When Ravan Won

The unwarranted and absurd loss of lives during the Dussehra celebrations in Amritsar has set many of us thinking; the first immediate question in everyone’s mind is: whose fault is it? How could it have been avoided? Much as the human mind is conditioned to look for easy and simple answers, there are seldom any straightforward answers. If we really want to find the causes for this and other similar tragedies like a stampede at the Dussehra celebrations in Patna, 2014, the Kumbh mela stampede in Allahabad 2013, and the Dabwali fire mishap in 1995 to name only a few, we will have to address the various ills of omission and commission which beleaguer our socio-administrative system and erupt in major incidents of death and destruction.

In any well-run system, the administration, judiciary and citizens have to shoulder their given responsibilities and function in cohesion. All must complement the others and function in tandem for optimum well-being, security and progress of the entire system. But somewhere in the race to grab political power, in the abdication of responsibility and moral obligations, immediate personal gratification and hedonistic grabbing, we have lost a wider vision of the disasters we are headed for. Let us look at the more immediate causes of the tragedy first: there is a rule for obtaining prior permission for holding such festivals, which was broken. As his earlier record shows, the local councillor and organizer of the festival was more apt to bully officers and harass them for doing their duty rather than ask permission to hold this event. The senior authorities submitted to him and the locals voted for him. So here we have a system where goondaism and political self-entitlement belittle the law. The politicians, big and small, are in a race to win cheap popularity by feeding such lollipops to people and keeping their attention away from real civic issues.

The district administration should have, on the other hand, taken a prior review of the entire city for any un sanctioned Dussehra festival preparations and stopped them beforehand. But the officers concerned have long conditioned themselves to abdicate their duties at the altar of the political masters who hold the power to order transfers and disrupt their family life. The railway authorities could have issued orders for precautionary safety measures, but failed to be pro-active. Why even bother when one will get one’s salary anyhow? What about the police personnel who were on duty at the venue? Was it not their duty to control the crowd and order them away from the railway lines? But their duties, for the major part, seem to have dwindled to escorting and protecting VIPs and their kin, with a most lackadaisical approach to other assignments.

The majority of Indians are an undisciplined lot and breaking of basic and simple rules like crossing red lights, crawling under railway gates which have been lowered to stop traffic when a train is on the way, breaking queues, tinkering with electricity poles to connect a power cable for unauthorized use, travelling ticketless by hanging on perilously to train door handles or perched on a bus roof are some of the foolhardy, mindless things one sees every other day. This loss of respect for the law, absence of self restraint and self regulation are major flaws that will push us to disaster again and again in various different ways. It begins at the top where 36% of the law makers in the Indian parliament are facing criminal charges (minus those who have managed to get away with their crimes). The common citizen emulates this tendency to cock a snook at the law when he sees criminals and law breakers enjoy power and riches.

Why are there so many people that they spill out of all boundaries? Why was there no better available public place for festivities than right next to a railway line? Because the population of India is bludgeoning at mindboggling rates and it is not even an issue with the government. Why would it be? The labour class families having seven to eight children are the ones who will fill the vote kitty for a few hundred rupees with some colourful dreams of free housing and rations. And why, one would ask, couldn’t the victims foresee the apparent danger of standing on a railway track? Or even, possibly, defecating on it every morning? Because no one probably introduced them to basic logical thought processes or civic sense in schools. Half of them, being migrant labourers, probably never attended school or dropped out after class five; the rest went to crowded classes of fifty students, shouted down by disgruntled teachers who had no time to even learn their names, let alone teach them civic sense and logical thinking.

A mass slaughter of sixty people is a gory incident causing public outrage, deep grief and sense of devastation. But to pelt stones and destroy public property or injure other innocent people is no justified expression of grief and outrage. Yet the government stood and let the law be bypassed once again, validating the very reasons which are at the root of this kind of devastation. Let us wake up to the fact that unless we uphold the law and imbibe discipline above all else, we will continue to pay a heavy price in human lives, mental trauma and material loss.

Dr.Ranjit Powar

Changing the Equation

Many skeletons have started rolling out of the cupboards ever since some gutsy women have gathered the courage to share painful and humiliating experiences with male sexual predators. It is apparent that there lies a serious fault line in our cross-gender interactions, behavioural expectations and perceptions of behavioural innuendoes. Besides honest and prompt implementations of related laws, we need to take a serious look at re-affirming and redefining gender roles and norms of acceptable behaviour for both males and females. The pre-accepted patriarchal set-up where a man had self-entitled himself to many unquestioned and unchallenged privileges is under serious challenge in societies where women are also financially and intellectually empowered now and resent being objectified for sexual gratification through rape, molestation and inappropriate verbal interaction. In our part of the world many men have still not re-oriented themselves to this change. We have a hugely stratified society in context of varied socio-cultural and economic indices, which affect attitudes towards gender issues too. Many men and women have the exposure and education to move and adapt with the changing global realities while many have taken the first step out of traditional, patriarchal households with the same behaviour codes etched in their minds.

 Men are not monsters; most are normal humans with a normal libido, mostly under control. A few are sexual predators and need nothing less than the severest of punishment under legal provisions. But many, I feel, are simply uncivilized, presumptuous, arrogant, ill informed or confused.  There is still hope for them to redeem themselves if they are tutored in some basic common sense rules when interacting with women colleagues, friends, travellers or at any other platform. These suggestions are for them.

Re modelling one’s behaviour towards a woman as an equal in office may require some effort for those who have not known a career woman in their family, but make an effort; the patronizing or macho attitude you use with your wife at home does not work here. Women outside your castle are your equals. Educate yourself towards a more gender neutral approach.

Most working women are done with being overly coy. A woman who laughs or talks freely with you is just being her natural self or nice; if you think she is flirting, maybe it’s wishful thinking. She dresses stylishly and is smart; but no, not for you; your colleague lives life for herself. Camaraderie at the work place should be limited to just that; don’t push it.

Even if a woman does flirt, appreciate your luck and enjoy it without feeling entitled to push it further. It’s not necessarily a ticket to the next station. Respect the limits she sets.

A woman who has had a relationship or even multiple relationships with other men is not obliged to entertain your unwanted advances; call her by any abusive name if you must, it still gives you no entitlement to similar favours.

Step out of the teenage hangover of the popular Bollywood-movie-saga of the hero pursuing the girl through obnoxious, annoying advances to win her over. These movies cater to starved sexual fantasies of deprived strata. You are not a hunter and women are not game to be pursued and won over as trophies.

Realize and know that there is another possible relationship between men and women besides a sexually oriented one; it’s called a platonic relationship. It is a totally above-the-waist relationship and can yet be a very close and affectionate one.

There are some points that women need to focus on too.

Take on a self confident and assertive role with colleagues; you are not a supplicant. Do not automatically take on the ‘so called female roles’ of always offering to make tea or organize meals.  Do not expect favours either and pitch in equally for work. Avoid playing the victim and getting lachrymose in office; do not reduce yourself to a vulnerable, infantile level; it is the weak that are hunted are attacked.

Be quick and clear in discouraging unwelcome advances. Quit being ‘nice’ before things go further.

These are not the medieval ages any longer. You are free to befriend men in an asexual or even sexual relationship, but do keep all interaction channels, vocal and otherwise, in sync with your intentions. Amorphous signals can be unfair. Conversely, women should be quite comfortable to make the first move with men where they want to, and nullify the assumption that there are specified gender roles regarding this. It would also lend more credibility to a denial.

Some women may acquiesce to men in authority in order to keep their jobs or for career promotion, even if unwillingly. I am not making a moral judgement here. If you do not want to protest and bring the man to book, make an informed choice here and take responsibility for it. Very often anyone who raises a voice against tyranny or injustice must pay a price for it. It is for you to choose. As far as you can, resist, fight and try not to be a victim. You are stronger than you were told.

Ranjit Powar

Myth of Bhutan's Gross National Happiness

The hitherto elusive Druk-yul, meaning “Land of the Thunder Dragon”, unreachable by air up to 1981, has always had a strange fascination of a Shangri La for most of the world. The brilliant and catchy concept of the Gross National happiness (GNH) propagated by the fourth King Jigme Singue Wangchuk of Bhutan added more charisma and poetry to an already existing aura of this fairy-tale kingdom. Tourists who plan to enjoy the tranquillity and natural beauty of this quaint Buddhist country for five or seven days and return with digital pictures of kira and gho-clad men and women love the idea of a happy little Shangri La with happy people living an idealistic life under an enlightened constitutional monarchy. Let us make a realistic appraisal of how justified is this claim to Bhutan being high on the index of happiness.

Bhutan’s switch over to a constitutional monarchy in 2007 is too recent to have brought about any significant change in people’s perception or comprehension of political ideology and the attitude of the common citizen is still very suppliant to the royals. Posters of the royal couple adorn most public places to the absolute absence of any other leader like the country’s prime minister. Bhutan’s identity and social ethos is greatly dictated by its state religion, Mahayana Buddhism. The literacy rate is 65% for men and 38% for women with most of them educated up to primary and middle school level only. The authorities seem to be alert to the corrupting influences of foreigners who are not welcome to settle here. Put together, a stronghold of the monarchy and the church, low education levels, and insulation from the wider world keep the people in a mental stupor.

Let us, for the time being, not dwell much on the fact that all villages still do not even have primary schools or dispensaries, that the infant mortality rate is as much as 30%, that the maternal mortality rate is high and that a third of the population lives below the poverty line. There is growing alcohol and drug abuse among youngsters, and many of them are chasing a dream of migrating to Australia for a golden future.

Let us take a look at the possible average life pattern of an ordinary Bhutanese woman gathered from a series of cross-sectional interviews to gauge her gross happiness index. Even though Bhutan’s culture does not disenfranchise women, they are definitely accorded a lower social and economic status. Public life is male-dominated with the village elders, called gewog, being mostly men. Amongst the 38% of educated women, most may have read from class two up to class ten only, making gender equality a farfetched dream. There are very few women in senior government positions.  Most working women hold low-paid traditional jobs like teaching and nursing, which, in all probability, will be given up once they are married. Child rearing and housework are mainly the wife’s responsibilities. Though Bhutan may take legitimate pride in the fact that there is a very low incidence of violence against women, polygamy is allowed with the consent of the first wife. The fourth king, Jigme Singye Wangchuk, married four sisters, further justifying polygamy as a choice. Post-divorce settlements are generally very low and provide only for the children who are in the mother’s custody. What is more worrying is that there is mostly an unquestioning condoning and acceptance of gender disparities.

Another less-known fact that the GNH hype has hushed over is a dark chapter of ethnic cleansing in Bhutan’s recent history. Bhutan’s ethnic minorities, Nepali-Bhutanese Lhotshampa, Sharchops and Tibetans, have suffered profound discrimination and mistreatment. Bhutan carried out a special census in the mid-1980s and proceeded to cast out nearly one million people, about one-sixth of its population then. It declared them illegal immigrants, even though many went several generations in Bhutan. The enormity and human outrage of this exodus have been overlooked by the international community in view of the beguiling charm and niceties of the monarchy. The minorities are mostly ghettoised outside the towns and hold low-paid menial jobs. Tibetans cannot get government jobs, enrol their children for higher education or obtain a license for private business without getting security clearance, which, they report, is close to impossible to get. A political censorship regime exists in Bhutan and most people fear voicing dissent against official policies openly. Public demonstrations are not allowed.

To justify its reputation of being a purveyor of happiness, Bhutan must realize that it must ensure concern for happiness for all strata of society: the minorities and women included. One cannot exclude more than fifty percent of the population and focus on a certain privileged class to earn this reputation. The system must accord greater exposure and democratic right to free expression to the common citizen to make this claim credible.

Is People’s Response to Terrorism More Dangerous than Terrorism Itself?

Lately, there have been isolated incidents of terror in Punjab, even while the traumatic memories of the decade of terror about four decades back are still fresh. No state, let alone a border state, can afford to neglect a matchstick of terrorism, which may well grow into an inferno. Let's understand the mechanisms of terror.

Terrorism may be understood as the use of violence to further a political or socio-religious cause. The terrorists’ strategic aims may include political/ social change through influencing public opinion, disrupt the government in power, avenge a wrong or generate a public reaction to legitimize their stand. Even though we tend to hear a lot more about acts of terrorism in contemporary times, there are many examples of terrorism throughout history. More recently, nationalist movements against colonial occupations resorted to terrorist methods in favour of their demands for freedom and global publicity for their cause. With the tremendous media coverage available now, the stakes related with terrorist acts have spiralled to higher proportions.

       Whereas prevention and neutralizing of terrorist operations is an important concern, managing people’s responses to terrorist episodes is extremely important too. Terrorist attacks are sudden and shocking and take people unawares, causing a host of reactions based on various social, cultural, political and personal factors. Such attacks generate an ambient fear psychosis across the country where they takes place; they also generates trauma at the individual level, which is in direct proportion to the closeness of the individual to the attack in terms of distance or association with the objects of terrorist activity. This intense experience of death and impending threat is bound to leave a print on collective consciousness for times to come. Besides these generalized reactions to episodes of terrorism, people’s reactions will be decided by multiple other variables. Social variables include ethnicity, culture, affiliation to political or religious parties and role of leadership and media. Individual determinants of the type and intensity of reactions to terrorist episodes are socio-economic status, educational levels, intelligence and awareness levels, family, upbringing, personal agendas and levels of frustration, insecurity and angst. Many informed people who have balanced outlooks are able to carry on with their routine lives and political views without being too rattled. But people from lower socio-economic strata, low educational levels, and low intelligence and awareness levels generally suffer from frustration and insecurity and carry an unresolved angst. This angst does not find justified outlets and is quick to be deflected towards any available target. These people are likely to be emotionally swayed through political jingoism and rousing feelings of panic and disunity by demagogic leaders. Those who are socially and economically disadvantaged or live as members of a marginal minority already host high anxiety levels which are easily aggravated by malicious hate mongering by such leaders and a manipulated media.

          Grief and outrage for the loss of victims through death and the psychological and material damage to the affected families are the common reactions in most of the population. But an outrage against a terror incident is not only an expression of fear, grief and outrage against that one incident. It conjures up demons of a myriad other repressed insecurities and smouldering resentments from the deeper layers of the subconscious. For some, a deep rooted angst against being marginalized assimilates and surfaces as a hostile expression which finds validity in a collectively accepted cause. For others, an intense reaction against such an incident provides an outlet for camouflaged hate feelings against a certain ethnic, religious or national group. Indian culture has a highly collectivistic orientation. Strong family, religious and community ties influence people’s reactions to a terrorist crisis, magnifying the intensity manifold than if it were an individual reaction. Given the closeness between community members, the fear and insecurity aroused by such incidents is infectious and spreads fast, bringing about a reassertion of group identity and heightened allegiance within the group to foster a sense of comforting solidarity. Whereas this may result in increased mutual support within a certain group, it causes an enhanced feeling of disconnect with the opposing group, leading to unhealthy and dangerous social polarization.

          A demagogic and exploitative leadership is likely to exploit these heightened insecurities and ambient social fear by further underlining the divide between groups and communities to serve their own political agendas. They may recount distorted historical episodes to further impress a feeling of victimization in a certain group, and enhance their insecurities with exaggerated and imagined threats from the perpetrators of terror. This generally serves two functions; it gives them an alternative to divert people’s anger for lack of good governance. It also presents a scapegoat group who can be blamed for what people lack or the threats they face. Since an immediate looming threat to one’s safety is much more engaging than poverty, lack of jobs or civic facilities, people overridden by a highly anxious and shaky state of mind are easily manipulated by the emotion rousing leaders.

            History in different times and different parts of the world has shown a replay in that it is often the minority which is pushed out to be seen as “the other” and made the scapegoat for all ills. It might have been the Jews in Europe or the people of colour in America or Sikhs and Muslims closer home. Hate mongering and overly expressive hyper-nationalism after a terror attack is the worst reaction to terrorism. It may serve the nefarious agenda of demagogy, and is actually helps the terrorists attain their motives. It is likely to rupture the social fabric of a diversely ethnic society like India’s, creating and sustaining mutual suspicions, fear and pervasive threat between different religious groups.  This can lead to social disorganization and bring out incipient fault lines between mutually hostile religious/ethnic groups.  Deliberate inactivity, dithering or complicity of the state in containing violent reactions are likely to undermine people’s faith in the law enforcing agencies and result in riots and looting and other forms of human rights violation. Any honest government true to the welfare of the nation and its people must necessarily take urgent and wholehearted steps to contain overreaction and knee jerk fixes to a terrorist episode. The aim is very clear; diagnose and heal the disease, not aid the spread of the infection.

Women Empowerment- tapping the sources within

We have just passed March 8th, a day internationally dedicated to women. Seminars were organized, banners put up at junctions, and catchy slogans circulated in the media. So, women have been duly acknowledged; now let’s return to our routines of running the world as usual. Will women wake up, move beyond these superficial lollipop appeasements, and engage in the serious and challenging work of writing their own script? If you are a woman, it’s time to face reality and recognize that no system, however liberal or progressive, is going to allow you to grow in stature, respect your identity, or give you your due in a fiercely competitive and dog-eat-dog world, where men are often engaged in tearing each other down to get a step ahead. Before you can ask others to facilitate gender equality, you must build up and strengthen your own personal resources. The men close to you may be supportive if you are very lucky, but more often than not, they are also victims of intense mental conditioning by the patriarchal social norms of the system they were born into and may need to be persuaded and cajoled into seeing your perspective. Even those who mean well will not be able to help you beyond a point unless you find your own way.

Know that the social system, and most likely even those close to you, will do little more than hinder you in challenging the set norms. Empowering yourself within the given social and legal parameters is your call. Maybe you will not be able to take huge leaps overnight, but take some basic steps and you will on the way. Start with standing on your own two feet, financially and emotionally. No one who is not financially self sufficient is truly free to make significant choices or decisions about her life. If you think women can get along by looking pretty and letting the husband carry the donkey’s load, be ready to compromise on your demands for equality. Even if you are earning but not equipped to manage your finances, investments and banking, you remain mentally handicapped by looking to a male family member for help. Competence is power, incompetence is dependence. Dependence is crippling. Equality and respect will evade you till you empower yourself with enough capability to manage your life affairs not only inside, but outside the home too. Break free of traditional gender- assigned arenas of action within the family and educate yourself about what to look for when buying a new car, refrigerator, flat or insurance; about making arrangements for family functions and travel, home repairs and car servicing. Any decision must be an informed decision, and a demand for decision taking rights must be qualified by knowledge of related logistics.

 For women in professions, especially the male dominated ones, patronizing and condescending attitudes of their bosses and colleagues can very often be annoying and frustrating. Change your own stance to change their attitudes. It pays to keep your general interaction with male colleagues professional and formal. Do not cave in to unwarranted pressures, do not allow yourself to be bullied and insist on your getting your dues. Earn respect through giving your best in your field of work and never ask for compassionate favours or lighter assignments on account of family duties or lack of self confidence. Let others in the family share such duties and not expect you to compromise on your professionalism. Women who shirk work and taking on tough duties can hardly be expected to be taken seriously.

Even when a woman is educationally and professionally accomplished, financially independent and able to fend for herself, she may still be emotionally over dependent on her male counterpart. There are many families in which men actually make not only personal but professional decisions for their wives, girl friends or daughters. There could not be a worse way for women to invite mental subjugation. How will any amount of education, reservation or support help any woman who will still look to a male mentor to tell her where to sign and how to handle her office? Whether to accept or refuse a transfer?

Managing interpersonal relationships in a fair and balanced manner is another major component of personal empowerment. The socially glorified image of women exalted to godliness through their given roles of endless sacrifices, nurturing and ‘adjusting’ needs to be smashed to smithereens. Insist on your natural right of being a normal human with needs and wishes of your own which may not always be put on the back burner for your father, husband, partner or your children. Do not sacrifice your own interests in relationships and allow yourself to be emotionally blackmailed or exploited. Avoid making desperate emotional investments even in the closest of relationships. Emotional neediness can be terribly destabilizing in instances of unrequited expectations or unfortunate break ups. The best of relationships are unpredictable, so be strong enough to keep or regain your emotional balance in the worst of scenarios. Get up, dust your clothes, heal your bruises and move on. It is never the end and you have a long way to go yet.