Lord Nihlus Pidog Voliaw

Masochistic-Sadism

2011-08-02T21:06:00.000+05:30

This is a question that I have wondered about for a long long time now and of recently it seems to me that the answer to that question is growing more and more important. It is as if, the very answer to the question itself will avert some great disaster that is to befall on all of humanity.

So, you would wonder what that question is? The question is simple: “Is there any purpose at all to life? If there is? What is it? And if there is none, then why does humanity exist at all?

Let’s take the case that there is a purpose to life. What could it be? Surely it could not be “Earth+Plastic”, as the great George Carlin claimed it to be? Is nature trying out an experiment with us? See what happens when it lets loose complex life forms and allows them to evolve in what way the life forms take?

As you can probably tell, I am more inclined to the answer that life has no purpose whatsoever. That it is due to a combination of various factors like Earth being in the Goldilocks Zone, the values of the various constants like Boltzmann’s being what they are lead to the evolution of single cell life forms that mutated to form us Humans billions of years later.

Then why is that humans have created such a complex social structures that seems intended on getting more and more complex. Most of humanity faces difficulties to attain a standard of life that it wants to maintain. Yet, once one reaches a standard of life, he/she doesn’t rest there but continues to struggle to get a better standard of life…the cycle is endless.

Think about the Hunter-Gathers who were our ancestors had a more simpler and easier life. Sure, the life expectancy was low; there were more physical dangers and no Internet!! But, their lives in many ways were easier, they didn’t have to involve in complex financial chicanery to stay at the same social status given the inflation levels.

There are people out there who actually like what they are doing. But what percentage of humanity do they represent? A small insignificant number and mostly I am inclined to say would contain people of fields such a research, arts and fields were the people are allowed, expected to use ingenuity.

But the vast majority of humans by the needs of the keeping the economy running and thereby providing for themselves are forced to do non-ingenuous work, work that is mundane and terribly boring.

It has always been my belief that Humans are Hedonistic beings, I mean seriously, have you met any human who wouldn’t like to relax without any worries. Sure, there are workaholics, I am not denying that, but explanation will incorporate this detail.

I am going to go out on a limb and claim that humanity has some degree of “masochistic-sadism” that is embedded into our genes. I am not using the term “sadomasochism” but “masochistic-sadism” because while the former is used to primarily refer to sexual acts the latter term(my own creation) I think refers to what I am trying to convey better.

Of course, I think I’ll leave it to psychologist to come up with a proper term, but I would be honored if they use the term that u have coined here. (Me be honored? More like I’ll have anyone who comes up with an alternate term decapitated. That should be incentive enough, don’t you think?)

The reason why I have chosen to use the term “masochistic-sadism” is because the behavior is primarily aimed at causing pain to others rather to oneself. It is just as an after effect that one is affected. The extent being of such a magnitude that it causes a pleasure response in the human brain.

This explains why hedonistic creatures like us subject ourselves into creating a complex structure that serves no purpose other than to keep us doing something that gives us no pleasure. I would like to clarify here that I am not referring to individuals alone here but also to groups (of people). In fact, humanity as a whole, as a single entity would be the first under this category.

The logical question anybody is going to ask me is there any empirical evidence that you can place before us, one that can be independently verified. I am going to say look around you. What more evidence do you need than what is happening right around you. You all have in all probability been seeing it everywhere but not observing it. (There is a lot of difference between seeing and observing.)

The solution to this type of behavior? The obvious that most would think about is to locate the gene that causes the “masochistic-sadism” and have it removed from every human’s DNA. But, I assure you this would only lead to many other problems, for humans have not progressed to the stage and never may when they can predict exactly what the aftereffects of removal of a particular gene may cause. This of course is assuming that the behavior is caused by a single gene and not due to interplay of many genes. This of course depends on whether humans will be able to locate the gene(s) that affect behavior.

If it were possible to point out that this gene affects precisely this attribute to such an extent, then I would have designed for myself a new body and transferred my consciousness into the new body (Of course, my most loyal followers to will be given new bodies…bodies that might last significantly longer than the human body that I currently reside in.) More on this later my dear subjects.

Instead, my solution is simpler…destroy humanity….ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha (Evil laughter). Or at least cull the human species. There is a reason why I am saying what I am saying. (What is it exactly that I am saying??) I think the “masochistic-sadism” behavior is due to the over population that we have. The current total resources available to humanity are not enough to sustain the current human population. And I am sure the situation will continue to persist for quite a long time, unless someone ( like me) takes decisive action to correct it. At one go, we are serve many purposes. We remove the scourge of earth and all living creatures -humans. We also get rid of the “masochistic-sadism” problem that is facing humans.

The above paragraph was of course to quench my megalomania. But here’s the answer, there is no solution. There are only options that we can try. One would be to consciously try to simply things. Like teaching our children that growing or becoming powerful are not the only thing in life and more importantly following that in our own lives.

Hopefully, over many many generations this behavior, may be even couple of centuries (If the human species survives that long, and I don’t think it will last that long.) would become strong enough to override the “masochistic-sadism” tendency.

Of course, one may ask what was the purpose of the long winded article above that does not even have a proper ending. But, isn’t the question what if there is a purpose to the drivel? An unnoticed (hopefully) purpose that will show itself quite later upon careful introspection.

The Fourth Estate – Sold??

2010-09-13T13:12:00.000+05:30

Yes, people I think that the Fourth estate is for sale or most likely has already been bought off by the people who have the money.

When there are so many other issues like Naxal problem, J& K problem, the rising inflation, food grains rotting in godowns, the perennial corruption, and so forth. The news item that really has caught the imagination of most of the new channels is that of the Spot-fixing done by some Pakistani players.

Over the last few weeks the Indian News Media at least the so called News Channels have been covering the Spot-Fixing scandal like it is the most important news item that everyone should know about. They have run expose video & audio taken by News of the World reporters again & again so much so that I am sure many people who have by-hearted it by now.

The fact that these News people are missing is that, a common Indian doesn’t really care it. Sure, the people would have cared if it had been done by an Indian but we are least interested if it was, is being done by a non-Indian player.

Somehow, the fact that many Indian athletes who were to participate or were probable for the Common Wealth Games have failed the doping test is not big news. In fact, this is supposed to be the all-time record for the number of athletes caught doping for a host country.

Just imagine, how it would be, if in most of the events the host countries athletes are banned from participating because of drugs use? And, here we are worried about Pakistani players involved in spot-fixing.

Here’s a quick statistics:

I went to the Times Now website and did search for “doping + CWG”, I got 9 hits. Do a search for “spot-fixing” and I got 10 hits. I did a search for “sopt-fixing” and guess what? I got a total of 66 hits, most of them relevant to the on-going row.

Okay, one may argue that since corruption scandal hit the CWG and given the fact that India was never anyways gonna be a contender to win the most medals in the games, people were least interested in the doping scandal.

What about the Rotting Food Grains in the godowns of the FCI? That is an important issue given the price rise, right? I did a search for “food grains” and “rotting food grains”. Yes I did get many hits, but almost 95% of the hits had nothing to do with this issue. In fact, most of the hits for the “food grains” were about the cooking shows that are broadcast on the channel.

And the biggest of all is that most of the News Channels and the print media have kept silent about the Paid News scandal. In fact, if any other group had anything like this these news channels and print media would have been hounding away about the scandal for 24 hours for at least 4 months.

But when they themselves were caught, with their hands in the cookie jar, these institutions have decided to act as if the whole thing never even happened.

I did a search for “paid news” on the times now website, I did not get even one relevant hit. That just about sums it all up for you.

Here, I have to note that The Hindu has been publishing many articles about the paid news phenomenon and so has Outlook magazine on its blog. However, these two institutions have not gone public with the report, though outlook has provided a link on its blog.

Imagine, being able to control what news you want to see published or broadcast. The power of propaganda is so powerful that any news can be twisted to suit your needs.

Here are some links for you to look at:

Paid News You Can't Read About

A blog on the paid news scandal with extracts from the report.

http://blogs.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&pid=2290&eid=5

Who Voted How?

Details of who on the PCI council voted for the report to be made public and who did not.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?266559

'Paid News': The Buried Report

The full report of the PCI subcommittee, which has been buried by the publishers.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?266542

Final Report on Paid News

The final report created by PCI that does not have the sub-committee’s report.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35436980/Final-Report-on-Paid-News

The above links clearly show that the Fourth Estate - at least a major share of it is up for grabs.now, who grabs that up is something we can never be sure of.

What needs to be done is that the News Publications involved in the paid news should be investigated and all thsoe involved should be banned for life from participating in any other media institution. Legal action taken should also be initiated against the institutions.

The PCI's functioning must change, eminent members of the public should be invited on board. The PCI given more powers to act against erring members.

The Fourth Estate should act as the soul of a nation, if it is corrupted then the nation itself will become corrupted. This will lead to a rot from the inside and we can forget about India being a Superpower by 2050 let alone 2020.

India's Foreign Policy - My Views

2010-07-19T23:15:00.000+05:30

I have always been interested in how a country comes up with its foreign policy. More so with how India’s foreign policy is formulated because I am citizen of this country.

But the current trends of India’s foreign policy, I must say does not look as if it was being formulated by people in touch with the present day reality.

Here’s what I think that India should do about its foreign policy.

Russia:
Consider the relationship between India and Russia. We have a bilateral trade of just $8 billion and that too with a country that has stood with us in thick and thin of our history. The rules on travel and trade between the countries read more like restrictions than guidelines.

How many people know that the BrahMos missile system that we Indians feel so proudly about is actually based on an existing Russian missile system called the Oniks? (The propulsion system is based on the Oniks.)

Though agreed that we have had disagreements on the price for the Aircraft Carrier, considering the past history, this should be treated as a one off event.

Russia has and is building some many civil nuclear plants in India for India and yet the GOI doesn’t take more steps to have closer ties Russia. Also, take into fact that Central Asia and Siberia have huge energy deposits and given India’s growing energy needs one would think India would make all the efforts to get closer to Russia.

China:
China is the fastest growing economy in the world. It will soon become a world power, if it already isn’t so. Given that China has never commented about other countries and that it has recently started to do so shows China’s growing self confidence.

China has also started modernizing its army, something that India can learn from.

Yet, the view is of India and China as enemies. In ancient times, these were two cultures that were mpost friendly to each other, why it cannot be so today is something that we must think about.

Sure, there are outlaying issues like the border issues, but the Russia-China have solved their border dispute and a much longer border at that shows that, is political will is applied the border issue can be amicably solved mutually.

Imagine if China and India were to work together in every field as they beautifully did in Copenhagen, the developing world will greatly benefit and institutions like IMF and World Bank can be easily reformed so that it benefits the poorer countries.

Though we are a part of the BRIC, the forum does not have much influence on the global scale. Also, we need China’s help to get into ASEAN which is more powerful than the SAARC.

China has substantial presence in Africa, India being a growing country needs to explore new channels for investment and what other continent than Africa has the highest potential for growth. China could defiantly help India in securing investments in Africa.

Iran:
I take the example of Iran to show how not to conduct a foreign policy.

India and Iran were in negotiations for building a pipeline that would deliver natural gas from Iran to India. The deal was nearing completion and any other country would not have taken an antagonistic step towards the other, especially the one providing the natural gas.

Not so, in India’s case. India voted against Iran in a crucial IAEA meeting; not that India’s vote tipped the case against Iran but still why did India vote against Iran especially at such a crucial juncture? No one knows the answer. And Iran simply like any sensible country simply stepped away from the deal.

So, we lost a crucial source of energy supply that to at a time when our energy needs is growing by leaps and bounds.

Turkey:
Turkey is one of the most modern countries in the middle-east. It is a country that has a blend of both Arabic and European cultures. It’s also a country that has a large degree of influence in the middle-east.

Did you know that the Turkish Army is the guardian of secularism and democracy in that country? That it was the army that secured the country against fundamentalism that was rampant in the country in the 1970’s.

India must develop better relationships with Turkey; for one thing we can learn how to seamlessly blend seemingly opposing views. Also, India was ill-afford to lose friendship with what could be a major power from the middle-east.

Africa:
The one continent that has the potential for the most rapid growth in all sectors in the globe is Africa. And yet, as pointed out in a recent editorial in Hindu, India does not have any kind of foreign policy document on Africa.

Sure, the continent is facing various kinds of problems that range from natural to man-made, but the potential is there. Just consider the geographic of the continent; it has rich store of energy- a large number of river systems, source of metals, the large market potential for every products.

Any country that can make investments in Africa now is bound to make huge dividends later. That is precisely what China is doing.

India, which has pretentions of being a super-power, should invest money, material in Africa. The short-term returns maybe negligible but the long-term returns are bound to be huge.

Myanmar:
Now, here is an example of a country that is ruled by a military junta that has kept one of the most fearless voices of democracy jailed for more than 15 years now.

For a country that boasts about being the world’s largest democracy, how can one explain India’s policy towards Myanmar?

India has not once issued a statement that criticizes the conduct of the military junta, nor has it taken any steps in helping get Aung San Suu Kyi released.

India in fact has cordial relations with the country in which democracy is blatantly violated. India has voted against UN bills condemning the violence unleashed by the military junta.

South & Central America:
These are another two continents which are growing at a fast pace and are bound to grow faster in the next few decades. The market potential, the amount of available natural resources all point to an investment destination that is bound to make huge profits for the people investing in these regions.

Take the case of Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico – though all these countries face problems of rampant crime, the potential for growth far outweighs any of the risks of investments in these countries.

Israel:
India does not have good relationship with Israel; I think that India should develop much better relationsip with Israel. The point being that I am not condoning Israel’s sometime over the board actions. But, India can learn a lot about counter-terrorism from Israel.

Israel’s security forces including its police are after all doing a hell of a job keeping Israel safe. Our security forces could do well from closer interactions that are not just limited to the defense industry as at present.

Of course, I have more views on India's foreign relations but at present i shall limit myself to the above. You may or may not agree with what I have to say but don't deny that what I say does not make sense.

Mercenary Vs Employee

2010-07-15T19:03:00.000+05:30

Being jobless is boring, taxing, drives one crazy (don’t ask how can a crazy person become crazy, tats beside the point.) but it also means that you have a lot of time to think about stuff that you wouldn’t think about otherwise (in my case, at least I wouldn’t have spent so much time thinking about it.)

Okay, so now back to the topic being discussed: Mercenaries and employees. Do you think that there is a difference between them? Well most people me myself (at one point of time) included would say Yes they are different.

Mercenary seems to have a negative connotation to it. Think of mercenary, freeze that image in your mind. Now think of employee, and freeze that image in your mind.

The Oxford dictionary gives the following meaning for Mercenary: As one primarily concerned with money. Know what’s the definition of employee? It’s given as: As one working for wages.

So, primarily there is no difference between the definitions of a mercenary and an employee.

Let’s explore employees. After all the global meltdown happened due to some employees; the Bhopal accident happened due to some employees; the BP oil spill happened due to some employees and the list is endless.

In comparison what an mercenaries do may result in direct loss of life, they may steal something valuable but it doesn’t have such a wide global impact as what an employee does.

And yet who gets the bad name? It’s the mercenaries.

Well, I am dedicating this article to all the mercenaries out there in the universe….

Note: The above article is written by me without any coercion on anyone’s part. Nor is it intended to hurt anybody’s feelings.

Hollywood and the Ancient Egyptians

2010-03-22T17:33:00.000+05:30

I saw the movie Transformers 2 movie recently. It was the last straw; I have had it with Hollywood. It’s not so much as the concept of the movie – which is crap – that I can’t agree with but, implicitly implying that the Pyramids and some other monuments in the Egypt- Jordan region were all built by aliens or at least with alien collaboration.

Take any sci-fi films that involves aliens and you are bound to have a sub-plot that says the pyramids were built by aliens. Sometimes the plot extends to saying all the ancient monuments in the world were all built by aliens – they are a portal to another dimension or they were built to protect some power source.

Imhotep – considered a great physician and the guy who designed and built the Step Pyramid (the first pyramid ever built) for his King - is shown as an evil, corrupt man who wants to take over the world.

Qin Shi Huang - China’s first emperor, the man who united China; is also portrayed as an power hungry evil monarch. The list goes on....Genghis Khan is another famous villain of Hollywood’s imagination.

Now imagine, if one was to portray say Charlemagne (the first Holy Roman Emperor) or Arthur (the mythical king of England) is the same vein would the film be allowed to release? Would the film be made at all is the million dollar question.

Interestingly there are no comparable ancient monuments in Europe or America - that is monuments that date from the period during which the pyramids of Egypt were built. Sure, there are the old monuments from this period but nothing as big or as spectacular. Only Stonehenge compares in this regard, but I was not able to find many films that have Stonehenge as an alien subplot.

Of course, one may argue that the monuments built by the Mayas, Aztecs, Incas are also portrayed as alien-built. One need not mention about the Easter Island statues. As again I am sure, you will notice a certain link between an monuments portrayal as alien and the civilization that built it. The link being that, the particular civilization would not be from Europe. The monuments would be spectacular having no equal in Europe.

So like I said, waiting for movies in which the Stonehenge is built by aliens, Charlemagne or Arthur shown as blood-thirsty, evil monarchs who want to rule all of human kind...you guys know the plot.

Happy & Sad – the contrasting tales of two artists.

2010-03-02T15:10:00.001+05:30

Feb 24th, 2010 will be both a Happy and a Sad day for India.

First the Happy Part:

There was a time before.....a time before the economic growth of India, a time before India was recognized as a important player on the world arena...a time before IT industry exploded all over India.

It was the time when Indian goods did not rank highly in the global market...when the Indian middle class was non-existent...when there was almost nothing to cheer about....well almost.

There were two words the World knew and trembled before, two words that raised the hopes of an entire nations, two words on whose shoulders India rested like the globe on Atlas’s shoulders, two words that were a cry for joy, hope, freedom....a freedom from the shackles that held the common man, the middle class man

Those two words are Sachin Tendulkar!!!!!!!!!

The words Sachin speaks when he introduces himself: “My name is Sachin Tendulkar and I play for India” is one that a billion plus people love to hear cherish and forever remember.

It was on Feb 24th, that the God decided that he would break the 200 mark in ODI cricket and he did it. Sachin is GOD.

If Cricket is religion then Sachin is God.

I am not trying to compare Sachin with Sir Don Bradman nor can anybody – it is impossible to compare two players who played in different ears, different conditions and more importantly in different periods of mindsets that people had.

Sir Don Bradman and Sachin Tendulkar are great players – the greatest ever in the game of cricket.

Here is a cricketer, a sportsperson, an artist who has entertained Indian and indeed all the world with his artistry. I need not go into the statistics, or what happens when Sachin is in full flow, the number of accolades he has won, the appreciations he has got from teammates, opponents, current former players...

His popularity is so much that even Pakistanis would pay to watch Sachin play, what more can I say? Look at the praise heaped upon him and invariable you will find some of the greatest Pakistani cricketers are among Sachins most ardent and vociferous supporters.

As in the old days, when people were honoured by giving them the “Key to the City”, Sachin should be given the “Key to India”.

Now the Sad part:

It was also on the Feb 24th that another great artist of our times M F Husain was offered a Qatar citizenship. This is not a bad thing in itself, but for the following two facts:

• Under Indian laws, a person cannot have dual citizenship.

• The reason why MF Hussain has agreed to accept the Qatar citizenship, thus will give up Indian citizenship.

Here is an man considered as one of the greatest contemporary artist of current times, but one who is forced into exile for following the freedom of expression that is a given to all the people of the country or is it?

People who are accused of instigating genocides and mass killings walk free in India, but its greatest artist fears coming to India, because of the harassment that he will face. Sadly, the government seems not to notice this.

The only comment that came from the government regarding the issue was that MF Hussain would be given protection if he asked for it.

Only the Supreme Court has come in support of the artist by throwing out many of the cases that were filled against MF Hussain.

Why were so many cases foisted on him, because of some nude paintings of his. Excuse me, but aren’t most Hindu temples filled with half naked figurines of men and women?

As the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi remarked:

“Periyar’s statue depicts him wearing shirt and dhoti. But some idols inside the temples are nude. What do you do with such idols?”

“For instance, you have the Vallabha Ganapathi idol at Chidambaram temple and the Utchishta Ganapathi idol at Tiruvarur, where even the priests are so embarrassed that they keep the idols covered with pieces of cloth.”

Now, i understand and acknowledge that there maybe artist who create art with no other aim than to create communal disruptions. Such people should be definitely be dealt with in the strictest of rules.

That India lost of one of its greatest artist on the same day that another great artist was rewriting history is an irony; it is events like these that have come to script India’s history.

As I have remarked earlier, the true greatness of any culture is measured not in its financial, political or military wealth but in its arts- how much is art patronized, how much freedom does art & artist have. The moment an art or artist is proscribed then the fall of the civilization begins.

Let us hope that it does not happen so with this country.

In Defense of My Insanity - Part 2

2009-11-27T14:41:00.002+05:30

I know, I know…its been a long time since I posted anything on my blog… I know some of you have withdrawal symptoms….sorry for all that.

I was trying to change the tone of my blog, by trying to try up something that was truly funny without being sarcastic, preachy or any of the other things that is my modus operandi.

Alas, I failed repeatedly, so I decided to write something serious. Seriously people, explaining one’s insanity is such a serious business – and I am the Emperor of this field as I am in many other fields.

Now, to the issue at hand: Let me defend my insanity in one more way.

The reason why I am insane is because that my being sane is so abhorrent to the nature, to the very existence of the Universe. So, the Universe is sending the Higgs Boson (the most primary of all particles that make up atoms.) or some other tool in it possession to travel back in time to make me insane and keep me that way – so that the Universe does not face annihilation.

You see, I have been trying to make a break for it – trying to go sane, but it is just not happening and not for trying mind you. Of course, I need not tell readers of my blog about my past trysts with attempts – all have failed miserably. I seem to have been caught at a status quo, a quagmire out of which I am not able to extract myself. It is like being at the wheels of an F1 car, but caught in peak hour traffic.

It is interesting of how I came about this explanation/defense – I was reading an article about the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). It felt vaguely familiar, until it hit me in the full the night after reading the article.

I have posted a link to article: The Collider, the Particle and a Theory About Fate

You see though the article may have a negative connotation for the time-backward travelling particles, in my own case I am entitled to believe that it is in a very positive connotation and not without reason.

I believe or rather know that my ingenuity, intelligence – capable of ruling the entire Universe – is but an off-shoot of my current state of insanity. So, my becoming sane may cause the Universe to lose the most powerful entity it has ever had the honor of hosting, capable of saving it from danger and taking it to unimaginable heights.

So, the Universe is sending out the Higgs Boson or some other tool to stop me from becoming sane. In the process, it is also stopping the LHC from being successful.

Lets us all hope that the Universe finds out a way to keep me insane without affecting the LHC. The march of science should continue, even at the cost annihilation of the Universe, for otherwise humanity would stagnate and waste away.

Double Standards

2009-05-25T13:13:00.005+05:30

I have decided to write about a subject on which I am a Subject Matter Expert. No people it’s not Insanity. Most of you don’t know that I am an expert on another subject, but believe me I am very good in the subject. It is Hypocrisy. Some of the followers of this blog will readily attest to the statement made above. I brought the subject of me being a master, so as to clarify questions of my competency on the subject about to be discussed.

With the Indian Parliamentary election results coming out and the whole noise about how a secular government has been elected, I thought it was a good time to explore, what I think are double standards by India/Indians. And one of the major double standards is our notion of secularism.

The First instance of double standards:

I am sure you all heard about the Court verdict that said Muslims in India would not be allowed to sport beards in educational institutes, government offices, the armed forces or any organization having to do with the government. Other institutions are permitted to apply this rule. More specifically I think the ruling said that a Muslim could not state religion as the reason for his sporting a beard. If a person refused to abide by the rule, that person could be expelled and it would not be taken as a case of discrimination.

Now, being a secular, liberal that I am, I completely support the ruling of the court and stand behind the court. Make no mistakes of that. I am all for the whole de-religious look.

I think one of the main reasons the court said that the Muslims would not be allowed to sport a beard is that, it would raise the differences between the different religions, especially in educational institutions. The court also said, it would not allow the “Tabilanization” of India. Also, the court said that Islam or the Koran does not ask its followers to necessarily grow a beard, thus Muslims need not grow a beard. Now, I don’t know if the Koran says you have to sport a beard if you are a Muslim or does not. That’s beside the point. Now for a little background and a look at other points before we come back to what the whole point is about.

The whole thing started because a student in a school said that he was a Muslim, hence he should be allowed to sport a beard to school. The school management disagreed with the student and the whole thing spilled on to the courts. I think there was also a case of an Officer attached with the Air Force who stated that he should be allowed to sport a beard because of his religion(Muslim again). I think the Air Force said something bout beards were not in line with the Air Forces uniform.

I completely agree. Educational institutions are not the places where ones religious identities should be displayed and support the court ruling. But, I am also shamefully reminded of how India/Indians seem to apply double standards in the issue of religion.

Now the question I wanted to ask since this issue came up is: Does the Hindu religion ask its followers to wear the thilak/bindhi on their foreheads? NO, I don’t think the Vedas or the Upanishads mentions that. Or even if it does, thats besides the point. Read on for more….

Now how many educational institutions do you think ask their students not to sport a thilak/bindhi? Or how many of them ask the students to remove them? I would say a very few.

In another case, the courts ruled in favor of the Sikh community when it said that the people belonging to the Sikh community must be allowed to sport a beard because their religion demands it. The Armed Forces allows officers of the Sikh community to sport a beard.

Now, I have nothing against the Sikh community except of course the same kind of…what can we call it…detestation that I share for all religion.
Now back to the topic.

Leave out the whole – the religion demands/does not demand that its male members sport a beard; wear a thilak /bindhi; wear turban – argument. It is irrelevant to what I am going to talk about.

How does the sporting of beard by a Muslim student raise the issue of religious differences in educational institutions when the sporting of beard by a Sikh student does not? How does the issue of religious differences not arise when a Hindu student wears a thilak/bindhi to the school?

The Second instance of double standards:

The second instance deals with how India/Indians seem to treat the 1984- Anti Sikh riots and the Godhra riots/ Khandamal riots differently.

Mr. X, a person who is accused of mind you NOT for instigating the Anti Sikh riots but is accused for not taking action to prevent the rioters is forced to withdraw his candidature from the parliamentary elections. This, after a large negative reaction from the public.

But then a Mr. Y, a person very much accused of instigating the Godhra riots is projected as a great leader. There is no clamor to remove his candidature except from a few lone voices that are never heard in the mainstream media anyway.

Nor are any of the people accused of being behind the Khandamal violence prevented from contesting the elections. Though many of these people lost – the point is, why was there no “public upraising” against these people contesting the elections as there was against Mr. X?

We talk about Human Rights abuse in other countries. What about India’s record? I have just one name Binayak Sen. What about the atrocities that are allegedly committed by our Armed Forces in the North-Eastern states and in Jammu & Kashmir? What about the atrocities that are allegedly committed by the police forces in the Naxal states in the name of combating naxalities?

What about the innumerable harassment that is allegedly done by the police forces on the common public, especially the people from the lower sections of the society. Please don’t tell me that we have the National Human Rights Commission to deal with such matters.

The National Human Rights Commission is for all practical purposes a joke that lacks the teeth to go after the truly powerful who commit atrocities.

And yet, we say we are concerned about the Human Rights status in other countries. We are a truly a different breed aren’t we? I think only American come near us. (And by Americans I don’t mean the average American but the policy makers.)

The Third Instance of Double Standards:

India says that the Kashmir dispute is an internal matter between Indian and Pakistan and that NO third part should interfere. Fine, good enough.

But, isn’t the Palestine-Israel conflict an internal matter between Israel and Palestine? If it is an internal matter, then why does India keep issuing statement that the two should resolve their conflict peacefully? Or if the Palestine-Israel conflict is not an internal matter, then doesn’t it mean that the Kashmir issue also no longer an internal matter.

Okay, you argue that India has the rights to air its views and that is quite different from actually interfering. Good enough, I’ll take that answer.

But, please explain why India interfered/interferes in the internal matters of Sri Lanka, namely the strife between the Sinhalese and the Tamils on that island nation. Isn’t that an internal matter of the Sri Lankan government?

Or, for that matter why does India take such active interest in the internal affairs of China, namely the Tibet issue.

Some Other instances of double standards:

People will talk about eradicating corruption with such fervor and passion that even a stone would be moved by their emotion, yet be one of the very first to offer a bribe to get their work done. People will talk ill about others who are cheating others and yet not think twice about buying duplicate DVDs and CDs of the latest movies, instead of going to theatres. People will talk about increasing the punishment for law breakers, yet go the wrong way on a One-Way road, get caught by the traffic police, ask to be forgiven and when that does not work offer a bribe to be let off.

Oh, I forgot. People will ask others to vote, but they themselves would not go and vote, cause they were “too busy” to do so.
And the list of the double standards goes on and on….I think it would not possible to list out all the instances of double standards, they are too numerous.

I think, the double standards add a unique flavor to India that you can never find it anywhere else in the world.

A time will come, when we will have to wake up to our double standards. What I am worried is not about the When this will happen, but by What will be the action taken?

Would it involve an honest look at all our double standards or will we come up with more double standards to cover the existing double standards. I fear to think what would happen, if we continue to build our society on double standards as a way of life.

So, all I am asking the readers of this post is to take time off from their busy schedules and take a look at their core beliefs, values and see whether there are any double standards in them before judging others.

The Three Stones – Part 2

2009-04-22T13:31:00.004+05:30

I know, I know! It’s been a really really long time since I blogged. What can I say? I had a writers block. Just couldn’t make myself sit down and write a half decent post. I did write a few...what it is called...preliminaries to work up into blogs. So, watch for many new posts in the following months.

The following post has been in my minds garage for many months now. It’s way too cluttered so, once is misplaced it took me so long a time to retrieve it.

A few days after I wrote “The Three Stones” one my friends (a girl and No, she is not one of my sisters) called me and said my post was so timely. I asked why. She told me that one of her relatives had died recently and she had gone through some of the silly things. She pointed out three things that she had encountered that I had missed. I promised her that I would definitely post them on my blog.

1. You should not laugh till the last rites are performed:

A few days before the funeral, some cousins of my friend had come to visit her. Being young people, the talk naturally turned to lighter issues and they all started laughing. Soon, one of her aunts came and giving them a stare, scolded them for laughing. Her aunt actually scolded them for being happy.

I think ours is the only country that actually scolds people for having a fun time. I mean, what’s the point here? Sure, a person is dead, but does that mean that one has to stop living? No, you get scolded for being sad also, believe I have seen it.

Well, anyways back to the “No Laughing” rule. I don’t see the connection. Are they trying to say that by laughing we are disrespecting the dead individual?

2. Women should not wear bindhi till the last rites are performed:

What kind of rule is that? Why shouldn’t women keep bindhi if someone dies? What’s the connection between a person’s death and his/her relatives keeping bindhi? The most irritating part, my friend says is that: Her people chide her when she doesn’t keep bindhi on other occasions, saying it will bring bad luck and such crap. But after the death, when my friend questioned why she shouldn’t keep bindhi, they chided for asking the question….

One more instance of a "gap" is all that i am going to venture here. I am not going add anything else. I will let the above passage speak for itself.

3. That because a bad incident happened, it should be followed by a good incident:

My friend really is pissed of at this “rule”, because they have made her the victim. She is fed up at this “good should follow bad” thing that everyone seems to be harping about. Guess what the good incident is?? It is supposed to be my friends wedding. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

Sounds like the Yin-Yang thing. But, if you point out that this and ask why Indians are following an essentially Chinese principle, I am sure; you’ll get lots of interesting answers. My friend says that she is quite sure they invented this thing to make her agree for marriage.

I think, I’ll go with her here. Indians have a quite a knack of inventing things for occasions and calling them tradition & culture.

Why am I so critical about Indian culture? Because, I was born and brought up in it. I am more familiar with it than with any culture and thus I can point out what I would call flaws in this culture.

All that I am saying is that culture should be able to absorb the good things from other cultures and adapt to the changing needs of the society or it is doomed to fail.

The Three Stones

2008-10-10T15:06:00.003+05:30

As most of this blog’s readers know, my father expired a couple of months ago. What followed his death is the subject of this post. I couldn’t decide whether the things that immediately followed his death were funny or disgusting. But, then I decided that they were on the funnier side of things. I know, I know, most of you are probably wondering what kind of (lunatic) guy sees funny things in his father’s death. I can because I can look at it objectively and not subjectively. But some the incidents I am about to narrate will I am sure if not make you laugh out aloud at least make you think” “Yeah, I can see the funny side of things here.”

1. All my “relatives” crying:
I couldn’t understand why in the hell were people who barely knew my father were crying loudly and profusely, whereas my bro, sis and I were not crying that much. I even went to take a nap and had food all three times of the day, whereas some of the people I have mentioned above ate very little food or completely refrained from eating food. What’s the point in not eating food? I don’t get it. Is the dead person going to come back to life if you don’t eat food?? The most funniest thing: here were the three people most closely related to deceased person going and consoling people who were distantly related to deceased.
I couldn’t understand why were people whom my father barely knew so worked up over his death. Then me friend told me: Most people cry at funeral whether they feel like it or not, because they think they are supposed to cry at funerals. It’s a sort of peer pressure thing. “People will think badly about me if i don’t cry at funerals” has been etched into the minds of people and they blindly follow it.
Also, people who were crying were uttering the following phrases to my father’s corpse. C’mon people, what’s the point in talking to a dead body? How can a dead person hear to what you are talking? And I am called insane!! Anyway, these phrases made me laugh. Some of the phrases were:
· “Why did you leave us and go? How did you have the heart to do this?”
Yeah, Right! Why would any sane person in his/her right mind voluntarily die? That too when they have many loved ones?? Some people actually scold the dead person for dying!!! I cannot still fathom till date why people behave that way in funerals.
· “Please open your eyes and look at me/us once.”
This is one seriously is the most funniest. I mean the person is dead, how would he/she open their eyes?? I wonder how many of them would not scream and run away or go mad, if a dead person opens his/her eyes?

Now, here are some questions.
a) According to most theist, when a person dies they go to heaven or hell depending upon whether they were a good person or a bad person. Now, most theists will claim heaven is a better place than the earth and etc etc. Now, I see that people cry at the funeral of everyone. The question is: So, is no one going to heaven, because everyone was a bad person or is that no one is happy that a person they know going to heaven??Answer this one theist!
b) Once a person dies, we start referring to the person’s body as it. Until that time, we refer to a person’s body as he/she. Why this disrespect? So, you guys mean to say that the body of a person has no relevance? If so, why then are people crying when only body has expired? Doesn’t a person still continue to live on?
c) Why at all do people cry at funerals? Just because a person dies does is it man that person is dead? I mean, physically that person is dead. But, doesn’t that person continue to live on in our memories and hearts?? It disgusts me that people seem to give so much importance to flesh and bones than to the person. After all a person is more than just flesh and bones. Isn’t a person also the ideals, values, and beliefs that were held by that person, the actions that the persons committed during his/her lifetime?

2. No Television:
This happened a couple of days (Some 4-5 days.) after my father’s death. One of my younger cousins wanted to watch that day’s IPL match. So, I was connecting the TV wires and was switching it on, when one of my aunts comes and says “No, No, you should not watch TV n all.” I was like “Huh!! Why can’t/shouldn’t I watch TV?” and switched on the TV. She stood there for some time starring at me and then walked away, because all my cousins and uncles came to watch the match. My aunt never gave me the explanation of why I shouldn’t switch on the TV. But the general message I think was that “You don’t watch TV, just a couple of days after someone has expired is the house.” I mean what kind of crap is that? I mean, isn’t it disgustingly funny??

3. No going out after dusk:
This is another “rule” that makes me laugh every time I think about it. This too happened a couple of days (Some 3-4 days.) after my father’s death. My friend had come to see me and said let’s go out, it will be a change for you. So I was starting to go out. Everyone was like “No, you can’t go out after dusk.” I laughed out aloud and asked “Why shouldn’t I go out after dusk?” The reply as usual was “You can’t gout that’s it.” and “Just listen to what we are saying. Don’t ask cross questions?” But, you all know me. I kept pressing everyone for an answer and not even one was able to come up with a proper answer.
I still am not able to understand the logic behind the “rule” that close relatives of a deceased person should not go out after dusk.

4. The Three Stones:
Now, to the main thing that inspired post and the tittle of the post.
What would you do if some guy brings you a stone and says this is your father/mother? You would, if not bash him up at least get into a verbal argument with him. Some of you would probably laugh. Right?? How many of you would do nothing about it and keep quiet??
Hindus have a final rites ritual, which happens about 10 days after a person dies. I did not want to do all these rituals. (One of the reasons being: Though he was a theist, my father never believed in rituals.) I was emotionally blackmailed into it. So, I accompanied my brother to the place where the ritual is to be performed. (It’s performed by some lake side.) I sit down and the guy who helps you do the rituals places three stones in front of me and says pointing to each stone in turn: “This is your father, your grandfather, your great grandfather!!!” I almost burst out laughing. I mean, come on people. Wouldn’t you find it funny if some guy/girl brought a stone and said this is my father/mother /grandfather/grandmother…. You would think “Poor thing, he/she has lost his/her marbles.” (Interestingly, marbles are also stones. Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!)
I was supposed to do all kinds of poojas to the three stones, sorry to my forefathers. It was pathetic to say the least. What was more disgusting was the attitude of all my relatives who had accompanied us to do the ritual. They actually looked as I they took the whole “stones are your forefather” thing seriously. Judge for yourself people. I mean it is funny isn’t it? At least a tiny weenie bit??

5. Women are not allowed to perform the last rites:
Why is that we are in such a male chauvinistic society? Why is that women are still considered/treated as inferior to men? Why is that when a guy flirts/seduces many girls he called a playboy, a casanova and treated as a special person? Some people (Both guys and girls.) actually admire these guys and sort of place them on a pedestal. Whereas as when a girl flirts/seduces many boys, she’s called a slut, a whore and people treat her as a thing that is to be thrown to the dungeons?? Where is this diatribe leading to? Read on…
I have never been able to understand this aspect of Hindu society, not only are women are discriminated against in life but also in death. Women are not allowed to perform most of the rituals especially the last rites of a deceased person. C’mon, doesn’t a wife/mother/daughter/friend have as much right over the deceased person as a husband/father/son/friend? If you ask why women are not allowed, I am sure the answer to that will be: “Our forefathers did not allow it; they must have had some reason for it.” or “You should not question things like this.” I mean, no one, not a single person I am sure will come up with a rationale reason.

I am not saying one should not cry at a funeral. What I am saying is that, cry only if you feel like it. Second, learn to treat a person as more than just flesh and bones. A person is definitely more than that. Thirdly as J. K. Rowling speaks through her character Dumbledore asking a question; “Do you think our loved ones ever leave us?” The answer is of course a big NO. As mentioned earlier, our loved ones continue to live on in our memories, through their ideas and values. Fourth, try looking at life (your) objectively; you will realize a lot of things that you didn’t notice before.

In Defense of My Insanity – A Theory(s)

2008-10-01T18:42:00.002+05:30

Finally, the theory/explanation for which all of you were eagerly waiting for! The theory that explains my insanity. Now, I am not going to tell you people how I became insane, that would be inappropriate as most of you are not ready for it. It would be like putting a 3 year old child in the controls of a 747 Boeing airplane with passengers in it. Actually, I myself do not know how and when I became insane!! Actually, even if i figure out how i went wrong i'll take it to my grave. (Which of course will never happen because, i am never going to die.)

Enough about myself, now for the theories:

Theory 1:

The idea for the first theory comes from two articles that I read in Popular Science magazine: Soul Search and Quantum Consciousness

The common aspect of both these articles is that; consciousness is in a way independent of the body and can exist even without the body. In the second article, the idea is stated that consciousness of a dead person escapes the body and still exists as energy. They go further to say that some apparatus can be designed to capture and store it.

Let us for a moment assume the above stated idea/theory to be true. So, now suppose that I was able to through the power of my will able to split my consciousness and extract one part of my consciousness and send that part of the consciousness in a journey across the entire Universe in search of knowledge.

So, only a part of my consciousness is available in my body. That explains a lot about my insanity, does it not??

Theory 2:

The second theory takes a completely different approach, but is still quite valid. The highest state that any human can achieve is called Nirvana. A state in which a person is beyond human desires and wants. A state where nothing “touches” the person who has reached this state.

To me, at least this definition sounds close to the definition of insanity. I am of the view that Insanity and Nirvana are quite similar states except for a few minor differences. (I would rank Insanity above Nirvana.) So, I could say that in my quest for Nirvana I made a slight mistake in my calculations and ended up insane.

But what’s the difference, I would say none. I have long been of the view that only two kinds of people can truly happy; children and the insane. I know, I know. It’s usually children and sages. But let me ask you a question: Do you think a sage can have states like happiness, sorrow?? The answer is a big NO.

But back to the theory; so, in a way I am enlightened person. So I am enlightened that I am giving the explanations for my insanity myself. Sort of like a problem generating the solution for itself.

Theory 3:

This is theory is the last of my theories. According to this theory; everyone except me is insane. But, since insanity has become the dominant state, it is considered normal and is considered sane. But because I am the only sane person here, I am considered insane. Crazy isn’t it?

The War for India

2008-08-26T18:21:00.000+05:30

India, the country of riches, is place where my physical self was born. Its history is a collage of legends, myths, facts, and what not. Many a traveler has described it as a land of riches. Its fame was renowned throughout the ancient world and still is. It has all the natural resources any country can wish for. Some of the greatest minds of all times are from India.

Ah, what a country India was…yes, my friend…was. India was once a great country, we no longer are great. I know it is difficult to accept what I am about to say, but the truth must be spoken and so it will be.

There are some common myths that must be addressed in order to continue this discussion.
a) That India won its independence.
b) We have achieved in 60years what it took America 200 years to achieve [economic growth].
c) India has never invaded another country in over 10,000 years of its culture.
d) That the war for India is over.

India did not win its independence as we would all like to think. It was granted to us. It was granted to us because the British Government was tired after the World War II. It lacked both the economic resources and the political will to control India. Thus, had it not been for the World War II India would not have attained Independence in 1947. I know that most of you may not agree with me; however what I have stated is the truth.

Now to the second myth - India has achieved economic growth that took the U.S 200 years to do. We forget that India did not kick start its economy on August 15th, 1947 but that we had various industries even during the British Raj. And, more importantly, the Raj left us the framework of a working transportation system – the Railways that was and is still used to run the economy. One more thing that I would like to say is that the methods and means we used to achieve the economic growth hat we have achieved were created, developed, tested, experimented and refined in other countries. What about the technology that was available when U.S. proclaimed independence and the technology that was available to us when we were granted Independence. Oh and also isn’t the Indian growth story, the IT industry heavily dependent on the U.S. economy? In fact isn’t America the birthplace of IT?

The third myth is the one that makes me want to laugh out aloud in the face of the person saying it. That India has never invaded another country in the 10,000 yeas of its existence. What we forget is that the idea of India emerged only around 330 B.C. to the great Chanakya. Secondly that India never had the chance to invade other countries as we were constantly being ravaged by the invaders from other countries. Thirdly, what about all the fighting going on between the different kingdoms that made up India? And weren’t these kingdoms considered to be separate countries in their own right? By the way, it is a well documented and accepted fact that the southern kingdoms of India have attacked and conquered Sri Lanka and some other island kingdoms in the Indian Ocean.

The final myth is the hardest and the most complex of all the myths. The myth is that the war for India is over. It is not my friends! We have but won only one battle, the battle for self-governance. The war still rages on. The enemy is decay of our country. Decay in everything. Can’t you see it all around us? I can. I can feel it everywhere; it stinks and makes me sick to the stomach. We are still fighting for independence.

Yes, we have achieved great progress in economic terms whether it is sustainable or not is another matter, but let us look at the other core areas that make up any society/country.

Politically, we proclaim that ours is the largest democracy. But is there true democracy? Does it reach the common man? The answer as we all know is a big NO. We have parties for literally every street corner most of which are based on caste lines with communal ideologies. And, what is worse that people actually vote for these parties. Every single state has some internal strife other going on, every single state without any exception.

Speaking about national leaders, we have none. We have no one with far-sightedness, the acumen, the political will, the charisma to lead the country. And, this is the land where Chanakya was born!!!

Socially, we have lost everything that we were. Atheists are still being discriminated against, though the condition has improved considerably. But there is still a social stigma against eunuchs. Eunuchs are discriminated against in all walks of life. They are abandoned by their parents and learn to grow up hating most of the society. Most of them turn to prostitution, begging for their live hoods. Homosexuality is still considered illegal. Homosexuals are considered diseased people, a group that is to be avoided at all costs.

Let me not even talk about AIDS patients. Some doctors and hospitals actually refuse treatment for AIDS patients. There own family and friends desert them. But the condition is improving through the work of NGO’s spreading awareness about AIDS.

Communally, Indians have become an intolerant lot. The people are still divided among caste and religious lines. Each community views the other community with a degree of distrust. The caste system is still rampant in many parts of the country, especially in the rural areas. Communal clashes are a common occurrence today in all parts of the country. Where is the communal harmony that was so synonymous of India?? Isn’t this the nation that was ruled by the great Emperor Akbar, one of the most benevolent emperors in the history of mankind??

Speaking about communal and religious intolerance, there is also a rise in the number of disputes between the various states that make up the country. Each state seems to be at the others neck over some trivial issue or the other.

Educationally, we have so many uneducated people. There are districts in which the primary school education structure is virtually non-existence except on paper. There are still schools were there are no teachers for many of the classes. Even among the “educated” section of the country, how many actually have the required skills to be considered truly educated is matter of debate among the experts. Whether the students in the various primary schools across the country actually understand the concepts taught to them is question for which the answer is no.

But the worst hit of all is Art. Art is the soul of culture. Art is integrity; Art is the essence of culture. Art at its purest form is the soul of the artist. Art cannot be defined, it should not be. Art has no definition, art is everything! Economic strength can be achieved, political power usurped but not Art. Art can never be conquered, but sadly it can be made to rot away. And, that is what is happening in India. Indians have grown intolerant to art and have been trying to restrict it. One of the greatest painters of our time, M.F. Hussein is prevented from displaying his works. The books of Salman Rushdie, one of best writers of India, are banned. A college’s art galleries were shut, because the painting displayed were considered inappropriate. Sections of books are removed or changed in books and films that give a critical look at India thus distorting or not fully conveying the message that they would other wise have conveyed. Some books and films are even banned from releasing in India. Music seems to have generally escaped, but of course from time to time there is a furor raised over the wordings of some song, poetry.

Every and any culture or civilization that has tried to restrain art will only end up in ruin. The reason being that art is the highest form of self-expression. Deny people the means of self-expression and you might as well as put a nose around your neck. It has precedents, look at the Europe that tried to restrict its art at the height of the Roman Empires and the Dark Ages was the result. A period, were the civilization just stagnated and no progress was made in any field. In fact, the accumulated knowledge of all generations past was lost irrevocably. Look at any great civilization ad you see that the arts bear a direct relation to the well being of the country. When the arts stagnate, the civilization collapses. Lets us look at two examples from our own civilizations. Look at the reigns of Ashok Maurya and Akbar the Great. These are considered the golden ages of Indian history. In both these periods if you see, the arts flourished at their zenith. There was also tolerance towards others views. To even imagine that India can escape the fact of the other cultures is a foolish one.

Is this what you call a great country? A country that has lost its religious tolerance, where communal disharmony is the order of the day. A country that cannot appreciate art. Is this the nation for which our forefathers laid down their lives for? Is this the country Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru imagined for us? Is this the country that you would like to leave to your children?

But all is not lost. There is still time, albeit very little. The window of opportunity to save this country is reducing; we are probably the only generation that have a chance to stop this rot. We must act and act decisively now.

Let us make an oath to all the ancestors who died fighting for the self-governance of the country, the unborn children of our future, to the idea of India, on the ideas that we hold dear to do everything in our hands to make this country a better place to live.

We must first free our arts; learn tolerance for others and their views. Tolerance for other religions must be promulgated. We must change our political system so that people with the real passion to serve the people get a chance to make a difference. The educational system must be revamped to impart practical knowledge to the students. We must engage our friends to have a frank discussion about the various social issues and what can be done about these issues.

If we do this, we shall forever be remembered as the generation that saved India. If we fail, we will always be remembered as the generation that failed to fight for the country and condemned by all the children of our future.

Why do we eat chickens?

2008-07-14T15:59:00.001+05:30

This has been a question that has been bothering me for a long time. Why do people eat chicken or for that matter beef, pork, egg, fish… since the list is endless, let’s just say any living matter and I am including plant life in this.

I confess that I am a “Non-Vegetarian”, basically a person who eats meat. But since plants are also life forms, shouldn’t we call the cells of the plants as meat too??

Now, coming to those self-righteous “Vegetarians” (Not all Vegetarians are like these, but some are. I am only referring to them and not all Vegetarians.) who go around saying that eating meat is a bad thing and that all “Non-Vegetarians” are “Killers”, let me tell you something. Plants i.e. vegetables are also life forms. Get your science right, before opening your traps.

So, coming back to the topic, we kill and eat (most of the time) life forms and no one says anything (most of the time) about this. But kill a human and the whole crowd descends on you with a ruckus about, how is wrong to hurt any life form and the whole thing.

Now, (I am borrowing heavily from the book “The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins.) what is the difference between a human life form and say that of a Chicken? Leaving out the biological differences, you will see that there is no difference at all. Both are lives. Both have flesh and bones. And, please don’t give me the argument about humans being more evolved than other species because it still does not make a difference in the sense that a life is still a life no matter how complex the life form maybe.

I always found it disgusting that we accept the use of guinea pigs, monkey, mice and any other species to test medicines, vaccines… but raise a hue when humans are used in trials. In fact, the laws are such that as long as no humans are harmed during the testing phase of any drug, you can kill as many guinea pigs, mice and monkeys as you want with impunity.

What about single cells organisms like bacteria, virus, amoeba, plankton…these too are life forms. But do we ever consider them in our normal day to day lives as life forms? No, I didn’t for a very long time.

We have all squashed/killed mosquitoes, insects, cockroaches… I have, I accept with all my heart. But do we ever pause and think that these too are life forms? No, we mostly don’t. My question is why? Is that we think that we are somehow superior to all other life forms on Earth?

The answer is surprisingly simple. As Richard Dawkins in the “The Selfish Gene” says, we accept these things as part of life because they (all life forms except humans) are all a different species from us.

The following link gives the various taxonomic ranks in biology.

As you will realize, all species come under the same category sooner or later. My point is “In which category do you draw the line and say, those not in the same category as humans are different? Because, all you have to do is move one category up and viola, some species not previously in the same category as humans will be present in the same category.

The question that immediately pops up is: Then what about the whole survival of the fittest thing? What about the laws of nature, where some species are the hunted and others are the hunters. Am I speaking against nature? No, I am not. Nature is best left un-tampered, a fact that we have yet to understand and accept.

Then, what you may ask is the entire purpose of this post? To stop eating vegetables or meat? Is to say stop killing insects, cockroaches, let them multiply in numbers and take over your houses? Stop using animals in laboratories? Stop using medicines to cure our diseases because they kill bacteria and viruses?

The answer is a definite No. What am I them proposing? It is simple. Give consideration to other life forms. Don’t apply double standards to other species.

Oppose the indiscriminate use of animals in laboratories. Animals, Plants of a species other than Homo sapiens sapien are also life forms.

Stop saying you are killers to “Non-Vegetarians”, because even “Vegetarians” too are killers.

Try avoiding medicines if you can. I know. I know, the body’s defense mechanism will anyways kill the foreign element, but at least it will be a natural death. (Funny isn’t it? To think about the death of bacteria, viruses as due to natural and unnatural causes. I am too good, am I not?)

If you can’t avoid taking medicines, then what happens? Well, that too bad for the bacteria or virus or whatever. It’s the survival of the fittest.

And oh, does it mean that I am proposing that people stop eating chickens, fish…etc. No, that’s a personal choice for each individual to take. Even though I have given an impassioned plea for the acceptance of all animals and plants as equals to humans, I continue to eat them.

What about the legal angle of my argument? I guess, it will take a long time to make a shift in the minds of the people to make them respect other life forms. This cannot be done through any law and must be from within the individual.

I end by saying, treat animals and plants kindly/humanely or who know maybe the incidents depicted in the film “The Happening” could happen one day.

Drifters

2008-07-04T20:46:00.002+05:30

This is my first post after joining the B-school and most of you were expecting a post on a very different topic I know, some were even predicting a change in the mood of the blog. Yeah! Yeah! I can hear you guys saying, it’s just been two weeks, let’s wait and watch, but you people should know better than that.

Now, you might wonder, why is the topic titled as drifters and the why in the hell are you talking about something else. The point is “Precisely that!!”

See, I am aimlessly drifting; I am going everywhere but no where. Of course, as you all know I am slightly insane and prone to ramble and rant.

The definition of drifter as given in dictionary.com is that of a person who moves from place to place or job to job without any aim.

But what about the people who are “highly successful” individuals but do not have a aim in their life. People who stay in one place are successful in their personal and professional life but do not have a purpose to their life.

Most people, I at least according tome fall into this second category of successful but purposeless people. I accept that I too belong to this category (Of course I am not as highly successful as some of the people in this category.)

The reasons may be various, one of this maybe because there is simple no time to think of these things. As the saying goes “In today’s world, we have run fast just to stay in the same place”.

Another reason could be that people don’t want to answer that question because they are afraid of the answer. After all aren’t most of us thought from our childhood that success is about getting high marks in the examinations and that sports, arts come secondary? These are so ingrained into us, that by the time we grow up and realize what we have missed it is too late and we have been conditioned in the “conventional” way that to think otherwise becomes a pain to us. And so, most people choose the easy way out.

So, what am I trying to convey through this post? The answer is that is most of us drifters in one way or the other. Just that we don’t realize it.

By the way, no one here suspects me yet to be the lunatic that I am. I have been keeping my insane side in control. But I am staring to lose it.

GOD

2008-05-30T10:40:00.003+05:30

God, as generally defined is a superpower that controls everything. God judges rights and wrongs and punishes us accordingly. Oh, by the way I forgot to mention that god also allows us free will.

I as an Atheist do not believe in god. Let me first explain what an Atheist is. An atheist is a person, who through the empirical evidence available to them, through logical reasoning independently arrives at the conclusion that a superpower as described by the many religions of the worlds is not possible.

Why do I think that god does not exist? Simple take two of the powers that are ascribed to god. The age old question to which no answer been given is “Can gods create a rock so big that gods cannot lift it?” No one has been able to successfully as of yet to answer this question. (The question was originally raised, I believe some time during the middle ages in Europe.)

Another argument is if god is omniscience, then god cannot be omnipotent. The reasoning goes some thing like this: Suppose god changes god’s mind over some issue, then god cannot be omnipotent as god would have already known that god’s mind is going to change. But if you say god does not or cannot change god’s mind over any issue then it means the omnipotent power is lost.

One more logical inconsistency with god as generally defined is that, if god is all good then why is there so much evil around? Why is there hunger, poverty, disease? Don’t tell me that all these are there as punishment. Because if god truly created us all, god would not wish us to suffer, at least everyone I know wouldn’t want anything they created to suffer one bit. Another answer given is that, we remember god only when there is suffering. So, god wants to be worshiped even at the cost of pain to its creation?

And they say that god will punish you if you don’t worship god, follow god’s guidelines. So in what way is the god you define any different from an autocrat?

Lets us come to the question of how god allows us free will yet controls all our actions and oh yeah god punishes us if we do “evil” by choosing the wrong choice of actions among all the choice that were presented to us in the first place by god.

How can you control everything that a person does yet give them free will? On yeah that’s because god can do thing that are incomprehensible to the human mind. Please………..

And, I forgot the icing… Take any book on god and you are most likely to see god referred to as a “He” and never as a “She” or “It”. This is true when we speak, we generally use the word he except when of course referring to a goddess or some gods that have an animal form.

How is it that you people decided that god was a male is something that escapes me. And also how is it that most representations of god are in a human likeness? You say god cannot be seen, only felt and yet all your representations of god are in human likeness and especially a likeness to male human.

And I could go on and on…But I will stop here and provide you a link to a George Carlin video on Religion that is damn funny.

And I would suggest reading "A God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. Because it is a good read and is a beautiful book on religion and god and written in such logical manner that i coule never achieve.

End Versus Means

2008-04-12T19:07:00.001+05:30

Does the End justify the Means or does it not. This is a question that has been with humanity as far long as humanity has existed.

I used to think that the End does and must justify the Means. Think about if after all, if the end result does a whole lot of good for a lot of people, then what is wrong if a few have to suffer?

This was the reasoning I held for a long time, but then, when I started thinking along the lines of morals, integrity I came across a dilemma. The dilemma is this: Say you use dubious means to achieve a highly honorable goal. Now, since you used dubious means, aren’t you morally unworthy of that goal? What if the means you used are contradictory of the goal that you wish to achieve?

Also, how do you define which is an honorable goal, and more importantly where do you draw the line on the means that you use to achieve the goal?

The above question along with the following quote which I came across

“He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster” by Friedrich Nietzsche begs the question of people who claim that the end does justify the means.

Scores and scores of cops, soldiers, and intelligence agents around the world have to make the choice everyday in their line of duty on end vs. means debate.

Now let’s take the other side of the debate that the End does not justify the Means. Of what use would a goal be, if it were not achieved? It would be another failure and would only lead to disillusionment for all those involved with the goal/idea. What use would an idea be, if it were to never see the light of the day and was destroyed by a unscrupulous few?

Of course one may argue that one retains their integrity, morality. That the people involved do not behave in a contradictory manner from their held conventions and thus they are “whole” in the intellectual sense. But this may be labeled, by some, as an excuse for them not being strong enough to stomach what is necessary to be done to achieve their goal/idea. After all many a country’s independence was won through violent means.

So, where does this leave us?

Does the End justify the Means or not? Well, that is a choice that every individual has to make their own choice on this.

I have made my choice and that is that the End does not justify the Means.

I leave you with a quote from the nadirs of my mind:

“A person who truly believes that the End justifies the Means will always claim that the End does not justify the Means.”

Student Vs Professor

2008-03-30T22:46:00.009+05:30

An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and.....

Prof: So you believe in God?
Student: Absolutely, sir.
Prof: Is God good?
Student: Sure.
Prof: Is God all-powerful?
Student: Yes.
Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm? (Student is silent.)
Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Is Satan good?
Student: No.
Prof: Where does Satan come from?
Student: From...God...
Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?
Student: Yes.
Prof: So who created evil? (Student does not answer.)
Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?
Student: Yes, sir.
Prof: So, who created them? (Student has no answer.)
Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student: Yes.
Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.
Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.
Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Prof: Yes.
Student: And is there such a thing as cold?
Prof: Yes.
Student: No sir. There isn't. (The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it. (There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)
Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?
Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?
Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?
Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?
Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir? (The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)
Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.) Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain? (The class breaks out into laughter.) Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir? (The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.
Student: That is it sir... The link between man & god is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive. And the student sits down.

To whomsoever it may concern,

This is a reply to the above dialogue between a Student and a Professor, which implicitly sates that it “proves” the existence of god. I was deeply hurt that a dialogue that has no logic in it has been going around the internet for so long a time.

The excerpts from the dialogue are in blue and the reply’s are in black.

Student: ... But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.
Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that.
There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat
we cannot measure cold. Heat is energy.

There is something called Cold. Cold is the name given to low temperatures or low energy (heat energy) levels, which is vastly different from " absence of heat ". Absolute temperature (0 K –273.15 °C/ –459.67 °F) cannot be achieved, as it requires a perfect system without any imperfections. A system without any imperfections is not found in nature and neither can it be created except in theory. We do measure cold. Low temperature is cold.

Student: Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

Wrong. Cold is not absence of heat, but the name given to low energy (heat energy) levels as stated in my previous response.

Student: You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?

Accepted, darkness is the absence of light as perceived by humans. You see darkness is a human term. Many animals use sound, infra-red, vibrations, chemical signature for navigation and other purposes. So what would be darkness to a human may not be so for some other animal. Also, what’s the point the student is trying to get at here? Is it that the professor is wrong? Well it in no way affects the authenticity of the professor’s statements about god. Why? The reason is the first sentence of the discussion. “An atheist professor of philosophy…..”, as you can very well see the professor is qualified on the subject of philosophy and it nowhere mentions his qualifications in the field of physics. It would therefore not be incorrect to make a premise that the professor’s knowledge in physics is that of a layman as the fields of philosophy and physics differ from each other widely. The Student has made a logically incorrect premise that an expertise in one subject means an expertise in other subjects too.

Student: You argue there is life and then there is death, To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it.

First of all The Professor nowhere makes a statement that death is the opposite of life. Again check the Student’s logic: There is absence of life on the Moon, so according to the Student, there is Death on the Moon. Wow, the Student is an absolute genius!!! I am expecting a thesis on the existence of death on the Moon. What crap?

Student: Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.

Really? I didn’t know that science couldn’t explain electricity and magnetism. I guess the Student has missed quite a few science classes during his school days.

Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)
Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.)

Evolution is a slow, continuous, cumulative process. It will take a hundred years if not a thousand years to perceive a change. The life period of an average human being is only 60 years. So isn't it logically incorrect of the Student to ask the Professor, if he has observed the process of evolution at work.

And as for evidence of evolution, one word: Fossils. Oh also the genes of animals belonging to different species are quite similar to each other.

Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir.

Again the Student’s logic is fallacious. That the Professor is able to reply coherently to his questions is not this by itself proof of a brain. The Professor is obviously qualified with at least Bachelors degree if not a Masters or Doctorate to be teaching. As far as I know, that would do require a brain.

The dialogue can be used to “prove” the existence of, among many others, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, and the Celestial Teapot. In the dialogue, just replace the instances of the word God with any of the three above and voila!

I doubt how many people would not ridicule a person who believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn or the Celestial Teapot. C'mon, you would at least give a wry smile and call the person a nutcase. And yet, if a person believes in God, everyone else is expected to respect their religious sentiment and not make fun of it.

Awaiting a reply,

An Atheist

Pidology

2008-03-16T18:48:00.003+05:30

Finally folks, you get to read the thoughts of the great Lord Pidog.

Lord Nihlus Pi Dog Says:

● In Life there are certain

✔ Questions not worth asking.

✔ Answers not worth chasing.

● If it's your fate to change fate then what can stop you?(If there is fate.)

● There is randomness in order and a order in randomness.

● Chaos is nothing but random order.

● Society is a tool for the non powerful who know their power to control the powerful who don't know their power.

● The only intransigent thing in life is transience.

● Life is transient, that's the beauty of it.

● Succeeding is great but knowing where you will is greater.

● It's easy to be wise you just need to know how.

● There is only one way from the top.

● No matter how many people you love, no matter how many people love you, when it really comes down to it, you are alone in this world.

● We don't determine our birth. We don't determine our death. Why then do we try to determine what happens in between?

Answer: Because we are humans!

● Is there anything as good or bad?

● Which is better? Being a Specialist or a Generalist.

● Sometimes we have to do things not because we want to but because we have to.

● In Life, tough decisions have to be taken whether you like it or not. The sooner you accept this fact the better it is for you.

● What would be the best way to show your contempt to something but by conquering it.

● We are what we are because of what we are.

● From the darkest of times come the brightest of lights (sort of redundant).

● Sometimes we do not mean what we mean and mean what we don't mean.

● The world is going to the dogs and i am one of them.

● The hardest thing in life is to be honest with oneself and the easiest is to lie.

● What will happen if we know what is going to happen?

● Which is worse? Consciously doing the wrong thing for the right reasons or doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.

● The greatest gift that you can offer a person is not that you can ascend the highest peaks but that you can descend to the deepest nadirs.

● Winners "write" history.

● History judges you not by How but by What.

● Your determination to do something is not shown by what your are willing to give up but by what your are willing to take up.

● The worse thing in life is not that giving up but refusing to take up.

● Which is better? Is it to "Stand and Fight" and Fall or to "Live Today, Fight Tomorrow" and Win.

● How much Grey matter you have determines how much you think about Grey area's.

● What is reality but our assumption that it something is real.

● Between the Deep Blue Sea and the Devil, choose the Devil at least you have a chance of making a deal.

● Sometimes to Win is to Lose and to Lose is to Win.

● It is sometimes better to Lose than to Win.

● Ignorance is sometimes better than knowledge.

● It is the principle of the thing rather than the thing itself that matters.

● If there had been no Goliath, there would have been no David.

● The Weak shall die and the Strong shall survive.

● The most barbaric are the most civilized and reverse holds as well.

● Death is not the end of Life, but its continuation.

● Nobody Wins in a War, the same goes for Life.

● Everyone Losses in a War, Life is the biggest War.

● I like journeys, but i don't like the biggest one of them all.

● Go to your deaths with your heads held high and with a laugh, after all it's what life is all about.

● Everyone has fears only the degree and the cause of fear varies.

● The two greatest sin's of the world Self-Deception and Self-Denial.

● Do we know all the time why we do what we do and why we feel what we feel?

● If perfection is a myth, why chase it?

● Perfection is against the very existence of the universe.

● Desire is considered the root of all evil, but without desire how can anyone live?

● If it is not about Winning or Losing, but only about how good a fight you put up, why is Winning given so much importance?

● If Winning is a habit (it should also hold true for Losing), then how does Losing become the first step to Success.

● That all truths are facts and all facts are truths is by itself a truth and a fact.

Nations, Nationality and Patriotism

2008-01-10T21:54:00.000+05:30

Nation, that absurd political idea that has, is, and causing so many problems for mankind, ever since it’s inception along with the growth of the civilizations.

Why do I call the idea of nation and nationality absurd? Well, the reasons are fairly simple. It is primarily an idea that was used to by the noblesse to capture and retain their power and wealth. Nations and nationality are at any level just a political idea and holds no other higher meaning. And, nationality does not mean that you have to dislike (nor hate) other countries.

Patriotism and nationality are being increasingly cited as reasons by governments across the world to extend support to their citizen(s), even though the person(s) may indeed be guilty. These are also increasingly being cited as reasons by people to oppose the ideas that other countries put forth and in most cases to look down upon other countries.

Mankind has spilled blood over this idea. I can understand if you are fighting over an area rich in natural resources. But mankind has spilled blood even over areas that are inhospitable and lack any kind of natural resources. Areas that only hold symbolic meaning and sometimes areas that are actually a loss are also defended. Why? Because there is a perception of difference of opinion.

All the differences of opinions among the 200 odd countries in the world evaporate if you take away the idea of nationality. In what way is a person from the continent of America any different from a person from the Asian continent? There is no difference.

Why shouldn’t an individual born in one country feel that his nationality is more that of another country? After all nations and nationality are just political ideas. But such an individual would be called unpatriotic.

And what is Patriotism anyway? Patriotism is an idea. It means not only to stand up for and stand by a country but more importantly for the ideas and principles behind that country. This is the true meaning of the word Patriotism.

Why have I stressed on the word country in the definition?

It is because; there is a difference between the “government of a country” and “country.” Many people have been misled to think that “government of a country” and “country” are the same. The first duty of a patriot is not the government of their country, not even towards his/her country but to the ideas and principles behind his/her country. A person truly becomes a patriot only if he/she is loyal to the the ideas and principles behind their country.

Also, patriotism does not mean and never meant that whatever your country does is correct and that whatever other countries do is wrong.

Just because, you were born in a country doesn’t mean that you have to feel patriotic towards it or have to identify yourself with the nationality of that country. Respect the country you were born in, if and only if it truly deserves it.

But if there is any other country that you can identify yourself with, go ahead and identify yourself by that country. And if you feel patriotic towards a country other than in which you were not born in, you are not unpatriotic.

Culture

2007-12-18T23:20:00.000+05:30

Culture means the complete lifestyle of a person, including but not limited to occupation, types of food consumed, how the food is cooked, language, dress style, laws, values, beliefs, religion, travel, construction methods, the materials used in the construction and so on.

The above definition encompasses all the various definitions that there are on culture.

Why am I stressing on the definition of culture? Because, so many people seem to use this word without knowing what the word stands for.

Especially, Indians seem to use this word more than the people from any other nationalities. They use it to raise a hue and cry about the changing dressing styles, the changing values, and generally for everything which is not to their taste. [I have used the word they when referring to Indians, even though I am a naturalized citizen of India because: I being the Emperor of the Universe, am a citizen of the Universe at large and cannot be categorized as a citizen of any one particular region.]

When someone wears jeans, people say it is not Indian culture to wear jeans. My question is what is Indian culture? Which point in India’s history, would you use as the benchmark for defining “Indian Culture”? Culture changes with time. The practices and beliefs practices today were not followed hundred years ago. And the practices that were followed a hundred years ago were not followed three hundred years ago and it goes on. So, which would be “Indian Culture”? The practices followed today? Or the one’s practiced hundred years ago?

The answer, I mostly get is that we are following the same practices that were followed a hundred years ago. Really? You didn’t have IT companies back then. So, working in an IT company is against “Indian Culture”. We didn’t have automobiles back then or cell phones, or television, or credit cards… and the list is endless. All these things are against the “Indian Culture”. Yet how many people do you see protesting against these? Not a single person!!!! Yet, you have people protesting that English should not be used in official documents, food chains should not open, and some stuff like that.

I was watching a program were two group of people were debating over whether not wearing dhoti is against “Indian Culture”. The whole thing left a bad taste in mouth. Little did the Pro-dhoti group or for that matter anyone else did not notice was that the medium (television) through which they were airing their views by itself is not “Indian Culture”.

Democracy as practiced now is also not an “Indian Culture” (The idea of democracy is from the Ancient Rome.). India since it’s inception by the great Chandragupta Maurya with the assistance of the even greater Chanakya (Who’s idea it was to create a large empire in the subcontinent.) was always ruled by a king in its long history until British Raj and became a true democracy only after the independence (In some ways, India is still not a democracy.). Yet, Indians never tire of shouting their throats hoarse that India is the largest democracy.

Show some consistency people!!!!!!!!

I end by saying that Culture is not permanent. It is unfixed, and ever-changing. It must change with time or will stagnate, decay and decompose everything that it touches. Culture absorbs new things, both modifying itself and that which it absorbs into a new entity constantly.

The idea of this post is not to say that you have to accept everything that is new and reject everything that is old. The idea is learn to accept change and do not stand in the way of progress saying something is not culture just because it is not to your taste.

Marriage

2007-12-06T13:55:00.000+05:30

Marriages are made in heavens goes a saying. You can find some version of this in almost all cultures (More about cultures in a later blog.). Since, scientific evidence for the “heavens” is lacking, I as a rationale being cannot accept the first statement. (I am too good….. ain’t I?)

I have quite a few arguments for taking the active stance, which I have taken, against Marriage.
These have been listed below:

Reasoning 1:

Marriage is the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies

The above is the definition I got from dictionary.com. It is also very close to the meaning given in my copy of the oxford dictionary.

Let me make it clear that I am not against love or more specifically romance. All I am against is the institution that is marriage.

Most of you may ask what is the difference. There is and it is quite simple, at least to me.
You have friends, right? You don’t have a ceremony to declare that this is my friend. Nor do you have a ceremony to say; my friend and I are parting ways, we are no longer friends.

See the logic? So, why have a ceremony to declare someone is your husband or wife?

Reasoning 2:

I have been asking the question “Why should one necessarily get married?” to almost everyone I know. The answer is get is “To share my life.” Or “ Imagine, when you are 50-60 yrs old. You will want someone to love and be close with.”

These answers all point to one thing: Fear. Yeah, yeah, I know. Most of you, will not agree with me. Some of you are probably thinking of some nice juicy words and lines for the comments. But people, sadly the truth is that it is true. It is fear of being alone that drives most people to marriage.

So, if you are really strong you will not have fear of being alone. Hence, you need not marry at all. This is not to say that all married people are weak, but most are.

Reasoning 3:

This is a reasoning to which great person (read, my elder sister) awakened me. I did a little research of my own and the finding did corroborate the conclusion to which I had already arrived.

This is again another major reason why many people in India marry. They want to have sex. I can hear the boos and nay’s. But people it is the sad truth about our culture. It is indeed a sad insight into our culture. We Indians push the entire topic of sex under the carpet. Have you seen any family (read, parents and children) having an open conversation about this topic? No, I have till date not come across such a situation. The result is a country full of sex-obsessed individuals. And, this is the country where marriage is considered sacred. Pathetic.

There is another reason why many men marry. They just want a unpaid house keeper who will also double up as their emotional support. A person who will put up with them no matter what they do.

Neither are the woman any more pious than men. What else does a woman want from a husband? They want a free meal. A person who will jump up to defend them, even for the most stupidest thing they do. And, the social status associated with marriage. Most women also follow the social norm that the better your spouse is (financially and socially), the better for you.

Conclusion:

I do not oppose marriage, when the people involved know each other, love each other and more importantly have respect for each other. But I do oppose people getting married for the sake of getting married.

I have not spoken about the survival of the species/procreation argument for marriage as it is a non-issue. We do not have any responsibility to increase our numbers.

Sisters

2007-11-25T17:53:00.001+05:30

Sisters, who can live with them or without them?

It is my personal opinion that all sisters should have a statutory warning label like they do on the cigarette packets. You may ask, why then do you still continue the relationship? Well, it is the same reason as why people continue to smoke, drink, and do drugs even though they know about their ill hazards. Believe me it is addictive and you will want to have more and more sisters. The worst part is there are no rehab centers for people like me!!

I have so many sisters that I have started loosing count. Okay, I am exaggerating by a huge margin here; the actual count is in the range of eight.

Read below to know how these sisters of mine make my life funny, happy, and sometimes drive me to utter insanity. In short, they add spice to my life.

This is what my elder sister (She is an darling [for lack of a better word] angel.) has made and I dread will continue to make me do.

I was once dumb enough to agree, when my sister asked me if I could go along with her for shopping (translation: It simply means they[girls] need a person who will drive her around, carry her bags, doesn’t comment on the time or on the choice of her tastes.). And, she even told me that she hadn’t seriously shopped (translation: which means, buying clothes that they[girls] can but will not wear for a lifetime) in a long time (translation: means about around a month). She made me wait in front of the dressing room with a whole bunch of clothes dumped on me! Imagine, my plight. And, guess what? It took her only two and half hours to decide on her clothes. She in between asked me if I was feeling embarrassed? Duh! What kind of a dumb question is that? Of course I was embarrassed. Thankfully she didn’t ask me to pay for her clothes, which was a big relief. The icing on the cake was this statement by her as we were going home: “I thought we could buy something for you too. But I guess there is no time, I have some work to do.”

The next one is even better. Her cooking. I seriously pity the person who is going to marry my sister. Once, she decided to make Poori (a south Indian dish). It was so hard that even my dog had difficulty eating it. Then there is this Thakkali Sadam that she made (I’ll never forget this once for the rest of my life.). She used a pressure cooker. The result: the rice at the bottom was roasted, on the top it was somewhere between uncooked and half-cooked. There was this tiny layer in between that was cooked properly. I can’t even today understand how she got it. Then she literally force feed the whole thing to me while laughing uncontrollably.

Now, for the sister who really spices up my life. She was my classmate in college and now my most adorable younger sister. How does she spice up my life? Well, she calls up at 11 in the night (all most every day) and cringes about something or the other. Well, what will any good brother do? Cheer her up. Well, that’s what I do. It usually takes an hour or so and by the time we say bye, her spirits are up or at least that’s what she says. Finally, I go to bed feeling good about myself. The next day around lunchtime I get a message from her saying that she’s still feeling low. This happens everytime. Isn't that enough to drive even a sane man to insanity; imagine what it will do to an already insane person?

Next, is the only second person that almost agrees with all most of my ideas (The first of course being my darling angel.). She’s crazy but on a lower scale then me though. Well, she irritates me by commenting on my laziness every time we speak. I have told her many times to give it a rest but she keeps continuing. It drives me nuts.

Then there is this sister of mine, whom I got to know mostly because we kept and keep getting into arguments (pointless arguments according to her, which I don’t agree with). Have you ever known anyone who laughs when someone is discussing a serious issue with them or scolding them? Well, she does precisely that. Effect, I get more gray hairs, and my blood pressure shoots up.

Then are these two classmates from my college again who are now my sisters. Both are pretty okay. One does sort of drive me mad because she never listens to me. I go mad of asking her the same question and getting the same reply that she still hasn’t done what she was supposed to do. I think I should be happy, as things would have been worse if she had been working in town. And the other sister is the only one of my sisters, who I think has up to now never tried to drive me crazy (Excepting of course the one time she nearly came close to the precipice of insanity but I pushed her back to sanity. But, i pushed her back to sanity, becasue she was not ready yet for insanity.).

Next is the sister that made and makes me very happy. Why? She’s is the third person, who agrees with most of the things I say. But, even she doesn’t agree with me on everything. I guess I am that rare breed of genius who comes along once in a millennium. Understanding, accepting, and appreciating such a genius like myself itself requires a kind of genius that comes along only once in a hundred years. So, back to the topic of discussion. Don’t worry she is not even near the vicinity of the area of what may and can be classified as the lower zones of my genius. Oh, I almost forgot to mention, how she drove me crazy. Well, it made to me so happy to find another person who is like me, that I went crazy.

I have saved the best for the last. Because, this next sister of mine is the winner hands down. No arguments about it. Why? She very nearly killed me by giving me a heart attack. I know, what you guys would be thinking. That she probably brought home some guy and introduced him as her boy friend. No, that wouldn’t give anyone a heart attack would it? C’mon people have some imagination. Remember people she is my sister. Can’t guess still, here’s the answer. She’s recently taken to calling me “anna”(Tamil, for elder brother). Now, you are probably wondering why she calling me anna gave me a heart attack. Because, until about seven-eight years ago, we both used to literally have wrestling matches with each other (serious ones, mind you). Come to think of it, I guess theses wrestling matches do partially explain some of my hair loss. Okay, enough about my hair loss problems, back to the story. You might wonder, didn’t you anticipate this, in the intervening years? See, in between, we didn’t get to meet each other lot because of my studies (Yeah, right) and generally we lost contact. So imagine, how would it be when suddenly she called me anna? I know what you people are thinking? You probably want to meet my sister to congratulate her on nearly killing me. But, sorry I am not going to name her so you people can never know who she is. (Sorry sis, you have to remain anonymous. But you know who you are and so you know how many people would have come to look up on you as a savior had you managed to kill me.) Evil, ain't I?

Note:

Not all sisters are like mine nor do I guarantee that they all would not be so. I have chosen to write only how they drive me crazy. They of course also sometimes make me very happy. I have written about the instances when they drive me mad not because of any lack of instances where they have made me happy but because I have chosen not mention these instances.

Special Note to Girls:

The intention of this blog is not to scare any brother into disowning his sisters. I till date have not disowned a single sister. I do not and will not take responsibility if any brother does so. As it is up to each individual on how he interprets this blog. But, I guess you all know that you have nothing to fear from one small tiny little blog. There are about hundreds of thousands of warning out there about marriage. Yet, men keep getting married.

Homosexuality

2007-11-22T23:37:00.000+05:30

Why have I written a blog on homosexuality? Well, because I have been asked by quite a few people if I am a homosexual. I don't mind or care how many people ask me how many times but what disgusted and disgusts me is that the question is asked with a sneer or in derogatory tone (expect by the one person I really really really really really care about.). So, it set me off thinking that should probably write something about the whole issue. Read on...

The one thing that immediately strikes me is: Philadelphia. Why? Because, it is the one single movie that makes me cry every single time I watch it. The characters are so beautifully created that the whole film just gets recorded into your mind. And, I personally consider it to be the best movie on homosexuality.

Now, for the main issue.

In India, which is where I live incidentally, the whole issue is avoided. People just don’t want to discuss about it. They would rather have the whole thing swept under the carpet like many other things are done.

What is most depressing is that even well educated, otherwise broadminded people too shrink away from discussing the issue. Sometimes, they even pass the most disgusting jokes on the issue.

This is a country that HAD a long history of tolerance. Now, look at the pathetic state of affairs Okay, I am digressing here. More about the deplorable state of affairs in a later blog.

First of all what people, I am sad to say, don’t understand is that homosexuality is not a disease nor is it some kind of a sin. No religion ever says anything against homosexuality. Yet, the religious leaders during medieval ages and even now continue to twist the minds of people against it. Why? Because, they are demagogues.

Discriminating against homosexuality is racism. Please think before you act, they are people just like you. They too have jobs, friends, families, and ideals just like you. Why then do you want to discriminate against them? Don’t they have every right to live, as they want to, just like you do?

Criminals and terrorist are pardoned and yet these people who have not done anything wrong are harassed and jailed. What kind of a society is this? Did you know that marriage between homosexual is considered illegal is India? And guess what people, this law was not formulated by us but was constituted under the British Raj and it is still in continued use today with no change. How about that people? For a country that has tried to remove all traces of its colonial days, it still uses the same arcane laws that were setup during that period. This just goes to show how hypocritical we Indians really are about on everything.

Personally, I believe that all those closet homosexual should come out and make a stance. Marriages between homosexuals should be made legal.

If you are a person who is against homosexuality, I am going to ask you to do a small favor. Go watch the movie Philadelphia.

Here is an link to another intresting blog on homosexuality. http://wingstoneverland.blogspot.com/2007/11/are-we-homo-sapience.html

What you can expect from this blog.

2007-11-21T16:09:00.000+05:30

This is kind of like a Introduction to a book that you read. Though this is a self-introduction. This blog has been created so that i can have some place put down my ideas(real crazy one, believe me) so that others can read them.
The logic of some of my reasoning may and sometimes will be baffling (sometimes even i can't undestand the reasoning of my statements!!!!!).
So, if you are not able to follow the chain of reasoning, leave it. Don't make me explain things that i myself can't understand.

Also, I absolutely love to argue. Infact, i argue with everyone about everything. So, if you too like arguing feel free to come in for an argument or two .

By the way, I am a avowed atheist and a hypocrite in all matters except my religious beliefs. And as my friends know, I am crazy and probably will be institutionalized in a couple of months/years. So, if suddenly the blog goes silent. Don't worry about me. I would probably have been safely locked up in some asylum.