The Government as the Big Daddy

I am surprised that the simple point I attempted to make in the post called Drinking and Democracy about adult universal franchise being inconsistent with treating adults like irresponsible children provoked so much controversy. Call me dense but I am at a loss figuring out what exactly the objections are. Continue reading “The Government as the Big Daddy”

Drinking and Democracy

Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday on Oct 2nd is observed as a public holiday in India. You could celebrate the day by raising a glass or two. Or you could just remember that Gandhi was not in favor of alcohol and voluntarily decide to abstain from alcohol. But if you want to have a drink all the same, you would be out of luck unless you have some sitting at home or in the comfort of a five-star hotel room. All liquor shops are closed and restaurants will not serve you alcohol. Continue reading “Drinking and Democracy”

Honor Killing in Denmark

The Dark Ages come to Denmark in broad daylight, as a Pakistani man murders his sister in a public street

Calmly and methodically, big brother stoops over his little sister while shooting one projectile after the other into her. Her spouse, affected by several shots to the abdomen, can only look on helplessly, while his wife is executed by her own family.

Localized Windows

Saturday silliness follows. Apologies to those who don’t know Hindi.

Windows Commands in Hindi:

Khidkiyan version shoonya bindu shoonya ek (0.01)

Phile = File
Kholo = Open
Bandh Karo = Close
Naya = New
Khatara = Old Continue reading “Localized Windows”

Puzzler #1

OK, if you thought that this blog has no mysteries associated with it, you are wrong. Here is a mystery for you to ponder. About a year and a half ago, I made an offer on this blog: I will send a gmail invite to anyone who emails me a request. I made it clear that sticking a comment at the end of the post asking for an invite will not get a response from me. One has to email me.

People started posting comments asking for gmail invites. Then I edited the post with additional wording in big bold red type saying don’t post a comment, just email me. Now I get about 10 requests a week posted as comments, most of which I delete and only keep the odd one for demonstration purposes.

Now here is the puzzler: what do you think these losers who post a comment asking for a gmail account are going to do with it anyway, considering that they lack basic reading comprehension skills and have the intelligence of a doorknob?

Charity begins at home, privately

… no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651

Earlier this month life for those who were unable to leave the city of New Orleans before hurricane Katrina struck turned decidedly Hobbesian. Take away the basic necessities of life from a bunch of people – water, food, shelter – and soon enough the struggle for existence reveals nature red in tooth and claw.

One can have all the political freedoms guaranteed by an enlightened constitution. But when survival is at stake, the law flows out of the barrel of gun, and if the gun is missing, knives and fists will do. The thin veneer of civilization is not sufficiently strong to withstand the primal drive for survival at any cost.

They dragged out the national guard to keep the desperate poor trapped in New Orleans. In a sense, it was no longer part of the United States of America. It was a Third World country and the people of that place had to be kept out of the US just as other intruders are. And like the Mexicans dying in the desert trying to cross into the US or the Chinese suffocating in the holds of illegal ships, the poor of New Orleans also died in the floods.

***********************

The government of the US and its various agencies failed in their duty, of course. The Bush’s ineptitude runs surprisingly deep. But Bush and his buddies are not idiots. They will make even more money as a result of the tragedy. They will pour billions in the re-construction of the city and all the contracts will be awarded to Bush’s cronies.

They did that in Iraq. They bombed the country with huge expensive bombs (paid for by the American taxpayers). Then they gave fat contracts to Bush’s friends’ firms – they made a killing again. Hundreds of billions have already been spent in the needless war in Iraq.

For the cost of the Iraq war, global hunger could have been eradicated. Perhaps malaria, that awesome killer in the tropics, could have been tamed. But the military industrial complex wanted blood.

There is always enough money for bombs. But never enough for the poor people in need. For the poor, charity is recommended. The US said it would accept foreign aid. As far as I can tell, the US does soak up a lot of aid every day by borrowing two billion dollars a day from the rest of the world. A little more would not hurt the world.

************************

Anyway, the Indian government in a gesture of grand magnanimity pledged $5 million for the US Red Cross for relief efforts. It also prepared to send an Air Force plane loaded with thousands of blankets and tens of thousands of meals. Good gesture.

Let me see. Five million dollars would buy lots of food and clothing for the people in need. But money is fungible. It can buy guns or it can buy butter. Of course, $5 million would not buy very many Patriot missiles – only five Patriot missiles, if I have my missile price correct. In an average night, they did shoot hundreds of those during the bombing of Iraq. Five more or less would not have significantly changed how much area was destroyed and how many people killed.

I think that in effect India contributed to the cost of five Patriot missiles fired in Afghanistan or in Iraq. Of course, India helped out in Afghanistan also by donating a fleet of buses which were probably destroyed by the missiles. Nice isn’t it: pay for the missiles, pay for the reconstruction.

********************

I am totally against the government of India sending public funds to the US as charity. Charity, in my opinion, should be private and not public. Each one of us has to decide for ourselves how much and to whom we will extend our help in time of need. A private citizen has the obligation and the right to give from his own resources as much as he wishes to the charity of his choosing. The government of India – or any other government – should not be in the business of charity.

The government of India should have trusted the people of India to make the necessary sacrifices to send the resources to the people of New Orleans. The Prime Minister, too, has the right to write his own personal check to whoever he wishes. But he should not be so generous with other peoples’ money.

Blogs as Conversations

Physically, the Internet is a network of networks, a network of physical connections with computers as the nodes. In a logical sense, at a higher level of conceptualization, it is a network of relationships that is established through conversations between humans. The Internet is new but it is merely a modern technological manifestation which addresses the much older higher-level need for humans to connect. We connect in our daily lives through conversations with people in our neighborhood. The Internet expands the concept of the neighborhood to global proportions through the World Wide Web.

Conversations on the Internet are not a new phenomenon. Before the World Wide Web, the Internet was home to Usenet, a very diverse set of virtual communities (called news groups) with interests that ranged from metaphysics to culture to science and everything in between. In the mid-80s and 90s, I conversed furiously on the various Usenet groups (such as soc.culture.Indian) writing thousands of posts on matters that mattered to me as an Indian living in the US, and connecting with others with similar interests—India, economic development, Buddhism, etc. That habit of conversing with others quite easily transferred to writing a blog centered on my obsession with India’s economic growth and development.

Einstein had noted that humans, limited by time and space, suffer from what he called an “optical delusion of consciousness” which makes one experience oneself as something separate from others. The goal then, he said, was to “free ourselves by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”

At its best, blogs enable that widening of compassion by connecting with others in conversations that continue to draw people with differing points of view. My blog helps me connect and learn from those who converse with me on my blog. By writing I often reveal to myself what I know implicitly but don’t know explicitly. It is process of discovery. Then there is the wider learning that comes from visiting other blogs and overhearing the conversations going on there.

Of course, one may not find all conversations interesting or meaningful. Coming across tales told by idiots full of sound and fury signifying nothing, one just moves on. There are many tellers of tales and many stories being told that deserve to be heard. Our neighborhood now has a virtually (sic) unlimited number of interesting people for us to hear stories from.

Let the blogs roll on.

Billions and Billions

Over the weekend, I spent some time with old friends in San Francisco. P was visiting from Delaware and B from North Dakota. Beautiful weather after the exhilarating storms that passed through a few days before that.

Sitting in the financial district Holiday Inn lobby waiting for A to show up (stop and go traffic, he kept telling us over the many cell phone contacts), the conversation drifted to ‘faith’.

B wanted to know what was it that made people have faith. I confessed that I have absolutely zero faith. P said that he had faith in his ability. B said that he was more interested in the faith that people have in an afterlife and in god and so on. I said that only feeble-minded people need the crutch that faith provides against the terrors of non-existence that follows death.

***

Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic philosopher and emperor, was not feeble-minded when he wrote in his “Meditations”:

What a soul that is which is ready, if at any moment it must be separated from the body, and ready either to be extinguished or dispersed or continue to exist; but so that this readiness comes from a man’s own judgment, not from mere obstinacy, as with the Christians, but considerately and with dignity and in a way to persuade another, without tragic show.

That was the attitude that Carl Sagan expressed when he was dying of cancer. He wrote

I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But as much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking.

. . .the world is so exquisite, with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better, it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides

…  Many [people] have asked me how it is possible to face death without the certainty of an afterlife. I can only say that it hasn’t been a problem. With reservations about feeble souls, I share the view of a hero of mine, Albert Einstein: I cannot conceive of a god who rewards and punishes his creatures or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I, nor would I want to, conceive of an individual that survives his physical death. Let feeble souls, from fear for absurd egotism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoting striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature.

***

Sagan passed into the great beyond in December 1999. A truly great soul, in a manner of speaking of course. I don’t have faith in the concept of soul. I am not one who believes that the universe is made of ‘matter’ and ‘spirit’. It is all of one thing — call it matter or call it spirit — take your pick. But you can’t have both.

Sagan is remembered for his great and triumphant attempt at sparking an interest in our wondrous universe in millions of people through his television series COSMOS and his many popular writings. And his trademark “billions and billions” expression which many people affectionately remember him saying in his COSMOS series (but which in fact he never did.)

He did say billions though and said it many times. But what else can you say when you are talking about the age of the universe or the number of galaxies and the number of stars in these galaxies. I dare you to talk about all that without saying billions.

***

When you talk about the length of a Day of Brahma, you have to say billions. One episode of Sagan’s Cosmos tv series focused on India. When asked why so, he replied that it did so because of that wonderful aspect of Hindu cosmology which first of all gives a time-scale for the Earth and the universe — a time-scale which is consonant with that of modern scientific cosmology. We know that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years old, and the cosmos, or at least its present incarnation, is something like 10 or 20 billion years old. The Hindu tradition has a day and night of Brahma in this range, somewhere in the region of 8.4 billion years.

He is referring to Mahakalpa. One thousand Mahakalpas is equal to one Day of Brahma.

Brahma’s waking period lasts 4.32 billion years. Following that he sleeps for another 4.32 billion years. While asleep, he dreams the world into existence.

We are a dream in Brahma’s mind. Brahma is running a simulation of the world while asleep. When he awakes, that simulation ends and so on.

We are just a lot of dream stuff.

The ancients in India dreamt all that stuff up, of course. And the physicists of today are dreaming more such stuff. And from time to time, there are surprising convergences between the two.

***

Here’s Sagan:

As far as I know [Hinduism] is the only ancient religious tradition on the Earth which talks about the right time-scale. We want to get across the concept of the right time-scale, and to show that it is not unnatural.

In the West, people have the sense that what is natural is for the universe to be a few thousand years old, and that billions is indwelling, and no one can understand it. The Hindu concept is very clear. Here is a great world culture which has always talked about billions of years.

Finally, the many billion year time-scale of Hindu cosmology is not the entire history of the universe, but just the day and night of Brahma, and there is the idea of an infinite cycle of births and deaths and an infinite number of universes, each with its own gods.

And this is a very grand idea. Whether it is true or not, is not yet clear. But it makes the pulse quicken, and we thought it was a good way to approach the subject.

***

It is a cyclic universe. Big crunches following big bangs following big crunches. The boom and bust cycle of the economy played on a stage the size of the known universe.

And I am at the center of that known universe. Just as you are of course. And so is everyone else at the center of the known universe. Everything is at the center of the known universe.

And the universe is perfect at every moment.

It is the perfect dance of Shiva as he dances the Tandava in his form as the King of Dancers, the Nataraja. Shiva dancing at the “Edge of Forever”. Which is the title of a chapter of COSMOS. Sagan explains

The traditional explanation of the Nataraja is that it symbolizes the creation of the universe in one hand and the death of the universe in the other — the drum and the flame — and after all, that is what cosmology is all about. So in addition to being artistically exquisite, the Nataraja provides exactly the kind of symbolism that we wanted.

So there you have it. What we can be certain about is that fact that we are going to die one day, as Bipin pointed out. The rest is uncertain. How did the universe begin? What caused it to come into existence? What is the point in all this?

Big minds can perhaps answer these questions. Or maybe not. The “Hymn to Creation” of the Rg Veda concludes

Who knows for certain? Who shall here declare it?
Whence was it born, whence came creation?
No one knows whence creation arose;
and whether god has or has not made it.
He who surveys it from the highest regions
Perhaps he knows it, or perhaps he knows not.

That’s the ultimate expression of agnosticism, of doubt, the first necessary step in the infinite journey of discovery and enlightenment. The ancients in India conjectured about the origin of the universe and why.  The Isa Upanishad:

“. . .in the beginning there was Existence alone
One only, without a second.He
the One thought to himself:
let me be many, let me grow forth.
Thus out of himself he projected the universe;
and having projected out of himself the universe,
he entered into every being. . .
He is the truth.
He is the Self.
And that, Svataketu,
THAT ART THOU.”

It is all karma, neh?


[This recycled post is from Nov 2002.]

POST SCRIPT: It is best not to interpret the above to mean that I claim that there is some mystical connection between ancient Hindu thought and modern cosmology. I merely noted that the time scales are similar. Just as I could looking up at the sky point out that the pattern made by the clouds reminds me of a leaping tiger.

I am merely doing a bit of pattern recognition. I just noted a curious coincidence. I would not stretch it to mean that all sorts of modern physical explanations derive their insights from Hindu metaphysics.

Ending Two Years

I love you too much
To ever start liking you
So don’t expect me
To be your friend.

Time flies like an arrow (but fruit flies like a banana.) Especially when you are having fun. I had great fun writing this blog since Sept 2003. Can’t say that I did not piss off a bunch of people. This blog has been the expression of a personal viewpoint. It could have been worse. It could have been an account of what I had for lunch or reporting on the details of the fad de jour or some such trivial pursuit. It was, instead, a contrarian viewpoint. I picked on holy cows such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi, the incompetent Indian governments, Mother “the Merciless” Teresa, and others. Being an equal opportunity offender, I even dared to poke fun at Thomas “Flat-head” Friedman. Finger-pointing at idols is not taken very kindly by idol-worshippers.

I do not write about pretty things. And some of the ugliness I write about is connected with India, but not all. Me write pretty some day but not yet. The population problem received quite a bit of play on this blog. So also the problem of inadequate infrastructure.

My motivation for asking why is India poor is simple. I don’t want India to be poor. I love India too much to ever like what I see around me in India.

Only by seeking to comprehend why India is poor can we figure out how to not be poor. I admire those who have transformed their nations and societies profoundly instead of merely making pretty speeches. That is why I admire leaders like Lee Kuan Yew. I think democracy in India is a rather pathetic joke. That viewpoint is, as Dale Carnegie would have pointed out, doesn’t make friends and influence people who talk loudly about democracy without recognizing that it is an institution that does not exist in a vacuum.

I have suggested some solutions along the way. For instance, Rural Infrastructure and Services Commons. I hope some day it will be implemented. Recently I hear Vinod Khosla, my co-author in the RISC concept paper, spoke to the Planning Commission about RISC. Or my recommendations about how to make India literate in three years, or the integrated rail transportation system (IRTS), etc.

Well, that is all for now. I speak my mind and I am sure that my readers (all five of them) will not hesitate to speak their minds and tell me where I am right and more importantly where I am wrong.

Goodnight, goodbye and may your god go with you.