Why partition may have been the best thing that happend to South Asia July 30, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in geo-politics, ideas, india.4 comments
Aswin, commenting on one of my previous posts here, said :
I loved the article about the pain of the Partition. It was very well written. But I do believe that the Partition was the best thing to happen.There might be a couple of stray incidents once in every year when 200 people get killed. But one needs only to look at Iraq now to see how many people can get killed with sectarian violence.
Even with the Hindus and Muslims separated out into two separate countries, we have Ayodhyas and Godhras arising every now and then. I can only imagine what would’ve happened if the entire population of pakistan and bangladesh were also part of Hindusthan.
Every war in this world has been a war of religion or ideology. If there were majority christian states or majority muslim states in india, believe me, there would be wars in India.
The only reason 25-30 states in india are co-existing peacefully is because the majority is Hinduism everywhere.
My response to Aswin’s comments to my own post here went thus :
i agree aswin.there was a time I thought otherwise. Now I think the partition was a surgical failure or rather surgically incomplete.
Natasha in reply to my comment says :
yea “surgically incomplete” ..maybe Kashmir should have been part of the majority muslim nation .. it would have been a lot better if partition hadn’t happened in the first place..we are all the same underneath it all, you know some time in the not too distant future we will reach a point when Hindus may not be the majority in India, then what ???do we split up again??
I respond to Natasha in this post.
yea “surgically incomplete” ..maybe Kashmir should have been part of the majority muslim nation ..
On the surface of it, yes. I do not confess to knowing all the many details of those times. Historical evidence is conflicting on what really happened. But going by other examples of those times – for eg: Nizam of Hyderabad (Muslim) insisting on remaining independent inspite of Hindu majority population, India simply moved troops into Hyderabad and forced accession to India. Another example is of Junagadh – which you may read in detail here where a plebiscite was held which determined accession to India ( muslim king fled to Karachi with most of the kingdom’s assets).
But how Kashmir might be solved after the events of 50 years is quite another question I wont go into here.
Natasha then says :
it would have been a lot better if partition hadn’t happened in the first place.
I disagree, as strongly as I possibly could. What could have happened had there not been a partition would be very very hard to argue and impossible to ever verify. Here is a hypothesis.
Assuming a unified India, with 1.5 billion people, one-third of which would be islamic concentrated in east and the west. A likely situation then would have been that over time, muslims from the muslim-majority regions of the present Indian states (Bihar, UP, AndraPradesh, Gujrat ) may have moved to areas comprising what is now Bangladesh and Pakistan.
I am suggesting this from my brief readings of the models of segragation that happened ( and continue to happen ) in the United States among whites and blacks. Thomas Schelling won the Nobel prize for this contribution. Quoting Marginal revolution from here.
Tom showed how communities can end up segregated even when no single individual cares to live in a segregated neighborhood. Under the right conditions, it only need be the case that the person does not want to live as a minority in the neighborhood, and will move to a neighborhood where the family can be in the majority. Try playing this game with white and black chess pieces, I bet you will get to segregation pretty quickly. Here is a demo model for playing the game.
Ofcourse, Schelling is talking about migrations within cities, one that is largely over a smaller area. But a large scale migration of similar nature is not entirely ruled out. I would love to see the demographics for countries with such a significant minority ( over 30% ), especially if Islamic.
One might argue why this is not happening now in Kashmir – why dont Indian muslims migrate to Kashmir, the only significant muslim majority region in today’s India ? Well, we know why – its not legal – outsiders cannot buy property in J&K. I am sure one of the reasons for this is to disallow changes in the region’s demographics – skewing them further in favor of the majority religion or diluting the muslim majority. Both of these scenarios would encourage secession – former by fuelling islamic nationalism and latter due to insecurity among muslims of being swamped by millions of Hindus from the rest of the Indian state.
Therefore, unless the hypothetical unified state granted such special status to the vast muslim majority regions as we have granted Kashmir ( hard to enforce) , there would have been a migrations that would further skew demographics – make what is India more Hindu and make what is now Pakistan and Bangladesh more muslim, this migration would likely have happened. Even if 10% of who are now Indian muslims moving over across the ‘border’ would significantly change the situation because such movements cause polarization and change compositions on both sides ! Even if we assume that no such movements ever happened, a combined population of nearly 450 million muslims ( 162 (pak) + 144 ( Bdesh ) + 140 (India) ) would have weilded considerable power to enforce different judicial systems, Islamic law and the like. The polarisation would have been immense. We know of no other region in the history of the world that would have faced a polarisation of this nature ( religious ) and scale ( hundreds of millions ).
We are already seeing a problem here. What then would have happened ?
1. Best case scenario – Czechoslovakia style peaceful separation
I will not elaborate on this one – you may read the details here.
2. Worst case scenario – Civil War
This is everybody’s guess – Iraq, Lebanon, Yugoslavia, Rwanda and the list goes on – nothing less than a civil war would ensue. Infact, we almost had one in 1947 itself.
When I think or rather read of the 1947 partitiion riots which ironically killed more than the entire tally during 200 odd years of struggle ( organised and otherwise ) against Colonial rule, I think we got away pretty cheap. A full-scale civil war in the 1950s in the hypothetical unified India would have been far worse – more people would have died than in the current low intensity and somewhat localized conflict over Kashmir. Simply thinking about the number of people involved, I think the partition of 1947 ( and a relatively peaceful one at that, atleast relative to what it might have turned out to be ) was one of the best things to have happened to the region.
And if the argument is that before the British came we were one nation, well, no, we werent really a nation at all. Even if Asoka and Akbar’s empires extended over a region as large as that of the hypothetical unified India, the argument doesnt hold because :
- they lasted only a few years.
- they were different periods in history – smaller populations, no concepts of nation-states and no nationalism
- they were held together not as democracies
- empires were too centralized and got weaker as we moved away from the capital.
Natasha then says,
we are all the same underneath it all,
Oh, I wont comment on this one. Barring rare exceptions, geopolitics and international diplomacy doesnt ever work on the basis of anything but national interests – that demands cold logic. Its not because there is something wrong with emotions and superior about cold logic, its just that when you are handling aggregate phenomenon involving millions of people and handle conflicts of interests and clash of objectives on such large scale, cold calculations work better. At any time, the current global order is a strategic equilibrium and we are at the margin ( because some wars always going on ! ). I believe that as of 1947, Pakistan had a stronger moral case on Kashmir than India did – but that doesnt matter here.
The two countries are more different than we think and over the past 50 years have only grown wider apart. There is peace whereever there is because the costs of war are higher and cooperation – trade and cultural – is more beneficial. No country is out here doing a favor to anyone else. We are better off not applying our skills at handling personal and familial relationships to those governing such macroentities as nation-states.
Besides, try telling this to the terrorists !
And finally, Natasha’s comment :
you know some time in the not too distant future we will reach a point when Hindus may not be the majority in India, then what ???do we split up again??
Even at the current rate of population growth, muslim population wont not surpass Hindu population for another 700 years ( I read this in IE editorial about 6 years ago – I hope to find a quote, if you do, please leave a comment ). Now even if India had a 5% total minority population ( as would have happened had 95% of the muslims migrated to Pakistan and Bangladesh), it would have taken over a couple of thousand years I guess – assuming nothing else changed – i.e. assuming Hindus wouldnt be alarmed – which itself would be an unjustifiable assumption.
Besides, its completely futile to even look that far. I hate analogies to put across my point, but okay, one last time 
. Its like saying how can we afford to use petrol and deisel when it will be exhausted in 150 years – a much smaller time-frame. So these words dont contribute meaningfully to the argument at all.
Natasha, my feeling is that you feel the way you do because of all the baggage associated with the word ‘partition’ and how much we have heard and read and watched works ( books, movies etc. ) based on the Indian experience. Two things though : (a) it neednt have been that bloody ! (b) there is nothing wrong in living as two (or three) separate nations if that promotes the common good – as it happened in Czechoslovakia.
That brings me to the other question – how then would be explain that India itself hasnt split up into a few pieces since afterall each of the states have different cultures etc. ? I guess I should keep my thoughts ( not answers ) on that question for a different post.
On writing brochures July 28, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in littlerockers, rant.add a comment
I wrote this piece first in the alumni blog and then found that this blog would be a more appropriate place to put this up. I have consistently used the alumni blog for news rather than opinion pieces and therefore I am linking to it here. Part of the post is a mail I wrote to Prof. Ninan last night regarding the brochure that came out of Little Rock.
A few words of criticism of the Footprints brochure are in order.The brochure printed on the occasion of Footprints requires a second look ; some serious editing wont hurt at all. The punctuation and sentence construction is just not up to the mark. The word usage and grammar is sloppy at best and disastrous at worst.
From my schooling days at Little Rock in general and a particular experience with regards to Prof. Ninan’s editing of my essay submission to a national level essay contest in March 1997, I can vouch that Prof. Ninan couldnt have possibly edited this brochure.
Here are a few examples ( all from page 6 here) :
“Nestled on a hillock, in the sylvan surroundings of a 30-acre campus in Chantar, Brahmavar” could rather be replaced by “Nestled on a hillock in a 30-acre campus in the sylvan surroundings of Chantar near Brahmavar”. ( we are not in the surroundings of the 30-acre campus, we are in the campus that is spread over 30 acres )
“a great visionary wanted to build up a school” could rather be “a great visionary wanted to build a school”. “Build up a” makes it look like a school is just another physical entity like a wall or a bridge.
To suggest “cordial and sensible student-teacher relationship” was really not necessary and ends up unduly emphasizing the “sensible nature of the relationship”. We are safe to assume they are.
“Personal attention to every student” is superfluous and so are “creative academic innovations.” and “seemingly unsurmountable obstacles and problems”. Phrases like “balanced growth of its students” sound out of place.
The sentence “The journey towards excellence continues, and is still a long way off the destination” is an unmitigated disaster. It seems like the “journey” itself is off the destination whereas its the school that is being meant. Secondly, “Off the destination” makes it sound like its on the wrong path – “from the destination” would be more appropriate. The comma before “and” is not really necessary but may not entirely be wrong. A better construction might have been – “As a school we are a long way from where we hope to be and the journey towards our destination continues unabated/ceaselessly/relentlessly.”
Unless otherwise intentional (which itself wouldnt be entirely appropriate), the word “school” appears as “School” in the middle of sentences.
…and the list goes on. I am sure competent English language teachers ( of which I am certainly not one ) can do a better job at critiquing the language used in the brochure.
We request Prof. Ninan not to outsource the editing of a brochure – nobody else could do better.
Update : Prof. Ninan got back to me on the mail I wrote to him last night. He has presented his views on my criticism and clarified some of my concerns and agreed to look into some of the issues raised.
From peacenik to a fatalist July 28, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in geo-politics, india, life.3 comments
I accidentally came across this post – A message for our times.
An excerpt here that comes from someone whose family was directly affected by the events :
my mind keeps saying it is time to look a “paki” in the eye and feel our real feelings. we are one people, torn asunder, still bleeding. time to heal. time to be intelligent and strong. not with guns. but with ourselves.
..
..
once upon a time there was undivided india. today we are pakistan, india, bangladesh. three nations, could one day be three great nations. if we are truly independent india, let’s free ourselves of our baggage. here’s to all of us.
I left behind a comment ; the comments section is moderated and I am not sure if it will show up etc. I am therefore reproducing my comments to that post here.
I do feel sorry for the tragedies that have beset you in your personal life but I must add something else too.There hasnt been a single time in history where there has been no conflict/war in some part of the world. As long as there is scarcity of resources, as long as there are different ideologies, there will be conflict. Very sad but mostly true.
How many nations do we know that have the diversity that we in India have and at this scale ? Liberal western style democracy presupposes certain homogeneity in demographics and a certain standard of living ( most importantly educated liberal mindset) – everywhere else it has failed – except in India. ( Even America is largely christian and of European descent and doesnt have the baggage of a few thousand years as India does – 150 years after slavery abolition and 40 years post-segregation the African-Americans who are still struggling …but hopefully they will be better off in a few decades )
That we have managed to live as a nation with unfavorable demographics and so much potential for unrest and mischief is one of the wonders of this century. Nobody in 1947 even gave us a chance. I see dark days ahead if nothing much changes.
Yes, I have gone from a peacenik ( 14 months ago ) to being a fatalist after Madrid, London, Delhi, several times in Egypt, Varanasi, Bangalore and Bombay. And a very angry one at that. I am posting this comment here – one that puts on record my pessimism – hoping that I can return sometime later to find that I am wrong. I am not worried about 140 million Indian muslims; I am worried about 140 million people who are largely uneducated and who are refusing to reform, who are attracted by distant causes before attending to their own problems at home and of a neighbour who couldnt be a happier witness to this.
140 million people of any religion or mixture of them showing these symptoms are a cause for concern.
In another’s shoe July 24, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in humor, life.add a comment
Ramya sends me a link to this article.And that was in ‘response’ to this one I sent her.
What do I say ? My libertarian motivations instantly take over and suggest to me that people in the first of the above two articles have taken decisions in their interests with no coercion whatsoever and cause no harm to anyone else – so its perfectly okay.
And this has nothing to do with how I would behave in the same situation. I say this because a typical next question in a discussion/debate would generally be – “Cmon, dont tell me you would do the same in their situation.” What I would do is completely irrelevant – you have the right to ask, but not the right to know !
This reminds me of Bernard Shaw’s quote that “Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.” Similarly, I believe that putting yourself in the shoes of the individual in a situation to determine what that individual should do is not always the best solution. I understand this is often the basis of much of advice that we give and receive among friends and family.
Nevertheless, it is good to bear caution and remind oneself of Bernard Shaw.
Reasons to refuse to engage in an argument July 22, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in general, rant.8 comments
I just thought of some good reasons for never taking up an argument or engaging in a debate with people. If you know of others, please leave a comment.
1. If you cannot quote a source majority of the times and for strongest of your assertions.
Eg : “I heard that…”, “My friend was saying that…”, “I saw somewhere…”
Retort : I generally trust you, but sorry, not now.
2. If you doubt generally credible sources and refuse to list sources that you find credible.
Eg : “How can you trust the Washington Post ….”, “That reporter is biased ….”
Retort : If you cannot trust well-known historical or contemporary sources especially when it does not suit your argument, why should I trust you (especially when it suits your argument !) ?
3. Anecodotal evidence
Eg : “This happened to my friend…”, “My brother is not like that …”
Retort : You friend and and your brother are statistical outliers, they dont matter when we are looking at aggregate patterns.
4. Quoting someone to make a point
Eg : God exists because Einstein said – “Religion without science is lame…”
Retort : Einstein didnt have the last word in ornithology, etymology, paleontology, economics or medieval Indian history. He wont even have one here.
5. Excessive relativism and semantic gymnastics
Eg : “It depends on how you define it”
Retort : No, it doesnt. By the way, we are done with debate. And that doesnt depend on the way you define “debate”
6. Profanities
Millions of examples : You are such an *{expletive}*
Retort : Its a debate no more. Lets close.
How not to write for an intelligent audience ! July 22, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in media, rant.4 comments
I am shocked by the poor quality of journalism coming out of so-called reputed magazines in India. This article from Business Standard reposted on rediff has several problems : its about “Why Indian IT pros don’t buy flashy cars”.
It starts off with:
Top-level people working in IT companies in India draw salaries that are at par with their global counterparts and even lead lives that can, at times, make globe-trotting executives envious.
Is that so ? Could you quote your source please ?
However, when in the country, our IT professionals tend not to use fast and flashy automobiles and stick to mid-segment cars. Why? They’re taking a cue from their bosses, that’s why.
Firstly, quite a bold statement to make. So give me empirical evidence – no anecdotal evidence please. Lets have numbers about how many executives were studied, from what parts of India (consumption patterns differ among metros too), over what period of time and split acorss income group. Did you ask them if they were taking a cue from their bosses or did they tell you so ? How you pose a question in a survey can alter survey results – our lessons from behavorial economics.
And then :
At times, Premji also travels in autorickshaws and public buses, while Murthy prefers an Ambassador to cruise around the Garden City.
Source please. What do you mean by “at times” – emergency, regularly, once a month or just once. What were his other choices ? Sit in his Toyota corolla and be stuck in the traffic ? These phrases are better avoided in serious matters are these and are often used to conceal ignorance. “Hand-waving” is the expression.
The article then goes anecdotal :
“Some of my senior colleagues who now work in India (after a stint in the US) are using modest cars like the Suzuki Swift or Ford Fiesta, taking a clue from senior executives in the company. However, when they were abroad, like in the US for instance, they drove around in BMWs and Mercs,” a senior Wipro official said on condition of anonymity.
Ofcourse quoting someone is okay – but what is the purpose of the above assertion. Is it to prove the author’s original assertion ? Or is it an effort to provide a balanced view – contrary evidence that often comes up.
It is starting to get amateurish here :
An official at Infosys agreed and shared a similar experience. ‘It is not that these executives cannot afford luxury saloons, but they feel it is not right to travel in these cars, especially when their bosses use simple cars.’
Is this official talking for himself ? Or is he a software engineer trainee who thinks that might be the reason ?
He now seems to come to the point :
Another factor why Indian top executives prefer modest cars is that “Indians generally tend to drive compact midsize cars due to poor infrastructure conditions in the country. Moreover, higher degree of taxes on foreign vehicles in India and stratospheric maintenance costs are deterrents”, another Infosysian said.
….but forgot that they are not infosysians, they are infoscions.
However, Aftek Infosys managing director Ranjit Dhuru had a different take on the subject.“A high-end car is an easily noticeable symbol of wealth and Indians generally don’t like to flaunt. They might be buying less noticeable things like expensive villas or real estate in many locales, they might be connoisseurs of other expensive items like art or they might be taking trips abroad… At the end of the day it his personal choice.”
Okay, you quote someone again. No problem. And then he adds :
Dhuru has an SUV and a Merc and uses them alternately.
“Uses them alternately ??” What is that supposed to mean ? Are they people who drive them together ? Alternately as in every other day ? occasion ? Is that even relevant ?
All in all, this article is poorer than high school quality. It could have been written over a cup of coffee in little over 30 minutes without moving from your desk by just talking to a couple of your friends/contacts in these companies and throwing in some arbitrary quotes and assertions. These serious studies are conducted over a period of atleast a month with people collecting data and quoting their sources – they are not meant to be this amateurish. So Mr. Prabodh Chandrasekhar & Rajesh S Kurup – find another job or go back to school.
I am not sure why this is happening or if this has always happened and its just that I was not well-exposed to other media to not make it out. In my understanding its a combination of several factors – poor writing skills from school, lack of exposure to serious media reports and scholarly articles, lack of background in economics/finance – often journalists tend to think they having an English honors degree suffices. Infact, quite the contrary – my understanding is that some background with good writing skills make a better business journalists than English graduates with half-baked knowledge of business/finance/economics. Alas ! I wish I had data to support this claim !
This, by the way, makes interesting reading.
Letter to Mankiw July 22, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in economics, landmark-post.4 comments
I have quoted/linked to Greg Mankiw ( here, here, here and here ) for quite a few times in this blog and several more times in my conversations with friends and a several more times in helping me assimilating things I read elsewhere. I could not finally resist writing to him today. I am posting my email to him here.
Hi Greg,
I am a graduate student at Carnegie Mellon studing Computer Science. I have been following this blog almost everyday for about 3 months now. I have no absolutely no formal Economics background ( though I am trained in computer science and statistics ) but nevertheless I find a majority of the posts quite comprehensible and I find myself quoting you very often in my conversations on these topics with friends and colleagues. The players in the comments section notably isocrates, mvpy, happyjuggler etc. are now household names ( atleast in my one-man household
The above might be quite expected but what I discovered over time was just how much it has improved my understanding of this country, its challenges, its accomplishments and some of its more nagging problems. I am a native of India and I would not confess to having as much understanding of India’s problems – facts and figures, policy deliberations, policy failures etc. And this is after having lived in India for my first 23 years. I know of very few professors from elite Indian universities or from the government or private thinktanks who volunteer so much time and effort as you ( and other economics bloggers ) do.
Therefore, although its very unlikely that you counted among your readers too many of my kind when you started off (did you ?), you have been doing a great job not just as an ambassador for your profession, as is obvious, but one of you country.
Keep blogging, Greg !
- Sharath Rao
A reluctant "I told you so" post July 20, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in india, politics, rant.add a comment
Its amazing. On June 22nd, I authored this post here on how the Mumbaikar spirit is bit of an overdone thing. Among many other things, I said :
What is this indomitable spirit all about – is it the spirit that makes you guys tolerate anything, everything and go about your life living in desolate conditions ? What use is this spirit of afterall ? Each time there is a major tragedy in Bombay, the legislator/MP comes in and makes a speech about Mumbaikars are resilient and go about their life the very day after floods, after bomb blast, after building collapse etc. as if nothing happened. The media too joins in and sings the same song. All Mumbaikars are not only convinced but they are also happy and proud that their city’s resilience is being bandied about. End of story.
This was a whole 3 weeks before the blasts on July 11th. When the blasts happened, I knew the media would again go gaga over the ’spirit’ and they did -
Vinod Mehta at Outlook wrote an utterly idiotic and worse still untimely politically motivated post here. TOI had their usual stuff here.
Now slowly some in the mainstream media and the blogosphere are also waking up to why that post was not quite off the mark. There are a few angry people there too. Here, here, here and Aswin here.
In any case, you must read this post by Tony on Vantage Point.
How romantic ! July 20, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in humor, india, politics.add a comment
Linked from here.
Soon after he took over as Minister for Overseas Indian Affairs, an English newspaper in India wrote that Vayalar Ravi once kidnapped a woman, and that AK Antony and Oommen Chandy, both of whom went on to become chief ministers of Kerala state, had abetted the crime.
‘It was true,’ Ravi, who turned 70 recently, said while referring to his marriage to Mercy Ravi, who till recently was a member of the state Assembly.
The two met when he was a student leader and she was a student at a women’s college. Antonty and Chandy were students in the college, and officials of the Kerala Students Union, at the time. Ravi was the senior leader, and the others helped him get the girl he was in love with, in the face of parental objection.
Very very interesting. One thing it shows is that we do so many things as children, teens and young adults without ever most often expecting that these would :
1. pass off as party time anecdotes if you grow up to be not so famous.
2. become skeletons in the cupboard giving rise to media reports and blogosphere humor/censure if you become a celebrity.
That shouldnt mean anything. As kids and teens, we must have a good time anyway. ( But try hard not to kidnap your girlfriend – that should be nothing less than the last resort ).
Lessons from E-ticketing July 20, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in economics, india.add a comment
Some policies and schemes coming out of places seem to have no rationale to me ( if it does to you, please leave a comment)
The Economic Times reports on the E-ticketing option for the Indian Railways. That would normally seem like good news if you arent too fond of standing in queues at railway counters. But here is the catch..rather here are the thousands of ‘catches’ :
However, if the booking is made through the internet, the passenger has to purchase two separate tickets — Mumbai to Delhi (Rs 421) and Delhi to Jammu (Rs 263). Hence, there’s a difference of Rs 167 in the fare alone. Apart from this, online charges are also levied.
The charge for a direct ticket ( for the same class etc. ) available at the counter is Rs. 517.00. Why does such a big difference exist?
And then :
The critical issue in the case of an e-ticket is the identity of the passenger. Proof of identity — be it a voter’s identity card, passport, PAN card, driving licence or a government-issued ID card — is compulsory for booking e-tickets, as well as during the time of travel.
So far so good. Read on.
The rule gets a little tricky for group tickets. Only one person’s identity is considered in the case of a group ticket, and if he/she is unable to make the journey for any reason, the entire ticket has to be cancelled and then rebooked after giving a new identity proof number. The risk here is that the passenger may lose his/her reservation and may end up getting a wait-listed ticket.
What are we trying to do here ? Disciplining people to ensure they bring their identification by heavily penalizing the entire group. What purpose is served ? Or alternately, what additional risk exists if rest of the group has proper identification ( photo ID ) ? To the best of my understanding, we need to encourage people to use e-ticketing options so that the system overall would be efficient, faster, transparent and above all convenient.
Ofcourse, a ‘problem’ with this is that people who have no access to the internet would be left out of the system and there would be a systematic discrimination against such individuals – the poor and the lowest middle class who are likely illiterate and very often have no proper identification and payment options.
How do we solve this problem ? Do we make only certain class of tickets available online ? That would again bring us to the quota system. And the moment you introduce these artificial restrictions, those who can afford to will find ways to bribe officials to buy their way out. This would neither do any good to the poor man in the queue or to the whole system as such.
If you think about it, every system in some sense is ‘discriminative’ – whether private owned or publicly owned. No matter what you do, there are always people ( in India atleast ) who cannot afford it and would thus be disadvantaged and feel discriminated against. On the other hand, if, to bring about equality, we resort to not have e-ticketing, that would discriminate against people who can actually afford it !
Perhaps the best solution would be to just let it be. Over time the system will throw up miraculous possibilities. Think for example, how can e-ticketing benefit the poor man who could not otherwise buy e-tickets and has to therefore stand in the queue ?
1. With shorter queue, he would have to wait for a fewer minutes – no mean thing.
2. Over time, the cream of this ‘left-out’ layer will see an incentive in perhaps accessing the net. The more the people are networked, the more the good for everybody.
3. If the above is rather too much to expect, cybercafes and public libraries which have internet access may, for a nominal service fee ( and public libraries for free) agree to book e-tickets for the poor – we then have a new business model.
My point is that nobody benefits from restricting use of efficient technologies and process that makes our systems efficient and transparent as a whole. Benefits of every new technology accrue to the higher classes to start with, but over time we all benefit. Sensible policies throw open interesting possibilities that a central planner technocrat/bureaucrat cannot imagine and the regulations should exist only as a measure to ensure things dont get out of hand and not to engage in social engineering to start with itself !
Beneficiaries of human tragedies ! July 19, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in india, media, rant.1 comment so far
Somebody atleast benefits from natural calamities and somebody ( other than the terrorists and their sympathesizers ofcourse ) benefit from man-made tragedies like the recent Bombay blasts – astrologers and numerologists ( and if it involves an individual maybe even palmists. )
Look at this piece from the Hindustantimes.
Is there a common thread between Indonesian tsunami (July 17, 2006), Kashmir earthquake (October 8, 2005), Mumbai floods (July 26, 2005), Gujarat earthquake (January 26, 2001) and the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami (December 26, 2004)? Indeed, it is number eight – the number of Saturn.
We heard this before. Except that was about different numbers, and after other tragedies. We heard about how 26 was an unlucky number after Mumbai floods, Gujrat Earthquake, Tsunami. Now since the Mumbai blasts happened on 11th and not on 26th or 8th or 17th, we have a new fact.
Lets now list a few tragedies of Independent India ( in addition to the above ) :
Death of Gandhi : Jan 30, 1948
China attacked India : Oct 20, 1962
Death of Nehru ( First PM in office ) : May 27, 1964
Indira Gandhi’s assasination ( First major political ass. ) : Oct 31, 1984
Sikh riots : Nov 1, 2, 3rd, 1984 ( 2000+ killed )
Bhopal Gas Tragedy : Dec 2, 1984 (3000 dead )
Second major political assasination ( Rajiv Gandhi ) – May 20th, 1991
Babri Masjid brought down : Dec 6, 1992
Gujrat riots : Feb 28, 2002 ( 2000+ dead )
Uttarkashi Earthquake : Oct 20, 1991 (1000 dead )
Latur-Osmanabad Earthquake : Sep 30, 1993 ( 7000+ dead )
Orissa cyclone : Oct 29, 1999 (10,000 dead )
How many 8s, 17s, and 26s do you see here ?
Someone has generously listed the top 10 biggest falls of the Indian stock market index. The 3rd biggest happens to be on May 17th, 2004 ( Black Monday as they call it – when Vajpayee came down ). Now if you were arguing on the side of the author of the HT article, you would cite only this as the evidence. I wouldnt go as far to call one a say one a cheater for doing that. What we doing here is either unjustified generalization. Or as statisiticians put it – showing confirmatory bias :
Rarely do any of us sit down before a table of facts, weigh them pro and con, and choose the most logical and rational explanation, regardless of what we previously believed. Most of us, most of the time, come to our beliefs for a variety of reasons having little to do with empirical evidence and logical reasoning. Rather, such variables as genetic predisposition, parental predilection, sibling influence, peer pressure, educational experience and life impressions all shape the personality preferences that, in conjunction with numerous social and cultural influences, lead us to our beliefs. We then sort through the body of data and select those that most confirm what we already believe, and ignore or rationalize away those that do not.This phenomenon, called the confirmation bias, helps to explain the findings published in the National Science Foundation’s biennial report (April 2002) on the state of science understanding: 30 percent of adult Americans believe that UFOs are space vehicles from other civilizations; 60 percent believe in ESP; 40 percent think that astrology is scientific; 32 percent believe in lucky numbers; 70 percent accept magnetic therapy as scientific; and 88 percent accept alternative medicine.
A homegrown example of confirmatory bias would be to listen to how people defend their favorite astrologers. I wont say anything more.
Sources : For earthquakes data, stockmarket data
Resource mis-allocation ? July 19, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in economics, india, landmark-post.9 comments
This picture from the Hindustan Times sourced at 9:35 PM, EST from here had me shocked !
Does this picture suggest lack of resource (roads) or highly suboptimal allocation of the same. I dont know much about Delhi ( except that the ITO (Income Tax Office) area is rather busy – but what is the empty double lane highway lying there. Am I missing some detail ( very likely ) or is this another case of the suboptimal and wasteful use of precious resource (road space in crowded Delhi ) ( especially at precarious times ( heavy rains )) that we see in India. Remember Nehru said “profit ( and often consequently efficiency ) is a dirty word.”
Lack of profit (inefficieny) then is a dirty ROAD !
Also note : The traffic is in the opposite direction on the highway. That may say something, but I am really clueless !
Update : Tyler has linked to this post from here. Welcome MR readers. Some of the comments on MR in response and Joe here on this blog pointed to the how this would be a usual phenomenon here in the United States on interstates in and out of every city. This has interested me too and caused to me to ask is there no way to utilize perhaps some of the sparsely used lanes more efficiently. Like bus timetables that are non-linearly spaced not the best comparison for essentially one of these is a costly hardware change, the other being a software tweak !. Bottlenecks at their ends would be another issue – but that exists even now anyway.
Either way, there has to be some way to use what is afterall a poorly used resource
The Indian State – an insecure bully ! July 18, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in blogging, india, rant.1 comment so far
Banning blogs. Link here , here and here.
What else would they do ? Ineffective, inept, misdirected energies and harebrained, repressive policies.
Nearly 2 years after coming to the United States, today, for the first time ever I was glad I was here and not in India and that I am beyond the reach of the bully that the Indian State is !! ( and that I will neither be persecuted for putting this up here nor be a social outcaste for ranting against the Indian State )!
Duh !
Think about it : Why is the Indian government harder on its citizens than the terrorists ? ( okay, some terrorists are citizens and some citizens commit acts of terror, but we will keep that out of the way for now)
Reliance votes for Indian agriculture July 16, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in economics, india.add a comment
Among the Indian middle class atleast ( where I come from), agriculture is synonymous with the ancient, anti-modernity and backwardness and consequently – idyll romaniticism. This is primarily because our interface with this sector of the economy is with poor laborers and farmers and rarely, unless you live in the Northwest, with the rich farmers of Punjab and Haryana.
The truth though is that a bad year in the monsoons spells doom for our GDP growth and not to mention bad year for stock market investors that very much includes the middle class itself. No wonder, everytime in March-April when the Indian meteriological department makes predictions for the coming monsoons, the stock markets wait with a bated breath.
Finally, Reliance has come up with some great plans for the Indian agriculture and food retailing. Read more on that here.
I really wouldnt care that the private sector is motivated by profits – they better be !! When we make such cliched statements, we forget that firstly, publicly held companies like reliance bring profits to their stock holders ( expands the middle class, creates jobs and propels economic growth ) and secondly, consensual economic transactions most often leave both parties better off when conducted in an free society.
Bill Gates and Poverty July 16, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in india, technology.add a comment
A very unlike and (perhaps therefore) interesting unwinding session with Bill Gates. Just loved this one !! Its not interview, its just him doing the talking it appears.
Warren (Buffet) started thinking about what should happen in the context of his will. This was after his wife, Susie, tragically died two years ago. And as he thought more about it, he thought, Hey, I don’t think I’m going to wait to give my fortune away. He’s always been the most generous person and said how his wealth should go back to society, and his articulation of that had a big influence on me.A few years before, Melinda and I had started making presentations about the work of our foundation, including to a group Warren hosted at the Greenbrier Resort in West Virginia, and he could see how energetic and excited we were – Wow, if you just get the right people together and you get the right incentives, you could have an impact on millions of lives.
Actually think about it – we in India, from India are accustomed to poverty, the intellectuals glorify it, the ruling class perpetuate it and the poor themselves are resigned to it. But there is something else about poverty – continents-wide poverty and consequent lack of healthcare, that millions die of diseases for which there exist cure – malaria, cholera etc – may just be the single biggest failure of mankind – its a failure on the biggest scale imaginable and a failure in every way – politically, intellectually, economically and morally as well.
Its hard to think of an equivalent failure – maybe NASA attempting over a 100 times to put man on the moon and each time the rocket plunging into the sea ( or worse a crowded city ) minutes after takeoff – that would be some failure. Ironically, that would then attrack more attention than world-wide poverty.
Bill Gates, hopefully will find as much success in his second venture ( fighting poverty ) as he found in his first – making the PC near ubiquitious. ( notwithstanding everything else he is hated for )
( Thankfully, NASA is generally doing well. )
Football becomes a metaphor – II July 16, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in America, geo-politics, sport.add a comment
Continuing from my previous post – here is an example of how different commentators around the world are looking at Zidane’s headbutting act and this is some way again brings out essential differences in national cultures.
France – philosophical reflection, idealism, larger than life :
In France, psychologists appeared on talk shows to ponder his motivations. Fear of success? Fear of failure? Childhood trauma? Even before Zidane spoke out, the iconic French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy wrote in the French press of the “suicide” of a “demigod,” calling Zidane a “super-Achilles” who was humanised by a headbutt instead of a vulnerable heel.
Many intellectuals saw a certain grandeur in Zidane’s act — a gesture of tragic or existential revolt against the huge weight of expectation the world had thrust upon his shoulders.
In England – stiff upper lippish reaction
Some commentators have not been so keen to overlook the transgression –seeing in Zidane’s act the morality of the vendetta, an outdated sense of honour and machismo that has oppressed women for millennia.
Mick Hume of the Times of London bridled at the suggestion that the headbutt was anything but an act of thuggery.
“It is a sign of the strange times how many big moral debates now seem to be about the antics of footballers. Apologists for Zinedine Zidane have wasted the week trying to read some higher meaning into his assault, claiming it as a righteous blow [against] racism, colonialism and Islamophobia,” he wrote.
Finally Americans : “This has got to help us lead happier, more fulfilling lives”
Soccer coaches in American suburbs — a world apart from the rough immigrant neighbourhood in Marseille where Zidane grew up and learned the sport — have held talks with kids about how to deal with anger on the field.
Football becomes a metaphor – I July 16, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in America, geo-politics, sport.add a comment
We, from the east and the middle east, see Europe and America as one and the same thing – and use a single word for both – “The West’. We couldnt be more wrong. ( I wrote a post about this before. )
This article without much intention ( and seemingly using Football as a metaphor ) brings out the differences that exist.
…In Europe, of course, the vernacular is a very different one. It is, in general, that of a Continent that saw too many of its own cut down on the battlefield in the 20th century to see in military heroism anything but a destructive illusion. For Europe, peace is a core value; Americans see the world another way.
The United States is a young country still hungry for grand undertakings, whether military or not. Europe is an old Continent wary of where such undertakings lead; witness Iraq. Absent the Cold War, which bound them through a shared threat, it is natural enough that these two sensibilities should diverge.
….
Read more here.
Several years ago in Class X – that would be mid 1… July 1, 2006
Posted by Sharath Rao in image, littlerockers, science.1 comment so far
Several years ago in Class X – that would be mid 1996 – I asked my physics teacher why the rainbows we see come in shapes they do. He didnt seem to be sure. I now see this ‘rainbow’ here below courtesy National Geographic.
