Desicritics Author: sooeydoo

Reservations: A Game Where the Players Want to Lose

sooeydoo — Sun, 9 Apr 2006 07:14:55 EDT

The new fever to have gripped India is Arjun Singh's or Congress Party's yet another silly gimmick - hiking reservations to almost 50% in IIMs, IITs and Central Universities - the cream of the country.

There are presently reservations in these institutions, but hiking them to 50% of the total seats will lead to incredible devaluing of the country's top institutes. If students were denied seats even if they deserved them on merit, that would be the greatest injustice in humanity next to denying food. Education is the birthright of every citizen of the world, more so in India where it is valued highly.

It has become quite a common headline to read of the high starting salaries that IIM graduates are paid, but supposing students are denied seats based on merit and admitted based on their caste, this will greatly dilute the talent in the IITs and the IIMs. The presently well-regarded institutes will fall in the eyes of all Indians as well as the world.

Now companies may start to discriminate against the lower castes because they gained an IIM degree through the back door. Or world-renowned universities may stop admitting IIT graduates because their quality is no longer assured.

On the other hand, reservations have done a great deal of good to India. They have levelled the playing field for the SCs and STs and even the BCs. Now we see more and more of the so-called 'lower' castes in mainstream education and employment, not only in government but also in the private sector.

But then again, our crass politicians have been digging Indians yet another hole by declaring OBCs, MBCs etc. as 'lower' caste groups and including more and more castes in such groups to gain petty votes during elections. And we also see the caste leaders lobbying for their caste to be called 'lower'.

Where else in the world would you see a game where the captains and the players want so desperately to lose?

Reservations have done good to Indians and they should continue for a decade or so at a sanely permissible level of around 25%. They should be gradually dealt away with and replaced with "affirmative action" where when two candidates are of equal merit, the one from a socially-deprived background is given preference. Why, affirmative action could even be made mandatory across public and private sectors - I don't think anybody would protest.

Or would you? Have your say below...

India - Islamic Under The Name Of Secularism

sooeydoo — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 09:28:04 EST

The Muhammad cartoons did rouse the Islamic Congress Govt. at the Centre. It seems that the Indian Govt. expressed its outrage and offered suggestions to the Danish Govt. in October of last year itself, when the Mohammed cartoons were first published.

The Press release from Indian Govt. reads:

"At the time these offending cartoons were first published, Indian
outrage at this had been conveyed to the Danish Government both in New
Delhi and in Copenhagen, in October, 2005 itself," the release said.

"It
is incumbent on all of us to be sensitive to the beliefs and sentiments
of others and avoid all actions that cause hurt to them. India's
commitment to religious harmony and tolerance is unshakeable and
actions that cause hurt to the sentiments of any section of our people
are not acceptable," the release added.

* The Govt. that did not express any displeasure when a Bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church called Krishna an 'evil demon';

* The Govt. that does not reprimand Pakistan nor Bangladesh for the routine kidnapping, rape and forced conversions of Hindu girls that occur there;

* The Govt. that remains quiet when Italian designer, Roberto Cavalli, prints Rama and other Gods on bikinis and underwear;

From where did it find the impudence to tell the Danish Govt. what to do when Muslim sentiments are alone hurt?

Not to mention the utter lacklustre response when MF Hussain draws Hindu Goddesses nude! He still roams free in a country where hurting religious sentiments is absolutely illegal. (Not a question of an artist's freedom of expression here, it is a question of the professed secularism of a government.)

The Congress is much better renamed IUML (2); and India may sooner be declared as the Islamic Repbulic of India.

So much for secularism!

Freedom to Paint Bharat Mata NUDE

sooeydoo — Tue, 7 Feb 2006 22:56:43 EST

Poor MF Hussain cannot draw the Gods or saints of Islam for fear of his violent Muslim brethren who will declare a fatwa and perhaps murder him in no time at all. Perhaps that is why he devotes his artistic love to Hindu Gods.

But the extremism, so characteristic of Muslims, seems to have creeped into Hinduism too, a religion whose followers are proud of its tolerant and peaceful roots. Roots that have, unfortunately, decayed today.

Maqbool Fida Hussain routinely draws nude Hindu Goddesses and then routinely apologizes for drawing them and hurting Hindu sentiments. He drew Saraswati naked before and there was a lot of hullabaloo from many Hindu groups such as VHP, Bajrang Dal, BJP etc. That was long back.

Now he has drawn Bharatmata naked and put it up for auction. The timing could not have been better for the Hindu groups. The entire Islamic fraternity is raging over caricatures of Muhammad published first by a Danish newspaper. And of course it is now the turn of Hindu groups to stifle artistic freedom of expression.

Let's start at the beginning: painting a God or Goddess nude is definitely heterodox and bound to hurt the sentiments of millions of Hindus. Nothing amiss. But is it not quite odd that of all the people in the world, the Hindus should get offended?

I mean, look at the temples whose architecture are filled with iconography that can be called softcore pornography. Vishnu has Brahma coming out of his navel, Brahma marries his daughter, Saraswati. Images of Radha and Krishna making love are appreciated as divine beauty.

Art of all professions sees no bounds in its expressions and emotions. Why should an artist be asked to consider the sentiments of six billion individuals who are fragile enough to get offended by a sneeze?

Now the historically free society of Hindus have imposed curbs on themselves. If Radha-Krishna making love is permissible, if Shiva can be worshipped as a lingam one of whose symbolic interpretation is of creation being depicted as a phallus, then what is wrong in nude art?

The Hindu groups have to realize that it is prudery that is imported from the West, and that muffling freedom of expression has no history in Hinduism.

The naked body is not something to be ashamed of, in fact it is the temple of the Divine in Hindu theology. It is the Abrahamic religions that preach distaste and hate towards the physical body and therefore require their monastic orders to cover their bodies from head to toe. It will do a lot of good if the Hindu groups realize their folly in following traditions alien to their own.

It is high time India, a supposed democracy, gave its Press and artists true freedom of expression without limits, where Hindu Gods and Goddesses along with Allah and Mohammed can be drawn in any manner imaginable.

(First published on Hindu blog)

Ugly Mohammed leads to Persia Burning

sooeydoo — Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:24:33 EST

I haven't yet heard of Indian Muslims acting like tortured souls - have you?

Of course, drawing Mohammed was unnecessary considering that it obviously would hurt Muslims the world over, almost two billion people. And Muslims are famous for their rage, uncivilized modes of protest and extreme forms of violence invoking threat in the mind of any non-Muslim.

That is exactly why he was not drawn until now; and also why the cartoonist still remains anonymous. But nothing stands in the way of free speech, very rightly exemplified by a Danish newspaper which published some cartoons of Mohammed.

Firstly, about the caricature. If the Muslims had themselves drawn Mohammed or Allah, then out of devotion and cultural affiliation, the subject would have been portrayed as extremely good-looking and entrancingly divine so as to induce devotion in the hearts of Muslims.

But they did not take the opportunity. If a Muslim had indeed drawn Mohammed, there would have been a fatwa and he would most likely be dead pretty soon.

So that's why the opportunity passed on to European hands - and they demonized Mohammed. I mean, just look at the cartoons, which I'm sure many of you would have seen by now. Mohammed is portrayed as any negative stereotype that you can imagine, his face is made of just facial hair, and he can by no means be described as good-looking.

The caricatures are politically wrong, disrespectful to millions of people, and repulsive as against art of anything saintly or divine.

So protests are justified.

But are not the Muslims of Syria, Palestine, Iran and other countries civilized human beings? To my eyes, they seem like savage eccentricities of Nature.

Syrians have been staging sit-ins outside the Danish embassy since the row intensified earlier this week, when Damascus recalled its ambassador.

On Saturday, hundreds hurled stones and stormed the Danish site, before moving to the Norwegian embassy.

"With our blood and souls we defend you, O Prophet of God," they chanted outside the Danish building, which also houses the Swedish and Chilean missions.

Right, as if the Prophet indeed needs the protection offered by these anti-social elements who claim to follow him, and who Muhammed should despise, or rather pity (if he conforms to the saintly qualities of a 'prophet').

Which is what I do, not because I'm a saint! I pity the Muslims because once again the world is told that Muslims are not a rosy bunch of people, and that too by the Muslims themselves. The Syrians and Palestinians shout to the world that they are violent, thirsty for the blood of Danes and Norwegians, for the destruction of European symbols, for killing innocent Europeans too. All because Islam forbids the portrayal of Mohammed.

If Islam forbids the portrayal of Mohammed or Allah, it is binding only on practicing Muslims; I can choose to respect it, but I am not bound by any Islamic edict. Ergo, I could draw Mohammed (unfortunately, drawing is not one of my passions).

(First published on Indiblog)

Bangalore Terror Implications Are Huge

sooeydoo — Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:21:09 EST

This time, the terrorists have been extremely clever in locating their target. The strike was not on the common man, but on the intellectual capital in India.

Having struck at one of the best institutes in India, the Indian Institute of Science, and that too during a major meeting, they have greatly monopolized on their target, and seriously threatened the stride India is making in international education.

Education is the heart of any civilization and we Indians have prided ourselves on the best education for over 5000 years! Now, at a point of history when India is at a crossroads in the field of education, this terror attack will be quite crippling.

India has been globally recognized as possessing a huge mass of "skill and education" which is one of the major reasons for its ongoing economic success. Moreover, India's strengths and her potential in science and technology are unique and not to be forgotten.

Now at this point, if terrorists have successfully penetrated one of the best educational establishments in the heart of a cosmopolitan city as Bangalore, it is more than likely to have some disastrous consequences.

International scientific, technical and social associations and organizations are most probably going to remove India from their choice of venues for conferences or meetings. This is not only for fear of direct terrorist strikes, but also the inconvenience of having their delegates undergo daily checks and walks through metal detectors which have now become quite essential at meetings in India. Why, even if the intellectual organizations defy terror and organize symposia in India, some delegates may be scared stiff to attend them!

India's better institutes may not attract as much high-caliber students from abroad as they do now. There is definitely going to be some trepidation in the minds of parents even if the students themselves defy terror. India's top institutes are well-respected in Asia, the Middle-East and Africa and lure many top brains from these regions with quality education for a much lower price than UK/US. Now the attraction comes with a very costly and effective deterrent - threat on life!

The best intellectual establishments of India will have to necessarily become guarded compounds with barbed wires. They have to turn down the general public from access to the intellectual wealth that flourishes within. The essential purpose of universities and institutes in a society will be undermined if the public is denied free entrance into them! Already most institutes have tight security, now they will become heavily guarded fortresses!

These are three disastrous situations that I think are most probable to occur as a direct consequence of last week's Bangalore attack.

It is of course in our hands to prevent them from happening. And the only way that I can think of is a direct "War on Terror" somewhat American-style. Have you any opinion on the potential fallouts of and ways to tackle terrorism in India?