The media’s obsession with war – a way to show patriotism

I try my best to avoid mocking Donald Trump but there was a recent interview on Fox News which I was unable to ignore.  I want to use that interview to showcase the sick attitude in the media.

Most critics on this interview focused on the wrong part, which is Trump’s obsession on explaining the Chocolate cake. I found a particular point quite curious. In the 8th second of the video, Mario Bartiromo the fox news interviewer asks a question “was that planned? .. because right there you are saying a reminder who the superpower in the world is….”. She says that with what I see as a condescending smirk, an expression I am increasingly seeing amongst republicans addressing the media. If you replace Donald Trump with Barrack Obama, that question could have definitely come from Jake Tapper  or Anderson Cooper of CNN. This attitude definitely exemplifies what is wrong with the media.

Every media outlet has been supportive of Trump’s strikes in Syria. They see subservience to the moral policing of the NATO forces headed by the US, the military strikes in the middle east and the regime changes across the globe as a way to prove their patriotism and also satisfy their owners who have heavily invested in arms dealers and manufacturers.

Though the reasons to support the military might could be different, the media attitude towards this testosterone-infused governance is quite pervasive across the globe. Countries like China, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Australia, the UK, Philippines have become glowing examples of military reverence. A mere act of questioning the military action is considered immoral and seditious.

Australia needs to find its Bernie Sanders or will get Pauline Hanson as the Prime Minister soon !!!!

Australia has a history of picking up the global cues slowly. This has been both an advantage and disadvantage. We have never been able to be at the forefront of innovation but were never impacted by big issues either. However, I see a horrifying pattern politically, something which Australia haven’t learnt from the political turmoil in the US and Europe. Let me use an example of last week’s parliament to prove this point.

Last week, the Coalition government under Malcolm Turnbull was busy trying to pass its Tax Cuts bill in the parliament. This bill will give tax breaks to enterprises, which will be transferred to the wealthy investors. On the other hand, they debated a lot about reducing the family tax rebate. The former according to them creates jobs while the latter creates lazy people. Can you see the trickle down economic theory in action? One would expect Labour to present a valid alternative for this, but their brand of politics has become despicably bad at the Federal level.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/jobs-lost-without-taxcut-plan-turnbull/news-story/0c39ef828553734b0e94c7cf2eadb2a7

http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/workers-miss-out-due-high-business-tax-pm/news-story/bd0f07a3f88c2fd1b770e4744e38b24e

On the other hand, Pauline Hanson and her team have gone on a strike, holding the Government to ransom. She wants to address the plight of Sugar farmers. She is demanding a national code of conduct for the Industry. Her point was to stand up for the people who voted for her. For the workers in the Sugar Industry or from other industries watching this, think who will look like a saviour?

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/03/27/pauline-hanson-go-strike-over-sugar

Pauline Hanson is known for the racist rhetoric. Her firebrand anti-immigration and anti-Muslim speech has drawn a comparison with Donald Trump. However, Pauline Hanson has been running this kind of politics since 1990s and has got much more political experience than Donald Trump. My friends who have lived longer in Australia are vouching that Australians will never elect someone like Pauline Hanson. My point to them is, 8 years back no one in the US thought they will elect Donald Trump. It is no racism folks, it is economics. Distressed people will automatically move to parties which recognise their problems. The increase in senate seats for One Nation party and emergence of the Shooters, Fisher and Farmer party in Orange is all an indication of how the ground is shifting beneath our feet. The progressives have to act or risk losing the hard fought social pluralism and harmony.

How do we arrest this slide?

The conservative party is a party for the wealthy. Their philosophy is to stand up for the rich under the name of employment. They lure everyone with wealth for all and hand them over to the wealthy individuals and enterprises. I don’t see that changing as any shift from that policy will mean they will no longer be a Conservative party. I have another detailed article to break the myths propagated by these parties through magazines like Financial Review. Financial Review is made to look like the magazine for intellectuals however, it is more a propaganda machine for the liberal(a.k.a. conservative/libertarian) principles.

The alternative to that is a real progressive party. A party which stands up for the workers and collective development. I don’t see the labour party in the current form do that. It needs a movement and systemic change where they move away from centrist ideas and expose the pitfalls in the policies. They need to have policies depicting real progressive ideas and support for the population. Remember, to get elected the wealthy can give you ads but people give you votes. Australia doesn’t have Koch brothers, Walton family or Murdoch family to invest in long-term systemic deterioration of the society.

The labour party has to cleanse its leadership team and identify a fresh set of people who can lead it to the next generation. They need concrete policies which will do the below.

1. Arrest outflow of jobs

Free market capitalism works only for the wealthy. There is a continuous outflow of both skilled and unskilled labour which has to be arrested. Australian consumers are not paying a lot lesser for goods manufactured outside. Unlike the popular perception, the wealth created as a result doesn’t go to other countries but to the top 1% in Australia. This approach which was initiated by Richard Nixon helps the creditor class but is not sustainable. Every country from the US to Australia, India to China need to create jobs locally to sustain its economy.

I am not against Globalisation or distributed form of working. I like the fact that countries in a way can support each other. However, from a macroeconomic stand point, it is not sustainable unless we address it locally. One cannot shift jobs outside at the expense of the local population, without providing a viable and rewarding alternative.

2. Investment to the next rural industry

The mining boom is coming to an end. The banking on accumulated minerals or fossil fuels is not a sustainable form of development. The government now needs to look at the next big industry for the rural Australia. The investment which will take Australia to the forefront of sustainable energy, infrastructure. This means we need to look at investment in Science and Technology. This means we have to invest in building up the infrastructure for the next set of industries in making this a reality.

3. Make companies pay their fair share of taxes

Financial Times is not a newspaper it is a propaganda machine. I will break their myths later but providing tax cuts to companies will not generate jobs. Most of these companies are Australian and will not move out. They have to pay their fair share of taxes so that we address the problem of dwindling government revenue. The conservative government makes us believe that we have a debt problem and we need to cut costs. It is factually untrue.

4. Arrest inflow of Foreign investment which drives local prices higher

A moderate inflation is an indication of collective growth, however opening up markets for investment without proper regulations will lead to hyper-inflation and hyper deflation. We leave ourselves at the whim of investors. Investors love hyper-inflation as it increases their returns.

Let us take the property industry in Australia. The price has been increased dramatically by foreign investment and government doesn’t want to arrest it. It has a massive macroeconomic aspect. The creditors want the price to go up as more people will take a mortgage to finance a property. The property industry wants this inflation as it drives their bottom line up. There are two fundamental points to be noted here.

  1. The growth in property prices is not in line with growth in affordability. This indicates that the prices have been artificially inflated and is not sustainable.
  2. Unless you control it, the fall is going to be dramatic and more definitely traumatic. It is going to impact every piece of savings which people have from Super to pension funds.

I have definitely seen this trend in other parts of the world, especially Chennai where property prices increased beyond the affordability because of factors from outside. It is not sustainable.

I want people to go through the below link. There is a callousness in the explanation which has to be discussed.

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/topics/investment/Pages/the-benefits-of-foreign-investment.aspx

The two key reasons for foreign investment mentioned are

  1. Capital to finance new industries and enhance existing industries, boosting infrastructure, productivity, and employment opportunities in the process.
  2. The higher growth supported by foreign investment pays dividends for all Australians by increasing tax revenues to Federal and State Governments and increasing the funds available to spend on hospitals, schools, roads and other essential services.

The first one is a simple problem to fix. Use public debt to finance the projects. Public debt is an amazing way to generate jobs and give money back to the public, instead of using foreign money to give returns back to the wealthy. The second one is an abject lie. Firstly, the Government is reducing taxes on these investments, thanks to taxation policies and free trade agreements. The effect is a reduction is spending on hospitals and schools as seen in our budget.

5. Diversify the trade portfolio

Australia is banking on trade from very few countries, the US and China hold the majority of it. Leaving protectionism aside, Australia has to derisk its revenue streams.

I suggest people go through this link for further details.

http://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/trade-investment/australias-trade-in-goods-and-services/Pages/australias-trade-in-goods-and-services-2015-16.aspx

Just on the export front the top two countries China and Japan account for 40% of Australian exports. That poses a massive threat to the Australian economy. There is a need to diversify and derisk this portfolio. There is a positive correlation between Australian economy and Chinese economy at the moment.

6. Increase budget for Health Care, Education and Welfare Schemes

When you give tax cuts to the wealthy, your revenue goes down. In order to balance the budget, you are then left with two options

  1. Devalue your currency
  2. Cut the spending on key government funded programmes.

The first one will affect the wealthy while the second will affect the common people. The choice is obvious. The axe always falls on Healthcare, education and other welfare schemes. They can easily be covered through budget cuts. Above all the damage is not felt immediately but in the next generation. These schemes are promises to the next generation which the government makes. It is analogous to me buying a house today by taking a loan hoping it will pay for me when I retire. The promise kept by the previous governments are the reason why the current crop of people is doing well. This has to be continued for the sake of humanity, collective growth and scientific development.

7. Take bold steps on handling extremism

Staying silent and blaming few people post the incident will not help allay the fears of people when it comes to extremism. It is an imminent threat and needs a secular, inclusive solution. Australia can definitely be at the forefront of handling this.  I have already detailed this in my previous article on the same topic.

Understand terrorism before acting

In Summary, time is quickly running out. People have to recognise the depression we are heading into. It is time for action otherwise, we will soon start blaming racism, xenophobia etc.  There is a dire need to act in this regard.

Wikileaks – love them, fear them, hate them, can’t ignore them

Julian Assange is arguably the most famous and even the most impactful journalist of my generation. There have been some famous ones including people like Christopher Hitchens but none has been as popular globally as Mr.Assange. He has got politicians after his life, bureaucrats running for cover and progressive activists waiting for his next revelation. However, his behaviour recently has been clouded with mystery. There is a suspicious tie up between him and Trump campaign. It is fine for him to support anyone but he is too well respected amongst progressive circles to support a candidate like Trump. Then, Nigel Farage visited Assange and had a brain fade on why he did so. It was a pretty weird case. I want to break down my feel of why people feel differently about Julian Assange and why I feel his recent behaviours have been suspicious.

Timing of the DNC email leaks

This is arguably the first item which shook the US Primaries. While most of the progressive media were supporting Bernie Sanders, there was massive corruption in the primaries to ensure Hillary Clinton wins. It was kind of an open secret to people who were following it closely. However, there was no concrete weapon to fight. Wikileaks, on the other hand, was silently collecting these weapons. They could have released them any day. That could have ensured that the progressives rally to ensure Hillary did not get selected.

Wikileaks decided to release the documents on the day of the convention. It exposed the inherent bias of DNC and its chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I was happy that they released it but I wanted it to be released sooner. When asked Julian’s response wasn’t convincing. There seems to be a clear plan here against Bernie Sanders and ensuring that he doesn’t get elected. This is not free, fair and unbiased media. This feels like fair but controlled media.

Subsequent interviews on the US election

After the primaries and right through the General Election process, there was a youtube channel which hosted all the Julian Assange interviews. He continuously kept mentioning points on the establishments plotting against Trump. I could get hold of a couple for now. I agree to all the accusations on Hillary Clinton and the CIA. The surprising thread to the story was him denying knowing anything about Donald Trump. It feels like there is a deeper connection here. Did Assange decide Trump was the lesser of the two evils? If it is, does that account for unbiased journalism?

 

Meeting with Nigel Farage

There is something really crazy about the secret meeting between Julian Assange and Nigel Farage. I can’t think of anything common between the two. Nigel is a poster child of horrible ideas. Julian wants to carry the mantle of the free press and progressive ideas. What is the connection? What makes it worse is Nigel cannot remember the conversation right outside Ecuador’s embassy where he met Julian.

For people who don’t know Nigel Farage, please go through his Wikipedia link here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Farage

Trump talks about Obama wiretapping a day before Wikileaks releases the documents

This is another surprising coincidence. Donald Trump sends tweets about Obama wiretapping him exactly a days before Wikileaks released documents on wiretapping. There was no evidence of Obama wiretapping Trump in that and I definitely want WikiLeaks to release those documents. However, there is a strange connection in terms of timing. I am not sure how it is playing out.

In conclusion, I was and still am in favour of the free press movement of Julian Assange. They have instilled fear in the hearts of the political establishments by exposing corruption. However, it is becoming increasingly unclear to me if it is still a free press. There are a lot of questions in my head on what is brooding under the surface.

 

Understand terrorism before acting

Most of us in Australia woke up on 24th Mar to the news of another terror attack in London. I have lived in the city, so I do have an affinity towards the place. It is another horrifying act of violence. I feel religious terrorism is pervasive and not isolated to just Islam. Islam has become its poster child but other religions like Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism are causing enough damage through terror. They are doing it in a way that doesn’t get as much coverage and the biased media is helping their cause.

The recent attacks showcase the grave reality of the modern world. These attacks are from the citizens of the respective countries. Some of these people have recently been converted to Islam. Most of them were moderates till a few months back. Further, they haven’t used any major weapon. The world today is more vulnerable than the last century. People are using domestic knives and cars to cause more damage than a bomb might. We cannot use traditional methods to handle this new age problem.

For the sake of this blog, I want to focus on terrorism under the name of Islam. I want to provide my unbiased view on the situation to the best of my ability. I would like to do this by first breaking the back of the popular opinions and then providing a view of my own. Most of these popular opinions have some facts backing them but they are fairly unidimensional.

Common Left Wing views

Absolve Religion

All of us would have heard or seen the below quotes everytime there is a terror attack.

“Islam is a religion of peace.”
“Terrorists don’t have a religion.”
“Don’t blame the religion. It is just a few individuals.”

These statements can help moderate the reaction but they are not factual.These statements are meek attempts to address Islamaphobia and people have started looking through these.

One can remove Islam and replace it with any other religion and it is still not true. There is no religion of peace. All religions give enough levers for people to justify violence. Be it Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism etc.

Blame Geo-politics

There is a lot of cause-effect relationship between most global issues and foreign policies. I acknowledge and condemn the western imperialism. However, blaming Geo-Politics alone as a reason for this masks the truth totally. For example, the last few terror attacks on western nations have all been conducted by the respective citizens. They are not directly impacted by the foreign policies but for their religious views.

Common Right-wing reactions

Divisive policies against Islam

Right wingers are waiting to come up with divisive strategies to further their dirty interests. They blame it on Islam. It is peculiar considering people don’t associate terrorism to the Christian extremism in Russia and Africa, the Hindu extremism in India, Judaism in Isreal or the Buddhist extremism in Burma and Sri Lanka. Pauline Hanson said a yesterday that “Islam is a disease and we need to vaccinate”. The problem with this approach is it tells the world that we believe only one religion is like this. It alienates moderates who are needed to reform the idea. I sincerely believe all religions are part of the same disease but isolating one over the other will not help us win the war on faith. Further, divisive strategies like this are detrimental and gives opportunity to further the divide

Pauline Hanson said a yesterday that “Islam is a disease and we need to vaccinate”. The problem with this approach is it tells the world that we believe only one religion is like this. It alienates moderates who are needed to reform the idea. I sincerely believe all religions are part of the same disease but isolating one over the other will not help us win the war on faith. Further, divisive strategies like this are detrimental and it gives an opportunity to further the divide.

Invasion

Invading countries hasn’t helped till date to handle terrorism. It has resulted in creating more extremist outfits and has destroyed families of people who were supporters of our way of life. I am not a pacifist. There are instances which demand targetted military strikes to ensure a specific mission is accomplished. For example, I am all in favour of siding with PKK to fight ISIS. Further, it exposes the hypocrisy. The government is Isreal or Saudi Arabia does nothing different from some of the other terrorist states. However, no one takes any concrete action against either of the nations.

Secondly, an invasion exposes the hypocrisy of the western world. The government of Isreal or Saudi Arabia does nothing different from the terrorist nations. However, no country ever takes action on these.

My Views on the causes

One cannot attribute the expansion of terrorism to just one reason the religion. Islam has existed for more than 13 centuries now. Terrorism of some form has existed through history and there has been a need to fight them. Here are the most concrete reasons.

Here are the most concrete reasons I can think.

  1. Islam is the latest religion to join the bandwagon of global extremism. They follow Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and Judaism to use force to spread their views. Islam is fairly new and it’s ideologies haven’t transformed yet. I look at it like like early earth. It needs time to think and calm down. The extremist views of Islam are no different from other religions, just that it hasn’t settled down yet.
  2. Economic anxieties and inequalities in wealth distribution results in the rise of fundamental behaviours. You need not go beyond rural parts of the developed nations to see an evidence of this. When people outside the USA think of the country, they only think of the east coast or California. Do people know the state of rural Mississippi? The economic issues in the state have resulted in people becoming more conservative and hold strong religious views. It has only helped the place go backwards. Most countries which act as a source of terrorism are ridden with these issues.
  3. There is a lot of anguish and disgust as people see the evidence of destruction caused by the continuous invasion of the Islamic nations. There have been atrocities committed in the past, however, it has taken years if not centuries for information to spread. Now, it is a matter of minutes. The damage caused by the wars have been captured and played repeatedly into the minds of the vulnerable. There hasn’t been a positive story to showcase the effects of the western world. This has impacted the image of the western world. The distressed people now have a way to vent their frustrations through these terror organisations.
  4. Insensitive, stupid and callous moves from the right wing parties of other religions add to the cause. When an anxious group is given weapons and more reason to be worried, they go back to the roots of survival. Comments made by people like Donald Trump, Pauline Hanson are massive triggers to the extreme group. Isolation has never created peace.
  5. Status of Women in any society determines the sustainability of any development. If you look at these nations, women are subjugated. There is no freedom of movement, speech or expression for these women. The education level amongst women is low and even when they are educated it is controlled and limited to only religious education. Every religion has empowered men and given them powers to enslave women. This has to change and in this aspect, slow change is not acceptable.
  6. The left wing and the liberal Muslim media have shied away from exposing these. They have spent most of the time defending the rights of the rest and less on the atrocities committed by the terror organisations. Television channels like Al-Jazzerra for example, haven’t done enough to expose and drive change in the Muslim world. The same media bias is true with the terrorism caused by the other religious groups.
  7. The rise of Saudi Arabia has a direct correlation with the rise of Islamic Terrorism. The Wahabi movement, an extreme form of Sunni Islam was started by   Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. This was adopted by Saudi King Abdul-Aziz Ibn Saud in the early 1900s after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. He used that to further the power of his autocracy. This was contained till Saudi discovered oil. Post that discovery, the western world through all its trade deals kept pumping money into Saudi Arabia in return for oil. As Saudi grew richer so did their Wahabi philosophy. They used the money from oil to spread their dangerous philosophies which not only impacts the non-Muslims but also other sects of Muslims.

How to we handle this?

Stop bombing countries under the name of liberation

The NATO forces are currently intervening the seven sovereign countries. Most of these countries are not democratic but not all cultures are ready for democracy. If you want to liberate any group, empower them to fight the battle without actually being involved in the war.

The NATO forces combined have some of the most powerful weapons the world has seen. These cause immense damage to the civilian population and that builds more resentment to the allied forces.

The world hasn’t built a war strategy to handle Gorilla warfare. There is a reason why Che Guevara believes it to be the most evolved form of warfare. You cannot defeat it without resulting in massive collateral damage. The war in Afghanistan has lasted for 15 years but it hasn’t still successfully eliminated Taliban.

Get more moderate Muslims into the mainstream

London has a Muslim mayor now. The result is the fellow members of the community listen to him and he is seen as an example of what Muslims can become in the society. The western society needs more such people in the field of politics, public discourse and media.

Build positive stories of investment in the Muslim world

The media needs stories of west building schools and hospitals in the Muslim world. They need better infrastructure, education, jobs for both men and women. As such stories spread it will solve both the refugee crisis and above all eliminate the source of terrorism, which is videos depicting western damage. In doing all this, it is important to ensure the benefit goes to the local population.

Formulate policies for empowerment of Muslim women and education of children

It is extremely important to have local policies where Muslim children receive education and the women are empowered. The more independent the women are, the better they will be able to drive their society. These policies are intergenerational plans and the impact will be slow but steady.

Reduce dependency on Saudi

The source of the Wahabi terrorism is Saudi Arabia. They are also the reason why the western world in Anti-Iran. The funding for this comes from oil and the world needs to move away from dependency on Saudi Arabia. This will cut off the key artery for the terror funding and will organically reduce the impact.

Take UN actions against both Saudi Arabia and Isreal

It is a lot easier to acknowledge the state terrorism in  Saudi Arabia than it is Isreal. The history of persecution of Jews makes everyone feel guilty. However, I look at antisemitism and questioning policies of Isreali government as two different entities. The governments of the world have to acknowledge the impact of the Isreali occupation of the Westbank and take necessary actions to pressurise them. It should also stop providing intelligence support to both the countries. Isreal has created as much damage to the rest of the secular world through its policies as Saudi Arabia has.

Encourage and support the debates within the Muslim world

The best way for the Muslim world to learn and understand is when people come out and have healthy debates in the public space. We need to encourage their leaders to come out and discuss. This will expose both sides of their world and make people reflect on the shortcomings.

Showcase the positive impact of the Muslim community

One key item which gets ignored by the media is the positive impact caused by the Muslim community. This includes people who have dedicated their lives to public works, arts, science and social development. This inverses the present state and will go a long way in eliminating Islamaphobia.

In conclusion, faith is evil in general but the society cannot progress if we start blaming one religion over the other. I am in favour of eradication of all religions in general. Only education and empowerment of women will accelerate the extinction of this stone age belief system.

Yogi Adiyanath – The next Modi??

I recently wrote an article on living with Narendra Modi’s past and the approach for the future. Can’t forget or forgive so, have to live with it. One of the points was to oppose him on the policy front. I didn’t have to wait long as he appointed  Yogi Adityanath as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. Here is my take on the situation.

Yogi Adityanath is not just a Hindu lover but a fundamentalist who wants the country to have one religion which is Hinduism. I have personally seen his mansion inside the Goraknath Temple in Gorakhpur in UP. It looks like a secret service building with strong men with firearms in Saffron standing outside. You need to wonder why a Yogi needs so much security.

I want to break this blog down to two parts. Part 1 is on the facts about Yogi Adiyantha and part 2 is why I think he was selected.

Facts

  1. Born Ajay Singh Bisht, he is a product of the Ayodhya Temple / Babri Masjit demolition movement which happened in early 1990s.
  2. Mahant Avaidyanath, who was the head of the Gorakhnath Temple, rechristened him to Yogi Adiyanath and made him the successor.
  3. Adiyanath was first elected to parliament in 1998 and has been a member of the parliament from Gorakhpur since then.
  4. He has got a series of criminal cases against him including the below
    1. Rioting – He was charged for the Gorakhpur riots in 2007 (smell Gujarat 2002!!!!)
    2. Attempt to murder
    3. Armed with deadly weapons
    4. Criminal intimidation
    5. Tresspassing of burial places
    6.  Promoting enmity based on religion, race, place of birth, residence etc
  5. He supported Donald Trump’s muslim ban and wanted India to do the same
  6. He wanted people who don’t do yoga to leave hindustan or drown in the sea
  7. He shared stage with a person who requested hindus to dig up graves of muslim women to rape their corpses
  8. He formed a group called Hindu Yuva Vahini, which is a nationalist hindu organisation with extremist views.
  9. He led a ‘purification’ drive for conversion of Christians to Hinduism

Breakdown

I read an article in Rediff.com on whether selecting Yogi Adiyanath is similar to Advani selecting Modi. Advani hoped Modi will stay under him and it back fired. As much as there are similarities, my opinion is different.

Narendra Modi is a smart operator. Much like Vajpayee, he has two parts to his personality. The first one is administerial which claims of being inclusive and focuses on development. The other one which is religious. He gets the right religious people to ensure traditional divide and rule policy continues to work. People like Yogi Adiyanath fits into the latter.

Modi has a strong bond with people who don’t have a family. If you look at the Haryana, Assam and Uttrakhand all have chief ministers who haven’t married. It is lot easier for you to maintain your extremist positions and bridge the divide between  your personal and public lives if you are single. Modi definitely sees that in Adiyanath.

Adiyanath has a strong follower base in UP. He has won consistently since 1998. If BJP harbours thoughts of getting re-elected in 2019, then the state of Uttar Pradesh is extremely crucial. Modi needs a strong person over there who will by hook or crook get him seats.

If you put Modi and Adiyanath’s CV side by side, you will definitely find starking similarities. Both are hardcore hindutva supporters, firebrand orator, ability to incite violence, strong ability to create unrest and stay in power and above all association with the Sangh parivar. In effect, Modi could be grooming a successor for him at the national level in 10 years time.

So, unlike many people I want to give credit to Modi on this move. I don’t think it was done out of compulsion but it is a calculated move with elections in mind. This is also a move that should concern progressive. Yogi Adiyanath could become a serious contender at the national level unless there is a ground up movement to identify alternatives.

References

http://www.dailyo.in/politics/yogi-adityanath-up-assembly-polls-communal-bjp/story/1/16253.html

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/yogi-adityanath-uttar-pradesh-chief-minister-gorakhpur-bjp/1/907812.html

http://www.elections.in/political-leaders/adityanath-yogi.html

http://thepoliticalfunda.com/Politics/Detail/List_of_serious_criminal_charges_against_new_UP_CM_Adityanath21571

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/top-five-controversial-comments-by-yogi-adityanath/articleshow/57707151.cms

http://www.inuth.com/india/politics/heres-the-few-crime-records-of-ups-next-cm-yogi-adityanath/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogi_Adityanath

 

It is critical to fight religious faith

I always get asked why I am so vocal against religion and just leave it as is. At the outset not raising one’s voice seems to be the most logical and neutral point. However, if I dig deep, I get a totally different point. What they want me to do, is not to raise concerns on the atrocities happening. For example, women are second class citizens in most religions. Should I not vehemently oppose that? What if women have become tuned to it? Still, it doesn’t mean the covenant is right. This so-called neutral viewpoint is a very malicious way that people are using to essentially silence any opposition to their atrocities. Here are my thoughts on why it is paramount for us to oppose and obliterate organised faiths.

Discrimination as a right

People of faith feel violated anytime they are called out on discriminating others. They claim to actually be discriminated when asked to treat people equally. They feel it is against their religious freedom. The irony is, all fighting religions unite when it comes to promoting discrimination.
Let me give you examples of the same. Every religious organisation says it is discrimination if they are asked to treat people of LGBTQ community equally. I want to cast everyone’s mind to the infamous baker in the US who wanted to not sell his cakes to gay weddings. In India, the upper caste people dislike to called out on their discrimination. Most of them still believe God has given them the power to do certain activities and the rest have to merely obey. Anytime the topic of niqab or burqa comes up as a way to discriminate women, it is seen as an intrusion into the private affairs of a religion. The list can go on, but left to themselves there is no semblance of hope that people of faith will treat everyone fairly. In fact, they see it as a divine right to discriminate.

Request for special rights

Religion always wants special rights, kind of right which you don’t give any other concept. If anyone says he or she is a person of faith, there is an implicit expectation is to get respect. Further, there is a difference between tolerance and privilege. We seculars want tolerance, we do not want privilege for the religious. We do not want faith to hold rights like building temple anywhere, right to inflict it on others. You never see an atheist standing in the middle of the street holding a microphone and abusing faith. For one, most of them are inherently rational and have enough shame to not do such things. Second, it is annoying and intrusive to everyone else. However, when a religious person does that people listen. Above all, there is an expectation to not question it.

Extraordinary Claims without any evidence

Every religion makes extraordinary claims but none provides any evidence. The closest someone has come is a question, “Do you think all this just popped into existence?”. Even if let’s say we grant 80% of most religious books are true(which they aren’t), that still doesn’t prove the remaining 20% as true as well. Every scientist has proven someone else wrong but hasn’t disrespected them for that. Listen to scientific research presentations, you will see researchers caveating their work and talk only about one subject with confidence. Religion claims to answer everything while answering nothing. From creation to evolution, from civil code to military rules, religion claims to have an answer tp everything. The bigger problem is there are hundreds of religions and no two is mutually compatible. Claims of faith and truth are non-overlapping magisteria.

Creating a false equivalence with science

Religions have started putting them in the same bracket as science. I am sure many readers have seen pamphlets of “Judeo-Christian Science”, “Vedic Science”, “Islamic Science”, “Scientology” etc. There are two malicious approaches in creating this equivalence.

1. Religion is an alternate theory which holds equal weight.
2. Religion and science are not mutually exclusive but religion encompasses science.

Let me take evolution and explain the ones above. The first group consists of people who claim their Creationism is a theory which has the same authenticity as evolution. The second group of people are ones who say God helped created the laws due to which evolution happened. I personally find the first one repulsive and the second one dangerous.

Preventing knowledge development

Religion adheres to practices which prevent development. For example, they have been against immunisation, contraception, stem cell research, space research to name a few. They are against people gaining more knowledge and improving their critical thinking. These two are the pillars of development which will negate the theories presented by religions.

Adherence to Bronze age civil codes

The people who do the Triple Talaq, the genital mutilation of both boys and girls, the excommunication of LGBTQ community, the extortion by grooms under the name of dowry are not psychopaths but normal individuals. These are people who feel they are on the moral side when they do this. I would like to quote Steven Weinberg, “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”. Some of these practices are inexplicable but for the divine will.

In conclusion, religion doesn’t stay peacefully indoors. It has corrupted the society and like a virus wants a free pathway to continue doing the same. The most neutral stand is to contain its impact and ensure it doesn’t inflict any more damage on the lives of millions of innocent people.By fighting religion, I am in effect doing exactly that.

Organised Faith doesn’t have legs to stand on its own. The core principle of logic is one cannot assume the existence of ‘A’ to prove the work of ‘A’. The only way the existence of God can be proved is by assuming the existence of God. This is a fallacy, which has to be eradicated. There is no reason to believe God exists or any good can come from these beliefs. People have claimed a modicum of success by showcasing the charitable work done by religion or by raising questions which science hasn’t answered yet. When a secular person does any charitable work, he has no expectation of eternal support so does it purely out of good will. However, when a religious person does a similar deed, one cannot say the same. Religion suppresses the critical faculties of its followers, so they end up doing what it asks, irrespective of whether it is good or bad. Anyone who claims any religion as peaceful is lying. There are people who are peaceful in spite of being religious or following a religion. No religion is inherently peaceful or non-damaging.

 

 

My fascination to “The Village Schoolmaster”

Art has something that transcends logic as I know it. As I grew up, few poetries have stuck with me without me realising it. I wasn’t a good student and found my literature teachers intolerable. However, I did manage to read a bit of poetry in English and Tamil, two languages which I understand.

As I reflect on my fascinations, interests, admirations, I am intrigued by how these relate to Oliver Goldsmith’s village schoolmaster. Here is the poem for people who don’t know or want to enjoy the lyrical beauty. I will then write about lines which meant a lot to me.


Beside yon straggling fence that skirts the way
With blossom’d furze unprofitably gay,
There, in his noisy mansion, skill’d to rule,
The village master taught his little school;
A man severe he was, and stern to view,
I knew him well, and every truant knew;
Well had the boding tremblers learn’d to trace
The days disasters in his morning face;
Full well they laugh’d with counterfeited glee,
At all his jokes, for many a joke had he:
Full well the busy whisper, circling round,
Convey’d the dismal tidings when he frown’d:
Yet he was kind; or if severe in aught,
The love he bore to learning was in fault.
The village all declar’d how much he knew;
‘Twas certain he could write, and cipher too:
Lands he could measure, terms and tides presage,
And e’en the story ran that he could gauge.
In arguing too, the parson own’d his skill,
For e’en though vanquish’d he could argue still;
While words of learned length and thund’ring sound
Amazed the gazing rustics rang’d around;
And still they gaz’d and still the wonder grew,
That one small head could carry all he knew.
But past is all his fame. The very spot
Where many a time he triumph’d is forgot.

 

Admiration for comedy

Comedy is a natural healer, an involuntary reaction and something which pushes boundaries. Comedy requires some special skills where you have to think deeply about an incident, exaggerate it to the right proportion and deliver it well to the audience. It is hard to be a dumb comedian especially if you writing your own scripts.

Love for learning

Life is a losing struggle from the time we were born. This is true for species to the stars. If I am going to lose everything that I get, I would rather gain happiness through knowledge than economic wealth. The truth is always deeper and more fascinating than what is apparent to our senses.

Arguing for life

Every new discovery requires our DNAs to reprogram. It isn’t easy. The best way to learn is by winning the war of ideas. The war of ideas is won by winning smaller battles like debates. Debates are inherently interesting and challenging.

Fascinated by people with knowledge

I can’t emphasise more on my fascination towards people with knowledge of multiple subjects. The people I admire, my father, Christopher Hitchens, Karl Marx, Professor Steven Hawking, Noam Chomsky and list goes on, were all people with knowledge on diverse subjects, with the ability to connect them and articulate a well thought out point.

In conclusion, art transcends generations and pushes boundaries. As I see growing intolerance towards art, communities taking offence and curtailing their free spirit, I wonder if we will slowly limit the pervasiveness of this wonderful subject. That is exactly why it is important to fight for liberty and freedom.

 

Amazing proof of bad design – evolution

The study of evolution was a quantum leap in our species understanding our origin. It has paved way for us to go back in time and look at the past. Growing up, I always associated evolution with Charles Darwin and natural selection. As I started digging deep, I realised to realise that neither was Charles Darwin the first person to talk about evolution nor was natural selection the only methodology. I would definitely like to read and write more on that.

The theory of evolution is inherently counter-intuitive to our species. Ironically as we have evolved, we have increasingly believed in creation than evolution. It feels more natural to us. This video is one of the very few where we see a practical demonstration of the legacy available in public domain. Borrowing the phrase from John Milton, I imagine myself traversing through time at a bidding speed from being a fish to a reptile to a mammal. The legacies left behind in my body through the DNA just fills my heart with pleasure.

 

Commentators killing the game of Cricket

As a kid, I loved waking up at 4:00 in the morning to watch cricket matches happening in Australia. More than the match itself, it was the voice of Richie Benaud that captivated me to wake up so early. Then there were Bill Lawry, Tony Greig, Geoff Boycott and Michael Holding and India’s Harsha Bhogle. However, if you look at the current crop ignoring the people left from the above list, it is abysmal. It is badly partisan, devoid of any analysis and insights that I feel like watching the matches on mute. I want to explain this using the latest India versus Australia series which is currently in progress.

Cricket is a spectator sport and spectators love to see passion. What the spectators also love to see is sportsmen get along well outside the field. The comradarie between Vivian Richards and Ian Botham, Sachin Tendulkar and Steve Waugh, Virat Kohli and Dale Steyn are few that come to my mind immediately. These are people who play with passion and leave everything on the field. The incident between Steven Smith and Virat Kohli is one such as well. It makes the game more exciting, passionate and driven. There is a clear line where members get physical or there is a case of cheating. No such incident actually happened.

As I say that about players no one wants to see commentators fighting over incidents like this. It is like going to a boxing match and end up watching the support staff fight. It is not interesting and doesn’t add any value to anyone. This is exactly what happened when Sunil Gavaskar and Ian Healy started talking. Both of them took sides of their respective home countries. The worse part of the defense was when they claimed their side to be totally innocent and the opponent totally corrupt. Firstly, both of them are well respected cricketers to behave in such childish fashion. Secondly, assuming they are paid to do this so that they can increase their ratings, it doesn’t work. It only drives people away.

I want to see non-partisan insights about the game. I know such commentators are few and far but the media outlets should at least try. Unless the intention is to kill the sport, they are not doing it right. Not all ex-cricketers are great commentators. Commentators should be non-partisan, have good understanding of the game and above all decent communication skill. Till this situation changes, I am going to watch the matches on mute.

Can’t forget or forgive so, have to live with it

One of my friends spoke about how his Grandmother can never look beyond what happened during the partition of India and Pakistan. It takes a very long time even generations and huge effort to go beyond those horrors. Like the Solitary Reaper, the memories lingered long after the incident.

“……
Some natural sorrow, loss, or pain, 
That has been, and may be again?
…..
I listened, motionless and still; 
And, as I mounted up the hill, 
The music in my heart I bore, 
Long after it was heard no more.”

I find this consistently true and cry for social empathy. There are quite a few examples of the same I see globally, from Immigration Crisis, Civil Wars to war-shattered economies. I want to particularly concentrate on the current Modi fervour in India and the Gujarat riot of 2002.

I am strictly looking at this from the eyes of the victims and the impacted. I do not want to consider the viewpoints of people who have scavenged on the misery of the victims to make a name for themselves. I recently read posts where people from rest of India, especially the young folks want people to get over this issue. I also see people using that to dismiss everything that Narendra Modi has done post that. There is less merit in both these cases. Let me take the first point.

Can’t get over the issue

The victims are still living the life that they didn’t imagine. This was a politically motivated riot exploiting the religious divide in people. Most of the victims irrespective of their religion were actually not in favour of violence. I can say this because they were innocent kids. Most of them were regular fathers, mothers, uncles and aunts we meet every day. They were brutally killed in this political struggle. Modi who was then the Chief Minister of the state didn’t do much to prevent it. Even if his claim of innocence is true as far as instigating and perpetuating this, it is definitely not true as far as being inept at handling such a situation. It is not a line item expected in the CV of an able administrator as he is portrayed. For rest of India, this was a news flash. I can say this with confidence as that is how Tamil Nadu looked at it. We were more bothered about the failure of Rajini movie Baba than the Gujarat riots. It is not for anyone to ask the victims or his detractors to forget or forgive Modi.

Dismiss everything that Modi does

The systemic flaws in the India government mean it depends on an able administrator to lead the country. At present, there is no one visible who is able to provide stability and leadership other than Narendra Modi. There are policies where I agree with him and there are policies where I don’t, but that is at a policy level and not at an individual level. There are policies which actually benefit the people and bring economic growth to the bottom 20%. The pundits and journalists will dismiss that at their own peril. As rational human beings, we need to fight policies and the situation now. India needs to create more leaders so that we can replace Modi with someone better. No other party is doing that and that is exactly why the Modi’s party is winning some big states. The families of the victims get this point and they have just learnt to live with that burden. The burden of seeing the person who wrecked the lives flourish.

Overall, it will be insane to expect the impacted to ignore or forget what happened in Gujarat. It is worse to ask victims and their sympathisers to forgive. Rest have to share their feelings and acknowledge the situation. At the same time, it is of no use trying to dismiss the current actions using past results. It will not help the victims, it will only give a short term boost to your image.