69. WASTED TIME : NATION

69. WASTED TIME : NATION

MEN,  their  time limited on earth, do suffer irrepairable loss when they miss opportunities in life. Life offers no second chances. Hindi poet Anand Bakshi wrote in telling words:

Time passes, never to return

ज़िन्दगी के सफ़र में गुज़र जाते हैं जो मकाम
वो फिर नहीं आते, वो फिर नहीं आते


Zindagi ke safar mein guzar jaate hain jo makam
Woh phir nahi aatae, woh phir nahi aatae

Those landmarks you pass in the journey of life
They never return, they never return.

[makam = maqam in Urdu. It also means destination  ]

सुबहो आती है, रात जाती है
सुबहो आती है, रात जाती है यूँ ही
वक़्त चलता ही रहता है रुकता नहीं
एक पल में ये आगे निकल जाता है
आदमी ठीक से देख पाता नहीं
और परदे पे मंज़र बदल जाता है
एक बार चले जाते हैं जो दिन-रात, सुबहो-शाम
वो फिर नहीं आते...

Subah aati hai, raat jaati hai yunhi 
Waqt chalta hi rehtaa hai rukta nahin
Ek pal mein ye aagae nikal jaata hain
Aadmi teekh se dekh paata nahin
Aur parde pe manzar badal jata hain
Ek baar chale jaate hain jo  din raat subah shaam
Woh phir nahi aatein, woh phir nahi aatein

Morning comes, night departs
In this manner time keeps moving, stops not
Just in a second it moves forward
Man is not able to see this properly
And the view keeps changing
And once the days, the nights, the mornings ,
the evenings pass,
They never come back, they never come back.

[From the 1974 film Aap Ki Kasam. Listen to the song on Youtube.]

That is why the man who feels he has missed or messed up something in life feels so  inconsolably  sad.

Take the tide!

Our master Shakespeare says this in his own way:


Brutus:
There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat…

This is from Julius Caesar. Act IV, Scene III.

Leaders miss chances, nation suffers!

We must be able to recognise an opportunity and seize the moment.  When the person involved is a national leader, his success or failure in understanding affects the whole nation. Thus it is not just the individuals who suffer by wasted time or missed opportunities; countries also do. 

India missed such an opportunity when Gandhi&Co refused to accept the Cripps proposals in March 1942. Had they accepted them, India would not have suffered Partition.

Cripps and Gandhi

Expectations belied

Those of us who have been students of public affairs and watching how the nation has shaped since Independence feel so disappointed. No doubt there were exciting days and a sense of exhilaration.

Years before, Wordsworth had written about the French Revolution:

Oh! pleasant exercise of hope and joy! 

For mighty were the auxiliars which then stood 

Upon our side, we who were strong in love! 

Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, 

But to be young was very heaven!—Oh! times, 

In which the meagre, stale, forbidding ways 

Of custom, law, and statute, took at once 

The attraction of a country in romance! 

When Reason seemed the most to assert her rights, 

When most intent on making of herself 

A prime Enchantress—to assist the work 

Which then was going forward in her name! 

 


He was not dreaming of a new world- this very earth on which we stood was so full of light, love and promise of happiness!

William Wordsworth

And in the region of their peaceful selves;— 

Now was it that both found, the meek and lofty 

Did both find, helpers to their heart's desire, 

And stuff at hand, plastic as they could wish; 

Were called upon to exercise their skill, 

Not in Utopia, subterranean fields, 

Or some secreted island, Heaven knows where! 

But in the very world, which is the world 

Of all of us,—the place where in the end 

We find our happiness, or not at all!

 Our own Subramanya Bharati sang of our freedom fully twenty five years before it actually dawned, and said how the lowly and the lost found their Freedom, how we all became equal!

விடுதலை !  விடுதலை ! விடுதலை !
பறையருக்கும் இங்கு தீயர் புலையருக்கும்  விடுதலை !
பரவரோடு குறவருக்கும் மறவருக்கும் விடுதலை !
திறமைகொண்ட தீமையற்ற  தொழில்புரிந்து யாவரும்
தேர்ந்த கல்வி ஞானம் எய்தி  வாழ்வம் இந்த நாட்டிலே .

He expressed the hope that we would all master learning and flourish in this country undertaking skillful, harmless industry!

Alas! We know how disappointing the French Revolution was in the end, culminating in violence, destruction and horror. Wordsworth renounced all his former enthusiasm for it. Edmund Burke has written a classic critique of it. In 1790, he stated that the Revolution would end in disaster, because it was based on  vague ideas and ignored the complexities of human nature and the realities of society.

Blunders of Nehru:

Economic ruin

For us who have studied (and not merely followed) the way our own economic and political life was organised and directed under Nehru, it has been equally disappointing. There may not have been the outward violence and horror, but the results have been disastrous. 

Nehru's political and economic ideas were acquired and crystallised  while he was in Cambridge (1907-10). They were socialist. Later his visit to Soviet Russia in the 20s made him an admirer of that system, and blind to its faults and horrors. He never learned anything further, and never cared to. He thought he knew everything. His mind was closed.

Though he was with Gandhi, he never fully imbibed Gandhi's ideas on the economy or politics. The moment Gandhi died, he started pursuing  his own  ideas. No doubt he had all good intentions but lacking practical experience in any walk of life, he did not know how to make use of the resources he had. He simply did not know or ignored that  ideologies like socialism, capitalism had undergone changes. Capitalism of the mid-20th century was not what he had learned when he was a student at Cambridge. Nor was socialism what he had imagined  it was.

Indian industry and business had struggled under the British to establish themselves and had acquired expertise and proficiency in many fields. But Nehru totally spurned them in favour of socialist designs. And what did it all  come to? The public sector units ended up as fiefdoms of bloody bureaucrats who did not know a thing, nor cared to learn. Huge investments were made, generating little income, but vastly expanding the bureaucracy. [Whether in private sector or in the public,investment must generate returns so as to cover the cost of investment, and also to provide for replacement and renewal. What the public does not realise is that the govt does not pluck the money from trees, the investment comes from taxation and borrowing and they have to be properly used, which is only when they generate a return. Nehru did not understand the scientific distinction between normal  profits in the economic sense, and 'profiteering'.This is the result of his infantile mind.] 

Nehru was against the concentration of economic power, but was blissfully ignorant of how that very power was being concentrated in the hands of bureaucrats and politicians.Public ownership means in the end govt ownership and control by politicians and  bureaucrats. Both  are not accountable to anyone.  Nehru thus laid the foundations of an oppressive  and economically unproductive regime. Gandhi had said: 

I look upon an increase in the power of the state with the greatest fear, because, while apparently doing good by minimizing exploitation, it does the greatest harm to mankind by destroying individuality which lies at the root of all progress.

The State represents violence in a concentrated and organised form. The individual has a soul, but as the State is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from violence to which it owes its very existence.

What I disapprove of is an organisation based on force which a State is. Voluntary organisation there must be.

Yet Nehru, anointed heir by Gandhi, was expanding and strengthening that very State machinery. The govt of 'free' India became even more oppressive of Indian enterprise than the colonial regime. There were two disastrous consequences:

• India's share in world trade was 1.5% in 1951. It came down to 0.5% in 1991, after 4 decades of centralised planning! This, in spite of the incredibly enormous expansion in mulilateral trade after the Second World War. India under Nehru failed to take advantage of the rising tide of world trade.
• 
  
• The British govt had, during the Second World War, introduced exchange controls with a fixed exchange rate to serve colonial interests. This was continued even after the end of the War and even after Independence with great vigour. It was continued even after the system of fixed exchange rates collapsed all over the world in 1971! All because the idiots who ran our economy swore by Nehru and could not sense his idiocy!

India thus lost 4 decades persisting in economic folly! An entire generation of Indians lost economic opportunities!

Even Hitler called his system "national socialism".

Foreign policy blunders

Another folly of Nehru was in respect of foreign policy. When Pakistan invaded Kashmir, Indian Army was asked to repulse it. While it was engaged in the task, and had very nearly won, it was asked to stop- a blunder no statesman or military general would commit! This was in 1948 and now, 68 years later, this problem is still with us! Two generations of Indians have lived with this problem! 

In these years, Pakistan has also acquired nuclear weapons capability! An aggression which could have been ended in another 48 hours is still continuing after 68 years! It has become an even bigger problem than it was originally!

Nehru initiated Panchsheel and special friendship with China. But there were ominous signs already- as when Tibet was invaded by China. Nehru ignored and ridiculed all those who cautioned him, including Sardar Patel. In 1962, China invaded India and Nehru lost his credibility. It was the very Imperialist America which came to the rescue of India.

But the world has moved forward. Today, the US and China are closely linked economically. Though communist, China has introduced enough reforms and taken advantage of the expanding world economy. India is still raising slogans!

India is reduced to the pathetic position of always trying to catch up!

Domestic bungling

Another area where Nehru wasted his years is in managing domestic polity. He started with tremendous advantages. Though Sardar Patel was the overwhelming choice of the party men, Nehru was foisted on them as the PM by Gandhi.. He was very popular throughout the country. Soon after Independence, Gandhi died. In three years, Patel also died. So there was no restraining influence or authority on Nehru. Yet he failed to take decisive steps in vital matters.

It began with the division of Punjab, Sindh and Bengal. Till the day of Independence, Nehru (who was the interim PM- actually vice-president of the Viceroy's executive council)) did not know the actual division. Mountbatten had called a lawyer  from England who had no idea of Indian politics,and no idea of the demographic composition of the areas. He was made to sit in a secluded bungalow with maps , cut off from everyone, and asked to draw the line between India and Pakistan and complete the job within a month! He delivered his redrawn map on 13 August 1947, but it was not disclosed for another 72 hours. So, Indians did not really know the boundaries till after Independence was declared! 

It was a serious  blunder and the main reason for the refugee problem- not partition as such.

 Nehru could do and did nothing. Mountbatten simply bulldozed him. [ The barrister, Sir Cyril Radcliffe himself was so disgusted with his work that he returned the remuneration he had received for his work]

It is thus Nehru alone who must bear the major blame for the violence associated with the Partition.

After Independence, conflicts arose between states in regard to sharing river waters, borders etc. Orissa had been created in1936 on linguistic basis. Yet, when Telugu people demanded a separate state on the basis of their language, Nehru opposed it. But he quietly agreed to it when a Telugu zealot fasted and died! Yet, when Marathis demanded a separate state for them, involving the bifurcation of the Bombay state, he did not yield till the agitation snowballed and over 100 people died. In the meantime, the Pataskar Commission had been appointed to suggest reorganisation of  North Eastern States. This too left many dissatisfied.

Agitation for separate Telengana from Andhra- both speaking Telugu! What is the logic of the linguistic state now?
picture: newsyahoo.com


 There are disputes to this day between Karnataka and Maharashtra. And linguistic minorities in every state do face discrimination and at times open oppression.

Front cover of a book.

Similar is the case with inter-state water disputes. These continue for years. Nehru was the most powerful leader and his party ruled the states. But he did not solve any of the practical problems of free India! It seems if he could bungle, he would!

Farmers' rally in Tamil Nadu in 2011 demanding end to river water disputes. Picture from The Hindu. 
But how will the disputes end when the same political party in the different states- be it Congress or BJP or others - support the respective states and not fair treatment, or refuse to accept judicial verdict?
In free India, people have forgotten that they are Indians!

With each passing day we are creating more difficulties for ourselves. 

68.SOCIAL LEADERSHIP

68. SOCIAL LEADERSHIP

Cover of the book published by the Yale University Press.Shown here for educational purpose.  Macaulay  is the architect of the Indian mind, still!


Leadership as vision is important in steering a community in turbulent times. Hindus have notoriously failed in this regard. Hindus have faced the threat of Muslims for over 800 years and from the British and the Christian missionaries for over 200 years. But they have failed to evolve a strategy to meet the threat. Against the Muslims, they went into a shell , except during the limited time of Vijayanagar and Maratha empires.Their saint-singers moved among the people and preserved their faith and religion, especially serving the common man. But life as a whole did not flourish.  Against the British, they succumbed to the subtle but steady pressure and embraced their reforms. A small faction of orthodox leaders advocated adherence/return to orthodox ways, with increasingly quixotic consequences and hypocrisy.

Hindu reform under English influence

 In the 18th/19th century, Hindus with English education were enamoured of the ways of the foreigners in almost all spheres. They adopted the foreigners' view of India and Hinduism and wanted to reform Hindu society according to their notions. The work of Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1722-1830) in the areas of politics, administration, education and social/religious reform illustrates this. His main idea seems to have been to secure political advantages for the Hindus by undertaking reform of Hindu religion and society in ways calculated to please the foreigners! He is said to have invented the word "Hinduism" in 1816.

He started the Brahmo Sabha (later Brahmo Samaj) as the reformed Hindu sect, and is said to have fabricated a work of scripture 'Maha Nirvana Tantra' in association with an English missionary and Indian pundit. The legal provisions in it were for a time treated as authoritative Hindu law and the Tagore family became wealthy practising it! The Brahmo Samaj became influential among the English educated Bengali youth but with it came clashes of opinions and  personalities and splits. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa exerted enormous personal influence on their last great leader Keshab Chandra Sen who began to see the merits of the real Hindu religion. All the young disciples of  Ramakrishna were followers of Brahmo Samaj and the brightest of them, Narendranath Dutta became the chief disciple of Ramakrishna as Vivekananda. 

With the rise of Ramakrishna, Hinduism got a new lease of life in Bengal, and fresh vigour. But Ramakrishna was not a social reformer and was a pure spiritual teacher, upholding the validity of traditional Hindu religion. He did not exert much direct influence on society in general. He was a spiritual teacher, not social leader.

English education

English education was introduced in India in 1836, based on the 1935 minute of Macaulay. Ramakrishna was  also born in 1836. But it is Macaulay who has prevailed on society at large, Sri Ramakrishna having been reduced to a cult figure by his own followers.

from:ducis.jhfc.duke.edu/programs
shown here for purely educational purpose.

The problem is not English language as such but the thoughts and ideas introduced through that language, and the intention behind it. Macaulay did not know Sanskrit or Arabic, but proceeded to condemn all Indian literature. By this one stroke, educated Indians were disconnected from their intellectual heritage and traditions.

Macaulay wrote a letter on Oct 12, 1836 to his father in which he stated that ...... He was sure that a Hindu who received English education would never remain faithful to his religion and some of them would embrace Christianity and if the British education plan was followed, there would not be a single idolater among the respected classes in Bengal. All this conversion would be done without proselytizing and religious interference. He said that he rejoiced in the prospect.

Vivekananda became famous after his exploits in the US and strode the land as a colossus. He interpreted the religion on scientific lines. Though he spoke much on Hindu society, he was a religious teacher,not a reformer and did not become a social leader.

Religion and modern life

The problem of Hindus was how to adapt to the changing world without giving up their religion. The modern world has become increasingly secular ( in the sense of not using religious standards to govern life in general: eg. marriage has become a contract, to be approved and annulled by civil courts, and not a sacrament to be governed by religious tenets and mediated by priests.) English became the language of education and public discourse. With it Sanskrit and native languages were neglected. European subjects and ideas were introduced in the name of education, and gradually educated people lost touch with native wisdom. This is the position which prevails even today.

Brahmins were the first to take to English education, because they had no  means of survival other than getting so educated and securing a job, as the old social order which sustained them was collapsing around them. But having received such education, what did they do? Each one lived for himself and not many thought of the community. 

Some politicians from the so called Brahmin community. Are they practising Brahmins? Did they serve the community or provide it leadership?
Picture from outlookindia.com

Settling for petty service

The Brahmins were timid and so by and large settled for the security of low paying clerical jobs. Many became lawyers and doctors, but they were still small numbers compared to the  huge clerical brigade. Even those qualified as engineers did not venture into independent enterprises but sought govt or other employment. There was absolutely no leadership among them. The educated Brahmins could have uplifted their community, but this kind of spirit is totally lacking among them even today. When the Brahmins talk of community, they only think of some meaningless religious ritual or ceremony, which today cannot secure the economic well being of the community. Life today is not centered round the temple or Vedic rite- it is important to realise this clearly.

What is the economic significance of this, except for the priests? Those who arrange for it must earn from other sources! Picture from the New Indian Express.

Let me not be misunderstood. I am not saying that Brahmins should live for themselves. That will be atrocious and inexcusable. All I am pointing out is that they did not even help the less fortunate members of their own community and formulate any plans for their upliftment. How are they going to help the society at large? It certainly is not wrong for someone to help his community just as it is not wrong to support one's own family first. Charity begins at home. But it seems everyone took his community for granted!

Solving the problem of education

Take education alone. Today, there are many highly educated and prosperous people in all communities- including the so called SC/ST, OBC, etc who are also politically powerful. If each community decides to start educational institutions for the exclusive benefit of its own members (which is not wrong or immoral or evil) without depending on the govt, the education problem will be solved! This is how many Christian institutions started! Hindus are so thoughtless  and so devoid of initiative that they always go begging to others. This is due to lack of leadership. Every one thinks of education as just one more way of making money, and no one views it primarily as service, which may, and must, also generate income to be self sustaining. But is it not an ugly thought for a rich man to be thinking of more riches, instead of using his wealth for public welfare? Let us face it: Hindus are about the least public spirited among all the people on earth. They will pour millions to the coffers of temples controlled and looted by the government and its minions, but will not spend enough on educating their own brethren or creating employment.

The Rich as Trustees of the people

Andrew Carnegie, the US steel baron, wrote this memo to himself:

Man does not live by bread alone. I have known millionaires starving for lack of the nutriment which alone can sustain all that is human in man, and I know workmen, and many so-called poor men, who revel in luxuries beyond the power of those millionaires to reach. It is the mind that makes the body rich. There is no class so pitiably wretched as that which possesses money and nothing else. Money can only be the useful drudge of things immeasurably higher than itself. Exalted beyond this, as it sometimes is, it remains Caliban still and still plays the beast. My aspirations take a higher flight. Mine be it to have contributed to the enlightenment and the joys of the mind, to the things of the spirit, to all that tends to bring into the lives of the toilers of Pittsburgh sweetness and light. I hold this the noblest possible use of wealth.

Andrew Carnegie, 1913.

And he wrote this on the uses of wealth in June 1889, in what is known as his "Gospel of Wealth".

This, then, is  held to be the duty of the man of wealth: to set an example of modest, unostentatious living, shunning display of extravagance; to provide moderately for the wants of those dependent upon him; and, after doing so, to consider all surplus revenues which come to him simply as trust funds, which he is called upon to administer .....the man of wealth thus becoming mere trustee and agent for his poor brethren.

90% of his wealth ( about $ 79 billion in today's price) was distributed in philanthropy before he died; the remaining was distributed after his death.


We see here the origin of the Gandhian idea of Trusteeship. Indeed it takes us all the way back to the Isha Upanishad which asks us to reduce our wants and enjoy by renunciation, for is wealth ours? Whose indeed is wealth?

Tena tyaktena bhunjhita 
ma gruda kasya swid dhanam.

True, we are not Carnegies, or Azim Premjis or Narayana Murthys. But when a lakh of us combine, what are these figures? Only, we do not know or care how to organise our little effort to great effect through purposeful philanthropy. Individually, many of us encourage beggary in the name of charity, or donate money to temples for the govt to loot. This is because Hindus lack sensible leadership. 

Brahmins disadvantaged

Among the Hindus, Brahmins alone are at a disadvantage as a group. Every other community has some traditional occupation or source of livelihood, which is not affected by modernising tendencies. Brahmins have to act as the custodians of the religious and sacred lore and tradition- which involves long years of study and discipline. This requires support from the community. But this support is dwindling. In the strict sense, Brahmins should not undertake any occupation just for the sake of money. They cannot compete with others for economic gain. However, this is not possible now due to the drastic socio-economic changes that have taken place. They have to take up- and they are taking up- modern occupations for a living. How to retain the religious traditions while pursuing modern occupations is the crux of their problem.

 And this has to take place in an atmosphere where the community has no political clout  or social influence, and has been marginalised. One would expect real leadership here but that is not happening. To go back to a purely religious life, to embrace poverty and simplicity - as recommended by some respected religious leaders- is not a solution or an option for the community as a whole. Brahmins cannot go back. In the last 100 years they have completely lost their rural roots and orientation. They are now urban and internationally mobile. Economic problem is the main question before them- not religion. Society as a whole has changed. But  religious leaders are unable to offer a solution, while most followers are hypocrites.

Failure of leadership

This is the result of the failure of leadership. The Brahmin community did well in the previous two/three generations. But the community failed to provide for itself! It remained at the mercy of political establishment. It did not build educational or employment opportunities on its own.[Even where the old leaders started something, the followers have not been able to maintain it, in the new political climate.] It now suffers the consequences! The initiative has entirely passed on to other hands and they are increasingly denied public space. The govt may be expected to become even more indifferent- if not hostile- in the years to come, considering that the community does not constitute a large or consolidated vote bank! They have to rise by their own efforts- aimed at the benefit of the community as a whole. This is something they have not done so far in history! 

Every community is now organised politically! Indian politics is caste -based, though every one talks against it! 
Brahmins alone do not count as a group! Brahmins alone have no support from any political party!

Uplifting self by self: Parsi example

Is there an example of a community in India which is self-governing, which has a community organ to take care of its interests, and which provides leadership? Yes- we have the Parsi community. They have the Parsi Panchayat - 5 community elders elected every 7 years by the vote of the adult Parsi population. The Panchayat decides all internal questions. No doubt there are groups and dissensions- it is bound to be among educated, intelligent people. But look at the over all results of leadership. They were the first to take up modern education. They concentrated on professions like law, engineering. They entered business, Their enterprising elders started industries. They were noted for hard work, integrity, charity. Whatever they did, they built up a reputation for reliability. They did not rely on govt. jobs. They made themselves. In their community, no one begs. No one is allowed to roam the streets, idle. The elderly and the indigent are cared for by the Panchayat. They do not look up to ma-baap sarkar.

Parsi fire temple- Bombay

 It is a small community, but they know how to take care of themselves. The Parsi Panchayat in Bombay owns and administers 5000 flats which it allots on subsidised basis to poor Parsis.But their definition of "poor" is one who earns less than Rs.90,000 p.m. and has assets of less than Rs. 25 lakhs! This itself shows the level of their overall prosperity.That is what leadership has done. The Parsis are phenomenal in their philanthropy, as in  their  enterprise and earning. There are of course crooked Parsis who are litigation prone. There are also problems relating to young Parsis settled or working abroad, but there the crux is about mixed marriages and admitting foreigners into their fold. One has to be born a Parsi- one cannot be converted. In this sense, Parsis are like a Hindu  "Caste". Because of this rule, the community has remained small- there are  about 80,000 Parsis,in India after all these centuries!  But they manage their affairs through their elders and thus are self-governing, though Indian courts are prone to interfere in their internal religious matters. One has to seriously examine the question of why and whether a civil court of a secular country can interfere in the religious affairs and practices of a community where it does not affect the rights of others, so long as we do not have a common civil code. 

Parsis queuing to vote in their Panchayat elections, Mumbai.picture from Mid Day.

I have written mainly about Brahmins here because they alone have no supporters among the politicians. No matter what they do- remove the tuft, give up the sacred thread, change name, etc, they will still be identified as Brahmins and discriminated against officially! It is for their elders to realise this and find ways to help the community on their own, without expecting govt support and without being a burden to others. They cannot continue like cats closing their eyes and imagining the world to be dark (or rosy)! And in the meantime indulging in empty rituals.

www.catster.com