A post I read today set me thinking about the link between fanaticism and economic and social deprivation. Logic would suggest that the dispossesed and the disenfranchised would have less of a stake in furthering stability and peace in society.
Its not surprising that the uneducated and the impoverished in third world countries are loyal followers of all manner of fanatcial and extremist ideologies -- from religious fundamentalism to the fanatical adulation of film starts and politicians, the latter being unique to the South Asian sub-continent. Recall the hysterical outpourings of grief that are routinely witnessed when politicians who are idolised in their lifetime decide to kick the bucket -- MGR in South India, Jinnah in Pakistan and Mujibur Rahman in Bangladesh are a few examples.
The only exception to the rule seems to be Middle America. Last week, I was watching Barbara Walters interview uber-evangelist Joel Osteen about his church in Houston, TX. as far as evangelical Christians go, I suppose Osteen is pretty mild -- nothing in the league of Pat Buchanan or Sen. Rick Santorum
Friday, April 13, 2007
Indian Politicians
I read an interesting discussion about the causative factors behind political corruption in India. Most people, self included, get all riled up and self-righteous when we talk about corrupt politicians. Of course, cynical Bollywood films, where the politician is the personification of every evil known to mankind, only indicate how deep-rooted our contempt for the political class is.
Its almost as if the profession has become some kind of lightening rod about what ails our economy, and our democracy. Remember Operation Duryodhana, where a group of journalists launched a sting operation against politicians who offered to ask questions during parliamentary debates in return for monetary compensation? Or the Tehelka expose about kickbacks given to senior officials of the defence ministry and the military?
Unless one stubbornly insists on burying one's head in the sand -- its quite obvious that the Rules of the Game are set up such that, in economic terms, there are strong incentives for corruption, and very weak rewards for those who refuse to be corrupt.
Its almost as if the profession has become some kind of lightening rod about what ails our economy, and our democracy. Remember Operation Duryodhana, where a group of journalists launched a sting operation against politicians who offered to ask questions during parliamentary debates in return for monetary compensation? Or the Tehelka expose about kickbacks given to senior officials of the defence ministry and the military?
Unless one stubbornly insists on burying one's head in the sand -- its quite obvious that the Rules of the Game are set up such that, in economic terms, there are strong incentives for corruption, and very weak rewards for those who refuse to be corrupt.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Indian Marriage
Its conventional wisdom to claim that the institution of Marriage is in a state of flux -- at least it seems to be, for us middle-class, urban Indians.
As a divorced woman, I can say that I've been on both sides of the fence. I have played the role of the angelic wife and daughter-in-law and simmered silently with long-suppressed resentment. Now that divorce has rid me of my marital chains, I have this bitter-sweet longing to be enslaved by those very chains.
Before anyone says 'I told you so', let me clarify -- my longing for the 'Mrs' tag is motivated by a desire to obtain the unconditonal acceptance that society bestows on Married Women. I think marriage is a great camouflage, it certifies that you are a productive, upstanding member of Indian society, fully committed to maintaining the status quo in all its tacky, hypocritical glory. The "married" tag also affords a middle-class woman a measure of safety -- in the guise of social respectability. Her trouble-making capacity is greatly reduced, as is her ability to rebel against convention, because now, she herself is a stakeholder.
Like everything else in this world, Indian Marriage can both be a life-saver and a deal-breaker. At its best, it coaxes the purest and noblest out of people - spurring them to step out of themselves and give a little of themselves to family, society and country.
The economist in me wonders if the punishing work culture that is so prevalent in white collar India would have been possible had we not had such a stellar support system -- patient wives who uncomplainingly put up with workaholic husbands, generous and long-suffering in-laws who will care for their grandchildren when the parents are at work, selfless parents who will feed and wait on their tired progeny, who have nothing left to give after a 60 or 70-hour work week.
The Indian Marriage is the bulwark of the Great Indian Family -- its warp and weft. Its the glue that keeps our society together, and helps the ordinary Indian survive exploitation at the hands of an indifferent and corrupt bureacracy, and a political class that seems to have become so cynical that one wonders if they are still human.
How is it then, that our public sphere is so corrupt and soul-less, when our private lives are so rich, replete with the spirit of giving, generosity, affection and selfless love?
Why don't these admirable qualities seep into our public spaces and pervade our public lives? How does a dutiful son and loving father transform himself into a corrupt politician or spineless bureaucrat the moment he steps out of his house?
As a divorced woman, I can say that I've been on both sides of the fence. I have played the role of the angelic wife and daughter-in-law and simmered silently with long-suppressed resentment. Now that divorce has rid me of my marital chains, I have this bitter-sweet longing to be enslaved by those very chains.
Before anyone says 'I told you so', let me clarify -- my longing for the 'Mrs' tag is motivated by a desire to obtain the unconditonal acceptance that society bestows on Married Women. I think marriage is a great camouflage, it certifies that you are a productive, upstanding member of Indian society, fully committed to maintaining the status quo in all its tacky, hypocritical glory. The "married" tag also affords a middle-class woman a measure of safety -- in the guise of social respectability. Her trouble-making capacity is greatly reduced, as is her ability to rebel against convention, because now, she herself is a stakeholder.
Like everything else in this world, Indian Marriage can both be a life-saver and a deal-breaker. At its best, it coaxes the purest and noblest out of people - spurring them to step out of themselves and give a little of themselves to family, society and country.
The economist in me wonders if the punishing work culture that is so prevalent in white collar India would have been possible had we not had such a stellar support system -- patient wives who uncomplainingly put up with workaholic husbands, generous and long-suffering in-laws who will care for their grandchildren when the parents are at work, selfless parents who will feed and wait on their tired progeny, who have nothing left to give after a 60 or 70-hour work week.
The Indian Marriage is the bulwark of the Great Indian Family -- its warp and weft. Its the glue that keeps our society together, and helps the ordinary Indian survive exploitation at the hands of an indifferent and corrupt bureacracy, and a political class that seems to have become so cynical that one wonders if they are still human.
How is it then, that our public sphere is so corrupt and soul-less, when our private lives are so rich, replete with the spirit of giving, generosity, affection and selfless love?
Why don't these admirable qualities seep into our public spaces and pervade our public lives? How does a dutiful son and loving father transform himself into a corrupt politician or spineless bureaucrat the moment he steps out of his house?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)