Voice From A 2.5-World Country

This blog is currently being reconstructed. No apologies for inconvenience caused. Deal with it, BUDDY!

I am an Idiot. What’s New?

So Mr. Pomposity Personified is at it again. Of course, it’s not like I ever expected him to stop…

The Latest Salvo:

All this is very exciting for me. I look forward to boarding the AGV one of these days. But it is also a bit sad. India will never have anything that exciting. India just does not have the imagination. We are quite happy with our trains that do an average of 25 km/hr and our top speed trains average around 80 km/hr. It’s strange that passenger train service began in India over 150 years ago. We are a slow moving people.

If one types the words ‘High Speed Rail Link Delhi Mumbai’ one turns up a number of articles - which talk about that the fact that the Indian Government had proposed to build a high-speed rail link (a la the Japanese Shinkansen) between Delhi and Mumbai, in partnership with the Japanese government.

On conducting feasibility studies, and cost-benefit analyses, this plan was revised and replaced with the Mumbai Delhi Industrial Corridor - it was felt that money would be better spent developing industry and creating wealth than building a high-speed rail line which would probably cost the same as a first class airline ticket, and benefit fewer people than the construction of dedicated freight corridors, and industrial hubs across 4 states. But no. The great God of All Things has spoken. Indians lack imagination.

“It’s strange that passenger train service began in India over 150 years ago. “. No. It didn’t. It began in British India 150 years ago, with the express aim of moving resources from the source of exploitation to a point of consumption. But no. We are a ‘Slow Moving People’.

How does one write two posts on the same subject with opposite points of view?

First you say you’re afraid of the car:

I have been reading about the Rs 1 Lakh (about US$2,500) car that Tata Motors is planning on selling soon.

It scares me witless. ……….

Yes, those cars scare the hell out of me.

Of course, then you also suggest what Ratan Tata should have done:

Ratan Tata is the “leader” in question when he decides that he will make the cheap car. Now he could have led alternatively. For instance, he could have called Mukesh Ambani, Aditya Birla, and other assorted movers and shakers of Indian industry and academia and said, “Guys and gals, let’s figure out what we need to do to solve India’s transportation problems. Let’s do the arithmetic and figure out which way we should go. And having figured it out, we push for that public policy to set that goal.

And then finally, without eating the least bit of humble pie (this would be a very nutritious dish in your case, Mr. Pompous Popinjay), you completely switch your stance:

 In any event, Tata Motors is making a game-changing move and I am proud that an Indian corporation is doing so. Way to go, Mr Ratan Tata. May you succeed beyond your wildest dreams.

Interesting.

Two car windscreens smashed, one bribe to the policeman, and broken vase this week. At least I got to work from home. Small mercies….

Response to a response

So although I will never really be acknowledged by The Head Typist, it’s interesting to note that my posts are responded to. I had written earlier about my opinion on the difference between Riots & Terrorism earlier, and why equating the 2 is dangerous. Well, according to the response to that post, Mr. D seems to assume what I am saying is: “Because you cannot punish everyone involved in a riot, you should let it go. But because you can catch all of those responsible for terrorist acts, you should focus on those”.

This is not what I said at all, and far be it from me to say that I am excellent writer and that my point was expressed well previously. So, to clarify, what I had said before is that the reason you should not equate Riots & Terrorism as the same thing is because the root causes are different.

This is why it’s damn near impossible to stop riots, and not terrorist attacks. By all means, punish the ones who are responsible, if it’s realistically possible. Is it possible in the type of riots that occured in Gujarat? So it means we need to punish the chief minister, his cronies, the police, and all of the people, which means some chunk of the citizenry of Gujarat. Best of luck, buddy. Yes, sure, in an ideal world where communists burn in hell, and the New Delhi traffic sticks to its lanes, this would be possible. But it’s not.

SO - how about actually trying to figure out WHY there is so much tension between the Hindus & Muslims of Gujarat that caused an explosion. It was limited to Gujarat - Why didn’t this tension spread to say Assam, or even Delhi for that matter, which is much closer? Why was restricted mostly to Gujarat? Has anybody sat down to determine the reasons? Yes, the Chief Minister incited the State Machinery. But the State Machinery was malleable to his will. How come? If I sat here and incited people to beat up somebody, nobody would listen to me. So how did he get that power? Are there laws that make policemen subordinate to Chief Ministers? Is that why the poplice did as they were told instead of behaving independently? What is the make up of the Gujarat police force? The general demographics of Gujarat. Is one community poorer than the other? If so why? Is it just 400 years of abuse? If yes, then why did this tension not surface elsewhere? Is the police force in other areas more diverse? If yes, then why wasn’t the Gujarati police force that diverse?

And on, and on and on. The causes behind the riots need to be studied, so that future riots don’t happen again. But the Head Typist simply says - killers are monsters, and should be punished. Oh what a lovely black and white world he lives in. Yes, for the most part, killers are monsters, but just like high-caste and low-caste people, black, brown white and yellow people, they are homo-sapiens too. many of them have functioning brains, and many of them are no dumber or smarter than you or I. I AM NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHED. I am saying that just punishing a few of the worst perpetrators in a riot, does not prevent future riots from occuring. 

When we talk about terrorism, punishing the damn fools who tried to blow up parliament, IS ENOUGH. It does send a message to other people out there with similar designs on their mind. It is also possible to CATCH individual terrorists and fry the bastards. The root-cause analysis I’ve mentioned above needs to be conducted to get behind the causes of terrorism too. But, even without that analysis, we can at least prevent the damage done by terrorists, to a REASONABLE extent. Put up metal detectors, x-ray baggage, get dogs to sniff for bombs. Yes, I concede that if somebody is determined to blow you up, they will eventually win. But just because the burglar/terrorist comes in through the window doesn’t mean you leave the door unlocked.

What preventive measures can one take against civil disorder? None. That is why it is called civil disorder. The System. Breaks. Down. So fix the system, or create a new one.

Terrosism is an attempt to fight The System, Riots are an implosion of the System.

If most people are happy with the system, Terrorism will occur, but it will fail, for the most part. If people are unhappy with a system, riots will occur, and terrorism will succeed.