Cheated by FIFA

This is the second time it is happening, first it was Ivory Coast and now Mexico. I am shocked that there isn’t any remedial measure against these blatant cheating. We all, placed thousands of miles away, saw it in happening. The penalty was given wherein there was no foul, the teams were cheated by the system. Why cannot there be a second referee, who could have easily seen the replay, and denied the penalty? Atleast in case of penalties (which is as good as gifting goals) this could be done. In the context of things it wouldn't farfetched to point out that both the teams to gain (ie Netherlands and Greece) are European teams. It is truly unfair, there isn’t any providence in these matters, it is nothing but incompetence on the part of FIFA. 
 

Mediocre Indians peeps in: Watching FIFA matches is always such a pleasurable experience. Unlike stupid market friendly ‘sport’ like cricket there is no space for advertisement, which is such a huge respite. The hooligans masquerading as sellers have seriously negated watching experience (they have even invaded social media with their primitive gusto). They lack basic etiquette and decency, as is the defining characteristic of this section, they barge in with noisy and appalling ways to somehow make us buy their product. Market friendly commentators even see them as agent of change!! The uncouth young Indians also make their ‘smart’ presence felt with their easy going ways, as if the product is because of them, worst still having these products somehow make them smart as the inventor! Market apart from being ‘agent of change’ has also severely degraded the cultural scene. Small time actors are the biggest problem, hoisted by crude market, these pests barge into even wildlife related channels. More than mediocrity it is the audacity that is astounding. They consistently degrade institutions and propriety, and I am quite sure they are into all kind of unethical activities, right from invading privacy and manipulation for gain at the expense of people. Clearly market is helping dimwits to make huge amount of money. They even can make decision of buying a car by watching some stupid ads. Such is the quality of elite in a country where majority are poor who cannot even afford proper meal. There surely is lots of black money doing the round, many times what is in foreign bank…

Coming back to FIFA, though we are saved by Indian presence through crude ads, but you still cannot push them out. A small time actor, I gather, was anchoring the discussions before the match. It also included another actor, whose claim, I am told, was to have acted in a football related movie!! Such is the ways of mediocre Indians. Anything that is degradable will be degraded is the motto, you cannot really blame them, its india’s population driven feudal development pattern that fattens these crass wonders. My only request is to show some respect to millions of football fans by being professionals for atleast sometime, Brazilians will do the rest.   

  

Please donate generously to Greenpeace

 It’s getting clear that we are in for a virulent form of development. The far right parties in West (specifically US) see nature as exploitable commodity, clearly it has semantic religion background to it – the one that seeks to dominate the earth. The economic model and patterns of ‘development’ is hinged and decided by these. It is therefore unfortunate that the incumbent government has sought to take this path that leads to wanton destruction and alienation in the name of development. 

Indian society, in its non brahmanical framework, has always given importance to Nature. Such was the reverence to the Nature that the elitist conception, the temple squatters, had to cleverly adapt to the need and be sensitive to the surroundings. The impetus of Jains and Buddhists, as also traditions of great souls and seers influenced Indians to see earth as Mother Nature and respect its myriad ways. This brought deep soulful understanding of surrounding and realities of existence. While the temple squatters saw only idols and pecking orders, devoid of any soul or any understanding to the realities, their grand views therefore became elaborate sick jokes. The temple squatters consumerism (read exploiting the devotees) was consistently devoid of these connections that bound societies and its culture, they saw it as commodity as much as what they saw in fellow human beings. This framework quite easily is in sync with exploiting market. The rabid grandness of civilization role of India as superpower hinges on this framework. Everything has to be subservient to goodness of nation. Previously it was some amazingly tawdry miracle stories of gods as saviors of nature while the people held nature as savior, the godly push to the conception was partially successful. So what started as prayer to nature forces (like tree, mountains so on) acquired brahmanical pointers, it opened the gates for charlatans. The mountains were codified for temples, the same happened to rivers, the places of worship of nature morphed into religious centers of exploitation. Though it seared the soul of the society and its people but thankfully the primacy of nature was maintained. Can you imagine that they cut the mountains at bellary (it’s only a small example in this nation of humungous exploitation) and also donated huge amount of gold to Thirupati temple, and quite understandably temple squatters wallowing in millions (in the name of god, of course) accepted it gleefully. What amazing debauchery.  

When environment is destroyed in the name of development, when mountains are flattened in the name of progress it is the common people who face the impact of the destruction. It is also disconnects their fragile relation with the surrounding that sustains them. It puts their lives at risk as also our biodiversity. It also puts the future of society at peril. The understanding that Nature sustains us and its wanton destruction will put the future at immense trouble is only beginning of an understanding of how earth functions.    

It is in this framework that the con work of pliable bureaucrats (steel frame my foot) who have come out with some wonderful notion on NGOs, specifically Greenpeace and other environment protection related organization that are doing job of sensitizing the people of the loot and destruction that is being unfolded in the name of development. The report by IB is a shoddy attempt to work out a threat, and it is also quite clear that some big money is making its move. The likes of Aggrawals (Vedanta) have been salivating for sometime now, in the meanwhile they branded themselves as socially concerned (it’s is a strategy to win over poor hapless people, it’s a invite to marginalized people to cannibalize themselves). Pronnoy & his angels have been ever gracious in the hypocrisy, with harebrained actors they have converted Vedanta into savior industry. Such is the power of money, and reach of erstwhile kabadiwala –the quintessential Indian rags to rich by manipulation and exploitation story. These type of exploitative development is a rather feeble feudal substitute for vibrant innovation oriented development that Indian elite lack. Indeed with rare exception this is the claim to riches of most, either service (english and superficial sophistication) or exploitation (feudal norms and crony capitalism). 

It is clear that things are going to get ugly from here. Any trampling with the environmental laws and laxing of its provision will be severely dealt. Any attempt to jostle people into submission will be replied with equal force. The development cannot be at the expense of natural wealth, and the greed of few and exploitation of nature and its people. This will resisted. Organization like Greenpeace is doing a wonderful job. This blogger requests everyone to contribute to these organizations and strengthen them. There seems to be renewed belligerence from the part of exploiters.  It is possible that if peaceful means are exhausted then things could get violent. One thing though is clear: development will not be at the expense of future. Nature will be represented and defended, it will not be left to hooligans to work out their exploitative model.   

The Farce of Global Warming..

This was essentially written in 2005...

There is a farce happening in the name of Global Warming. No not the kind that Mr. Bush and cronies are cooking and force feeding to media, attempts on unsexing up the data. No it is not even about scuttling the discussions with God ordained verdicts of inevitability call it karma, qayamat or judgment day, take your pick!!. It is not even about the ubiquitous ever-prevailing globalized ideation of weonlyseeprofit Corporates. It is none of these. The farce is so very deep that it can claim to be a tradition. The farce is so very prevalent that it is almost a culture. The culture of deceit of “trustees of nation”. It is about being used as pawns by the indulgent elite for their purpose. Indulgence (or indolence it breeds) is a matter of choice and we common people have absolutely no problem with it. We also have no problem with those Editors, TV channel honchos, Columnists (carrying that aura of intelligentsia and other petty world views), photo op. activists and regrettable Gandhians (who have nothing about Gandhi or anything near it, its about positioning to gain)…….promote these lifestyle, it’s exercising their choice. We have no problem with any of these, infact we are not bothered, we have more pressing problems of day-to-day existence. Yes if you have money flaunt it, what is money for then? If you have body show it, show it wide open, before botox takes over (pun intended!! Frankly I have no problem with people using latest means to look good, it’s their life). If you can write, vomit columns. But NEVER ever think!!. Thou aint do that. The modern human has been influenced by philosophies like materialism and existentialism. He has entertained views like "The world is a machine, composed of inert bodies, moved by physical necessity, indifferent to the existence of thinking beings." He refused to take a holistic view of reality; and help in developing a system in which requirements of body, mind, intellect and soul are integrated in a balanced and harmonious pattern and in which human societies function, not separately, but as complementary units of the same universe. But then we all have right to choose and choose we do. So why should we, the common people, have any problem with the elites? We have absolutely no problem. It’s a free country all have right to choose. So far so good. The problem arises when we, the common people in this country, are used. That is what the farce of discussion on Environmental problems; particularly Global Warming is all about. Consider all the International Agreements (mostly disagreements!!) on Environment whether its Montreal or Kyoto protocol there is a demarcation between “developed” and “developing” countries. This becomes a standards for defining, calculations, measures to be followed and time frame settings. So India is classified as “developing” country, which means all these elites are packed into one group with the common people!!. The latest UNDP report pegs India’s position at 127. The report says “…failure to provide substantial investments in human development and health and education opportunities for all could undermine India’s future prospects”. Studies after studies have shown growing acute disparities not only in India but also all over the world. The UN's Human Development Report (1999) adds that in 1960, the top 20 per cent of the world's people in the richest countries had 30 times the income (in terms of total GDP) of the poorest 20 per cent. This grew to 32 times in 1970, to 45 times in 1980, and to 59 times in 1989. By 1997, the top 20 per cent received 74 times the income of the bottom 20 per cent." This implies that the globalized world we are living in today is seeing a dramatic rise in inequality. There are also marked and increasing disparities in the world community between those who have access to clean and safe resources and those who do not. Disparities of this nature may be the result of historical circumstance, contemporary economic and trade relations or simply inadequate or inappropriate governmental regulation. In a study from the London School of Economics by Robert H. Wade (‘Is globalization making world income distribution more equal?’ May 2001), similar factors have been cited as the cause for the rise in global and between-country inequalities. Rapidly widening income distribution within the biggest countries (India and China) has also been a major contributory factor. While the gap, worldwide, between the average income of the top quintile of people (top 20 per cent) and the average income of the bottom quintile within each country is about 5:1, the gap between the average income of the top quintile of states and that of the bottom quintile in India is of the order of 25-30:1. According to the results of the 53rd round of the National Sample Survey, the percentage of rural poor in India increased from 35% in 1991 to 38.5% in 1997. Since the vast majority of India’s poor, estimated to be anywhere between 320-400 million, live in rural areas the overall number of poor has risen. Almost 50% children are malnourished, U5MR is as high as 141/1000 in poorest section. Majority of people have very low life expectancy, much less than already low national average. 62% of household do not have water supply in or near their home, potable water is a dream in millions of household. 93% don’t even have toilet in their home or any sewerage facility connected. Obviously it’s clear from the above that water consumption is minimal (not as a choice, off course). So these seminars, documentaries, talk shows are obviously not meant for 93% people in this country for the simple reason they just cannot afford to waste water. Few decades back Mrs. Indira Gandhi made a very dumb statement (if she were alive today she would, I assume, take it back) poverty she said is the greatest polluter. Dumb as Bush is he quoted this recently!. It is important not to fall for these elitist definitions on pollution. Poverty is NOT the greatest polluter. The difference between “pollution” and “dirtying” need to be understood. Poverty is definitely the greatest dirtifier (yep that’s a new word. Thanx!!). Poverty creates unsanitary conditions, dirties the surroundings, and causes disease and epidemic, the reason for high sickness, mortality rate among poor albeit many could be prevented with awareness and primary health facility. But its contribution to pollution is miniscule as compared to richer societies; say in posh colonies of Delhi, Islamabad or Las Vegas. In richer societies the surrounding is clean (sometimes at an obsessive level, like in Singapore), the lifestyle in such societies exudes cleanliness to the extent that even they sneer at “unclean” people on the streets. But behind this façade of cleanliness hides the story of some greatest polluters in the world. In fact the lifestyle of most people in richer society itself is a study on: How pollution happens. Just a simple example from daily experience to make the point clear. If a common man wants to move from point A to point B in a city he uses bus (very rarely that is in case of emergency an Auto, after much haggling). The buses are generally packed with 80-100 people in peak hours. The same distance is covered by an occupant in car. So whose per capita consumption is more, whose per capita pollution is more, who is taking more space of road in peak hours contributing to more pollution?. India faces a serious urban transportation crisis marked by traffic congestions, disorder, extreme high level of environmental pollution (noise pollution included), accidents with high fatalities and injuries as also deep inequities of access. WHO on World Health Day last year focused its attention on Road Safety, the report points that1.2 million people die in road accidents every year around the world. The death toll is highest in low and middle-income countries, where pedestrians, motorcyclists, cyclists and passengers are especially vulnerable. 85% of all road accident deaths occur in developing countries and nearly half in the Asia-Pacific region. In addition to human suffering, estimated costs of road traffic injuries are between 1% and 2% of GNP per annum in these countries. This represents a loss of approximately US$ 65 billion every year; almost twice the total development assistance received worldwide by developing countries. India accounts for about 10 percent of road accident fatalities worldwide. This accentuates deep inequities in access further. Yes please use car use all the modern gadgets, be comfortable (even I would if I have money, who doesn’t want to have a comfortable life but at the moment I am comfortable with my cycle or walking small distances…you see I am rarely in a hurry. I don’t have to rush anywhere!!) but it’s wrong to include us common people with the elite particularly during the discussion on pollution. Studies show that buses now occupy less than 1% of all vehicles on urban roads of India. Some people are so poor that they cannot even afford to travel even in this cheapest mode of transportation (which in most cases are rickety metal boxes with engines). Thousands of people use cycles in unruly traffic of cities defying death everyday. Studies show that 56% of road accident fatalities are accounted by cyclists. As we are aware now that Bangalore has serious infrastructure problems. One wonders how much misuse of vehicles (sometimes as style statement as shown in ads) has contributed to this chaos. The investment on urban transport mostly focuses on widening of roads or spaces for parking while the cyclists and pedestrians are ignored. This imbalance has to be rectified. There is a need to make traveling in private vehicles more costly and the money invested in pedestrian oriented infrastructure. Each society needs to create vehicle free zones and bicycle tracks. Traveling in fancy cars (all the features are useless in congested streets) in cities is no longer cool; it has become a liability on most of us common people. Proposals to tackle global warming are being described as “bad investment”. Infact a panel of eminent economists (Nobel prize winners among them) some years ago placed initiatives to tackle HIV/AIDS, malaria, sanitation and other problems confronting the world ahead of the issue of Global Warming!!. It was referred to as Copenhagen consensus. Clearly problems of sanitation are very important, it causes millions of avoidable deaths but prioritizing it over the dangers of global warming is what the elitist farce all about. Sanitation can be and need be tackled at local level so is the case of HIV; it needs a culture-region specific response (an international guidelines can be proposed). The effort at international level need be (and essentially be) focused on policies that have long term impact on the planet. Global warming and issue of climatic changes has to get the utmost priority. This pointing the finger at poor societies and their sanitation (dirtying) is an attempt to hide the real culprits and scuttle the issue. Classifying sanitation over dangers of global warming is an attempt at playing God on poorer societies. This also reeks of cottage industry of charity. Those who are trying to play God need to look at the mirror. Their lifestyle and what they are promoting around the world as “clean” is causing serious impact on environment in effect the vulnerable societies. The poorest people almost always live in the poorest environment. Global warming will affect (and is affecting) the world’s poor- those least able to protect themselves against crop failures and rising sea levels- far more severely than the affluent. The effluent’s who create more effluence. Yes its “bad investment” to reduce global warming. Yes reducing profit is definitely a “bad investment”. But the question here is why should we and our future generations suffer because of your life style. The “problem” at the grass root level in poorer societies is that they use material (technology), which they have access to. The main criterion here is cost-benefit. The cost most time is such an over riding factor that they forgo even the basic comfort or need. So asking poor societies to do “bad investment” is criminal. It is because of the greed and life style demand of the elite that the sanitation and basic needs of impoverished have worsened. Take the example of Coke Pepsi and other luxury product at the expense of local basic needs. This is being replicated all over the world. Dirtying is definitely the byproduct of reduced access to means of survival.


There is definitely an equity dimension in the whole issue of global warming. There is a deep abyss separating these two societies. The line of demarcation is not between nations but between societies within the nations. We people in this part of the world share more with common people in mumbai or plachimada or New Orleans. We are the one who have to first face the fierceness of any natural or man made catastrophe. It is we (our near ones, neighbors) who contribute to the statistics in Breaking News. Whether it is tsunami or flood or cyclones the poor part of the society faces the maximum brunt. How is that occupants of huts (or small houses) with minimal facilities is equated with houses/flats with 5-6 air conditioners and fridge stacked with “soft” drinks and so on. It is not that I am against modern lifestyle and choice of comfort. People can decide for themselves. But they definitely will have to take responsibility for the consequences. We common people cannot pay for their exigencies nor will we allow them to piggyback ride us. There is everything for need (that too is depleting) but there is definitely not for greed (that’s an oft quoted line). So when Mr.N.Ram writes in a column (in The Hindu, where else!!) few months back that …..per capita Co2 emission by India is very small fraction of what is seen in USA…..it shows nothing but his very carefully cultivated Machiavellian ignorance (or probably delusions). What do I like millions of people in this country share anything with this megalomaniac and his Formulae One juvenilities or some Botox Turd in some excellent car. Theirs is a different world which majority us people don’t identify with (in many cases, like upwardly mobile, this could be not by choice. Attributing egalitarianism or restraint to poverty is crap philosophy). But the fact whether we like it or not we live in different worlds albeit we share the same geographical region of India. A small example will suffice: Although per capita per day water consumption in India is low there is a huge inequity in access. The per capita consumption in urban slum is 10 liters while in rural India it averages 40 liters (for domestic use). The per capita consumption in urban rich areas stands at whooping 300-450 liters wherein according to Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security, an overall basic water requirement of 50 liters per person per day is proposed as a minimum standard to meet four basic needs—for drinking, sanitation, bathing, and cooking. Another scientist Falkenmark uses the figure of 100 liters of freshwater per capita per day for personal use as a rough estimate of the amount needed for a minimally acceptable standard of living in developing countries, not including uses for agriculture and industry. Taking an average of both 70-80 liters per capita per day we find that rural India and urban slum are below the water requirement wherein the urban rich consumes almost triple the required! Clearly there is a huge disparity. Majority of us do not share this world of greed, instant gratifications, gimmickry, superficiality coupled with essential attitudinal arrogance (for people like Botox Turd its about occupying the eyeball space, its exhibitionism which has replaced demonstration. Presentablilty of self that is no different from the chauvinists in audaciously classified “backward” places, instantly placing Botox Turd and her clan as forward!!). This is the world wherein sensibilities are declining with onslaught of pop culture, material acquisitions and life style-success they define. A world of cultivated politeness (politeness here is limited to within their circle, people who are influential), exchange of pleasantries, strategic use of words, market messages……ofcourse everything with lots of style! When they argue (as in Times of India, Editorial) that India, brazil, china…..have equal right to first benefit from the earth resources……what they really mean is the benefits for greedy indulgent elite in these “developing” countries at the expense of poorer section of these societies. You can feed on us and still be part of us is a strange logic. This nation based per capita classification is an unacceptable argument. Its not “rich countries should clean up their act first”. It is rich societies in each country should clean up their act first. You cannot hide behind us, come forward and take responsibility towards consequences of your profligacy. There is a need for Environmental or Pollution Tax to curb per capita consumption and life style demands (so instead of frequent flier benefits we can have frequent flier tax!!!!). You see we need socio-environmental “Growth” too. The companies should be forced to reveal their green house liabilities to their investors. The profit over people (Chomsky) extended to profit over people and environment has to stop. There is an immediate need for a paradigm shift in policies related to issues of environment, particularly on global warming, green house gases (GHGs) and ozone. Mr. George Monbiot writes in Guardian Newspaper “....…“raise awareness”, “accelerate deployment of cleaner technology” and “diversify our energy supply mix”. There is nothing wrong with these objectives. But unless there is a regulation to reduce the amount of fossil fuel we use, alternative technologies are waste of time and money, for they will supplement rather than replace coal and oil burning. What counts is not what we do but what we do not do (emphasis mine). Our success and failure in tacking climate change depends on just one thing: how much fossil fuel we leave in the ground……”. He further writes “…..meaningful action on climate change has been prohibited by totalitarian capitalism…”. Totalitarian capitalism is where the government lax the rules for “efficient business” and market to decide the peril of “disposable” environment. This is not denying that there are instances of Corporates do want (and are insisting) stricter environmental laws to give impetus to eco-friendly technology to be viable. Clearly the global warming and issue of climatic changes are hinged on what elites (including upwardly mobile middle class) of all societies in all the countries do not do, that is in relevance to per capita consumption and life style demands.

The issue of Global Warming at the moment is being tackled at two levels. The first is more recent one that is the need for adaptation. With increasingly turbulent and extreme oscillation of climate the need for system to adapt to the changes is being recognized. But the need for adaptation shouldn’t side track the more important issue of mitigation, which is the second level at which the global warming is being tackled. Mitigation, wherein a sincere concerted global effort is more urgently needed. The International Agreements and concerns towards reducing GHGs, improving technologies and stringent pollution rules has also to take into consideration the issue of disparities within the societies. Classifying counties into “developing” and “developed” for international agreements has to go and replaced by rich and poor societies. Each country needs to be forced as part of international agreement to recognize this division and make rules accordingly on pollution control and sustainable development. We majority people all around the world cannot take the burden of indulgent few who are sucking away our common resources with impunity (off course it does give them a chance to “help” us and be in the news). As a Marketeer verdicts in one show (well its all a show !!!) “…being profitable allows for concern for environment”. It’s about let me fatten myself first. Many of these elites who are jostling the eyeball space have reached there by the very means which has caused much misery and harm to others, not to forget the long term environmental consequences. Then they try to patronize us, by charity, by whatever means that help them to cling on public space (Crude woman is only a symptom of bigger epidemic). As early as 1987 The Brundtland Report in Europe (UK?), titled Our Common Future, defines development as “…..that which meets the needs of the poorest without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs….”. Already world over the indications are that the global warming has crossed that threshold wherein sudden shifts in climatic changes happen. Sergei kirpotin and Judith Marguard reports in New Scientist recently that an area of permafrost (in Siberia) has started to melt for the first time since it was formed some 11000 years ago at the end of the last ice age. The area, which covers the sub arctic region of western Siberia is world’s largest frozen peat bog and scientists fear that as it thaws, it will release billions of tones of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than Co2 into the atmosphere. The peat bog could hold some 70bn tonnes of methane, a quarter of all of the methane stored in the ground around the world. Over the next 100 years it would add around 700mn tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere each year. This would effectively double atmospheric levels of the gas leading to a 10% to 25% increase in global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Changes (IPCC), 2001 points out “…that a global average temperature change ranging from 2.5 degree F to 10.4 Degree F would translate into climate related impacts that are much larger and faster than any that have occurred during the 10,000 year history of civilization”. It further says “…the impact associated with deceptively changes in temperature are evident in all corners of the globe. There is heavier rains in some areas (people in Mumbai and Bangalore, recently Chennai are quite aware of it now! Thankfully I was prudent enough to choose a place where I was spared of this misery) and droughts in others. Glaciers are melting and spring is arriving earlier, oceans are warming (hurricanes and storms are related to these changes) and coral reefs are dying…”. Things therefore are slipping from bad to worse. Leonard Fuentes (a Cuban novelist) writes in a column recently “…..as Cuban poet Jose Marti said about poetry, either we save ourselves together or we all lose ourselves. This is the nature of “global” game in which what is at stake is not the wealth and comfort of few but the lives of everyone, in Cuba, in Barundi, in Ceylon, in Venice, in California…..”. Let me end this very long (thanx for the patience! Not that I give a damn!) article with a line I read somewhere : we are not getting along with each other if we are not getting along with the planet.

Why you must read Gail Omvedt

Gail is someone whom I am aware of quite well, this is an article that was written about a decade and half back (just about the time when the Congress on "Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance", was held in South Africa, in 2001). Amazingly these issues were pushed under the carpet with Gandhian ease!! It’s time for opening up to global scrutiny. Indian elitizens have reasons to ignore these and carry on as they have, there seems to be nothing amiss in the garden of muck. The reality though is that they are being scrutinized, and they stand exposed. It is not out of place to mention that Gail was not born Indian, therefore the necessary clarity, that Sharmas and Mishras (and ofcourse Pandes) will never understand.  

    

Not that I am an admirer of BBC, it has got juvenile, the last stroke was puerile (ridiculous) obsession with anachronism of our time called monarchy. The feudal India too loves it, its  how they stay connected. A woman from dumb country New Zealand (could you believe, they accept British monarchy?!! I would like to know what aborigines/ Maurois have to say on this) was rolling over for monarchy. Amazing dimwit, that one. It is in the same context that Sharmas have crept in without much shame!! They have in few decades established these as part of culture, ideally this woman should be asked to get out. But then it is BBC, they have to 'sex up' things! As Gail mentions “The sun has set over the great British Empire; but not over the Caste Empire” 

 Discrimination that must be cast away 

THE proposed World Congress on "Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance", (Durban, South Africa, August 31 to September 7, 2001), has provoked a long-overdue debate on caste. Caste today enjoys unprecedented political leverage in this country. The political establishment argues, nonetheless, that since constitutional provisions for dealing with caste-based discriminations and disabilities are in place, caste is no longer a problem waiting to be addressed. At the same time, the protagonists of dalit identity have had considerable success, especially in recent years, in globalising their grievances. The United Nations, in the meanwhile, has become bolder in rejecting the erstwhile dogma that the "internal affairs" of nations should not be interfered with. Those who remain stuck with the mind set of nation states, though, will take a while longer to get used to this changing reality. 

Given the track record of tenacious resistance to social reform, it becomes regrettably necessary to expose the pathology of caste practices to global scrutiny. Sticking plaster over festering wounds is not known to help in healing them. They are healed best in exposure. The more we deny dignity and development to our dalit brothers and sisters and try to keep this scandal under wraps, the surer we are to invite scrutiny and embarrassment in a globalising world. 

However, the Government, stage-managed by the caste lobby, is keen to forestall the proposed debate. The strategy of obstruction in this instance is two-fold. The official objection articulated by Soli Sorabjee, Attorney General, is that caste being an issue internal to this country, the U.N. should refrain from meddling with it. He argues, further, that bringing caste into the ambit of this conference will dilute the focus on race. The latter in particular is a curious argument. The U.N. Congress is not envisaged to be an academic exercise on race, but an initiative to address the evils of "intolerance and discrimination" in whichever form they exist. Else, the words "Xenophobia and Related Intolerance" would not have found a place in the ambit of the conference. The basic question is not if caste is generically identical or related to race. It is if caste perpetuates intolerance and discrimination as race does. The mandate of the world body is not to shoot down race or caste, it is to rid the world of intolerance and discrimination in its myriad forms. 

In the meanwhile, a segment of the intelligentsia has launched itself into endorsing the establishment's stand. Prof. Andre Beteille has protested vehemently against equating caste with race. "Treating caste as a form of race," he writes, "is politically mischievous; what is worse, it is scientifically nonsensical." Even though he concedes that "the practice of untouchability is reprehensible and must be condemned", he feels obliged, nonetheless, to insist that caste is not "a form of racial discrimination". It is not Andre's case that the caste system is free from "discrimination". Like Vivekananda and Gandhiji, he finds "untouchability" repugnant. Condemn it by all means, but let not caste be polluted by having it discussed alongside race. Due to his image as an ideologue of liberal individualism, Andre grants that casteism deserves to be condemned. But that does not prevent him from objecting to the way the U.N. proposes to deal with the issue of caste. The underlying logic amounts to this. "Caste is obnoxious. It must go. But the U.N. should leave it alone". That is clever; for if the U.N. does not question caste, assuredly no one else who matters would. 

The Gujarat earthquake is a recent illustration of the discrimination native to the casteist mindset. Kuldeep Nayyar, one of our most respected journalists, has this to say on the discrimination that vitiated relief operations in the quake affected areas. "The criteria for distribution of relief," he wrote, "are said to have been caste, creed and religion. High caste Patels did not allow relief vehicles to reach many places because the population living there belongs to lower castes, which the Patels describe as 'the disease-ridden people'." This is distressingly similar to the situation in Gujarat that Ambedkar describes in his book, Annihilation of Caste. "In November 1935, some untouchable women of well-to-do families started fetching water in metal pots. The Hindus looked upon the use of metal pots by untouchables as an affront to their dignity and assaulted the untouchable women for their impudence". 

India was at the forefront of globalising the opposition to Apartheid. We were among the earliest to honour Nelson Mandela for undoing this discriminatory system. Even so we are averse to debating caste objectively. In contrast, when the protagonists of the caste system began targetting a minority community in certain parts of the country, the Prime Minister found it appropriate to have a "national debate" on conversion. Given the prolonged history of caste atrocities, shouldn't there have been a series of national debates on caste, so that the dalits too could have told their part of the story? As long as we are shying away from this long-overdue exercise, how can we convincingly argue against a global debate on caste? 

Swami Dayanand, founder of the Arya Samaj, blasted the citadels of orthodoxy and proved beyond doubt that the correct interpretation of the Purush Sukta of the Rig Veda not only repudiated the birth-based caste system but also supported the Varna system based on one's Guna, Karma and Swabhava, i.e. Talent, Action and Aptitude. Dayanand advocated inter-caste marriages and uplifted dalits to the status of Aryas. He also denounced the very concept of race by insisting that all of humanity is one race and any discrimination on the basis of colour or form was an abomination. The Indian establishment should proudly appropriate the great legacy of Swami Dayanand and his Vedic insights. 

As a tribute to the legacy of another of India's greatest sons, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, India should proclaim from Durban that both race and caste are inhuman institutions and they deserve to be cast out, lock, stock and barrel. 

Race and caste leave indelible marks on their victims, physically and psychologically. Various attempts have been made by their apologists to invent scriptural sanctions for them. The Dutch Reformed Church in South Africa, for instance, deceived itself into believing that Apartheid was compatible with the biblical world view. The Church of England, for long, dragged its feet in condemning this obnoxious system, largely because of the mammoth investments the Church had in South Africa. The prolonged silence of the Church universal in the face of such a scandalous treatment of human beings is at once inexplicable and inexcusable. How on earth could the Dutch Reformed Church preach that all people are created in the Image of God and also justify racism is a riddle that is hard to unravel? 

Apparently, caste too claims its sanction from scripture: an allegation acceptable only to those who do not either know or respect the Vedas. Ironically, the very fact that scriptural legitimacy had to be invented for caste proves that it could not have been justified or legitimised in any other way. It is not rarely that scripture is used and abused to defend the indefensible. In point of fact, caste is a post-Vedic invention meant to perpetuate the religious, social and economic domination of a few over the rest. Despite the battle cry issued by social and religious reformers like Buddha, Nanak, Kabir, Dayanand, Narayana Guru, Jyotiba Phule and Ambedkar, caste discrimination continues to afflict millions in this country. 

Caste, like race is exploitative, discriminatory and anti- developmental. Its virulence can be gauged from the fact that though originally a creation of the medieval Brahmanical priest- craft, the abominable caste system has spread its tentacles into those religions that admitted converts from Hinduism, such as Islam, Christianity and Buddhism. It has not spared even a great social reform movement like the Khalsa Panth, launched 300 years ago, by the warrior-saint Guru Gobind Singh. The invidious character of the caste system has even divided the Dalits into disunited fragments, disabling them from breaking out of this social prison. Decades after B. R. Ambedkar issued the clarion call for its annihilation, caste continues to dominate the social, cultural, religious and political horizon of India. The sun has set over the great British Empire; but not over the Caste Empire.

Hence the eagerness of our Government to forestall the proposed U.N. debate. It is common knowledge that the sole agenda of the Sangh Parivar is to perpetuate the iniquitous caste system under the pretext of Hindu resurgence. It is a measure of the prevalent spiritual illiteracy that this gross misrepresentation has managed to sway many in this country. In the words of Swami Vivekananda, "In religion there is no caste. A man from the highest caste and a man from the lowest may become a monk in India and the two castes become equal. The caste system is opposed to the religion of Vedanta". 

In the euphoria that accompanied the birth of the Republic, it was widely believed that the curses of casteism and communalism would wither away with the rise of secularism and scientific temper. Precisely the opposite has happened. An intolerant and casteist perversion of Hinduism is asserting itself politically. The major institutions of our society and culture are being ideologically colonised. Policies and priorities are being tilted in favour of the upper castes and to the disadvantage of the dalits and minorities. The rights and guarantees enshrined in the Constitution are being eroded. A palpable allergy to dissent is becoming the order of the day. Shadows of despair are lengthening over "the India of our dreams". 

In the emerging, carefully choreographed media debate on caste, it is doubtful if the voice of the victims of caste oppression will be heard at all. Even if it is, it will be formatted strictly within the academic and conceptual parameters set for this debate by the protagonists of the caste order. This is only to be expected, as they are in a position to fix the terminological and ideological framework for this debate. It is naive in the extreme to expect that there can be a fair debate as long as one of the parties enjoys the exclusive right to fix the rules. Hence the rationale for a global debate that could ensure a level playing-field for both sides. The invidious trick that the social, cultural and political elite have played all through history is to invent the scruples that shape human perceptions and options from within. Once these are internalised, the advocacies of the elite seem logically inevitable. Today irrational scruples are being worked up against linking race with caste, even though discrimination and endemic injustice vitiate both. These arbitrary scruples are a far cry from the plight of the caste victims. Sadly, they do not have the polemical weapons to counter this rhetorical offensive.

The time has come to call the bluff on the immorality of the scruples of the establishment. The reeking injustice of perpetuating caste oppression and the irreligion of justifying this aberration in the name of religion must all be seen for what it is. A world free from the scandals of destitution and discrimination, a society where all are free to fulfill their potential, where none is arya or "pariah" for being in the right or wrong wombs, is the minimum goal towards which we need to move together as a nation. If the forthcoming U.N. conference urges us to take a step in this direction, we should avail ourselves of that chance rather than relapse into defensive disarray. 

The discriminatory nature of caste as well as race is duly recognised by the Constitution. Article 15 (which outlaws discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth) and Article 17 (which in effect accepts the existence of caste-based discrimination and its effect of untouchability as racial discrimination) are instances in point. Likewise, Article 29 offers protection against caste-based discrimination in admission to educational institutions. The recognition of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as victims of caste discrimination over the centuries underlies the need to provide for reservation in the Lok Sabha and the legislative assemblies of the States (Articles 331 and 332). Statutory provisions for reversing the ill-effects of discrimination do not make sense unless caste-based discriminations are both prevalent and rampant. 

The stark reality of discrimination that plagues a fifth of India's population continues to stare us in the face. This can no longer be hidden nor justified. Our stature and future as a nation depend on the willingness to acknowledge mistakes and the readiness to correct them, rather than on the stubbornness in denying their prevalence or the adroitness in defending them. At any rate, the question of masking the true nature of the caste system does not even arise; for it is not confined to Indian territory. From here, it has spread to our neighbouring countries and, in that sense, caste-based discrimination is not, strictly speaking, an "internal affair" of our country. The fact that this sub-human pseudo-religious mechanism has survived for so long and that it continues to be ascendant does not prove that it cannot be eradicated. It is unlikely that the caste system, despite its rare genius for survival, continues to remain immune to the challenge of the global order, with the vulnerability of nation- states implied in it, and the inevitable subaltern ferment in the wake of an unprecedented celebration of human awareness. 

This is not a time for academic hair-splitting. It is a time for bold and forward-looking initiatives. The hangers-on of the old order will have to realise sooner or later that their customary framework of discourse has already given way to a global frame of reference. This is bound to rob their rhetoric of the semblance of plausibility it enjoyed till the rise of the global order. Caste is a blatant anachronism in a globalising world. The sooner this is realised, the better it is for the country as a whole. The attainment of an egalitarian society free from the stains of casteism, communalism and corruption, rather than erecting some temples here and there, should be our authentic "national aspiration".