Intolerance is for Real

Their fears are indeed real. They are not lying for sure. But sadly, it is all nothing but their hallucination and that is arguably their self creation. For no fault of theirs, they have been made to believe since independence that RSS is out and out an extremist organization with a single mission of driving minorities out of India. The secular brigade led by the left-liberal ‘extra-nationals’ have worked over-excessively all through to somehow construct a perception that has no real foundation, strangely. Just notice the recent comparison that an eminent secular made between ISIS and RSS. The ISIS with only about 50000 members has kept the entire militarily-developed west on their toes with their mindless showcasing of terror incidents. But it goes only to the credit of our skewed-seculars who can still believe that an organization with 50 lac members having its presence at 50000 places as Shakha units in this country can also be as irrational as the ISIS. Surprisingly, they fail to notice the glaring contrast between the two. Only if someone in his senses would extrapolate the situation assuming the presence of 50 lac alleged ‘Hindu ISIS’ in India, even a counter argument would lose its worth. It is not difficult to recall their desperation during the built-up before the last Loksabha election. I remember several of these making chest-beating appeals to the voters not to support BJP. They were apparently more than convinced that their hate-campaign that they had carried out for the past more than half a decade would never allow an RSS supported BJP to come to the power. They thought that they have been successfully able to convince the peace-loving and inherently secular majority of India to identify RSS with the communal tag.

We must now realize that this left-liberal extra-national brigade did not want the BJP to come to the power not because they feared a regime of intolerance towards minorities but – they actually feared even worse. They feared that with this government at the centre, their more than half a century propaganda for branding RSS as a rabid communal organization would get thoroughly exposed. The source of their strength to keep on maligning RSS came only from a well-executed mis-campaign. They were losing their sleep on the thought of the voters accepting BJP finally as a truly-secular party. All hell broke for them when the inevitable happened. Modi became the PM. All fears that they had been spreading to the voters were suddenly put to test. The propagandists had no option left but to create a scenario to prove that whatever they had been warning us for was never hypothetical or imaginary. They went overboard by picking up each single case that had a potential to be blown out of proportion. They started filtering the news with their skewed-magnifying lenses. Initially all negative news on the churches were reported with only single flavor. The investigation results unfortunately failed their campaign completely. They looked for another spate of incidents and finally they got one – the barbaric lynching of a human being. They only wanted a single streak to swim the tide – and they got that. Even though the immediate responsibility was of another ‘secular’ government, ‘seciulars’ did not have the luxury to care for this contradiction. They could have hardly afforded to miss this glimmer-opportunity. They kept on pushing the ventilator of award-returning ‘oxygen’ to keep the issue fat and alive. A scientific analysis based on the available statistical-data would refuse to hint at any conclusion that can justify this ‘intolerance-hype’ bult-up, but when did they bother themselves to engage in an honest discussion on such serious issues. They have a habit of using situations, accidents and emotions as tools to fool and bluff us.

And I pity for Amir Khan and Kiran – for getting counted as the latest victims of this ‘manufactured’ fear campaign carried out by the left-congress-secular trio.

True Colour of Terror

Is there a way to arrest the alarming spread of terror? Undeniably, ‘terror’ has acquired a dangerous proportion worldwide and has posed a challenge before the civilized world.

We must come out of the state of denial first. We have wasted enough resources, intelligence, time and energy in proving somehow that there is nothing unusual about terrorism and it is merely a law and order problem. A construct however, coined by the ‘sane’ world that ‘terror has no religion’ has only helped us in fooling ourselves. Even cancer can be cured but for that at least those who are treating you must be unanimous about the nature of the disease, its extent and the area affected with the disease. Asking the family of the patient to believe that all diseases are bad for health will only make the patient complacent and that would only help aggravate the problem further. The first step to treat this menace would be to accept that this disease finds its strength in a particular religion ‘Islam’. Unless we dig out our head from the sand of our virtual and idealized surroundings, we would not be able to make effective strategies to tackle this problem that exists unfortunately in our real world.

It must be realized that the genesis of the problem rests in some construct of the Islamic theology. At the same time, fortunately for us, the solution also lies in several other constructs that are part of the same theology. After all, isn’t it a fact that ‘Sufism’ that is widely owned by the Indian Muslims and appreciated equally by other believers, also have originated from the same theological concepts? That a plural thought such as ‘Sufism’ can find its root in Islam is an evidence enough to prove that Islamic theology also has a scope of being as accommodative and as plural as any of our Bharatiya religions. Unfortunately, our country has been following a policy that is even more repulsive than those adopted in the west. Indian intelligentsia and strategists, over the years, have been working overtime to prove that terror has no religion. What is worst is that they have also been investing enough time, energy and thought to prove that terror also has other colors. This approach in the name of ‘Secularism’ has worked negatively for our country on two accounts. Those who could have otherwise worked to find a theological solution of the ‘real terror’ were made to feel complacent while on the other hand this approach also provided enough reasons to instigate counter-terrorism. It is as if a cancer patient is advised that one should worry about the cancerous wounds only as much as one pays attention to scratches as both are primarily wounds but only of different verities.

There are umpteen verses that exist in Ancient Vedas, Ramayana, several instances reported in Mahabharata and Manusmriti that are neither owned nor followed now because they have lost all relevance today even if they were being owned and followed religiously historically. Old traditions such as Sati-pratha, Child-marriage, Denial of education to the Girls, Caste-discrimination, Denial of Equal opportunity and Animal sacrifice find no support today only because the progressive and reformist thoughts are traditionally being appreciated and encouraged in the same society. On the contrary, Islam needs such reformers immediately, not to disown irrelevant verses of holy ‘Koran’ or ‘Hadith’ or ‘Sharia’ but to pick up the right verses that can find relevance and encouragement in the present context. We must understand that reforms are accepted easily only when the reformers belong to the same society. Reforms imposed from outside have often proven to be counterproductive.

We only need to identify potential reformers within the Islamic society and back them to carry out the desired transformation. Is it difficult to understand that – what USA could have achieved through Saddam Hussain, they have actually achieved just its opposite till now after eliminating him? But for that we must begin with acknowledging the true color of ‘terror’ that is nothing but ‘Islam’.

A supporter’s analysis of - Bihar Election Results

(Published in the Millennium post in the issue of 13 november 2015, http://millenniumpost.in/NewsContent.aspx?NID=166146 )
      Delhi and then in Bihar, election results have thrown the biggest challenge to the BJP since Modi became its driving force. The high-energy election campaign that worked for Amit Shah and Modi in recent times, failed to yield similar results in Delhi and Bihar. Modi is however, known for converting challenges into opportunities; infusing hopes during adverse circumstances; transforming despair and despondency into hope; injecting energy into dejected admirers; turning adversaries into admirers and successfully reversing the opposition strategies into his own advantage. I am sure, his admirers including me are feeling dejected at Bihar Election results, but not him.

     Statistically speaking, the strategy of Shah and Modi has worked even during these elections very well in retaining the loyal voters with them. They have been successfully maintaining the vote-shares despite going through these trying circumstances. The extreme ‘intolerant’ opposition of BJP and especially Modi, has provided enough reasons to keep BJP supporters on their edges, completely alert and active. Due to all this, votes in favour of BJP could never decrease any significantly even in these landslide and one-sided results. This is also the reason that even in these elections, feedback received by the leaders were identical to those when BJP reported landslide victories.

     So, where have they gone wrong? 

    There are more than many theories on offer even within BJP. RSS trying to cut Modi to his size; Advani supporters engineering these debacles; Modi’s diminishing popularity or his supporters getting disillusioned – but none of these would be able to explain how he has been able to retain the voters with him. These results, not surprisingly, give an opportunity to certain elements within BJP, to vent out their frustrations even on those issues that only remotely be considered as one of the reasons for the loss. Besides this, BJP has been ‘fortunate’ enough that even their adversaries do not shy away from advising Modi to ‘correct’ himself. After all they must have never gone through such a fear of extinction as they would have felt this time whenever this government displayed any success potentials.

    In my analysis, more than the problems within, in fact BJP lost these elections only because their aggressive style of campaigning forced its opposition to unite and huddle. BJP must realize that in the present circumstances, they are bound to lose against a united opposition. Statistically, if votes were shared between AAP and Congress in Delhi elections or if Nitish and Lalu were not united in Bihar, BJP would have swept these elections with the existing share of votes. In fact one of the prime reasons of the success of Modi in the general elections 2014 has been that his opposition never believed that Modi would ever be able to cross the mark. Statistically it can never be denied that in 2014 elections, historically, BJP got the highest number of seats with smallest percentage share of votes only because the opposition never felt any reason to get united. Even in Gujarat, only in the last assembly elections, BJP was in a position of taking on a united opposition.

     Now, to turn the tide in their favour, BJP needs to convince their voters that they can deliver on their promises. Once the voters are convinced, only then as per the Gujarat model, even a united opposition would fail to make any impact. Till then, instead of following the recent short-term impact style campaigns, BJP needs to work on twin long term strategies. Firstly, they must direct their aggression to display enough examples and hints that they would be able to deliver on their promises and secondly they must try to identify potential local leaders having clean images and help them build their images on issues of common interest following a long term plan. A loss in Bihar has saved BJP from raising the expectations of the voters further that would have burdened the leadership unnecessarily. And just as Modi had controlled the lunatic elements present on his side during his Gujarat tenure, he must stop everyone from interacting with media who would keep him engaged in explanations and other damage control exercises and would derail him from his single and winning plank of development. 

BJP - the Dalit of Indian Politics

(Published in the Organiser issue of November 8,2015 http://epaper.organiser.org/epaper.aspx?lang=4&spage=Mpage&NB=2015-10-31#Mpage_25 )
        These days BJP is experiencing what Dalits generally feel when they taste success. BJP symbolizes the forces, that were till recently discarded as ‘untouchables’ by the mainstream politics. To the discomfort of these mainstream forces, they have now been able to position themselves at the fulcrum of the Indian politics from where they are about to dictate a new paradigm. The upper caste political dispensation (Congress and Left combine) are unable to digest the rise of nationalist forces. They are losing their peace and balance as they find themselves cornered in the political space - to witness what they had never dreamt of. A socio-political mindset that was created and constructed by these upper-caste political constructs and was used to enjoying power since the British rule, is now being seriously challenged by the hitherto ‘marginalized’ BJP. Those who are suffering from the ‘ill-belief’ that only British or British-like mindset (read congress) can govern India - are losing their sleeps. Those who were used to getting favours from the government in return to their full time effort in maintaining this mind set (read as Left) have suddenly started losing their grounds. These forces have invested their life in trying to make us believe that we can be properly governed only through some ‘imported ideology’. Drawing parallel with the upper caste mentality, they wanted us to believe that ‘nationalist forces’ are not good enough to govern. They are convinced that, left on our own indigenous thoughts, we will fight to finish ourselves. They think that ‘nationalists’ need to be taught lessons on the idea of 'secularism', 'socialism', 'equal opportunity' and 'development' as they have least regard for these instruments that are absolutely necessary to claim any progress in the modern world. For this, they want us to feel ashamed of our past, to disown our existence and to feel dependent on borrowed constructs and imported ideology to think of making any meaningful progress.

          Just as the upper castes, they have carefully calibrated a socio-political order where those who were ready to disown their roots/existence and were ashamed of their past were categorized as acceptable and worthy for taking control of the government whereas those who drew inspiration from the past or from indigenous thoughts were termed as lumpens and goons required to be brainwashed before giving any responsibility. This upper caste construct in our political setup believed that their empire would grow with time and would never be in danger. Their unthinkable and unimaginable fears have come true with the Modi government storming at the centre. And what is making them restless is that this government is also showing genuine promise of making India a progressive and economically developed country despite refusing to toe their prescribed line.

          Modi refused to read out the line of apology that was almost being forced by Karan Thapar just to make Modi admit his guilt; Modi refused to enact the skull-cap ‘secular’ drama, he insisted with everyone to realize the sincerity of his comment regarding puppy killing instead of retracting on the same; he started taking pride in several personalities other than Nehru and Gandhi; he started exhibiting his pride in our ancient culture, beliefs and texts – and therefore as per the judgment of the existing upper caste political construct - Modi was not fit to occupy the chair. But to snatch them of their livelihoods Modi arrived at the centre.

          With their dooming future looming large, just to prove their conjectures right, these forces are prepared to do everything to prove that this government is undesirable. To save themselves from becoming extinct, they are bent upon blowing up events after events entirely out of proportions to somehow project that India is now destined to doom, that the liberal space of this country has shrunk all of a sudden and that this country has suddenly turned into a country of cannibals and conservative intolerant. They are doing this despite the fact that this country has started showing a great turnaround in economy – that was never witnessed before in this country. A careful and academic exercise would be enough to show statistics that though the hate incidences need to be curbed immediately and effectively but contrary to the secular’s projection - it is far from peaking recently.

POLITICS ON CRIME - the Indian Phenomenon

Over the years since independence, India has developed a strange habit of classifying ‘gruesome crimes’ as - ‘hate-generating’, ‘communal clashes’, ‘religious fanaticism’, ‘class atrocities’, ‘gender suppression’, ‘reactionary outbursts’, ‘revolutionary unrest’ and recently as ‘media marketable’. To cover up the governance failures, administrative inefficiencies and other corrupt practices the administration has found it extremely useful and easy to play politics on crimes. To their relief, these classifications have helped the successive governments in setting up a trend where all other kind of crimes that are left ‘unclassified’ gets considered as ‘simple’ and therefore almost as ‘acceptable’. The information about the ‘character’ of a crime has become so important that we have got used to the news headlines such as ‘crime against minority’, ‘crime against child’, ‘crime against woman’, ‘crime against Dalit’ - so much so that thinking of headlines as ‘crime against men’, ‘crime against a majority community’, ‘crime against an adult’ or ‘crime against an upper caste’ are either likely to evoke laughter or no response at all. 

Not that the ‘classified’ crimes get any better or the desirable attention, but the government utilizes this politics only to pass the blame somehow on the majority community entirely. Being arguably one of the most tolerant and accommodating community existing in the world, this majority is then expected either to absorb the blame or to start hating itself. Under this ‘secular formula' we are expected to accept all the blame as ‘evils’ of our society and at the same time are also left to consider all other ‘unclassified’ crimes as natural, simple, normal (and therefore desirable??).

As its natural consequence the Indian administration wastes much of its precious time in ‘discovering’, ‘investigating’ and  ‘establishing’ the color and shade of a crime when it is actually required to act swiftly and efficiently. I am convinced that until this country stops taking interest in knowing the caste, gender, religion, faith and ideology of a victim – politics will continue to sideline our real administrative concerns. Instead of doing a political comparative analysis, the state must be extremely serious and ruthless in addressing all crimes and thereby punishing each criminal blindly. 

Left - and Their art of provocation

(Published in the August 16, 2015 issue of Organiser and can be visited using this link http://organiser.org//Encyc/2015/8/10/Opinion---%E2%80%98Left%E2%80%99-and-their-Art-of-Provocation.aspx)
I often get amused at the fact that although leftists have always remained in hopeless minority in India but still they manage to influence and occupy the decision making instruments of this country. Fortunately for them, the overwhelming majority in this country is rational, liberal and have always remained against all kinds of victimization. Leftists use the 'politics of victim-hood' to influence this rational and liberal majority. They use different methods and tricks to project themselves as victims. They have mastered the 'act of provocation' and have evolved it into an effective weapon in this regard. Using apparently-patient and cunningly-academic techniques they provoke nationalists and force them in breaking the fine line of socially acceptable behavioral norms. Then they use those incidents to paint the nationalists as hooligans and goons. They efficiently abuse the 'freedom of expression' and stretch the limits of 'human rights' to provoke nationalists to force them in committing legal-lapses. To succeed in their evil designs, they go to any extent to provoke the nationalists forces. They would not hesitate in calling a social and peaceful organization producing nationalists for the country as a terrorists' organization and would also go to the extent of not only blaming an arguably progressive community as repressive and conservative but instead would also project the other community, that needs reforms urgently, as better. To provoke the nationalists they not only never hesitated in creating a hero out of Aurangzeb but also painted the greats like Sikh gurus, Rana Pratap and Shivaji in poor light in the same breath. They would not only ignore an entire carnage incident altogether but keep on reminding us the incidents that took place after that. They would not only ignore the exodus of a particular 'Pandit' community from a state but would also not stop from asking the army to leave the state. They would resort to support a terrorist waiting to be hanged and they can even show that community as communal who is the reason for secularism in our country. They keep on producing and screening films that would project only nationalists as rioters. The list is huge and they have built this up in the last century with the help of British before the independence and the Congress thereafter. The only factor that favored the nationalists till now and was completely underestimated by the leftists was the fact that Indians have always felt a positive influence of religion and our faiths have an overwhelmingly progressive outlook towards our thoughts and beliefs. This striking feature of our religious behavior and spirituality, irrespective of our worshiping styles, did not allow leftists to spread its influence horizontally but with the help of the rulers they have been able to spread their roots deep in our soul wherever they could.

Nationalists however, need to realize now that they are in a position to spread their influence in this country after a very long era and they must now counter this age-old left strategy by refraining from falling into their trap again and again. Nationalists forces have an opportunity to construct a trap for them that would help in exposing the anti-national mindset of the 'left-leaning intellectuals'.

DEATH SENTENCE AS DETERRENT

"Nobody will believe your agencies if they make a promise next time. Nobody will trust the Indian government in future," - says Chota Shakeel. 

Yes this country does not want any terrorist to believe our agencies. Our agencies seems to have given them a clear and understandable message this time that they must think thousand times before executing such heinous terror plans as they would have none to trust upon in future. He must know that we are not interested to investigate terror attacks, we want to prevent them.

Pseudo-intellectuals mainly of left-leaning variety are chest-beating these days saying that death sentences have never served as deterrent in terror cases. Let me add to their confusion by stating that no punishment has been able to stop any crime anywhere on this earth - so what would be there suggestion? Would they suggest the governments to convert all the police stations and army outposts into advice and counseling centers? 

No law can put brakes on crime rates - it has never achieved that feat anywhere. What can control a crime rate is not strict laws but the seriousness with which the existing law of the land is taken both by the government and its people. One can behave ignorant while claiming that it would have been 'politically correct' to reject the death sentence of Yakub - but the wrong message that would have gone to all of us would have fueled an already established perception that there is always a way to take the law of this land lightly.

Chota Shakeel further said "Somebody trusted a government but the government breached the trust. The company doesn't have any faith in the government. Who will come back to get killed?" 

Now they seem to have got the message right. The country wants them back not to give them a red carpet welcome, but to punish them instead for the crimes committed by them - using our established and transparent legal procedures.

Reportedly, Shakeel said that India will face consequences for hanging Yakub. Unfortunately for them, this threat works both ways.

Common course contents - its desirability in higher education

This article was published in the August 7, 2015 issue of the Millennium post  http://www.millenniumpost.in/NewsContent.aspx?NID=144348 )
Uniformity and diversity are not synonyms to black and white. Talking of uniformity can't be always considered as wrong in any absolute sense. Whereas a desirability to enforce uniforms for school-students is well accepted, similar enforcement in colleges is also considered as avoidable. Recently a move of UGC to enforce a common syllabus in the entire country has generated intense discussions in academics. Traditionally, higher education in India has been following a trend of denouncing any such proposals. One of the prime argument offered in its favour is that nowhere in the world, where institutions are known for their excellence, such uniformity has been imposed. Ironically, while carrying out these comparisons, these arguments conveniently choose to ignore the glaring inequalities between the performances of those institutions with ours. It is no secret that our education sector currently needs to expand its age-old narrow and pure-academic outlook to include many other important and extremely useful aspects of modern education. In addition to this it is also advisable to never overlook the enormity of the exercise that we need to carry out in India in terms of numbers. One also must not forget that nowhere else, countries have been working with these many number of potential students and relatively fewer institutions. In my view, in the context of India, the absence of a common structure and syllabus has been encouraging anarchy and chaos in the mass education sector instead of providing any glimpse of excellence.

                In the name of autonomy, inexplicable and most often undesirable sense of diversity has been encouraged in the higher education. Identical degrees issued by two universities of this country can't ensure anyone that there syllabus would also have some level of commonality. It is strange also because the 'eligibility' to become a teacher in an institution gets decided not by the course contents covered by the applicants but only by the nomenclature of their degrees. I fail to understand that why can't we ensure that if the name of the degrees are identical then at least sixty-seventy percent of the course contents will also be same. On the other hand, if two course-contents do not have sixty-seventy percent common then why shouldn't they be identified by two different names. Further, it is also an undeniable fact that in the name of autonomy and diversity, some institutions are known to have taken its advantage in introducing some anti-national and anti-society studies in some typically designed courses. Is it not a fact that a common test called NET has successfully worked to an acceptable extent in ensuring a minimum standard of the quality of teachers.

                When one has a task of regulating the academic standards of more than many institutions, common structure always helps in fixing a hard lower bound on the academic standards of the educational institutions. In the absence of such a common structure it often becomes impossible to stop the falling standards of a deteriorating institution. Enforcing a common structure and course helps in carrying all the institutions along and also helps in putting brakes on their downslide. An autonomous institution, showing signs of failure, is undeniably designed for a free fall in such a scenario. Autonomy is undoubtedly beneficial but only for those who are showing signs of improvement since a uniform structure would ultimately limit their rise. In a typical Delhi University scenario, we all would agree that if all the colleges of this prestigious University are made autonomous, more than many would fail to survive beyond a decade. We argue therefore in favour of having a common course, a common degree, a common structure for all the colleges of Delhi University to stop those institutions from getting exposed. I also believe that some of the very good performing colleges of Delhi University is well poised to give an incredible show if they are allowed to become autonomous. But it must not be favoured only because the autonomy of these few would force more than many other institutions of the University to follow a downslide. Since we are aiming at mass education, we must not think of doing that too. IITs and IIMs have better performing institutions and therefore any move to implement a common syllabus over there would limit their rise. On a deeper analysis, since the tags of 'IIT' and 'IIM' have recently been extended to additional institutions, this fact may add a new dimension into this discussion as even these entities are now being dragged into mass education. Let us not ignore the glaring fact that a common syllabus of CBSE has helped in maintaining a nationwide minimum standard in the school education sector.

                So the strategy of the regulatory authorities is crucial in these circumstances. They should be able to assess the timing when to provide greater autonomy to an institution. But all those central and state universities who are serving for mass education must be asked to adhere to some level of commonality in the course structure and contents to ensure a minimum standard in education.

Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) - aim, intent and the method

(Published in the June 7, 2015 issue of Organiser and can be visited through the following link http://organiser.org/Encyc/2015/6/13/1331814.aspx )

Higher education in India has been traditionally designed to produce academic thinkers primarily. In fact, academicians are still being produced by the present education system as individuals having a deep understanding of their subjects. However, we have collectively failed to realise that this education system does not have a copyright of producing thinkers. A degree has no relation with the amount of thinking or the extent of analysis one is capable of indulging into. We are confused between the sense of literacy and the importance of experience. We are yet to acknowledge the difference between a bookish knowledge and the confidence gained in a working environment, between a source of information and a source of wisdom. In our society, a skilled worker is invariably rated as poorer to pure-thinkers. An executor is often rated lower to an administrator. Advice of a doctor and an engineer on any other field other than their own profession never get the importance as compared to the degree-holding academic thinkers. We want the academic thinkers to rule this society. With this absurdity, we have been used to giving undue importance to the marks that we score in examinations as we use those marks to measure our overall 'value' in the society. In this system, failures opt for skills and winners enjoy a skill-free life and often keep a skill-demeaning attitude.

In view of the above, if one is asking for allowing choices in a course; allowing flexibility in the span period and place; making provision for inter-disciplinary approach; introducing innovative methods and advance technology in teaching; asking each student to complete, write and present some hands-on project during any course; giving options for skill-learning courses; maintaining some commonality in the structure and contents of those courses that are identified by identical names; bringing some highly desirable changes in our evaluation schemes, I have absolutely no reasons to oppose CBCS (Choice Based Credit System). Strangely, what is hard to accept is when it is asserted that these features can only come integrated with a semester structure. It becomes even difficult to digest when we are made to believe that these features can only come at the cost of having floating workloads for the teachers. And the most important of all, it is most stupid to imagine that these features can be introduced in any hurried manner as it has been witnessed in the recent years.

Let me address some of these issues over here. Semester system is good - beyond doubt. But it can work only where we have a one-teacher one-examination paper structure. Even IITs would fail to deliver if all of them decide to have identical examination papers in their semester examinations. Delhi University, where a paper is taught at 30 odd colleges or more and students are expected to get identical examination paper to solve, the semester system will fail to deliver the desired result. Further, let no one fool us in believing that with the same infrastructure and human resources we will ever be able to offer more choices than what we are providing the students right now. With the present constraints of manpower and infrastructure, we can only allow exchanges - allowing a choice to one student only at the cost of a choice of another student.

If we want all the features of CBCS to get embedded into the undergraduate courses in Delhi University, the first thing that we must decide uncompromisingly is to go back to the annual mode. An honest internal evaluation of the students in an annual duration, combined with their true-assessment through external evaluators in their final examinations can be used to Grade them perfectly. I would advocate for an hindrance free three years of such a scheme without failing them or holding them back in any year. They should then be allowed to 'improve' their grades and alternately allowed to even opt for around six to eight additional papers to claim a degree in their own choice of subject if they happen to clear their original degree requirements. Let time be no constraint for those interested students who after completing their History(Honours) would like to appear for additional six to eight papers of mathematics to claim a degree to pursue a career in mathematics. A choice and mobility can this way be introduced meaningfully. Further, in the annual system, summer vacations would be purposefully utilized by the students as they can be asked to do summer projects either at their parent institute or depending on the availability any other place of their choice to give them skill-training, academic-training or research-training as per their own inclination.

Many attempts have been already wasted in Delhi University, let us prepare this university first before attempting any meaningful transition. Let us decide on the contents of the syllabus in so much advance that the university is able to conduct a year of continuous refresher courses before implementation. Ensuring adequate preparedness is what makes a distinction between a meaningful transition and a failed experimentation.

LET THE SENSE PREVAIL

When all the University will have similar syllabus and courses then why on earth there will be a need for the seamless movement of the students from one institution to another? Having provision for such a movement is therefore simply erroneous and stupid. I would only conclude that the credit-scheme that are being lauded as a feature that will facilitate movements across the institutions are not meant for this at all but it is only to allow students to give extended time to accumulate credits to qualify for a degree. It seems, it is meant only to help failing students to complete the requirement for the degree at their own convenience, pace and duration. If it means that Universities should have a liberal policy towards the concept of strict 'span periods', I would gladly advocate in favour of this.

Secondly, even if the question of desirability is set aside for a while, all those features that are being sought to be introduced in the higher education through CBCS, I can challenge, will work in a far more meaningful manner if the format is kept annual in the context of Delhi University where there are more than handful colleges running such courses. Isn't it stupid to allow students to hop in and out from any course twice in a year and five times in a three year-course?

And lastly, apart from 'suggesting' model syllabus and model courses at a centralized web-site, UGC can also provide an exhaustive list of all the courses being run in this country along with their detailed syllabus. Our education is already a victim of forced teaching - parents expect the teachers to forcibly teach students, students themselves chose courses that are forced by their peers and societal pressures and these are often get decided by the marks only, that they eventually achieve in their qualifying exams. 

When there is an urgent need for this country to switch on to interest-driven mode of study, these forced strategies are going to yield undesirable results that will never help India to become a developed nation. It's time that we remove all hurdles of age and financial requirements for all those who are really interested in learning specific skills, a particular subject or show interest to become independent professionals.

Education reforms - Kitchenette vs Cafeteria approach

(The edited version of this was also published in the Organiser that can be visited using the following link
http://organiser.org//Encyc/2015/5/2/Column---Yielding-New-Education-Approach.aspx)

The Cafeteria approach

The academic reforms in the name of CBCS is on the verge of being implemented in the higher education. The new system as proposed by the government will basically need us to review our old single-discipline oriented approach in higher education. It demands, what they call, a cafeteria approach in our education. What is meant thereby is that the new system would encourage a multi-disciplinary approach and it is claimed further that it would give the students the much desired flexibility in terms of choice of the discipline papers. In addition to this, it also boasts of leaving the issues of choosing the span period and the place to acquire education, entirely on the students. While nobody can deny the desirability of these features in our higher education but the feasibility, the state of preparedness of our institutions and other costs in terms of infrastructure and other resources to provide these choices have always remained in doubt. 

Assessment of The Present system

Our present education system follows a strict strait-jacket approach. It has little scope for any flexibility in the choice of papers. The span period to complete a course is also predefined in our institutions that gives very little scope to those who prefer to learn at their own speed. It is due to this that generally Indian students go through a forced-study approach - wherein choices are often forced by the parents, by the peers, by the teachers and many a times even forced by the ease with which marks can be scored therein. The studies here therefore are largely teacher-centric, parent-driven and forced by the societal-preferences. Some major aspects that need to be addressed immediately by any new system are given as under:

1) We need to do away with the concept of having a fixed time frame for acquiring degrees. Those who realise their passion, potential and interest a little late find the doors of learning options closed. Despite our general agreement with the common perception that an interested and motivated student learns much faster, restrictions still rule against this provision in India.

2) In the absence of even a quasi-uniform acceptable standard of a particular degree in this country, it becomes really impossible to compare identical degrees issued from different institutions of India. What adds to this problem is that students find it impossible to use a part of their studies at one place while continuing studies at another place. 

3) We are so used to relate studies only with academics that any deviation from this is considered as a blow on our education system. The higher studies in India aims at producing only academics. Skill-learning are considered sub-standard and are never preferred over academics. There is an urgent need to break this hierarchy and treat academics as only one of the areas for the students to choose from.

4) We need to look at our examination system also urgently. The invention of electronic gadgets have exposed many holes in our university examination system. Moreover our examinations work as a dampener for the spirit of learning. Understanding becomes a casualty in our examinations. Knowing well that we can only group students under a handful of categories such as (extraordinary, good, above-average, average, below average, poor and worthless) our system make them waste their useful energy, time and ideas to get exhausted in a process of rote-learning just to acquire a rank within a category. 

Past Experience

We must also learn from the failed attempt to implement FYUP ( Four Year Undergraduate Program ) in Delhi University. The tall claims could not be realised as the reforms were carried out in isolation and with inexplicable hurry. An apprehensive Delhi University now has developed an attitude that is hardly conducive to carry out a fresh round of reforms. The lesson must be learnt from this failed exercise that whenever such a change in the system is proposed, its implementation must precede with a series of refresher courses to prepare the teachers and the infrastructure according to the requirement. Although there is an urgent need to attempt reforms, instead of a piece-meal approach we must keep a holistic vision starting right from the primary education. The whole idea of forced-study in India needs to change towards encouraging a self-study attitude in higher education. Primary and secondary education curricula should also be developed so that they complement the student-centric approach in the higher education. However, Keeping in view our own state of affairs, I would suggest that instead of the celebrated cafeteria approach we must explore a kitchenette approach. 

Cafeteria and the Kitchenette approach

The cafeteria approach symbolizes a student-centric approach but at the same time it often means a pocket-centric and in the Indian context a parent-unfriendly approach. The choices in a cafeteria come at a price and playing around with the choices such as even sharing a plate is often discouraged in a cafeteria approach. It also includes paying penalty for any cancelled order and therefore in an honest analysis this cafeteria approach turns out to be primarily a market-friendly approach at all costs.

Instead, India needs a kitchenette approach wherein the government can play a role of provider and the users will have all the options available before them. Depending on their choice they would not only be able to prepare items of their choices but they would additionally be encouraged to explore into the unexplored territories. With raw materials available to them, users of a kitchenette are provided with options that are  not limited by the pocket but only by the availability of food items.

To indulge into this, the government will have to explore ways to provide learning materials free on the internet sites in the form of lecture series of interactive and non-interactive variety, demonstration of experimental procedures, generous discussion on cutting edge technologies, providing scope for developing useful industrial ideas and other job-providing skills. We must create an environment where at least those who have realized their potential or interest are not deprived of an opportunity to acquire the relevant knowledge. The most regressive attitude is that we often relate age of a student with her ability to acquire knowledge. A person who realises that he should have chosen medicine as a field of choice in his late 40s finds his/her dream inexplicably unrealizable. Now that will be an injustice in a kitchenette approach. Whenever one realizes hunger, there must be a scope of preparing food making use of the available items in the kitchenette along with things available with her. Let us think of setting the students free to accumulate credits and once someone successfully acquires the required credits let an appropriate degree be given without any other unnecessary requirements. Let the working experience also provide some credit to a student in this system. Let an electrician start with some credit already in her kitty while attempting a degree in science/technology. Let an electronics equipment-repairing professional, a worker with an experience in building brick/steel/concrete structures, a plumber or a mechanic start with some advantage if they decide to study for a relevant degree. Let a nurse or a person having experience in pathology start with some advantage on the others aspiring to become a doctor. Let skills be treated at par with academics so that the preference for academics is not unjustifiably driven by an expectation for getting respect in our society. Let only the passion and interest rule the choice in this kitchenette approach as while preparing food only taste and quality governs our choice and not the cost of the food items involved.

Even though CBCS is being claimed to have been addressing some of the concerns discussed above, a cautious approach allowing wider consultation and discussions will only help in realizing its aims better.

Cafeteria vs Kitchenette approach

Let us not avoid discussion any more. We have suffered enough for keeping this approach. Sheer criticism devoid of any vision to carry out the much needed reforms, gives a false impression that we are not serious about the very idea of reforms.

But are they serious? I have a serious doubt in this regard as a preliminary analysis would suggest that at least two years of preparation must precede a change in the structure, content and intent of a magnitude such as those proposed in the CBCS. This period must be utilized for improving the infrastructure required for such an implementation along with holding a continuous series of refresher courses throughout the period to make any shift of this scale of its intended worth.

But do we need such reforms in the name of allowing the students to have a cafeteria approach in studies? 

I would rather advocate for a kitchenette approach instead of the much talked about cafeteria approach. A cafeteria requires the user to pay for each optional toppings and this restricts the choice whereas the kitchenette approach allows you to choose from whatever is made available to the user.

Why do we need a change? 

In this new era only those would be able to survive as 'learned' who would learn how to unlearn and relearn with ease. A new educational policy must focus on encouraging self-study instead of the present forced-study approach in our country. With this in mind, stress on online studies must be given its due importance within the courses. The colonial era concept of having a "fixed span period" must be done away with to give everyone a chance to acquire a degree in a discipline of one's own choice. The age bar for admission and a span period to accumulate the required credits will have no meaning if one is to be given a choice to keep on accumulating credits "at one's own pace" to finally become eligible for a degree. We have enough of this forced concept of studies. Forced by parents, forced by peers, forced by teachers and forced by examinations! It is now known that those students who take admissions under 'working professionals' category wherein the admission itself is earned by them out of their choices are seen to be far more motivated than the others. And a motivated students can learn at a much faster speed and in a more meaningful manner. And for them who want to learn a subject - our examinations work as a spirit dampener. Understanding becomes a casualty in our examinations - thanks to the undue importance to the marks that we have become so used to now. Knowing well that we can only group students under a handful of categories (such as - extraordinary, good, above-average, average, below average, poor and worthless) our system makes them waste their useful energy and time to get exhausted in a process of rote-learning to acquire a rank within a category.

Come on - let us lead the change - otherwise they would succeed in their design to paint us wrongly as a group that is always opposed to the reforms.

Let us carry out the Change

It is never wise to reject a system without reasons. We had arguments against the semester system to arrive at a unanimous decision of opposing the same. We had reasoned out the absurdities in the FYUP. Our stands in these cases were never blind and were always based on their detailed analysis. We therefore, must spare ourselves from becoming slaves of our final decisions. Our opposition for FYUP or the CBCS were not because of their nomenclature but because of the objectives behind them. Now, an effort is being made to pull us all into the trap of opposing every change in the name of our well-meaning decisions of opposing these formulations. It often reminds me of the laughable stand of the university wherein they have resorted to notify all kinds of teachers' strikes as illegal not because of the issues at hand but by citing a court order that is arguably quoted completely 'out of context'. Let us remind ourselves that even our existing migration schemes are nothing but our own method of transferring credits from one college to the other. We were also never opposed to another credit transfer scheme wherein we were absolutely comfortable in transferring our Honours students to the respective program courses when they used to get less than a threshold marks. Whereas the DTF has a history of taking an ideological stand irrespective of the stand of DUTA, recently the DU authorities helped them in creating a space and environment wherein all of us were pushed to appear on their side. What helped them was the idiocy with which FYUP was formulated and implemented as these did not confine to the format alone but spilled over even to the contents and the syllabus. Whereas we all can feel the relevance and usefulness of even the foundation courses that have been designed in other institutes such as IISc (Bangalore), in DU they were reduced to jokes because of their compulsory nature, the unreasonable weightage attached with these courses, the standard of the contents and above all the state of unpreparedness with which these were launched. The DU authorities were further exposed defenceless as all these experiments were being carried out in an isolated manner ONLY in this university – thereby defeating the very purpose for which it was championing. The fact that these changes were being implemented without affecting the desired changes in the approach of school-teaching further established beyond doubts that the experiments were badly designed, were ill-thought and hurriedly approached.

Even if we decide to leave all the above arguments aside, does it not make sense in having broad centralized guideline to help different universities to come some kind of an even-level wherein assessment of students from different universities would not remain as difficult as it is now. Just as we have a CBSE syllabus to guide all other boards to keep up with the pace, relevance and some sense of uniformity, is it not time to discuss the same in the area of higher education too? Just as we all were unanimous in opposing the experiments that were carried out in our university it is also a fact that we all are not happy with state of education in this country.

Let us not run away from discussions as there is no other known way to arrive at a consensus. CBCS or a modified FYUP – what would ensure a better performance of any new system of education is our involvement and preparedness that will eventually help us in developing the necessary confidence and conviction – to make any new system deliver.

India - a country of rapists?

Do you know what made Phoolan Devi an Indian icon? Because of an impression, true or false, that she murdered her rapists to teach them a lesson. And do you know why Gopal Kanda lost his elections recently? Because he is understood to be the real reason behind the death of Ms Geetika Sharma and her mother. Can you recall why the IPS officer R K Sharma was running for cover? Because someone pointed out that he had exploited a lady journalist Shivani Bhatnagar. And do you know what had made Ruchika Girhotra, a tennis player, resonate with our collective feelings when she stood up against another infamous IPS officer S P S Rathore ? Because she had exposed a rapist's intentions. Do you know where did the talented and promising movie star Shainey Ahuja go? The rape blame consumed his career. - For God's sake let us think twice before painting this country as a place of rapists. That the Indian mass felt outraged on the Nirbhaya's case was no exception but only a culmination of the continuous testing of our collective patience.

We have always raised our voice - it is also logical to feel outraged and disgusted, but let us never ignore that India is a place where rapists run for cover. Rapists can do almost anything to hide their face and identity. This country has no history of celebrating rapes and instead has been instrumental in making the life hell for the rapists. Apart from the alarming lack of will that our administration has exhibited over the years in delaying the justice to the victims where our country needs to correct itself in a major way is the manner in which we treat our rape-victims. Yes, there may be many elected politicians who are facing serious rape charges but for heaven's sake refrain from concluding that they get elected only because of that.

On yet another serious note, allow me to say that when a father asks a girl to take precaution, when a brother begs her to be cautious – isn't it completely insensitive to blame them of having rapists' mindset? What purpose does it serve when we justify blaming a helpless well-wisher to be possessing a rapist's attitude? Aren't the slut walking and kissing protests targeted only to provoke a large section of well meaning members of the society by blaming them and the entire society as a rapists' society?

I have been brought up in a family where even boys who used to roam around aimlessly or only for unnecessary fun was considered bad. We boys were not given easy permission to watch even a late night movie. We were asked to change our association if we were seen to be a part of a group consisting of students who were not career oriented. We were, thankfully, even beaten for not taking our health, behavior and studies properly. I am pretty sure that I am not alone sharing these experiences here. I would not deny that these restrictions were more on the girls within the family but to say that boys were left on their own would be only a conspiratorial misrepresentation of the facts. Where we have erred probably is that when the society realized the need to have career oriented girls, in its intention to provide them the desired liberty it neglected a desired care for the boys. Boys, instead of allowing the girls to become at par with them, almost inadvertently, went beyond their desired limits trying to keep their earlier parity intact. Mistaking that boys will remain the same, they were probably not given proper attention during this development and were allowed to enjoy an uncontrolled upbringing.

There is no escape from building a system that has a potential to deliver the justice sooner. But that is only an administrative solution that can help us only in setting examples. On the other hand, the society must also prepare itself to educate men and boys – sensitize them – and make them aware about the modern needs of the society where even girls need to be educated and career oriented. Unless the new generation is imparted with these values through the education, our old values that were meant for our earlier society structure will keep on confronting with the recent reality. And the criminal minds will keep on extracting, manufacturing, manipulating and misrepresenting reasons to justify the unjustifiable. Let us not allow others to get a chance, intentional or otherwise, to see us through the minds of these rapists.

Women in India - is there a hope?

No other society can match the number of reforms that ours has successfully carried out. Our ability to allow and encourage questions is simply unparalleled. That our society still exists and has remained alive and kicking transcending eras of conflicts and invasions - is a proof enough to convince that we have always remained open to questions and reforms. Yes, the kind of individualistic freedom that the today's modern world advocates might not have existed earlier - but the current model is yet to prove its worth. Individual freedom at the cost of maintaining an order in the society has remained a point of real concern for the modern day social scientists. How far is enough - has been the question that the modern world has often struggled to answer. On the other hand, that our society has managed reasonably well in accommodating diverse views and conflicting interests and that too with considerable ease - can only be a matter of amusement for the west. More than us, the West needs to learn from us on how to live in this manner. 

Our present rogue and rotten understanding of the issue of respecting our women and allowing them a desired space is nowhere near to what is depicted in our mythology. The present outlook can only be understood to have got developed over the years during adverse circumstances when probably the society was left with no other alternative to keep. This skewed opinion to put women under so much of restrictions must have been our way to defend us from our inability to affect the required changes in the system that ruled us. A loss of confidence in the ruling system can only be the reason of affecting such transformation where 'precautions' started dominating over 'justice' and 'reasoning'. Yes, the idea of having 'Kunti' or 'Draupadi' may not pass the current scrutiny based on the modern world norms but quite strangely it also appears as un-Indian if it is compared with the present India. The idea of a character "Durga' and 'Kali' on one hand and "Saraswati' and 'Laxmi' on the other may not be 'perfect' by the standards of our modern world but nevertheless they also collide head-on with our current opinion about women. 

Our 'glorious past' may not pass the quality test on a scrutiny based on the parameters of today's modern society but it would only be absurd to overlook the same just because it fails to show us a rosy picture when viewed with a microscope of today's world. Why can't we be asked to change our microscope itself. For it is high time that we start inspecting the idea of putting individual concerns ahead of the concerns of the society as that has only resulted in encouraging a culture of violence and dissatisfaction - prevalent everywhere today. A disturbed and agitated society that lost its patience on the rape-events in the absence of any effective action by the system has shown enough glimpses to prove that branding us as a society that encourages rape-culture is patently unjustified. This strategy is intended only to encourage 'Mukesh Singhs' and abuse and suffocate 'Nitbhayas'.

The case of BBC documentary

A fear shivered down my spine the day I had heard about the Nirbhaya case. Subsequently it has always been an emotion-shattering feeling for me whenever through the media I happened to encounter the details about how the crime was executed beyond all 'imagined' limits of brutality. A movie would have been completely censored if someone had tried to show what had actually happened that night! I remember, despite these hard hitting realities and despite the fact that the entire country was mourning the death of a braveheart and was feeling disgusted and ashamed, it could not stop an insensitive 'creative' artist from attempting to glamorize that gruesome 'rape in a bus' event. Understandably, the attempt faced spontaneous uproar from all corners and the creator was forced to dump the project (probably). Yet another insensitive attempt has been made by the BBC by daring to air the views of that mentally sick culprit who is undoubtedly an inhuman criminal by instinct. With no intention of asking you to draw any conclusion on those who could watch the documentary, I must confess that I will never be able to find enough strength to face his weird views in the name of logic as it would only expose our collective failure and magnify our sense of helplessness in proving him that there is no place for him in this universe.

You are free to blame me and my origin for having a feeling like this but I could not stop myself from writing this when I saw my feelings almost resonating with the shattered mother of the unfortunate victim yesterday on a TV channel. This development has only magnified the sense of defeat in me!

What hurts me most is when a set of 'independent and free thinkers' make an attempt at extracting and then magnifying a non-existent 'Indian' trace out of the words and sentences of the culprit that found a crucial space in the BBC documentary. I am convinced along with my countrymen that there was nothing 'Indian' in whatever had happened that night. As a matter of fact, it was Indian-ness that transformed the victim into an overnight emblem of courage and fighting spirit and it was exactly the same reason that had instantaneously demon-ized the culprit.

Survival of Indian Secularism Industry

Secularism in its mutated format of majority-bashing flavour is not an idea in India any more, it has developed into an industry. The entire media thrives on this skewed understanding of secularism. It is used as a protection by a selected few individuals among the vast population of minority to keep on exploiting their supporters. It pays to side with an NGO that supports this violated form of secularism as (a la Teesta) money starts pouring in. This industry provides a cover to many minority institutions to hide their activities of conversion. Human activism as a byproduct of this industry helps many groups in hiding their anti-nationalist intentions and activities. Corruption happens to be the end product of this industry. Seculars are so overflowing with leaders like Lalus, Mulayams, Kapils, Mamtas, Jayalalitas and Rajas that it becomes impossible to find a clean leader among them. And even if with some great difficulty you are able to identify a small fry with a clean history, the culture of secularism makes them difficult to accept that clean individual as their leader.

After the emergence of BJP in India, this nearly century-old secularism industry has been hit very hard. What adds to the discomfort of these seculars is the fact that the nationalist party has no dearth of financially clean leaders who are devoted to their ideology. A clean leader on the top makes these seculars uncomfortable – it becomes difficult for them to breathe corruption. They find no other way but to follow the same old tactics that they had been pursuing ever since Modi became the CM of Gujarat. These elements keep on trying to portray a picture that is very far from the hard reality. They kept on doing the chest-beating on the alleged poor and dismal condition of minorities in Gujarat while the reality has remained opposite to their claims if their status is compared with the other states in India. The rise of minorities in Gujarat during Modi's tenure is an example enough to shut these laud-mouths up but they would not do that as they earn their living on this. I dare these close-minds to first rise above their vested interest and then honestly analyze why an RSS man Modi saved a minority 'Father Alexis' from Taliban – they would immediately realize that RSS and Modi are actually following our true tradition and ancient-pure form of secularism. They consider all Indians as Hindus - a word that helps them in discovering a deeper connect within the fellow nationals.