Saturday 13 August 2011

IMPACT OF GLOBALISATION ON INDIAN SOCIETY: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES


20 years is a long time, measuring up to a generation, almost. For those like me, born a shade before this generation leap transpired, the idea of globalization has always been an issue of immense intrigue.
                        Imperialism, capitalism, modernization; globalization is all this and more. It’s appropriately a socio-political economic process that has converted the world into a proverbial global village, but doubts remain over the viability of this freshet of consumerism which has become the force behind Government’s neoliberal policymaking. A market driven approach works in developed economies where internal inequalities are next to nothing, but in a country like ours, the idea of globalization only fuels the prevalent skewed power equations, as a result of which it divides the society into stark gainers and losers. This is not to suggest that globalization is the marauding monster we must detest, it’s just that it works in the Indian scenario with a fair degree of moderation. It has successfully dissolved physical boundaries and obliterated the importance of nation states, it has made earth a flat planet, given us immense choices, exposed us to the inexorable explosion of innovations and possibilities and in the process, made the rich richer and happier. This, on the flip side has sounded death knell for unorganized sectors, trade unions and farmers.
                                Farmers across the world have been the biggest losers because of the inefficient price mechanisms while trade unions lose because of the corresponding loss of bargaining power. Globalization is creating more losers than gainers and the losses are not just economic. But translate into losses of lives, case in point being the increased number of farmer suicides across India in recent years. With the Government’s expenditure on agriculture successively declining and its focus shifting towards cash crops (a classic neoliberal practice), farmers are pushed into the irreversible debt cycle, culminating in years of bondage and eventually, suicides.
                        In agrarian economies like ours, globalization is doing its bit in promulgating ethnic hegemony and fostering economic divide. Rural economies have collapsed, agrarian crisis has amplified, inequality has intensified while public expenditure in agriculture has shrunk to less than 2% of the GDP.For every millionaire that we produce, there are 700 others who go without food. For a country whose 60% population depends on agriculture, the price of neoliberalism has indeed been very high.
                        The solution lies in alternate globalization that depends on human rights’ movements, women rights’ movements and pro environment movements. Globalization is welcome in the Indian society but not at the cost of unemployed peasants, landless laborers, dying farmers, hordes of hungry millions and debt inducing suicidal agrarian policies. The concept of flat globe has oodles of eye appeal, but the sight of countless, nameless dying souls-the victims of globalization- is too high a cost to entail.

WHY POLITICS MATTERS?


The mood in world’s largest democratic republic is pensive. Everybody is angry and almost everybody wants to light a candle. Everybody (including the burgeoning misnomer called ‘middle class’ represented by the fashionable ‘civil society’) is of the view that politics is at the heart of corruption –a term conveniently used to generalize everything wrong in the society.
                This wisdom spawns from the deep seated cynicism, which in turn manifests itself in unsavory externalization and eventual marginalization of the bigger and more dangerous problem-what ails politics?Yes,politics does matter, especially in a country where State assumes humongous and homogenous powers bestowed upon by its people-the very edifice of a democratic structure. Politics is the manifestation of people power, their needs and desires and a suitable method of facilitating the creation of a systematic mechanism to further their cause; in terms of public policies, agendas and manifestoes.
            Sounds a diabetically succulent chimera-good responsible politics. Aren’t politicians and polity per se supposed to be the active evangelists, perpetrators and protectors of all that ails the social fabric? Yes and No. While cynical, myopic and blinkered political bashing is increasingly becoming our alter ego, a word of caution is more than welcome. To put the onus entirely, (un)fairly and squarely on a systematic mechanism and to proclaim and promulgate that the buck finally does start and stop there is a classic case of narcissistic-fascist ideology, based on the idea of an exclusive abstinence from the malaise and its medicine. The proponents of this view believe that corruption is the root cause of all the ailments, politics is at the heart of corruption and the only way to snap this corruption-politician nexus is creation of better laws. While it sounds good and appears fashionable, this constricted, stigmatized, skewed vision of apparent vibrancy is only an extension of our proclivity of externalization.
                        Poor and opaque systems of accountability, verification and prosecution and staunchly centralized decision making sites create a celebrated chasm, that diabolic dichotomy which festers filthy socio-economic contrasts leading to corruption by means and for means. To blame corruption as the sole reason for the stark naked inequalities thus becomes a slightly shaky proposition; it is instead a symptom of the central malaise that affects us. Then, to say that corruption is nestled and protected by politicians is true and false in equal measure. Politics inevitably will find itself interlinked even with the most apolitical issues, and yes, corruption exists in apolitical circles too. It’s all too easy to debate if strong regulation reduces corruption, but heartbreaking as it may sound, politics is, and can never be controlled by legislation; for legislation itself is approved, endorsed  and sanctioned by political bodies, and this circularity is omnipresent. This doesn’t imply that laws are nothing better than voluminous legislative literature, of course a democracy exists due to the existence of a system of checks and balances, but to believe it to be the one stop shop for every political infirmity would be personification of the exaggerated optimism at its very best.
                                Top has to be self regulatory and politics has to be a self censuring activity. Evils of politics can be countered by more and mature politics, effective politics, a better kind of politics, and this breed of hitherto unknown, unheard politics requires a public re-orientation to be seen. It’s present in the daily struggles of ordinary citizens to alter and balance power equations. If politics is the heart of every evil we love to hate, it’s also the heart of every change wish want to see. Undoubtedly it’s one of the more chequered social activity, but to be fair to it, the good breed of politics transcends the trammels of formal, sacrosanct structures of politics, much like the results of the kind of ambiguous, ambivalent brand of politics we love to hate.
                        Politics is not, as many believe, the bridge between the immoral and the illegal. What is morally wrong can never be politically right. Politics deserves better than the unwanted pariah treatment so often reserved for it, it deserves a hearing and an informed participation. Jaundiced views and choleric critique might make for an engaging read, but in effect it’s far removed from the constructive cataclysm we lust for. Politics matters for all this, and more.  

Friday 5 August 2011

SHOULD PROSTITUTION BE LEGALISED IN INDIA?

If you can't amend it,accept it.That seems to be the mantra of the noble minds rooting for legalizing prostitution in India. Their defense: its world's oldest profession (so probably it needs to be preserved),legalizing it will bring down the rate of human trafficking,spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs)  etc. and many progressive economies have already legalized it(The Netherlands,Canada,Wales,Australia, Israel etc).Some with an economic bent of mind suggest that if the prostitution 'industry' be recognized, it would contribute constructively to national GDP.Sounds seductively speculative.
                                         Well its not going to be yet another prosaic assimilation of what our much hyped value systems preach,nor will this write-up deal with the hypocrite conventional social framework of a chaste 'good' girl.What bothers the pulp out of me is that with the 'world's oldest profession' getting legal sanctity,will it not create the mad rush among women, and men,young and old,poor and not so poor for the highly lucrative career (alternate or full time,depending upon your commitments), one that doesn't require any textbook erudite nor an inherent personality trait.Its baffling how and why the proponents of this novel idea of legalizing prostitution missed this underlying remedy for unemployment.
                                     Technically speaking,prostitution is not illegal in India; public solicitation is.Legalizing prostitution would presumably legalize public solicitation too,and without riding a moral high ground,lets think pragmatically,would we relish living in a neighborhood dotted with ladies soliciting overtly or covertly with hackneyed pimps in tow,sharing their spoils? Personal dignity is indeed independent of person's choice of profession,but would a civilized society,or any society for that matter respect a career of prostitution.By no means should this translate to social ostracisation,but prostitution as a legalized vocation calls for social censure.Its easy for us to sit in cushioned environs and speak of social stigma when most of us sheepishly whisk our children away at the slightest mention of sex.A uniform social order is alright,but going by that constricted solitary logic and myopic vision,doesn't it precedes the calls for legalizing burglary (since the police force is understaffed),bribery(since corruption is our middle name),adulteration in foodstuffs(since we are immune to it anyway) and piracy (since we love our cinema ever so much)?Doesn't it guarantee, in due course of time a crime free state,since all the 'crimes' would be a part of State legislature anyway?How's that for an 'inclusive' democracy?
                                          Will legalizing prostitution improve the living conditions of the famous GB Road and Sonigachi?The answer lies somewhere in that term called political will.The law doesn't prohibit sex workers to ask for better living conditions nor does it abstain Governments to address their plight.The habitual nonchalance of governance can't be a reason to legalize anything that falls within the purview of constitutional definition of 'criminal activity' .Will it stop human trafficking?The answer is a resounding no. Law abiding citizens that we are ,given our proclivity to push and shove and spit and cuss at every given or created opportunity,to think that a lengthy legislative literature would miraculously abdicate us of our inherent virtuoso  is the stuff mooney,lobotomized teenage dreams are made of.Once legalized,it will be lot easier for unscrupulous agents to traffic gullible girls (minors included) into flesh trade,hoodwinking them into believing that its alright to shun their extreme penury for a much higher paid 'legal profession'.What happens to these girls when they decide to call it a day?Retirement bonus/pension from the Government/patrons?New job?Changing the definition doesn't alter the  demeanor and with a CV that proudly mentions the world's oldest profession as the incumbent's solitary experience and expertise,wonder which public pr private enterprise will favor them.If that's still a stigma,then so be it,but legalizing it won't erase it.Never.As far as the spread of STDs go,awareness camps by NGOs and initiatives by the Health Ministry can cut down the risk,probably more effectively than creating yet another law.
                                            In a nation where morality,a highly individualistic and subjective factor becomes a defining systematic phenomenon,the copycat idea of legalizing prostitution is inherently and intricately flawed.Whether hey do it by choice or otherwise,objectification and harassment of sex workers is strictly unacceptable.Dignity is an individual's propriety and is independent of cliched trammels of social definitions.That however doesn't legalize the act.The evangelists of the supposed revolutionary cause would do well to channelize their reserves towards ensuring better life and after life of sex workers ,rather than legalizing their misfortunes and asking them to live and die with that celebrated cross.The thin line between the immoral and the illegal does exist,and the advocates of prostitution must not be willfully and blissfully ignorant to its glaring existence.Sometimes there are no grey areas, only black and whites and some red lights of course.




PS : In a free world of legalized prostitution,a strapping, shaking teenager approaches a cop coyly ,"That pimp across the subway asks for Rs.1500 while the 'rate' is Rs.1000.This is corruption!"




RAHUL GANDHI : POLITICAL PRODIGY OR CELEBRATED CHARADE ?

Mr. Digvijay Singh,national spokesperson of the Indian National Congress (the majority party in the ruling coalition) claimed recently that Mr Rahul Gandhi is ready to be the Prime Minister of India.These words of wisdom come shortly before he,upon some grandiose realization said that right wing Hindu extremists were responsible for the Mumbai 13/07 carnage;even before Mumbai ATS probing the attack could gather any credible clues.While personal political vendetta has been a part of the India's  political ideology since long, motormouth Singh's endorsement of Mr. Gandhi for the impending North Block deserves to be seriously revisited.
                                     If exuberance of youth were to be the eligibility criterion for Government's high offices,a sizable chunk of India's unemployed population would have been working.To give him his due,he's suave and carries his dimpled stubble with laudable elan.He's young(at 41 yes,in Indian politics),inherently good looking (some stray music and lifestyle channels regularly have him in their 'most eligible bachelor' listings) and obviously attempts to reach the grassroots(Bhatta Parasaul arrest,Padyatra).
                                     If pedigree,a thoroughly personal propriety ,were to be a qualifying benchmark and lineage its upper limit,a certain Mr Abhishek Bachchan would be the more substantial superstar he's made out to be,and hence Mr Gandhi would sleepwalk into the PMO.Sadly for him,national interests are independent of pedigree and the promises it generates.They are in direct proportion to how our politicians fare in the Parliament-the sacrosanct edifice of democracy. Now consider this,
Number of questions asked-0
Number of debates participated in-0
Attendance-47%
Excerpts from a horrible report card of a horrible student? These telltale figures are performance indicators of Mr Gandhi , touted and desired by many as the PM in waiting.As the General Secretary of Congress and chairperson of IYC(Indian Youth Congress) and NSUI (National Student Union of India),he deserves to do better.Forget Parliamentary performance,this dismal record would happily allow a school or college Principal to debar a student from taking his/her exams.He did slightly better in his first term in Lok Sabha (2004-09); his attendance then was 63% against national average of 70%,he had asked 3 questions in 5 years during Question Hour,as opposed to the all MP average of about 180 each.He had participated in 5 debates, the LS average being 30.This time around,that is in  the 15th Lok sabha , Mr Gandhi  hasn't asked a single question yet(against a national average of 119 questions per MP),is yet to participate in a Parliamentary debate (there have been 16 already,before the current Monsoon session),his 47% attendance is a poor contrast  against the Lok Sabha average of 77%,and significantly the Lok Sabha meets for only about 65 sittings in a year now.Legislative duties are not a matter of choice,and it is di riguer  for a MP to participate in Parliamentary proceedings.Being a reluctant participant doesn't put the Gandhi scion in good light,even as he hogs the national limelight.
                                  Though 41,the caprice of youth has apparently stayed with the Gandhi blue- blood,which explains his premature ,presumptuous and preposterous   assumptions; he claimed to know of mounds of "dead bodies,around 70 odd" in Bhatta Parasaul village,soon after his return from the hinterland.All that the forensic experts could manage were mounds of manure.no charred bones,no mangled flesh as he had fantasised.On his famous 'Padyatra' to prepare groundwork for next year's Assembly Elections in Uttar Pradesh,Mr Gandhi had this gem to share,"UP is run by dalals(brokers)". A nonchalant BSP reiterated that UPA II was run by his mother,Mrs Sonia Gandhi! 'Yuvraj' had jumped the gun,again.After Mumbai 13/07,he addressed a waiting media and fuming nation,"99% of terrorist attacks are foiled,can't guarantee for 1%..." The comment was met with severe derision in political circles and was shredded to smithereens, quite expectedly,by hungry broadcast media.No details were shared of the "99%" foiled attacks, neither was there any explanation for "1%" that after all, still claims lives.
                                   Face value aside,he comes across as  an amateur, gullible politician still learning the basic tricks of the trade.His party's oft repeated excuse of him being too busy with "party responsibilities" to take a role in governance doesn't hold much ground either.Does that, in the first place absolve him of his Parliamentary duties?Does that allow him to continue misinforming the nation unapologetically? Importantly,is he deserving,as of now for the premature push being given to him for the country's top job,and doesn't that reek of feudal, patriarchal mindset of the largest democratic party of this country?
                                  No wonder crowds love him for his overtures but does that translate into results? He campaigned for Congress in 2007 UP Assembly polls.Congress managed a poor 22 seats with only 8.53% of votes share.A case of exaggerated,overbored and slightly misplaced magnetism?Irony or illusion?Is the Rahul Gandhi phenomenon all hope without homework?Is it an imminent oasis or a heartbreaking mirage?Too many uncomfortable questions for a ghost Parliamentarian cum poster boy born with the proverbial silver spoon and attending 5 debates in 7 years. Blinkered optimism and misplaced enthusiasm, the proposition of Mr Rahul Gandhi-a work in progress,as the Prime Minister of India is an enticing catastrophic bait that the Congress would do well to avoid.Hold your horses people.






PS: If style,spark,charisma,chutzpah and panache were the lone criterion,don't one of the famous(and arguably better informed) Khans of our movies qualify for the top job?You see they are identifiable,charming,adored the world over and are rated higher than Mr Gandhi in 'hottest male' listings!