Search

Search.

In the stillness of life, I search for movement,

In the pell-mell of life I search for silence.

In the burning deserts of life I search for shade,

In the comforting shades of life I search for challenges.

In the mighty planes of life I search for corners,

In the tiny corners of life I search for vastness.

In the shallow waters of life I search for knowledge,

In the deep oceans of life I search for ignorance.

In the unknown crowds of life I search for an identity,

In the known valleys of life I search for anonymity.

In the harsh reality of life I search for an illusion,

In the deceptive illusion of life I search for the truth.

In the disorderly array of life I search for perfection,

In this quest for perfection, I discover life.

Mumbai.

I am Mumbai. On the shores of Arabian sea, looking westward to the holy land of Mecca. Everyday thousands throng into my heart, all with dreams. Some big. Some small. But dreams nonetheless. I am not a city. I am an illusion. An illusion with bright lights and darker shadows. An illusion made of unreal stories and broken dreams. An illusion that is broken with every heartbeat and reinforced with every breath. As far as the eye can see, I see people of all colors and features. They all call me their own. I am not defined by a language or a religion. I am defined by a spirit that can not be defined.

I sing the tunes of the films that are made here. I wear the sweat of the mill workers who worked here. I  taste the hard work of dabbawallas who bring food to millions here. I believe in the faith of Mount Mary, Siddhivinayak and Haji Ali. I dance to the music of dandiya and the dhol of  Durga Puja. I wake up to the holy sounds of Azaans in Bombay Central and sleep to the quiet murmurs of the distant waterfalls in the ghats. I live vicariously through the youth of Fashion street and Colaba causeway. I relive my past  with the sounds of Bhindi Bazaar and the songs of the kolis. I smile at undying spirit of the kids who grow up on my streets. I am saddened  by the unending pursuit of money at Dalal Street.

Yes, I am an illusion. An illusion one can touch and feel and see. I am an illusion made up of millions of dreams. I am an illusion people live in and call their own. I... am Mumbai.

Facebook...a collectivist movement towards individualism?

So its been over three years that I have been hooked to Facebook (FB from now on). I use it to connect with my old friends and to get to know my new friends better. Being an avid user of FB I know that this social networking site tends to be addictive and I have had my days of logging into FB almost every hour to see what my friends are up to. I also admit that there were days, when I would spend a couple of hours in a day to come up with 'witty' status updates. But like any other fad, FB too has become secondary in my life now. And I can safely say that I can be objective in my views about this social networking site.

On surface it seems like that FB simply helps people connect to long lost friends, people with similar interests etc. But if we dig a little deeper, FB really caters to  three most basic needs of man-curiosity, the inherent want to show off and the need for attention.

Let's be honest, out of the 300 odd friends you have on your friend list...how many are you really interested in reconnecting with? More likely than not, you are simply curious to know what they are up to. How have they done in their lives? Are they married? If yes, then are they married to their college sweethearts? If not, then why not...etc? It is in our inherent nature to be curious about people you have known in your life. We are a curious lot and FB has simply made it easier to quench our curiosity.

But more than curiosity really FB gives an instant platform to show off. In fact, I call this, living for FB. What is the first thing people do after coming back from an expensive dinner at a high end restaurant? You start posting the pictures taken in the evening on your FB account. Be it an expensive dinner or a trip to some exotic part of the world, the first thing one tends to do or at least wants to do is sort out the thousands of pictures and upload the ones, in which you look the skinniest and the prettiest! In fact, some don't even have the decency or the patience to sort the pictures out, but instead end up uploading hundreds of pictures on FB.

Lastly, FB indulges our inherent need for attention. And I am as guilty as the person next to me. I have had days, when I left cryptic status updates so as to arouse curiosity of my friends and in turn being the center of attention for a few hours. There are people who make their lives completely public via status updates. So and so is off to Guam or so and so made chicken tikka masala are some examples of status updates, which are screaming for attention. And then you have those, who are not even polite enough to thank people personally for birthday wishes or other such wishes. I find it extremely rude, when someone just thanks everyone for those wishes by updating their status message. Come on, if someone has taken the time to remember your birthday and then made the effort to go to your FB page and wish you, the least the person deserves is a personal thank you on their profile wall. Also, a thank you via a status update is also a way to remind those who did not wish you on your birthday.

From being a reasonably elite social networking site to catering to over 400 million active users, FB has certainly come a long way. Of course, the reason, that FB is as popular as it is is because, people are curious, have an inherent want to show off and the need for attention.

All said, I will be the first to admit that FB has served its purpose as a social networking site. Many pages and groups have been formed, which highlight some social issue. Many protests, marches, news updates have been made via FB. The recent elections in Iran and the subsequent protests found publicity only via FB and similar social networking sites.

FB like any other social institution has made an impact on our lives. But if this institution should be used for promoting individual needs or if it should be used as a platform for a social change is entirely upon us.

Human race towards an evolutionary Cul-de-sac

The other day, I was reading the news and I came across an article, in which a reputable naturalist said that the Giant pandas should be allowed to die out. One can find his comments here. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/reputable-naturalist-says-we-should-let-pandas-die-out

According to him, these cute and cuddly animals have not been able to adapt themselves and therefore it makes more sense to simply let them die out.

Of course, I am no naturalist or an expert in this field. But, with my limited knowledge I can safely say that when an animal is endangered due to a loss of habitat, which is a result of human activities, it is difficult for me to fathom as to why the poor animal is being blamed for its own demise. However, the point of my piece is not whether what he said was acceptable or not. According to Packham, 'this species has gone down an evolutionary cul-de-sac'.

What struck me when I read this article was that if any species is headed towards an evolutionary cul-de-sac, it is in my opinion the human race.

I understand that human species is the most intelligent and has been able to adapt itself to the most difficult environments in the world. Man has learnt to play with fire, irrigate barren lands, create the most beautiful music and has also managed to visit moon. Then why do I say that man is headed towards an evolutionary cul-de-sac?

The answer is a complicated one. And I will attempt to answer it with my limited ability to use logic and knowledge. For centuries now man has made advances in technology and science. And there is no reason to believe that science and technology has not made our lives better. Of course it has. We produce much more than we ever have. We save more lives from devastating diseases than we have ever had in the past. We are much better equipped to handle natural disasters than ever before. Then, why is it that we are still moving towards an inevitable end?

It is not because of our advance in science, but rather it the regression in our moral responsibility, which is leading out species to a slow death. Famous economist Malthus was afraid that we are headed towards certain doom because, food production grows at an arithmetic progression, but when it comes to population growth it is geometric in nature. In short he foresaw that population will grow at much faster rate than food and the species will probably starve to death. Fortunately or unfortunately, the development of high yielding seeds, Genetically modified food and hormone induced animals, the demise of our race for nutritional reasons seems to be unlikely. But there was an element of truth in Malthus's fear....it is the growth of man's wants, which is increasing geometrically. We never seem to be happy with what we have. Of course, it would be highly unfair to say this for the entire human race, but it is certainly true for a large proportion of the world population.

When you look at the so called developed nations and the urban cores of the developing nations, it fairly easy to see the increase in consumerism. It has simply become a must to have more. Veblen, another economist, albeit a lesser known economist had introduced the term conspicuous consumption. He had used this term to describe the consumeristic attitude of the nouveau riche. It basically described the attempt made by this class of the society, which indulged in buying new and expensive commodities in order to secure a good social standing. Though Veblen wrote about this more than hundred years back, it couldn't be any truer than ever before. It is not just the middle class of the so called developed nations, which are demanding bigger cars, houses etc, but it is also the fast growing middle class of the developing nations, which is being sucked into this ever attractive and glittering world of consumerism.

With increasing demand on limited natural resources, it is easy to see how the unending demand for more has taken a toll on our environment. Be it the deforestation of amazon rain forests, the pollution of life giving rivers, the dumping of toxic wastes in fertile lands, it is just a matter of time before we will see that the geometric expansion of our wants will lead to what Malthus feared....our end. It is our own evolution that we need to be worried about...not that of the pandas. If not for the pandas or the whales or the tigers it is probably time for us to think about our own evolutionary future. It is in the healthy future of these species that we can see our own future secured.

Maybe its time for us to say that two pairs of shoes are enough or that seven sets of clothes are enough or one car for a family is enough. It is not science and technology that needs to be changed it is something much more fundamental....its us.

The death of a hero

He was my hero, my idol, my inspiration. For a while now, I have been completely in awe of his ideas and his propositions. I have always held him in a very high pedestal not only for his academic success, but also for his extraordinary vision. I am talking about John Maynard Keynes-the author of the most talked about book on economics -The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. He is often hailed as one of the greatest economist of last century. But for me, with, I might add very limited exposure to his work, he was a thinker and a philosopher, who attempted to introduce the world to a new way of thinking. His contributions came during times of great economic instability and political turmoil. He was concerned about the deep economic recession that the world was facing during the interwar period, which is often referred to as the great depression. He noticed that the existing economic system (read capitalism) had lost its ability to ensure a smooth functioning of the society. He went on to suggest ways in which government intervention would lead to less unemployment and an increase in effective demand, thus stimulating the economy.

When I was an undergraduate student, I found his views to be not only theoretically grounded but also fantastically radical. I thought, here is a person, who had seen the flaws of the very society he was a part of and had successfully demonstrated to the world, the alternative to a capitalist way of functioning. He paved the way for the next fifty years of economic planning for a majority of the world, in particular the developing nations. Above all, I imagined him to be a progressive thinker who looked beyond his own status to better the lives of the general population.

However, recently, I came across some literature, which has effectively shattered this image. As per the new evidence, Keynes was a supporter of capitalism. He understood the flaws of this system, but, was of the opinion that one needs to take corrective steps to ensure that this structure of the society is maintained. To do this, he suggested regulatory body, which would look into the functioning of the big enterprises, so that they would not indulge into cut throat competition, which would eventually lead to a decline of capitalism. Of course, this regulatory body would include the elite of the society, who are more "intelligent" and "able" to look after the needs of the rest of the society. If in the process one needs to shake hands with the labour unions (which formed the majority of the British population as this time.), one might consider doing so. In short, Keynes's main purpose was, as one of my Professors puts it, " to clean the mess of capitalism and give capitalism a new look."

Of course, I am not anti-capitalism. But yes, I do have problems with some of the results of capitalism in modern world. For me Keynes was not a hero because I thought him to be an anti-capitalist, but because he managed to see beyond the ongoing popular academic and political view. But, with the introduction of the recent literature one can clearly see that all Keynes was trying to do is save the old order of the society with new ways.

But, does it take away all the credit from Keynes? Why is it that when we think of our heros or idols, we imagine them to be flawless, almost god-like characters? Why is it that we cannot accept our heros as humans who are susceptible to worldly influences? So why is it that we feel upset, when we find out that our favourite professor is a politically motivated individual? Does this make the professor any less of a teacher-the very trait which made her our favourite in the first place? Why do we feel betrayed when our favourite author gets arrested for financial fraud? Does his criminal recored make him any less of a writer? Does Keynes being a capitalist take anything away from his theory? No, it doesn't. General theory is still one of the best books and his ideas on government intervention has helped many developing countries come out of their state of less development.

I guess, when we see any flaws in our heros, we suddenly realize that these heros are just people like you and me. These are ordinary people with some extraordinary traits. Their ideas or views might me immortal, but they certainly aren't. As Keynes says, " In the long run....WE all are dead".

Of course, I am upset and disappointed, but is that Keynes's fault or mine? I guess the answer is obvious..