The attack in Mumbai yesterday was a slap on the face of the security and it is clear that the city is completely vulnerable and infiltrated to an unbelievable extent. While people were held as hostage, a warring debate in my hostel was whether the police should go in and wipe off the terrorists and end the continuously increasing feeling of helplessness OR should they wait and tackle the situation and make sure to save as many innocent lives as possible. Inefficiency in rescuing people makes the situation worse, panic spreads and peace cannot be restored till then; at the same time there are no direct demands from terrorists, uncertainty what their intentions are and no guarantee that the rescue operations would succeed. On the other hand a direct attempt to shoot out them would endanger the life of innocent citizens and I feel it is high time that the life of every Indian citizen be given its deserved respect.The terrorist’s attack in Mumbai has exposed the futile security in the city and the virtual illusion of control. Such co-ordinated attacks from within the city are same as the direct army assault to the country. Off course these are the situations which are exposed only if something happens and are never observed when some disasters are avoided and hence it would be totally unfair to comment against the capacity and intelligence of Indian police. However there is a visible lack of sophistication in surveillance and control and the terrorists seem to have a better system in place than the police if they have any. At the same time, I would say the attack was a complete failure and just a drama, since life in Mumbai was restored immediately and people of India would only get more united with such incidents. .I salute those brave policemen who died in their effort and the spirit of Mumbaikars.
The terrorists can create chaos .. may be a little fear but no terror .. its a failed attempt ..just well tried .
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Peene walo ko peene ka bahana chahiye ..
Ever been to a social gathering and faced the question "Do you drink ?" , I am stuck in it almost every time .. mostly the question I face is " You don drink !!!" and I am confused how to answer that ... because it leads to a series of questions ...most of the time my answer is "hamein nashe ki jaroorat nahi" [ha ha ]
So seriously people sometimes I think why is drinking considered a social taboo in India though India has a tradition where the kings used to take in madira !! . Alcohol consumption is acceptable to common in most parts of the world and is essential in almost 30-50 % of world population !! .. Many cannot imagine celebration without it and remaining can't imagine mourning without it !! ... Also alcohol of consumed in right amount would get washed away from ur body so not a big health hazard as such if taken in moderation .. off course anything that not taken in moderation is gonna harm you and so is alcohol !! . I agree that there is nothing healthy in it to consume but so is the case with french fries and fast food !! .. Apparently alcohol is placed in a very different category atleast in India whereas some cultures alcohol is gifted at occasions!! .
On the other hand I wonder how people get addicted to it knowing that you ll get addicted to it !! ... and sometimes I wonder why do people like to get high !! .. isn't it a state of partial unconsciousness !! ..and if being unconscious by drinking is good ..... y do most of them think doping is bad !! So whats the hype around being high and celebrating with alcohol !! The only thing that comes out good from it is it creates a big industry in itself and hence leads to growth !!
This is what the wiki has to say :
"Although the type of alcohol, social attitude toward (and acceptance of) drinking varies around the world, nearly every civilization has independently discovered the process of brewing beer, fermenting wine or distilling liquor.
Alcohol and its effects have been present wherever people have lived throughout history. Drinking is documented in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles, Greek literature as old as Homer, and Confucius' Analects. Given its continuing popularity and the failure of alcohol Prohibitions, drinking may remain a part of human life interminably."
Irrespective of whatever the opinion is ... those who like to drink would always say "Thodi si jo peele hein .. Chori to nahi ki hein !"
So seriously people sometimes I think why is drinking considered a social taboo in India though India has a tradition where the kings used to take in madira !! . Alcohol consumption is acceptable to common in most parts of the world and is essential in almost 30-50 % of world population !! .. Many cannot imagine celebration without it and remaining can't imagine mourning without it !! ... Also alcohol of consumed in right amount would get washed away from ur body so not a big health hazard as such if taken in moderation .. off course anything that not taken in moderation is gonna harm you and so is alcohol !! . I agree that there is nothing healthy in it to consume but so is the case with french fries and fast food !! .. Apparently alcohol is placed in a very different category atleast in India whereas some cultures alcohol is gifted at occasions!! .
On the other hand I wonder how people get addicted to it knowing that you ll get addicted to it !! ... and sometimes I wonder why do people like to get high !! .. isn't it a state of partial unconsciousness !! ..and if being unconscious by drinking is good ..... y do most of them think doping is bad !! So whats the hype around being high and celebrating with alcohol !! The only thing that comes out good from it is it creates a big industry in itself and hence leads to growth !!
This is what the wiki has to say :
"Although the type of alcohol, social attitude toward (and acceptance of) drinking varies around the world, nearly every civilization has independently discovered the process of brewing beer, fermenting wine or distilling liquor.
Alcohol and its effects have been present wherever people have lived throughout history. Drinking is documented in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles, Greek literature as old as Homer, and Confucius' Analects. Given its continuing popularity and the failure of alcohol Prohibitions, drinking may remain a part of human life interminably."
Irrespective of whatever the opinion is ... those who like to drink would always say "Thodi si jo peele hein .. Chori to nahi ki hein !"
Friday, April 11, 2008
Reservation .. a birth right ?
2 years back there was this wide agitation against the reservation policy adopted by the Union. People cried loud about this foul game . Opposition on streets, in colleges, in side library , in living room everywhere . And as usual heat cooled off and Life goes on ..
Lets take it from the people's prospective . Most of us agree:
1] Opportunities should be based on merit
2] If required reservation should be based on income/financial stature
3] There should be a free system, Darwin would come to the rescue of the society.
Clearly we all agree that if there is inequality it can never be eradicated by providing inequality in the other direction!
So why the hell were these ministers so bent on going against the majority ? was there a tincture of correctness that the law was passed . Lets think of these points wrt those mentioned above:
1] For merit being the deciding factor , isn't it necessary that there should be equal opportunities right in the first place. How is a child studying in a municipality school with unstable family and tethered self confidence supposed to compete with the one who is trained in an international school
2] Income as per me comes very close to be the best candidate for reservation . But in the real society there is always a bias wrt to people from the same state , same caste , same community etc . And many decisions in the real world are based on the community thinking and the truth is that there are actually few communities who are underdeveloped and the entire community needs a raise .
3] In a free system not only does the fittest survive but also the weak dies. And normally the weak attacks first out of insecurity ... clearly the weak part of the society would turn to improper means to survive.
There's a major consensus that reservations should not be on caste and it only remains as a false solution to the problem . Supreme court yesterday gave away a way 20 additional 27% reservation which ll make the reservations in institutions as high as 49% .. ha ha .. does that make any sense . If you are trying to create an equal opportunity place , how can minority have 49% res ? The entire point of these people being minority is that their strength can no where be close to 49% !! .. and if they are 49% then they can by no means be minor !! ..
I don't think political parties have so much influence on supreme court decision . I have not found a single person who was able to explain the logistics behind this !!
Moreover if this is a vote bank strategy , why would a party screw majority and give provisions for minority . Then I should say that the majority is sleeping and democracy is being fed to dogs .. All I can say is , Use your voting right properly and teach lessons to these useless politicians ...
Lets take it from the people's prospective . Most of us agree:
1] Opportunities should be based on merit
2] If required reservation should be based on income/financial stature
3] There should be a free system, Darwin would come to the rescue of the society.
Clearly we all agree that if there is inequality it can never be eradicated by providing inequality in the other direction!
So why the hell were these ministers so bent on going against the majority ? was there a tincture of correctness that the law was passed . Lets think of these points wrt those mentioned above:
1] For merit being the deciding factor , isn't it necessary that there should be equal opportunities right in the first place. How is a child studying in a municipality school with unstable family and tethered self confidence supposed to compete with the one who is trained in an international school
2] Income as per me comes very close to be the best candidate for reservation . But in the real society there is always a bias wrt to people from the same state , same caste , same community etc . And many decisions in the real world are based on the community thinking and the truth is that there are actually few communities who are underdeveloped and the entire community needs a raise .
3] In a free system not only does the fittest survive but also the weak dies. And normally the weak attacks first out of insecurity ... clearly the weak part of the society would turn to improper means to survive.
There's a major consensus that reservations should not be on caste and it only remains as a false solution to the problem . Supreme court yesterday gave away a way 20 additional 27% reservation which ll make the reservations in institutions as high as 49% .. ha ha .. does that make any sense . If you are trying to create an equal opportunity place , how can minority have 49% res ? The entire point of these people being minority is that their strength can no where be close to 49% !! .. and if they are 49% then they can by no means be minor !! ..
I don't think political parties have so much influence on supreme court decision . I have not found a single person who was able to explain the logistics behind this !!
Moreover if this is a vote bank strategy , why would a party screw majority and give provisions for minority . Then I should say that the majority is sleeping and democracy is being fed to dogs .. All I can say is , Use your voting right properly and teach lessons to these useless politicians ...
Friday, February 29, 2008
Leader's GPA !
Recently there was a lot of huzz buzzz related to the Lead India competition [http://lead.timesofindia.com/default.asp]. It was a search for the future leaders of India . What struck me was a thought of what should be a leader material and could there a be any single criteria that is must filtering criteria for a leader. Should future leaders have a minimum education criteria ??
Most obvious and generic answer to this question is YES ! . Most of the people I know believe that this should be definitely true for all leaders. They should at least have one area of specialization . How would a illiterate non-graduate person understand the complexities in this arena of globalization . Would his decision making be simply based on personal instincts and favoritism with a complete absence of any logistics behind it! .
While most of the people agree with the above views , I am still not 100% in favor of keeping a strict eligibility for a leader. When we say a graduate , there are so many graduates around us from various background who lack the basic knowledge of their own expertise. Automobile Engineers who are far worse than an automobile mechanic around , commerce graduates who cannot do any more calculations and analysis than a shopkeeper can do. Moreover most of their time is spent in attending some useless lectures and mugging up the most likely questions for their exams. Social life is limited to a hostel room , night parties and college gatherings . Do these people really represent the common man ? Do they have a slightest insights of the needs and difficulties of the poor ? . Have they seen any world outside their urban culture . Moreover how do these people earn public support and keep party members happy and loyal without slogging for the party . Do their earned certificates give them a right to rule the people since all they did was passed some graduate exam . Could anyone testify that they are always better than an illiterate leader who never got an opportunity to study and spent his life working for the people around and thereby increasing his good will and support.
To sum it up few things that are essential for a leader is decision making , domination at least in the party , guts to withstand and play political moves and ability to earn popular support even if by misguiding the common people ! . A future leader should definitely be able to not only understand the global opportunities and issues apart from local and national politics but also be able to put the implementation to the grass root . Should there be any rule demanding leaders to be academically proficient still remains a controversial issue for me !
Most obvious and generic answer to this question is YES ! . Most of the people I know believe that this should be definitely true for all leaders. They should at least have one area of specialization . How would a illiterate non-graduate person understand the complexities in this arena of globalization . Would his decision making be simply based on personal instincts and favoritism with a complete absence of any logistics behind it! .
While most of the people agree with the above views , I am still not 100% in favor of keeping a strict eligibility for a leader. When we say a graduate , there are so many graduates around us from various background who lack the basic knowledge of their own expertise. Automobile Engineers who are far worse than an automobile mechanic around , commerce graduates who cannot do any more calculations and analysis than a shopkeeper can do. Moreover most of their time is spent in attending some useless lectures and mugging up the most likely questions for their exams. Social life is limited to a hostel room , night parties and college gatherings . Do these people really represent the common man ? Do they have a slightest insights of the needs and difficulties of the poor ? . Have they seen any world outside their urban culture . Moreover how do these people earn public support and keep party members happy and loyal without slogging for the party . Do their earned certificates give them a right to rule the people since all they did was passed some graduate exam . Could anyone testify that they are always better than an illiterate leader who never got an opportunity to study and spent his life working for the people around and thereby increasing his good will and support.
To sum it up few things that are essential for a leader is decision making , domination at least in the party , guts to withstand and play political moves and ability to earn popular support even if by misguiding the common people ! . A future leader should definitely be able to not only understand the global opportunities and issues apart from local and national politics but also be able to put the implementation to the grass root . Should there be any rule demanding leaders to be academically proficient still remains a controversial issue for me !
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Sarhad Insano ke liye hein ...
New controversies have engaged people of Maharashtra these days [http://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/India/20080209/885935.html] and I thought it isn't wise to stay behind :) ...
First of all .. a generic question .. What was the theory behind dividing people on the basis of countries .. was it their dna , culture , demography or a mix of all these things .. Today if we call ourselves a global citizen then we should be allowed to move to any place in this world , build properties , do business etc ..,in the same way as an India citizen is allowed to move to any state and live life .. So what would happen if the true global citizen concept comes to a reality ? CHAOS !! ... well welcome to Maharashtra !!
So the main concern here is .. on what level should this distinction go to .. country level , state level , district level or even to more granular levels!. There's a huge rush of ppl migrating to developed parts. But also there is an restriction on number of people that a particular region can nurture.. anything above the limit .. imbalance gonna result .Center and States should try and analyze the factors to check y few states are prospering and remaining are not .I wonder why no one questions the inabilities of the states like Madhya Pradesh and Bihar which are rich in culture , natural resources etc . Most of my OMS friends also agree that there is goonda raj and ignorance prevailing there. So isn’t one cause responsible for this chaos also lying in other states. Should there be a need for visa and work permit to travel among states ,. then such imbalance would not result ..however then it would be too difficult for people to move across and progress .. it would be impossible to have cultural exchange .. in short we[this is in context of country being the level of distinction!] would get divided.. On top of it most of the immigrants have little interest to mix with people from the state and have the tendency to create mini- Bihar,Delhi , Chennai etc ..along with their disregard for the culture . This all further adds to the growing anguish not to mention the inability of the regions to satisfy the basic needs of food , shelter and employment to the alarmingly increasing migrants. I feel there should be some laws to check the migrants among the states and a more balanced development should be sought .. otherwise there remains no rational in stopping people from pakistan,nepal ,bhutan etc migrating to India in search of better life .
It also isn’t fair to let the culture and identity of one place to die completely .. the way Indian culture is getting westernized. Its however important that a given culture evolves with time.
Though there is a need of political attention to these factors .. the way the anguish is been shown and motivated by political parties and used to attract the support of majority is nothing but dirty politics.
All in all Center as well as State is responsible for not achieving balanced development across regions. Strict rules to curtail ppl from migrating also isn't favorable since this would add to the imbalance in development. What is to be done in such a scenario still remains controversial ,and such unhappy incidents would keep on popping up and political parties would continue to reap benefits out of this mistrust and uncertainties.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Love or Arranged !!
I wonder if Adam and Eve had ever thought that they should go for love or arranged marriage.. as if they had a choice .. infact as if they got married !! . However in today’s cosmopolitan culture one is often grounded by the love and arranged marriage scenario.
I have come across so many people in love[wonder if that really exists] around me , ranging from those who go allgushy pushy in public to those who have those gr8 secretive love affairs ,from the time they are together to the time they break-up .. If we plot a graph of the relationship ...peak in the starting to disrupts in the middle and then crash at the end, would represents senSEX. Most of the time peak is characterized by infatuation , center is sustainable only due to memories of the past and anticipations in the future and the as the memories decrease and anticipation turns into disappointment relationship crashes. Recently there are so many articles in Times regarding how to keep your relationship alive /going etc ... Sometimes I wonder y do relationships need such a tonic and in that case is it Love or just plain adjustment . One of my friend who believes a lot in love said " There is no blind love in todays world .. ultimately you even start loving a dog when you spend a long time with him !!".. well I seriously think its very true in the real world . There have been so many cases that a pair madly in love[right now this word is getting more and more controversial!] with each other separated due to some reason discovers love in some other person and the relationship dies!. So many cases where one of them likes other but other doesn't have that feeling however after spending a good amount of time with the same person ..both fall in love with each other [reminds me of the dog]!! . So many cases [in fact all] where 2 people are in love with each others however they also have feelings for some other XYZ but just that they don't think that they would be able to make it to them .. settle for someone else and still call it love !. Few cases when both of them cannot decide whether they are in love or not and decide that if until XYZ age they don’t discover anyone better they ll get married !!
The other side , I have a friend who recently got engaged the arranged way . She once said "My family has decided a filter that only those guys whose current salary is more than 7-8Lac are screened !!" . I wonder if she would have had such liberties if she would have fallen in love with any of her colleague earning same as her !!. I personally don't feel she or family was wrong in any way by looking for a person who is economically very balanced , all they did was they set a benchmark for them based on the girls qualities/qualifications etc . Well we have already seen that there is no blind love, then what’s wrong in keeping the eyes completely open ! And the surprising fact was after they got engaged they got along so well like a pair in love .. having late night calls ,pet names , streams of SMS chatting!! . Same thing happened with one of my relative who got engaged the arranged way and was sharing few of their personal conversation with me. It appeared as if they were in Love !! ..
Apparently it appeared to me that whether you discover someone by infatuations or in an arranged way you reach the same state of controversial love .. which eventually turns into a duty, responsibility , a relationship for which you need tonic to keep it going in form of best practices that are printed in the Times .
Ultimately if Love that we are talking about is all about being able to spend the rest of time together than arranged marriage seems to be a safe bet where you get to choose and decide exactly what do you want from your partner as against those cases where you select someone because you start liking him/her just because you spent a good time with each other in times of loneliness. At the same time its very dangerous and difficult to know the person properly in very short time as in case of arranged marriages !!
My verdict : Adam and Eve were Lucky !!
Sunday, January 13, 2008
BoSS ... I QUIT!!
Shyam joined a very famous MNC with dreams of a fabulous carrier ahead. After joining he wasn't quite satisfied with the work that was given to him but he found that was true with every other geek in town :), so he decided to stick to his basic principles of working hard and trying to make a place in the crowd. His project manager Anaswamy was happy to get a hardworking and intelligent resource like him who started taking many responsibilities too early for his age. He slogged like a dog and always thought would get a bite of that juicy bone for sure. Nevertheless the managers had no rights to give him any perks. Project was on budget freeze and client was driving life out of them like always. Shyam saw others leaving the job, changing it for a higher pay better opportunities but he thought his team would give him chance to grow for sure. However , the manager had other plans. Their job was to get things done at minimal cost and that’s what he was doing. So after all the frustration Shyam decided to change his job. Furiously he announced that to his Managers etc and there it was!. Suddenly Anaswamy started offering him different opportunities. He started agreeing to all those demands which once he had claimed were absurd. Company started appreciating that he was one of the best performers blah blah blah . In short every one got into the retention mode with false promises being thrown at him .
Now lets look at this from Anaswamy's point of view. He got a resource called Shyam who was hard working and ready to take challenges . He loaded him with work and Shyam performed without slightest hesitation, skipping meals slogging like a DOG!. Anaswamy could have thought of letting him few performance bonus may be some more perks but everything would cost him something. And Shyam was working hard anyways , so why should he not keep the perks for other unsatisfied souls who had a problem. Isn't Anaswamy supposed to do that , Management is about getting things done remember!. Also if he proposes more money to client he ll have to make a justifying case for that and fight with the client . Why should he commit such a crime ! and Anaswamy has already learnt IF ITS NOT BROKEN DON'T FIX IT .
Finally Shyam quits and finds a new Anaswamy but for better pay and better opportunities. Anaswamy finds a new Shyam for his project and they live happily ever after :)
SHYAM's story is a story of millions of unstaisfied souls around us . Shyam should have not accepted the job right in the first place if he was not satisfied . Anaswamy should have played a fair game but he hardly had choices . He was hired to play the cunning game. Everyone wanted to wait and watch and start playing only when required. These are the rules of the game.
BoSS .. I QUIT!! Ever wondered what this 3 words can do to your career .. They can build a whole lot of opportunities at your footstep but you should know when to use them.
In these scheme of things I guess its very controversial to tag ,any threat of changing a job from an employee or tactics of mean managers to retain them , as right or wrong . I guess in today’s world EVERYTHING IS FAIR IN WORK AND WAR:)
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Veg or Non-Veg
It's impossible that you are in India and you don't land up into controversy called Veg or Non-Veg.
People have different opinions about eating veg or non-veg food, influenced mainly by caste , taste, nourishment , violence etc. I ll try to give opinions that I have come across :
Against Non-Veg
1] Cruelty to animals.
2] Man is a herbivorous
3] No killing for food.
4] Few say we cannot withstand bloodshed
5] Even if plants are killed they at least don't cry loud ... I know a weired one :) ... Many eggetirians fall in this category
6] religion prohibits ..... again baseless I feel for obvious reasons..
For Non-Veg
1] Is nutritious
2] Plants also get killed in Veg food ... so no big deal in killing animals
3] These animals are specially bred for killing
4] People who eat don't actually kill them and if they stop eating a large amount of people get unemployed .. I think this is baseless ... this way if you curb terrorism a lot of terrorists would get unemployed :)
5] In some places vegetation is scant .. so people have to eat meat. [I guess these people are exempt from controversy... though there is surely some controversy in it evident from this blog's Title :) ...we can ignore that from the time being.. ]
I have found no one yet who oppose eating veg food completely .. I mean a purely non-vegetarian human :) .. though i am sure such specimen would surely exist...
All in all .. this is no doubt a controversial issue... but we have to accept some of these points to make our own theory to conclude which type of diet you wanna follow and then change the theory as you agree to others opinions :) .. Bon Appetite
People have different opinions about eating veg or non-veg food, influenced mainly by caste , taste, nourishment , violence etc. I ll try to give opinions that I have come across :
Against Non-Veg
1] Cruelty to animals.
2] Man is a herbivorous
3] No killing for food.
4] Few say we cannot withstand bloodshed
5] Even if plants are killed they at least don't cry loud ... I know a weired one :) ... Many eggetirians fall in this category
6] religion prohibits ..... again baseless I feel for obvious reasons..
For Non-Veg
1] Is nutritious
2] Plants also get killed in Veg food ... so no big deal in killing animals
3] These animals are specially bred for killing
4] People who eat don't actually kill them and if they stop eating a large amount of people get unemployed .. I think this is baseless ... this way if you curb terrorism a lot of terrorists would get unemployed :)
5] In some places vegetation is scant .. so people have to eat meat. [I guess these people are exempt from controversy... though there is surely some controversy in it evident from this blog's Title :) ...we can ignore that from the time being.. ]
I have found no one yet who oppose eating veg food completely .. I mean a purely non-vegetarian human :) .. though i am sure such specimen would surely exist...
All in all .. this is no doubt a controversial issue... but we have to accept some of these points to make our own theory to conclude which type of diet you wanna follow and then change the theory as you agree to others opinions :) .. Bon Appetite
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Can Equality be justified
I wanted to start this blog for a long time ... It’s totally a different controversy y i didnt :) So here goes nothing ..
Recently I read this article in Times of India about James Watson, co-discoverer of the DNA double-helix.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Watsons_Error/articleshow/2479257.cms
His most recent comment that he is “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really”, There it goes the first topic for this blog : Is the Universe programmed to be equal
So what does this scientist has to say "Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so." So when we say that every1 will get equal opportunity, everyone has some skill less or more, ultimately we are all born equal etc etc ...give it a second thought.
Its more than agreed that females are physically less strong than male counterparts [feminists : no offence meantt ]. Can it be not true that some section of society cannot be more smart than other? Few people would never be able to do what others can?. We are not born equal?. In this case is it justified to have equal opportunities for all ? Off course there are exceptions...
The topic isn’t about men and women , scientists .. The idea is to find Is equality justified?
Friends please give your views..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
