the world, who do care for them, though once in a year.

I hope you will take it upon yourself to identify a charity of repute in the near future, and donate something to that charity. Please do this every year. It should become a habit. Let us show we have our hearts in the right place.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
31st July 2011
Mumbai

Nuclear Terrorism

We have all seen Hollywood movies where John Travolta threatens New York or Los Angeles with nuclear attacks – there are so many such movies, I cannot recall the movie names, but I distinctly remember the enigmatic grin on Travolta’s face. Those movies were based on Soviet-era nuclear bombs smuggled out of Ukraine and planned to be deployed on a moving train – I am sure you would have by now got the name(s) of such movies.

It is now time for the world and the United Nations to start worrying seriously about such nuclear terrorism, and finally move towards taking some concrete actions, as the damage caused by a nuclear attack is no longer going to be restricted to the country which is targeted. Apart from the huge collateral damage and destruction of civilian population, the nuclear cloud will cause massive destruction to urban centres all around, may be in neighbouring countries. Further, the massive retaliation from the country that is attacked is sure to create untold human misery and environmental hazards, and could even lead to a limited Third World War.

The justification that a country’s conventional army is small in size, so a nuclear attack would be more appropriate is complete hogwash. Yes, if you have a smaller army and if you launch an unwarranted attack on your larger neighbour, the only possibility that exists for you to win is to accentuate the war with a tactical nuclear attack to bring your larger neighbour to its knees. However, this argument assumes that your larger neighbour would be persuaded not to launch a nuclear counter attack on you, and that would be a foolish assumption. It would be totally relevant for such a counter attack to be launched which would obliterate the smaller country.

While the nuclear weapons states are advanced societies with clear-cut definitions on the usage of nuclear weapons, and exhaustive checks and balances, rogue states do not have any such policies or restrictions. Pronouncements to the contrary have to be taken with a huge pinch of salt, because none of such states are trustworthy. At the end of the day, their actions are going to be based on “maverick” decision-makers, who are not well-versed in diplomacy and the implications of their actions to societies at large.

Given such a situation, it is critical for the United Nations to step in and take some decisions to initiate certain actions which could impinge on the sovereignty of non-nuclear weapons states, who are acquiring nuclear weapons capability at a rapid or unknown pace. Such planning and actions are needed to save the planet and its peoples. Why would the world allow some rogues to control our destiny ?

The United Nations is generally useless (I have blogged about this in one of my earlier posts) as it kowtows to the Security Council, and its actions or inaction is largely symbolic. So, it becomes critical for the world to rely on the Security Council and push it for urgent and immediate actions against the build-up of nuclear plants for the sole purpose of constructing weapons of mass destruction. While the UNSC did take such action against Iraq, the action was based on false information, and such action should not be permitted in future.

But, actions based on known and verifiable data should be taken, starting with coercive and collective diplomacy from the UNSC. This is very urgently needed, and should not have dissension within the Security Council. It should be unified action, supported by the larger UN organization.

Let us hope that the UNSC and UN will take some appropriate action against potential nuclear attacks and nuclear terrorism against the hapless peoples of this world.

Cheers,

Vijay Srinivasan
31st July 2011
Mumbai