INTRODUCTION AND STAND:
Richard Attenborough’s Academy Award winning film, “Gandhi” that was “shot through a romantic Raj haze, ensured that millions of people came away with the impression that Jinnah created Pakistan because he was jealous of Gandhi and a villain at heart” .
Mohamed Ali Jinnah, a man who believes that he and his typewriter created Pakistan . A man of extremes, who detested being stereotyped as a ‘Mohammedan’, he created a ‘Muslim homeland’, which he declared a secular state.
The greatest mystery surrounding Jinnah however are the reasons fuelling his sudden transformation from the austere westernised gentleman he was when he began his political career to the Sherwani-decked Muslim politician who declared Pakistan independent. This essay will examine the ‘faults’ of Jinnah, the lack of a successor, autocratic rule and other factors which seem to suggest his self interest and juxtapose these factors with his denial of the prime ministership of an independent India as well as his aim to eventually establish a Pakistan with a modern, democratic constitution as opposed to the continuation of autocratic rule he started with. Although we can never know the real motivations of Jinnah, we can hypothesize, as does this essay, that Jinnah was motivated by his self-interests as opposed to the magnanimous politician of the people that some make him out to be.
DID HE ALWAYS ACT IN PAKISTAN’S BEST INTERESTS?
Jinnah ruled early Pakistan in an autocratic fashion and had groomed no clear successor, the knowledge that he knew of his impending death, paints him as a man who was too self-obsessed to prepare for a Pakistan after his death. Yet pragmatism comes into play here and one has to recognize that at that stage in Pakistan’s life, autocracy and a ‘supreme leader’ were absolutely essential to counter the many problems she was beset with, economically, politically and socially
SUCCESSION:
Benazir Bhutto once commented that Pakistan’s problems could be attributed to the Quaid-E-Azam
"Because Jinnah's death a year after Independence left the entire concept of Pakistan and Jinnah's dream unfinished. It left the nation leaderless and the constitution was made an orphan. The nation had never really recovered from that loss" .
According to her, the man who created Pakistan could also be said to be responsible for its ‘sorry state’ today due to his lack of foresight.
Jinnah knew from June 1946 that he was suffering from fatal tuberculosis and could be taken sick and die anytime. Yet, in his typical obstinate manner, Jinnah continued as always and refused to take measures to prepare for Pakistan’s survival after him. At no point did Jinnah appoint a successor or even hint to his “second-in-command” – Liaqat Ali Khan that his death was impending; such that measures could have been put into place to arrange for a smooth transition of power and to prevent a loss of ideals or principles which were the backbone of the new nation.
On the side of pragmatism, it must be admitted, “people seldom speak with one voice. In time of trouble there is a need to rally around a forceful and confident leader. ” Jinnah knew what he had to do once the gauntlet for Pakistan had been thrown down, come what may, to maintain the name of the Muslim League he had to follow through on the Lahore resolution, especially after the Cabinet Mission plan flopped. As such, he chose to be the rallying point for Pakistan. Perhaps he believed that if power was shared, the masses that vested their trust in him would be split too, and the unity he had worked so hard to achieve would be lost. Jinnah believed strongly in the dictum of ‘ignorance being bliss’ and in some situations he chose to ‘remain ignorant so that knowledge might not inhibit him from the course he wished to pursue’ . He did not wish news of his illness to prevent any party from doing what they would have done in any other case.
Furthermore, he believed in his ‘brethren’ following this dictum as well. Of the masses whose blood was spilled to attain the dream of Pakistan, most of them knew not where it was going to be, or what the essence of Pakistan was. Jinnah delivered his speeches in English and as depicted in the documentary “Partition of Blood”, we see that although the masses did not understand English and the meaning of Jinnah’s words, they nonetheless agreed with him and believed he was right and acting in their best interests .
AUTOCRACY:
When the time came, Jinnah opted to become the Governor General of Pakistan instead of Prime Minister because, under the Constitution, Governor General could give instructions to the Prime Minister, “in Pakistan, I will be Governor-General and the Prime Minister will do what I tell him to do”. In doing so, he cared little that he greatly insulted Lord Mountbatten who had been offered the Governor-Generalship of India and coveted that of Pakistan as well.
After becoming Governor General, Jinnah not only appointed the Prime Minister but also chose and appointed all the members of the Cabinet. He was the President of Muslim League, and did not relinquish party presidency even after becoming the Governor General. Thus, Jinnah accumulated all state power in him; as the leader of the party, head of the administration and the State - a virtual dictator. He even assumed authority to take care of the government's Kashmir and Frontier Departments. As a Governor General, he could influence the Legislative Assembly to endorse these additional powers. He even presided over Cabinet meetings, a move unprecedented in any parliamentary democracy, which is what Jinnah claimed Pakistan was. He often, without the knowledge of the Prime Minister, instructed the Provincial Governors, Ministers and Departmental Secretaries; resulting in increasing tension between Prime Minister Liaqat Khan and him. The tensions escalated to a stage where Liaqat Ali Khan resigned from his post, although Jinnah refused to accept the resignation, further increasing the tension level. Parliamentary norms were not applicable to Jinnah. In fact, the way Jinnah ran the administration, though briefly, established a precedent in Pakistan to concentrate all power and key positions in a single person; the tendency that later gave birth to military autocracy in Pakistan .
However, it must again in the name of pragmatism be admitted that given the unstable political climate of Pakistan at that time and his administrative, diplomatic and political abilities, Jinnah was undoubtedly the best candidate for all the above-mentioned positions. A fact that he knew and exploited, if only for the larger good; given his frail health, the responsibilities he took on must have been very taxing, nonetheless, it seems that Jinnah was driven by a superhuman strength and took it all in his stride.
SELF-INTEREST:
Jinnah was in every conceivable manner a contradiction. In the words of Collins and Lapierre:
“A more improbable leader of India’s Moslem masses could hardly be imagined. He drank, ate pork, religiously shaved his beard every morning and just as religiously avoided the mosque each Friday. God and the Koran had no place in Jinnah’s vision of the world”
Yet, it is impossible to deny that the founding father of Pakistan was a religious man; he was just ahead of his time. Jinnah’s practice of Islam has a contemporary ring to it, in western terms, “a modern Moses” The reasons for his rapid conversion from a constitutional, whiskey-swigging man to Quaid–E–Azam of the Moslems, can be explained in many ways, including the changing of the old guard following the death of politicians such as Gokhale and Dadabhai Naoroji who identified with Jinnah’s concepts of a united India achieved through constitutionalist methods. Gandhi and Nehru both contributed to this change and ironically to the idea of Pakistan gaining full steam. Gandhi, by becoming increasingly religiousin his politics with cow-protection acts and anti constitutionalist with his mass politics, which in Jinnah’s opinion caused ‘mass hysteria’. Nehru, by proving to India’s Muslims after the 1937 elections that he could not cater to the needs and wants of the Muslim community.
However, other, more personal factors were also at play here. The Islamic concept of 40 being the age where a man begins to take responsibility for his actions was strong in causing changes to Jinnah’s personality and politics. When Jinnah left India and politics and went to England to practice law after the death of his wife, he was already 59, perhaps it was at this belated stage that he realised that since Hindu-Muslim unity seemed an impossibility, the next best thing would be to create a separate Muslim homeland and by engineering it, he would gain favour in the eyes of God.
Of course, non-religious factors, like Nehru spurning him and his much-lauded 14 points as “preposterous” and advising Congress to “ignore Mr. Jinnah” also could have played a very major role in Jinnah wanting to assert himself and the power of the Muslims in general; making sure he could not be ignored.
FLIPSIDE: ALL FOR THE PEOPLE
“I have done my job, when the field marshal leads his army into victory, it is for the civil authority to take over” is what he said upon the declaration of Pakistan. Jinnah saw himself as a military leader leading his troops to victory, their prize being Pakistan. The mere title of Akbar S. Ahmed’s “Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity: The Search for Saladin” is very telling. In his book Akbar compares Jinnah to Saladin , both of them uniting the Muslim masses and leading them to a common goal, while exhorting peace and minimum violence.
If indeed self-aggrandizement was most significant motivation Jinnah faced, then Gandhi’s offer to make him the first prime minister of an independent India would have been a dream come true, a Muslim leader at the head of an independent India, it would have been the greatest coup for Jinnah . However, Jinnah rejected the offer for the sake of his people.
It would appear from his speeches that Jinnah did indeed care about the largely subaltern masses he was leading. He has been known to mention at various junctures his concern for minorities and has gone so far as to declare the protection of Hindus in Pakistan ‘a sacred undertaking’ on the part of Pakistanis. He repeatedly mentions in his speeches credos like “universal brotherhood” , to “eschew violence of thought, word and action” and “subordinate personal interest to the welfare of others” .
CONCLUSION:
This essay aimed to examine the reasons behind the transformation of Jinnah from intensely secular, to quite the other extreme, and whether these reasons were largely personal or grassroots-centered.
It is easy to paint Jinnah as a man chasing after self-aggrandizement if one does not look at the lack of alternatives he was faced with at that time. To set up the incorruptible government he hoped to, he had to take on the majority of the responsibilities. His conversion that is often discussed was less of a personal choice than that of a politician who had to adapt to serve the needs of his people. He not only rejected the prestigious prime ministership of India but also knighthood under the British Empire and even Islamic Maulana-ship; preferring to remain ‘plain Mr. Jinnah’ .
It is often said that Jinnah came back from England a changed man, but even upon his return he tried to persevere for Hindu-Muslim unity, it was not until the elections of 1937 when Nehru and Gandhi tried to ignore the Muslims from politics altogether that Jinnah realized the plight the Muslims he was leading were facing and felt the need to do something .
On the other hand, it is equally simple to classify Jinnah as a man who worked for his people to the point where he completely neglected the state of his own health and “gave his life for Pakistan”.
The truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes. Jinnah was indeed a man who was worldly enough to enjoy and even crave the limelight and pomp that being a successful politician brought. However, he was driven by the liberal ideas he had picked up during his time in the West and from his daily consumption of newspapers from around the world. These were the very ideas that influenced him so deeply that they infused him with an almost superhuman strength, allowing him to survive him last 3 years on little more than willpower.
The perfect politician does not exist. At some point, power corrupts, with this notion in mind, we can analyse M. A. Jinnah as a man who was driven by the beautiful ideals of protecting the people who implicitly trusted him and for whom he wanted to set up a democratic, liberal society. However, he could not live in a fool’s paradise and had to, at times, make decisions and policies that went against his democratic beliefs. He demanded from his sister Fatima, whom she thought would take charge of all Pakistan’s problems when she asked him to rest for the sake of his health. Jinnah saw himself as the only hope for Pakistan, and in this way can be said to be self-obsessed, however this obsession sprung from his determination to deliver to his people the best he possibly could.
Bibliography:
1. Ahmed, Akbar S, “Jinnah and the Making of Pakistan”, History Today, Sept. 1994
2. Ahmed, Akbar S, “Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity : The Search for Saladin” New York : Routledge, 1997
3. Allana, G, “Quaid-E-Azam Jinnah” Lahore: Ferozons Ltd, 1967
4. Beg, Aziz, “Jinnah and His Times : A Biography” Islamabad: Babur & Amer Publications, 1986
5. Burke, S.M (ed), Jinnah, speeches and statements 1947-1948, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001
6. Burke, S. M., “Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. : His Personality & His Politics” Karachi: Oxford University Press
7. Collins, Larry & Lapierre, Dominique, “Freedom at Midnight: London : HarperCollins, 1997
8. Enver, E. H, “The Modern Moses - A brief biography of M.A.Jinnah” Karachi Jinnah Memorial Institute, 1990.
9. Hasan, Mushirul, “The Partition Omnibus” New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2002
10. Inder Singh, Anita, “The Origins of The Partition of India, 1936 – 1947” Delhi; New York: Oxford University Press, 1987
11. Jalal, Ayesha, :The sole spokesman : Jinnah, the Muslim League, and the demand for Pakistan” Cambridge [Cambridgeshire] ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1985
12. Khan, Hamid, “Constitutional and political history of Pakistan” Karachi : Oxford University Press, 2001.
13. Khurshid, K.H, “Memories of Jinnah” Karachi; New York: Oxford University Press, 1990
14. Malik, Muhammad Aslam, “The Making of The Pakistan Resolution” Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2001
15. Moon, Penderel, Divide and quit London : Chatto & Windus, 1961
16. Moore, R.J, “Jinnah and The Pakistan Demand”, Modern Asian Studies, 17,4, 1983
17. Naim, C.M [et al.], “ Iqbal, Jinnah and Pakistan: the vision and reality” Lahore: Vanguard Books Ltd, 1985.
18. Pirzada, Syed Sharifuddin, “Gandhi and Quaid-E-Azam Jinnah” Karachi: East and West Publishing Company, 1983
19. Robinson, Francis, “The Muslims and Partition”, History Today, Sept. 1997
20. Saiyid, Matlubul Hasan, “Mohammad Ali Jinnah: A Political Study” Lahore: Sh. M. Ashraf, 1963
21. Sayeed, Khalid B., “Pakistan, the Formative Phase” Karachi: Pakistan Publishing House, 1960
22. Seervai, H. M, “Partition of India: Legend and Reality” Bombay, N. M. Tripathi, 1989
23. Talbot, Ian A, “Jinnah and the Making of Pakistan”, History Today, May 1982
24. Wolpert, Stanley A, “Jinnah of Pakistan”, New York : Oxford University Press, 1984
Internet Resources:
1. Farzana Versey, “Mohammed Ali Jinnah Haazir Ho”, September 10, 2004, http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00004061&channel=gulberg&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1
(Accessed on 12th March, 2005)
2. M B Naqvi : The News, Karachi, Pakistan, December 11, 2002 – “Why Jinnah's Pakistan Ended”
http://www.usenet.com/newsgroups/soc.culture.bangladesh/msg02747.html
(Accessed on 12th March, 2005)
3. Mubarak Ali, “Jinnah: Making a myth”, October 2000 http://sacw.insaf.net/i_aii/MakingJinnah_a_myth.html
(Accessed on 15th March, 2005)
4. Dr. Rashad Khalifa, “Authorized English translation of the Quran, The crucial age of 40”
http://www.submission.org/suras/app32.html
(Accessed on 15th March, 2005)
Film Resources:
1. Partition of India [videorecording]: legacy of blood. Cafe Productions; producer, Sophia Swire; director, Christopher Mitchell. Princeton, N.J.: Films for the Humanities, c1997.
Monday, October 10, 2005
Thursday, June 16, 2005
chapter 2
Replying to my emails, my mind is still in the kitchen, planning your lunch. Your habit of living near your workplace has never left you and the great part is that you can pop home for lunch, or occasionally, even coffee, anytime!
I head to the kitchen and place potatoes to boil. As they boil, I tidy up and clean the house. Memories of my stubborn youth come flooding back and I remember many conversations we had where I vehemently declared never to clean the house! I love cleaning your house; I love doing everything for you. I’m more than your wife; I’m your other half, your life.
Feeling rather sweaty now, I ignore the beep of my computer and rush for another bath instead. It’s almost 11, you’ll be home soon, other than you, and everything else can wait! Dressing in a prettier sari now that the housework is done, I place a flower in my hair and set about preparing the rest of the meal and setting the table, with everything done and the food heating, I sit down to answer my emails. I hear the click of the door and hear you come in; I rush to the hall and kiss you.
“I missed you, I know it’s only 4.5 hours, but I still missed you!”
You laugh and kiss me back, unbuttoning your shirt as you settle at the table, smiling at you, I feel the same excitement in me as I have, every single time I have seen you, right from the beginning.
Putting rice and some dishes on a thali, I again feed you, and just as you reach for the plate, I laugh and eat too, alternating mouthfuls between you and me. This is what I have always longed for, a life of laughter and fun, hugs and kisses, being utterly comfortable with someone – you.
As you finish your last mouthful, I rinse my hands and bring you sweetened lemon juice to freshen your mouth. As we move to the sofa, arm in arm, we discuss our respective days so far. I’m so thankful that you were the one to get me involved in my own writing and never once deride me for not having a ‘proper’ day job. I’m so grateful that you empathise with the work I do as well as the other little chores that you never fail to appreciate.
“Babul, jo tumne sikhaya, jo tumse payaa, Sajan ghar le chali. Sajan ghar mai chali… Kaise bhool paaungi mai Baba, sune jo tumse kahaaniya, chor chali aangan me maiya, bachpan ki nishaaniya. Ban gaya pardes, ghar janam ka, mili hai dunia, mujhe nayee. Naam jo piya se maine jora, naye rishton se bandh gayee. Mere Sasur Ji Pitah hain, Pati devta hai, Devar chavi Krishna ki.”
Finishing the dedication of my new book, I thank God that my life turned out the way it did. Things were never easy, nor will the road ahead be lined with roses; but the knowledge that being with you does not hurt anyone and I am doing exactly what my parents always wanted me to do, is sufficient to carry me through any hardship life may bring.
Sitting at my laptop, as I send the dedication to my editor, I stop a minute and look at our wedding photo on my desktop; the thought that possibly, you too are looking at the same photo fills my soul with warmth.
I remember my Bidai, it’s been almost 2 years with you, yet, I can remember so clearly, every moment of our wedding. Both sets of parents had ultimately deigned to attend, and your mother had even bought me a Bidai sari. It was the fact that the sari was pink that made me sure that life was going to be good with you. It was the final sign I needed. Bidai was definitely the saddest moment for my family and me too. We were all aware that as I walked away, I was walking into a new life leaving my family and relations behind, to join yours and adopt your family as my own. I left with tears of joy and sadness but knowing that I carried only the very best wishes from all who were there made me sure that the future would only bring us all joy!
I was so quiet in the car; the ceremony had meant so much to me, as I know it did to you. We had come so far together; the future seemed endless and beautiful. I clutched your hand as I thought about all the vows we had made.
My Papa doing the kanyadaan was to me, the most touching part of the ceremony. As he washed your feet, and ritually bestowed the worldly goods of Vishnu on you, I knew that in his heart he was praying with everything he had in him that I had made the right choice. To both my parents, the Kanyadaan was very emotional whereby both of them gave the responsibility of their daughter to you; this signified not only their blessing of this union but also their approval. I was so glad I was not there to witness that, my tears would not have stopped, as it is, looking at your damp eyes in the mandap made me sure that you too loved my Papa as I did and appreciated his actions.
During the Hasta Mallap, the priest was chanting away, but all I noticed was the strength of your hand as mine was placed on yours. I could honestly feel the union of our hearts forever as we held hands in that moment. As we promised with God and all guests as witnesses, to remain devoted to each other and to treat each other with love, respect, sympathy and compassion, I couldn’t help but tear.
The priest then looped white raw cotton round twenty four times, and put it around our shoulders. Symbolising the different characteristics and virtues of human life, these threads of cotton bound us together forever from now on. They were a vow to each other, to fulfil each of our roles fully and honestly.
After the Agni Poojan, as we stepped on the stone together, we looked at each other, and I knew that we would always look and walk in the same direction, with the same goals.
Although we had been ‘dating’ for so long, and everyone saw us as nearly married, ourselves included, we both knew that these rituals were needed to bind us ever closer, in the eyes of the world, as well as God. The Mangal Fere would symbolically solidify our marriage and make us husband and wife. The four rounds represented Dharma and a life of righteousness, Artha and a life of prosperity, Kama and a happy family and Moksha, a life dedicated to God. As the cloth that was tied to my pallu was put over your shoulder, I knew you would always take care of me. As Vikram filled our hands with rice and grains, denoting a bounty of wealth, good health, prosperity and happiness, I could sense that even my little brother wa praying that we would have all that and more in our life. Together, we offered these to the Agni and seeked blessings.
You smiled at me and slowly led me around the Agni three times, as we both vowed to follow each other anywhere – in happiness or in times of hardship and shall always serve you. On the final round it was my turn to lead you, signifying that in old age, when it is time to depart, all I wanted from God to take me before he touched you.
Following that, we took the Saptapadi. Christian vows always sound so touching, but it was not till our wedding day that I truly realised how much sweeter our vows were. We looked at each other (shameless me, I should have been looking down), as we took a step with each vow. Vowing to live with honour and respect and to provide our household with nourishment; to be happy and enjoy life, to develop mental, spiritual and physical peace and progress; to share joys and pains together and to increase wealth and prosperity for righteous use; to remember our parents and elders, to acquire knowledge, happiness and harmony through mutual love, trust and respect; to observe acts of charity and be blessed with healthy, strong and courageous children; to develop self-restraint and be true partners, with love and sacrifice and to remain life-long partners in wedlock and friendship.
I was still lost in the significance of all that I had just promised you when I felt you placing the sindoor in my maang and clasping the mangalsutra round my neck. Someone placed kheer in my hands and smiling at you, with tears in my eyes, I raised the spoon to your lips and vowed to bind your heart with the thread of truth, sincerity and love, so my heart will be yours and your heart will be mine forever.
I wiped away my tears and smiled at your photo, thoughts of you are always just beneath the surface, it is so simple to get lost in you.
I head to the kitchen and place potatoes to boil. As they boil, I tidy up and clean the house. Memories of my stubborn youth come flooding back and I remember many conversations we had where I vehemently declared never to clean the house! I love cleaning your house; I love doing everything for you. I’m more than your wife; I’m your other half, your life.
Feeling rather sweaty now, I ignore the beep of my computer and rush for another bath instead. It’s almost 11, you’ll be home soon, other than you, and everything else can wait! Dressing in a prettier sari now that the housework is done, I place a flower in my hair and set about preparing the rest of the meal and setting the table, with everything done and the food heating, I sit down to answer my emails. I hear the click of the door and hear you come in; I rush to the hall and kiss you.
“I missed you, I know it’s only 4.5 hours, but I still missed you!”
You laugh and kiss me back, unbuttoning your shirt as you settle at the table, smiling at you, I feel the same excitement in me as I have, every single time I have seen you, right from the beginning.
Putting rice and some dishes on a thali, I again feed you, and just as you reach for the plate, I laugh and eat too, alternating mouthfuls between you and me. This is what I have always longed for, a life of laughter and fun, hugs and kisses, being utterly comfortable with someone – you.
As you finish your last mouthful, I rinse my hands and bring you sweetened lemon juice to freshen your mouth. As we move to the sofa, arm in arm, we discuss our respective days so far. I’m so thankful that you were the one to get me involved in my own writing and never once deride me for not having a ‘proper’ day job. I’m so grateful that you empathise with the work I do as well as the other little chores that you never fail to appreciate.
“Babul, jo tumne sikhaya, jo tumse payaa, Sajan ghar le chali. Sajan ghar mai chali… Kaise bhool paaungi mai Baba, sune jo tumse kahaaniya, chor chali aangan me maiya, bachpan ki nishaaniya. Ban gaya pardes, ghar janam ka, mili hai dunia, mujhe nayee. Naam jo piya se maine jora, naye rishton se bandh gayee. Mere Sasur Ji Pitah hain, Pati devta hai, Devar chavi Krishna ki.”
Finishing the dedication of my new book, I thank God that my life turned out the way it did. Things were never easy, nor will the road ahead be lined with roses; but the knowledge that being with you does not hurt anyone and I am doing exactly what my parents always wanted me to do, is sufficient to carry me through any hardship life may bring.
Sitting at my laptop, as I send the dedication to my editor, I stop a minute and look at our wedding photo on my desktop; the thought that possibly, you too are looking at the same photo fills my soul with warmth.
I remember my Bidai, it’s been almost 2 years with you, yet, I can remember so clearly, every moment of our wedding. Both sets of parents had ultimately deigned to attend, and your mother had even bought me a Bidai sari. It was the fact that the sari was pink that made me sure that life was going to be good with you. It was the final sign I needed. Bidai was definitely the saddest moment for my family and me too. We were all aware that as I walked away, I was walking into a new life leaving my family and relations behind, to join yours and adopt your family as my own. I left with tears of joy and sadness but knowing that I carried only the very best wishes from all who were there made me sure that the future would only bring us all joy!
I was so quiet in the car; the ceremony had meant so much to me, as I know it did to you. We had come so far together; the future seemed endless and beautiful. I clutched your hand as I thought about all the vows we had made.
My Papa doing the kanyadaan was to me, the most touching part of the ceremony. As he washed your feet, and ritually bestowed the worldly goods of Vishnu on you, I knew that in his heart he was praying with everything he had in him that I had made the right choice. To both my parents, the Kanyadaan was very emotional whereby both of them gave the responsibility of their daughter to you; this signified not only their blessing of this union but also their approval. I was so glad I was not there to witness that, my tears would not have stopped, as it is, looking at your damp eyes in the mandap made me sure that you too loved my Papa as I did and appreciated his actions.
During the Hasta Mallap, the priest was chanting away, but all I noticed was the strength of your hand as mine was placed on yours. I could honestly feel the union of our hearts forever as we held hands in that moment. As we promised with God and all guests as witnesses, to remain devoted to each other and to treat each other with love, respect, sympathy and compassion, I couldn’t help but tear.
The priest then looped white raw cotton round twenty four times, and put it around our shoulders. Symbolising the different characteristics and virtues of human life, these threads of cotton bound us together forever from now on. They were a vow to each other, to fulfil each of our roles fully and honestly.
After the Agni Poojan, as we stepped on the stone together, we looked at each other, and I knew that we would always look and walk in the same direction, with the same goals.
Although we had been ‘dating’ for so long, and everyone saw us as nearly married, ourselves included, we both knew that these rituals were needed to bind us ever closer, in the eyes of the world, as well as God. The Mangal Fere would symbolically solidify our marriage and make us husband and wife. The four rounds represented Dharma and a life of righteousness, Artha and a life of prosperity, Kama and a happy family and Moksha, a life dedicated to God. As the cloth that was tied to my pallu was put over your shoulder, I knew you would always take care of me. As Vikram filled our hands with rice and grains, denoting a bounty of wealth, good health, prosperity and happiness, I could sense that even my little brother wa praying that we would have all that and more in our life. Together, we offered these to the Agni and seeked blessings.
You smiled at me and slowly led me around the Agni three times, as we both vowed to follow each other anywhere – in happiness or in times of hardship and shall always serve you. On the final round it was my turn to lead you, signifying that in old age, when it is time to depart, all I wanted from God to take me before he touched you.
Following that, we took the Saptapadi. Christian vows always sound so touching, but it was not till our wedding day that I truly realised how much sweeter our vows were. We looked at each other (shameless me, I should have been looking down), as we took a step with each vow. Vowing to live with honour and respect and to provide our household with nourishment; to be happy and enjoy life, to develop mental, spiritual and physical peace and progress; to share joys and pains together and to increase wealth and prosperity for righteous use; to remember our parents and elders, to acquire knowledge, happiness and harmony through mutual love, trust and respect; to observe acts of charity and be blessed with healthy, strong and courageous children; to develop self-restraint and be true partners, with love and sacrifice and to remain life-long partners in wedlock and friendship.
I was still lost in the significance of all that I had just promised you when I felt you placing the sindoor in my maang and clasping the mangalsutra round my neck. Someone placed kheer in my hands and smiling at you, with tears in my eyes, I raised the spoon to your lips and vowed to bind your heart with the thread of truth, sincerity and love, so my heart will be yours and your heart will be mine forever.
I wiped away my tears and smiled at your photo, thoughts of you are always just beneath the surface, it is so simple to get lost in you.
chapter 1
You’ll be asleep, but I open my eyes and slide out of your embrace, feeling
you turn over; I kiss your forehead gently and sit up in bed. I graze my hand over your feet and touch it to my heart and head. I’ve been blessed.
I step into the bathroom and look at my reflection, maybe my skin is not as taut and there are fine lines at the edge of my eyes. Yet, my eyes capture my heart, I see you in them. I see a complexion that glows despite the early hour, I see a woman who is content. There is no beauty that can surpass that. The beauty that comes from loving you. I run my fingers through my hair and see the first white strand, I laugh to myself, thinking of the jokes you can finally make, the same ones I have been teasing you with the last 3 years.
I step under the shower and the thought that you’re in the next room infuses me with happiness. I inhale the scent of vanilla shower cream and I can imagine your fingers on me. It’s gone beyond minutes, hours, days, weeks and months. Its gone into years, and its still you, only you, always you. After years, I still think of you every moment, every beat of my heart, I dedicate to you.
I step back into the room to dress and as I pleat my sari I see you looking at me, I giggle and fling my blouse at you, “stop peeping”! You grin sleepily at me and doze off… I can’t help remembering the first time we went out with me in a sari, for a Hindi movie, of all things! As I brush my hair I can smell your cologne in the room, a fragrance I’ve always loved. I tuck the end of my sari tightly into the gathers around my hip and again, your thought pops into my mind, as I see you looking at me, in my minds’ eye. I see you admiring my waist… kissing my navel and waiting for the day when you kiss my navel and kiss two people.
I switch on dim lights and open curtains as I walk to the kitchen to prepare the prayer items. As I go around the cosy little room we designed, I recite the ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ along with prayers for your well-being. Finally, covering my head I walk into the prayer room and settle down for an hour’s peace. ‘Tis no one but you who occupies my mind and prayers. Since I got to know you I have dedicated prayers to you and for you. Getting to spend my life with you is not a prayer come true, it’s a dream so huge, that I never dared dream it!
As I hear the clock strike a quarter past 7, I wrap up my thanksgiving and raise the offerings to my head. Wandering back to my cosy peach-coloured kitchen, I put the tea to boil and wonder if you have discovered that I serve you tea not made in water but in milk. Pouring the tea into a pretty cup, I inhale the sweet scent and remind myself to brush my hair again. I place the tea next to you and gently awaken you while smoothing back my hair.
“Good morning Ji… Chai aa gaya”;
I smile as you stretch and place your head on my lap. Stroking your hair, I coax you out of bed and hug you from the back as you sip your tea. As you head to the shower, I set about laying out your (pre-ironed) clothes. Heading back to my favourite nook – the kitchen, I get your breakfast done, Indian style. Aloo parathas and chutney, with dahi if you’re in the mood, of course, your steaming hot milk is already waiting. As you come into the kitchen in search of me, I button your shirt for you and push you into the chair, popping a sweetmeat I had offered earlier in my prayers, into your mouth. Planting your milk in front of you, I ask if you’ve finished the tea. Breaking off some of the paratha, I place it in your mouth. This sweet habit was borne out of necessity, as neither of us liked you going to work with masala-scented hands or a stained shirt. Halfway through the meal you begin protesting, so resorting to old tricks, I cajole you into a mouthful for mother, father, sister, brother and finally, laughingly, for myself.
As you stand to wash up, I wait next to you with a towel in my hands. Walking with you to the door, I pick up my prayer tray and place a vermilion spot on your forehead, I wait as you fill the parting of my hair with the fragrant vermilion and kiss my cheek as you leave for the day.
I bend to touch your feet once more and knot your laces. I wave at your departing back once more, then, smiling to myself, I close the door and lean back against it, just thinking of you and still feeling your presence in the little house. Shaking my head, I begin to clear up in the kitchen and place the dry dishes back in the cupboards. Hearing my laptop beep, I head to my study, fully prepared to battle with my editor. God bless you for sending my work to a publisher! Although every cut my editor makes hurts me, I’m so grateful that I can work from home and be around for you all day.
you turn over; I kiss your forehead gently and sit up in bed. I graze my hand over your feet and touch it to my heart and head. I’ve been blessed.
I step into the bathroom and look at my reflection, maybe my skin is not as taut and there are fine lines at the edge of my eyes. Yet, my eyes capture my heart, I see you in them. I see a complexion that glows despite the early hour, I see a woman who is content. There is no beauty that can surpass that. The beauty that comes from loving you. I run my fingers through my hair and see the first white strand, I laugh to myself, thinking of the jokes you can finally make, the same ones I have been teasing you with the last 3 years.
I step under the shower and the thought that you’re in the next room infuses me with happiness. I inhale the scent of vanilla shower cream and I can imagine your fingers on me. It’s gone beyond minutes, hours, days, weeks and months. Its gone into years, and its still you, only you, always you. After years, I still think of you every moment, every beat of my heart, I dedicate to you.
I step back into the room to dress and as I pleat my sari I see you looking at me, I giggle and fling my blouse at you, “stop peeping”! You grin sleepily at me and doze off… I can’t help remembering the first time we went out with me in a sari, for a Hindi movie, of all things! As I brush my hair I can smell your cologne in the room, a fragrance I’ve always loved. I tuck the end of my sari tightly into the gathers around my hip and again, your thought pops into my mind, as I see you looking at me, in my minds’ eye. I see you admiring my waist… kissing my navel and waiting for the day when you kiss my navel and kiss two people.
I switch on dim lights and open curtains as I walk to the kitchen to prepare the prayer items. As I go around the cosy little room we designed, I recite the ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ along with prayers for your well-being. Finally, covering my head I walk into the prayer room and settle down for an hour’s peace. ‘Tis no one but you who occupies my mind and prayers. Since I got to know you I have dedicated prayers to you and for you. Getting to spend my life with you is not a prayer come true, it’s a dream so huge, that I never dared dream it!
As I hear the clock strike a quarter past 7, I wrap up my thanksgiving and raise the offerings to my head. Wandering back to my cosy peach-coloured kitchen, I put the tea to boil and wonder if you have discovered that I serve you tea not made in water but in milk. Pouring the tea into a pretty cup, I inhale the sweet scent and remind myself to brush my hair again. I place the tea next to you and gently awaken you while smoothing back my hair.
“Good morning Ji… Chai aa gaya”;
I smile as you stretch and place your head on my lap. Stroking your hair, I coax you out of bed and hug you from the back as you sip your tea. As you head to the shower, I set about laying out your (pre-ironed) clothes. Heading back to my favourite nook – the kitchen, I get your breakfast done, Indian style. Aloo parathas and chutney, with dahi if you’re in the mood, of course, your steaming hot milk is already waiting. As you come into the kitchen in search of me, I button your shirt for you and push you into the chair, popping a sweetmeat I had offered earlier in my prayers, into your mouth. Planting your milk in front of you, I ask if you’ve finished the tea. Breaking off some of the paratha, I place it in your mouth. This sweet habit was borne out of necessity, as neither of us liked you going to work with masala-scented hands or a stained shirt. Halfway through the meal you begin protesting, so resorting to old tricks, I cajole you into a mouthful for mother, father, sister, brother and finally, laughingly, for myself.
As you stand to wash up, I wait next to you with a towel in my hands. Walking with you to the door, I pick up my prayer tray and place a vermilion spot on your forehead, I wait as you fill the parting of my hair with the fragrant vermilion and kiss my cheek as you leave for the day.
I bend to touch your feet once more and knot your laces. I wave at your departing back once more, then, smiling to myself, I close the door and lean back against it, just thinking of you and still feeling your presence in the little house. Shaking my head, I begin to clear up in the kitchen and place the dry dishes back in the cupboards. Hearing my laptop beep, I head to my study, fully prepared to battle with my editor. God bless you for sending my work to a publisher! Although every cut my editor makes hurts me, I’m so grateful that I can work from home and be around for you all day.
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Article on IIT
An article from www.indiatimes.com: It's just so sad that not just in IIT and india, but all over the world, parents tend to judge their children by what they can achieve... 'my good for nothing son' and 'my intelligent daughter' kinda thing...
children should be loved simply cuz of who they are, not what they are!
Not just children, but everyone, we cant walk around with our school crests tatooed on our heads right!? this mindset of getting into the best schools at the expense of all else is little more than a reflection of the failure of education.
now, if only we could really educate people, but that sort of education comes from life, not schools and books.
----------------
MUMBAI: In one of Mumbai's old gloomy buildings, grim parents are walking through a dark corridor with the somewhat melancholic resolve of converting their children into engineering graduates, if not engineers.
Over three dozen of them are squeezed into a 150 sq ft classroom along with other adolescents - boys who have just grown taller than their fathers and studious girls who do not yet have the domestic right to shape their own eyebrows; potentially talented singers, writers and athletes, all consumed by the great native obsession to enter the Indian Institute of Technology. It's an annual ritual. It's an orientation programme for parents and 10th standard students before they sign up for a strenuous two-year preparatory programme for IIT's feared Joint Entrance Exam. Panthers can just walk into the IIT campus in Mumbai, but human adolescents must take one of the toughest exams in the world for entry. Only one in 60 will make it. The ratio is only a bit kinder for other top engineering tests. Last year, over 250,000 students took the All-India Engineering Entrance Examinations for the 7,500 merit seats in second rung colleges.
The fate of India's young today is so inextricably tied to tough entrance exams that a section of this country's youth is lost to a long stoic preparation. Even eighth standard students have begun a long arduous road towards IIT, full four years away. An average 12th standard student today takes at least three entrance tests.
A graduate hoping to escape poverty through a management degree takes even more. Then there is medicine, and of course, the avarice of dentistry. Over 170,000 students took CBSE's Pre-Medical and Pre-Dental Exams last year, of whom about 1,600 will be chosen by top colleges. Nearly 7,000 12th standard students take an annual aptitude test for the 80 seats in the premier National Law School in Bangalore. The entrance exams of even second rung law schools eliminate over 90 candidates for every three who are admitted. It's worse in top management exams like the Common Admission Test (CAT).
Though the glamour of working for the government has faded for urban students over the years, the number of candidates who take the civil services exam every year has only increased, while the vacancies have decreased. Last year, nearly 200,000 appeared for 385 vacancies in the Indian Administrative Service, Indian Foreign Service, Indian Police Service and other benevolent names that the bureaucracy wears.
Even modest clerical jobs in the Reserve Bank of India see 3-4 lakh candidates battling for 200 posts. The RBI officers' exam attracts 60,000-70,000 graduates. Usually, less than 60 make it. Indian Railways too is forced to wield such unkind ratios to contain the flood of hopefuls.
If you want to make God laugh, old Western mothers often say bitterly, tell him about your plans. But in this country that pretends to be fatalistic when convenient, preparing for the future is a massive organised industry.
Coaching for IIT's JEE alone, "might be a Rs 2,000-3,000 crore industry if you include small one-man tutorials," according to Shiva Kumar, a key person in Career Launcher, a popular entrance exam coaching chain. Hopeful parents are the drivers. Enticed by IIT's power to cure Indian destinies, impoverished parents in semi-urban and rural areas are taking drastic steps to pay expensive tutorials. "They sell their jewels, sell their lands, take money on high interest, take extreme measures," says TC Badan, marketing manager of Brilliant Tutorials. Three years ago, a poor farmer from Muzaffarnagar district sold his land to enroll his son in a JEE coaching class in Delhi. Encouraged by nothing else but the sheer act of sending his son to a coaching class, the man began to tell everybody back home that his son would sail through. The boy didn't. But the grief-stricken son lied to his father that he had passed. When the father finally found out that his son was working as a salesman to discreetly fund a second shot at the JEE, the boy attempted suicide by jumping in front of a train. Even in the cities, the pressures that parents exert on their children is not exactly subtle. "My parents are more nervous than me," says Pranav Baxi who will sit for the JEE in a few weeks. Sixteen-year old Shashwat Purushottam has not distracted himself with anything in the past two years but prepared for the JEE "four to six hours a day apart from studying for the board exams. I don't think I have missed out on anything. Nothing is more important than IIT."
Most students who are preparing for JEE believe that the training has changed them forever. "I feel I can do anything now," Purushottam says.
Prasad Rao, project head of IMS Learning Resources, believes that eight months of "diligent" training two hours every day is enough for those taking one of the toughest management tests in the world, CAT. "But the insecurity of students has forced coaching institutes to offer 18-month courses. That's the level of desperation." Back at that gloomy orientation in Mumbai, the newbies reflect that desperation as they wait silently for Arun Roy of Arun Roy classes. Middleclass parents sit clutching a yellow course brochure that lays out the importance of quality training worth Rs 38, 000 for two years, surveying each other as though they are all rivals.A portly man looks at a red paperback that this correspondent is holding. The man is worried because he was given only a yellow brochure, no red book. "Can I have a look?" he asks nervously, worried that some important material that will ensure the security of his gelled 15-year-old son has been denied to him. He looks carefully at Marquez's Love In The Time Of Cholera. He asks, "Is it a guide?" "It's a love story." The man falls back to the peace of waiting for Mr. Roy. Arun Roy, evidently wise, walks in like an affable teacher and asks everybody, "What is inertia?" The gelled boy next to his portly father raises his hand and is in the middle of a wrong answer. "Shut up," Roy says. "But don't be afraid to answer next time. At the most I will humiliate you. Your parents pay me for that."
Some tutorials in Chennai and Hyderabad begin at four in the morning. Several entrance exam tutorials, like educationalist Chukka Ramaiah's famous coaching centre in Hyderabad, conduct their own entrance exams to filter out aspirants. One out of 10 who want to join Ramaiah makes it. One out of three who are interested in Arun Roy Coaching classes is accepted.
Some of those who are lost to engineering and management entrance exams, eventually return to the Arts that they originally loved in their later careers. They become singers, writers, economists and other things, greatly favoured by a hilarious rumour that they must all be intelligent. Strangely, they could crack the toughest exams in the world but could not answer in time their primary school teacher's first enduring question, "Children, what do you want to become in life?"
children should be loved simply cuz of who they are, not what they are!
Not just children, but everyone, we cant walk around with our school crests tatooed on our heads right!? this mindset of getting into the best schools at the expense of all else is little more than a reflection of the failure of education.
now, if only we could really educate people, but that sort of education comes from life, not schools and books.
----------------
MUMBAI: In one of Mumbai's old gloomy buildings, grim parents are walking through a dark corridor with the somewhat melancholic resolve of converting their children into engineering graduates, if not engineers.
Over three dozen of them are squeezed into a 150 sq ft classroom along with other adolescents - boys who have just grown taller than their fathers and studious girls who do not yet have the domestic right to shape their own eyebrows; potentially talented singers, writers and athletes, all consumed by the great native obsession to enter the Indian Institute of Technology. It's an annual ritual. It's an orientation programme for parents and 10th standard students before they sign up for a strenuous two-year preparatory programme for IIT's feared Joint Entrance Exam. Panthers can just walk into the IIT campus in Mumbai, but human adolescents must take one of the toughest exams in the world for entry. Only one in 60 will make it. The ratio is only a bit kinder for other top engineering tests. Last year, over 250,000 students took the All-India Engineering Entrance Examinations for the 7,500 merit seats in second rung colleges.
The fate of India's young today is so inextricably tied to tough entrance exams that a section of this country's youth is lost to a long stoic preparation. Even eighth standard students have begun a long arduous road towards IIT, full four years away. An average 12th standard student today takes at least three entrance tests.
A graduate hoping to escape poverty through a management degree takes even more. Then there is medicine, and of course, the avarice of dentistry. Over 170,000 students took CBSE's Pre-Medical and Pre-Dental Exams last year, of whom about 1,600 will be chosen by top colleges. Nearly 7,000 12th standard students take an annual aptitude test for the 80 seats in the premier National Law School in Bangalore. The entrance exams of even second rung law schools eliminate over 90 candidates for every three who are admitted. It's worse in top management exams like the Common Admission Test (CAT).
Though the glamour of working for the government has faded for urban students over the years, the number of candidates who take the civil services exam every year has only increased, while the vacancies have decreased. Last year, nearly 200,000 appeared for 385 vacancies in the Indian Administrative Service, Indian Foreign Service, Indian Police Service and other benevolent names that the bureaucracy wears.
Even modest clerical jobs in the Reserve Bank of India see 3-4 lakh candidates battling for 200 posts. The RBI officers' exam attracts 60,000-70,000 graduates. Usually, less than 60 make it. Indian Railways too is forced to wield such unkind ratios to contain the flood of hopefuls.
If you want to make God laugh, old Western mothers often say bitterly, tell him about your plans. But in this country that pretends to be fatalistic when convenient, preparing for the future is a massive organised industry.
Coaching for IIT's JEE alone, "might be a Rs 2,000-3,000 crore industry if you include small one-man tutorials," according to Shiva Kumar, a key person in Career Launcher, a popular entrance exam coaching chain. Hopeful parents are the drivers. Enticed by IIT's power to cure Indian destinies, impoverished parents in semi-urban and rural areas are taking drastic steps to pay expensive tutorials. "They sell their jewels, sell their lands, take money on high interest, take extreme measures," says TC Badan, marketing manager of Brilliant Tutorials. Three years ago, a poor farmer from Muzaffarnagar district sold his land to enroll his son in a JEE coaching class in Delhi. Encouraged by nothing else but the sheer act of sending his son to a coaching class, the man began to tell everybody back home that his son would sail through. The boy didn't. But the grief-stricken son lied to his father that he had passed. When the father finally found out that his son was working as a salesman to discreetly fund a second shot at the JEE, the boy attempted suicide by jumping in front of a train. Even in the cities, the pressures that parents exert on their children is not exactly subtle. "My parents are more nervous than me," says Pranav Baxi who will sit for the JEE in a few weeks. Sixteen-year old Shashwat Purushottam has not distracted himself with anything in the past two years but prepared for the JEE "four to six hours a day apart from studying for the board exams. I don't think I have missed out on anything. Nothing is more important than IIT."
Most students who are preparing for JEE believe that the training has changed them forever. "I feel I can do anything now," Purushottam says.
Prasad Rao, project head of IMS Learning Resources, believes that eight months of "diligent" training two hours every day is enough for those taking one of the toughest management tests in the world, CAT. "But the insecurity of students has forced coaching institutes to offer 18-month courses. That's the level of desperation." Back at that gloomy orientation in Mumbai, the newbies reflect that desperation as they wait silently for Arun Roy of Arun Roy classes. Middleclass parents sit clutching a yellow course brochure that lays out the importance of quality training worth Rs 38, 000 for two years, surveying each other as though they are all rivals.A portly man looks at a red paperback that this correspondent is holding. The man is worried because he was given only a yellow brochure, no red book. "Can I have a look?" he asks nervously, worried that some important material that will ensure the security of his gelled 15-year-old son has been denied to him. He looks carefully at Marquez's Love In The Time Of Cholera. He asks, "Is it a guide?" "It's a love story." The man falls back to the peace of waiting for Mr. Roy. Arun Roy, evidently wise, walks in like an affable teacher and asks everybody, "What is inertia?" The gelled boy next to his portly father raises his hand and is in the middle of a wrong answer. "Shut up," Roy says. "But don't be afraid to answer next time. At the most I will humiliate you. Your parents pay me for that."
Some tutorials in Chennai and Hyderabad begin at four in the morning. Several entrance exam tutorials, like educationalist Chukka Ramaiah's famous coaching centre in Hyderabad, conduct their own entrance exams to filter out aspirants. One out of 10 who want to join Ramaiah makes it. One out of three who are interested in Arun Roy Coaching classes is accepted.
Some of those who are lost to engineering and management entrance exams, eventually return to the Arts that they originally loved in their later careers. They become singers, writers, economists and other things, greatly favoured by a hilarious rumour that they must all be intelligent. Strangely, they could crack the toughest exams in the world but could not answer in time their primary school teacher's first enduring question, "Children, what do you want to become in life?"
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Marital rape!
In no way does marriage give one individual the right to control or force another into doing something against their will. Why then does the penal code of our civilised society protect Singaporean men who force their wives into sexual intercourse? How is it that our society does not punish marital RAPE?
A man who kills his wife gets charged with murder; a man who steals from his wife also gets charged, with theft. Yet a man who outrages his wife’s modesty goes free. It brings to mind the question of what the priorities of our society are, apparently money matters more than dignity and modesty because money is protected under the law.
The White Ribbon campaign run by AWARE is admirable and they have numerous forms of advertisements to spread the facts of this ‘loophole’ in our legal code, but something needs to be done by our government, as soon as possible.
In a well developed, almost first world nation, essentials such as marital rape ought definitely be crimes by law. Basic human rights including modesty and freedom of choice (on whether and when to have sex) do not get eliminated upon marriage.
Before the debate over oral sex and homosexuality can continue, our society needs to look at this pertinent issue before too many women suffer. Women need to know that it is a crime, as do men. Sex, whenever HE wants it is not a prerogative of marriage, and we wonder why educated women choose to remain single!
A man who kills his wife gets charged with murder; a man who steals from his wife also gets charged, with theft. Yet a man who outrages his wife’s modesty goes free. It brings to mind the question of what the priorities of our society are, apparently money matters more than dignity and modesty because money is protected under the law.
The White Ribbon campaign run by AWARE is admirable and they have numerous forms of advertisements to spread the facts of this ‘loophole’ in our legal code, but something needs to be done by our government, as soon as possible.
In a well developed, almost first world nation, essentials such as marital rape ought definitely be crimes by law. Basic human rights including modesty and freedom of choice (on whether and when to have sex) do not get eliminated upon marriage.
Before the debate over oral sex and homosexuality can continue, our society needs to look at this pertinent issue before too many women suffer. Women need to know that it is a crime, as do men. Sex, whenever HE wants it is not a prerogative of marriage, and we wonder why educated women choose to remain single!
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
all about the power
U cannot hurt me
I won’t grant u that
Power.
I am in control
I am master of
Myself.
I won’t grant u that
Power.
I am in control
I am master of
Myself.
denials
Denials make hollow facts
We deny the truth
Afraid of reality
Children fear the dark,
But adults fear light.
Leave me by candlelight
So I can at least delude
Myself.
We deny the truth
Afraid of reality
Children fear the dark,
But adults fear light.
Leave me by candlelight
So I can at least delude
Myself.
i did it
I stopped crying
U thought I was happy
I had reached beyond the bottom
Was 5.5 feet under.
I wanted to keep you
But when u left
I realised that
I needed u not
I rose up and out
On my own.
U thought I was happy
I had reached beyond the bottom
Was 5.5 feet under.
I wanted to keep you
But when u left
I realised that
I needed u not
I rose up and out
On my own.
~reality is a bracket~
One day,
My prince will come.
(prince of hades
feeling sympathetic that day)
Sweep me away,
On a pink palomino.
(horses are never pink
and cannot sweep)
take me to a rose garden
build me an arbour.
(im allergic to pollen
and arbours let in rain)
we’ll have a lil
prince and princess.
(monsters more like
yelling all day)
I’ll maintain my figure
And wear icy-pink ball-dresses.
(hairnets and bathrobes,
with morning coffee stains)
I’ll be gracious and cordial
A married Diana.
(snapping all day long
a true-blue fishwife)
My prince will come.
(prince of hades
feeling sympathetic that day)
Sweep me away,
On a pink palomino.
(horses are never pink
and cannot sweep)
take me to a rose garden
build me an arbour.
(im allergic to pollen
and arbours let in rain)
we’ll have a lil
prince and princess.
(monsters more like
yelling all day)
I’ll maintain my figure
And wear icy-pink ball-dresses.
(hairnets and bathrobes,
with morning coffee stains)
I’ll be gracious and cordial
A married Diana.
(snapping all day long
a true-blue fishwife)
if i loved a married man
Everywhere I turn,
I see her face.
You’re my husband,
But she’s your wife.
Can you ever be mine?
I daily wonder.
Will I ever,
Carry your name?
What am I really?
The love of your life?
Or
Your hidden shame?
Babies, a home,
Cooking dinner,
Doing laundry and ironing,
These are pleasures destined not for me.
Daily arguments over kids’ school,
Their undone homework,
Her indecent dressing,
His soccer practice.
Why Why Why?
Why does she get these privileges,
I’m the one who loves you,
‘tis indeed an unjust world.
Every thought of mine,
Revolves around you,
My every breath is yours,
But you are Hers.
I see her face.
You’re my husband,
But she’s your wife.
Can you ever be mine?
I daily wonder.
Will I ever,
Carry your name?
What am I really?
The love of your life?
Or
Your hidden shame?
Babies, a home,
Cooking dinner,
Doing laundry and ironing,
These are pleasures destined not for me.
Daily arguments over kids’ school,
Their undone homework,
Her indecent dressing,
His soccer practice.
Why Why Why?
Why does she get these privileges,
I’m the one who loves you,
‘tis indeed an unjust world.
Every thought of mine,
Revolves around you,
My every breath is yours,
But you are Hers.
Friday, October 29, 2004
capitalism
I've seen the best minds of my generation destroyed by capitalism,
no longer starving, hysterical, naked,
but portly, Prozac fed, Armani clad,
dragging themselves through neon shopping malls at dawn looking for a
cashflow fix,
angelheaded hype-stars burning for a brand name connection - Victoria's
Secret, maybe, or Starbucks - to open up another outlet, to milk the
sacred cow of commerce and make things predictable, tedious, subject to
a national marketing strategy;
WHO once in poverty and tatters, hollow-eyed and high, sat up smoking in
the supernatural darkness...
WHO were expelled from the academies for craziness & publishing obscene
odes on the windows of the skull, and
WHO are now engaged in the most mammoth dumbing down of culture the
world has ever seen,
WHO wringing their hands in car retrieval lobbies of Intercontinentals,
after six hour feasts, impatient for the stretch Rolls, sing madrigals
to global consumerism, sternly reminding me of Soviet horrors, Tianamen
Square, famines, secret police ...
and anyway, the entire population of China deserves to be shod in Nike,
with their distinctive polyurethane airbag cushions,
containing sulphur hexafluoride,
the world's most lethal greenhouse gas,
with a global warming hit 22,000 times greater than
carbon dioxide,
and which hangs in the atmosphere for 500 years;
yes, produced by girls in Indonesia for five bucks,
strikes outlawed, overtime compulsory, 20 cents an hour,
Nike's inflate on-the-shelf to $200.
Asked about onerous conditions,
the area manager shrugs:
"I don't know that I need to know".
Bliss.
Shimmering on Fortune's list of fabulous
rates of return to investors, (46.9%),
Nike is a Shareholder Superstar,
to the best minds of my generation,
not a Sweatshop Slavelord.
These are the minds
WHO manipulate, degrade and exploit the ass end of pop culture in all
its forms, using tabloid sadism, salivating weeklies, splatter-trash
cinema ("it's art! it's art!"), footie fetishism, and gluttony elevated
to haute cuisine,
WHO justify intellectual slumming, star-fucking-then-crushing, fad
promotions, supergossip, with the
ineluctable logic of economic rationalism,
the most odious of opiates,
the cruellest of illusions,
WHO, knowing the decline of health & happiness outside their elite
zones, persist in formenting the great Dumbing Down (including their own
minds, once finegazing at starry nights with radiant cool eyes, poetry
on their lips and no thought of material excess), yes, subsidising the
hip vulgarity of media scams with ads, promos and "tie-ins" for
objects objects objects
of destruction,
either of self,
or the swirling backyard we 5.6 billion inhabit, and
WHO, by fostering commercial falsehoods,
shield us from the truth,
and each other,
either in small matters, like wrinkle banishing lotions or
big myths, like multi millionaires being good for the planet because
gold trickles down to the peasants in Brazil, ha!
(and to avoid too many cliches you'll notice I haven't mentioned
resource depletion);
WHO don't know that they need to know, these growth-rate trippers
hallucinating Sydney 2000 real estate,
WHO provoke the scandalised descendants of Victor Hugo to call for "a
halt to the pillage of Disney", after their ancestor's story was stolen
and his name excluded from posters plastering the planet, nor honoured
in the merchandised debauch of fluffy toys, CD's & video nasties;
WHO so excessively reward the chairman of Disney
that it would take a Mickey Mouse pyjama seamstress in Haiti
three lifetimes
to earn what Michael Eisner makes in a day,
WHO pride themselves on stretching the frontiers of youth marketing,
even beyond alco-pop, "the most important teen drinking trend in
decades", to the irresistable alchemy of ...
alco-milk;
WHO, because of soaring US profits of the female shaving industry,
Target Europe with a $20 million campaign to render women uncouth &
smelly unless they reach for a
plastic pink handled Lady Protector,
every day,
WHO once screamed out of windows in despair until rescued by throngs of
songsters dreaming gleaming impossible utopias, for the hell of it, for
the high of it, and now, looking back, plan to sanitize & bastardize it
as
a 1000 acre Woodstock Theme Park
of museums, train rides, theatres, and jelly vats writhing with
skinny-dipping hippie robots,
a Hard Rock cafe franchise and,
to promote Mega Virgin Global,
a sky-flying inflatable Jimi Hendrix;
(Why not?
Che Guevara is already a Swatch watch);
as the likelihood of real political change recedes,
we are told,
people need symbols of resistance -
it makes them feel better;
WHO in everyday seeming unimportant ways
connive in their own dumbing down -
as did John Travolta, recently on David Letterman worldwide, (isn't
everything?) hugging, schmoozing, drivel-drooling, playing to the
brain dead gallery,
anything to stop futon spuds channel drifting,
never to say anything of import, or even for a moment
think aloud
in case it unleashes the wrath of an unseen ratings god
and crush a career,
(Maybe they're right.
It's why Dennis Potter called his cancer
Rupert),
WHO realise that outside their gilded enclaves are gridlocked
slumblocks,
cars cars cars,
exeeding 500 million this year
airports airports airports ,
annual release of carbon dioxide 23 bilion tonnes,
casinos multiplying, like youth suicides, tides of landless, jobless,
homeless, swarming citywards,
trees felled, salt rising, heat rising, cancer rising, coasts wrecked -
a strip of Bali three McDonalds already - everywhere mangroves uprooted
for hotels, dugongs gutted,
countless mammal species,
168 bird species judged critically endangered,
goodbye, goodbye,
who know in their hearts of this hellshock, yes, these best minds of my
generation, who control & mould the global brainbox and cannot bear to
recognise the most obvious connections between what they do
and don't do
and the destiny of this toxic orb.
In my dreams you walk dripping from a lost journey on the superhighway
in tears
to my clifftop door in the Western night.
no longer starving, hysterical, naked,
but portly, Prozac fed, Armani clad,
dragging themselves through neon shopping malls at dawn looking for a
cashflow fix,
angelheaded hype-stars burning for a brand name connection - Victoria's
Secret, maybe, or Starbucks - to open up another outlet, to milk the
sacred cow of commerce and make things predictable, tedious, subject to
a national marketing strategy;
WHO once in poverty and tatters, hollow-eyed and high, sat up smoking in
the supernatural darkness...
WHO were expelled from the academies for craziness & publishing obscene
odes on the windows of the skull, and
WHO are now engaged in the most mammoth dumbing down of culture the
world has ever seen,
WHO wringing their hands in car retrieval lobbies of Intercontinentals,
after six hour feasts, impatient for the stretch Rolls, sing madrigals
to global consumerism, sternly reminding me of Soviet horrors, Tianamen
Square, famines, secret police ...
and anyway, the entire population of China deserves to be shod in Nike,
with their distinctive polyurethane airbag cushions,
containing sulphur hexafluoride,
the world's most lethal greenhouse gas,
with a global warming hit 22,000 times greater than
carbon dioxide,
and which hangs in the atmosphere for 500 years;
yes, produced by girls in Indonesia for five bucks,
strikes outlawed, overtime compulsory, 20 cents an hour,
Nike's inflate on-the-shelf to $200.
Asked about onerous conditions,
the area manager shrugs:
"I don't know that I need to know".
Bliss.
Shimmering on Fortune's list of fabulous
rates of return to investors, (46.9%),
Nike is a Shareholder Superstar,
to the best minds of my generation,
not a Sweatshop Slavelord.
These are the minds
WHO manipulate, degrade and exploit the ass end of pop culture in all
its forms, using tabloid sadism, salivating weeklies, splatter-trash
cinema ("it's art! it's art!"), footie fetishism, and gluttony elevated
to haute cuisine,
WHO justify intellectual slumming, star-fucking-then-crushing, fad
promotions, supergossip, with the
ineluctable logic of economic rationalism,
the most odious of opiates,
the cruellest of illusions,
WHO, knowing the decline of health & happiness outside their elite
zones, persist in formenting the great Dumbing Down (including their own
minds, once finegazing at starry nights with radiant cool eyes, poetry
on their lips and no thought of material excess), yes, subsidising the
hip vulgarity of media scams with ads, promos and "tie-ins" for
objects objects objects
of destruction,
either of self,
or the swirling backyard we 5.6 billion inhabit, and
WHO, by fostering commercial falsehoods,
shield us from the truth,
and each other,
either in small matters, like wrinkle banishing lotions or
big myths, like multi millionaires being good for the planet because
gold trickles down to the peasants in Brazil, ha!
(and to avoid too many cliches you'll notice I haven't mentioned
resource depletion);
WHO don't know that they need to know, these growth-rate trippers
hallucinating Sydney 2000 real estate,
WHO provoke the scandalised descendants of Victor Hugo to call for "a
halt to the pillage of Disney", after their ancestor's story was stolen
and his name excluded from posters plastering the planet, nor honoured
in the merchandised debauch of fluffy toys, CD's & video nasties;
WHO so excessively reward the chairman of Disney
that it would take a Mickey Mouse pyjama seamstress in Haiti
three lifetimes
to earn what Michael Eisner makes in a day,
WHO pride themselves on stretching the frontiers of youth marketing,
even beyond alco-pop, "the most important teen drinking trend in
decades", to the irresistable alchemy of ...
alco-milk;
WHO, because of soaring US profits of the female shaving industry,
Target Europe with a $20 million campaign to render women uncouth &
smelly unless they reach for a
plastic pink handled Lady Protector,
every day,
WHO once screamed out of windows in despair until rescued by throngs of
songsters dreaming gleaming impossible utopias, for the hell of it, for
the high of it, and now, looking back, plan to sanitize & bastardize it
as
a 1000 acre Woodstock Theme Park
of museums, train rides, theatres, and jelly vats writhing with
skinny-dipping hippie robots,
a Hard Rock cafe franchise and,
to promote Mega Virgin Global,
a sky-flying inflatable Jimi Hendrix;
(Why not?
Che Guevara is already a Swatch watch);
as the likelihood of real political change recedes,
we are told,
people need symbols of resistance -
it makes them feel better;
WHO in everyday seeming unimportant ways
connive in their own dumbing down -
as did John Travolta, recently on David Letterman worldwide, (isn't
everything?) hugging, schmoozing, drivel-drooling, playing to the
brain dead gallery,
anything to stop futon spuds channel drifting,
never to say anything of import, or even for a moment
think aloud
in case it unleashes the wrath of an unseen ratings god
and crush a career,
(Maybe they're right.
It's why Dennis Potter called his cancer
Rupert),
WHO realise that outside their gilded enclaves are gridlocked
slumblocks,
cars cars cars,
exeeding 500 million this year
airports airports airports ,
annual release of carbon dioxide 23 bilion tonnes,
casinos multiplying, like youth suicides, tides of landless, jobless,
homeless, swarming citywards,
trees felled, salt rising, heat rising, cancer rising, coasts wrecked -
a strip of Bali three McDonalds already - everywhere mangroves uprooted
for hotels, dugongs gutted,
countless mammal species,
168 bird species judged critically endangered,
goodbye, goodbye,
who know in their hearts of this hellshock, yes, these best minds of my
generation, who control & mould the global brainbox and cannot bear to
recognise the most obvious connections between what they do
and don't do
and the destiny of this toxic orb.
In my dreams you walk dripping from a lost journey on the superhighway
in tears
to my clifftop door in the Western night.
Write an essay on 'the movement for Pakistan'. How would you evaluate Muhammad Ali Jinnah's leadership of that 'movement'?
Introduction and Stand:
The purpose of this essay is to evaluate and analyse the contributions of Mohamed Ali Jinnah to the creation of Pakistan as a sovereign state. It also aims to criticise his aims and ambitions in doing so. With the aim of depicting M.A. Jinnah as a man who led the movement for Pakistan with personal power as one of his motivating factors, this essay will prove the aforesaid hypothesis and yet go on to show that despite his own motivations, M.A. Jinnah led the movement in a highly admirable manner.
Jinnah's Beginning:
To begin at the beginning, the idea of a separate state for Muslims was not an idea that Jinnah liked or supported. Being a highly secular man, trained in British law and practicing constitutional, democratic politics, the idea of a separate state was not something he encouraged until his return to India after his self-imposed exile in Britain (1937). When the idea of a separate Muslim state was first conceptualised by the Islamic poet, Mohamed Iqbal and a nationalistic minded student in Britain told Jinnah of the plan, he slapped the student in outrage . He resented being typecast as a 'Muslim', according to his good friend, “He was very very British” . Being a member of both the Muslim League and Indian National Congress, he spent his early political career working to bring them together. It was due to Jinnah's leadership and liaison role that the 1915 session of the Muslim League coincided with that of Congress, and at that session, Jinnah played a significant role in negotiations, which resulted in the Lucknow pact of 1916. This pact was one of the first formal Hindu-Muslim agreements granting rights to Muslims, and it was the only time that the Muslim League and Congress came to a voluntary agreement about India. The Lucknow Pact granted Indian Muslims a separate electorate, and 'weightage' in legislative councils that had a Muslim minority. It had but a temporary effect on Hindu-Muslim relations as it represented only the agreement of a 'tiny political elite' of the two communities. There were many reasons that resulted in the most dramatic change in a man that history has ever seen; religious, personal and otherwise. The aim of the question is to 'evaluate' Jinnah's 'leadership' of the 'movement' for Pakistan, as such, before analysing his work, we must first analyse the situations before and after his 'policies' were put into action.
His 'Transformation':
The main reason for the increasing sense of nationalism among the Indian Muslims at that time was due to a growing fear of their increasing marginalisation, and not just in India.
It is often suspected that Jinnah's sudden change from secular constitutional leader to a pro-Islam figure had a lot to do with his disillusionment of the non-constitutional and increasingly Hindu-oriented policies practiced by his fellow congress leader and good friend Mohandas K. Gandhi. It was Gandhi's 'Civil Disobedience Campaign' that Jinnah was ill-at-ease with and he resigned soon after Gandhi gained control of the Congress party in 1920. There was in India at that time, a growing fear of the 'British Raj' being replaced by 'Ram Raj' . Jinnah was shrewd enough to realise that Hindu extremists could make life difficult for Muslims in India.
Increasing this fear was the marginalizing of minorities in Germany under Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime. Golwalkar's 'We Or Our Nationhood Defined' (1938), which argued that, if German Jews could be exterminated by Hitler, so could Indian Muslims by Hindus. Jinnah commented in relation to the increasingly tense situation of Indian Hindus and Muslims that, “Hitler's attempt at purity was a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by” . The sheer enormity of his linking the German genocide to India showed his growing concern, and that of the masses of Muslims in South Asia about the growing threat of Hindu extremism.
Another factor frequently attributed to the growing fear of being sidelined among the Muslims was the collapse of Ottoman Caliphate Empire. This was the loss of one of the biggest Islamic powers in the world. However, although Jinnah sympathized with his fellow Muslims, he was not convinced that Muslims should march out of British India and migrate to Muslim states like Afghanistan.
Another reason often attributed to Jinnah's sudden departure to England was the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms of 1919. These reforms posed a significant setback to Jinnah's career; education, public works and local self-governance were all transferred to the control of local ministers in a diarchal system. This was a good opportunity for politicians with strong local support which Jinnah lacked as he had always seen himself representing India in its entirety and lacked a landed or tribal powerbase. Although he tried to carry on in his previous role as a Hindu-Muslim negotiator, he was not on the best terms with Nehru and many of his proposal were often rejected , and his mediatory role was taken over by Mian Fazl-I-Husain who had a much stronger provincial base and thus greater authority in negotiating on the behalf of Muslims in India.
His return and alliances formed:
One of the biographers of M. A. Jinnah, Stanley Wolpert of UCLA said: "Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation-state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah did all three. Hailed as 'Great Leader' (Quaid-I-Azam) of Pakistan and its first governor-general, Jinnah virtually conjured that country into statehood by the force of his indomitable will. His place of primacy in Pakistan's history looms like a minaret over the achievements of all his contemporaries in the Muslim League." "We are a nation," Jinnah said, three years before Partition, "with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and tradition, aptitude and ambitions - in short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life." When in 1934 the Muslims of India elected Jinnah as their representative to the Central Legislative Assembly, in his absence, and the 1935 Government of India Act gave him an opportunity to regain his former influence, Jinnah returned to India and worked towards the creation of a separate state for Muslims by uniting the various disparate Muslim groups scattered throughout India
Jinnah knew exactly what he was doing throughout his leadership of the Pakistan movement. He was “an able, single-minded political tactician who took full advantage of the dramatic political changes which occurred after India's entry into the Second World War” . However, even before the advent of the Second World War, Jinnah made his alliances and manipulated them to benefit his cause. His alliance with Sikander Hayat Khan, after the 1937 elections where the Unionist Party won the majority of Muslim votes, was a recognition of the latter's power and the need for the support of rural landowners who controlled the majority of rural votes. In exchange for Khan's support in National politics, Jinnah allowed him control over the organisation of the Muslim League. By 1939, the Muslim League had greatly increased their influence; this was largely due to the blunders of Congress. After the 1937 elections, Congress had won the mandate to form ministries in 7 out of 11 provinces, which put many Muslims under Congress (largely Hindu) rule. This would have been an apt opportunity for Congress to establish itself as an all-India party and shed its 'Hindu' mantle, however, the reality was quite the opposite. Congress made no effort to empathize with or respect Muslim culture and religion . This boosted the Muslim League's rhectoric that it alone could safeguard Islamic interests in India. It was after this period that the demand for Pakistan intensified. Even the British agreed with this viewpoint, in 1939, Linlithgow dubbed Congress 'a Hindu organisation', implicitly accepting the right of the Muslim League to speak for all Indian Muslims.
It could be said that the outbreak of World War Two was a watershed in the movement for Pakistan. World War Two served to firstly accelerate British departure and also to put Muslim League and Congress on the same platform. The 1942 Crippes Mission, which was a British attempt to garner wartime support from India in exchange for self-government, conceded the theory of partition. “The British could not contemplate the transfer of their present responsibility for the peace and welfare of India to any system of government whose authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in India's national life.”
The Psychological Game:
Jinnah's creation of a 'modern Muslim persona' was the binding force that brought about the uniting of the Muslims in India. The main divisions among them at that time were a common dress, language, political organization, sect and territory. Jinnah brought together the various factions with his vociferous talk for a 'common land' - Pakistan. In this 'Muslim utopia', Urdu would be the common language; the Muslim League a central political organisation and Jinnah's own dress sense and lack of any particular sect the common practices. Just as Nehru and Gandhi used clothes to unite and bring together the majority of Hindus, Jinnah amalgamated the various forms of Islamic dress to form a common attire that would appeal to all sects of Muslim society. By dressing in an Islamic fashion, he managed to completely divide himself from his previous counterparts, Gandhi, Nehru and the largely Hindu Congress party. When he was once asked for his sect (Sunni or Shia), he responded by asking what was the prophet . This again brought about a sense of unity among the Muslims of India, divided among themselves on the basis of their Islamisation. Some were Hindu converts from the time of the Mughal empire, others were of Arab or Turkish descent. Jinnah's answer, radical as it might have been for that time, united all of them as Muslims.
Also, Jinnah made all Muslims feel an affinity with this new 'dream nation', which would have a place for all Muslims, and thus served to unite the people of the future Pakistan. Professor Ziauddin Ahmad, the biographer of “Quaid-e-Azam”, commented, "When he defined Muslim nationhood in such tangible terms, every Muslim found himself testifying to the justice of this claim, and subscribing to the logical corollary of the fact and recognition of separate Muslim nationhood, viz., the demand for a Muslim homeland."
There are many factors that go to show that Mohamed Ali Jinnah did ensure that the newly created nation of Pakistan would be a fair and just nation for all its citizens, regardless of sect or gender. In a social system where women were, more often than not, oppressed, Jinnah brought about woman's rights, human rights and minority rights.
Was it all for power?
His sincerity in ensuring the creation of a land for his followers could be seen in his repeated rejection of the offer to be the first Indian prime minister in exchange for giving up the idea of Pakistan and maintaining a united India. There is a common misconception that Jinnah wanted a separate state for Muslims, even if it was at the expense of many innocent lives. However, Jinnah did actually accept the Cabinet Mission plan for a united India with Muslim-majority areas to be under Muslim rule. The Cabinet Mission plan advocated a union of India comprising both British India and the Indian States, with a central government to deal with foreign affairs, defence and communications. The union would have an Executive and a Legislature. Each province would maintain power over all other areas. The provinces were also to be divided into three sections. Provinces could opt out of any group after the first general elections. Lastly, there would be an interim government having the support of the major political parties. It was only when Nehru rejected the plan as a 'stop-gap' , after Congress had first accepted it on 24th May 1946, that Jinnah, for the first time in his political career, turned to a non-constitutional move and called for a communal mobilisation among the Muslims, resulting in rapidly spreading horrific violence, starting in Calcutta, India seemed to be on the brink of a civil war . It was only when Viceroy Wavell invited the League to join Congress in forming the interim government that the violence decreased.
Conclusion:
Jinnah began his leadership of the Pakistan movement around the time he turned 40, the age Muslims believe is a turning point in life. The death of his wife ended his family commitments and his children were grown. Repeated appeals to return to India to guide the Muslims could have been a way for him to get back with God and Islam. Whatever his motivations, Jinnah was indeed a leader who despite his personal motives, served to unite the Islamic people of India and give them a land to call their own.
By analysing his motives however, we can see that he seemed to be motivated largely by both a quest for personal power and to a desire to carry out his politics in the diplomatic manner he saw fit as opposed to Gandhi's anti-British movements, and to perhaps prove the superiority of constitutional politics as opposed to anti-constitutional means.
His psychological method of using himself as an example in terms of dress, religion and politics to unite the Muslims was an extraordinary. His inclusion of minority and women's rights made him a politician with support on all sides and a very wide base to work with. He realised after the 1937 elections and the poor showing of the Muslim League that theories were good but grassroots participation was needed to establish power.
He was shrewd in his dealings with his opponents and made use of the unionists to garner support crucial for the Muslim league in 1936 and then moved to essentially put them down in 1944
Jinnah leadership of the moment was impeccable for the uniting of the disparate Muslim factions but it was lacking in that there was no 'successor' capable of replacing Jinnah's place after his death. Knowing that his death was close, Jinnah ought to have groomed a successor to prevent Pakistan from falling into the quagmire it did. However his quest for power could have stood in the way of that. The other factor that could have possibly influenced his decision not to 'share' his power and leadership could have been that at that stage, Pakistan needed one strong leader and power could not have been shared. As such, as Lord Mouthbatten called Jinnah, a “psychopathic case ” or otherwise, Mohamed Ali Jinnah used the Pakistan demand to hoist himself to power and succeeded remarkably at the same time managing to create a nation-state which was, for a short time, the dream of many an Indian Muslim.
The purpose of this essay is to evaluate and analyse the contributions of Mohamed Ali Jinnah to the creation of Pakistan as a sovereign state. It also aims to criticise his aims and ambitions in doing so. With the aim of depicting M.A. Jinnah as a man who led the movement for Pakistan with personal power as one of his motivating factors, this essay will prove the aforesaid hypothesis and yet go on to show that despite his own motivations, M.A. Jinnah led the movement in a highly admirable manner.
Jinnah's Beginning:
To begin at the beginning, the idea of a separate state for Muslims was not an idea that Jinnah liked or supported. Being a highly secular man, trained in British law and practicing constitutional, democratic politics, the idea of a separate state was not something he encouraged until his return to India after his self-imposed exile in Britain (1937). When the idea of a separate Muslim state was first conceptualised by the Islamic poet, Mohamed Iqbal and a nationalistic minded student in Britain told Jinnah of the plan, he slapped the student in outrage . He resented being typecast as a 'Muslim', according to his good friend, “He was very very British” . Being a member of both the Muslim League and Indian National Congress, he spent his early political career working to bring them together. It was due to Jinnah's leadership and liaison role that the 1915 session of the Muslim League coincided with that of Congress, and at that session, Jinnah played a significant role in negotiations, which resulted in the Lucknow pact of 1916. This pact was one of the first formal Hindu-Muslim agreements granting rights to Muslims, and it was the only time that the Muslim League and Congress came to a voluntary agreement about India. The Lucknow Pact granted Indian Muslims a separate electorate, and 'weightage' in legislative councils that had a Muslim minority. It had but a temporary effect on Hindu-Muslim relations as it represented only the agreement of a 'tiny political elite' of the two communities. There were many reasons that resulted in the most dramatic change in a man that history has ever seen; religious, personal and otherwise. The aim of the question is to 'evaluate' Jinnah's 'leadership' of the 'movement' for Pakistan, as such, before analysing his work, we must first analyse the situations before and after his 'policies' were put into action.
His 'Transformation':
The main reason for the increasing sense of nationalism among the Indian Muslims at that time was due to a growing fear of their increasing marginalisation, and not just in India.
It is often suspected that Jinnah's sudden change from secular constitutional leader to a pro-Islam figure had a lot to do with his disillusionment of the non-constitutional and increasingly Hindu-oriented policies practiced by his fellow congress leader and good friend Mohandas K. Gandhi. It was Gandhi's 'Civil Disobedience Campaign' that Jinnah was ill-at-ease with and he resigned soon after Gandhi gained control of the Congress party in 1920. There was in India at that time, a growing fear of the 'British Raj' being replaced by 'Ram Raj' . Jinnah was shrewd enough to realise that Hindu extremists could make life difficult for Muslims in India.
Increasing this fear was the marginalizing of minorities in Germany under Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime. Golwalkar's 'We Or Our Nationhood Defined' (1938), which argued that, if German Jews could be exterminated by Hitler, so could Indian Muslims by Hindus. Jinnah commented in relation to the increasingly tense situation of Indian Hindus and Muslims that, “Hitler's attempt at purity was a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by” . The sheer enormity of his linking the German genocide to India showed his growing concern, and that of the masses of Muslims in South Asia about the growing threat of Hindu extremism.
Another factor frequently attributed to the growing fear of being sidelined among the Muslims was the collapse of Ottoman Caliphate Empire. This was the loss of one of the biggest Islamic powers in the world. However, although Jinnah sympathized with his fellow Muslims, he was not convinced that Muslims should march out of British India and migrate to Muslim states like Afghanistan.
Another reason often attributed to Jinnah's sudden departure to England was the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms of 1919. These reforms posed a significant setback to Jinnah's career; education, public works and local self-governance were all transferred to the control of local ministers in a diarchal system. This was a good opportunity for politicians with strong local support which Jinnah lacked as he had always seen himself representing India in its entirety and lacked a landed or tribal powerbase. Although he tried to carry on in his previous role as a Hindu-Muslim negotiator, he was not on the best terms with Nehru and many of his proposal were often rejected , and his mediatory role was taken over by Mian Fazl-I-Husain who had a much stronger provincial base and thus greater authority in negotiating on the behalf of Muslims in India.
His return and alliances formed:
One of the biographers of M. A. Jinnah, Stanley Wolpert of UCLA said: "Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation-state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah did all three. Hailed as 'Great Leader' (Quaid-I-Azam) of Pakistan and its first governor-general, Jinnah virtually conjured that country into statehood by the force of his indomitable will. His place of primacy in Pakistan's history looms like a minaret over the achievements of all his contemporaries in the Muslim League." "We are a nation," Jinnah said, three years before Partition, "with our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and tradition, aptitude and ambitions - in short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life." When in 1934 the Muslims of India elected Jinnah as their representative to the Central Legislative Assembly, in his absence, and the 1935 Government of India Act gave him an opportunity to regain his former influence, Jinnah returned to India and worked towards the creation of a separate state for Muslims by uniting the various disparate Muslim groups scattered throughout India
Jinnah knew exactly what he was doing throughout his leadership of the Pakistan movement. He was “an able, single-minded political tactician who took full advantage of the dramatic political changes which occurred after India's entry into the Second World War” . However, even before the advent of the Second World War, Jinnah made his alliances and manipulated them to benefit his cause. His alliance with Sikander Hayat Khan, after the 1937 elections where the Unionist Party won the majority of Muslim votes, was a recognition of the latter's power and the need for the support of rural landowners who controlled the majority of rural votes. In exchange for Khan's support in National politics, Jinnah allowed him control over the organisation of the Muslim League. By 1939, the Muslim League had greatly increased their influence; this was largely due to the blunders of Congress. After the 1937 elections, Congress had won the mandate to form ministries in 7 out of 11 provinces, which put many Muslims under Congress (largely Hindu) rule. This would have been an apt opportunity for Congress to establish itself as an all-India party and shed its 'Hindu' mantle, however, the reality was quite the opposite. Congress made no effort to empathize with or respect Muslim culture and religion . This boosted the Muslim League's rhectoric that it alone could safeguard Islamic interests in India. It was after this period that the demand for Pakistan intensified. Even the British agreed with this viewpoint, in 1939, Linlithgow dubbed Congress 'a Hindu organisation', implicitly accepting the right of the Muslim League to speak for all Indian Muslims.
It could be said that the outbreak of World War Two was a watershed in the movement for Pakistan. World War Two served to firstly accelerate British departure and also to put Muslim League and Congress on the same platform. The 1942 Crippes Mission, which was a British attempt to garner wartime support from India in exchange for self-government, conceded the theory of partition. “The British could not contemplate the transfer of their present responsibility for the peace and welfare of India to any system of government whose authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in India's national life.”
The Psychological Game:
Jinnah's creation of a 'modern Muslim persona' was the binding force that brought about the uniting of the Muslims in India. The main divisions among them at that time were a common dress, language, political organization, sect and territory. Jinnah brought together the various factions with his vociferous talk for a 'common land' - Pakistan. In this 'Muslim utopia', Urdu would be the common language; the Muslim League a central political organisation and Jinnah's own dress sense and lack of any particular sect the common practices. Just as Nehru and Gandhi used clothes to unite and bring together the majority of Hindus, Jinnah amalgamated the various forms of Islamic dress to form a common attire that would appeal to all sects of Muslim society. By dressing in an Islamic fashion, he managed to completely divide himself from his previous counterparts, Gandhi, Nehru and the largely Hindu Congress party. When he was once asked for his sect (Sunni or Shia), he responded by asking what was the prophet . This again brought about a sense of unity among the Muslims of India, divided among themselves on the basis of their Islamisation. Some were Hindu converts from the time of the Mughal empire, others were of Arab or Turkish descent. Jinnah's answer, radical as it might have been for that time, united all of them as Muslims.
Also, Jinnah made all Muslims feel an affinity with this new 'dream nation', which would have a place for all Muslims, and thus served to unite the people of the future Pakistan. Professor Ziauddin Ahmad, the biographer of “Quaid-e-Azam”, commented, "When he defined Muslim nationhood in such tangible terms, every Muslim found himself testifying to the justice of this claim, and subscribing to the logical corollary of the fact and recognition of separate Muslim nationhood, viz., the demand for a Muslim homeland."
There are many factors that go to show that Mohamed Ali Jinnah did ensure that the newly created nation of Pakistan would be a fair and just nation for all its citizens, regardless of sect or gender. In a social system where women were, more often than not, oppressed, Jinnah brought about woman's rights, human rights and minority rights.
Was it all for power?
His sincerity in ensuring the creation of a land for his followers could be seen in his repeated rejection of the offer to be the first Indian prime minister in exchange for giving up the idea of Pakistan and maintaining a united India. There is a common misconception that Jinnah wanted a separate state for Muslims, even if it was at the expense of many innocent lives. However, Jinnah did actually accept the Cabinet Mission plan for a united India with Muslim-majority areas to be under Muslim rule. The Cabinet Mission plan advocated a union of India comprising both British India and the Indian States, with a central government to deal with foreign affairs, defence and communications. The union would have an Executive and a Legislature. Each province would maintain power over all other areas. The provinces were also to be divided into three sections. Provinces could opt out of any group after the first general elections. Lastly, there would be an interim government having the support of the major political parties. It was only when Nehru rejected the plan as a 'stop-gap' , after Congress had first accepted it on 24th May 1946, that Jinnah, for the first time in his political career, turned to a non-constitutional move and called for a communal mobilisation among the Muslims, resulting in rapidly spreading horrific violence, starting in Calcutta, India seemed to be on the brink of a civil war . It was only when Viceroy Wavell invited the League to join Congress in forming the interim government that the violence decreased.
Conclusion:
Jinnah began his leadership of the Pakistan movement around the time he turned 40, the age Muslims believe is a turning point in life. The death of his wife ended his family commitments and his children were grown. Repeated appeals to return to India to guide the Muslims could have been a way for him to get back with God and Islam. Whatever his motivations, Jinnah was indeed a leader who despite his personal motives, served to unite the Islamic people of India and give them a land to call their own.
By analysing his motives however, we can see that he seemed to be motivated largely by both a quest for personal power and to a desire to carry out his politics in the diplomatic manner he saw fit as opposed to Gandhi's anti-British movements, and to perhaps prove the superiority of constitutional politics as opposed to anti-constitutional means.
His psychological method of using himself as an example in terms of dress, religion and politics to unite the Muslims was an extraordinary. His inclusion of minority and women's rights made him a politician with support on all sides and a very wide base to work with. He realised after the 1937 elections and the poor showing of the Muslim League that theories were good but grassroots participation was needed to establish power.
He was shrewd in his dealings with his opponents and made use of the unionists to garner support crucial for the Muslim league in 1936 and then moved to essentially put them down in 1944
Jinnah leadership of the moment was impeccable for the uniting of the disparate Muslim factions but it was lacking in that there was no 'successor' capable of replacing Jinnah's place after his death. Knowing that his death was close, Jinnah ought to have groomed a successor to prevent Pakistan from falling into the quagmire it did. However his quest for power could have stood in the way of that. The other factor that could have possibly influenced his decision not to 'share' his power and leadership could have been that at that stage, Pakistan needed one strong leader and power could not have been shared. As such, as Lord Mouthbatten called Jinnah, a “psychopathic case ” or otherwise, Mohamed Ali Jinnah used the Pakistan demand to hoist himself to power and succeeded remarkably at the same time managing to create a nation-state which was, for a short time, the dream of many an Indian Muslim.
Feminism -should feminist politics aim to establish gender equality or difference
Introduction:
The aim of this essay is to prove the impossibility of achieving equality and the futility of aiming to establish equality in feminist politics. In feminist politics, equality and difference have been understood to be alternative concepts; difference has become the reverse side of equality. Over the years, one of these terms has gained the laurel of being a positive term and the other a negative term. Before analysing whether or not equality is indeed possible, a brief overview of feminism and equality is needed. There are three schools of feminist thought, which are namely Liberalist, Marxist and Radicalist.
The Liberal school of thought believes that 'gender equality can be brought about through incremental reform' . They believe that all of society has the ability to govern itself, including women and they need to be elevated to power in order to use their governing abilities, this elevation can be brought about by reforms. This is in significant contrast to the Radical feminists' viewpoint, where a significantly more negative view of the order of things exists. This branch of feminism sees 'gender divisions to be the most politically significant of social cleavages, and believes that they are rooted in the structure of domestic life' . Basically, radical feminists see the world as 'run by men… for men' . Their point of view is not completely different from that of Marxist feminists, who believe in much the same thing but see things from a more economic point of view as opposed to the gender inequality point of view of radical feminists. Thus, it is apparent, that despite the differences in the different branches of feminism, the quest for equality, albeit in different forms, is a common thread among them.
Stand:
Equality is in itself a word with many connotations. It could mean parity or sameness, among other meanings. Now, to be 'same' would be impossible in this context given the biological differences between males and females. Parity, however, is what feminists seek to implement when gender equality is mentioned. Seeking similar levels of opportunities in careers, a level ratio in political representation, and in some countries, namely strongly Islamic states, levels of freedom that are on par with that received by males.
Equality and difference theories both aim to establish women in a better position in society, the end in similar, just the method that is different. The option that feminists face is to pursue either 'gender neutrality' - equality, or 'gender visibility' - difference. This essay takes the stand that gender difference ought to be established instead of gender equality due to the differing concerns of men and women in society and politics. After all, gender-neutrality would mean to imply that women lose the right to leave and continued job security when having babies. This would definitely be unacceptable because in the rapidly aging populations of many developed nations, childbirth is counted as socially necessary work, and women at this stage have unique needs which must be fulfilled for the better good and continuation of society.
Differences between Masculine and Feminine peoples:
In a study conducted to find the differences between political inclinations and interests of masculine and feminine people, it was seen that masculine people expressed greater interest in the generic term 'politics' whereas feminine people expressed more interest in particular issues such as women as candidates and public officials, abortion and the equal rights amendment. This study goes to prove that men focus on generalities and women on particularities.
In the highly general aspect of the world, society at large and politics, it is then apparent why men have been dominant in this realm, thus far. With women focusing largely on personal and domestic politics, it does not make sense to put them in charge of volatile international affairs or national defence arenas, which could be a possibility if complete gender equality was somehow achieved. As such, feminist politics, ought definitely to aim to establish gender visibility as opposed to gender neutrality.
To bring out the best in each gender instead of ignoring sex and gender differences, not just in the area of politics, but also in terms of career opportunities and domestic issues. Specialisation of labour according to one's strong points is definitely preferable to trying one's hand at something with the possibility of failure.
Probability of Gender Equality:
Other than the previous argument regarding the possibility of aiming for gender equality decreasing the quality of output produced, by men or women in society, there is another important argument; which is that achieving gender equality is a nigh impossible task, which should not even be attempted. As Mackinnon said,
to require that one be the same as those who set the standard - those which one is already socially different from - simply means that sex equality is designed never to be achieved. Those who most need equal treatment will be the least similar, socially, to those whose situation sets the standard as against which one's entitlement to be equally treated is measured. Doctrinally speaking, the deepest problem of sex inequality will not find women 'similarly situated' to men. Far less will practices of sex inequality require that acts be intentionally discriminatory.
In fact, some feminists themselves agree that the 'struggle' against gender inequality and the establishment of feminist politics requires the dropping of 'equality' for 'autonomy' .
“Equality… implies a measurement according to a given standard.”
“Autonomy… implies the right to accept or reject such norms or standards according to their appropriateness to one's self-definition. Struggles for equality… imply an acceptance of given standards and a conformity to their expectations and requirements. Struggles for autonomy, on the other hand, imply the right to reject such standards and create new ones.”
As such, to aim for equality would not just be to agree that the actions of men today are right but would also be to 'become the enemy', to do what you have fought against. As such, the stand of this essay is reaffirmed, that feminist politics ought to aim for gender difference as opposed to gender equality. If women want to be free to redefine social roles, as they please to suit the modern woman of today, then autonomy and not equality should be their rallying cry and aim in mind.
Autonomy:
If autonomy were to be the aim of feminists, then some of the policies they would suggest would include the right to represent themselves in sectors of government that directly affect their interests, including abortion, human rights legislation, women's charter, domestic violence, etc. These are some of the areas of particular interest to feminine peoples.7 The right to choose areas of governance to involve themselves in, would certainly drive home their rejection of the 'male-stream' values of today's society and state.
Policies regarding childcare benefits and maternity leave ought to be restructured so as to better suit women's job schedules and allow them greater opportunities in applying for jobs.
A major obstacle in the employment of women in today's workforce is their domestic 'duties'. It has come to a stage where employers do not wish to employ newly married women or those who are at an age where their biological clock is ticking loudly, for fear that they would soon apply for maternity leave and childcare and medical benefits, which would not contribute to the company's profits in any way.
Merits of Equality (Flipside):
It must however be mentioned that equality, despite the many complications it does present, has proved to be more than efficient over the years. It is through the concept of equality that women gained the legislation to vote and managed to prevent (at least to some extent) the arbitrary treatment of women. It is only, that as mentioned above, the main problems with the notion of equality is that they not only cause women to become more 'masculine' but also that they ruin the specialised balance of labour and power that biological and physiological differences in men and women have wrought in society over the years. Equality is based on the premise that en and women are essentially similar and as such, women can be compared by the same yardstick that applies to men. This however, completely ignores the nurturing process that girls go through that makes them completely unsuitable for male tasks. Men better understand defence issues due to conscription and armed forces service, whereas women learn to abhor war due to massive loss of loved ones. Men are trained to be physically more able than women and thus are better equipped for certain jobs and gender equality can simply never be achieved because physically, women are and will always be disadvantaged.
Conclusion:
Thus, women could only make a more significant impact in the workforce and political arenas by playing up their skills in jobs that require the 'human touch' and greater 'emotions' as opposed to trying to 'compete' with men; competition being a 'masculine' obsession anyway . In the political scene, they ought to campaign for offices that focus on areas that particularly interest them. It is on this basis that women can then propel themselves further and into other realms of politics and careers, based on the success they first achieve in these areas. As such the establishment of differences between the 2 genders would serve the purposes of feminist politics far more than the aim to establish equality ever
The aim of this essay is to prove the impossibility of achieving equality and the futility of aiming to establish equality in feminist politics. In feminist politics, equality and difference have been understood to be alternative concepts; difference has become the reverse side of equality. Over the years, one of these terms has gained the laurel of being a positive term and the other a negative term. Before analysing whether or not equality is indeed possible, a brief overview of feminism and equality is needed. There are three schools of feminist thought, which are namely Liberalist, Marxist and Radicalist.
The Liberal school of thought believes that 'gender equality can be brought about through incremental reform' . They believe that all of society has the ability to govern itself, including women and they need to be elevated to power in order to use their governing abilities, this elevation can be brought about by reforms. This is in significant contrast to the Radical feminists' viewpoint, where a significantly more negative view of the order of things exists. This branch of feminism sees 'gender divisions to be the most politically significant of social cleavages, and believes that they are rooted in the structure of domestic life' . Basically, radical feminists see the world as 'run by men… for men' . Their point of view is not completely different from that of Marxist feminists, who believe in much the same thing but see things from a more economic point of view as opposed to the gender inequality point of view of radical feminists. Thus, it is apparent, that despite the differences in the different branches of feminism, the quest for equality, albeit in different forms, is a common thread among them.
Stand:
Equality is in itself a word with many connotations. It could mean parity or sameness, among other meanings. Now, to be 'same' would be impossible in this context given the biological differences between males and females. Parity, however, is what feminists seek to implement when gender equality is mentioned. Seeking similar levels of opportunities in careers, a level ratio in political representation, and in some countries, namely strongly Islamic states, levels of freedom that are on par with that received by males.
Equality and difference theories both aim to establish women in a better position in society, the end in similar, just the method that is different. The option that feminists face is to pursue either 'gender neutrality' - equality, or 'gender visibility' - difference. This essay takes the stand that gender difference ought to be established instead of gender equality due to the differing concerns of men and women in society and politics. After all, gender-neutrality would mean to imply that women lose the right to leave and continued job security when having babies. This would definitely be unacceptable because in the rapidly aging populations of many developed nations, childbirth is counted as socially necessary work, and women at this stage have unique needs which must be fulfilled for the better good and continuation of society.
Differences between Masculine and Feminine peoples:
In a study conducted to find the differences between political inclinations and interests of masculine and feminine people, it was seen that masculine people expressed greater interest in the generic term 'politics' whereas feminine people expressed more interest in particular issues such as women as candidates and public officials, abortion and the equal rights amendment. This study goes to prove that men focus on generalities and women on particularities.
In the highly general aspect of the world, society at large and politics, it is then apparent why men have been dominant in this realm, thus far. With women focusing largely on personal and domestic politics, it does not make sense to put them in charge of volatile international affairs or national defence arenas, which could be a possibility if complete gender equality was somehow achieved. As such, feminist politics, ought definitely to aim to establish gender visibility as opposed to gender neutrality.
To bring out the best in each gender instead of ignoring sex and gender differences, not just in the area of politics, but also in terms of career opportunities and domestic issues. Specialisation of labour according to one's strong points is definitely preferable to trying one's hand at something with the possibility of failure.
Probability of Gender Equality:
Other than the previous argument regarding the possibility of aiming for gender equality decreasing the quality of output produced, by men or women in society, there is another important argument; which is that achieving gender equality is a nigh impossible task, which should not even be attempted. As Mackinnon said,
to require that one be the same as those who set the standard - those which one is already socially different from - simply means that sex equality is designed never to be achieved. Those who most need equal treatment will be the least similar, socially, to those whose situation sets the standard as against which one's entitlement to be equally treated is measured. Doctrinally speaking, the deepest problem of sex inequality will not find women 'similarly situated' to men. Far less will practices of sex inequality require that acts be intentionally discriminatory.
In fact, some feminists themselves agree that the 'struggle' against gender inequality and the establishment of feminist politics requires the dropping of 'equality' for 'autonomy' .
“Equality… implies a measurement according to a given standard.”
“Autonomy… implies the right to accept or reject such norms or standards according to their appropriateness to one's self-definition. Struggles for equality… imply an acceptance of given standards and a conformity to their expectations and requirements. Struggles for autonomy, on the other hand, imply the right to reject such standards and create new ones.”
As such, to aim for equality would not just be to agree that the actions of men today are right but would also be to 'become the enemy', to do what you have fought against. As such, the stand of this essay is reaffirmed, that feminist politics ought to aim for gender difference as opposed to gender equality. If women want to be free to redefine social roles, as they please to suit the modern woman of today, then autonomy and not equality should be their rallying cry and aim in mind.
Autonomy:
If autonomy were to be the aim of feminists, then some of the policies they would suggest would include the right to represent themselves in sectors of government that directly affect their interests, including abortion, human rights legislation, women's charter, domestic violence, etc. These are some of the areas of particular interest to feminine peoples.7 The right to choose areas of governance to involve themselves in, would certainly drive home their rejection of the 'male-stream' values of today's society and state.
Policies regarding childcare benefits and maternity leave ought to be restructured so as to better suit women's job schedules and allow them greater opportunities in applying for jobs.
A major obstacle in the employment of women in today's workforce is their domestic 'duties'. It has come to a stage where employers do not wish to employ newly married women or those who are at an age where their biological clock is ticking loudly, for fear that they would soon apply for maternity leave and childcare and medical benefits, which would not contribute to the company's profits in any way.
Merits of Equality (Flipside):
It must however be mentioned that equality, despite the many complications it does present, has proved to be more than efficient over the years. It is through the concept of equality that women gained the legislation to vote and managed to prevent (at least to some extent) the arbitrary treatment of women. It is only, that as mentioned above, the main problems with the notion of equality is that they not only cause women to become more 'masculine' but also that they ruin the specialised balance of labour and power that biological and physiological differences in men and women have wrought in society over the years. Equality is based on the premise that en and women are essentially similar and as such, women can be compared by the same yardstick that applies to men. This however, completely ignores the nurturing process that girls go through that makes them completely unsuitable for male tasks. Men better understand defence issues due to conscription and armed forces service, whereas women learn to abhor war due to massive loss of loved ones. Men are trained to be physically more able than women and thus are better equipped for certain jobs and gender equality can simply never be achieved because physically, women are and will always be disadvantaged.
Conclusion:
Thus, women could only make a more significant impact in the workforce and political arenas by playing up their skills in jobs that require the 'human touch' and greater 'emotions' as opposed to trying to 'compete' with men; competition being a 'masculine' obsession anyway . In the political scene, they ought to campaign for offices that focus on areas that particularly interest them. It is on this basis that women can then propel themselves further and into other realms of politics and careers, based on the success they first achieve in these areas. As such the establishment of differences between the 2 genders would serve the purposes of feminist politics far more than the aim to establish equality ever
Authoritarian and Totalitarian Experiments in Europe - The Bolshevik Seizure of Power (November - December 1917) - Lenin's relevance to today's world
The aim of this essay is to link Lenin and the early Bolshevik era of Russia to Asia and the modern world. It also aims to explain how Lenin's policies regarding internationalism bear weight in today's world and how his actions had repercussions on the world at large and how these effects live on today.
The document covers four main areas, World War 1 and the ensuing Bolshevik revolution and overthrow of the provisional government in Russia; followed by the effects and policies implemented by the new Bolshevik government, including a government that was meant to be one of the people and for the people, a secret police force and stringent censorship laws. The last two points went completely against the communist and Bolshevik pre-revolution rhetoric which could have been a significant reason in communism being relatively short lived in most parts of Asia with the exceptions of China and Vietnam, and even then being practiced in an altered manner.
Lenin, otherwise known as Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov was the 'germ' that the Germans secreted into Russia towards the end of World War 1 to topple the existing political scene. The leader of the Bolshevik party spent the majority of his time in exile until 1917 when he was secreted back to Russia from Switzerland. Russia had overthrown the Czarist system in February 1917 and a provisional government of liberal Duma leaders, led by Alexender Kerensky had been installed. However this government was still rooted in the 'mindset' of war and supported one 'last' offensive in the summer of 1917, the failure of this offensive toppled the government. With his rhetoric of “land, bread and peace”, Lenin reached the masses and addressed their most basic needs instead of espousing Marxist theories to them. This united the people and with 'generally brief' fighting, the 'never strong' grip of the provisional government was broken. The Bolshevik revolutionaries, led by Lenin, formed the new government.
The bulk of Lenin's time in power was spent battling bloody wars with various factions all trying to topple the communist Lenin government. As one American journalist commented, “it took more like five years than then days” for the Bolsheviks to master Russia but “it was the retention rather than the seizing of power that earned the Bolsheviks their place in history”. By Lenin's demise in 1924, the communists were finally in control of Russia.
Communism preached a classless society and equality, however in practice, Lenin's rule of Russia was far from classless and equal. The document very clearly shows how he ruled Russia with an iron fist. Nonetheless, in one of his speeches on Marxism, Lenin had justified that before a classless society could be formed, in the transition from a capitalist society, there had to be a period of authoritarianism to restore stability after the workers' revolution.
However, invoking a secret police and enforcing extreme censorship was not in his rhetoric. It created on the world outside Russia a warped view of communism that today is called Leninism. In most parts of Asia, communism took off very well because it posed a way of managing a very large and divided country very well, with complete power in the hands of one leader. China, Vietnam and Laos are some examples that succumbed to communism whereas Malaya, Indonesia and others fought hard to prevent it.
Lenin used Marx's ideals as a base but he changed his concept slightly in that he while he did believe the workers had to rise up against the government in order to overthrow it, he also felt that the 'educated' had to play a leadership role in the bringing about of the revolution. Lenin himself was the son of a school administrator and began his political career as a student demonstrator, being one of the relatively well educated. Lenin saw communism as something all countries would have to resort to eventually, which is something that has relevance even in today's context as Francis Fukuyama mentioned in his “The End of History”, communism being the last major political change the world would see. "Experience has proved," Lenin wrote in 1920, in speaking of both the Russian revolution and the post-October development of the world revolutionary process. ''That, on certain very important questions of the proletarian revolution, all countries will inevitably have to do what Russia has done." In his book 'Left-wing' Communism - an Infantile Disorder' Lenin examined the Russian experience from the standpoint of the pressing problems relating to international Communist tactics, and of applying to the work and the policies of the Communist Parties of other countries "whatever is universally practicable, significant and relevant in the history and the present-day tactics of Bolshevism." In Lenin's writings one finds the most profound analyses of the economic, social and political development and the revolutionary movement in such countries as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Many of his articles deal with the national liberation and revolutionary movements in China, India, Indonesia and the Middle East. In his writings, Lenin did not just focus on the political scene of the Soviet Union but also devoted a large part of his writings to drawing up a number of important, often programmatic, documents for the international working-class and communist movement.
One of the greatest divides in post-Lenin Russia ensued between Lenin's real right-hand man, Trotsky and Stalin, who made out that he was Lenin-s right0hand man. Stalin wanted Russia to focus on building itself up whereas Trotsky wanted to continue Lenin's work of looking at the world and working towards global communism. That Lenin wanted to influence world politics and bring up communism was indisputable looking at his writings and speeches that focused on world issues. Lenin saw Russia to be the base of world communism and wanted to extend aid to nations fighting to establish communism, namely china and Vietnam at that time. The Socialist Revolution in Russia had opened up a new era in the worldwide proletarian struggle for emancipation. Soviet Russia did indeed become the base and stronghold and a catalyst of the world revolutionary process. "Our socialist Republic of Soviets," Lenin said with fervour in one of his speeches, "will stand secure, as a torch of international socialism and as an example to all the working people.
It was Lenin who set up the Third Communist International (Comintern) which played an important role in promoting the liberation movement of the working masses, in facilitating the forming and strengthening of Communist Parties, in evolving working-class tactics and strategies, and in bringing to the fore and training outstanding leaders of the communist movement.
Ho Chih Minh of Vietnam and Mao Zedong of China were both avid participants of the Comintern and received significant amounts of aid to pursue the proletarian revolutions in their own countries. The Malayan communist party and Indonesian communist party also worked very closely with the Comintern. Before and after Comintern congresses, Lenin would take the time to interact with individual leaders of various communist parties and learn about their problems. These interactions aided the world communist movement greatly and provided a window for non-soviet communists to feel closer to the 'comradeship' of communism.
At a time when many nations were waging nationalistic battles, Lenin's suggestions, such as those in his book “Left-Wing Communism - an Infantile Disorder”, and his success in the formation of a communist republic in one of the largest European countries spurred on the eastern nationalists and also provided them with a model to work towards, however skewed that model might have been in terms of economic and social practices. It was on the model of the Soviet Union that communist China was founded, picking up many of its policies, including severe censorship of the press, even attempting in later years to censor the Internet. The formation of secret police forces in Russia and later in China went against the basic communist theory of classlessness. The secret police were endowed with unchallenged power and could arrest and censure without trial or justification other than mere suspicion of being a defector or planning to defect.
Communism has spread like wildfire throughout the world and largely so in Asia. Even in 'democratic' nations , the control practiced by Lenin in terms of censorship and economy is practiced. To take Singapore as an example, the press is under stringent controls as is the economy. However, the growing power of America is affecting the world at large and economies everywhere, including
China are opening up.
Lenin's set up of a communist country that wielded significant power in the world is a lasting legacy that still has repercussions on the world today, especially because of the way he chose to control that state. Russia being under Lenin's authoritarian rule not only affected Russia but true to Lenin's dream, his actions affected the modern world, including Asia at large.
The document covers four main areas, World War 1 and the ensuing Bolshevik revolution and overthrow of the provisional government in Russia; followed by the effects and policies implemented by the new Bolshevik government, including a government that was meant to be one of the people and for the people, a secret police force and stringent censorship laws. The last two points went completely against the communist and Bolshevik pre-revolution rhetoric which could have been a significant reason in communism being relatively short lived in most parts of Asia with the exceptions of China and Vietnam, and even then being practiced in an altered manner.
Lenin, otherwise known as Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov was the 'germ' that the Germans secreted into Russia towards the end of World War 1 to topple the existing political scene. The leader of the Bolshevik party spent the majority of his time in exile until 1917 when he was secreted back to Russia from Switzerland. Russia had overthrown the Czarist system in February 1917 and a provisional government of liberal Duma leaders, led by Alexender Kerensky had been installed. However this government was still rooted in the 'mindset' of war and supported one 'last' offensive in the summer of 1917, the failure of this offensive toppled the government. With his rhetoric of “land, bread and peace”, Lenin reached the masses and addressed their most basic needs instead of espousing Marxist theories to them. This united the people and with 'generally brief' fighting, the 'never strong' grip of the provisional government was broken. The Bolshevik revolutionaries, led by Lenin, formed the new government.
The bulk of Lenin's time in power was spent battling bloody wars with various factions all trying to topple the communist Lenin government. As one American journalist commented, “it took more like five years than then days” for the Bolsheviks to master Russia but “it was the retention rather than the seizing of power that earned the Bolsheviks their place in history”. By Lenin's demise in 1924, the communists were finally in control of Russia.
Communism preached a classless society and equality, however in practice, Lenin's rule of Russia was far from classless and equal. The document very clearly shows how he ruled Russia with an iron fist. Nonetheless, in one of his speeches on Marxism, Lenin had justified that before a classless society could be formed, in the transition from a capitalist society, there had to be a period of authoritarianism to restore stability after the workers' revolution.
However, invoking a secret police and enforcing extreme censorship was not in his rhetoric. It created on the world outside Russia a warped view of communism that today is called Leninism. In most parts of Asia, communism took off very well because it posed a way of managing a very large and divided country very well, with complete power in the hands of one leader. China, Vietnam and Laos are some examples that succumbed to communism whereas Malaya, Indonesia and others fought hard to prevent it.
Lenin used Marx's ideals as a base but he changed his concept slightly in that he while he did believe the workers had to rise up against the government in order to overthrow it, he also felt that the 'educated' had to play a leadership role in the bringing about of the revolution. Lenin himself was the son of a school administrator and began his political career as a student demonstrator, being one of the relatively well educated. Lenin saw communism as something all countries would have to resort to eventually, which is something that has relevance even in today's context as Francis Fukuyama mentioned in his “The End of History”, communism being the last major political change the world would see. "Experience has proved," Lenin wrote in 1920, in speaking of both the Russian revolution and the post-October development of the world revolutionary process. ''That, on certain very important questions of the proletarian revolution, all countries will inevitably have to do what Russia has done." In his book 'Left-wing' Communism - an Infantile Disorder' Lenin examined the Russian experience from the standpoint of the pressing problems relating to international Communist tactics, and of applying to the work and the policies of the Communist Parties of other countries "whatever is universally practicable, significant and relevant in the history and the present-day tactics of Bolshevism." In Lenin's writings one finds the most profound analyses of the economic, social and political development and the revolutionary movement in such countries as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. Many of his articles deal with the national liberation and revolutionary movements in China, India, Indonesia and the Middle East. In his writings, Lenin did not just focus on the political scene of the Soviet Union but also devoted a large part of his writings to drawing up a number of important, often programmatic, documents for the international working-class and communist movement.
One of the greatest divides in post-Lenin Russia ensued between Lenin's real right-hand man, Trotsky and Stalin, who made out that he was Lenin-s right0hand man. Stalin wanted Russia to focus on building itself up whereas Trotsky wanted to continue Lenin's work of looking at the world and working towards global communism. That Lenin wanted to influence world politics and bring up communism was indisputable looking at his writings and speeches that focused on world issues. Lenin saw Russia to be the base of world communism and wanted to extend aid to nations fighting to establish communism, namely china and Vietnam at that time. The Socialist Revolution in Russia had opened up a new era in the worldwide proletarian struggle for emancipation. Soviet Russia did indeed become the base and stronghold and a catalyst of the world revolutionary process. "Our socialist Republic of Soviets," Lenin said with fervour in one of his speeches, "will stand secure, as a torch of international socialism and as an example to all the working people.
It was Lenin who set up the Third Communist International (Comintern) which played an important role in promoting the liberation movement of the working masses, in facilitating the forming and strengthening of Communist Parties, in evolving working-class tactics and strategies, and in bringing to the fore and training outstanding leaders of the communist movement.
Ho Chih Minh of Vietnam and Mao Zedong of China were both avid participants of the Comintern and received significant amounts of aid to pursue the proletarian revolutions in their own countries. The Malayan communist party and Indonesian communist party also worked very closely with the Comintern. Before and after Comintern congresses, Lenin would take the time to interact with individual leaders of various communist parties and learn about their problems. These interactions aided the world communist movement greatly and provided a window for non-soviet communists to feel closer to the 'comradeship' of communism.
At a time when many nations were waging nationalistic battles, Lenin's suggestions, such as those in his book “Left-Wing Communism - an Infantile Disorder”, and his success in the formation of a communist republic in one of the largest European countries spurred on the eastern nationalists and also provided them with a model to work towards, however skewed that model might have been in terms of economic and social practices. It was on the model of the Soviet Union that communist China was founded, picking up many of its policies, including severe censorship of the press, even attempting in later years to censor the Internet. The formation of secret police forces in Russia and later in China went against the basic communist theory of classlessness. The secret police were endowed with unchallenged power and could arrest and censure without trial or justification other than mere suspicion of being a defector or planning to defect.
Communism has spread like wildfire throughout the world and largely so in Asia. Even in 'democratic' nations , the control practiced by Lenin in terms of censorship and economy is practiced. To take Singapore as an example, the press is under stringent controls as is the economy. However, the growing power of America is affecting the world at large and economies everywhere, including
China are opening up.
Lenin's set up of a communist country that wielded significant power in the world is a lasting legacy that still has repercussions on the world today, especially because of the way he chose to control that state. Russia being under Lenin's authoritarian rule not only affected Russia but true to Lenin's dream, his actions affected the modern world, including Asia at large.
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Singapore's capitalism myth By Gary LaMoshi
HONG KONG - When people talk about Japan Inc or the US military-industrial complex, they're referring to a metaphorical representation of a perceived phenomenon. But when they talk about Singapore Inc, they mean Temasek Holdings.
Temasek is the Singapore government's S$70 billion (US$40 billion) investment vehicle with major stakes in Singapore's key sectors, in line with its mission: "To contribute to Singapore's economic growth by nurturing world-class companies through effective stewardship and commercially driven [sic] strategic investments." Temasek's only shareholder is the Singapore Ministry of Finance, from which it was spun off in 1974.
So when Temasek and the Singapore government disagree, as they do over quarterly corporate reporting, it's news. Even bigger news, in this age of deregulation, free-marketeer calls for bureaucrats to get out of the way of capitalism, and knee-jerk condescension toward Singapore's nannyism: the government is right on this matter.
Marx to Lenin to Lee
The Heritage Foundation, a leading US conservative think-tank, touts Singapore as one of the world's two freest economies, but that's just a myth. In fact, Singapore is the world's most successful socialist state.
More than 80 percent of Singapore's population lives in public housing, sheltered from the harsh realities of the government-controlled property market. While Singapore has the trappings of a democracy, the ruling People's Action Party is living proof that the one-party state survives outside the dustbin of history. Rather than the sharp-elbowed unabashed capitalism of Wall Street, Singapore's economic philosophy more closely mirrors that of another tropical island with a signature rum cocktail: Cuba.
Temasek is Exhibit A in Singapore's blatant, and largely profitable, government intervention in the economy. Buying a computer? Temasek owns 70 percent of Chartered Semiconductor. Chatting on the phone? Temasek owns 67 percent of Singapore Telecom. Taking a vacation? Temasek owns 57 percent of Singapore Airlines.
There's nothing wrong with any of that, other than the blatant lies about unbridled capitalism. (Since when was veracity among Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's vaunted Asian values, or the Heritage Foundation's?) In its charter, Temasek adopts an ideal major investor's stance: "Temasek will exercise its shareholder rights to influence the strategic directions of its companies. But it does not involve itself in their day-to-day commercial decisions." In another document, it elaborates, "Temasek's guiding philosophy is to 'put the right people in charge, make sure that the decision-making process is transparent, and then let them carry on with the business'."
Information, please
Financial reports are the main way for Temasek and other investors to exercise their rights and responsibilities, and the more timely and complete the information the better. The Singapore government, in its drive to make Singapore's capital markets a more attractive destination for overseas investment, recognizes that and declared quarterly reporting mandatory starting next year.
But in his keynote address to the Asian Business Dialogue on Corporate Governance last Thursday, Temasek chairman S Dhanabalan slammed quarterly reports, a world standard for nearly 70 years but still an anomaly in Asia. "I am dismayed that we in Singapore have decided to impose this practice on listed companies," Dhanabalan lamented. Decrying management and market focus on quarterly earnings, he added, "We seem to have tilted in favor of traders in stocks rather than investors in stocks."
Dhanabalan is also the chairman of government-controlled banking group DBS. Two of those letters pretty much sum up the merits of his position. His basic premise that quarterly reporting causes volatility is wrong, and the thinking behind his argument shows that, despite differences with the government on this issue, Dhanabalan hasn't strayed far from the Singapore-think we all know and mock. But don't take my word for it; listen to experts from opposite ends of the globe.
"It is lack of information, not too much information, that causes short-termism," Deborah Pastor, director of shareholder advocacy website eRaider.com, said from New York. "Annual disclosure, like pro forma earnings, forces investors to guess how a company is doing. When investors do not have fresh, reliable information, they have no choice but to trade on rumor. Solid information leads to solid trading."
Five-year plan
"In finance and in weather, longer-range forecasts are inherently less accurate than short-range forecasts, and a company is more likely to miss a six-month forecast than a three-month forecast, so the market is in fact much more vulnerable to shocks when data are only released twice yearly," said David Webb, editor of Hong Kong corporate governance watchdog Webb-site.com.
"Taking [Dhanabalan's] argument to the extreme, perhaps companies should only report every five years, in line with the supposed business cycle, to avoid management behaving in a 'short-term fashion'," Webb suggested. "Then minority shareholders would just have to speculate in the intervening years about what is really going on inside their company. Clearly that does not make for an efficient market."
Lack of information hardly makes for efficient investing either, so it seems ridiculous for Temasek to oppose increased information. Webb, a former investment banker, unraveled the mystery: "Controlling shareholders, through their board seats, have access to corporate data on a real-time basis. Within the limits of what is practical, there is no reason to withhold such information from outside shareholders, as it creates information asymmetry between shareholders."
In other words, Temasek gets its information and, naturally, uses it responsibly, but Dhanabalan doesn't trust you to have it. That's a dose of Singapore paternalism that's too strong for Singapore's government to spoon up these days.
It's bad enough that investors who want to play the game in Asia have to buy companies with controlling shareholders in markets that offer few protections for minority interests, but a controlling shareholder that's also the government poses special dangers. Dhanabalan spent the bulk of his keynote address assuring investors that Singapore Inc leads the fight to build shareholder value for all investors.
The character issue
"The character of Temasek derives from the character of the political leadership in Singapore with the qualities of honesty, probity, meritocracy, focus on the right rather than the popular decision and transparency being the main features. Temasek has defined for itself a proactive stewardship role. Being an involved, interested and informed owner, and with enough clout, it can help prevent the types of excesses seen in the US."
However, the Temasek way can lead to some uniquely Singaporean excesses. Dhanabalan ought to know, since he was in the middle of one last year.
To face overseas competitors at home and in the region better, Singapore's government encouraged mergers among its banks. Small banks resisted the call. Luckily for the government, Dhanabalan's DBS launched a lowball bid to gobble up Overseas Union Bank (OUB), which failed to find a white knight. United Overseas Bank (UOB) came to the rescue with a higher bid and promised to merge the two banks' boards of directors. DBS was big enough already, and the government was delighted to see second-place UOB grow.
Unfortunately, DBS's investment banker Goldman Sachs took its client's takeover bid seriously. Its analysis of the bids lambasted the UOB offer and its unwieldy merged board, saying "this combination is designed to keep family control intact without regard for shareholder value". The government considered Goldman's analysis a rude intrusion that threatened to scuttle its preferred union. After a chat with a reportedly enraged Lee Kuan Yew, DBS in effect abandoned its bid, published newspaper ads featuring a retraction of the previously obscure Goldman report, and agreed to pay UOB and OUB S$1 million each as a wedding present. Goldman chairman Henry Paulson jetted in to kowtow to the banks and regulators and paid the hong bao to the two banks, plus expenses to DBS.
In his speech last week, Dhanabalan assured, "There is no divergence between Temasek's interests and those of other shareholders since its aim is to ensure that TLCs [Temasek-linked companies] are well managed and create value for the benefit of all shareholders." As long as those investors share Temasek's stated mission "to contribute to Singapore's economic growth", that is. Judging from Dhanabalan's words and deeds, when the mission conflicts with the quest for shareholder value, it's easy to guess which side gets the nod.
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd.
Temasek is the Singapore government's S$70 billion (US$40 billion) investment vehicle with major stakes in Singapore's key sectors, in line with its mission: "To contribute to Singapore's economic growth by nurturing world-class companies through effective stewardship and commercially driven [sic] strategic investments." Temasek's only shareholder is the Singapore Ministry of Finance, from which it was spun off in 1974.
So when Temasek and the Singapore government disagree, as they do over quarterly corporate reporting, it's news. Even bigger news, in this age of deregulation, free-marketeer calls for bureaucrats to get out of the way of capitalism, and knee-jerk condescension toward Singapore's nannyism: the government is right on this matter.
Marx to Lenin to Lee
The Heritage Foundation, a leading US conservative think-tank, touts Singapore as one of the world's two freest economies, but that's just a myth. In fact, Singapore is the world's most successful socialist state.
More than 80 percent of Singapore's population lives in public housing, sheltered from the harsh realities of the government-controlled property market. While Singapore has the trappings of a democracy, the ruling People's Action Party is living proof that the one-party state survives outside the dustbin of history. Rather than the sharp-elbowed unabashed capitalism of Wall Street, Singapore's economic philosophy more closely mirrors that of another tropical island with a signature rum cocktail: Cuba.
Temasek is Exhibit A in Singapore's blatant, and largely profitable, government intervention in the economy. Buying a computer? Temasek owns 70 percent of Chartered Semiconductor. Chatting on the phone? Temasek owns 67 percent of Singapore Telecom. Taking a vacation? Temasek owns 57 percent of Singapore Airlines.
There's nothing wrong with any of that, other than the blatant lies about unbridled capitalism. (Since when was veracity among Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's vaunted Asian values, or the Heritage Foundation's?) In its charter, Temasek adopts an ideal major investor's stance: "Temasek will exercise its shareholder rights to influence the strategic directions of its companies. But it does not involve itself in their day-to-day commercial decisions." In another document, it elaborates, "Temasek's guiding philosophy is to 'put the right people in charge, make sure that the decision-making process is transparent, and then let them carry on with the business'."
Information, please
Financial reports are the main way for Temasek and other investors to exercise their rights and responsibilities, and the more timely and complete the information the better. The Singapore government, in its drive to make Singapore's capital markets a more attractive destination for overseas investment, recognizes that and declared quarterly reporting mandatory starting next year.
But in his keynote address to the Asian Business Dialogue on Corporate Governance last Thursday, Temasek chairman S Dhanabalan slammed quarterly reports, a world standard for nearly 70 years but still an anomaly in Asia. "I am dismayed that we in Singapore have decided to impose this practice on listed companies," Dhanabalan lamented. Decrying management and market focus on quarterly earnings, he added, "We seem to have tilted in favor of traders in stocks rather than investors in stocks."
Dhanabalan is also the chairman of government-controlled banking group DBS. Two of those letters pretty much sum up the merits of his position. His basic premise that quarterly reporting causes volatility is wrong, and the thinking behind his argument shows that, despite differences with the government on this issue, Dhanabalan hasn't strayed far from the Singapore-think we all know and mock. But don't take my word for it; listen to experts from opposite ends of the globe.
"It is lack of information, not too much information, that causes short-termism," Deborah Pastor, director of shareholder advocacy website eRaider.com, said from New York. "Annual disclosure, like pro forma earnings, forces investors to guess how a company is doing. When investors do not have fresh, reliable information, they have no choice but to trade on rumor. Solid information leads to solid trading."
Five-year plan
"In finance and in weather, longer-range forecasts are inherently less accurate than short-range forecasts, and a company is more likely to miss a six-month forecast than a three-month forecast, so the market is in fact much more vulnerable to shocks when data are only released twice yearly," said David Webb, editor of Hong Kong corporate governance watchdog Webb-site.com.
"Taking [Dhanabalan's] argument to the extreme, perhaps companies should only report every five years, in line with the supposed business cycle, to avoid management behaving in a 'short-term fashion'," Webb suggested. "Then minority shareholders would just have to speculate in the intervening years about what is really going on inside their company. Clearly that does not make for an efficient market."
Lack of information hardly makes for efficient investing either, so it seems ridiculous for Temasek to oppose increased information. Webb, a former investment banker, unraveled the mystery: "Controlling shareholders, through their board seats, have access to corporate data on a real-time basis. Within the limits of what is practical, there is no reason to withhold such information from outside shareholders, as it creates information asymmetry between shareholders."
In other words, Temasek gets its information and, naturally, uses it responsibly, but Dhanabalan doesn't trust you to have it. That's a dose of Singapore paternalism that's too strong for Singapore's government to spoon up these days.
It's bad enough that investors who want to play the game in Asia have to buy companies with controlling shareholders in markets that offer few protections for minority interests, but a controlling shareholder that's also the government poses special dangers. Dhanabalan spent the bulk of his keynote address assuring investors that Singapore Inc leads the fight to build shareholder value for all investors.
The character issue
"The character of Temasek derives from the character of the political leadership in Singapore with the qualities of honesty, probity, meritocracy, focus on the right rather than the popular decision and transparency being the main features. Temasek has defined for itself a proactive stewardship role. Being an involved, interested and informed owner, and with enough clout, it can help prevent the types of excesses seen in the US."
However, the Temasek way can lead to some uniquely Singaporean excesses. Dhanabalan ought to know, since he was in the middle of one last year.
To face overseas competitors at home and in the region better, Singapore's government encouraged mergers among its banks. Small banks resisted the call. Luckily for the government, Dhanabalan's DBS launched a lowball bid to gobble up Overseas Union Bank (OUB), which failed to find a white knight. United Overseas Bank (UOB) came to the rescue with a higher bid and promised to merge the two banks' boards of directors. DBS was big enough already, and the government was delighted to see second-place UOB grow.
Unfortunately, DBS's investment banker Goldman Sachs took its client's takeover bid seriously. Its analysis of the bids lambasted the UOB offer and its unwieldy merged board, saying "this combination is designed to keep family control intact without regard for shareholder value". The government considered Goldman's analysis a rude intrusion that threatened to scuttle its preferred union. After a chat with a reportedly enraged Lee Kuan Yew, DBS in effect abandoned its bid, published newspaper ads featuring a retraction of the previously obscure Goldman report, and agreed to pay UOB and OUB S$1 million each as a wedding present. Goldman chairman Henry Paulson jetted in to kowtow to the banks and regulators and paid the hong bao to the two banks, plus expenses to DBS.
In his speech last week, Dhanabalan assured, "There is no divergence between Temasek's interests and those of other shareholders since its aim is to ensure that TLCs [Temasek-linked companies] are well managed and create value for the benefit of all shareholders." As long as those investors share Temasek's stated mission "to contribute to Singapore's economic growth", that is. Judging from Dhanabalan's words and deeds, when the mission conflicts with the quest for shareholder value, it's easy to guess which side gets the nod.
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Marxism
It makes me so so angry! The language of war pits working class soldiers of 2 different countries against each other, to try to kill each other. Marx would be crying in his grave, men, especially the working class were meant to work with, not against each other
Capitalism will result in the end of mankind altogether!
The affluent in Singapore are not half as happy as the dirt poor in India who at least have freedom to think. With all the money in the world, we cannot buy time! Time to live life and see the world. We even travel on nicely organised package tours! Every aspect of our lives is well organised.
I sometimes wonder if capitalist governments sit down and plan the lives of newborns down to the last day of their lives.
Where is the point in living a life for everything except oneself?
Capitalism will result in the end of mankind altogether!
The affluent in Singapore are not half as happy as the dirt poor in India who at least have freedom to think. With all the money in the world, we cannot buy time! Time to live life and see the world. We even travel on nicely organised package tours! Every aspect of our lives is well organised.
I sometimes wonder if capitalist governments sit down and plan the lives of newborns down to the last day of their lives.
Where is the point in living a life for everything except oneself?
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Main Hoon Na (Sonu Nigam, Shreya Ghosal)
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kabhi Jo Tum Socho Ke Tum Yeh Dekho
If you happen to wonder or find out
Are Kitna Mujhko Tumse Pyar Hai
How much I love you
To Chup Mat Rahna Yeh Mujhse Kehna
Then don’t be silent, tell me
Are Koi Kya Aisa Bhi Yaar Hai
Where will you such a lover (like me)
Dil Hi Nahi De Jaan Bhi De Jo Tumhe
Who gives not just his heart but also his life
Dil Hi Nahi De Jaan Bhi De Jo Tumhe
Who gives not just his heart but also his life
Ho, To Main Kahoonga Sarkar Main Hoon Na
Then I shall say I am here Highness!
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
>Look this way once, (for) I am here
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kehni Ki Ho Dil Mein Koi Baat Mujhse Kaho
If you need someone to tell your feelings, tell me
Koi Pal Ho Din Ho Ya Ho Raat Mujhse Kaho
Be it day or night, tell me
Koi Mushkil Koi Pareshaani Aaye
Whatever trouble or anxiety that may come
Tumhe Lage Kuch Theek Nahi Halaat Mujhse Kaho
If you feel something is wrong do tell me
Koi Ho Tamanna Ya Ho Koi Arzoo
Be it any wish or desire
Koi Ho Tamanna Ya Ho Koi Arzoo
Be it any wish or desire
Ho, Rehna Kabhi Na Bekaraar Main Hoon Na
Don’t ever be anxious (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kabhi Jo Tum Socho Ke Tum Yeh Dekho
If you happen to wonder or find out
Are Kitna Mujhko Tumse Pyar Hai
How much I love you
To Chup Mat Rahna Yeh Mujhse Kehna
Then don’t be silent, tell me
Are Koi Kya Aisa Bhi Yaar Hai
Where will you such a lover (like me)
Dil Hi Nahi De Jaan Bhi De Jo Tumhe
Who gives not just his heart but also his life
Dil Hi Nahi De Jaan Bhi De Jo Tumhe
Who gives not just his heart but also his life
Ho, To Main Kahoonga Sarkar Main Hoon Na
Then I shall say I am here Highness!
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kehni Ki Ho Dil Mein Koi Baat Mujhse Kaho
If you need someone to tell your feelings, tell me
Koi Pal Ho Din Ho Ya Ho Raat Mujhse Kaho
Be it day or night, tell me
Koi Mushkil Koi Pareshaani Aaye
Whatever trouble or anxiety that may come
Tumhe Lage Kuch Theek Nahi Halaat Mujhse Kaho
If you feel something is wrong do tell me
Koi Ho Tamanna Ya Ho Koi Arzoo
Be it any wish or desire
Koi Ho Tamanna Ya Ho Koi Arzoo
Be it any wish or desire
Ho, Rehna Kabhi Na Bekaraar Main Hoon Na
Don’t ever be anxious (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Intezaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
Khamosh Kyon Ho Jo Bhi Kehna Hai Kaho
Why are you silent, speak your heart out
Dil Chahe Jitna Pyar Utna Maang Lo
Ask as much love as your heart yearns for
Ho, Tumko Milega Utna Pyar Main Hoon Na
You will be given that love (as) I am here
Kiska Hai Yeh Tumko Inetzaar Main Hoon Na
Who are you waiting for, I am here
Dekhlo Idhar To Ek Baar Main Hoon Na
Look this way once, (for) I am here
MAKE THE PIE HIGHER - G.W.Bush
I think we all agree, the past is over.
This is still a dangerous world.
It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses.
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?
Will the highways of the Internet become more few?
How many hands have I shaked?
They misunderestimate me.
I am a pitbull on the pantleg of opportunity.
I know that the human being and the fish can coexist.
Families is where our nation finds hope, where our wings take dream.
Put food on your family!
Knock down the tollbooth!
Vulcanize Society!
Make the pie higher! Make the pie higher!
More George W. fumbles:
I think we agree, the past is over.--President George W. Bush, Dallas Morning News, May 10, 2000
I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question—President George W. Bush, Reynoldsburg, Ohio, October 4, 2000
They misunderestimated me. –President George W. Bush, Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000
And a political classic:
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.--Robert McCloskey, State Department spokesman.
This is still a dangerous world.
It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses.
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?
Will the highways of the Internet become more few?
How many hands have I shaked?
They misunderestimate me.
I am a pitbull on the pantleg of opportunity.
I know that the human being and the fish can coexist.
Families is where our nation finds hope, where our wings take dream.
Put food on your family!
Knock down the tollbooth!
Vulcanize Society!
Make the pie higher! Make the pie higher!
More George W. fumbles:
I think we agree, the past is over.--President George W. Bush, Dallas Morning News, May 10, 2000
I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question—President George W. Bush, Reynoldsburg, Ohio, October 4, 2000
They misunderestimated me. –President George W. Bush, Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000
And a political classic:
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.--Robert McCloskey, State Department spokesman.
HOW (NOT) TO USE ENGLISH PROPERLY
A writer must not shift your point of view.
Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.
Always pick on the correct idiom.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat)
Be more or less specific.
Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
Contractions aren't necessary and shouldn't be used.
Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
Don’t over-use exclamation points!!!!!
Eliminate commas, that are, not necessary. Parenthetical words however should be enclosed in commas.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
Employ the vernacular.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
Even IF a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than under-statement.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times: Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it correctly.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
No sentence fragments.
One should NEVER generalize.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary.
Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences, as of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
Puns are for children, not groan readers.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
The adverb always follows the verb.
The passive voice is to be ignored.
Understatement is always the absolute best way to put forth earth-shaking ideas.
Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
Verbs HAS to agree with their subjects.
(And the last one...)
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.
Always pick on the correct idiom.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat)
Be more or less specific.
Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
Contractions aren't necessary and shouldn't be used.
Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
Don’t over-use exclamation points!!!!!
Eliminate commas, that are, not necessary. Parenthetical words however should be enclosed in commas.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
Employ the vernacular.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
Even IF a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than under-statement.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times: Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it correctly.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
No sentence fragments.
One should NEVER generalize.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary.
Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences, as of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
Puns are for children, not groan readers.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
The adverb always follows the verb.
The passive voice is to be ignored.
Understatement is always the absolute best way to put forth earth-shaking ideas.
Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
Verbs HAS to agree with their subjects.
(And the last one...)
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
