Dantewara; Sania-Shoaib-Ayesha; IPL & Tiger Woods

In the recent past, I was closely following news reports in connection with the events as mentioned below:

1. The Dantewara conflict resulting in the death of approximately 80 security personnel at the hands of local Maoist militia / insurgents.
2. The Sania Mirza – Shoaib Malik – Ayesha Siddiqui marriage and divorce saga.
3. The bidding and the finalization of the Pune and the Kochi IPL franchisees at astronomical sums.
4. The return of Tiger Woods.

These incidents were reported in the print and the electronic media almost round the clock with enormous heat, hype and passion. I was sucked into its tantalizing vortex of reportage and opinions without any realistic resistance.

Once the immediacy of the news had settled in, I got some time to reflect. The issues that came to my mind are:

1. The classical divide between the rich (the powerful who run the state) and the poor (the disenfranchised) has converted itself into a full scale war in the darkness of the jungles, low lying mountains and plateaus of India. The war is between greed on one side and human survival on the other. The upwardly mobile class hangs onto the political idea of democracy and nationalism propagated by the rich (but not practiced). The English speaking media is a complex matrix of organizations that works to the interests of large corporations (including compradors) and is run and fuelled by the most capable and suave members of this upwardly mobile community. The mainstream vernacular media is not free of vested interests; it operates as the branch offices of the mainstream English speaking media. The variance in styling of similar content – more aggressive, insensitive, unrefined and sensationalizing – is worth noticing. The poor has very little voice in the institutions of the state as well as the media. Vast expanse of land is being snatched away by large corporations in the name of development through mining and setting up of colossal industrial units resulting in displacement of millions of people. The total wealth generated by such industrial enterprise is shared between the promoters and the state most disproportionately in the approximate ratio of 90:10 (in the form of revenue received through taxes and royalty). Only 3 to 4% of the wealth accrued to the promoters cascade downwards. The state, as such, who is assigned with the duty of protecting its citizenry by statute, works in joint venture with the promoters of these large corporations to protect their interests by validating their objectives, aims, and methods to achieve such objectives and aims in the names of development and growth. The fact is systemic impoverishment, malnourishment and neglect have combined together to form such an intense envelope of darkness in the mineral and timber rich districts of India that it is beyond imagination today to work out a roadmap for reconciliation between the 2 sides. Do we have any elected representative who has the imagination to suggest a workable methodology to the tribals to continue with their movement non-violently in an atmosphere where private armies and state agencies in cohort run the writ or to halt the locomotion of these armies and agencies? What does a tribal want? First: she does not want to give away her land (the track record of rehabilitation in India is abjectly poor); second: she wants means of livelihood so that she is able to earn food, shelter and clothing for her and her family; third: she aspires to get access to healthcare, water and education to be able to lead a dignified life. But when you are driven away from your own land against your wish you become a hapless migrant. Your chances of survival become minimal. So the tribal today is involved in a bloody battle not to get thrown away from her own land. How does one do it non-violently in the face of these powerful armies and agencies? The large corporations also invest huge sums of money in getting parliamentarians elected so that legislations are made in their favor. Is there any parliamentarian to take up the case based on merits and objective analysis and reasoning and whose imagination is not rooted to the wants and desires of the promoters of large corporations? I feel utterly sorry for the foot soldiers of the state (and the large corporations it sets out to protect) who inundate the jungles, kill tribals and die at their hands; they essentially prowl under-prepared and of course, without knowing the implicit objectives, and have been unleashed on the people most dangerously by their masters. The irony is: People who mask their true interests in the garb of circuitous discussions on democracy, nationalism, and denouncing the use of violence (when it comes to common men having taken up arms against the state in desperation) are neither aware of the scale of hunger and desperation that is fuelling this war nor are they sensitive and sincere to their foot soldiers (on whose account they shed tears in TV studios) who have been (literally) thrown into the battlefields without adequate food, shelter, water, mosquito repellents, arms and ammunitions, and above all, a clear-cut strategy. I have another question to ask: Will violence be in the long term interest of the tribals? I think, no. Violence will help them to retaliate and protect themselves in the short term, but it will end up undermining the political battle against the dictatorship of the rich (landlords and large corporations put together) embedded in the idea of democracy as practiced in India. Secondly, violent politics is most likely to be criminalized in the long run. Bhagat Singh’s strategic use of violence was political (as it was being played with an audience around it) and not prophylactic; Gandhi’s strategic use of non-violence was political too and it arose from within the politics of the trusteeship of the rich and the leisured class; violence used by the tribals is retaliatory and prophylactic and is essentially devoid of politics. How does one bring the human civilization back to the idea that its survival rests in the ecological survival of all communities including every constituent of the biosphere? For this we have to move away from industrial economics and the idea of modernity that multiplies consumption and brings every ambit of our existence under commercial laws; go back to our lands and sources of water to live in farming communities without the polluted idea of adding too much to nature in our lifespan in the name of wealth generation.
2. How would you react if a non-celebrity status Indian woman was to fall in love with a Pakistani man or vice versa? What kind of a man marries on phone? What kind of a sports-star marries a woman without seeing her face? What kind of a woman keeps her clothes (dipped in her man’s fluids) unwashed and stacked securely for years? What kind of a woman gets engaged to her childhood sweetheart (publicly and pompously); breaks off her engagement in a few months time (again publicly and pompously); and then after a short break announces her marriage to another man [well, a falling sports icon this time from another country but settled in a different country] (once again publicly and pompously)?
3. Have you read the Koran? Polygamy as described in the Koran has a background context to it of the gory holy-war; it is very different from institutionalized polygamy as enshrined in the Muslim Personal Laws. Divorce by utterance (even in sense) does not find approval in the Koran. However, these are the 2 issues on which the Koran is denigrated by its religious opponents, very wrongly and ignorantly according to me.
4. IPL is plush with funds. Where is this money coming from; who are the real investors? Who is earning, and how much? IPL is the crucible for showcasing of advertisements, and creating an engine for selling and pumping of multifarious products and services in the marketplace. As such, there was a need to showcase it as a huge carnival, bonanza and razzmatazz, where stars from the movie industry work as front men for investors: it is a cocktail of money, movies and a popular sport where the needs of the sportsmen fared last. Forget Kochi and Pune; Kings X1 Punjab (which is likely to come last in IPL 3) is valued now at Rs. 1000 crores: 3 to 4 times more than that of what it was bought at 3 years back. Where do you get such astronomical returns for underperformance? Which means, price of a team in IPL is not proportional to its performance; well, this contradicts the fundamental principle of free market economics! UP, Uttarakhand, MP, Chattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal and the whole of North East has 1 team: Kolkata Knight Riders. Maharashtra has 2 teams; all the 4 Southern states have 1 team each; the North has 3 teams. What does this show? IPL is consolidating and underlining the already existing biases in India: that between regions; classes; and, privileges.
5. Tiger Woods is an exceptional sportsman: his career built on passion and hard work. Unfortunately, he was made into a pseudo-cultural icon once again by the biggest multi-national corporations by fabricating (in many cases suitably exaggerating) stories around him: rags to riches; racial discrimination; doting father; doting husband; and, his political and religious correctness. The agenda was simple: Such conformist guys sell products and services much better than brigands like, Muhammad Ali and George Best. Once, Tiger Woods’ personal life was exposed to the hilt (I sympathize with him), the same corporations lost no time in abandoning him. Meanwhile, the bosses found out one thing: The investments made on Tiger Woods have been astronomical and he cannot go scot-free. So, they will take him back once again, when the stories of his sexual transgressions fade from public memory (on which the media at the behest of these corporations has already started working). I think in the next 3 to 6 months time you will find the Tiger is back on the billboards. Conservatism in politics, religious beliefs, and cultural positioning works to the advantage of commercial corporations.

Kindly do not think I am a secularist or a leftist; I am neither of these. But I am very unhappy at: the way consumption, greed, commercialization, and justification for going to war and violence unleashed on the powerless by the powerful have taken over each and every existential microcosm of our life. I am also deeply saddened by the decimation of countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and many others in Africa on one pretext or the other.

Is there a way to move forward or have we been irrevocably entangled in a downward helix of self-annihilation of the human race?

Yesterday I saw a wonderful film: Paul Greengrass’s Green Zone – US Army on their deceitful trail to find WMDs in Iraq and they ended up finding none!!!

Some Recent Thoughts

1.

In Bharatpur bird sanctuary I came to know of two things. One, there is a specific variety of birds that pick on the teeth of tigers. A tiger having had a dense meal sits leisurely, possibly drooling, with its teeth open to the sky. These birds come and sit on the tiger’s mouth and feed on the tiny morsels of meat stuck between the spaces of its teeth. So, this results in two things: the cleaning of the tiger’s teeth and feeding of the hungry bird. Second, woodpeckers peck on tree stems in search of food like ants and insects of variety, resulting in creation of warm labyrinths, which are then enjoyed as homes by parakeets.

Nature has devised wonderful complimentary patterns of survival that hints at the fundamental grammar of melody and ethic.

2.
If rape (in the sexual context) is defined as sexual assault and act of hostile intercourse against the wishes of another person, how then can rape be gender specific? But the problem is: it is hardly defined in a gender neutral manner! It is always meant to be an act of sexual aggression by men on women. Rights activists argue that a man can never be raped; at the most he can be sexually harassed. What about men being sodomized by men and transvestites, and transvestites and eunuchs by men? Because men have disproportionate power in the realm of the real world compared to what women have, hence acts of all kinds of aggression (including rape) on women by men will of course outnumber similar acts on men by women. Further, the rape of a man is likely to be least reported in the present context because involving in a sexual act is seen to be macho behavior (and, men do not enjoy being projected un-macho because that’s just so un-cool!) and as such, shying away from sexual activity (where opportunity permits) is seen to be cloaking oneself ungainfully with feminine traits. I have listened to many stories where the men had to be involved unwillingly in sexual intercourse with their wives (yes wives!) to demonstrate: their interest in marriage and their partners, and their ability to perform; they were threatened by their powerful wives (on account of having more access to wealth and accompanying beauty in most of these cases) that otherwise they would face desertion and public humiliation of the worst kind. In such cases, these men have reported to have felt the very act of getting aroused excruciatingly tormenting. This is not rape but not very different from rape either.

Although, I do agree that men cannot be physically or emotionally bruised or violated or put to risk to the extent a woman can be in an act of rape.

While rape laws should be written considering the existential realities arising out of the enormously disproportionate gap in power between men and women in every sector of our society, however, there is every reason to alter the gender specificity of the act of rape in its literal meaning: just because it is not true.

3.
Children rob you of your basic freedom to rebel. In this context children are seen to be obfuscation or an impediment to ones individuality whether they are born to a plan or by default. I know of innumerable incidents where parents have abandoned their children both under impoverished as well as privileged conditions for multifarious reasons. There are situations akin to abandonment even in cases where the parent might not have left the family physically. I must add: I have also met parents who have gone out of families due to discord with their partners, and yet have been very dutiful to and protective of their children.

I have often wondered about the possible incentives in abandoning your children (although considering respectfully that in all the cases it must have been a very painful experience for the parent). There is of course the life of Buddha in search of truth having abandoned his family and kingdom. It is complicated but the life of Buddha (specifically his act of abandonment) can be viewed in many ways. Parents, who abandon, in most of the cases, alter their memory to find an underlying justification to abandon to unburden the weight of guilt that sits on their soul like a monster. The souls of children get mauled in the process of abandonment for they do not understand and their vulnerability, both emotional and physical, alters their understanding of life and existence.

There is a violent world prowling around us.

If we have children it is ethically incumbent on us to protect them from the shadows of this ever-increasing violence, and try to help them grow as fine individuals.

4.
There is so much talk all around about the reforms in the modern education system. But nobody in power seems to be talking about reducing the burden: both in terms of the number of subjects and the constituent syllabus, especially up to high school. Education is no longer contemplative and is not aimed towards sharpening our faculties to understand and realize. Education must help us to observe the universe and our lives with sensitivity and humor, and must help us to think and question. But that is not the aim of the education industry and mafia for sure! I want to write about this in greater detail sometime later. To end may I say: The examinations per se are not bad but the format is?