Per capita income means how much each individual receives, in monetary terms, of the yearly income generated in the country. This is what each citizen is to receive if the yearly national income is divided equally among everyone.
It has several weaknesses as a measurement. Economic activity that does not result in monetary income, such as services provided within the family, or for barter, are usually not counted. The importance of these services will vary widely between different economies, both between countries and among different groups within a country. Per capita income gives no indication of the distribution of that income within the country.
A small wealthy class in a country can increase the measured per-capita income far above that of the majority of the population ( Countries with autocratic rulers who alongwith their coterie live in unimaginable luxury while a large section of the people may be wallowing in poverty ).
Then again there is the India syndrome wherein the economic growth has virtually bye-passed the poor. In such a case the increase in per capita income has been virtually usurped by the middle and upper classes.
Most of the analysis and reporting on this subject are off the mark:
· E.g., Spokesmen of various industries quote the per capita consumption of this or that item in various industrially developed countries with particular mention to the position obtained in USA. And then lament at the poor record of India and measures required to catch up with USA. Various questions arise. Should we just copy their example when many in those countries are questioning the wisdom of wasteful consumption in those countries, depleting the world resources at a fast pace. Increasing consumption of all items is becoming the order of the day in those countries. Want is being slowly replaced by greed. ‘ live like the Joneses ‘ is the credo. There is mad rush to earn more to buy ( and waste ) more.
· The second misnomer is pattern of consumption. ‘ They are consuming so much of liquor, cigarettes, medicines, meat ‘ – we have to go far to catch up with them. Why catch up at all. Per capita consumption of wool in India is only so many meters whereas…..’ tongue in cheek statement, because India being essentially a tropical country two thirds of the population do not require any woolen cloths.
INFLATION
· Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.
· Inflation can also be described as a decline in the real value of money—a loss of purchasing power. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services. A chief measure of price inflation is the inflation rate, which is the percentage change in a price index over time
· Inflation can cause adverse effects on the economy. For example, uncertainty about future inflation may discourage investment and saving. Inflation may widen an income gap between those with fixed incomes and those with variable incomes. High inflation may lead to shortages of goods as consumers begin hoarding them out of concern their prices will increase in the future.
· Economists generally agree that high rates of inflation and hyperinflation are caused by an excessive growth of the money supply. Views on which factors determine moderate rates of inflation are more varied. Low or moderate inflation may be attributed to fluctuations in real demand for goods and services, or changes in available supplies such as during scarcities, as well as to growth in the money supply. The consensus view is that a sustained period of inflation is caused when money supply increases faster than the growth in productivity in the economy.
· The term "inflation" usually refers to a measured rise in a broad price index that represents the overall level of prices in goods and services in the economy. Consumer Price Index (CPI) Related economic concepts include: deflation, a fall in the general price level; disinflation, a decrease in the rate of inflation; hyperinflation, an out-of-control inflationary spiral; stagflation, a combination of inflation, slow economic growth and rising unemployment; and reflation, which is an attempt to raise the general level of prices to counteract deflationary pressures. The Consumer Price Index measures prices of a selection of goods and services purchased by a "typical consumer. The inflation rate is the percentage rate of change of a price index over time.
· For example, in January 2007, the U.S. Consumer Price Index was 202.416, and in January 2008 it was 211.080. The formula
for calculating the annual percentage rate inflation in the CPI over the course of 2007 is
· The resulting inflation rate for the CPI in this one year period is 4.28%, meaning the general level of prices for typical U.S. consumers rose by approximately four percent in 2007. Other widely used price indices for calculating price inflation include the following:
· Cost-of-living indices (COLI) are indices similar to the CPI which are often used to adjust fixed incomes and contractual incomes to maintain the real value of those incomes
· Measuring inflation in an economy requires objective means of differentiating changes in nominal prices on a common set of goods and services, and distinguishing them from those price shifts resulting from changes in value such as volume, quality, or performance. To measure overall inflation, the price change of a large "basket" of representative goods and services is measured. This is the purpose of a price index, which is the combined price of a "basket" of many goods and services.
· The effect of inflation is not distributed evenly, and as a consequence there are hidden costs to some and benefits to others from this decrease in purchasing power. For example, with inflation lenders or depositors who are paid a fixed rate of interest on loans or deposits will lose purchasing power from their interest earnings, while their borrowers benefit. Individuals or institutions with cash assets will experience a decline in the purchasing power of their holdings. Increases in payments to workers and pensioners often lag behind inflation, especially for those with fixed payments.
· High or unpredictable inflation rates are regarded as harmful to an overall economy. They add inefficiencies in the market, and make it difficult for companies to budget or plan long-term. Inflation can act as a drag on productivity as companies are forced to shift resources away from products and services in
order to focus on profit and losses from currency inflation. Uncertainty about the future purchasing power of money discourages investment and saving. And inflation can impose hidden tax increases, as inflated earnings push taxpayers into higher income tax rates.
· With high inflation, purchasing power is redistributed from those on fixed incomes such as pensioners towards those with variable incomes whose earnings may better keep pace with the inflation. This redistribution of purchasing power will also occur between international trading partners. Where fixed exchange rates are imposed, rising inflation in one economy will cause its exports to become more expensive and affect the balance of trade. There can also be negative impacts to trade from an increased instability in currency exchange prices caused by unpredictable inflation.
· Cost-push inflation: Rising inflation can prompt trade unions to demand higher wages, to keep up with consumer prices. Rising wages in turn can help fuel inflation. In the case of collective bargaining, wages will be set as a factor of price expectations, which will be higher when inflation has an upward trend. This can cause a wage spiral. In a sense, inflation begets further inflationary expectations.
· Inflation erodes the real value of nominally fixed payments - The real value of fixed nominal payments (like rents, pensions, wages, interest, and taxes) are eroded by inflation. In many countries, such payments are adjusted for inflation on an annual basis.
Controlling inflation
· A variety of methods have been used in attempts to control inflation.
Monetary policy.
· Today the primary tool for controlling inflation is monetary policy. Most central banks are tasked with keeping the federal funds lending rate at a low level, normally to a target rate around 2% to 3% per annum, and within a targeted low inflation range, somewhere from about 2% to 6% per annum.
· High interest rates and slow growth of the money supply are the traditional ways through which central banks fight or prevent inflation.
· Monetarists emphasize increasing interest rates (slowing the rise in the money supply, monetary policy) to fight inflation. Keynesians emphasize reducing demand in general, often through fiscal policy, using increased taxation or reduced government spending to reduce demand as well as by using monetary policy. Supply-side economists advocate fighting inflation by fixing the exchange rate between the currency and some reference currency such as gold. This would be a return to the gold standard. All of these policies are achieved in practice through a process of open market operations.
· It is obvious that inflaion affects the poor more than the middle class and rich people. Hence the concern of Government at the inflation level at any time.
Yet these three yardsticks are quoted ad nausea by the fourth estate, businessmen and economists. Production/consumption has been equated with happiness. Equitable distribution
of goods produced should be the first priority. Containing inflation has to be the second priority. And curbing greed ( in consumption ) has to be the goal.
**
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Sunday, December 21, 2008
NON TAX PAID MONEY WITH
1. According to the Website ‘MillionFace,’ on account of considerable pressure, Swiss Banking Association in its report, 2006, had stated that Indian nationals have an accumulated deposit of $1456 billion with the Swiss Banks. The Report further says that nationals of countries who have extremely high bank deposits in Switzerland are:
India: $1,456 billion
Russia: $ 470 “
UK $ 390 “
Ukraine $ 100 “
China: $ 96 “
i.e., in Indian currency, with the present exchange rate, India has a deposit of Rs. 75,00,000 crores. Truly mind boggling.
2. The Website MillionFace further reports that “Recently, due to international pressure, the Swiss government agreed to disclose the names of the account holders, but only if the respective governments formally asked for it. The Indian government is not asking for the details. No marks for guessing why!”
3. This is a sensational news. Then why is it that the fourth estate ( both print and visual media ) has not reported the above revelation. Is it a hoax?
4. Assuming that what has been put out is correct, this is not the whole picture. Non tax paid money is also being deposited in a few other countries, where also, as in the case of Switzerland, no questions are asked on the source of the money or whether tax for the same has been paid in the country from which the money has originated. Then again within the country ( India ) a lot of non tax paid money is hoarded.
5. If the whole of Rs. 75,00.000 of Indian money with Swiss banks is repatriated to India, Rs. 25,00,000 crores is due to the Government of India @ rate of 30% tax.
6. As against the above, the total tax collection of Government of India in 2007-08 was Rs. 602,935 crores.
7. For a long time Switzerland has been the tax haven for ill gotten wealth of people from all countries. Attraction for people to deposit in Swiss banks is the total secrecy in keeping the bank accounts there. There is some legislation enabling banks to maintain secrecy of funds deposited with them. But the banks pay no interest on such deposits made.
8. The Swiss Bank accounts are operated with utmost secrecy. Coded numbers have to be used for accessing the accounts. If somebody who had deposited huge amounts and dies suddenly without the account code ( and authorization ) being given to somebody, obviously the money in the account would go to the bank concerned, at the cost of revenue to Indian Government.
9. Estimates of unaccounted money within India vary from 20% to 60% of GDP.
10. Fourth estate should organize intense debates of tax experts ( on how to deal with the matter pragmatically ) and sociologists ( on the motivations for creating non tax paid money and how to reduce if not prevent the creation of such money ). The scope of discussion should be on both non tax money hoarded within and outside the country.
11. The immediate reaction of the Government on the above report ( assuming that the report is correct ) and discussions in legislature would be to form committees to look into the matter. That should be desisted. Nothing much would come out of such action because in a sense the matter is not complicated and does not require babus to ponder over the same ( and visiting other countries with fact finding teams ). What has been done by other countries to check the menace in the past and how far they were successful in the past and what they propose to do in future could be ascertained. Such inputs would be valuable to deciding this country’s course of action.
12. Government should also study the reasons for the lukewarm response to earlier schemes of voluntary disclosure of such money and then consider bringing in new schemes which would be more successful ( It is the businessmen who could advice informally Government on what type of scheme and how much incentive would work! ).
13. Will there be loud calls in the legislatures for booking the offenders, when a large number of offenders are from the political class. And will the Government have the courage to take on that class..
14. Honest tax payers may start wondering whether they are increasingly becoming suckers of the system.
15. Will Government of India coming up with another amnesty scheme work, i.e., no punishment for bringing the money to India and paying tax as enunciated under the Scheme.
16. Or should Government go in for the kill, i.e., imposing massive fine, imprisonment, etc., on those who are indulging in such an activity and have been caught red handed.
17. Pros and cons of repeating such schemes:
Pros
· Whatever money flows to Government kitty under the scheme can be spent by Government on developmental works and for amelioration of the suffering and poverty of those down and under.
· If no such scheme is announced, the money will remain outside and Government of India can do nothing about it ( Laws in Switzerland enjoins banks there to maintain secrecy of the names and the amount of money deposited by them in the banks )
· It is better to be practical instead of being puritanical.
· It can be expected that those who bring money back to the country under scheme will invest, if not the full amount at least part of it, in projects and other commercial activities, which will give employment and improve GDP.
Cons:
· Any such scheme basically amounts to exonerating illegal actions.
· Such schemes demoralize honest tax payers from paying full their tax.
· If amnesty is given in one area, then there could be demands for similar amnesty in other areas.
· Any such scheme would encourage tax payers to hoard non tax paid money in banks outside the country in the hope of such schemes being repeated.
· There would be demands for starting similar schemes in respect of those who have hoarded within the country non tax paid money.
· And if the suggestion above is implemented then the same would encourage hoarding of unaccounted money both within and outside the country.
· Any such scheme goes against the jurisprudence of the country, i.e., punishing the guilty.
18. When the Indian Income tax rate at the highest level was over 90% more than two decades back and niggardly foreign exchange was given by Government for foreign travel, some excuse could be offered on why many Indians hoard their money in banks in other countries. But that is not the case any more. Our present Income Tax rates are more or less at the same level as that of many countries. There is also no problem in getting foreign exchange for travel. The obvious conclusion could be only one and that is that the above reasons quoted were lame excuses.
Summing up
1. Government has no other option but to go in for carrot and stick policy to deal with the matter.
2. Eradication of Black money can happen only when morality of citizens improve. That is not likely to happen. Hence Government has to prod on with what has been stated in point 1 above.
3. In some respects the urge to create Black money is a disease. Because it never stops in the case of individuals who have tasted blood. It is not created for living luxuriously. It is not mainly created so that the same can be passed on to progenies so that the latter would be well off. After some time, creation of such money becomes part of the psyche.
Post script:
1. Long back I had a discussion with a senior businessman on Black money. He enlightened me by saying ‘ It is the politicians and cine stars who have got black money. Businessmen do not have Black money. They have No.2 accounts. This is required to pay off politicians and babus who can put obstacles to running of our business.’
2. Let not the middle class people ( including professionals ) smugly point their accusing fingers at businessmen and politicians for creation of Black money. They in their own way are part of this syndrome. Avoidance of tax is a legitimate right but not evasion by finding loopholes not intended in the law. How many insist on receipt on purchases made. When the shopkeeper points out that receipt means a higher price, invariably one shrugs and thinks / says, ‘ what has government done for me. Forget the receipt.’
***
India: $1,456 billion
Russia: $ 470 “
UK $ 390 “
Ukraine $ 100 “
China: $ 96 “
i.e., in Indian currency, with the present exchange rate, India has a deposit of Rs. 75,00,000 crores. Truly mind boggling.
2. The Website MillionFace further reports that “Recently, due to international pressure, the Swiss government agreed to disclose the names of the account holders, but only if the respective governments formally asked for it. The Indian government is not asking for the details. No marks for guessing why!”
3. This is a sensational news. Then why is it that the fourth estate ( both print and visual media ) has not reported the above revelation. Is it a hoax?
4. Assuming that what has been put out is correct, this is not the whole picture. Non tax paid money is also being deposited in a few other countries, where also, as in the case of Switzerland, no questions are asked on the source of the money or whether tax for the same has been paid in the country from which the money has originated. Then again within the country ( India ) a lot of non tax paid money is hoarded.
5. If the whole of Rs. 75,00.000 of Indian money with Swiss banks is repatriated to India, Rs. 25,00,000 crores is due to the Government of India @ rate of 30% tax.
6. As against the above, the total tax collection of Government of India in 2007-08 was Rs. 602,935 crores.
7. For a long time Switzerland has been the tax haven for ill gotten wealth of people from all countries. Attraction for people to deposit in Swiss banks is the total secrecy in keeping the bank accounts there. There is some legislation enabling banks to maintain secrecy of funds deposited with them. But the banks pay no interest on such deposits made.
8. The Swiss Bank accounts are operated with utmost secrecy. Coded numbers have to be used for accessing the accounts. If somebody who had deposited huge amounts and dies suddenly without the account code ( and authorization ) being given to somebody, obviously the money in the account would go to the bank concerned, at the cost of revenue to Indian Government.
9. Estimates of unaccounted money within India vary from 20% to 60% of GDP.
10. Fourth estate should organize intense debates of tax experts ( on how to deal with the matter pragmatically ) and sociologists ( on the motivations for creating non tax paid money and how to reduce if not prevent the creation of such money ). The scope of discussion should be on both non tax money hoarded within and outside the country.
11. The immediate reaction of the Government on the above report ( assuming that the report is correct ) and discussions in legislature would be to form committees to look into the matter. That should be desisted. Nothing much would come out of such action because in a sense the matter is not complicated and does not require babus to ponder over the same ( and visiting other countries with fact finding teams ). What has been done by other countries to check the menace in the past and how far they were successful in the past and what they propose to do in future could be ascertained. Such inputs would be valuable to deciding this country’s course of action.
12. Government should also study the reasons for the lukewarm response to earlier schemes of voluntary disclosure of such money and then consider bringing in new schemes which would be more successful ( It is the businessmen who could advice informally Government on what type of scheme and how much incentive would work! ).
13. Will there be loud calls in the legislatures for booking the offenders, when a large number of offenders are from the political class. And will the Government have the courage to take on that class..
14. Honest tax payers may start wondering whether they are increasingly becoming suckers of the system.
15. Will Government of India coming up with another amnesty scheme work, i.e., no punishment for bringing the money to India and paying tax as enunciated under the Scheme.
16. Or should Government go in for the kill, i.e., imposing massive fine, imprisonment, etc., on those who are indulging in such an activity and have been caught red handed.
17. Pros and cons of repeating such schemes:
Pros
· Whatever money flows to Government kitty under the scheme can be spent by Government on developmental works and for amelioration of the suffering and poverty of those down and under.
· If no such scheme is announced, the money will remain outside and Government of India can do nothing about it ( Laws in Switzerland enjoins banks there to maintain secrecy of the names and the amount of money deposited by them in the banks )
· It is better to be practical instead of being puritanical.
· It can be expected that those who bring money back to the country under scheme will invest, if not the full amount at least part of it, in projects and other commercial activities, which will give employment and improve GDP.
Cons:
· Any such scheme basically amounts to exonerating illegal actions.
· Such schemes demoralize honest tax payers from paying full their tax.
· If amnesty is given in one area, then there could be demands for similar amnesty in other areas.
· Any such scheme would encourage tax payers to hoard non tax paid money in banks outside the country in the hope of such schemes being repeated.
· There would be demands for starting similar schemes in respect of those who have hoarded within the country non tax paid money.
· And if the suggestion above is implemented then the same would encourage hoarding of unaccounted money both within and outside the country.
· Any such scheme goes against the jurisprudence of the country, i.e., punishing the guilty.
18. When the Indian Income tax rate at the highest level was over 90% more than two decades back and niggardly foreign exchange was given by Government for foreign travel, some excuse could be offered on why many Indians hoard their money in banks in other countries. But that is not the case any more. Our present Income Tax rates are more or less at the same level as that of many countries. There is also no problem in getting foreign exchange for travel. The obvious conclusion could be only one and that is that the above reasons quoted were lame excuses.
Summing up
1. Government has no other option but to go in for carrot and stick policy to deal with the matter.
2. Eradication of Black money can happen only when morality of citizens improve. That is not likely to happen. Hence Government has to prod on with what has been stated in point 1 above.
3. In some respects the urge to create Black money is a disease. Because it never stops in the case of individuals who have tasted blood. It is not created for living luxuriously. It is not mainly created so that the same can be passed on to progenies so that the latter would be well off. After some time, creation of such money becomes part of the psyche.
Post script:
1. Long back I had a discussion with a senior businessman on Black money. He enlightened me by saying ‘ It is the politicians and cine stars who have got black money. Businessmen do not have Black money. They have No.2 accounts. This is required to pay off politicians and babus who can put obstacles to running of our business.’
2. Let not the middle class people ( including professionals ) smugly point their accusing fingers at businessmen and politicians for creation of Black money. They in their own way are part of this syndrome. Avoidance of tax is a legitimate right but not evasion by finding loopholes not intended in the law. How many insist on receipt on purchases made. When the shopkeeper points out that receipt means a higher price, invariably one shrugs and thinks / says, ‘ what has government done for me. Forget the receipt.’
***
Sunday, December 14, 2008
GDP growth
Economist, London
‘ GDP yardstick is badly flawed as a guide to a nation’s economic well being. A nation’s well being depends on many factors ignored by GDP, such as leisure time, income inequality and the quality of the environment.’
During the last few years, i.e., when India leaped out of the sedentary ‘ Hindu ‘ growth rate of 3% or so, Government / fourth estate have been going ‘ ga ga’ over the +8% growth and all sorts of chest thumping prognostications are made of India overtaking USA in terms of gross production growth by 2020 or 2030 or so. Aware of the limitations of GDP as a yardstick of growth, economists are often circumspect on the subject. World over, increasingly more and more ‘wise-men’ have started making contrary noise on high GDP growth, with its ill effects on ecology, fast depletion of natural resources, wastages, etc., They also point out that quite often the benefits of high GDP growth do not percolate to low income people, whereas the negative factors of such high growth will have to be borne by all people and possibly more by poor people.
Arun Shourie:
‘The way GDP is measured yields at best a very gross estimate of productive activity in the country. In spite of everyone knowing this, the slightest fluctuation in the estimated GDP becomes the basis for elaborate theses – for gloom or elation. The imperfections of measurement apart, what has grown in the reference period is almost never the object of scrutiny.’
( The large number of cases before the various courts in India would indicate that we are a litigant prone people. Related to the subject under discussion, processing such a large number of cases by courts, does add to the level of GDP growth, because income accrued by service rendered is included in GDP. Alcohol and cigarette consumption goes up. The same improves the level of GDP. More gossip magazines come into the market. That also adds to GDP ).
With India achieving higher levels of GDP growth and maintaining that high level during the last few years, anybody and everybody and fourth estate have been cheering / mourning / comparing India’s position at a particular time with the position obtained in other countries. GDP is now taken as the yardstick / mantra for economic growth. While it is the prime indicator of economic growth, there are a number of related factors which are over-looked.
· GDP yardstick was developed primarily as a measuring tool to assess growth / deceleration in production of goods and services during a particular period. It is a tool for Governments for planning the development growth of a country.
· Economic growth is the increase in the amount of the goods and services produced by an economy over time. It is conventionally measured as the percent rate of increase in real gross domestic product, or real GDP. Growth is usually
· calculated in real terms, i.e. inflation-adjusted terms, in order to net out the effect of inflation on the price of the goods and services produced.
· Economists are aware of the limitations of this yardstick. Growth is not synonymous with equity. Growth has also to be looked into from the perspectives of the level of inflation, equitable distribution of the benefits of growth, level of employment creation, etc.,
· There is wide-spread misunderstanding on these fundamentals and how they affect individuals. Consistent high level of GDP growth is the wish list of all, individuals, Government, economists, etc., since the same is supposed to result in production of more and more goods, consequent to which employment opportunities increase and both these developments would have trickle down effect. People would be better clothed, better fed, will have money to meet not only expenses in living but will enable to meet various demands because of increased income. But this is hypothesis.
· On the other hand, high level of growth could result in trickle down effect. Over a period of time the poor would also be benefited because of the increase in the size of the cake.
· Once production growth takes place, distributive justice, to the extent of not happening could be repaired.
The negative factors related to higher growth:
· Growth will have adverse effect on the quality of life because growth to a large extent would affect environment ( more mining, more pollution, cutting of trees, etc., )
· Growth leads to creation of artificial needs. Industry cause consumers to develop new tastes, and preferences for growth to occur. Consequently, "wants are created, and consumers have become the servants, instead of the masters, of the economy."
· Resources ( e.g., mines, forest cover ) are depleted at a higher rate for which the generations to follow would have to pay a higher price.
· The gap between the ‘ haves ‘ and ‘have nots’ would go on widening with attendant social problems ( During the period of high growth level, the benefit of the growth would be taken in a disproportionate manner by the ‘haves’)
· Creation of high consumption society, which is the case of Western countries, is at odds with the ethos of Indian society of simple living. Consumption level being taken as synonymous with happiness level is a
concept, which many thinkers and sociologists question.
To a large extent the absurdity in the assumption that high GDP growth would automatically improve the lot of the people has been exposed by the following pithy write up with imaginary developments.
Arun Shourie
‘To encourage growth in the North East, the Finance Minister announces excise concessions for industries that will be set up there. Cigarette companies, firms producing pan masala rush to the region. That is growth! ( and hence factores in measuring GDP growth level ).
X is a small businessmen. Producing the car in which he goes to office increases the GDP, and therefore counts as growth. That the dealer shovels his margin into the price, increases the GDP, therefore that too boosts growth. If X does not have money to buy the car on his own, and borrows from the bank, better still – he helps expand the financial sector too, and thereby his car increases the GDP twice over. He can contribute to growth even more by not repaying the loan – the bank then has to deploy lawyers, and hoods, and the money it shells out to them is all growth
If, while X is at office, his car gets stolen, and the police set a posse to catch the thief – growth, for salaries of the policemen form part of GDP. The traffic jams, the difficulties in repaying the loan, the accident, the tussle with the insurance company, the lawyer’s fees, X turning to a
psychiatrist. The doctor puts X on mood boosters – growth. The drugs, the bills, the troubles in office, the failing business run X’s family relationships. His wife sues for divorce. Like her, X too engages a lawyer. The case takes weeks and weeks of the court’s time – growth several times over.’
Summing up:
· There is spurt in production of, say, cotton and Natural Rubber. Related to the weightage given for these items in the GDP Index for calculation of growth / deceleration, GDP increases. But the higher production may bring down the price of these two items, affecting the growers of the same.
· Mechanisation, computerisation, etc., may increase production of an item. Positive effect on GDP. But such a development possibly would also have a negative effect of reducing the level of employment.
· Cigarette and liquor demand goes up and hence production also goes up. Improves the GDP. But what about the negative effect on people.
This is not to argue against higher level of economic growth on a sustained basis. It is only to caution on the negative sides. The media, economists and also Government have made it appear as if higher level of growth is the panacea for ills ( poverty, unemployment, sickness, etc., ) afflicting the country. But such growth has also its down-sides, which should not be forgotten and Governments have to intervene in ensuring that the benefits of higher level of growth percolates to those who are down and under.
If higher GDP growth is an unmixed blessing, then with reasonably higher level of growth in India during the last few years, poverty and unemployment level in the country should have come down sinificantly. But many are of the view that this has not happened. The main reason is that the trickle down theory has not happened effectively or widely.
India is still 128 in the ranking of Human Development Index done by UN Agency.
****
‘ GDP yardstick is badly flawed as a guide to a nation’s economic well being. A nation’s well being depends on many factors ignored by GDP, such as leisure time, income inequality and the quality of the environment.’
During the last few years, i.e., when India leaped out of the sedentary ‘ Hindu ‘ growth rate of 3% or so, Government / fourth estate have been going ‘ ga ga’ over the +8% growth and all sorts of chest thumping prognostications are made of India overtaking USA in terms of gross production growth by 2020 or 2030 or so. Aware of the limitations of GDP as a yardstick of growth, economists are often circumspect on the subject. World over, increasingly more and more ‘wise-men’ have started making contrary noise on high GDP growth, with its ill effects on ecology, fast depletion of natural resources, wastages, etc., They also point out that quite often the benefits of high GDP growth do not percolate to low income people, whereas the negative factors of such high growth will have to be borne by all people and possibly more by poor people.
Arun Shourie:
‘The way GDP is measured yields at best a very gross estimate of productive activity in the country. In spite of everyone knowing this, the slightest fluctuation in the estimated GDP becomes the basis for elaborate theses – for gloom or elation. The imperfections of measurement apart, what has grown in the reference period is almost never the object of scrutiny.’
( The large number of cases before the various courts in India would indicate that we are a litigant prone people. Related to the subject under discussion, processing such a large number of cases by courts, does add to the level of GDP growth, because income accrued by service rendered is included in GDP. Alcohol and cigarette consumption goes up. The same improves the level of GDP. More gossip magazines come into the market. That also adds to GDP ).
With India achieving higher levels of GDP growth and maintaining that high level during the last few years, anybody and everybody and fourth estate have been cheering / mourning / comparing India’s position at a particular time with the position obtained in other countries. GDP is now taken as the yardstick / mantra for economic growth. While it is the prime indicator of economic growth, there are a number of related factors which are over-looked.
· GDP yardstick was developed primarily as a measuring tool to assess growth / deceleration in production of goods and services during a particular period. It is a tool for Governments for planning the development growth of a country.
· Economic growth is the increase in the amount of the goods and services produced by an economy over time. It is conventionally measured as the percent rate of increase in real gross domestic product, or real GDP. Growth is usually
· calculated in real terms, i.e. inflation-adjusted terms, in order to net out the effect of inflation on the price of the goods and services produced.
· Economists are aware of the limitations of this yardstick. Growth is not synonymous with equity. Growth has also to be looked into from the perspectives of the level of inflation, equitable distribution of the benefits of growth, level of employment creation, etc.,
· There is wide-spread misunderstanding on these fundamentals and how they affect individuals. Consistent high level of GDP growth is the wish list of all, individuals, Government, economists, etc., since the same is supposed to result in production of more and more goods, consequent to which employment opportunities increase and both these developments would have trickle down effect. People would be better clothed, better fed, will have money to meet not only expenses in living but will enable to meet various demands because of increased income. But this is hypothesis.
· On the other hand, high level of growth could result in trickle down effect. Over a period of time the poor would also be benefited because of the increase in the size of the cake.
· Once production growth takes place, distributive justice, to the extent of not happening could be repaired.
The negative factors related to higher growth:
· Growth will have adverse effect on the quality of life because growth to a large extent would affect environment ( more mining, more pollution, cutting of trees, etc., )
· Growth leads to creation of artificial needs. Industry cause consumers to develop new tastes, and preferences for growth to occur. Consequently, "wants are created, and consumers have become the servants, instead of the masters, of the economy."
· Resources ( e.g., mines, forest cover ) are depleted at a higher rate for which the generations to follow would have to pay a higher price.
· The gap between the ‘ haves ‘ and ‘have nots’ would go on widening with attendant social problems ( During the period of high growth level, the benefit of the growth would be taken in a disproportionate manner by the ‘haves’)
· Creation of high consumption society, which is the case of Western countries, is at odds with the ethos of Indian society of simple living. Consumption level being taken as synonymous with happiness level is a
concept, which many thinkers and sociologists question.
To a large extent the absurdity in the assumption that high GDP growth would automatically improve the lot of the people has been exposed by the following pithy write up with imaginary developments.
Arun Shourie
‘To encourage growth in the North East, the Finance Minister announces excise concessions for industries that will be set up there. Cigarette companies, firms producing pan masala rush to the region. That is growth! ( and hence factores in measuring GDP growth level ).
X is a small businessmen. Producing the car in which he goes to office increases the GDP, and therefore counts as growth. That the dealer shovels his margin into the price, increases the GDP, therefore that too boosts growth. If X does not have money to buy the car on his own, and borrows from the bank, better still – he helps expand the financial sector too, and thereby his car increases the GDP twice over. He can contribute to growth even more by not repaying the loan – the bank then has to deploy lawyers, and hoods, and the money it shells out to them is all growth
If, while X is at office, his car gets stolen, and the police set a posse to catch the thief – growth, for salaries of the policemen form part of GDP. The traffic jams, the difficulties in repaying the loan, the accident, the tussle with the insurance company, the lawyer’s fees, X turning to a
psychiatrist. The doctor puts X on mood boosters – growth. The drugs, the bills, the troubles in office, the failing business run X’s family relationships. His wife sues for divorce. Like her, X too engages a lawyer. The case takes weeks and weeks of the court’s time – growth several times over.’
Summing up:
· There is spurt in production of, say, cotton and Natural Rubber. Related to the weightage given for these items in the GDP Index for calculation of growth / deceleration, GDP increases. But the higher production may bring down the price of these two items, affecting the growers of the same.
· Mechanisation, computerisation, etc., may increase production of an item. Positive effect on GDP. But such a development possibly would also have a negative effect of reducing the level of employment.
· Cigarette and liquor demand goes up and hence production also goes up. Improves the GDP. But what about the negative effect on people.
This is not to argue against higher level of economic growth on a sustained basis. It is only to caution on the negative sides. The media, economists and also Government have made it appear as if higher level of growth is the panacea for ills ( poverty, unemployment, sickness, etc., ) afflicting the country. But such growth has also its down-sides, which should not be forgotten and Governments have to intervene in ensuring that the benefits of higher level of growth percolates to those who are down and under.
If higher GDP growth is an unmixed blessing, then with reasonably higher level of growth in India during the last few years, poverty and unemployment level in the country should have come down sinificantly. But many are of the view that this has not happened. The main reason is that the trickle down theory has not happened effectively or widely.
India is still 128 in the ranking of Human Development Index done by UN Agency.
****
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Fourth Estate – Whitherto
If the TV/ main newspaper reporting continues in the present style, then I will have no alternative but to shoot the TV ( since I can’t shoot the TV journalists ) and then migrate to Himalayas. Or I join them since I am good at writing / talking on any matter without any knowledge on the subject.
Days are not far off when we would be watching an interview in TV as below:
Interviewer ( Young lass of 26 something, oozing full of self
confidence, wearing western dress, using Yankee lingo, without a trace of Indian etiquette of reverence to elders and hence addressing by name without any prefix, aggressive, interrupting often, jumping from one context to another, ending the interview misquoting and with wrong conclusions )
‘ O.K. Azim, both Man and Amartya, who are with us here, were together in some college in USA (!), studied astrology and witchcraft (!!) and in due course both achieved success and became VVIPs (!!!). But do you rate their joint contribution below, equal or more than the contribution of Raj Thackeray in taking the Marathi Manoos or morons out of their stupor. Since time is running out, just give ‘ Yes’ or ‘ No’ answer.’
1. Should we call it ‘ Times of Obama ‘ and ‘ Hindustan Gossip.’
· ‘ Pundits conduct last rites for Citi’s Pandit’ - Headlines in Times of India ( 23.11.08 ). ( ‘ Un-Indian sickening language’ )
· ‘ Will jehadis have last laugh’ – Headline in Times of India. ( Is it not trivialising a very serious matter – was the levity called for ).
· ‘ Obama won because of wearing Hanuman Chalisa – So says pundits in Delhi ‘ Hindustan Times ( Poor Obama, God save him from such windbags ).
· ‘ Obama has not yet phoned Indian P.M.’ This is after the election of Obama as President of US. ( Is this not a clear cut case of our inflated ego ).
· ‘Ashok Chavan new kid in Maha block ‘ Times of India ( Is it a selection to the local football club. Where is the sense of proportion while using adjectives )
· Front page of photo of Maradona shaking hands of football aficionado ( Times of India ) – and the caption ‘ THE HAND OF GOD ‘ ( There is a limit to trivialising )
· ‘ 40% of Indians live with space less than that is available to American prisoners.’ Hindustan Times ( What sort of comparison is this )
· Wherever possible, any reporting should have an American angle or comparison with the position obtained in US of A. ( As if we are the second most important global player )
· Possible induction of some body as the Secretary of Interior in Obama Cabinet ( not a person known in India ) is reported with a lot of fan fare accompanied by a detailed write up, when India will have no impact on any area by the actions of Secretary of Interior of USA. ( There is a limit to America-mania )
· Virtually a controversy was built up on induction of an Indian born American citizen to the transition team of Obama, on the ground that she or her relatives had some connections with a Hindu party here. ( How rdiculous to think that we should have say in such matters )
· Many of the veteran political commentators had commented that for India McCain would be a better choice than Obama. But then the Indian English media had opted for Obama and wote off McCain even before the election ( because it was reflecting popular view, but not necessarily ground level reality ).
· Showing half nude pictures of some foreign film star in the inside page has become the in thing ( yes, voeurs like me would enjoy ogling at such pictures. But was it not out place in important National dailies ) .
· Media of late has started virtual trial in its columns ( camaflouged as ‘ after the truth ‘ and remaining within the borderline of legal propriety ) of individuals involved in violence and sex. ( the line differentiaing responsible and yellow media is blurring )
· In America when they started investigative reporting, we here started intuitive reporting. In depth reporting is being slowly replaced by trivia. ‘ suggestio falsi’ (positive misinterpretation not involving direct lie but going beyond concealment of truth ) and ‘suppressio veri ‘( suppression of truth, misrepresentation by concealment of facts that ought to be made known) are becoming increasingly the style.
· Discussions in the visual media are termed as ‘ fights ‘ probably emulating the American style and the anchors prod the main speakers to virtually fight. This mode is adopted brazenly on topics where there are hardly any differing views, e.g., infra structure deveopment ( Consider this with the matter of fact and sober discussions in the Lok Sabha TV of persons representing different partieis or perspectives on an issue ).
· ‘ People’s Verdict ‘ - is another con game. The number: a miniscule. Who votes: Retired people ( who never had any power while working and through the voting will have the satisfaction of being party to decision making ) or unemployed people or bored house wives. Have you ever voted? I have not.
· ‘ Our own Vishwanathan Anand is the King of Chess.’ A 30 second programme. And then ‘ On to the 230th episode of the cricket match between India and Somalia where India has roundly defeated Somalia.’ And the match is shown for another 15 minutes. Skewed priorities?
· Increasingly the intervieweing of VIPs or ordinary people is becoming the typical style of ‘ are you still beating your wife. Give ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ answer, making the interviewed squirming because either ‘ Yes ‘ or ‘No’ answer would compromise his position.
· For panel discussions in the aftermath of the terrorist attack, invitee speakers invariably included some fading or budding film star, socialites and a few businessmen. Hardly sociologists, psychologists, historians, writers or thinkers are invited to participate. It would appear that the idea is to make the programme as glamorous as possible. ‘ Let us nuke Pakistan ‘ receives more applause than ‘ let us engage Pakistan in serious discussions.’ And the TV channels are looking essentially to that applause. That is the tragedy.
· Within a week of the attack on Mumbai, terrorists struck in Assam and killed 35 persons. How much coverage for that was given by the fourth estate in print/visual media? Next to nothing.
· Businessmen came with some inane sugestions. ‘We are prepared to pay an extra cess of 3% to deal with the matter. Industry bodies up in arms if the Government makes this proposal formally. Make Mumbai a separate Central unit - Will Maharashtra Government agree. Then if other major cities follow up with similar demands, what happens. Businessmen have suggestions which are akin to steps to be taken for making a business unit efficient. But that analogy can hardly be applied to a country, and that too a country like India. The focus was on Mumbai attack. What about Kashmiris, Assamese and people of many of the Naxalite infested Districts in Bihar, UP, etc., who have been living with terror for years, with rampant killings. In other words, the wake up call can come only when Mumbai or such other city and business people are affected. Incidently, where was the
2. Extracts from the article of Anil Dharkar, well known writer
“……..there are many viewers who feel that our television channels in their coverage of the horrific attack on Mumbai unleashed their own brand of terrorism. The criticicism centres on the following charges.
· Elitism: In those 60 hours when television covered the carnage, attention was focused almost exclusively on the Taj and Oberoi hotels with some time given to the commando operations at Nariman House. There was virtually no airtime given to the attacks of Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus or Cama Hospital. Yet the mayhem began there and 54 people were killed. Is that because the dead there were not from the elite?
· TV channels becoming the unwitting tools of the terrorists. During the siege of the Taj almost all channels ran the story that 150 people had taken refuge in its Chambers Club. When they were given the signal to leave they found the terrorists waiting for them; only a few escaped being brutally gunned down. The inference is clear. We, sitting in our homes were not the only ones watching TV. The terrorists were too.
· The commandos aired the problems they were facing to TV channels. This was obviously seen by terrorists also. The first rule of battle is that you do not reveal your weaknesses to the enemy.
· Competitivenes of TV channels in giving coverage ( meaning that winning the competition became more important than objective reporting ).
· Why were the anchors so loud and hysterical.
3. Jug Suraiya ( Contributing Editor to Times of India )
‘ The fame or notoriety of Somali pirates is the creation of the media.
In the case of resistible rise of Raj Thackery, a number of people are of the opinion that the Marathi chauvinist was ‘ creation ‘ of the media. Raj was and is a nobody, apolitical non entity until his infantile tantrums were picked up and amplified by newspapers and TV channels which gave him a spurious stature by according him far more coverage than he merited. If only the media had down played Raj Thackeray’s initial shenanigans he never would have assumed the monstrous dimension.
By and large, bad news outsellf good news: monsters and more marketable than teddy bears. So does the media create monsters?’
But then the qustion is: Why can’t Jug Suraiya, as Contributing Editor of Times of India, do something in respect of that paper.
4. Emulation of Hitler
The old boy Hitler got away with a trick, which now our visual media is imitating. To impress the crowd that gathered to witness the parade of soldiers at the beginning of World War II, about the prowess of military, the soldiers in the parade once out of sight of the people watching, changed their dresses and adorned new uniforms and again joined the march past, giving the impression to the crowd that the army assembled is mammoth. In the same way, the visual media repeatedly shows same pictures to exaggerate the gravity of any incident and that too within a time gap of ten minutes or so. Sometimes it is sickening, more so when the visual object is gore.
5. Haile Selase showed the way
Haile Selase ( Did I spell the name of the old chap correctly ) was the Emporer of Ethiopia a few decades back. The chap was King but wanted to become Emporer. Now the question before him was how to do it properly instead of anointing himself as Emperor. He had a la Chanakya as adviser who said that all the mofussil chiefs be promoted as kings. Who is above kings - the Emporer. So the guy became Emporer.
In the same fashion one major TV channel promoted all the commentators as Managing Directors. And the prima donna as the Group Managing Director. But to give a convoluted twist the chief was designated as the President, which is not the way designations are in vogue in the corporate world, i.e., a President would be lower in rank compared to Managing Director ( It is a clever ploy. Will these MDs get jobs in other news channels. Unless they also follow this ludicrous policy, no-one will touch them ).
6. O.K. these are their internal piccadillos. But why should they play havoc with the viewers / readers.
7. Gossip reporting and photos of more and more unclad lasses are increasing in the main dailies. Somebody could argue that if that be so and if the reader resents this change in style, the reader is free to shift to another paper, say, a staid one. But then over a period of time a newspaper changes the taste of its readers. He now likes gossip and semi nude photos. This is so world over and from time immeorial. The media caters to the demand / taste of the readers and slowly the media also influences the tastes of readers. So it is becoming a Hobson’s choice for the reader and viewer.
8. Recently the Government advised print and visual media to show restraint in publishing news and views on the terror attacks. Media has brazenly rejected this suggestion on the specious ground that they are only reflecting the ‘ actual ‘ and further it is the body now constituted by Government with a retired Supreme Court judge to look into such matters.
9. The Navy Chief ticked off the star visual media reporter for crossing the borderline in such matters. But by then, the star having become mega star, megalomania had infected her to such an extent that she virtually poured scorn on the stand of the Navy chief. The specious argument advanced was that media operated within its limits. That may be so. But what about decency, unintended harm, fuelling anger, etc.,
10. Times of India in its column of ‘ for and against ‘ on various issues had raised the following points:
‘ Government has issued an advisory indicating that Government feels that TV channels by focusing on ‘ gory ‘ images, ‘ tragedy ‘ and ‘ politician bashing ‘ – are not helping India overcome the Mumbai attacks. Further, according to Government, sensationalism may grab eyeballs, but playing on negatives will only gladden terror-mongers. India needs feel-good, not enfeebling.
The above advisory has been rejected by news channels.
There has been criticism of reportage showing gruesome footage or jeopardising commando operations in the rush for ‘ breaking news.’ Some TV anchors were seen using a tragic occasion for histriuonics and grandstanding. Others were said to fuel public ire against politicians - objectivity be damned.
Part justification of media comes by saying that media is now ‘ operating in the backdrop of ‘ dog-eat-dog competition,’ Related to print media, visual media is a kid in the block, meaning that it is still in the learning stage. As opinion makers the media has its duties. Independent channels cannot function with government counsel, however well meant it may be. News broadcasters have their own code of ethics (!!!!!!!! – exclamation remark by the author of this write-up) There is the citizens’ right to information. Consumers have choice.
Counter view: News coverage should refrain from whipping up anger, by repeating violent images. This prurient tendency has been called disaster porn, and research suggests it can add to fear and confusion. Children could be scarred for life after watching on TV showing such violent acts. News should be level headed and not hysterical.
Conclusions:
· Yes, it is realised that to some extent media caters to the tastes and wishes of the readers. But then over a period of time the media also sways the tastes of the readers.
· Government has now appointed a high power panel to oversee the media with a retired judge of Supreme Court as Chairman. But then such bodies would only frame some general guidelines for the media and would go into matters, such as, unethical, violating decency, against the interests of the country, unwittingly becoming party of communcal divide, etc., But the panel is unlikely to get involved in the nuances mentioned above. That restraint should come from within. Will it come. That is the question.
P.S: Let me end this somewhat depressing and bitter write up with something that would bring a smile to your lips
Manas Chakravarty writes an extremely witty column in Hindustan Times Sunday Edition. Extracts
‘The decision facing the Congress High Command was an exceptionally difficult one. The task was to find a chief minister for Maharashtra who would not only be effective against terror, but who would also be able to deliver the Maratha vote, not antagonise the sugar lobby, make sure the Dalits are not offended, assuage the fears of the people of the non-Marathwada area, taking into account Sharad Pawar’s feelings while cleverly trying to take votes away from him and, finally, ensuring that the new chief minister does not know Ram Gopal Varma.’
*****
Days are not far off when we would be watching an interview in TV as below:
Interviewer ( Young lass of 26 something, oozing full of self
confidence, wearing western dress, using Yankee lingo, without a trace of Indian etiquette of reverence to elders and hence addressing by name without any prefix, aggressive, interrupting often, jumping from one context to another, ending the interview misquoting and with wrong conclusions )
‘ O.K. Azim, both Man and Amartya, who are with us here, were together in some college in USA (!), studied astrology and witchcraft (!!) and in due course both achieved success and became VVIPs (!!!). But do you rate their joint contribution below, equal or more than the contribution of Raj Thackeray in taking the Marathi Manoos or morons out of their stupor. Since time is running out, just give ‘ Yes’ or ‘ No’ answer.’
1. Should we call it ‘ Times of Obama ‘ and ‘ Hindustan Gossip.’
· ‘ Pundits conduct last rites for Citi’s Pandit’ - Headlines in Times of India ( 23.11.08 ). ( ‘ Un-Indian sickening language’ )
· ‘ Will jehadis have last laugh’ – Headline in Times of India. ( Is it not trivialising a very serious matter – was the levity called for ).
· ‘ Obama won because of wearing Hanuman Chalisa – So says pundits in Delhi ‘ Hindustan Times ( Poor Obama, God save him from such windbags ).
· ‘ Obama has not yet phoned Indian P.M.’ This is after the election of Obama as President of US. ( Is this not a clear cut case of our inflated ego ).
· ‘Ashok Chavan new kid in Maha block ‘ Times of India ( Is it a selection to the local football club. Where is the sense of proportion while using adjectives )
· Front page of photo of Maradona shaking hands of football aficionado ( Times of India ) – and the caption ‘ THE HAND OF GOD ‘ ( There is a limit to trivialising )
· ‘ 40% of Indians live with space less than that is available to American prisoners.’ Hindustan Times ( What sort of comparison is this )
· Wherever possible, any reporting should have an American angle or comparison with the position obtained in US of A. ( As if we are the second most important global player )
· Possible induction of some body as the Secretary of Interior in Obama Cabinet ( not a person known in India ) is reported with a lot of fan fare accompanied by a detailed write up, when India will have no impact on any area by the actions of Secretary of Interior of USA. ( There is a limit to America-mania )
· Virtually a controversy was built up on induction of an Indian born American citizen to the transition team of Obama, on the ground that she or her relatives had some connections with a Hindu party here. ( How rdiculous to think that we should have say in such matters )
· Many of the veteran political commentators had commented that for India McCain would be a better choice than Obama. But then the Indian English media had opted for Obama and wote off McCain even before the election ( because it was reflecting popular view, but not necessarily ground level reality ).
· Showing half nude pictures of some foreign film star in the inside page has become the in thing ( yes, voeurs like me would enjoy ogling at such pictures. But was it not out place in important National dailies ) .
· Media of late has started virtual trial in its columns ( camaflouged as ‘ after the truth ‘ and remaining within the borderline of legal propriety ) of individuals involved in violence and sex. ( the line differentiaing responsible and yellow media is blurring )
· In America when they started investigative reporting, we here started intuitive reporting. In depth reporting is being slowly replaced by trivia. ‘ suggestio falsi’ (positive misinterpretation not involving direct lie but going beyond concealment of truth ) and ‘suppressio veri ‘( suppression of truth, misrepresentation by concealment of facts that ought to be made known) are becoming increasingly the style.
· Discussions in the visual media are termed as ‘ fights ‘ probably emulating the American style and the anchors prod the main speakers to virtually fight. This mode is adopted brazenly on topics where there are hardly any differing views, e.g., infra structure deveopment ( Consider this with the matter of fact and sober discussions in the Lok Sabha TV of persons representing different partieis or perspectives on an issue ).
· ‘ People’s Verdict ‘ - is another con game. The number: a miniscule. Who votes: Retired people ( who never had any power while working and through the voting will have the satisfaction of being party to decision making ) or unemployed people or bored house wives. Have you ever voted? I have not.
· ‘ Our own Vishwanathan Anand is the King of Chess.’ A 30 second programme. And then ‘ On to the 230th episode of the cricket match between India and Somalia where India has roundly defeated Somalia.’ And the match is shown for another 15 minutes. Skewed priorities?
· Increasingly the intervieweing of VIPs or ordinary people is becoming the typical style of ‘ are you still beating your wife. Give ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ answer, making the interviewed squirming because either ‘ Yes ‘ or ‘No’ answer would compromise his position.
· For panel discussions in the aftermath of the terrorist attack, invitee speakers invariably included some fading or budding film star, socialites and a few businessmen. Hardly sociologists, psychologists, historians, writers or thinkers are invited to participate. It would appear that the idea is to make the programme as glamorous as possible. ‘ Let us nuke Pakistan ‘ receives more applause than ‘ let us engage Pakistan in serious discussions.’ And the TV channels are looking essentially to that applause. That is the tragedy.
· Within a week of the attack on Mumbai, terrorists struck in Assam and killed 35 persons. How much coverage for that was given by the fourth estate in print/visual media? Next to nothing.
· Businessmen came with some inane sugestions. ‘We are prepared to pay an extra cess of 3% to deal with the matter. Industry bodies up in arms if the Government makes this proposal formally. Make Mumbai a separate Central unit - Will Maharashtra Government agree. Then if other major cities follow up with similar demands, what happens. Businessmen have suggestions which are akin to steps to be taken for making a business unit efficient. But that analogy can hardly be applied to a country, and that too a country like India. The focus was on Mumbai attack. What about Kashmiris, Assamese and people of many of the Naxalite infested Districts in Bihar, UP, etc., who have been living with terror for years, with rampant killings. In other words, the wake up call can come only when Mumbai or such other city and business people are affected. Incidently, where was the
2. Extracts from the article of Anil Dharkar, well known writer
“……..there are many viewers who feel that our television channels in their coverage of the horrific attack on Mumbai unleashed their own brand of terrorism. The criticicism centres on the following charges.
· Elitism: In those 60 hours when television covered the carnage, attention was focused almost exclusively on the Taj and Oberoi hotels with some time given to the commando operations at Nariman House. There was virtually no airtime given to the attacks of Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus or Cama Hospital. Yet the mayhem began there and 54 people were killed. Is that because the dead there were not from the elite?
· TV channels becoming the unwitting tools of the terrorists. During the siege of the Taj almost all channels ran the story that 150 people had taken refuge in its Chambers Club. When they were given the signal to leave they found the terrorists waiting for them; only a few escaped being brutally gunned down. The inference is clear. We, sitting in our homes were not the only ones watching TV. The terrorists were too.
· The commandos aired the problems they were facing to TV channels. This was obviously seen by terrorists also. The first rule of battle is that you do not reveal your weaknesses to the enemy.
· Competitivenes of TV channels in giving coverage ( meaning that winning the competition became more important than objective reporting ).
· Why were the anchors so loud and hysterical.
3. Jug Suraiya ( Contributing Editor to Times of India )
‘ The fame or notoriety of Somali pirates is the creation of the media.
In the case of resistible rise of Raj Thackery, a number of people are of the opinion that the Marathi chauvinist was ‘ creation ‘ of the media. Raj was and is a nobody, apolitical non entity until his infantile tantrums were picked up and amplified by newspapers and TV channels which gave him a spurious stature by according him far more coverage than he merited. If only the media had down played Raj Thackeray’s initial shenanigans he never would have assumed the monstrous dimension.
By and large, bad news outsellf good news: monsters and more marketable than teddy bears. So does the media create monsters?’
But then the qustion is: Why can’t Jug Suraiya, as Contributing Editor of Times of India, do something in respect of that paper.
4. Emulation of Hitler
The old boy Hitler got away with a trick, which now our visual media is imitating. To impress the crowd that gathered to witness the parade of soldiers at the beginning of World War II, about the prowess of military, the soldiers in the parade once out of sight of the people watching, changed their dresses and adorned new uniforms and again joined the march past, giving the impression to the crowd that the army assembled is mammoth. In the same way, the visual media repeatedly shows same pictures to exaggerate the gravity of any incident and that too within a time gap of ten minutes or so. Sometimes it is sickening, more so when the visual object is gore.
5. Haile Selase showed the way
Haile Selase ( Did I spell the name of the old chap correctly ) was the Emporer of Ethiopia a few decades back. The chap was King but wanted to become Emporer. Now the question before him was how to do it properly instead of anointing himself as Emperor. He had a la Chanakya as adviser who said that all the mofussil chiefs be promoted as kings. Who is above kings - the Emporer. So the guy became Emporer.
In the same fashion one major TV channel promoted all the commentators as Managing Directors. And the prima donna as the Group Managing Director. But to give a convoluted twist the chief was designated as the President, which is not the way designations are in vogue in the corporate world, i.e., a President would be lower in rank compared to Managing Director ( It is a clever ploy. Will these MDs get jobs in other news channels. Unless they also follow this ludicrous policy, no-one will touch them ).
6. O.K. these are their internal piccadillos. But why should they play havoc with the viewers / readers.
7. Gossip reporting and photos of more and more unclad lasses are increasing in the main dailies. Somebody could argue that if that be so and if the reader resents this change in style, the reader is free to shift to another paper, say, a staid one. But then over a period of time a newspaper changes the taste of its readers. He now likes gossip and semi nude photos. This is so world over and from time immeorial. The media caters to the demand / taste of the readers and slowly the media also influences the tastes of readers. So it is becoming a Hobson’s choice for the reader and viewer.
8. Recently the Government advised print and visual media to show restraint in publishing news and views on the terror attacks. Media has brazenly rejected this suggestion on the specious ground that they are only reflecting the ‘ actual ‘ and further it is the body now constituted by Government with a retired Supreme Court judge to look into such matters.
9. The Navy Chief ticked off the star visual media reporter for crossing the borderline in such matters. But by then, the star having become mega star, megalomania had infected her to such an extent that she virtually poured scorn on the stand of the Navy chief. The specious argument advanced was that media operated within its limits. That may be so. But what about decency, unintended harm, fuelling anger, etc.,
10. Times of India in its column of ‘ for and against ‘ on various issues had raised the following points:
‘ Government has issued an advisory indicating that Government feels that TV channels by focusing on ‘ gory ‘ images, ‘ tragedy ‘ and ‘ politician bashing ‘ – are not helping India overcome the Mumbai attacks. Further, according to Government, sensationalism may grab eyeballs, but playing on negatives will only gladden terror-mongers. India needs feel-good, not enfeebling.
The above advisory has been rejected by news channels.
There has been criticism of reportage showing gruesome footage or jeopardising commando operations in the rush for ‘ breaking news.’ Some TV anchors were seen using a tragic occasion for histriuonics and grandstanding. Others were said to fuel public ire against politicians - objectivity be damned.
Part justification of media comes by saying that media is now ‘ operating in the backdrop of ‘ dog-eat-dog competition,’ Related to print media, visual media is a kid in the block, meaning that it is still in the learning stage. As opinion makers the media has its duties. Independent channels cannot function with government counsel, however well meant it may be. News broadcasters have their own code of ethics (!!!!!!!! – exclamation remark by the author of this write-up) There is the citizens’ right to information. Consumers have choice.
Counter view: News coverage should refrain from whipping up anger, by repeating violent images. This prurient tendency has been called disaster porn, and research suggests it can add to fear and confusion. Children could be scarred for life after watching on TV showing such violent acts. News should be level headed and not hysterical.
Conclusions:
· Yes, it is realised that to some extent media caters to the tastes and wishes of the readers. But then over a period of time the media also sways the tastes of the readers.
· Government has now appointed a high power panel to oversee the media with a retired judge of Supreme Court as Chairman. But then such bodies would only frame some general guidelines for the media and would go into matters, such as, unethical, violating decency, against the interests of the country, unwittingly becoming party of communcal divide, etc., But the panel is unlikely to get involved in the nuances mentioned above. That restraint should come from within. Will it come. That is the question.
P.S: Let me end this somewhat depressing and bitter write up with something that would bring a smile to your lips
Manas Chakravarty writes an extremely witty column in Hindustan Times Sunday Edition. Extracts
‘The decision facing the Congress High Command was an exceptionally difficult one. The task was to find a chief minister for Maharashtra who would not only be effective against terror, but who would also be able to deliver the Maratha vote, not antagonise the sugar lobby, make sure the Dalits are not offended, assuage the fears of the people of the non-Marathwada area, taking into account Sharad Pawar’s feelings while cleverly trying to take votes away from him and, finally, ensuring that the new chief minister does not know Ram Gopal Varma.’
*****
Monday, December 1, 2008
Terrorist attacks at Mumbai ( disjointed comments )
· It is a systemic fault. Sacking a Union Minister is
essentially an attempt to cleanse the collective guilt. The Minister may be inefficient. But responding to terror requires a war time like machinery which is all the time alert and there is total co-ordination. Their requirements of personnel, material and money should get priority.
· Politicians have been pilloried. But then politicians are incapable of handling this subject. It is that of experts on the subject. Yes, politicians should not interfere with the job of such experts.
· What is missed is that lethargy of babus which is often the cause for not upgrading the mechanism and machinery.
· Intelligence failure, so said most of the people and fourth estate . Then USA also failed. So also U.K. So also many other countries. The problem in tackling terror is that terrorist attacks when least expected and it is always difficult to find out in advance the place where the attack would occur.
· The whole nation mourned the death of police personnel. There were ceremonial functions related to cremating of the dead. Well deserved and our hearts went for those who laid their lives. But then what about police personnel gunned down by Naxalites. A small news item in the press. Is there no contradiction.
· Visual media reporting was reduced from one of objective analysis ( as was the case with BBC ) to exhibition of empathy with the victims. Sympathy was alright but empathy gives a different colour to the event. Repeated visual presentation of gore was an ungainly sight.
· Overtaken by grief and anger, there were a lot of impractical and a few juvenile suggestions. Let us give training to children in schools for one year on how to tackle such situations. Let us give intensive training to fight terrorists to all the security people in buildings, let Mumbaikars refuse to pay taxes, let us nuke terrorist outfits in Pakistan, etc., ( Did we not support LTTE. Then we stopped the support and sided with Sri Lankan Government. That led of murder of Rajiv Gandhi. Now Tamil Nadu Government is openly supporting LTTE. What would be reaction of Sri Lankan Government to that ).
· Apart from the antics of the main opposition party ( not going along with Congress Party to Mumbai, not attending the all party meeting, offering money to the family of slain policemen, etc.,), and seeking the head of the Home Minister, the party had not come out with any practical suggestion to prevent such attacks.
· ‘ It is a horrendous act ‘ so said most of the Hindus. ‘ What about Malagoan. ‘ ‘ Yes, that is unfortunate, i. e., if there is truth in the case made by the police.’
*****
essentially an attempt to cleanse the collective guilt. The Minister may be inefficient. But responding to terror requires a war time like machinery which is all the time alert and there is total co-ordination. Their requirements of personnel, material and money should get priority.
· Politicians have been pilloried. But then politicians are incapable of handling this subject. It is that of experts on the subject. Yes, politicians should not interfere with the job of such experts.
· What is missed is that lethargy of babus which is often the cause for not upgrading the mechanism and machinery.
· Intelligence failure, so said most of the people and fourth estate . Then USA also failed. So also U.K. So also many other countries. The problem in tackling terror is that terrorist attacks when least expected and it is always difficult to find out in advance the place where the attack would occur.
· The whole nation mourned the death of police personnel. There were ceremonial functions related to cremating of the dead. Well deserved and our hearts went for those who laid their lives. But then what about police personnel gunned down by Naxalites. A small news item in the press. Is there no contradiction.
· Visual media reporting was reduced from one of objective analysis ( as was the case with BBC ) to exhibition of empathy with the victims. Sympathy was alright but empathy gives a different colour to the event. Repeated visual presentation of gore was an ungainly sight.
· Overtaken by grief and anger, there were a lot of impractical and a few juvenile suggestions. Let us give training to children in schools for one year on how to tackle such situations. Let us give intensive training to fight terrorists to all the security people in buildings, let Mumbaikars refuse to pay taxes, let us nuke terrorist outfits in Pakistan, etc., ( Did we not support LTTE. Then we stopped the support and sided with Sri Lankan Government. That led of murder of Rajiv Gandhi. Now Tamil Nadu Government is openly supporting LTTE. What would be reaction of Sri Lankan Government to that ).
· Apart from the antics of the main opposition party ( not going along with Congress Party to Mumbai, not attending the all party meeting, offering money to the family of slain policemen, etc.,), and seeking the head of the Home Minister, the party had not come out with any practical suggestion to prevent such attacks.
· ‘ It is a horrendous act ‘ so said most of the Hindus. ‘ What about Malagoan. ‘ ‘ Yes, that is unfortunate, i. e., if there is truth in the case made by the police.’
*****
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Euthanasia
Euthanasia refers to the practice of ending a human life in a gentle and easy way in case of incurable and painful disease.
Euthanasia is implemented with the assistance of medical people only after the person suffering has given his consent for the ending of his life. In case of patients who have been incapacitated to the extent of not even able to indicate whether he should be subjected to euthanasia, the ending of life is done only when the closest relatives indicate that euthanasia be effected. The process is generally gone through only in the presence of witnesses. For example, a person has met with a serious accident which has incapacitated him and he cannot be cured with the present level knowledge of medical science.
Present position in respect of countries
As of 2008, some forms of euthanasia are legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Switzerland, Thailand, the U.S. States of Oregon and Washington, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain). Medical Associations of many countries have opposed legalizing euthanasia.
A Member of Parliament in India had tabled a Bill a few years back for introducing Euthanasia in India. However, so far the Bill has not been formally proposed for consideration of the Parliament.
//
Classification of euthanasia
1 ) Euthanasia by consent
Euthanasia may be conducted with consent (voluntary euthanasia) or without consent (involuntary euthanasia). Involuntary euthanasia is conducted where an individual makes a decision for another person incapable of doing so. The decision can be made based on what the incapacitated individual would have wanted, or it could be made on substituted judgment of what the decision maker would want were he or she in the incapacitated person's place, or finally, the decision could be made by assessing objectively whether euthanasia is the most beneficial course of treatment. In any case, euthanasia by proxy consent is highly controversial, especially because multiple proxies may claim the authority to decide for the patient and may or may not have explicit consent from the patient to make that decision.
Euthanasia by means
Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, pain medications, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. Passive euthanasia is the most accepted form, and it is a common practice in most hospitals. Non-active euthanasia entails the withdrawing of life support and is more controversial. Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces to kill and is the most controversial means.
Reasons given for voluntary euthanasia:
Choice: Proponents of voluntary euthanasia emphasize that choice is a fundamental principle for liberal democracies and free market systems.
Quality of Life: The pain and suffering a person feels during a disease, even with pain relievers, can be incomprehensible to a person who has not gone through it. Even without considering the physical pain, it is often difficult for patients to overcome the emotional pain of losing their independence.
Economic costs and human resources: Today in many countries there is a shortage of hospital space. The energy of doctors and hospital beds could be used for people whose lives could be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die which increases the general quality of care and shortens hospital waiting lists. It is a burden to keep people alive past the point they can contribute to society, especially if the resources used could be spent on a curable ailment.
Reasons given against voluntary euthanasia:
Professional role: Critics argue that voluntary euthanasia could unduly compromise the professional roles of health care employees, especially doctors. They point out that European physicians of previous centuries traditionally swore some variation of the Hippocratic Oath, which in its ancient form excluded euthanasia: "To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.." However, since the 1970s, this oath has largely fallen out of use.
Moral: Some people consider euthanasia of some or all types to be morally unacceptable. This view usually treats euthanasia to be a type of murder and voluntary euthanasia as a type of suicide, the morality of which is the subject of active debate.
Theological: Voluntary euthanasia has often been rejected as a violation of the sanctity of human life. Specifically, some Christians argue that human life ultimately belongs to God, so that humans should not be the ones to make the choice to end life. Orthodox Judaism takes basically the same approach, however, it is more open minded, and does, given certain circumstances, allow for euthanasia to be exercised under passive or non-aggressive means. Accordingly, some theologians and other religious thinkers consider voluntary euthanasia (and suicide generally) as sinful acts, i.e. unjustified killings. Feasibility of implementation: Euthanasia can only be considered "voluntary" if a patient is mentally competent to make the decision, i.e., has a rational understanding of options and consequences. Competence can be difficult to determine or even define.
Necessity: If there is some reason to believe the cause of a patient's illness or suffering is or will soon be curable, the correct action is sometimes considered to attempt to bring about a cure or engage in palliative care.
Wishes of Family: Family members often desire to spend as much time with their loved ones as possible before they die.
Consent under pressure: Given the economic grounds for voluntary euthanasia, critics are concerned that patients may experience psychological pressure to consent to voluntary euthanasia rather than be a financial burden on their families. Even where health costs are mostly covered by public money, as in various European countries, critics are concerned that hospital personnel would have an economic incentive to advise or pressure people toward euthanasia consent.
Additional points for consideration
· I am 95 years old. Most of my faculties have impaired. I am slowly losing other faculties. Living is an eternal pain for me. Then should not the State assist in my wish to die. But then what about a person who is only fifty but yet don’t want to live any more. A person may be facing extreme poverty and there is nobody to look after him. A person has gone through extreme tragedies in his life and don’t want to live any more. These are only illustrative examples. The situations could be multiplied whereby it would become applicable to a twenty year old person.
· A child is born with some major defect. The child will remain in a vegetable state throughout the life, taking into account the present level of medical science. If the State was to apply euthanasia on such a child, nobody would probably protest. But as said in the earlier point, this could be extended to a number of cases. Say, a child could live and grow up to a man, but the living would be extremely painful or arduous. Parents of one child with such extreme complication may opt for euthanasia but parents of another child with the same condition may decide to take care of the child. In such a case how will the State be adjudged for the action in the case of the first child.
· If euthanasia is allowed under certain extreme ccircumstances, then why not allow suicide. Attempt to suicide is a crime. Why should it be so. Will not somebody argue that he attempted suicide because he has no interest in living. He may be an able bodied person. But the person could argue that the point is of wishing to live or not. If somebody has an incurable disease or cannot function properly and hence makes it clear that he has no interest in living. If the State decides that euthanasia can be done on such a person, then why not on the second person. But would not then the central point gets reduced to interest in living. Then again what about undesirable developments, such as, relatives making the life of an old person miserable to acquisce him to agree for euthanasia.
Here again the dilemma is the role of State to determine or interfere in such maters, and since the State should relect the views of the society, can society allow euthanasia. If yes, then where is the line to be drawn.
In India ( and probably that is the case with most of the other countries ) there is hardly any awareness on the subject under analysis. Medical profession is aware of the fact that its members cannot assist in euthanasia. It is a criminal offense. Hence in the case of patients suffering from various serious ailments or severe pain or inability to look after oneself or there is no cure in the (English) medical system, doctors advise relatives of the patients to take them back to their homes and quietly suggest how euthanasia could be effected. Further, relatives of such persons, unaware of the legal nuances of euthanasia, do not meticulously ensure that their action of effecting euthanasia is kept in wraps. The danger is that if and when police suspect of such action, they can fleece those who indulged in euthanasia.
It is precisely in a poor country like India which should have a law for euthanasia. Poor in many cases are not able to look after invalid and old relatives, not to speak of providing them with treatment and medication. So what happens is those persons go through a painful process of slow death.
Tenets of various religions, though may not have explicitly stated, are also against such a deed ( euthanasia ). Hence it becomes extremely repugnant for most people to think of administering authanasia on their relatives. There would also be objections from the society. But the suffering of the one afflicted is overlooked with a sigh of that it is their ‘ karma.’
But somewhere the debate on the subject should start. Awareness of the subject has to be slowly built up with pros and cons thoroughly discussed. Civil societies and medical profession should take a lead in the matter.
****
Euthanasia is implemented with the assistance of medical people only after the person suffering has given his consent for the ending of his life. In case of patients who have been incapacitated to the extent of not even able to indicate whether he should be subjected to euthanasia, the ending of life is done only when the closest relatives indicate that euthanasia be effected. The process is generally gone through only in the presence of witnesses. For example, a person has met with a serious accident which has incapacitated him and he cannot be cured with the present level knowledge of medical science.
Present position in respect of countries
As of 2008, some forms of euthanasia are legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Switzerland, Thailand, the U.S. States of Oregon and Washington, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain). Medical Associations of many countries have opposed legalizing euthanasia.
A Member of Parliament in India had tabled a Bill a few years back for introducing Euthanasia in India. However, so far the Bill has not been formally proposed for consideration of the Parliament.
//
Classification of euthanasia
1 ) Euthanasia by consent
Euthanasia may be conducted with consent (voluntary euthanasia) or without consent (involuntary euthanasia). Involuntary euthanasia is conducted where an individual makes a decision for another person incapable of doing so. The decision can be made based on what the incapacitated individual would have wanted, or it could be made on substituted judgment of what the decision maker would want were he or she in the incapacitated person's place, or finally, the decision could be made by assessing objectively whether euthanasia is the most beneficial course of treatment. In any case, euthanasia by proxy consent is highly controversial, especially because multiple proxies may claim the authority to decide for the patient and may or may not have explicit consent from the patient to make that decision.
Euthanasia by means
Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, pain medications, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. Passive euthanasia is the most accepted form, and it is a common practice in most hospitals. Non-active euthanasia entails the withdrawing of life support and is more controversial. Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces to kill and is the most controversial means.
Reasons given for voluntary euthanasia:
Choice: Proponents of voluntary euthanasia emphasize that choice is a fundamental principle for liberal democracies and free market systems.
Quality of Life: The pain and suffering a person feels during a disease, even with pain relievers, can be incomprehensible to a person who has not gone through it. Even without considering the physical pain, it is often difficult for patients to overcome the emotional pain of losing their independence.
Economic costs and human resources: Today in many countries there is a shortage of hospital space. The energy of doctors and hospital beds could be used for people whose lives could be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die which increases the general quality of care and shortens hospital waiting lists. It is a burden to keep people alive past the point they can contribute to society, especially if the resources used could be spent on a curable ailment.
Reasons given against voluntary euthanasia:
Professional role: Critics argue that voluntary euthanasia could unduly compromise the professional roles of health care employees, especially doctors. They point out that European physicians of previous centuries traditionally swore some variation of the Hippocratic Oath, which in its ancient form excluded euthanasia: "To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.." However, since the 1970s, this oath has largely fallen out of use.
Moral: Some people consider euthanasia of some or all types to be morally unacceptable. This view usually treats euthanasia to be a type of murder and voluntary euthanasia as a type of suicide, the morality of which is the subject of active debate.
Theological: Voluntary euthanasia has often been rejected as a violation of the sanctity of human life. Specifically, some Christians argue that human life ultimately belongs to God, so that humans should not be the ones to make the choice to end life. Orthodox Judaism takes basically the same approach, however, it is more open minded, and does, given certain circumstances, allow for euthanasia to be exercised under passive or non-aggressive means. Accordingly, some theologians and other religious thinkers consider voluntary euthanasia (and suicide generally) as sinful acts, i.e. unjustified killings. Feasibility of implementation: Euthanasia can only be considered "voluntary" if a patient is mentally competent to make the decision, i.e., has a rational understanding of options and consequences. Competence can be difficult to determine or even define.
Necessity: If there is some reason to believe the cause of a patient's illness or suffering is or will soon be curable, the correct action is sometimes considered to attempt to bring about a cure or engage in palliative care.
Wishes of Family: Family members often desire to spend as much time with their loved ones as possible before they die.
Consent under pressure: Given the economic grounds for voluntary euthanasia, critics are concerned that patients may experience psychological pressure to consent to voluntary euthanasia rather than be a financial burden on their families. Even where health costs are mostly covered by public money, as in various European countries, critics are concerned that hospital personnel would have an economic incentive to advise or pressure people toward euthanasia consent.
Additional points for consideration
· I am 95 years old. Most of my faculties have impaired. I am slowly losing other faculties. Living is an eternal pain for me. Then should not the State assist in my wish to die. But then what about a person who is only fifty but yet don’t want to live any more. A person may be facing extreme poverty and there is nobody to look after him. A person has gone through extreme tragedies in his life and don’t want to live any more. These are only illustrative examples. The situations could be multiplied whereby it would become applicable to a twenty year old person.
· A child is born with some major defect. The child will remain in a vegetable state throughout the life, taking into account the present level of medical science. If the State was to apply euthanasia on such a child, nobody would probably protest. But as said in the earlier point, this could be extended to a number of cases. Say, a child could live and grow up to a man, but the living would be extremely painful or arduous. Parents of one child with such extreme complication may opt for euthanasia but parents of another child with the same condition may decide to take care of the child. In such a case how will the State be adjudged for the action in the case of the first child.
· If euthanasia is allowed under certain extreme ccircumstances, then why not allow suicide. Attempt to suicide is a crime. Why should it be so. Will not somebody argue that he attempted suicide because he has no interest in living. He may be an able bodied person. But the person could argue that the point is of wishing to live or not. If somebody has an incurable disease or cannot function properly and hence makes it clear that he has no interest in living. If the State decides that euthanasia can be done on such a person, then why not on the second person. But would not then the central point gets reduced to interest in living. Then again what about undesirable developments, such as, relatives making the life of an old person miserable to acquisce him to agree for euthanasia.
Here again the dilemma is the role of State to determine or interfere in such maters, and since the State should relect the views of the society, can society allow euthanasia. If yes, then where is the line to be drawn.
In India ( and probably that is the case with most of the other countries ) there is hardly any awareness on the subject under analysis. Medical profession is aware of the fact that its members cannot assist in euthanasia. It is a criminal offense. Hence in the case of patients suffering from various serious ailments or severe pain or inability to look after oneself or there is no cure in the (English) medical system, doctors advise relatives of the patients to take them back to their homes and quietly suggest how euthanasia could be effected. Further, relatives of such persons, unaware of the legal nuances of euthanasia, do not meticulously ensure that their action of effecting euthanasia is kept in wraps. The danger is that if and when police suspect of such action, they can fleece those who indulged in euthanasia.
It is precisely in a poor country like India which should have a law for euthanasia. Poor in many cases are not able to look after invalid and old relatives, not to speak of providing them with treatment and medication. So what happens is those persons go through a painful process of slow death.
Tenets of various religions, though may not have explicitly stated, are also against such a deed ( euthanasia ). Hence it becomes extremely repugnant for most people to think of administering authanasia on their relatives. There would also be objections from the society. But the suffering of the one afflicted is overlooked with a sigh of that it is their ‘ karma.’
But somewhere the debate on the subject should start. Awareness of the subject has to be slowly built up with pros and cons thoroughly discussed. Civil societies and medical profession should take a lead in the matter.
****
Friday, November 21, 2008
Euthanasia
Euthanasia refers to the practice of ending a human life in a gentle and easy way in case of incurable and painful disease.
Euthanasia is implemented with the assistance of medical people only after the person suffering has given his consent for the ending of his life. In case of patients who have been incapacitated to the extent of not even able to indicate whether he should be subjected to euthanasia, the ending of life is done only when the closest relatives indicate that euthanasia be effected. The process is generally gone through only in the presence of witnesses. For example, a person has met with a serious accident which has incapacitated him and he cannot be cured with the present level knowledge of medical science.
Present position in respect of countries
As of 2008, some forms of euthanasia are legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Switzerland, Thailand, the U.S. States of Oregon and Washington, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain). Medical Associations of many countries have opposed legalizing euthanasia.
A Member of Parliament in India had tabled a Bill a few years back for introducing Euthanasia in India. However, so far the Bill has not been formally proposed for consideration of the Parliament.
//
Classification of euthanasia
1 ) Euthanasia by consent
Euthanasia may be conducted with consent (voluntary euthanasia) or without consent (involuntary euthanasia). Involuntary euthanasia is conducted where an individual makes a decision for another person incapable of doing so. The decision can be made based on what the incapacitated individual would have wanted, or it could be made on substituted judgment of what the decision maker would want were he or she in the incapacitated person's place, or finally, the decision could be made by assessing objectively whether euthanasia is the most beneficial course of treatment. In any case, euthanasia by proxy consent is highly controversial, especially because multiple proxies may claim the authority to decide for the patient and may or may not have explicit consent from the patient to make that decision.
Euthanasia by means
Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, pain medications, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. Passive euthanasia is the most accepted form, and it is a common practice in most hospitals. Non-active euthanasia entails the withdrawing of life support and is more controversial. Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces to kill and is the most controversial means.
Reasons given for voluntary euthanasia:
Choice: Proponents of voluntary euthanasia emphasize that choice is a fundamental principle for liberal democracies and free market systems.
Quality of Life: The pain and suffering a person feels during a disease, even with pain relievers, can be incomprehensible to a person who has not gone through it. Even without considering the physical pain, it is often difficult for patients to overcome the emotional pain of losing their independence.
Economic costs and human resources: Today in many countries there is a shortage of hospital space. The energy of doctors and hospital beds could be used for people whose lives could be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die which increases the general quality of care and shortens hospital waiting lists. It is a burden to keep people alive past the point they can contribute to society, especially if the resources used could be spent on a curable ailment.
Reasons given against voluntary euthanasia:
Professional role: Critics argue that voluntary euthanasia could unduly compromise the professional roles of health care employees, especially doctors. They point out that European physicians of previous centuries traditionally swore some variation of the Hippocratic Oath, which in its ancient form excluded euthanasia: "To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.." However, since the 1970s, this oath has largely fallen out of use.
Moral: Some people consider euthanasia of some or all types to be morally unacceptable. This view usually treats euthanasia to be a type of murder and voluntary euthanasia as a type of suicide, the morality of which is the subject of active debate.
Theological: Voluntary euthanasia has often been rejected as a violation of the sanctity of human life. Specifically, some Christians argue that human life ultimately belongs to God, so that humans should not be the ones to make the choice to end life. Orthodox Judaism takes basically the same approach, however, it is more open minded, and does, given certain circumstances, allow for euthanasia to be exercised under passive or non-aggressive means. Accordingly, some theologians and other religious thinkers consider voluntary euthanasia (and suicide generally) as sinful acts, i.e. unjustified killings. Feasibility of implementation: Euthanasia can only be considered "voluntary" if a patient is mentally competent to make the decision, i.e., has a rational understanding of options and consequences. Competence can be difficult to determine or even define.
Necessity: If there is some reason to believe the cause of a patient's illness or suffering is or will soon be curable, the correct action is sometimes considered to attempt to bring about a cure or engage in palliative care.
Wishes of Family: Family members often desire to spend as much time with their loved ones as possible before they die.
Consent under pressure: Given the economic grounds for voluntary euthanasia, critics are concerned that patients may experience psychological pressure to consent to voluntary euthanasia rather than be a financial burden on their families. Even where health costs are mostly covered by public money, as in various European countries, critics are concerned that hospital personnel would have an economic incentive to advise or pressure people toward euthanasia consent.
Additional points for consideration
· I am 95 years old. Most of my faculties have impaired. I am slowly losing other faculties. Living is an eternal pain for me. Then should not the State assist in my wish to die. But then what about a person who is only fifty but yet don’t want to live any more. A person may be facing extreme poverty and there is nobody to look after him. A person has gone through extreme tragedies in his life and don’t want to live any more. These are only illustrative examples. The situations could be multiplied whereby it would become applicable to a twenty year old person.
· A child is born with some major defect. The child will remain in a vegetable state throughout the life, taking into account the present level of medical science. If the State was to apply euthanasia on such a child, nobody would probably protest. But as said in the earlier point, this could be extended to a number of cases. Say, a child could live and grow up to a man, but the living would be extremely painful or arduous. Parents of one child with such extreme complication may opt for euthanasia but parents of another child with the same condition may decide to take care of the child. In such a case how will the State be adjudged for the action in the case of the first child.
· If euthanasia is allowed under certain extreme ccircumstances, then why not allow suicide. Attempt to suicide is a crime. Why should it be so. Will not somebody argue that he attempted suicide because he has no interest in living. He may be an able bodied person. But the person could argue that the point is of wishing to live or not. If somebody has an incurable disease or cannot function properly and hence makes it clear that he has no interest in living. If the State decides that euthanasia can be done on such a person, then why not on the second person. But would not then the central point gets reduced to interest in living. Then again what about undesirable developments, such as, relatives making the life of an old person miserable to acquisce him to agree for euthanasia.
Here again the dilemma is the role of State to determine or interfere in such maters, and since the State should relect the views of the society, can society allow euthanasia. If yes, then where is the line to be drawn.
***
Euthanasia is implemented with the assistance of medical people only after the person suffering has given his consent for the ending of his life. In case of patients who have been incapacitated to the extent of not even able to indicate whether he should be subjected to euthanasia, the ending of life is done only when the closest relatives indicate that euthanasia be effected. The process is generally gone through only in the presence of witnesses. For example, a person has met with a serious accident which has incapacitated him and he cannot be cured with the present level knowledge of medical science.
Present position in respect of countries
As of 2008, some forms of euthanasia are legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Switzerland, Thailand, the U.S. States of Oregon and Washington, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain). Medical Associations of many countries have opposed legalizing euthanasia.
A Member of Parliament in India had tabled a Bill a few years back for introducing Euthanasia in India. However, so far the Bill has not been formally proposed for consideration of the Parliament.
//
Classification of euthanasia
1 ) Euthanasia by consent
Euthanasia may be conducted with consent (voluntary euthanasia) or without consent (involuntary euthanasia). Involuntary euthanasia is conducted where an individual makes a decision for another person incapable of doing so. The decision can be made based on what the incapacitated individual would have wanted, or it could be made on substituted judgment of what the decision maker would want were he or she in the incapacitated person's place, or finally, the decision could be made by assessing objectively whether euthanasia is the most beneficial course of treatment. In any case, euthanasia by proxy consent is highly controversial, especially because multiple proxies may claim the authority to decide for the patient and may or may not have explicit consent from the patient to make that decision.
Euthanasia by means
Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, pain medications, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. Passive euthanasia is the most accepted form, and it is a common practice in most hospitals. Non-active euthanasia entails the withdrawing of life support and is more controversial. Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces to kill and is the most controversial means.
Reasons given for voluntary euthanasia:
Choice: Proponents of voluntary euthanasia emphasize that choice is a fundamental principle for liberal democracies and free market systems.
Quality of Life: The pain and suffering a person feels during a disease, even with pain relievers, can be incomprehensible to a person who has not gone through it. Even without considering the physical pain, it is often difficult for patients to overcome the emotional pain of losing their independence.
Economic costs and human resources: Today in many countries there is a shortage of hospital space. The energy of doctors and hospital beds could be used for people whose lives could be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die which increases the general quality of care and shortens hospital waiting lists. It is a burden to keep people alive past the point they can contribute to society, especially if the resources used could be spent on a curable ailment.
Reasons given against voluntary euthanasia:
Professional role: Critics argue that voluntary euthanasia could unduly compromise the professional roles of health care employees, especially doctors. They point out that European physicians of previous centuries traditionally swore some variation of the Hippocratic Oath, which in its ancient form excluded euthanasia: "To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.." However, since the 1970s, this oath has largely fallen out of use.
Moral: Some people consider euthanasia of some or all types to be morally unacceptable. This view usually treats euthanasia to be a type of murder and voluntary euthanasia as a type of suicide, the morality of which is the subject of active debate.
Theological: Voluntary euthanasia has often been rejected as a violation of the sanctity of human life. Specifically, some Christians argue that human life ultimately belongs to God, so that humans should not be the ones to make the choice to end life. Orthodox Judaism takes basically the same approach, however, it is more open minded, and does, given certain circumstances, allow for euthanasia to be exercised under passive or non-aggressive means. Accordingly, some theologians and other religious thinkers consider voluntary euthanasia (and suicide generally) as sinful acts, i.e. unjustified killings. Feasibility of implementation: Euthanasia can only be considered "voluntary" if a patient is mentally competent to make the decision, i.e., has a rational understanding of options and consequences. Competence can be difficult to determine or even define.
Necessity: If there is some reason to believe the cause of a patient's illness or suffering is or will soon be curable, the correct action is sometimes considered to attempt to bring about a cure or engage in palliative care.
Wishes of Family: Family members often desire to spend as much time with their loved ones as possible before they die.
Consent under pressure: Given the economic grounds for voluntary euthanasia, critics are concerned that patients may experience psychological pressure to consent to voluntary euthanasia rather than be a financial burden on their families. Even where health costs are mostly covered by public money, as in various European countries, critics are concerned that hospital personnel would have an economic incentive to advise or pressure people toward euthanasia consent.
Additional points for consideration
· I am 95 years old. Most of my faculties have impaired. I am slowly losing other faculties. Living is an eternal pain for me. Then should not the State assist in my wish to die. But then what about a person who is only fifty but yet don’t want to live any more. A person may be facing extreme poverty and there is nobody to look after him. A person has gone through extreme tragedies in his life and don’t want to live any more. These are only illustrative examples. The situations could be multiplied whereby it would become applicable to a twenty year old person.
· A child is born with some major defect. The child will remain in a vegetable state throughout the life, taking into account the present level of medical science. If the State was to apply euthanasia on such a child, nobody would probably protest. But as said in the earlier point, this could be extended to a number of cases. Say, a child could live and grow up to a man, but the living would be extremely painful or arduous. Parents of one child with such extreme complication may opt for euthanasia but parents of another child with the same condition may decide to take care of the child. In such a case how will the State be adjudged for the action in the case of the first child.
· If euthanasia is allowed under certain extreme ccircumstances, then why not allow suicide. Attempt to suicide is a crime. Why should it be so. Will not somebody argue that he attempted suicide because he has no interest in living. He may be an able bodied person. But the person could argue that the point is of wishing to live or not. If somebody has an incurable disease or cannot function properly and hence makes it clear that he has no interest in living. If the State decides that euthanasia can be done on such a person, then why not on the second person. But would not then the central point gets reduced to interest in living. Then again what about undesirable developments, such as, relatives making the life of an old person miserable to acquisce him to agree for euthanasia.
Here again the dilemma is the role of State to determine or interfere in such maters, and since the State should relect the views of the society, can society allow euthanasia. If yes, then where is the line to be drawn.
***
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Capital punishment
Capital punishment, the death penalty or execution, is the killing of a person by judicial process as punishment. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences.
I. Facts & Statistics
· 137 countries have abolished death penalty in law or practice
· This list of 137 countries include EU and most of the States of USA
· 60 countries, including India, have retained Capital punishment, though mainly imposed on people convicted of murder or terrorism.
· At least 1252 people were known to have been executed in 24 countreis in 2007, out of which 88% took place in China ( by far the largest number ), Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and US.
· Most of the polls conducted in various countries in the recent past indicate that majority of people want to retain this form of punishment.
· Amnesty International is against Capital Punishment.
· Stand of various religions has been somewhat abiguous on this issue.
II. Reasons given by Amnesty International for opposing Capital punishment
· The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice. It violates the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations’ General Assembly in 1948. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
· Like torture, an execution constitutes an extreme physical and mental assault on the individual. The physical pain caused by the action of killing a human being cannot be quantified, nor can the psychological suffering caused by foreknowledge of death at the hands of the state.
· As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminaed.
· Capital punishment in vogue in various countries has not shown to have a special deterrent effect. It denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation. It promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies. It prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner.
· The death penalty has been and coninues to be used as a tool of political repression, as a means to silence forever political opponents or to eliminate politically ‘ troublesome’ individuals.
· Thousands have been put to death under one government only to be recognized as innocent victims when the new government comes to power.
· Death penalty is not an act of self-defence against an immediate threat to life. It is the premeditated killing of a prisoner who could therefore be dealt with equally well by less harsh means.
· Too many governments believe that they can solve urgent social or political problems by executing a few or even hundreds of their prisoners. Too many citizens in too many countries are still unaware that the death penalty offers society not further protection but further brutalization.
· Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
· Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted in 1998, the death penalty is excluded from the punishment which the court is authorized to impose, even though it has jurisdiction over extremely grave crtimes, such as, crimes against humanity, including genocide, and violations of the laws of armed conflict.
· Recent crime figures from abolitionist countries fail to show that abolition of Capital Punishment has harmful effects. In fact the rate of crime had actually gone down.
· It is incorrect to assume that people who commit such serious crimes as murder do so after rationally calculating the consequences. Often murders are committed in moments when emotion overcomes reason or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Some people who commit violent crime are highly unstable or mentally ill.
· Such an act ( Capital punishment ) by the state is the mirror image of the criminal’s willingness to use physical violence against a victim.
· Criminal justice systems are vulnerable to discrimination and error. No system is or could conceivably be capable of deciding failrly, consistently and infallibly who should live and who should die. Expediency, discretionary decisions and prevailing public opinion may influence the proceedings from the initial arrest to the last minute decision on clemency.
· Past experience demonstrates that whenever the death penalty is used some people will be killed while others who have committed similar or even worse crimes may be spared. The prisoners executed are not necessarily only those who committed the worst crimes, but also those who were too poor to hire skilled lawyers to defend them or those who faced harsher prosecutors or judges.
· Officials responsible for fighting terrorism and political crimes have repeatedly pointed out that executions are as likely to increase such acts as they are to stop them.
· The reasons for a seemingly strong public support for the death penalty can be complex and lacking in factual foundation. Public support for the death penalty is most often based on the erroneous belief that it is an effecive measure against crime. What the public overwhelmingly want is truly effective measures to reduce criminality.
III. Supporting views in favour of Capital punishment
· A modern society that outlaws the death penalty does not send a message of reverence for life, but a message of moral confusion. When we outlaw the death panalty, we tell the murderer that, no matter what he may do to innocent people in our custody the care, women, children, old people, his most treasured possession, his life, is secure. We guarantee it in advance. Just as a nation that declares that nothing will make it go to war finds itself at the mercy of warlike regimes, so a society that will not put the worst of its criminals to death will find itself at the mercy of criminals who have no qualms about putting innocent people to death.
· Advocates of Capital Punishment aver that it is a ‘deterrent proviso’ in the law which may dissuade or at least reduce future acts of murder, espionage, extremely violent activities, etc.,
· However, unsaid, what is consciously or sub consciously sought by advocates of Capital Punishment is for the State to ‘avenge’ for the dastardly act of the one who commited the crime. In other words, the demand is for the State to ensure / effect ‘retribution’ for the henious crime committed. Again camaflouging this desire to punish, the demand, euphimistically, is made in the name of ‘justice’ ( it is noticed that the fourth estate also invaraibly confuses justice with retributition/ avenging. In a land dispute or a retrenchment or on such civil matters, court’s role is to hand down ‘ justice.’ In other words, the judiciary does justice to the aggrieved party. But how can death punishment to the accused bring about justice to the victim or his family?)
· Deterrent is the main plank of those who are advocating death penalty. But they do not have answer to the vital question whether death penalty had worked as deterrent. There is hardly any way of verifying this assumption. On a matter like this opinion polls could go widely off the mark. It is extremely subjective. The replies would be based on assumptions. One may feel it is a deterrent but another may feel it is not.
· Should nations continue with the concept of an ‘ eye for an eye’? Should that be the approach of a civilised society. Then what is the diference between the barbaric kings of yesteryears and today’s society which I supposed to be ‘civilised.’
· If the State can murder me because I killed somebody, then what is the difference between my action and the action of the State. Should not the State be above such abhorrent behaviour.
· Should the State have power on the lives of its citizens. A counterpoint would be made that when a State goes to war, it sends its soldiers to fight knowing very well that some soldiers may be killed.
· Murder could have been committed in a rage. Rape could have been committed either due to extreme provocation or uncontrollable passion. It could be argued that these are aberrations to the normal behavious of the culprit. While considering the subject matter, these aberrations have to be necessarily taken into account.
· By awarding Capital Punishment, the state not only takes away a life but punishes the family of the person condemned to death. To this there could be counter argument that when a person is put in jail for years, his family is also seriously affected.
· Period of sentences awarded are at times reduced for good behaviour. But then somebody who has been awarded Capital Punishment is denied such an opportunity.
· Finally, on matters such as these State cannot make decisions based on opinion polls ( ‘ go to war with that country ‘ – so says opinion polls. Should the State then act accordingly ?) Decisions have to be taken by the State on the basis of mature consideration of the matter by wise and mature persons.
*******
I. Facts & Statistics
· 137 countries have abolished death penalty in law or practice
· This list of 137 countries include EU and most of the States of USA
· 60 countries, including India, have retained Capital punishment, though mainly imposed on people convicted of murder or terrorism.
· At least 1252 people were known to have been executed in 24 countreis in 2007, out of which 88% took place in China ( by far the largest number ), Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and US.
· Most of the polls conducted in various countries in the recent past indicate that majority of people want to retain this form of punishment.
· Amnesty International is against Capital Punishment.
· Stand of various religions has been somewhat abiguous on this issue.
II. Reasons given by Amnesty International for opposing Capital punishment
· The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice. It violates the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations’ General Assembly in 1948. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
· Like torture, an execution constitutes an extreme physical and mental assault on the individual. The physical pain caused by the action of killing a human being cannot be quantified, nor can the psychological suffering caused by foreknowledge of death at the hands of the state.
· As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminaed.
· Capital punishment in vogue in various countries has not shown to have a special deterrent effect. It denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation. It promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies. It prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner.
· The death penalty has been and coninues to be used as a tool of political repression, as a means to silence forever political opponents or to eliminate politically ‘ troublesome’ individuals.
· Thousands have been put to death under one government only to be recognized as innocent victims when the new government comes to power.
· Death penalty is not an act of self-defence against an immediate threat to life. It is the premeditated killing of a prisoner who could therefore be dealt with equally well by less harsh means.
· Too many governments believe that they can solve urgent social or political problems by executing a few or even hundreds of their prisoners. Too many citizens in too many countries are still unaware that the death penalty offers society not further protection but further brutalization.
· Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.
· Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted in 1998, the death penalty is excluded from the punishment which the court is authorized to impose, even though it has jurisdiction over extremely grave crtimes, such as, crimes against humanity, including genocide, and violations of the laws of armed conflict.
· Recent crime figures from abolitionist countries fail to show that abolition of Capital Punishment has harmful effects. In fact the rate of crime had actually gone down.
· It is incorrect to assume that people who commit such serious crimes as murder do so after rationally calculating the consequences. Often murders are committed in moments when emotion overcomes reason or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Some people who commit violent crime are highly unstable or mentally ill.
· Such an act ( Capital punishment ) by the state is the mirror image of the criminal’s willingness to use physical violence against a victim.
· Criminal justice systems are vulnerable to discrimination and error. No system is or could conceivably be capable of deciding failrly, consistently and infallibly who should live and who should die. Expediency, discretionary decisions and prevailing public opinion may influence the proceedings from the initial arrest to the last minute decision on clemency.
· Past experience demonstrates that whenever the death penalty is used some people will be killed while others who have committed similar or even worse crimes may be spared. The prisoners executed are not necessarily only those who committed the worst crimes, but also those who were too poor to hire skilled lawyers to defend them or those who faced harsher prosecutors or judges.
· Officials responsible for fighting terrorism and political crimes have repeatedly pointed out that executions are as likely to increase such acts as they are to stop them.
· The reasons for a seemingly strong public support for the death penalty can be complex and lacking in factual foundation. Public support for the death penalty is most often based on the erroneous belief that it is an effecive measure against crime. What the public overwhelmingly want is truly effective measures to reduce criminality.
III. Supporting views in favour of Capital punishment
· A modern society that outlaws the death penalty does not send a message of reverence for life, but a message of moral confusion. When we outlaw the death panalty, we tell the murderer that, no matter what he may do to innocent people in our custody the care, women, children, old people, his most treasured possession, his life, is secure. We guarantee it in advance. Just as a nation that declares that nothing will make it go to war finds itself at the mercy of warlike regimes, so a society that will not put the worst of its criminals to death will find itself at the mercy of criminals who have no qualms about putting innocent people to death.
· Advocates of Capital Punishment aver that it is a ‘deterrent proviso’ in the law which may dissuade or at least reduce future acts of murder, espionage, extremely violent activities, etc.,
· However, unsaid, what is consciously or sub consciously sought by advocates of Capital Punishment is for the State to ‘avenge’ for the dastardly act of the one who commited the crime. In other words, the demand is for the State to ensure / effect ‘retribution’ for the henious crime committed. Again camaflouging this desire to punish, the demand, euphimistically, is made in the name of ‘justice’ ( it is noticed that the fourth estate also invaraibly confuses justice with retributition/ avenging. In a land dispute or a retrenchment or on such civil matters, court’s role is to hand down ‘ justice.’ In other words, the judiciary does justice to the aggrieved party. But how can death punishment to the accused bring about justice to the victim or his family?)
· Deterrent is the main plank of those who are advocating death penalty. But they do not have answer to the vital question whether death penalty had worked as deterrent. There is hardly any way of verifying this assumption. On a matter like this opinion polls could go widely off the mark. It is extremely subjective. The replies would be based on assumptions. One may feel it is a deterrent but another may feel it is not.
· Should nations continue with the concept of an ‘ eye for an eye’? Should that be the approach of a civilised society. Then what is the diference between the barbaric kings of yesteryears and today’s society which I supposed to be ‘civilised.’
· If the State can murder me because I killed somebody, then what is the difference between my action and the action of the State. Should not the State be above such abhorrent behaviour.
· Should the State have power on the lives of its citizens. A counterpoint would be made that when a State goes to war, it sends its soldiers to fight knowing very well that some soldiers may be killed.
· Murder could have been committed in a rage. Rape could have been committed either due to extreme provocation or uncontrollable passion. It could be argued that these are aberrations to the normal behavious of the culprit. While considering the subject matter, these aberrations have to be necessarily taken into account.
· By awarding Capital Punishment, the state not only takes away a life but punishes the family of the person condemned to death. To this there could be counter argument that when a person is put in jail for years, his family is also seriously affected.
· Period of sentences awarded are at times reduced for good behaviour. But then somebody who has been awarded Capital Punishment is denied such an opportunity.
· Finally, on matters such as these State cannot make decisions based on opinion polls ( ‘ go to war with that country ‘ – so says opinion polls. Should the State then act accordingly ?) Decisions have to be taken by the State on the basis of mature consideration of the matter by wise and mature persons.
*******
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Meditation and ability to withstand extreme stress
According to a newspaper report:
“Investigators are finding Pragnya Singh Thakur alias Sadhvi Purnachetanand Giri, arrested by Maharashtran Police for her alleged involvement in the Malegaon blast case, a tough nut to crack. And they are blaming her expertise in meditation. The report further says that powered by her meditation training, the 36 year old priestess knows how to control her mind and body mechanism.
A polygraph or a lie detector measures and records several physiological responses like blood pressure, pulse, respiration and skin condutivity when a person is subjected to a series of questions. It measures phisiological changes caused by the sympathetic nervous system during questioning. These are different when people lie.
But in the case of this yogini, since she has been practicing the meditation methods for years and can control her responses making it really tough to believe if the answers even under the polygraph can be believed.”
I have read extensively on Mediation by various experts and none had made this point. Further, I have been doing meditation for a long time. It gives peace of mind and at times one can experience bliss. Meditation calms the worrying mind. Problems confronting one appear to be not that serious after meditation. Meditation provides antidote against negative emotions, such as, anger, envy, anxiety, fear, etc., But I find it difficult to accept the theory of police.
But if we accept what the Police say, then there are immense possibilities. Parents in the case of their off-springs, wives in the case of their hubbies and close friends in the case of close friends, can without any effort detect when a lie is said. Now those who read the above report, and if they believe in what has been said, are going to join meditation courses. What about politicians, spies, lazy office staff, etc., Many of them would at least try their hand in learning meditation. Some of these species are adept in it without any learning of meditation. Yet there may be those who are worried at their inability to speak a lie with a straight face. For all those the above report would give some hope. It is a known fact that wives can, by just looking at the husband even before the husband opens his mouth, know in advance whether the husband is going lie, not to speak of finding out the same after the husband has spoken. Same is not the case of husbands so far as lies said by wives. Husbands are not the only group. Children are always surprised when the mothers find out when they lie. Hence if they read this report they are going to join covertly some meditation course. Of course, lawyers need no such course, because they are adept in lying without being found out.
And think of the explosive demand for our expertise in meditation in the world markets. Crooks abound everywhere. Not only present day crooks but those who want to opt out for that profession would like to have a special course in meditation which can beat a lie detector.
Lie we do and we have no qualm about doing it. What we don’t like is the person lied to finding out the truth by looking straight at us so that our eyes or our facial expression or our whole demeanour give away whether what we said is the whole truth.
In the matter of lying, the general conviction is that so long as the lie is white one ( and not black or red one ) there is not much harm in indulging in it.
I am sure that some of the readers of my write ups are way ahead of me in the art of lying undetected. I would like to hear from those veterans. I would like to assure them that not only their names would remain secret until my death but more than that I would be ever lastingly grateful to them for making my life a wee bit better.
I have studied the subject of lying in depth. There are lies and lies. White ones, black ones, yellow ones, etc., I will share my expertise with all of you at no fee at some time in the future.
Nominated members of Rajya Sabha
N.K. Singh, who was former Cabinet Secretary, and Rangarajan, former Governor of RBI and currently Chairman of PM’s Advisory Coucil for Economic Affairs are the personse who have been nominated to the Rajya Sabha in the recent times. And look at the names of some ( names of all those nomninated are not given ) of the eminenet personalities nominated to Rajya Sabha in the past, as below:
Vyjayantimala Bali, Dr. Raja Ramanna, Mrinal Sen, Shabana Azmi, Kuldip Nayyar, Lata Mangeshkar, Fali S. Nariman, Cho. S. Ramaswamy, Bimal Jalan, Dara Singh, Hema Malini, Dr. Chandan Mitra, Dr. K. Kasturirangan, Shobhana Bhartia, Shyam Benegal
Constitution makers made this provision so that Rajya Sabha would have the benefit of the views of eminent personalities in different disciplines. But with the passage of time, it has become largely one of giving favours to individuals by the senior politicians. With the slow degeneration of values this was bound to happen. They are not the heavy weights in politics who get sufficient time to express their views on any subject. These nominated MPs are not gate crashers like some of the politicians who, ignoring the command of Chairman of the House would go on speaking expressing their views. Hence these nominated MPs speak only rarely, which is largely ignored by other MPs. What they say, not being sensational, is largely ignored by the fourth estate also.
But my focus on this brief write up is why these people at all want to get into Rajya Sabha. Yes, some are nominated by the State without their asking or seeking. But in the case of some, if not many, nomination is the outcome of extensive lobbying. What attracts these people to become members of Rajya Sabha. Over a period of time MPs have been devalued. Most of the people nominated have excelled in different disciplines and they are revered by many people in the country. That is not the case with MPs these days. They can do a lot of service to the country by contributing to the area of their discipline. Then what attracts them to be MPs. Salary and perks. Considering that most of those nominated are well off, this cannot be an attraction. To help them lobbying with the Government for their disciplines. They can do this without being an MP.
The issue foxes me.
“Investigators are finding Pragnya Singh Thakur alias Sadhvi Purnachetanand Giri, arrested by Maharashtran Police for her alleged involvement in the Malegaon blast case, a tough nut to crack. And they are blaming her expertise in meditation. The report further says that powered by her meditation training, the 36 year old priestess knows how to control her mind and body mechanism.
A polygraph or a lie detector measures and records several physiological responses like blood pressure, pulse, respiration and skin condutivity when a person is subjected to a series of questions. It measures phisiological changes caused by the sympathetic nervous system during questioning. These are different when people lie.
But in the case of this yogini, since she has been practicing the meditation methods for years and can control her responses making it really tough to believe if the answers even under the polygraph can be believed.”
I have read extensively on Mediation by various experts and none had made this point. Further, I have been doing meditation for a long time. It gives peace of mind and at times one can experience bliss. Meditation calms the worrying mind. Problems confronting one appear to be not that serious after meditation. Meditation provides antidote against negative emotions, such as, anger, envy, anxiety, fear, etc., But I find it difficult to accept the theory of police.
But if we accept what the Police say, then there are immense possibilities. Parents in the case of their off-springs, wives in the case of their hubbies and close friends in the case of close friends, can without any effort detect when a lie is said. Now those who read the above report, and if they believe in what has been said, are going to join meditation courses. What about politicians, spies, lazy office staff, etc., Many of them would at least try their hand in learning meditation. Some of these species are adept in it without any learning of meditation. Yet there may be those who are worried at their inability to speak a lie with a straight face. For all those the above report would give some hope. It is a known fact that wives can, by just looking at the husband even before the husband opens his mouth, know in advance whether the husband is going lie, not to speak of finding out the same after the husband has spoken. Same is not the case of husbands so far as lies said by wives. Husbands are not the only group. Children are always surprised when the mothers find out when they lie. Hence if they read this report they are going to join covertly some meditation course. Of course, lawyers need no such course, because they are adept in lying without being found out.
And think of the explosive demand for our expertise in meditation in the world markets. Crooks abound everywhere. Not only present day crooks but those who want to opt out for that profession would like to have a special course in meditation which can beat a lie detector.
Lie we do and we have no qualm about doing it. What we don’t like is the person lied to finding out the truth by looking straight at us so that our eyes or our facial expression or our whole demeanour give away whether what we said is the whole truth.
In the matter of lying, the general conviction is that so long as the lie is white one ( and not black or red one ) there is not much harm in indulging in it.
I am sure that some of the readers of my write ups are way ahead of me in the art of lying undetected. I would like to hear from those veterans. I would like to assure them that not only their names would remain secret until my death but more than that I would be ever lastingly grateful to them for making my life a wee bit better.
I have studied the subject of lying in depth. There are lies and lies. White ones, black ones, yellow ones, etc., I will share my expertise with all of you at no fee at some time in the future.
Nominated members of Rajya Sabha
N.K. Singh, who was former Cabinet Secretary, and Rangarajan, former Governor of RBI and currently Chairman of PM’s Advisory Coucil for Economic Affairs are the personse who have been nominated to the Rajya Sabha in the recent times. And look at the names of some ( names of all those nomninated are not given ) of the eminenet personalities nominated to Rajya Sabha in the past, as below:
Vyjayantimala Bali, Dr. Raja Ramanna, Mrinal Sen, Shabana Azmi, Kuldip Nayyar, Lata Mangeshkar, Fali S. Nariman, Cho. S. Ramaswamy, Bimal Jalan, Dara Singh, Hema Malini, Dr. Chandan Mitra, Dr. K. Kasturirangan, Shobhana Bhartia, Shyam Benegal
Constitution makers made this provision so that Rajya Sabha would have the benefit of the views of eminent personalities in different disciplines. But with the passage of time, it has become largely one of giving favours to individuals by the senior politicians. With the slow degeneration of values this was bound to happen. They are not the heavy weights in politics who get sufficient time to express their views on any subject. These nominated MPs are not gate crashers like some of the politicians who, ignoring the command of Chairman of the House would go on speaking expressing their views. Hence these nominated MPs speak only rarely, which is largely ignored by other MPs. What they say, not being sensational, is largely ignored by the fourth estate also.
But my focus on this brief write up is why these people at all want to get into Rajya Sabha. Yes, some are nominated by the State without their asking or seeking. But in the case of some, if not many, nomination is the outcome of extensive lobbying. What attracts these people to become members of Rajya Sabha. Over a period of time MPs have been devalued. Most of the people nominated have excelled in different disciplines and they are revered by many people in the country. That is not the case with MPs these days. They can do a lot of service to the country by contributing to the area of their discipline. Then what attracts them to be MPs. Salary and perks. Considering that most of those nominated are well off, this cannot be an attraction. To help them lobbying with the Government for their disciplines. They can do this without being an MP.
The issue foxes me.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Corruption Perception Index
Transperancy International ( TI ) is a non Governmental organisation, which has been coming out with Corruption Perception Index of various countries during the last few years. TI has chapters in various countries which are manned by eminent persons. Admiral Tahilani, formerce Chief of Indian Navy, is the Chief of TI Chapter in India.
Governments of countries, which are identified in the higher level of Corruption Perception Index, obviously are chary of both quoting the Index or accepting the veracity of the Index. Yet it is a fact that over a period of time world-wide there is considerable credibility to the Index.
In the Index published by TI for the year, India has been ranked at 74, i.e., there are 73 countries in the world which according to TI have levels of corruption less than that of India. It is the Scandinavian counrtries which are least corrupt. Then comes most of the Western countries.
The Corruption Perception Index has sometimes been criticized as the perception of a select few, since it ignores the perception of the wider population, and instead focuses on that of a few experts like the rest of science does. Furthermore, some have opined that the index analyzes a "mere perception", and that the method followed in preparing the index couldn't measure institutional corruption.
While on can’t dismiss the above view points, still the fact remains that India is a very corupt country, a fact known to all Indians and those foreign inviduals or institutions which had to do business or work in India.
Having lived with corruption for such a long time, unfortunately, Indians tend to accept the same as a fact of life and resigned to the situation. But why should it be so. Consider the massive investments being made by Government for improving the lot of the poor. But a large part of such investment does not reach the poor because of massive corruption. Further, project cost goes up because of corruption. In brief, corruption corrodes our endeavour to improve the position of India and Indians. There is also the danger of corruption being accepted as a part of life in this blesseed country. Today, there is hardly any stigma attached to it. One does not mind friendship at individual or family level with corupt people. That is the tragedy of India.
Downward journey of fourth estate
· Electronic media is increasingly reporting remarks and issues out of context. TV channels ignore wittingly or unwittingly historical context, nuance, explanatory arguments and the innate complexity of issues and personalities involved in the news. There is often ‘ Do you continue to beat your wife‘ syndrome, whereby both answers of ‘ yes ‘ and ‘ no’ would show in poor light the person replying the question .
· There is a wide-spread perception that both print and visual media are slowly pandering too much to the base instincts of human beings and abdicating from giving perceptive analysis on serious matters, with not a single angle but inclusive of both pros and cons. One must hasten to add that there could be developments where there may be only ‘ pros ‘ or ‘con.’ But objective reporting is being increasingly substituted with subjective reporting. Frivolous angles are highlighted. Depth and content are both slipping away slowly. Sort of Americanism is seeping, i.e., unwanted aggression in the coverage and comments and question & answers and in dress style of female anchors. . Scandals are given repeated coverage and often blown out of proportion.
· The arguments of the media that they are all the time pressed for time, that they are only catering to the tastes of the viewers / readers, that they are following the trend in advanced countries, that the time span of viewer on any matter is short, etc., while cannot be dismissed should be taken as an excuse rather than justification. To some extent it is the print and visual media which influences the tastes of viewers. So first they influence viewers / readers by repeatedly presenting news as mentioned above and then they take the stand that what they give is according to the tastes of the viewers.
Why should our worthy Prime Minister curry for favour
‘Indian people love you’ – So said Mr. Manmohan Singh to Mr. Bush. The allergy of Karat against anything American prompted him to caustically comment ‘ Yes, we all know that Manmohan Singh likes Bush but why should he bring Indian people into the statement. While I am not in cahoots with Karat in his total hatred for the Americans, in this instance I agree with him. Why should a level headed Man Mohan Singh make such a statement. Most of the Indians have no admiration and much less love for Bush.
Nobel prize for peace.
Former Finnish President was selected for the Nobel Peace Prize and the print media published this in one of the inside pages with a short write up, as against the hoopla created by the print media when the prize is given to a known personality. Yes, when it is a well known figure, there is bound to be detailed write ups and at times criticism on the choice. But does that mean a figure unknown in Indian circles should be virtually written off with a few sentences.
Resistance to change related to modernity:
A lady teacher in West Bengal School has been taken to task by the management of the school for wearing salwar kameez instead of the usual dress of saree for the teachers in the school. ‘ We have nothing against the salwar kameez but there is something called tradition,’ so said the management. Apart from other reasons for wearing saree, the lady teacher has said that she has to travel in bus for coming and going to school and salwar kameez is more comfortable and convenient for traveling in bus rather than saree. In many parts of the country salwar kameez was taken in the past as North Indian dress. However, during the last few years in many places, particularly in cities and towns, both girls / women in large number, and the number is increasing as time goes by, have opted for salwar kameez. It is also catching up in villages.
Somerset Maugham had said that tradition is a guide and not a jailer. For many elders in this country tradition is a non negotiable mater, rooted as they are to tradition
Sacrifices of judges
When it comes to self interest – or should one term it as ‘ selfish interest, ‘ judges are not above you and me. In the aftermath of Pay Commission recommendations, there have been statements of sitting and retired judges to the effect that ‘ the judges of HCs and SC, who are experts in law, have sacrificed lucrative practice at bar to serve the country.’ It is the hyperbole that was used by serving and retired soldiers of all ranks for claiming higher remuneration, i.e., ‘ sacrifice ‘ for the country. From the bar once a while somebody is seconded to the Bench by Government. Those advocates who have lucrative practice often decline the offer of Government because of level of salary of Judges, which by itself is not on the lower side but when compared to good practice in the bar would be less. But then there is prestige in being a judge.
The job of a successful senior lawyer is very arduous as compared to that of judge. A judge gets his salary and perks irrespective of the level of his performance. Not so in the case of advocates. And then there is life long pension for judges, which is not the case with Advocates. So where is the question of ‘ sacrifice.’ In any case they joined the Judicial service in the beginning because of the prestige. Now you can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The hoopla on banning of smoking in public places
The media, both print and visual, have covered this action of the Government as a momentous one. As if a burning problem ( double entendre intended ) facing the nation, has been effectively dealt with. Now what are the facts. Over 90% of the smoking in this blessed country is of bidis. Though strictly speaking smoking of bidis has also been banned in public places. But the fact is that bidis are never smoked in public places. Even after the ban, one can smoke in his house and in open areas. Only in public places, i.e., offices, cinema theatres, eateries, etc., the ban is applicable. Smokers working in offices would go out of the office and smoke. They will smoke in cars. Yes, a few would be booked. I a m a smoker and yet I support the ban. But I am not going to be hooked in to the wild cheering for this step of the Government
Transperancy International ( TI ) is a non Governmental organisation, which has been coming out with Corruption Perception Index of various countries during the last few years. TI has chapters in various countries which are manned by eminent persons. Admiral Tahilani, formerce Chief of Indian Navy, is the Chief of TI Chapter in India.
Governments of countries, which are identified in the higher level of Corruption Perception Index, obviously are chary of both quoting the Index or accepting the veracity of the Index. Yet it is a fact that over a period of time world-wide there is considerable credibility to the Index.
In the Index published by TI for the year, India has been ranked at 74, i.e., there are 73 countries in the world which according to TI have levels of corruption less than that of India. It is the Scandinavian counrtries which are least corrupt. Then comes most of the Western countries.
The Corruption Perception Index has sometimes been criticized as the perception of a select few, since it ignores the perception of the wider population, and instead focuses on that of a few experts like the rest of science does. Furthermore, some have opined that the index analyzes a "mere perception", and that the method followed in preparing the index couldn't measure institutional corruption.
While on can’t dismiss the above view points, still the fact remains that India is a very corupt country, a fact known to all Indians and those foreign inviduals or institutions which had to do business or work in India.
Having lived with corruption for such a long time, unfortunately, Indians tend to accept the same as a fact of life and resigned to the situation. But why should it be so. Consider the massive investments being made by Government for improving the lot of the poor. But a large part of such investment does not reach the poor because of massive corruption. Further, project cost goes up because of corruption. In brief, corruption corrodes our endeavour to improve the position of India and Indians. There is also the danger of corruption being accepted as a part of life in this blesseed country. Today, there is hardly any stigma attached to it. One does not mind friendship at individual or family level with corupt people. That is the tragedy of India.
Downward journey of fourth estate
· Electronic media is increasingly reporting remarks and issues out of context. TV channels ignore wittingly or unwittingly historical context, nuance, explanatory arguments and the innate complexity of issues and personalities involved in the news. There is often ‘ Do you continue to beat your wife‘ syndrome, whereby both answers of ‘ yes ‘ and ‘ no’ would show in poor light the person replying the question .
· There is a wide-spread perception that both print and visual media are slowly pandering too much to the base instincts of human beings and abdicating from giving perceptive analysis on serious matters, with not a single angle but inclusive of both pros and cons. One must hasten to add that there could be developments where there may be only ‘ pros ‘ or ‘con.’ But objective reporting is being increasingly substituted with subjective reporting. Frivolous angles are highlighted. Depth and content are both slipping away slowly. Sort of Americanism is seeping, i.e., unwanted aggression in the coverage and comments and question & answers and in dress style of female anchors. . Scandals are given repeated coverage and often blown out of proportion.
· The arguments of the media that they are all the time pressed for time, that they are only catering to the tastes of the viewers / readers, that they are following the trend in advanced countries, that the time span of viewer on any matter is short, etc., while cannot be dismissed should be taken as an excuse rather than justification. To some extent it is the print and visual media which influences the tastes of viewers. So first they influence viewers / readers by repeatedly presenting news as mentioned above and then they take the stand that what they give is according to the tastes of the viewers.
Why should our worthy Prime Minister curry for favour
‘Indian people love you’ – So said Mr. Manmohan Singh to Mr. Bush. The allergy of Karat against anything American prompted him to caustically comment ‘ Yes, we all know that Manmohan Singh likes Bush but why should he bring Indian people into the statement. While I am not in cahoots with Karat in his total hatred for the Americans, in this instance I agree with him. Why should a level headed Man Mohan Singh make such a statement. Most of the Indians have no admiration and much less love for Bush.
Nobel prize for peace.
Former Finnish President was selected for the Nobel Peace Prize and the print media published this in one of the inside pages with a short write up, as against the hoopla created by the print media when the prize is given to a known personality. Yes, when it is a well known figure, there is bound to be detailed write ups and at times criticism on the choice. But does that mean a figure unknown in Indian circles should be virtually written off with a few sentences.
Resistance to change related to modernity:
A lady teacher in West Bengal School has been taken to task by the management of the school for wearing salwar kameez instead of the usual dress of saree for the teachers in the school. ‘ We have nothing against the salwar kameez but there is something called tradition,’ so said the management. Apart from other reasons for wearing saree, the lady teacher has said that she has to travel in bus for coming and going to school and salwar kameez is more comfortable and convenient for traveling in bus rather than saree. In many parts of the country salwar kameez was taken in the past as North Indian dress. However, during the last few years in many places, particularly in cities and towns, both girls / women in large number, and the number is increasing as time goes by, have opted for salwar kameez. It is also catching up in villages.
Somerset Maugham had said that tradition is a guide and not a jailer. For many elders in this country tradition is a non negotiable mater, rooted as they are to tradition
Sacrifices of judges
When it comes to self interest – or should one term it as ‘ selfish interest, ‘ judges are not above you and me. In the aftermath of Pay Commission recommendations, there have been statements of sitting and retired judges to the effect that ‘ the judges of HCs and SC, who are experts in law, have sacrificed lucrative practice at bar to serve the country.’ It is the hyperbole that was used by serving and retired soldiers of all ranks for claiming higher remuneration, i.e., ‘ sacrifice ‘ for the country. From the bar once a while somebody is seconded to the Bench by Government. Those advocates who have lucrative practice often decline the offer of Government because of level of salary of Judges, which by itself is not on the lower side but when compared to good practice in the bar would be less. But then there is prestige in being a judge.
The job of a successful senior lawyer is very arduous as compared to that of judge. A judge gets his salary and perks irrespective of the level of his performance. Not so in the case of advocates. And then there is life long pension for judges, which is not the case with Advocates. So where is the question of ‘ sacrifice.’ In any case they joined the Judicial service in the beginning because of the prestige. Now you can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The hoopla on banning of smoking in public places
The media, both print and visual, have covered this action of the Government as a momentous one. As if a burning problem ( double entendre intended ) facing the nation, has been effectively dealt with. Now what are the facts. Over 90% of the smoking in this blessed country is of bidis. Though strictly speaking smoking of bidis has also been banned in public places. But the fact is that bidis are never smoked in public places. Even after the ban, one can smoke in his house and in open areas. Only in public places, i.e., offices, cinema theatres, eateries, etc., the ban is applicable. Smokers working in offices would go out of the office and smoke. They will smoke in cars. Yes, a few would be booked. I a m a smoker and yet I support the ban. But I am not going to be hooked in to the wild cheering for this step of the Government
Monday, October 27, 2008
Corruption Perception Index
Transperancy International ( TI ) is a non Governmental organisation, which has been coming out with Corruption Perception Index of various countries during the last few years. TI has chapters in various countries which are manned by eminent persons. Admiral Tahilani, formerce Chief of Indian Navy, is the Chief of TI Chapter in India.
Governments of countries, which are identified in the higher level of Corruption Perception Index, obviously are chary of both quoting the Index or accepting the veracity of the Index. Yet it is a fact that over a period of time world-wide there is considerable credibility to the Index.
In the Index published by TI for the year, India has been ranked at 74, i.e., there are 73 countries in the world which according to TI have levels of corruption less than that of India. It is the Scandinavian counrtries which are least corrupt. Then comes most of the Western countries.
The Corruption Perception Index has sometimes been criticized as the perception of a select few, since it ignores the perception of the wider population, and instead focuses on that of a few experts like the rest of science does. Furthermore, some have opined that the index analyzes a "mere perception", and that the method followed in preparing the index couldn't measure institutional corruption.
While on can’t dismiss the above view points, still the fact remains that India is a very corupt country, a fact known to all Indians and those foreign inviduals or institutions which had to do business or work in India.
Having lived with corruption for such a long time, unfortunately, Indians tend to accept the same as a fact of life and resigned to the situation. But why should it be so. Consider the massive investments being made by Government for improving the lot of the poor. But a large part of such investment does not reach the poor because of massive corruption. Further, project cost goes up because of corruption. In brief, corruption corrodes our endeavour to improve the position of India and Indians. There is also the danger of corruption being accepted as a part of life in this blesseed country. Today, there is hardly any stigma attached to it. One does not mind friendship at individual or family level with corupt people. That is the tragedy of India.
Downward journey of fourth estate
· Electronic media is increasingly reporting remarks and issues out of context. TV channels ignore wittingly or unwittingly historical context, nuance, explanatory arguments and the innate complexity of issues and personalities involved in the news. There is often ‘ Do you continue to beat your wife‘ syndrome, whereby both answers of ‘ yes ‘ and ‘ no’ would show in poor light the person replying the question .
· There is a wide-spread perception that both print and visual media are slowly pandering too much to the base instincts of human beings and abdicating from giving perceptive analysis on serious matters, with not a single angle but inclusive of both pros and cons. One must hasten to add that there could be developments where there may be only ‘ pros ‘ or ‘con.’ But objective reporting is being increasingly substituted with subjective reporting. Frivolous angles are highlighted. Depth and content are both slipping away slowly. Sort of Americanism is seeping, i.e., unwanted aggression in the coverage and comments and question & answers and in dress style of female anchors. . Scandals are given repeated coverage and often blown out of proportion.
· The arguments of the media that they are all the time pressed for time, that they are only catering to the tastes of the viewers / readers, that they are following the trend in advanced countries, that the time span of viewer on any matter is short, etc., while cannot be dismissed should be taken as an excuse rather than justification. To some extent it is the print and visual media which influences the tastes of viewers. So first they influence viewers / readers by repeatedly presenting news as mentioned above and then they take the stand that what they give is according to the tastes of the viewers.
Why should our worthy Prime Minister curry for favour
‘Indian people love you’ – So said Mr. Manmohan Singh to Mr. Bush. The allergy of Karat against anything American prompted him to caustically comment ‘ Yes, we all know that Manmohan Singh likes Bush but why should he bring Indian people into the statement. While I am not in cahoots with Karat in his total hatred for the Americans, in this instance I agree with him. Why should a level headed Man Mohan Singh make such a statement. Most of the Indians have no admiration and much less love for Bush.
Nobel prize for peace.
Former Finnish President was selected for the Nobel Peace Prize and the print media published this in one of the inside pages with a short write up, as against the hoopla created by the print media when the prize is given to a known personality. Yes, when it is a well known figure, there is bound to be detailed write ups and at times criticism on the choice. But does that mean a figure unknown in Indian circles should be virtually written off with a few sentences.
Resistance to change related to modernity:
A lady teacher in West Bengal School has been taken to task by the management of the school for wearing salwar kameez instead of the usual dress of saree for the teachers in the school. ‘ We have nothing against the salwar kameez but there is something called tradition,’ so said the management. Apart from other reasons for wearing saree, the lady teacher has said that she has to travel in bus for coming and going to school and salwar kameez is more comfortable and convenient for traveling in bus rather than saree. In many parts of the country salwar kameez was taken in the past as North Indian dress. However, during the last few years in many places, particularly in cities and towns, both girls / women in large number, and the number is increasing as time goes by, have opted for salwar kameez. It is also catching up in villages.
Somerset Maugham had said that tradition is a guide and not a jailer. For many elders in this country tradition is a non negotiable mater, rooted as they are to tradition
Sacrifices of judges
When it comes to self interest – or should one term it as ‘ selfish interest, ‘ judges are not above you and me. In the aftermath of Pay Commission recommendations, there have been statements of sitting and retired judges to the effect that ‘ the judges of HCs and SC, who are experts in law, have sacrificed lucrative practice at bar to serve the country.’ It is the hyperbole that was used by serving and retired soldiers of all ranks for claiming higher remuneration, i.e., ‘ sacrifice ‘ for the country. From the bar once a while somebody is seconded to the Bench by Government. Those advocates who have lucrative practice often decline the offer of Government because of level of salary of Judges, which by itself is not on the lower side but when compared to good practice in the bar would be less. But then there is prestige in being a judge.
The job of a successful senior lawyer is very arduous as compared to that of judge. A judge gets his salary and perks irrespective of the level of his performance. Not so in the case of advocates. And then there is life long pension for judges, which is not the case with Advocates. So where is the question of ‘ sacrifice.’ In any case they joined the Judicial service in the beginning because of the prestige. Now you can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The hoopla on banning of smoking in public places
The media, both print and visual, have covered this action of the Government as a momentous one. As if a burning problem ( double entendre intended ) facing the nation, has been effectively dealt with. Now what are the facts. Over 90% of the smoking in this blessed country is of bidis. Though strictly speaking smoking of bidis has also been banned in public places. But the fact is that bidis are never smoked in public places. Even after the ban, one can smoke in his house and in open areas. Only in public places, i.e., offices, cinema theatres, eateries, etc., the ban is applicable. Smokers working in offices would go out of the office and smoke. They will smoke in cars. Yes, a few would be booked. I a m a smoker and yet I support the ban. But I am not going to be hooked in to the wild cheering for this step of the Government
Transperancy International ( TI ) is a non Governmental organisation, which has been coming out with Corruption Perception Index of various countries during the last few years. TI has chapters in various countries which are manned by eminent persons. Admiral Tahilani, formerce Chief of Indian Navy, is the Chief of TI Chapter in India.
Governments of countries, which are identified in the higher level of Corruption Perception Index, obviously are chary of both quoting the Index or accepting the veracity of the Index. Yet it is a fact that over a period of time world-wide there is considerable credibility to the Index.
In the Index published by TI for the year, India has been ranked at 74, i.e., there are 73 countries in the world which according to TI have levels of corruption less than that of India. It is the Scandinavian counrtries which are least corrupt. Then comes most of the Western countries.
The Corruption Perception Index has sometimes been criticized as the perception of a select few, since it ignores the perception of the wider population, and instead focuses on that of a few experts like the rest of science does. Furthermore, some have opined that the index analyzes a "mere perception", and that the method followed in preparing the index couldn't measure institutional corruption.
While on can’t dismiss the above view points, still the fact remains that India is a very corupt country, a fact known to all Indians and those foreign inviduals or institutions which had to do business or work in India.
Having lived with corruption for such a long time, unfortunately, Indians tend to accept the same as a fact of life and resigned to the situation. But why should it be so. Consider the massive investments being made by Government for improving the lot of the poor. But a large part of such investment does not reach the poor because of massive corruption. Further, project cost goes up because of corruption. In brief, corruption corrodes our endeavour to improve the position of India and Indians. There is also the danger of corruption being accepted as a part of life in this blesseed country. Today, there is hardly any stigma attached to it. One does not mind friendship at individual or family level with corupt people. That is the tragedy of India.
Downward journey of fourth estate
· Electronic media is increasingly reporting remarks and issues out of context. TV channels ignore wittingly or unwittingly historical context, nuance, explanatory arguments and the innate complexity of issues and personalities involved in the news. There is often ‘ Do you continue to beat your wife‘ syndrome, whereby both answers of ‘ yes ‘ and ‘ no’ would show in poor light the person replying the question .
· There is a wide-spread perception that both print and visual media are slowly pandering too much to the base instincts of human beings and abdicating from giving perceptive analysis on serious matters, with not a single angle but inclusive of both pros and cons. One must hasten to add that there could be developments where there may be only ‘ pros ‘ or ‘con.’ But objective reporting is being increasingly substituted with subjective reporting. Frivolous angles are highlighted. Depth and content are both slipping away slowly. Sort of Americanism is seeping, i.e., unwanted aggression in the coverage and comments and question & answers and in dress style of female anchors. . Scandals are given repeated coverage and often blown out of proportion.
· The arguments of the media that they are all the time pressed for time, that they are only catering to the tastes of the viewers / readers, that they are following the trend in advanced countries, that the time span of viewer on any matter is short, etc., while cannot be dismissed should be taken as an excuse rather than justification. To some extent it is the print and visual media which influences the tastes of viewers. So first they influence viewers / readers by repeatedly presenting news as mentioned above and then they take the stand that what they give is according to the tastes of the viewers.
Why should our worthy Prime Minister curry for favour
‘Indian people love you’ – So said Mr. Manmohan Singh to Mr. Bush. The allergy of Karat against anything American prompted him to caustically comment ‘ Yes, we all know that Manmohan Singh likes Bush but why should he bring Indian people into the statement. While I am not in cahoots with Karat in his total hatred for the Americans, in this instance I agree with him. Why should a level headed Man Mohan Singh make such a statement. Most of the Indians have no admiration and much less love for Bush.
Nobel prize for peace.
Former Finnish President was selected for the Nobel Peace Prize and the print media published this in one of the inside pages with a short write up, as against the hoopla created by the print media when the prize is given to a known personality. Yes, when it is a well known figure, there is bound to be detailed write ups and at times criticism on the choice. But does that mean a figure unknown in Indian circles should be virtually written off with a few sentences.
Resistance to change related to modernity:
A lady teacher in West Bengal School has been taken to task by the management of the school for wearing salwar kameez instead of the usual dress of saree for the teachers in the school. ‘ We have nothing against the salwar kameez but there is something called tradition,’ so said the management. Apart from other reasons for wearing saree, the lady teacher has said that she has to travel in bus for coming and going to school and salwar kameez is more comfortable and convenient for traveling in bus rather than saree. In many parts of the country salwar kameez was taken in the past as North Indian dress. However, during the last few years in many places, particularly in cities and towns, both girls / women in large number, and the number is increasing as time goes by, have opted for salwar kameez. It is also catching up in villages.
Somerset Maugham had said that tradition is a guide and not a jailer. For many elders in this country tradition is a non negotiable mater, rooted as they are to tradition
Sacrifices of judges
When it comes to self interest – or should one term it as ‘ selfish interest, ‘ judges are not above you and me. In the aftermath of Pay Commission recommendations, there have been statements of sitting and retired judges to the effect that ‘ the judges of HCs and SC, who are experts in law, have sacrificed lucrative practice at bar to serve the country.’ It is the hyperbole that was used by serving and retired soldiers of all ranks for claiming higher remuneration, i.e., ‘ sacrifice ‘ for the country. From the bar once a while somebody is seconded to the Bench by Government. Those advocates who have lucrative practice often decline the offer of Government because of level of salary of Judges, which by itself is not on the lower side but when compared to good practice in the bar would be less. But then there is prestige in being a judge.
The job of a successful senior lawyer is very arduous as compared to that of judge. A judge gets his salary and perks irrespective of the level of his performance. Not so in the case of advocates. And then there is life long pension for judges, which is not the case with Advocates. So where is the question of ‘ sacrifice.’ In any case they joined the Judicial service in the beginning because of the prestige. Now you can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The hoopla on banning of smoking in public places
The media, both print and visual, have covered this action of the Government as a momentous one. As if a burning problem ( double entendre intended ) facing the nation, has been effectively dealt with. Now what are the facts. Over 90% of the smoking in this blessed country is of bidis. Though strictly speaking smoking of bidis has also been banned in public places. But the fact is that bidis are never smoked in public places. Even after the ban, one can smoke in his house and in open areas. Only in public places, i.e., offices, cinema theatres, eateries, etc., the ban is applicable. Smokers working in offices would go out of the office and smoke. They will smoke in cars. Yes, a few would be booked. I a m a smoker and yet I support the ban. But I am not going to be hooked in to the wild cheering for this step of the Government
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
