Indian Youth and TINA

The average Indian youth might be vociferous with his views on the political scenario in the country plagued by rampant corruption and ‘policy paralysis’, might have grand ideas to convert a going downhill economy into a ‘India shining’, might have an answer to all malaise that affects the country, and might express all their views on social networks, but when it comes to the D-day, the elections, the platform which would effectively bring about change in the ‘system’, the same youth prefers to take a day off for vacation or watch the ‘analysis’ on television.

How many of you reading this article vote? Or how many, eligible, of you have a voter ID? These are some uncomfortable questions posed to the average Indian youth. While some answers hover around futility of the exercise, like ‘What will my single vote do to the huge system?’ others address lack of ease, like “I am away from my home town, how do you think I could vote?’, while few others talk about non-believers in the electoral system, like ‘Is it necessary to just vote to bring about change, cannot other methods serve the purpose?’.

While you may ponder over these questions and their answers or the lack of it, there is one answer that stands out. Those answer which has probably contributed to the disenchantment of Indian youth with electoral politics. TINA. There Is No Alternative.

There is no alternative political formation which could replace ineffective regimes. The host of political parties, at the end of the day, are not really ‘different’ from one another, is the view that most people carry. While seniors might still see optimism out of the situation and exercise their voting rights, Gen Y perhaps looks at the situation in a grimmer light.

The beauty of democracy, that the ruling class is put to an acid test of elections, after a stipulated time, is lost upon the youth. In an ideal situation, if there were any anguish against the treasury benches of the parliament, it would be voted against and better leaders be elected. But what skews the ideal situation for the youth in India is the lack of the ‘better’ leaders. They do not see an alternative. Unfortunately and largely owing to their deeds, politicians are painted with one brush. Such is the disillusion that has grown over the years that only a miniscule of adults willingly discusses politics. And it is a sorry affair for any nation.

It is also TINA which causes crusaders, both genuine and fifteen-minutes-of-fame-grabbers to emerge. It is TINA which has, and many a times thankfully, caused sprouting of regional parties. No one wishes for underdevelopment, corruption, lack of opportunities, thinning salaries, pink slips, atmosphere of mistrust, terrorist attacks, insurgency, poor infrastructure; every youth in India, with bigger dreams for themselves and the nation, wishes for an ‘alternative’. Alas TINA factor in Indian politics keeps them and thus the nation at large disenchanted.

This article was originally posted on http://manipalblog.com/2012/08/indian-youth-and-tina/

11 - the new 12 !

Times have changed. Quite literally. A major change that students (those residing in Manipal University Hostels) experienced was a notice announcing the change in curfew hours. The upper limit of Hostel entry time, which was 12 o’ clock midnight, was changed to 11 o’ clock. Likewise the Health Sciences Library had its time of closure reduced from 11.30 to 10 o’ clock. The decision was taken at a recent meeting held with Superintendent of Police and other officials in view of security situation.

While this exasperated some, others appreciated it and for the rest ‘it didnt matter’.

So what is the exasperation about? There are people who liken the decision to a stifling of freedom. They believe that such a forced decision takes away the ‘cool’ tag from campus life. That extra hour of fun, relaxing, cutting loose, time spent with friends, boyfriends and girlfriends is their right (even if not fundamental) and should not be snatched away. The unhappier lot thinks that 11 is too early to get back to your rooms. The ‘library people’ (you know who you are) are fuming as it takes away an hour of study, which they do best in the library.

The set of people who are happy with it are happy because they feel 11 in the night is not ‘too early’ by any stretch of imagination. That more and more hours let outside are recipes to brew trouble. And at the time when there is a percieved security issue, it is better to be safe, even if it means coming back to hostels little early. The ‘library people’ supporting the decision have a realization that taking away one hour from the entire library time would not make a difference in the ‘productive’ hours.

For people to whom the decision doesnt matter might fall in many categories. Ones who do not go to library, they like studying in their rooms. The students staying in appartments and also not going to library are least concerned. There are anyway appartments with stricter rules than the one which is subject to discussion now. Also people who do not like venturing out to ‘social hangouts’ (read whatever you wish to) are not fluttered by the decision.

Is the change of timings good or bad? It is only human to reject ‘change’. The moment a change, especially ones that affects our daily routine, is enforced, we react. We react all the more if we have not been part of making the decision of the change. However we may pose to ourselves some questions – can we be part of any and every decision that affects us? Are we willing to believe that there indeed is a security risk that authorities have assessed.

Coming to the time per se, I recall when I was a student and used to inform my friends and family about the curfew timing of midnight, they used to be shocked. For the reason that many institutions, reputed ones, do have much stricter time policies. When I was a in my graduation we used to get back by 7.30. But times have changed. The average sleeping time has been pushed to much later. My friends will cite me as an example to that effect. Hence the question, is 11 o clock in the night ‘early’ to get back to hostel?

It probably is because we were used to 12 that we are unhappy about it. It is probably the good we see in the change of time that we are happy about it. Amidst all the wide range of emotions it has evoked, the change is here to stay. Until it is changed again.

(The views expressed are of the author and has no relation to policy matters)
The article featured in ManipalBlog.com on 7th August 2012.

Unfortunate Opening Address

After a show of grandeur in the Presidential procession from Raisina Hills to the Parliament, the 13th President of India, Pranab Mukherjee signed on the dotted line after being sworn in. And then the president spoke. In all that I heard on the news channel, there was one of the preliminary sentences that stuck out, and it did not just stick out, it did prick. It pricked the conscience, it pricked the pride and it pricked the collective vision of a nation. And I quote that part of the speech:

“Our national mission must continue to be what it was when the generation of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Ambedkar and Maulana Azad offered us a tryst with destiny: to end the curse of poverty, and create such opportunities for the young that they can take our India forward by quantum leaps.”

So what did I find so distasteful, so repulsive, so unfortunate about it?
The distasteful, the repulsive and the unfortunate part of it is that after having been independent for 67 years we still have to strive for that basic need, that whiff of development, that goal of elimination of poverty, that creation of opportunities. We still have to pursue, for we have not yet reached anywhere near that ‘national mission’ which the forefathers of the nation had set. That ‘ tryst with destiny’ that Jawaharlal Nehru had famously mentioned in his horologically mistaken speech (it was not midnight in other parts of the world and the world was not sleeping then as he mentioned) continues to this date.

India has caught the development bus, but has been able to get on board those who could run to catch the moving bus, those who had aesthetically designed shoes, those who were wearing good jogging outfits, those who were fit to run. It left everyone else, and that everyone else is the majority. They are the poor, the downtrodden and how much ever one would like to believe it to be non-existent or a minority the fact is in the contrary. Hence the tryst which is now going on since years has not resulted in what is a buzz word these days – inclusive growth. Mr. Mukherjee exhorted everyone to work for that left out section, but what good are words which has become cliche of every politician and mocked in movies to such an extent that no one tries it anymore. There could have been better, meaningful words.

What else could have Mr. Mukherjee spoken on? His speech writer would have thought it glorious to invoke the larger than life political figures of India, all with a Congress connection on this momentous occasion. But in a world where everyone is increasingly being heard and analysed, little thought should have been spared either in acknowledging that India has failed in feeding its poor, uplifting from bottomless pit of poverty its citizens or a more pragmatic approach to cater to these goals should have been mentioned. Although it is not a Prime Minister speaking from the Red Fort, extraordinary times, which the new President describes as Fourth World War, calls for extraordinary measures, speeches included.

Everyone will agree that in Indian democracy President is unceremoniously described as ‘rubber stamp’, but the ceremonies associated with the President is in no way reflective of that view. While one may argue what spectacle of austerity did the new President present with the grand limousine, and a grand procession, more on it later. The President however detached from the policy making has a role to play in affecting the psyche of the nation, a feat well achieved by Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam. Despite playing the role of a rubber stamp, he was able to use his office to reach out to children, motivate them, thereby contributing in nation building. When he spoke, he spoke about pragmatic steps, and a glorious vision for the country. Will the erudite scholar with impeccable memory Mr. Mukherjee deliver anything on those lines? At least his words at the beginning of the innings did not say so.

Will it be just another banter against the system? Will this article just about another pot shot at our political establishment? Will it be lament at the state of affairs? will it be read and realised and commented on and passed on as yet another essay? As unfortunate the speech of the new President is, so is the answer to the questions, an unfortunate ‘yes’.

(This post originally appeared on ManipalBlog.com http://manipalblog.com/2012/08/and-the-president-spoke/)