Thanks to all the advertising by Hero Honda, there has been a surge in hockey watchers in India, both inside and outside the stadium. For a change, people could be seen talking about hockey. But after 3 consecutive defeats for the Indian team, the enthusiasm plunged. People had build very high expectations from the team after the hosts defeated Pakistan in their first game.
Considering the fact that team India is ranked 10th in the hockey, I really found their performance good. Their defense against Australia and Spain was sluggish which costed them huge defeats. But except for that, the team performed reasonably well. For a team which has historically depended on dribbling than on pace, the team adapted well to the newer ways. And I personally feel that Indian fans should rejoice the performance of the team. The team is learning and improving quickly. The coach Jose Brasa has done some really good work but it would take some time before standards of team can match those of nations like Holland, Germany and Australia. After all years of neglect and mis-management of the sport can't be undone overnight.
After all these months of cricket, it was quite a refreshing change to watch a new sport. I do occasionally watch lawn tennis and sometimes football, but after watching the recent matches, I liked hockey better. After all its our sport though shadowed by the influence of cricket in subcontinent. But I believe that if promoted well, hockey has the potential to grab attention of the people. The game is fast and with 70 minutes playing time and 90 minutes running time, it can fit well into the prime time zone. Lets hope that even after the world cup, the game continues to retain the attention that it has lately got.
Showing posts with label op-ed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label op-ed. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Sunday, November 1, 2009
A legacy named Indira
"Her story is a story of a woman pushed into the public eye by men, corrupted by power and assasinated by those she should have trusted best". (Sunday Times)
She is revered and despised in equal measures. She is the most recognized Indian in the world after Gandhi himself. Her leadership in the 1971 war was iconic. At the same time, she has been touted as the most controversial Prime Minister of all time. The emergency that she imposed is seen as the biggest spot on the Indian democracy.
So who is she for the generation which knows her only by the archives of the newspapers, books and some documentaries ?
While growing up as child, I had an image of a woman who was hungry for power, who toyed with democracy at her will. An image of someone totally averse to criticism. And it was because my grandfather was jailed during emergency for shouting anti-government slogans and the whole story looked so virtuous and glorious to me.
As I grew up, I came accross new information and facts. The more I get to know about her, the more I was intrigued. Her metamorphosis from a shy young woman to a stolid, imposing and fearsome ruler is spectacular. It was by a sudden chance that she became the Prime Minister and from there on started a dramatic journey of highs and lows.
I respect her for the vision that she uphold for India. She abolished the titles of Maharajas, nationalized the banks and other corporations. Her efforts saw India becoming a nuclear power. She was not averse to taking to any means to further the interests of India inside the coutry as well as else where.
But I am a critic of her pursuit to obtain absolute powers. Her brand of politics was quite opposite to that of her father. She is the one responsible for the dynastic nature of the Indian politics, for the interference of legislature with the judiaciary and bureaucracy. She was the one who led Khalistan grew to increase her control in Punjab and it was this very factor that caused her demise.
And for all these reasons, good or bad, she remanins a legacy to everyone in this country. A legacy named Indira.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Nobel to Obama
What work has Barack Obama done in 8 months of his presidency for which Mother Teresa took 30 years and which Gandhi could not finish in his lifetime ? I guess he has not attacked another country in these 8 months. He has also delivered a speech addressing Muslim nations in Cairo, probably a first for any US president and has shown 'intentions' of building cordial relations with them. He has taken a start in developing peaceful relations with Iran. He has also decided to close down the ill famed prison at Guantanamo Bay though the inmates would not be freed and the cases, some of which are highly dubitable, would continue.
On their website the committee has said that "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." There are some initiatives that he might have taken and for other few he might have shown intentions. But till now, nothing concrete has been delivered.
The committe has also said that "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population." To me, it looks that he has been honoured just for doing the right thing. Things which his predecessors failed to do. As the head of the most powerful nation of the world, he is expected to behave in the most responsible manner. Just because US under George Bush had destroyed 2 coutries doesn't mean that Obama should be applauded for not destroying another.
In any case, it is too early to honour him. Prizes like these are not meant to be bestowed just for showing the intentions. There are so many things which are yet to be done. He can probably start by giving a new headway to the Kyoto Protocol which has reached an impasse because of US' disinclination to ratify it. He can also start working up with the blue print for withdrawal of the US army from Iraq and Afghanistan though it does look highly improbably to me given the huge amount of oil reserves in Iraq and the strategic leverage that is offered by Afghanistan. In fact, it should be noted that the size of the troops in Afghanistan has increased after Obama has ascended the presidency.
Another aspect of the whole processes that this decision has exposed is the bias of the committee towards the developed nations. Though the committe has always denied this allegation (understandably). There have been several instances in the past when the prize was not awarded to a particular scientist but to others whose work have been related to his research. One name that instantly comes in my mind is that of Satyendra Nath Bose, the Indian physicist who along with Einstein gave the theory of Bose-Einstein condensate. It should also be noted that more than one Nobel prize has been given for the work related to Bose's work, the latest being 2001 Nobel Physics prize for advancng the Bose-Einstein condensate theory (quoting wikipedia here). This time also, the name of Morgan Tsvangirai, the Zimbabwean prime minister was in circulation for the peace prize for fighiting the tyranny of Robert Mugabe but it instead went to Obama.
What is more unfortunate is the fact that no other award of such repute has been established by any other institution or country and hence Nobel prize remains the only possible benchmark and a platform for achieving recognition. Even in India, we have Padme Shri, Padma Bhushan etc, but they have been distributed like freebies in the past. I would like to see greater prudence from the Indian government in distributing these awards so that they gain some significance (the way it has been done with Bharat Ratna and Gandhi Peace Prize). I don't know whether there are awards for rewarding the contribution to the science. But if there is not, then there should be one whose reputation is uncontestable.
I can also see one bright side to this. Obama would now, probably, have to live up to the expectations that have been thrusted on him after this award. I wonder if the same strategy could work on Osama as well.
On their website the committee has said that "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." There are some initiatives that he might have taken and for other few he might have shown intentions. But till now, nothing concrete has been delivered.
The committe has also said that "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population." To me, it looks that he has been honoured just for doing the right thing. Things which his predecessors failed to do. As the head of the most powerful nation of the world, he is expected to behave in the most responsible manner. Just because US under George Bush had destroyed 2 coutries doesn't mean that Obama should be applauded for not destroying another.
In any case, it is too early to honour him. Prizes like these are not meant to be bestowed just for showing the intentions. There are so many things which are yet to be done. He can probably start by giving a new headway to the Kyoto Protocol which has reached an impasse because of US' disinclination to ratify it. He can also start working up with the blue print for withdrawal of the US army from Iraq and Afghanistan though it does look highly improbably to me given the huge amount of oil reserves in Iraq and the strategic leverage that is offered by Afghanistan. In fact, it should be noted that the size of the troops in Afghanistan has increased after Obama has ascended the presidency.
Another aspect of the whole processes that this decision has exposed is the bias of the committee towards the developed nations. Though the committe has always denied this allegation (understandably). There have been several instances in the past when the prize was not awarded to a particular scientist but to others whose work have been related to his research. One name that instantly comes in my mind is that of Satyendra Nath Bose, the Indian physicist who along with Einstein gave the theory of Bose-Einstein condensate. It should also be noted that more than one Nobel prize has been given for the work related to Bose's work, the latest being 2001 Nobel Physics prize for advancng the Bose-Einstein condensate theory (quoting wikipedia here). This time also, the name of Morgan Tsvangirai, the Zimbabwean prime minister was in circulation for the peace prize for fighiting the tyranny of Robert Mugabe but it instead went to Obama.
What is more unfortunate is the fact that no other award of such repute has been established by any other institution or country and hence Nobel prize remains the only possible benchmark and a platform for achieving recognition. Even in India, we have Padme Shri, Padma Bhushan etc, but they have been distributed like freebies in the past. I would like to see greater prudence from the Indian government in distributing these awards so that they gain some significance (the way it has been done with Bharat Ratna and Gandhi Peace Prize). I don't know whether there are awards for rewarding the contribution to the science. But if there is not, then there should be one whose reputation is uncontestable.
I can also see one bright side to this. Obama would now, probably, have to live up to the expectations that have been thrusted on him after this award. I wonder if the same strategy could work on Osama as well.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
A beggar free Delhi
The world is not a right place to live in for those who don't have money. For long, its laws have been dictated by those who have money, by those who have power. Whether its a country, or a corporation or just a man, if you have power, you can make the world work on your terms. You can make your own laws. You can give your own judgements.
In the wake of the commonwealth games, it has been decided to make Delhi beggar free. Apparently, these beggars are a nuisance for the city. They don't give the right picture of the capital of this great nation. Hence, to make things right, they would be removed from the city. An adult caught begging would be sent to a jail. The children would be sent to juvenile homes. Consideration would however be shown to those who are caught for the first time for begging.
The people from the lowest economic strata and those who don't have any economy have always been dispensable. Most of these people are the migrants from the rural areas who are forced to come to the cities because of the fewer opportunities for earnings back home. This situation has aroused because of the continuous neglect of these rural areas by one government after the other. The major chunk of our resources are poured into the cities. And hence it is but natural for people to migrate there.
But the government has shown the intent that they are not keen on entertaining these people if they can't find themselves a source of living. It would have really called for some mammoth efforts to eradicate poverty from the city. Hence the government took a shortcut. They have instead start eradicating the poor.
It just leaves me wondering at the selfishness and hypocrisy of the affluent class. We want a clean city, a green city, a beggar less city for ourselves. We want the cheap labours at our home and industries. But we don't want the slums where they live. Its as if the mere reason for the existence of the poor in this country is to subsidize the life of the rich. We don't want their problems. We only want their services.
I just wish that the government reconsiders its decision. I agree that it is important to portray a nice picture of our country to the rest of the world. But do we want it at the expense of life of 1 lakh people. Think.
In the wake of the commonwealth games, it has been decided to make Delhi beggar free. Apparently, these beggars are a nuisance for the city. They don't give the right picture of the capital of this great nation. Hence, to make things right, they would be removed from the city. An adult caught begging would be sent to a jail. The children would be sent to juvenile homes. Consideration would however be shown to those who are caught for the first time for begging.
The people from the lowest economic strata and those who don't have any economy have always been dispensable. Most of these people are the migrants from the rural areas who are forced to come to the cities because of the fewer opportunities for earnings back home. This situation has aroused because of the continuous neglect of these rural areas by one government after the other. The major chunk of our resources are poured into the cities. And hence it is but natural for people to migrate there.
But the government has shown the intent that they are not keen on entertaining these people if they can't find themselves a source of living. It would have really called for some mammoth efforts to eradicate poverty from the city. Hence the government took a shortcut. They have instead start eradicating the poor.
It just leaves me wondering at the selfishness and hypocrisy of the affluent class. We want a clean city, a green city, a beggar less city for ourselves. We want the cheap labours at our home and industries. But we don't want the slums where they live. Its as if the mere reason for the existence of the poor in this country is to subsidize the life of the rich. We don't want their problems. We only want their services.
I just wish that the government reconsiders its decision. I agree that it is important to portray a nice picture of our country to the rest of the world. But do we want it at the expense of life of 1 lakh people. Think.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Secularism and Casteism
I have been meaning to write this post since quite a long time. And by long time, I mean the time before the fateful general elections were held, time before we witness one of the most dominating majority in the Lok Sabha in the recent years. It was the time when all the parties and alliances were battling it out for each and every Lok Sabha seat. It was the time when the allegations and counter allegations were at their zenith. BJP accusing Congress of 5 years of weak and inefficient administration. And the Congress calling BJP a non secular party.
Secularism. Its the word that has dominated the Indian politics since the time Lal Krishna Advani decided to embark that Rath Yatra. The word which was echoed again and again when Babri Masjid was demolished and when communal riots broke out in Bombay. The word which has reverberated in the corridors of Indian politics since the country saw Godhra burning. All over the place, there were hues and cries to form a secular government at centre. Alliances were made and broken because some parties were more secular than other.
So what does secularism means ? Wikipedia says that secularism is the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion and/or religious beliefs. I alternatively think that it means people should not be discriminated against or favoured on the basis of religion. All religions are equal. But in the recent years, a new variable has emerged which has made it necessary to revise this definition. And this variable is caste.
Caste is the new religion. And if not, it is definitely as important as religion the reason being it is the main divide among the people. You are no more a Hindu. You are now a Dalit or a Yadav or a Jat or a Gujjar or a Meena or a Patel or a Reddy or a Naidu. And it was really appalling to see how a politician like Mayawti can call herself secular or how a party like Congress can tag itself as a secular party after having divided the country through reservation. How is Congress more secular than BJP. Its not that I endorse Barbri Masjid demolition or the Gujrat riots. I mean that religion is no more the parameter for calling a party secular.
Casteism is the modern day equivalent of non secularism. It was the casteism which saw Gujjar taking on Meenas in Rajasthan. Names are no more the identities. Surnames are. You listen a surname and the first thing that comes into your mind is caste. Casteism was inherent to the Indian society for centuries. But it remained at a sub conscious level. But the political parties have brought it into our consciousness. Rulers of our country might not have realized the repercussions of playing that reservations card. But as a student I have realized it again and again. I realized it when I saw students taking on students on reservation. And I realize it every time when I hear the words "reserved category". Why are these people so adamant at diving us ? What is the cost that our country is paying for this imbecility ? What our country really needs is a government which is truly secular.
Secularism. Its the word that has dominated the Indian politics since the time Lal Krishna Advani decided to embark that Rath Yatra. The word which was echoed again and again when Babri Masjid was demolished and when communal riots broke out in Bombay. The word which has reverberated in the corridors of Indian politics since the country saw Godhra burning. All over the place, there were hues and cries to form a secular government at centre. Alliances were made and broken because some parties were more secular than other.
So what does secularism means ? Wikipedia says that secularism is the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion and/or religious beliefs. I alternatively think that it means people should not be discriminated against or favoured on the basis of religion. All religions are equal. But in the recent years, a new variable has emerged which has made it necessary to revise this definition. And this variable is caste.
Caste is the new religion. And if not, it is definitely as important as religion the reason being it is the main divide among the people. You are no more a Hindu. You are now a Dalit or a Yadav or a Jat or a Gujjar or a Meena or a Patel or a Reddy or a Naidu. And it was really appalling to see how a politician like Mayawti can call herself secular or how a party like Congress can tag itself as a secular party after having divided the country through reservation. How is Congress more secular than BJP. Its not that I endorse Barbri Masjid demolition or the Gujrat riots. I mean that religion is no more the parameter for calling a party secular.
Casteism is the modern day equivalent of non secularism. It was the casteism which saw Gujjar taking on Meenas in Rajasthan. Names are no more the identities. Surnames are. You listen a surname and the first thing that comes into your mind is caste. Casteism was inherent to the Indian society for centuries. But it remained at a sub conscious level. But the political parties have brought it into our consciousness. Rulers of our country might not have realized the repercussions of playing that reservations card. But as a student I have realized it again and again. I realized it when I saw students taking on students on reservation. And I realize it every time when I hear the words "reserved category". Why are these people so adamant at diving us ? What is the cost that our country is paying for this imbecility ? What our country really needs is a government which is truly secular.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Breaking News..
Breaking News: Harry Potter lives on................
After months of excitement, this was possibly the least expected ending for my curiosity. For quite a time, I had avoided reading news concerning Potter series in the papers so as not to accidently step on to any speculations. But I just couldnt manage to avoid the news. All the channels were flooded with the news of the endings. Some of them had even got some speed readers so as to be the first one to tell the ending. It seemed that all the television world has been swooped by the wizard who survived.
Same kind of scenario could be witnessed when the millenium marriage of Abhishek Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai took place. The news was everywhere. It seemed that all other news have dried up. No deaths, no disputes, no burglary, no politics. Only the Abhi-Ash marriage.
There was a time when I use to wait for the news at 8 (the times when I used to watch Doordarshan). All the happenings of the day put up succintly in half an hour. But slowly with the advent of 24 hours news channel, whole scenario changed up drastically. The whole journalism thing seems to lose up its motive. The only motive now is to grab more and more viewers anyhow in the cut-throat satellite television industry. Every news is tried to make sensational. No human touch left, everything is pure business. Griefs and miseries are shown but they are always attached with the tag of exclusive. And in this race of being exclusive, they have tried everything, sting operations(sometimes genuine and sometimes framed), shows showing fradulent sadhus being beaten up, crime reporters and so on. And in all this, they have even compromised their quality. The calm and poised Salma Sultan, Shammi Narang, Tejeshwar Singh have been replaced by the modern day theatrical heroes and heroines which could be seen confronting all the interviewees with the same cliche 'Kaisa lag raha hai aapko'. It doesnt make any difference whether they are interviewing a winning captain or an ailing widow. They are just professionals. They are no longer carrier of the public consensus. They are merely the informers.
But I wouldn't definitely take all the credits away from them. There have been times when they have stirred up public opinions for a socially good cause(like in Jessica Lal murder case). But more and more such initiaves need to be taken. They have to become a medium for carrying out the public discourse, a medium to carry voices of the individuals to the masses, a medium for providing unbiased information to the people. They are the pillars of democracy and they need to function well in order to keep the great democratic engine going.
After months of excitement, this was possibly the least expected ending for my curiosity. For quite a time, I had avoided reading news concerning Potter series in the papers so as not to accidently step on to any speculations. But I just couldnt manage to avoid the news. All the channels were flooded with the news of the endings. Some of them had even got some speed readers so as to be the first one to tell the ending. It seemed that all the television world has been swooped by the wizard who survived.
Same kind of scenario could be witnessed when the millenium marriage of Abhishek Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai took place. The news was everywhere. It seemed that all other news have dried up. No deaths, no disputes, no burglary, no politics. Only the Abhi-Ash marriage.
There was a time when I use to wait for the news at 8 (the times when I used to watch Doordarshan). All the happenings of the day put up succintly in half an hour. But slowly with the advent of 24 hours news channel, whole scenario changed up drastically. The whole journalism thing seems to lose up its motive. The only motive now is to grab more and more viewers anyhow in the cut-throat satellite television industry. Every news is tried to make sensational. No human touch left, everything is pure business. Griefs and miseries are shown but they are always attached with the tag of exclusive. And in this race of being exclusive, they have tried everything, sting operations(sometimes genuine and sometimes framed), shows showing fradulent sadhus being beaten up, crime reporters and so on. And in all this, they have even compromised their quality. The calm and poised Salma Sultan, Shammi Narang, Tejeshwar Singh have been replaced by the modern day theatrical heroes and heroines which could be seen confronting all the interviewees with the same cliche 'Kaisa lag raha hai aapko'. It doesnt make any difference whether they are interviewing a winning captain or an ailing widow. They are just professionals. They are no longer carrier of the public consensus. They are merely the informers.
But I wouldn't definitely take all the credits away from them. There have been times when they have stirred up public opinions for a socially good cause(like in Jessica Lal murder case). But more and more such initiaves need to be taken. They have to become a medium for carrying out the public discourse, a medium to carry voices of the individuals to the masses, a medium for providing unbiased information to the people. They are the pillars of democracy and they need to function well in order to keep the great democratic engine going.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Communism in India...
In the news, ruling party in Kerala has been accused of giving away land (including those which were declared ecologically fragile) to the real state developers. The video of the channel showed the natives resenting against the decisions. The news was reminiscent of what had happened earlier in Singur.
The commonality in both the incidences is that the ruling party was none other than our very own CPI. So is the party going for an image makeover or what. Isn't the poor supposed to be the beneficiary in a communist rule. But what has happened in both these states is ironical. The Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government justified their step on the grounds of industrializing the resourceful state. But in the process, the money was flowing from poor to the rich. The land at Singur which is just 50 km from Kolkata was been given to Tatas at very petty prices at the cost of poor people's livelihood. And the most ironical fact is that the site has been proposed for the manufacturing of the NANO- India's cheapest car.
So the question which arises in my naive mind is what exactly are the ideologies of the CPI. Is this is what communism really is? The sight of Communists fighting with their Communist propaganda at the centre but at the same time being indifferent to the plight of the poor in their own state is very frustrating. And what baffles me most is the adamance with which the party has stuck to their resolution of opposing the Nuclear Deal with US just beacause it is a capitalist economy.
The CPI, as it looks has gone all the way to distort the Communist dogma, as much as possible to suit them but at the same time reviving it at times and again to make grounds for their otherwise baseless oppositions. I feel its time that the party should incorporate some changes in their otherwise obsolete ideologies so as to justiy the need for some form of capitalism and also to play some meaningful role in the national politics.
The commonality in both the incidences is that the ruling party was none other than our very own CPI. So is the party going for an image makeover or what. Isn't the poor supposed to be the beneficiary in a communist rule. But what has happened in both these states is ironical. The Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government justified their step on the grounds of industrializing the resourceful state. But in the process, the money was flowing from poor to the rich. The land at Singur which is just 50 km from Kolkata was been given to Tatas at very petty prices at the cost of poor people's livelihood. And the most ironical fact is that the site has been proposed for the manufacturing of the NANO- India's cheapest car.
So the question which arises in my naive mind is what exactly are the ideologies of the CPI. Is this is what communism really is? The sight of Communists fighting with their Communist propaganda at the centre but at the same time being indifferent to the plight of the poor in their own state is very frustrating. And what baffles me most is the adamance with which the party has stuck to their resolution of opposing the Nuclear Deal with US just beacause it is a capitalist economy.
The CPI, as it looks has gone all the way to distort the Communist dogma, as much as possible to suit them but at the same time reviving it at times and again to make grounds for their otherwise baseless oppositions. I feel its time that the party should incorporate some changes in their otherwise obsolete ideologies so as to justiy the need for some form of capitalism and also to play some meaningful role in the national politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
