What I have learned from Palm Sunday

This is not another religiously pompous and theologically thought provoking post on the significance of Palm Sunday, atleast not in the conventional sense. There are probably tons of them floating around. This is all about one lesson that I stumbled upon at a very epiphanic moment: Do not put your trust in people or other things temporal! Why you ask? Because one week they would be riding you triumphantly on an ass into the city waving palm branches and proclaiming you the king while the very next week they are baying for your blood and leading you out the city on foot with a freaking wooden cross on your back. To add insult to injury they kill you in the most excruciating way possible.

People's mind are as fickle as they come and I still wonder why HE took this crap from people who don't really care!

The shaky moorings of an ideological centerist

I had a more cooler title for the post but I can't remember it for the life of me! The title could be misleading in many ways, because the definition of a centrist varies depending on who you ask; from a spineless rat to a highly practical deal breaker. I am personally not very comfortable with the tag of a centrist seeing that there are too many pseudo centrist out there, which brings us to the question of the definition of a centrist.

The reason I find the moorings shaky is because they do not have the adamantine morality of the right or the freewheeling social boundaries of the left. This is further compounded by the fact that they hate both extremes but are equally poised to embrace either on most issues.

On the topic of definitions, I have seen - all the more frequently now-a-days - that conservatism and right-wing are used interchangeably. I beg to differ on that synonym as all right-wingers are social conservatives but not the other way around. A simple point of reference is that the right-wing in the US generally tends to be the Christian right while in India they would be the Hindu right. Conservatives on the other hand tend to be hard to define along religious views. Same applies for the left too, while the serious left have no religious underpinnings, the liberals are from all religious and non-religious persuasions.

That being said, I am ready to prod on with my rambling. So how does a left of the right of the center conservative liberal find myself at the crossroads? that question hides the answer!

There are times when I wish that things were simple and right and wrong was black and white like the conservatives want us to believe. The very idea seems Utopian and gives you the familiar longings of a simple life. Then there are times when I wish people would understand that traditions were made for men and not the other way around. Growing up in an ultra-conservative society with very rule based and sometimes hypocritical values I have come to recognize and value the solid comfort that conservative ideas provide. There is not much of a grey area when it comes to conservative ideals while across the spectrum its a lot more grey with no idea of the were the black and white start.

I have often wondered how this ultra-conservative boy could move to the non-conformistic and shifting sands of the center? It was probably the cultural shock of the contradictory characteristics of conservatism in different cultures. More importantly though, it was the realisation that the conservations "WWJD" Jesus I was raised to believe was more a non-conformist liberal who challenged the prevalent traditions and cultures. I never thought to question the fact that Jesus ate with "sinners" while I would not be allowed to talk to "morally bad" people.

Does this make me want to be a hippie? (A lot of people in South America really think that all Indians are Ganja smoking hippies). Far from it, I could never truly be a snob (Inspite of various attempts). And why would I not be able to call myself a liberal? The fact that I would have to care more about animals than humans, the perpetrators than victims and assign all responsibility of evil to the society rather than the individual.

Starting on this blog I really didn't know where I was going with it, neither has then position changed in the last couple of days that I have been trying to finish it. It started out more as a attempt at putting down my frustration in finding people with exactly similar views. I do realise now that by my definition I am not going to find somebody else with the same exact views on all topics. I have also come to realise the fact that inspite of the shaky moorings, I would not want to be self righteous, condemning right-winger nor a snobbish, superficial left-winger.

I also did realise that I needed to finish this post!

Live to Impact

That was the title of the sermon at my church this past Sunday. An apt motto for those who really want to live rather than just survive. A motto I have aspired to for a long time. It is not a one step or multi step process but a way of life. The irony of the situation is that it does not matter if one wants to impact or not, ones actions always have an impact on the surrounding environment for better or for worse.

The assumption of the title is to make a positive impact. The simplest way would be to reduce your negative impact, which is easier said than done. A few days ago I was driving with some friends and was (as is usual) boasting about my Indian driving skills i.e. jumping red lights, driving on the opposite side of the road, etc etc, when I realised that it was not something to be proud about. I know that sounds corny but the truth of the matter is that if you want to 'live to impact' (for good) you have to make conscious decisions on such simple things.

A lot of people, of which yours truly is foremost, provide a lot of lip service to such a life but their actions betray most of what they say. But people like Gandhi, Mandela, Mother Teresa did not just impact the world with their words but their actions. The fruits of their actions are testament to the impact that they have had in the lives of others.

There is no denying the fact that our life has an impact, the question remains weather it is for better or for worse?

Freedom

I was at the world war II memorial in London the other day and came across these words "... gave their lives for the freedom of the world ...". The irony of the statement wouldn't strike everybody, but being that I am from a former colony of the British Empire, it was an eye opener. This statement was made when numerous countries including mine was under the oppressive English hands.

Does freedom only belong to a select few individuals? Or does it only belong to the people that the media says it belongs too? In this day and age when everything gets a sense of legitimacy by using the word freedom, it is imperative on us to consider the broader picture and not confine our self to our narrow world view.

The Indians and the Nigerians and the Ugandans and the countless others British colonies deserved their freedom as much as the British or the french deserved from the Germans. Maybe the days of "Dogs and Indians not allowed" are like water under the bridge but it is still trying to repeat it in different fashions! And history be damned there are always enough snoots around to spoil the broth for us.

So people might think that I am just joining the rhetoric of bashing the British of yesteryear but then you are not in my shoes. Sometimes my blood just boils over when I hear of the hypocrisies of "freedom loving" "democratic" countries which try to take the glory for all the world's good and nothing of the blame for it's evil.

The English bashing probably is because of my first trip there and the sight of the Kohinoor diamond on the queen's crown, instead of being in the hands of an Indian. That being said no freedom is 'freedom' until it belongs to everybody. There is no clause to withhold it from a few or from the dis-advantaged.

On a personal note the pictures are available on my diary

The case for war

Its finally time that I get into the war debate, four years after it began. I see that the rhetoric has shifted too and the momentum has clearly swung the anti-war way, atleast most of the noice is coming from the anti-war lobby. What an oppurtunate time for me to defend it

It’s often been said, and rightly so, that for evil to prosper good men do nothing. I have read and heard about the Sheehans, the Moores, the Clooneys and others of the ink who seem to think a little to highly of themselves then they ought too, while sneering down on plebeians like us for not seeing their point of view. Before I dwell deeply into it, I think a little background - from my viewpoint - is needed.

Iraq is this country formerly part of the region called Mesopotamia and it has tons of oil. The westerns, namely the British, the French, the Americans and the Russians, try to overrun it for the oil with a mixed success rate. And there is this guy called Saddam who rises up in Iraq and takes over the ruling party that had previously deposed the King and becomes “the President” with 100% of all eligible votes (It was just a ballot with his name on it). So like any dictator, he had absolute control of the country with no open opposition (Even closed opposition had to be outside the border) also modeling the South African style, he was part of the minority community. A very mitigating factor in his favor was that he had a neighbor that the west hated more than they hated him, and so they fought with his authoritarian rule against the totalitarian rule, helping him with biological and chemical weapons.

Once that war got boring, the west (America), lost focus which normally happens here with a change of COC*, and forgot about the tons of biological and chemical weapons! And then Hussein probably committed his biggest and only mistake, he got greedy and decided for whatever weird reason that he was Nebuchadnezzar and wanted to rule another country. Unfortunately for him, it was the end of the cold war which left Bush Sr. with a ton of old arsenal. So they bombed him back to his city and then chickened out before they could get the job done (just like some people are trying to now). The regime changed and America’s sometimes flawed foreign policy was in full affect, the new COC was more interested in a certain Ms. Lewsenski than in an old guy who fished using grenades. Then 9/11 happened and people wanted blood, Bush Jr. saw his opportunity to leave behind a legacy. Afghanistan was easy, but then it was not enough, the next logical choice was between doing something in Sudan, Iraq, Iran or North Korea. Sudan only had its deserts as a prize ditto for North Korea, albeit it had more forest cover. Iran was too powerful to take on while Iraq seemed much easier, with Sadam’s regime in taters due to a decade of sanctions. The administration knew they could use the chemical and biological weapons as an excuse, after all wasn’t it the US that provided it. It was a win-win situation, American’s largest and most powerful lobby (the gun lobby) could make a ton of money for replenishing the arsenal and the second most powerful lobby (Read the oil lobby) could finally get control of the second largest oil reserves in the world.

Then all hell broke loose, Sadam was and has been much smarter than they expected in hiding the weapons, or probably he had already used it all up, what with having to put down a plethora of revolts after the first gulf war. The administration had not been prepared for a long drawn out battle, also they had believed their own propaganda that technological superiority was enough on the battlefield. They also failed to understand that a dictator never has the whole country against him; there is always a section of people that have benefited from his patronage, who would feel the heat when he is gone. A prime example is the non-white sympathisers of the British Empire who are now citizens there. They went there as the empire was falling, rather than risk loosing their lives in their home country!

This should be enough of a digression.

So why support a war which has seen its opposition grow exponentially each day? ‘cause once the cacophonous rhetoric from either side is dissected, it will clearly emerge that the issue is more complex and greyer than both sides want us to believe. At the core of the issue as I see it is, not the WMDs but deciding when the issue is internal to a sovereignty or and when it becomes imperative for the world to step in. Don’t know if many of you remember the person called Ahmed Chalabi, he was part of an umbrella Iraqi opposition group that wanted to topple Saddam and took the normal Iraqis’ plight to various governments. Some of his information, which was heavily relied upon by the US government, on WMD have been shown to be false, for which he is in the dock right now. Looking at it from another perspective, the lies could be the sign of a desperate group of people tired of living under a draconian ruler. Indians should be well aware of such feelings, Netaji Subash Chandra Bose allied with the Japanese during to the Second World War to fight the British colonists in India.

The same people who are demanding US withdrawal are also asking for foreign intervention in Darfur! These also are part of the same group of individuals that want the international communities to do something about Iran and North Korea and Tibet and Taiwan and … the list goes on. Is there a double standard here or is there a lack of spine to face difficulties. Is running away at the first sign of trouble the mark of any self-respecting nation? Like dad used to compare certain cribbers to asses that would bite when you stand in front and kick you when stand behind.

Another rhetoric has been the human cost of it, the sacrifices of the soldiers and how they did not sign up for this. If the soldiers and the marines did not sign up for war what did they sign up for, guard duty in a safe place in the middle of America in a air conditioned room? I say this having seen and been with immediate family members in all wings of the Indian military including two active duty members in the navy currently. Some might say that I have not served in the army so I wouldn’t know, all I have to say is that if I joined the army I wouldn’t crib about it neither would I like anybody cribbing for me. To see civilians asking for withdrawal using the causalities as an excuse is not only a grave affront but is also short sighted. Those who have died or have been injured didn’t do what they did for nothing. The people who join the armed forces are not fools who do not know what is expected of them and if they are not ready to stand up then they have no reason to enlist. Like a ship is only useful if it is able to loose sight of land, the armed forces is not an ornament that a country wears but is there for a very specific purpose. The world’s supposedly greatest army does not earn its colours by staying home.

This also fits in well with larger problem of an opportunistic American foreign policy. If we just drop everything and walk out of Iraq right now, there would be anarchy there and it would have been better if we had not tried to help them out. The last sentence probably made a few of you snigger, but that is the truth according to NoViCe! The Iraqis were living under a dictator, and there is no going around it. There are probably a few other more notorious totalitarian regime in the world, but there is no established pecking order that the world can use to dismantle them. The muddle foreign policy was the one that prevented the job from being finished in ’92, which also probably caused the death of thousands of Iraqis who rose up in revolt against Saddam and then were left to die by a weakened American foreign policy that withdrew at the first sign of trouble.

I remember as a kid hearing about the letters that some churches in Indian received from certain extremists’ organizations like RSS and VHP - as the right-wing BJP was gathering a wider foothold in India – threatening them with expulsion from their Indian once they come to power. As absurd as it might sound right now, my immature mind started thinking of what happens when the state turns against its own people. I wondered if any other country would help us or if the rest of the world would even bother. Now that the world has done something about it in a country that needed it, with any number of hidden agendas included, we can only stay the course.

We cannot under any circumstances let the terrorists dictate terms to us, we would not be really free if we are not ready to make any sacrifices whatsoever. The news of the torture and killings that emanate from Iraq and Afghanistan only tend to fortify my opinion that we must stay the course. Would I like to stay in a country where I am told what to wear, eat, think and say or in a country that has high terrorist activity with my freedom intact? It’s like asking if I would like to die once with honour or die everyday of fear.

In every country the views that get the most exposure is not the majority opinion - which more often than not is middle of the road – but the opinion of fringe groups from both extremes that tend to muddy the whole affair.

Until we are able to see above ourselves, our family, our city, our state, our country we would not have really lived. This is the time for action and its either a free world or back to the stoneage!

*Commander-in-chief

The essence of Charity!

Charity
- The theological virtue defined as love directed first toward God but also toward oneself and one's neighbors as objects of God's love.
- Benevolence or generosity toward others or toward humanity.

The charity I am talking about is the King James version (KJV), unrequited love towards all men, not the one that is commonplace now, giving to score brownie points. The human ingredient of love in giving is the most important part of it, more than all the other factors put together. Also in the KJV version of the bible, the word charity is used in place of love.

Give early, give Always

I once read somewhere that charity is not throwing a bone to the dog but sharing a bone with the dog when you are just as hungry as the dog. I am not suggesting that we need to get into an unenviable position to help others but that our own circumstances must not be a hindrance to acts of charity.

The excuse given my most people I know for their lack of charity is the hardships that they themselves are facing. They want to give back once they have more money and worse some even suggest that all the richer and more powerful people should practice charity before they do it themselves. The problems with this logic are that there is now set limit for more money and its all was the poor who give and not the rich. From experience I have come to realise that there is no limit to wanting more money, I am just as broke now as when I was earning 1/5th of what I earn now (With a definite increase in material possessions).

The only way to break out of this circle of waiting-to-give-when-you-have -more-money is to give when you have no money. I have my parents to thank for, for instilling in me the sense of charity by first practicing it in all circumstances and by initiating me into it even with the first real money I ever made (Incidentally it was an inconsequential amount won in quiz competition). It was also their persuasion that made me realise that if I didn't give when I had the burden of the student and other loans, I wouldn't give when I had no such burdens. There have been times when even some of my close friends have questioned my wisdom in giving when I could have used it to close all my debts and there were even times that I myself had doubts about my decision. But now that I look back on that decision, I am convinced without a iota of doubt that it was one of the best decision that I have ever made.

Its pretty simple to see why I wouldn't have been able to give now if I didn't give then, my needs and comforts have dramatically grown with my pay scale, giving them a run for their money, and anybody who has had the 'privilege' of knowing me would know that I am not given to moderation when it comes to the good things in life ... oh what a waste it would have been!

Before you all start thinking that I am trying to blow my own horn, I am just trying to pass on some practical advice that I got, with a living proof in me. Of course it is not for everybody, but then again what is?

Give cheerfully

I had always wondered what Jesus had meant when he said God loves a cheerful giver, and then it struck me, that He was trying to make the point that people would remember the spirit and cheer in the gift long after the gift itself is forgotten. As I said earlier charity is more than monetary and material gifts, its the heart that makes the gift worth it. A kind word and a smile with your act of charity is of infinitely more value than just the act of charity alone. What the needy like all homo sapiens need more than money is a cheerful face that makes them feel wanted. It is the only need that cannot be bought, it has to be given.

The other more compelling reason for giving cheerfully is more self centered. For the only reward of KJV charity is happiness and contentment. As any financial advisor will tell you that the less you invest the less you get back, if your giving is cheerless, don't expect any returns of happiness and contentment. Far worse, charity without cheerfulness looses itself.

Be good stewards

Some people think that giving is just to cut a check out to every Tom dick and Harry, which more often than not is foolish. It is your hard-earned money, so treat it the same way you would treat your own business dealings. Personally I keep track of all beneficiaries of my charity and have a goal to reach certain groups of people through education, maybe I could expand on it but for now I know my target group and that's what each of us needs. Its always a good idea to have a field of focus, even Bill Gates is not capable enough of solving everyone's problem. Try not to go with the crowd all the time (sometimes its prudent to ignore this), and focus on small issues that really get a hold of you and consume you with passion. The passion of a motivated heart is insurmountable.

The reason for being good stewards is pretty obvious, there are some rotten apples who are out to make a quick buck and some issues which may not really be an issue like the society to promote vegetarianism (I could be wrong about that ha-ha). It also ensures that Charity is available where its due and not in the back pocket of a conman. Also you don't have to sow where somebody else already has already.

Be innovative

All the previous rules lean more towards material or monetary giving, so what if you can't afford to give any such thing. There is always something to give in everybody no matter how high or how low you might be in the natural food chain. Time is more important than money and more often than not it is much more in short supply. I would love to spend more time on my passions but unfortunately I hold a job that consumes most of my time. Its always best to give what you have than to say that you have nothing to offer the world. Charity is not for the Bill gates of the world but also for the Toms and Dicks and Harries.

If you have money, give money;if teaching skills, then teach;if organising skills, then organise;if caring, then care; as the parts of the body are different and equaly important so are all these different forms of charity.

At the end, What you spend is forgotten, what is save is for somebody else but what you give is what remains, there are people who keep it all for themselves and become poor and those who give away everything and yet get richer.

"And now abideth faith, hope, charity(love), these three; but the greatest of these is charity(love)" - 1 Corinthians 13:13

While I am on this subject, just an update on the kids that come for the evening school run by "Falcon Foundation" in Chennai... It's been great going so far and the number of kids has stayed constant so far, with a marked improvement in their academic abilities. Planning to get a few computers so they can start on it at a early stage. Also looking for other locations to start up a similar evening school and a adult education program. Soon you should be able to get more updates on it's own website.... and no this is not a plea for money :). If you have any brighter plans for the slum kids talk to me ;).

An eye for an eye

5:45 P.M : he was excited, it couldn't have come sooner, he would become a man or so he thought. He was a year older and ready to take on the world, after all he has proved to be a great elder brother, yes he knew he was a grown up now … officially. At ten years he was a typical boy who wasn'’t old enough to drive and thought he was too old to be called a kid. It was his birthday, and as was family tradition they were going to have a party at the local ice cream shop. Life couldn'’t be better!

9:45 P.M : He woke up with a start, how couldn'’t move there was a seething pain going through his body, people shouting and running all around, he tried to cry out for his mom and dad without any affect, he was scared and then the drugs took effect.

Three days later: His grandparents were there and so were some of his cousins but his own parents and sisters were no where in sight. He did not know the loss his grandparents had suffered, they had lost three kids on the same day. He was crying now, all thought of being grown up far away. He wanted his mom's kisses and his dad'’s strong arms, where were they, where was his baby sister who was always getting in his ways?

One month later: He now knew that his parents weren'’t coming back neither was his sister. He wasn'’t going to be the big brother anymore, just a person growing up alone. He knew the people who did it, though he couldn'’t comprehend their rationale, but it didn'’t matter now for he was going to have his revenge. His sole purpose in life now was to see the same pain inflicted on those that he thought were responsible for this pain ... and he knew he was going to succeed.

15 years later ...

It was one of the biggest wedding's in the city, people had come from far and wide. It was not often that people had something to cheer about in these trying times and yet they still had hope. One moment there was dancing and good natured revelry and the next moment the sky was falling. Scattering bodies, bones, blood and bricks, producing with it more righteous anger and revenge filled hearts.

So the cycle continues all over the world...

You can substitute any nationality in the above story and it would fit, giving a template for the cycle of war that continues around the world.

I once read a story of a boy asking his parents on how wars start ... now I know the answer 'cause war never really end, it just waits for more angry people to be born.

The only way is forgiveness, an oft used word that is never really practiced. The world is divided everywhere because of stiff-necked leaders with vengeanceful souls I n their command. From Kashmir to the middle east, from Korea to Sudan, normal people just want food while the incompetent leaders rule the only way they know, by making martyrs and murderers.

A bird in hand

I was listening to the radio a couple of days back when I heard this song which goes something like 'A bird in hand is worth one in the bush is worth one on a electric wire', which instantly sounded like one of those meaningless songs that are the rule rather than exception now-a-days. And then suddenly realization hit me like a ton of bricks on a glass window, this song had a deeper meaning that I could ever imagine.

'A bird in hand is worth two in the bush' is one of those oft' quoted and misquoted sayings. The song though was at a entirely different level, subtle though it might be. How often do we esteem one person over another? How often do we put down one person to show up another? Or how often have we knowingly or unknowingly estimated one life over another?

I know what some of you are guessing, I am getting sensitive here (An unknown quality to me).

We thinking highly of a person in power more than the homeless. I have been in situations where somebody gets a place of honour just because they know somebody who is powerful. I don't want to get into the argument about how a person works all his life to be recoganised. The differences that I want to point out is in judging a person by the what he belongs to, by who he knows, by what society says rather than by what he is.

To further drill this point home, the sermon at my church last week was a eye opener. The Pastor passed around the flyer that wanted people to write down a list of various things that people thought were important. It ranged from important clothing brands to important women not in the entertainment industry. More often than not people picked the expensive ones for inanimate objects and people in power for the people centric questions. And then he proceeded to ask us why we didn't consider the brands that we normally use as important? Why we didn't consider our own relatives and friends as important? The worst part of it all was that he was right.

Our sense of importance seems to be highly wrapped and twisted. We cannot survive without our friends and family but we accord more importance to people we don't even know or will never meet. We don't consider the simple things in life that we cannot live without as important rather spending all that adulation on things that we don't need, that we would buy just to impress people we don't have to!

It was definitely an eye opener for me, atleast God is not a respecter of personsRomans 2:11, or I am definitely screwed(Pardon the French)

Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
Leviticus 19:15

Check out my other blog tamilnole.blogspot.com

What would you die for?

Just came across this news article on a death penalty case involving a afgan man who converted to Christianity 14 years back. The picture shows the bible that was seized from him.

apparently he could have avoided all this by just telling them that he is converting back to Islam, if only for namesake that would have saved him his skin. It is precisely this kind of moral courage in the face of insurmountable danger that baffles me. Call it faith or belief or any other thing ... it takes a lot of conviction to stand firm behind your decision. Some people may compare this to the kamakzie/suicide bombers and other "freedom fighters" who wouldn't mind killing for their belief. But there is a world of difference between them. Its easier to kill than to die for your belief ... people who kill are afraid that they could be wrong, while those that die have no such fear.

Being that I don't know, if I have his kind of moral courage yet ... I'll refrain from dissecting this issue and let you learn or be encouraged by this One Man ... Martyr to some, heretic to others.

"Give What You Can't Keep to Gain What You Can't Lose"

New World Order

I can vividly remember the Coco-Cola company coming into India, with the opening up of India's economy in 1992, as the first MNC riding piggy back on the shoulders of India's market leaders at that time the Gold Spot company, . Within a very short period of time Coco-Cola had flexed its muscle and staged a successful hostile take over of the company. The Thumbs Up pictured on the left and Limca are the only remnants of the old soda range. The flagship Gold Spot was replaced by fanta. The hostile takeover scared the other India companies to such an extent that all talks broke down between them and the MNCs for a whole year. So why this lesson in history? Two recent events ...

The first was me getting a case (24 count) of "Thumbs Up" from the India store. I remember how we used (still do) call Coco-Cola and Pepsi as a wimp's drink compared to Thumbs Up! So it brought back memories of how the fledging new open economy was attacked by the well loaded MNCs.

The second event ... flash forward 14 years and a technology boom later. The world has turned more capitalistic than ever (even red china), thanks mainly to the pressure of the US of A and the third world countries are finding the pros of having a capitalistic society. And then its protectionism all over again, this time from the flag bearer of the Capitalistic free society, good 'ole Uncle Sam. I am talking about the Dubai Ports Deal, which provided a common ground for both democrats and republicans. And it seems that prejudicial politics has overcome the basic tenets of free trade and a level playing field. Am I calling them racist .... no... its just shows that they are not ready for the new world order. How can a bunch of horse riders "barbarians" living in a kingdom gain a foot hold in their own backyard. I don't think there would have been so much furor if this had been a European "civilized" company.

This is not an isolated event ... across the ocean, France is trying to prevent Lakshmi Mittal (An India) take over Europe's largest steel manufacturer. And here racism is pretty apparent. They just can't seem to comprehend how a country that they controlled not more than half a century ago, would now have to the guts to come into their house and rule their ... steel. Its unthinkable for the Europeans who weren't below putting up "Dogs and Indians not allowed" signboard in India to now loose to an "Brown" owned company.

Welcome to the reality of capitalism ... its a dog eat dog world, the pandora's box has been opened and no amount of tears over job loss and out-sourcing is going to close it. The best thing to do is to get on your feet and eat before you are eaten.

It is hypocritical for feminists and intellectuals to enjoy the pleasures and conveniences of capitalism while sneering at it.... Everyone born into capitalism has incurred a debt to it.
Camille Paglia

...great America....poor india

Ok before you guys go beating up on me for that statement, just wanted to let you guys know that, it is not my statement. This is one my mom oft quoted statements, whenever I don't agree with her point of you. Its actually even higher than "you are more educated than me"(Which is false since she has two degrees to my one).

I am not going into the merits of the statements itself, I'll leave it to the "nationalists" of both countries. The reason I brought this up is to talk about psychology! Ok I don't have a psychology nor am I a psychologist but am sure a master at the defensive offensive strategy. That's again a new phrase ... I am talking about the way people usually lower themselves so the other would feel guilty.

It's pretty useful if you want to say whatever you want and then hide behind the supposed direness of your situation. This strategy was pretty effective in college when a trio of us used to make fun of everybody and then would self-deprecate ourselves so others wouldn't get a handle to make fun of us.

It's usage that really bugs me though is when it's an emotional blackmail and yours truly has given as much as he has got. My sisters have most often been my victims, the closer you are to me the more you would be emotionally blackmailed ;) while my mom and uncles have been pretty effective giving it to me.

So why am I writing this ?? Well just confessing my sins in the open so I won't repeat them again... hopefully ... and who is to be credited for making a saint out of a sinner? Somebody who is trying the greatest defensive offense on me.

If you can't beat em', join em'..
If you can't join em', bribe em',
If you can't bribe em', blackmail em'..

Anatomy of an Indian Movie

I am finally stepping into the unknown and writing about stuff that I have no business about, not that I had any business with the previous ones. But for a guy who hasn't seen an Indian movie in well over 11 years, I do know a lot about it (Or so I think). Why would you let a guy who once infamously asked who Ramba(A then famous Tamil actress) was? The picture says it all.

All I need is one minute of the film to tell which of the general plotline it would take, so lets dig in and try to conjure up one right now. To begin with need a few songs with lots of dancing shot in various locations around the world. Then you need to decide if you want a love story between a rich girl and a poor guy or vice versa, this can be exchanged for a urban - rural matchup or a literate - illiterate match up. This will form the skeleton structure of the movie.

Next come the muscles, need to make the hero stronger than Superman, able to as the picture indicates walk with a bullet in the heart. Also needs strength to cut a bullet into two using a knife and kill two people using those sliced pieces. Also helps if the hero is always outnumbered 1000 to 1.

Ofcourse you need the heart which would be 10 minutes of crying for whatever reason it might be. Maybe everytime the sacrifice of the hero is mentioned, it could turn into a sob scene.

The skin is provided by the fairer sex, specially with their "item" numbers*.

There is no need for a brain in this anatomy, if it had one, there would be a stroke as soon as it started functioning.

No movie is complete without the perfect climax, a pot pourri mix of fighting, blood(preferably from the hero), death (of one of the hero's close family/friend) and the triumph of good over evil.

If only I had the money or the backing of the underworld.

"I'll be back."

* Item numer -> When you have a pretty lass who has no connection with the storyline dance sensuously as a popcorn break during the boring part of the movie.

Credits to Vijay for the picture.

Just another day ..

... in paradise ... oops that's the song. Anyhoo with all the cacophony around us about the new year and the old year. Seems like every columnist, magazine, newspaper ... that is worth a mention had a top 10/25 list of things gone by. So that makes a list by me kind of redundant. But it did get me thinking about this New Year "stuff" and gave me the million dollar question of who created New Years day???? Beats me

By the way if you are wondering about the picture, its Mukhtaran Mai. The post on this one pictures has got more hits to my website than anybody else this past year!! Her fight still continues. Nobody said its easy to take on the establishment.

So instead of making list like everybody else is doing, I am going to introduce a new writing partner for this blog. Introducing CrackerJack (The Identity has been withheld per request!) . I and CrackerJack have a difference of opinion on quite a few subjects. Also I presume that quite a few of you are sick of seeing one side of the coin through my ramblings! I had hoped to change the format of the blog but I guess that has to wait for another day.

See you all next year folks and I'll let CrackerJack start off the year.

Ring out the old, ring in the new,
Ring, happy bells, across the snow:
The year is going, let him go;
Ring out the false, ring in the true.
~Alfred, Lord Tennyson, 1850