Since the Congress-led UPA began its second term in office Inclusive Growth seems to be the most preferred two words in every minister’s vocabulary. Ask any question and the answer begins and ends with Inclusive Growth. Sounds nice, but is there much substance to it? I doubt.
I doubt it because of the sentence that immediately follows Inclusive Growth. It was first Kapil Sibal, who after talking of unshackling education in the country said, “I will do my best but can’t guarantee results for all participants in the process have to deliver.” It sounded odd to me then but I gave him the benefit of doubt, knowing how things work in India.
Then came the Budget and Pranab Mukherjee’s noises after presenting it. In reply to almost every question related to development and growth, our dear Finance Minister’s reply either began or ended with, “I will do my best but can’t guarantee results for all participants in the process have to deliver.”
That’s when it stuck me. This was the Congress-led UPA government’s latest game plan when they say Inclusive Growth. Promise a lot and deliver nothing, and if questioned at the end of the five years on their failure to deliver on promises, twist the Inclusive Growth theory and say, “We tried out best but all participants in the process did not cooperate and failed to deliver.”
To me the term Inclusive Growth in itself is spurious coming from political constituents who have been ruling the country for the past 60-odd years. So now when they talk of Inclusive Growth, am I to assume that they are admitting until now all their efforts and policies lacked the spirit of inclusiveness?
No point in writing thousands of words but simply put: This government led by the Congress looks all set to take forward its Dole Politics, i.e., buying votes through apparent acts of charity. And why won’t they, for didn’t this government towards the end of its first term spend more than Rs.100,000 crore of taxpayer money to win another term in office?
So friends, be prepared for more Indians turning into beggars, for that’s what this government is trying to do, in the name of Inclusive Growth create a country of beggars whose votes can be bought for a few rupees every five years to return to power and rip this country of its last penny. Jai Ho!
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
Why?
Why is it that when one says love
People think sex
Why is it that when one says doing good
People think charity
Why is it that when one says peace
People think cowardice
Why is it that when one says silence
People think dumb
Why is it that when one says rules
People think bend
Why is it that when one says respect
People refuse to think
And why is it that when one says enough
People think failure
People think sex
Why is it that when one says doing good
People think charity
Why is it that when one says peace
People think cowardice
Why is it that when one says silence
People think dumb
Why is it that when one says rules
People think bend
Why is it that when one says respect
People refuse to think
And why is it that when one says enough
People think failure
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Roger wins Wimbledon, Andy Hearts
Roger Federer beat Andy Roddick in five grueling but absorbing sets on Wimbledon center court Sunday. That is the synopsis. The actual more than four-hour marathon tells a different tale of grit, determination, desire to win, willingness to fight until the other man drops dead, and above all the triumph of human spirit. And that cannot be captured in any synopsis.
Before and when the match began most of the world would have been rooting for Federer who was chasing a record 15th Grand slam title. That was though contrary to backing the underdog theory which generally prevails when a multi-time champion meets a two-time loser in the finals to the same opponent and a testimony of Federer’s ability to capture the imagination of a whole generation of tennis fans. Not even the great Pete Sampras had been able to capture the collective fancy of tennis fans as Federer has since Bjorn Borg retired in 1981.
And when Andy Roddick against the run of play captured the first set, the Federer millions, including me, groaned. The second set went on game until the tie-break where Roddick again was on the verge of consolidating 2-zip, leading 6-2 in the tie-break. But then the plot went awry for the former world number 1 and 2003 US Open champion and he lost 6 straight points to lose the tie-break and the set. Fedex had equalized.
The third set again went to a tie-break with Federer emerging winner, now leading the match 2-1. However, what was visible even at the third set was Roddick’s impressive play, with Federer failing to break the Roddick serve even once. And Roddick was playing some of the best tennis of his life.
In the fourth set, Roddick mounted a gamely challenge, breaking the Federer serve for the second time in the match to take the set. Federer’s inability to break the Roddick serve after four tough sets meant that Roddick was now favorite to win the match, given the fifth set had no tie-break
By the beginning of the fifth set, I in my heart had secretly started praying for a Roddick win and so must have many other Federer fans. And that was not because I suddenly stated disliking Roger. It was more because Andy was playing better tennis than Roger, and it’s always fair that the better player on the day wins.
The fifth set began with me now firmly rooting for Andy and what a set it was. A total of 30 riveting games played over more than 90 minutes with both players dipping into their years of experience to conjure one game win after another. And here Federer did show his class, whipping up aces at will. Both had their chances until the 30th game of the set, but failed to convert.
As the last game of the set got underway with Andy showing signs of cracking up, I guess the collective cries of viewers across continents of “Go Andy, you are almost there” would have increased. But alas, that was not to be. Fedex broke Andy’s serve for the first time in five sets that too in the last game of the match, to lift the cup, with a disconsolate but sportsman to the core Roddick watching.
The sight of Roddick watching Fedex lift the cup with moist eyes must have brought tears to the eyes of most viewers for Andy played like a true champion and deserved to win the title as much as Roger, if not more. But then sport is cruel and life always is not fair. And what better example can there be than Andy winning 39 games to Roger’s 38 in the match and yet ending up the loser.
To me Andy may have lost the match, but was as much a winner as Roger. And I hope that he retains his form until the US open, and maybe beat Roger in the finals, i.e., if Rafa is not yet back by then.
Before and when the match began most of the world would have been rooting for Federer who was chasing a record 15th Grand slam title. That was though contrary to backing the underdog theory which generally prevails when a multi-time champion meets a two-time loser in the finals to the same opponent and a testimony of Federer’s ability to capture the imagination of a whole generation of tennis fans. Not even the great Pete Sampras had been able to capture the collective fancy of tennis fans as Federer has since Bjorn Borg retired in 1981.
And when Andy Roddick against the run of play captured the first set, the Federer millions, including me, groaned. The second set went on game until the tie-break where Roddick again was on the verge of consolidating 2-zip, leading 6-2 in the tie-break. But then the plot went awry for the former world number 1 and 2003 US Open champion and he lost 6 straight points to lose the tie-break and the set. Fedex had equalized.
The third set again went to a tie-break with Federer emerging winner, now leading the match 2-1. However, what was visible even at the third set was Roddick’s impressive play, with Federer failing to break the Roddick serve even once. And Roddick was playing some of the best tennis of his life.
In the fourth set, Roddick mounted a gamely challenge, breaking the Federer serve for the second time in the match to take the set. Federer’s inability to break the Roddick serve after four tough sets meant that Roddick was now favorite to win the match, given the fifth set had no tie-break
By the beginning of the fifth set, I in my heart had secretly started praying for a Roddick win and so must have many other Federer fans. And that was not because I suddenly stated disliking Roger. It was more because Andy was playing better tennis than Roger, and it’s always fair that the better player on the day wins.
The fifth set began with me now firmly rooting for Andy and what a set it was. A total of 30 riveting games played over more than 90 minutes with both players dipping into their years of experience to conjure one game win after another. And here Federer did show his class, whipping up aces at will. Both had their chances until the 30th game of the set, but failed to convert.
As the last game of the set got underway with Andy showing signs of cracking up, I guess the collective cries of viewers across continents of “Go Andy, you are almost there” would have increased. But alas, that was not to be. Fedex broke Andy’s serve for the first time in five sets that too in the last game of the match, to lift the cup, with a disconsolate but sportsman to the core Roddick watching.
The sight of Roddick watching Fedex lift the cup with moist eyes must have brought tears to the eyes of most viewers for Andy played like a true champion and deserved to win the title as much as Roger, if not more. But then sport is cruel and life always is not fair. And what better example can there be than Andy winning 39 games to Roger’s 38 in the match and yet ending up the loser.
To me Andy may have lost the match, but was as much a winner as Roger. And I hope that he retains his form until the US open, and maybe beat Roger in the finals, i.e., if Rafa is not yet back by then.
Monday, June 15, 2009
India lost, so what?
The unthinkable has happened. Captain Marvel has lost his crown and mad Indians have started baying for his throne. But then what more can one expect of a nation that values success at any cost, but individually has failure written all over?
India lost to England and the media and its millions of news lapping rabid followers have started to bark. The media had already behaved like a responsible one by warming up with stories of rifts within the team even before India’s campaign got underway. And as the days go by, the bark is only going to get louder. Dhoni’s effigy has been burnt at Ranchi under 24 hours of defeat. And I won't be surprised if the effigies of other players are burnt too, stones pelted at their homes, and their near and dear ones humiliated.
And the single logic will be if you make the money you do, then you bloody well win. To me it’s more of anger at not being able to make the kind of money that some cricketers make than ire at the team having lost. Also, gamblers who foolishly betted on Team India thinking the other teams were just around to make Dhoni and his boys look good will vent out their frustration on having lost neat sums of money.
Advertisers and marketing professionals who backed Team India to win will also be spewing venom. And politicians will in all likelihood jump into to the fray to extract their pound of flesh.
Amid all this mess the real culprits responsible for India’s loss—the BCCI and the IPL—will walk free of much criticism for having milked these cricketers dry over 45 days of energy-sapping cricket in an alien land just 20 days before this World Cup.
Grow up India for every match cannot be won and Dhoni isn’t God. So be graceful, look above you selfish motives for grief, and allow the team its losses for if we look at the team’s performance since they won the T20 cup in 2007, they have won more often than lost. And all of us are allowed a few losses, some more than the others.
India lost to England and the media and its millions of news lapping rabid followers have started to bark. The media had already behaved like a responsible one by warming up with stories of rifts within the team even before India’s campaign got underway. And as the days go by, the bark is only going to get louder. Dhoni’s effigy has been burnt at Ranchi under 24 hours of defeat. And I won't be surprised if the effigies of other players are burnt too, stones pelted at their homes, and their near and dear ones humiliated.
And the single logic will be if you make the money you do, then you bloody well win. To me it’s more of anger at not being able to make the kind of money that some cricketers make than ire at the team having lost. Also, gamblers who foolishly betted on Team India thinking the other teams were just around to make Dhoni and his boys look good will vent out their frustration on having lost neat sums of money.
Advertisers and marketing professionals who backed Team India to win will also be spewing venom. And politicians will in all likelihood jump into to the fray to extract their pound of flesh.
Amid all this mess the real culprits responsible for India’s loss—the BCCI and the IPL—will walk free of much criticism for having milked these cricketers dry over 45 days of energy-sapping cricket in an alien land just 20 days before this World Cup.
Grow up India for every match cannot be won and Dhoni isn’t God. So be graceful, look above you selfish motives for grief, and allow the team its losses for if we look at the team’s performance since they won the T20 cup in 2007, they have won more often than lost. And all of us are allowed a few losses, some more than the others.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Slumdog: The Million Dollar Baby
Amitabh Bachchan kicked-off the debate whether Slumdog Millionaire made capital of India’s poverty by feeding Western audiences what they always want to see—An India so poor that kids run naked on its streets, bullock carts block traffic, and snake charmers sit at every possible corner to make a living. There was a huge brouhaha at that time with many of the so called intelligentsia panning Mr. Bachchan for holding such a narrow view.
One of the Indian actors in the movie, Irfaan Khan, waxed eloquent about how we should stop brushing reality under the carpet, while another star, Anil Kapoor, found nothing wrong in showing the Western world what they want to see. Giving people what they want for a price is marketing, right? It’s a small matter that both actors managed to get recognition in the West and now may be harboring Hollywood aspirations. And which actor is ever going to rail and rant against his/her movie?
By writing what I have, I am not saying that we need to sweep poverty under the carpet. It’s a different matter that even if I want to, that’s not going to happen. Take Mumbai for instance—60% of its people live in slums, i.e., about 12 million people. When a plane lands or takes off, the poverty is there for all to see—forget having to visit Dharavi.
But I do take umbrage of this poverty being packaged as a message of hope and sold to Western audiences. Yes, we are a predominantly poor nation. Yes, any foreigner who has visited the country knows about it. And I don’t think we have ever tried to sweep that fact under anything, less a carpet. In Mumbai, we even have slum tours—read Dharavi--for foreigners to marvel. Then to praise the work of foreigners coming to India, filming that poverty, and peddling it to a Western audience is not only disgusting, but rank repulsive, to say the least. And I am not questioning the art, but the subject and the premise.
I saw Slumdog Millionaire and found it to be nothing so earth shattering that it deserves to be nominated for 10 Oscars. To me it is a slickly made song and dance movie akin to any other Bollywood flick. Then for Danny Boyle and his team to be interviewed across channels, be part of panel discussions shows the intelligence of our esteemed media. And for Boyle to say he is open to all criticism is like a criminal on death role saying he is open to being hanged. Does he have a choice?
P.S. Slumdog Millionaire has grossed over $100 million world wide and is going strong.
One of the Indian actors in the movie, Irfaan Khan, waxed eloquent about how we should stop brushing reality under the carpet, while another star, Anil Kapoor, found nothing wrong in showing the Western world what they want to see. Giving people what they want for a price is marketing, right? It’s a small matter that both actors managed to get recognition in the West and now may be harboring Hollywood aspirations. And which actor is ever going to rail and rant against his/her movie?
By writing what I have, I am not saying that we need to sweep poverty under the carpet. It’s a different matter that even if I want to, that’s not going to happen. Take Mumbai for instance—60% of its people live in slums, i.e., about 12 million people. When a plane lands or takes off, the poverty is there for all to see—forget having to visit Dharavi.
But I do take umbrage of this poverty being packaged as a message of hope and sold to Western audiences. Yes, we are a predominantly poor nation. Yes, any foreigner who has visited the country knows about it. And I don’t think we have ever tried to sweep that fact under anything, less a carpet. In Mumbai, we even have slum tours—read Dharavi--for foreigners to marvel. Then to praise the work of foreigners coming to India, filming that poverty, and peddling it to a Western audience is not only disgusting, but rank repulsive, to say the least. And I am not questioning the art, but the subject and the premise.
I saw Slumdog Millionaire and found it to be nothing so earth shattering that it deserves to be nominated for 10 Oscars. To me it is a slickly made song and dance movie akin to any other Bollywood flick. Then for Danny Boyle and his team to be interviewed across channels, be part of panel discussions shows the intelligence of our esteemed media. And for Boyle to say he is open to all criticism is like a criminal on death role saying he is open to being hanged. Does he have a choice?
P.S. Slumdog Millionaire has grossed over $100 million world wide and is going strong.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Forget Pakistan, Kill The Kasab Within
Terrorists came, saw, and killed. That’s the story in a nutshell. So did they achieve all this without internal support? The answer is NO. Then why is it that we as a nation are so keen on getting Pakistan to admit guilt while doing nothing to catch and/or eliminate the facilitators of the attack at home? That is the question we should be asking our Government in particular and all political parties in general.
How does it matter whether Pakistan admits its complicity or not? How reasonable and sensible is it to expect cooperation from a people who could not be true to their own motherland, leading to the formation of Pakistan. And logically speaking is the guilty ever going to accept his/her crime, more so when the party is Pakistan?
Successive Indian governments have been demanding the extradition of Dawood Ibrahim, Masood Azhar, Mohammad Hafiz and many others. My question is what do we expect to achieve even if we manage to get them to India? We could not hang an Afzal Guru in spite of the highest court of the sentencing him to death. Then is the government telling us they would do so with Dawood and the gang if the highest court of the land was to sentence them to the gallows? I would say, please spin this yarn elsewhere other than India. Maybe you will find a few takers!
For a change, let’s forget Pakistan and stop giving so much importance to a near-bankrupt megalomaniac neighbor with regional aspirations. That country has always maintained: “I don’t care if I lose an eye, but will ensure that India loses both”. So instead of crying for Pakistan’s blood even if Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gets a cold, let’s find ways to set our house in order.
For starters, instead of trying to extradite Dawood, let’s go after his networks and cronies in India and finish them. Sitting in Karachi, Dawood will only be as effective in India as his network lets him be. No network, no Dawood in India. And I refuse to believe that our government does not realize this small fact. As a bonus let Pakistan enjoy Dawood, for a man who could not be faithful to his own motherland is never going to be faithful to anyone else.
The problem is if the government guns for Dawood’s network, a whole lot of white ants will start falling out of the woodwork of all political parties, including the one in power at the Center and in Maharashtra. If the government is serious, then finding proof and bring the guilty to book will not be difficult. But no government will even attempt, so all we will do is cry hoarse of Pakistan’s evil intentions and actions.
As I have written in many of my earlier blog posts, our problem is corruption. And all we commons can do is not subscribe to corruption to achieve our goals. The corrupt exist only because they have takers. But will we be willing to do so? There in lies the answer to all our problems. And I don't see us collectively as a nation doing anything to address this issue. Each one of us will individually swear that we are not corrupt, but collectively we are among the most corrupt nations on Earth. That is some achievement, I must say.
All we will do is fight over land, water, religion, caste, creed and many non-issues. And when a country stands so divided internally, then do we really need a Pakistan to destroy us? I would say no. In my opinion Pakistan should look to strengthen its economy, work for the betterment of its people instead of wasting time, money and energy on trying to destroy us. Leave that job to us, we are quiet capable of and willing to self destruct.
How does it matter whether Pakistan admits its complicity or not? How reasonable and sensible is it to expect cooperation from a people who could not be true to their own motherland, leading to the formation of Pakistan. And logically speaking is the guilty ever going to accept his/her crime, more so when the party is Pakistan?
Successive Indian governments have been demanding the extradition of Dawood Ibrahim, Masood Azhar, Mohammad Hafiz and many others. My question is what do we expect to achieve even if we manage to get them to India? We could not hang an Afzal Guru in spite of the highest court of the sentencing him to death. Then is the government telling us they would do so with Dawood and the gang if the highest court of the land was to sentence them to the gallows? I would say, please spin this yarn elsewhere other than India. Maybe you will find a few takers!
For a change, let’s forget Pakistan and stop giving so much importance to a near-bankrupt megalomaniac neighbor with regional aspirations. That country has always maintained: “I don’t care if I lose an eye, but will ensure that India loses both”. So instead of crying for Pakistan’s blood even if Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gets a cold, let’s find ways to set our house in order.
For starters, instead of trying to extradite Dawood, let’s go after his networks and cronies in India and finish them. Sitting in Karachi, Dawood will only be as effective in India as his network lets him be. No network, no Dawood in India. And I refuse to believe that our government does not realize this small fact. As a bonus let Pakistan enjoy Dawood, for a man who could not be faithful to his own motherland is never going to be faithful to anyone else.
The problem is if the government guns for Dawood’s network, a whole lot of white ants will start falling out of the woodwork of all political parties, including the one in power at the Center and in Maharashtra. If the government is serious, then finding proof and bring the guilty to book will not be difficult. But no government will even attempt, so all we will do is cry hoarse of Pakistan’s evil intentions and actions.
As I have written in many of my earlier blog posts, our problem is corruption. And all we commons can do is not subscribe to corruption to achieve our goals. The corrupt exist only because they have takers. But will we be willing to do so? There in lies the answer to all our problems. And I don't see us collectively as a nation doing anything to address this issue. Each one of us will individually swear that we are not corrupt, but collectively we are among the most corrupt nations on Earth. That is some achievement, I must say.
All we will do is fight over land, water, religion, caste, creed and many non-issues. And when a country stands so divided internally, then do we really need a Pakistan to destroy us? I would say no. In my opinion Pakistan should look to strengthen its economy, work for the betterment of its people instead of wasting time, money and energy on trying to destroy us. Leave that job to us, we are quiet capable of and willing to self destruct.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Mourning Over, It’s Back To Politics
Mumbai’s dead have barely been laid to rest and for politicians it’s back to business. Forty eight hours and counting, the country’s oldest political party, Congress, is yet to arrive at a consensus candidate to replace the outgoing chief minister in Maharashtra. For a country grappling for answers about the readiness and capability of our governments, central and states, to fight terror and protect its people, this impasse is extremely reassuring.
And more reassuring it must be to see one of its leaders on national television running down his party colleague as being not fit to be chief minister and the adding, as an afterthought, that he is not interested in being chief minister. I guess this leader in question is just trying to apply pressure on the party high command to act quickly and he has nothing but the good of the state and country in mind. It also must just be a matter of small detail that this very leader left a party that he had been with for decades to join the Congress three years ago, all because he was not made Chief Minister then.
But then the people of the state want him to be chief minister, and I am not saying this, but the venerable leader himself. And the leader’s language… very colourful, I must say. His style reminded me of a certain Raghu bhai in the movie Vaastav. For the uninitiated, Raghu bhai was enacted by Sanjay Dutt, who played the role of a gangster in the movie.
And to know that this very party is ruling the country is again very reassuring. But then our other political parties are also making hay while the sun shines. Each party is busy accusing the others of incompetence and concluding with the statement that it will do anything for the country, to protect the sovereignty of the country, and again as an afterthought, to protect the people of the land. Elections are round the corner is just coincidence.
If the Congress and its leaders can conduct business in such an exemplary manner amid all the people anger, then I must say our country is in safe hands. After all, our ancient texts do teach us that everything is predetermined, or a matter of destiny. Hence, we must believe that all those who have been felled by terror bullets and bombs until now were anyways destined to die, so why waste money on providing security to those who are anyways destined to leave their mortal cage at a destined time and place.
When one thinks of how our country has survived and progressed in the more than 60 years after independence, I am led to believe that God does exist. For if not, then there is no way on Earth that we could have survived as one country all these years. And that after we, as a people, including our politicians who are a reflection of our society, have done every possible thing to self-destruct.
At a time when the government should be focussed on securing our country from such attacks, we are witness to the same government using its resources in trying to quell the revolt in its own house. My question: How will a government and a party that are so divided be able to unite a country and protect it from outsiders? But then I seem to be forgetting that it is always about the power and never about the people. So what if on paper it is people power that is believed to make or break a democracy?
And more reassuring it must be to see one of its leaders on national television running down his party colleague as being not fit to be chief minister and the adding, as an afterthought, that he is not interested in being chief minister. I guess this leader in question is just trying to apply pressure on the party high command to act quickly and he has nothing but the good of the state and country in mind. It also must just be a matter of small detail that this very leader left a party that he had been with for decades to join the Congress three years ago, all because he was not made Chief Minister then.
But then the people of the state want him to be chief minister, and I am not saying this, but the venerable leader himself. And the leader’s language… very colourful, I must say. His style reminded me of a certain Raghu bhai in the movie Vaastav. For the uninitiated, Raghu bhai was enacted by Sanjay Dutt, who played the role of a gangster in the movie.
And to know that this very party is ruling the country is again very reassuring. But then our other political parties are also making hay while the sun shines. Each party is busy accusing the others of incompetence and concluding with the statement that it will do anything for the country, to protect the sovereignty of the country, and again as an afterthought, to protect the people of the land. Elections are round the corner is just coincidence.
If the Congress and its leaders can conduct business in such an exemplary manner amid all the people anger, then I must say our country is in safe hands. After all, our ancient texts do teach us that everything is predetermined, or a matter of destiny. Hence, we must believe that all those who have been felled by terror bullets and bombs until now were anyways destined to die, so why waste money on providing security to those who are anyways destined to leave their mortal cage at a destined time and place.
When one thinks of how our country has survived and progressed in the more than 60 years after independence, I am led to believe that God does exist. For if not, then there is no way on Earth that we could have survived as one country all these years. And that after we, as a people, including our politicians who are a reflection of our society, have done every possible thing to self-destruct.
At a time when the government should be focussed on securing our country from such attacks, we are witness to the same government using its resources in trying to quell the revolt in its own house. My question: How will a government and a party that are so divided be able to unite a country and protect it from outsiders? But then I seem to be forgetting that it is always about the power and never about the people. So what if on paper it is people power that is believed to make or break a democracy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)