Ye insecurity feeling kya hotha hai bhaiyya

Last few days TV studios of English/ Hindi channels are invaded by people with “insecurity feeling” or “sense of insecurity”. It is an affliction that the richer section finds difficulty in handling. Recently commemorating anniversary of terrorist attack on Mumbai this feeling has become all pervasive. Tragedy of the event withstanding this blogger finds tribulation of these fragile people quite amusing. That they need psychiatric help is quite evident, that they find themselves incapable of handling realities of life is not unexpected. Of course there are remarkable people with amazing resilience but this blog is not about them.

In the opulence of now or never world, pushing out the realities with big curtains, the sequestered life try evading mortality. A feeling of omnipotence and misplaced vigor defines their action. It is when realities barges in that “sense of insecurity” envelopes their little life. They feel cheated and harassed. There is unison “we don’t deserve this” lament. On the sidelines there is also fierce competition among “could have been victims” celebrities trying to capitalize the rush. It is the eyeball chase. Not denying that rare few did raise some relevant questions.

It seems that the sole responsibility of the government is to provide sense of security to this section while majority people in this country don’t even understand what secure life means. What arrogance. It is clear that the Indian government failed miserably to prevent these attacks and the response too was tardy, there has been lots of allegation and counter allegation since (not the least by senior police officers). But the question is how can these attacks be prevented?. Terrorists are mindless people and they care for none. It is quite difficult to anticipate, but yes response could be worked.

Pertinent question here would be when was life secure?. How can life ever be secure?. Don’t people face these realities everyday? I guess we all know that things could change quite drastically any moment. Common people negotiate these everyday, every moment. Indeed living is a risky proposition in the circumstance which most people find themselves in. With all kinds of diseases, violence, misshapes lurking in corners, things are stacked heavily against them, life is stressful. Many give up, many die undeservedly, most survive and stare death back. No not because they are brave, it is just that it is the last option, and yes after few instances it get routine, so habituated. Try figuring out how many people die every day and for what reason, of course behind every death there are many near deaths too. People keep dying for no reason of theirs. Where is then sense of security?.

Negotiating insecurities: this blogger recall feeling terribly insecure sometimes in early part of his life, later as I started my career in Chennai there were lots of rich guys who ran family business, for them job was fun which it really was but somewhere a thought always lurked in me of being one step away from abyss. There were no fall back options. So unless I do something substantial I felt very insecure, in the earlier part it nearly consumed me (even trying exploring what exactly is ‘substantial’). Also the impression given was that these are ‘crucial period of getting experience for furthering career so don’t waste time’, that added to the stress.

Later while I traveled around the country, I got the experience of fragility of life and many times just about managed to scrape through. Don’t know whether it was exuberance of youth or general excitement of traveling to new places I mostly felt insecurity in retrospect “man that could have gone wrong” kind of thing, and incorrigibly forget to take precaution next time!. It was probably during that time I started to carry this note on the first page of diary that I carried (plz click to enlarge). Recently though I carry paper sheet as diaries add to extra weight. One of my weird hobbies is to locate the road map of the accident I see in news. The recent bus accident near Nagrota (HP) is well known to me. Spate of minor train accidents in recent times has left me vaguely uncomfortable.

Information asymmetry and not very invisible hand of Thierry Henry

Well I have been reading Stiglitz last few days, I had read some of his columns here and there (trying to figure out what this financial crisis all about, as also searching about World Bank) but now thought of sitting down and read through his basics (encapsulated in his very long Nobel Prize speech). While I was reading these I was also watching TV!!. It was about the controversy that surrounded France win over Ireland in pre world cup. It is very clear that Thierry Henry handled the ball. The players knew it the world saw it. It was an obvious foul and should have been disallowed. But it was allowed, it didn’t violate the rule, it fitted in well into the system. So even though we all know it was wrong but the system doesn’t perceive nor could it rectify or correct the wrong. It seems it depends on the individuals to confess. It is therefore matter of individual choices thus subjective. In the meantime there is stress on transparency. But things are as transparent as it could ever be!!. This precisely is the problem.

We all want to do something to prevent climate related catastrophe, we all want to protect environment but the system seems incapable of perceiving these. It is also about the kind of things that keep happening around us, we are all very concerned about insidious nature of market and how it is seriously undermining socio-cultural context. Trivialization, macabre exaggeration and amazingly crude is what is sought to be seen as normal change. There is something seriously wrong but the system instead of rectifying has chosen to propagate this. Isn’t it funny that the economic system is hinged on people spending, the more you consume the healthier the system. Conventional wisdom though contradicts, indeed it is absurd. But this it seems is the path to prosperity, development.

Stiglitz mentions “When I began the study of economics some forty one years ago, I was struck by the incongruity between the models that I was taught and the world that I had seen growing up, in Gary Indiana, a city whose rise and fall paralleled the rise and fall of the industrial economy. Founded in 1906 by U.S. Steel, and named after its Chairman of the Board, by the end of the century it had declined to but a shadow of its former self. But even in its heyday, it was marred by poverty, periodic unemployment, and massive racial discrimination. Yet the theories that we were taught paid little attention to poverty, said that all markets cleared – including the labor market, so unemployment must be nothing more than a phantasm, and that the profit motive ensured that there could not be economic discrimination. If the central theorems that argued that the economy was Pareto efficient – that, in some sense, we were living in the best of all possible worlds – were true, it seemed to me that we should be striving to create a different world”. So there the contradiction.

One of the key aspect of Stiglitz’s assertion is information “what happens when people lack the key information that bears on the decisions they have to make, or when markets for important kinds of transactions are inadequate or don't exist, or when other institutions that standard economic thinking takes for granted are absent or flawed”. The referee in the Ireland-France match (or any other match) lacked the key information, which quite absurdly was accessible to even an audience across the globe within few seconds, and the system saw to it that he couldn’t access these. Fairness was compromised for institution. Doesn’t that sound familiar?. It seems we are controlled by an inexplicable superior force, an invisible hand.

Is it surprising that Adam smith (the founder of modern economics) also mentions “by an invisible hand”, the free market led efficient outcomes?. The “invisible hand”, one can safely say now, was a euphemism for lack of information but necessarily meant to keep the government out. Stiglitz has argued “Interestingly, there has been no intellectual challenge to the refutation of Adam Smith’s invisible hand….individuals and firms, in the pursuit of their self-interest, are not necessarily, or in general, led as if by an invisible hand, to economic efficiency". He adds "have shown that whenever information is imperfect and markets incomplete, which is to say always, and especially in developing countries, then the invisible hand works most imperfectly." He concludes “governments can improve the outcome by well-chosen interventions”.

Like the financial crisis recently there clearly was no “invisible hand” in Ireland-French match. The world saw Thierry Henry handling the ball, the Irish though can include these in their enviable collection of fables.

PS. Last heard: they are thinking of banning Thierry Henry!!. Frankly what exactly is his fault?!!. Theater of absurd, the script should make Samuel Beckett proud!!

It is time for Tobin Tax

Tobin tax was suggested by James Tobin way back 1970s. The idea was to implement a tax on each foreign currency transaction thereby penalizing short-term speculation. This is what Tobin said “This dissuades speculators as many investors invest their money in foreign exchange on a very short-term basis. If this money is suddenly withdrawn, countries have to drastically increase interest rates for their currency to still be attractive. But high interest is often disastrous for a national economy, as the nineties’ crises in Mexico, South East Asia and Russia have proven. My tax would return some margin of maneuver to issuing banks in small countries and would be a measure of opposition to the dictate of the financial markets”.

His suggestion has been in the cold storage for a longtime (except maybe a nightmare for students preparing for exams, like this blogger many years back!!. I came to know about Tobin tax in mid 1990s, I found it attractive even then. Later East Asian currency crisis confirmed it). Recently British PM Gordon Brown brought it out, he said “I think we should discuss whether we need a better social contract to reflect the global responsibilities of financial institutions to our society. There have been proposals for an insurance fee, or a resolution fund or a contingent capital arrangements or a global financial transaction levy.”.
Tobin tax will help counter the volatility of financial markets and avert financial crisis. It will also discourage speculative currency trading and reduce exchange rate volatility. There is a popular support for these suggestions not only at the policy making level but even in the streets. There have been much discussions and it is high time to implement these proposals.

Need to add here that Tobin saw it as step to cushion exchange rate fluctuations only and nothing else but I guess world has grown much after him or quite likely he had tunnel view of world and yes role of economist in socio-political context is only advisory. Tobin tax will create as Brown puts it “contingent capital arrangement”. The suggestion to put it under UN is quite brilliant, this would give UN much needed fund to put the priorities of world community in place. Unlike Tobin this blogger would like to see UN strengthened, World Bank and IMF can wait. UN represents multilateralism and there is an urgent need to foster these. As UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said recently "We share one planet, one small blue speck in space. As people, as nations, as a species: we sink or swim together,"

Shocking (some clarifications included)

This blogger stumbled upon in the net the other day that the former US president George Bush had visited India recently. I am shocked. What was the basis of granting him visa to visit this country? He stands accused of war crimes, causing untold misery to many. The dangerous situation in Iraq that has spilled into the region, now threatening Pakistan is directly the result of actions of Bush administration. Even now hundreds are dying, the vicious cycle of killing and counter killing that started with the attack on Baghdad. This blogger strongly feels that criminal case need be taken up against Bush&Co in International Criminal Court. If perpetrators of mass killings in Bosnia, Rwanda or Sudan could be tried then what prevents Mr.Bush from facing the justice. In the meantime Bush &Co should be treated with disdain, the law need to catch up with them at the earliest. If Milosevic and Al Bashir can be tried what prevents the trial of Mr. Bush. Or is it that USA is a powerful country therefore it can break international laws and convention with impunity?. And yes what about Mister Tony Blair?.

I am ashamed of Indian government for giving permission for his visit, and yes I shudder to think how Al Qaeda reacts to this. I am really concerned about innocent people whose lives are put at serious risk by these foolish actions. One wonders what kind of people would like to listen to a former President, who was a nuisance. Really what weight does his views now carry? When it mattered he bungled up big time, it killed thousands of innocents people, then he says Intelligence agency "misguided" him on WMD!!. It is not only a travesty but reflection of servile nature of socio-political elite holed up in delhi, who invite him. The argument is that he was friend of India. Really! understand this US under Bush did only what it suits them, and yes if India was Uganda he wouldn't be looking this way. Indeed international diplomacy is about national interest. The lack of statesmen and people with vision for humanity is reason why this blogger was excited about Obama. Mr.Bush a friend of India is an enemy of the world and humanity!!. That is the India I hate to be in. Why should any country for that matter even allow Mr.Bush to enter?. He need be declared as persona non grata.

Post Script: The International Criminal Court (referred to as the ICC or ICCt) is a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Article 5 of the Rome Statute grants the court jurisdiction over four groups of crimes, which it refers to as the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”: the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. This blogger wants to know why suo moto case not be taken against Mr Bush?

India is not a signatory but wanted to have the use of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction included as war crimes but this move was defeated. India has expressed concern that “the Statute of the ICC lays down, by clear implication, that the use of weapons of mass destruction is not a war crime". Well said.

When the baby elephant got killed

When the baby elephant got killed

The baby elephant trailing its mother
suckle her in leisure
ran about the forest in abandon
its tiny trunk explores anything and everything.
It was the very instance
the Superfast train smashed into it,
limp body thrown meters into the air.

Inside the train
people hurrying to reach
people traveling for fun
not aware of the fate of baby elephant
that lay mangled to be photographed, commented
and condemned for being a nuisance.

(written few months back forgot to post!!)

An apology

Well i guess i need to apologize for being too harsh on the Environment Minister in my last blog. The fact is he is under tremendous pressure by vested interests. He did spoke few months back on voluntary carbon cut, which this blogger thought was path breaking, but unfortunately had to retract. It is clear economic interest of few is a major influence on policy decisions. Mr Jairam Ramesh's job is increasingly getting tough, he is in an unenviable position. Do you are damned, don't do you damned still, but he is making his attempts despite tremendous pressure . I guess it is easy to pass judgment sitting in front of computer screen. My fault, i do go overboard sometimes.

Having said nothing explains his endorsement to report on glacier melting, i thought his views were mischievous and the timing also puts serious aspersion. Hopefully these are not repeated. And yes there is nothing admirable about Chanakya, this blogger thinks that he and Manu were instrumental in putting foundation to an understanding that justified crude social system and individual ethical laxity. Arthashastra and Manusmriti should been condemned to dustbin of history with its writers many centuries back.

The bogeyman strikes

The Ministry of Environment and Forest has come out with an astounding report that says Global warming has nothing to do with glacier melting, since it couldn’t concoct it fully without sounding absurd it admits that “While some glaciers are certainly shrinking, the pace is not as fast as elsewhere and it is certainly not because of global warming”. How it is certain is not clear. Our regrettable man at helm of affairs is turning out to be small timer bend on pleasing the masters, the moneybags. Jairam Ramesh is playing the role of Phillip Cooney, the henchman for irresponsible corporates. He calls it “informed discussion”, never mind that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, headed by Dr R K Pachauri, in its last report had, in contrast, warned that "glaciers in Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world" and that at current rate of depletion, "the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high" if the global temperatures rise unabated. Dr Pachauri, in response to the Environment ministry discussion paper, said, "I'd like to find out the secret source of this divine intervention... I don't understand the logic of this... I am puzzled where this magical science has come from... This is something indefensible." When asked if the discussion paper could be taken into consideration in the on-going round of scientific review by IPCC, he said, "IPCC studies only peer-review science. Let someone publish the data in a decent credible publication. I am sure IPCC would then accept it, otherwise we can just throw it into the dustbin.". Jairam Ramesh it is clear is incompetent to be Environment Minister.

Mister Ramesh has also the temerity to call IPCC “alarmist”. The Machiavellian fellow’s love for Chanakya is an open secret (Chanakya or Kautaliya- in case one is not aware, was the original scoundrel who lived few thousand years back, justifying lack of moral ethical context. The elite sections over the centuries have invoked him for their selfishness and crude behavior). The “informed discussion” for likes of Jairam Ramesh is step towards subjectifying the issue. It is about obfuscating the truth, it helps the scoundrels to sneak in and create havoc. In Market media democracy this theatrics is referred to as discussion, but what it does is polarize the society. Since the whole exercise of market is hinged on perception, there seem to be no reality and the common people tend to take sides on what they feel comfortable about or justify their surrounding or gain. It helps in building up cynicism about reality and acceptable context for emotional reactions. Arrogance of ignorance is the product of market media.

The reason why the world finds it difficult to come into any understanding on Global Warming despite the fact that there is clear and urgent scientific evidence (as also conventional understanding) about these may not be because of any psychology rigidity of elderly (as Manbiot argued in Guardian Newspaper recently-go to my link for further, on the contrary elders in poorer and societies closer too nature will agree with it readily, they go by what they observe) it is more to do with the nature of market economy and the functioning of market media. USA is a good example they have very advanced level of literacy as also facilities to learn, they also have done some experiment with pedagogy and so on. But nowhere in the world despite these advanced levels of availability of information and technology is the society so polarized, for an outsider it borders absurd. The evolutionist- creationist debate is just an example of arrogance of informed ignorance. These unhealthy polarization of societies is the bloodline of elite section, they thrive on it. They rarely work for common good but create adversaries and controversies, and other distractions to take away the realities of common people and replace it with concoctions.

So am I surprised by our home grown Machiavellian, he is doing for his very own survival. This is his opportunity for PR work for his future and in India (as also other poor societies) you had it if you antagonized powerful people or moneybags. Jairam Ramesh is just trying his trick to work on his cost benefit analysis, as also playing for the people who placed him in this position. Infact the logic is everyone is expected to do what is good for oneself, otherwise you are misfit -market economy has justified it for centuries. So if everyone is working for their narrow gains how collective decision making possible that too at global level?. Global warming will seriously impact the poorest and marginalized. The perpetrators rarely pay, and the system has seen to that profit is accrued by small section and they fatten at the cost of majority. So if any attempt is made to rectify these it is clear that powerful people will try to obfuscate. Jairam Ramesh is also making a crude attempt to pit Indian scientist against “western scientist”, it is about science and patriotic sentiments I guess!!. What a shame.

Frankly the reality here is crude form of capitalism has become a threat to democracy. It is being hijacked by moneybags and seriously power hungry people. We seem to have reached an impasse and unless these are resolved there doesn’t seem to be scope for collective actions. Also this blogger strongly believes that there is no developing country and developed country issue here, there are only people who pollute more and people who pollute less. And the people who pollute more are rich and powerful and so they try to create confusion on veracity on anything that threatens their lifestyle or greed. Don’t know about greed but certain level of lifestyle can be maintained with adaptive technology, but if you find it difficult to even do that since it will reduce your profit then it is unacceptable, it is a crime. Indian corporates are basically family businesses, status quo solutions is more profitable. They are rarely known for innovations (check out R&D investment) and basically incompetent to handle changing realities and so need government support. Infact government machinery is being actively used for narrow gains of corporates. In a globalized world governments are not expected to biased towards domestic industries and yes I as a consumer will prefer product that uses adaptive or mitigative technology whether Indian or foreign. There are no borders in global warming.

Post Script: conventional wisdom says that Mister Jairam Ramesh should resign as Union Environment Minister. He has failed to take up the issues of environment, his priorities are misplaced and I wouldn’t be surprised if I find him in the board of some corporate few years down the line or is he trying to collect money to fight elections (that is a tough call, sycophancy is second best option). Anyway our man is trying to secure his (not to forget family and friends) future at the expense of majority, people like him are liability. Why blame him even our Nobel laureate behaves like small time intellectual pimp!!. So when he talks about ecology he gives the impression that he has got his pants down, these are beneath his dignity it seems!. Afterall Marx didn't see anything beyond labor capital!!. This blogger places huge significance on Nobel prizes and has been a major source of reference for many great writings in recent times, but the awards on Economics has rather trivialized the awards. Apart from Stiglitz, Krugman and recently Ostrom and few more I haven’t really found anyone much inspiring. Indeed the whole concept of economics looks rather fragile in the immediacy of the problems the world faces.

Meet Kakki

I met Kakki few days back on the trail of dense forest of Western Ghats. Western ghat is a biodiversity hot spot with an amazing variety of flora and fauna that are threatened to extinction. It was while waiting for infrequent transport that I encountered Kakki. I found him laughing and pendulate his head as if he knew that I would have to interact with him, maybe he was used to people asking about timing of next bus to town and so on. Aware of this I maintained a stoic distance and a stance of “well you got it wrong this time”. Minutes passed and every time my eyes explored the surrounding, he was very much in the frame with expectation and some amusement. I took out my pocket diary to scribble something I had observed and now recollect, in the circumstance it also served an assertion on my part. Kakki took few steps and sat next “so you are coming from far?”. My first reaction was to avoid him with non committal disinterested “yes” and maintained with myself. I could hear a chuckle then he too relapsed into silence. His initial excitement mellowed or most likely he was taken aback by my rudeness. Spending too much time in cities tends to take away spontaneity in interaction with strangers, mistrust being an overriding emotion, not entirely misplaced but yes that may not be defining in all context or situations. Kakki was facing the brunt of it but he came out amazingly tolerant. Kakki lived in a world where it was normal for people to interact with anyone they met, and so he insisted being normal “you came two days back didn’t you?. I saw you walking all around the place”. This agitated me: so I am being observed, no privacy, some backward people these. The fact though was outsiders are an anomy in remote places and so a source of curiosity. “What is there to see in jungles?” he giggled.

“What’s your name?” I finally condescended, unable to ignore him.

“Kakki”

“Kakki that is an interesting name” I try to patronize, it comes naturally.

“Well you can call me kakki or nakki, it doesn’t matter” he retorted and to soften it immediately followed with a loud guffaw (nakki in Malayalam means sucker).

“So what do you do?” I asked the mandatory question. His answer startled me, in his accented Malayalam (that had strong hint of Tamil) he said “kaat adikunnu, mazha peyunnu, angne pokunnu” meaning “wind blows, it rains, going on”. Kakki may have never heard about haikus but what he spoke was poetry, also in a subtle way he was pointing to the absurdity of my query. Later though he did tell that he works as a casual labor in one the plantations.

Kakki stayed inside the forest, he invited me but to go there I needed permit from forest department, so I declined. He belonged to karumba tribe “the lowest of low in tribal community” he said. “So you also have hierarchy?” I asked. “Sure we learned” he laughed insane. When I took the camera to take his pic Kakki insisted that I need to tell before I clicked he wanted to give serious expression he said and made sure it came correctly!.