travelogues

First of all I dont want to sound neither like a NRI snob nor a rustic going ga ga over the desh ki mitti while writing this, so I will try my best to stick to bare facts and observations I made. So I have reasons for being both - I am a cynic and thus tend to seek perfection and criticize a lot when not found and at the same time am not really keen to criticize a bit too much because of my impending permanent shift to India a few years down the line.
So the run up to the trip was quite sensational got into a mad rush to set everything straight before leaving, somehow things started falling into place by themselves. No need for boring gory details - basically it was very hectic and a lot could go wrong but events mostly seemed to unfurl in a way that was positive for me.
Anywho .. the travel was not going to be good and I made sure of that with the tickets I booked. I cut short by already short trip further by taking So instead of a 3 hour stopover at washington one for 15 hour (slight oversight with regards to AM/PM in the timings at the time of booking tickets) . To make matters worse I somehow felt that I could wait it out at the terminal with my laptop, music phone and a lot of international minutes. Well I did make it, but very soon it was quite apparent that it was not a good decision.
I will skip the minor troubles I had in finding the boarding gate for the flight to Delhi - it was expected considering my limited experience of traveling through large airports. I was dreading a crummy aircraft and dreading that my travails would be heightened by the fact that the flight time for almost a whole day for me. But the craft turned out to be pretty nice, the staff .. I will be neutral I guess. Not as thoroughly professional and hospitalable but efficient nonetheless, so anyone looking for airline suggestions - AI is definitely okay if not the best choice.
So fellow passengers, I do not interact much with strangers but I did notice a few interesting characters, this american group of students going to Delhi to know India as part of their course - one of them was somewhat funny. The unavoidable bong bitch glaring at everyone. And the really really stereotypical aunty wanting to get a window seat and creating a fuss over the seat assignment. I got a similar seat as her and I was pretty happy with it, so I wondered what the fuss was about. Anyways she did manage to have her way in the end. Then of course the rustic uncle sitting next to me - making me fill his arrival immigration info card and the lady with the kid. Not much of a nuisance but still funny how I tended to stereotype so many of them. Then another fellow making a fuss over the name of the city being Kolkata and not Calcutta. I don't get it how people get the impression that this is a particularly funny or innovative joke. Then the guy peeping into my screen as I type this post(later I saw every male eye in the same direction and realised what it meant - there was a TV screen behind me and nothing short of a one day cricket match of India was on :D)
So arrival in India - New Delhi.. had to catch another flight from here to Kolkata. So here came the funny part. When the guy issuing the new boarding pass asked me how many bags I had checked in and wrote it on a piece of paper - I couldn't help remembering stories of people losing their luggage. Well I assured myself that at least it would have reached Delhi, so well I don't know how much of a difference that makes but still that was all I could do to fortify hopes. Then came the funny part. So while we nagged and cussed over the fact that we had to go through another security check at JFK - NY (desis/americans alike), not even a murmur was heard when we were told to do the same at Delhi.
So there I proceed to gate 1 where my flight is supposed to depart. I was pleasantly surprised to see a sign beckoning passengers to use free WiFi while they wait. I swished out my laptop and to my wonder it asked for a password. I said oh well at least they intend to provide some services and its the intentional that counts.. blah blah. [Nevertheless later I found out that we need to register ourselves to get a password, where should we know that is something I am clueless about] So I thought fine, I will simply write this entry. Perhaps a couple of people might even read it someday (when I force them)
Fact is there is such thorough unprofessionalism that its funny and sad at the same time. And avoid it as much as you can, there is no way you can be blind enough to find it perfectly alright. I guess the problem was more that I was getting weary of the wait and cranky. Anyway I will skip the rants about the last flight, just suffice to say never take Indian Airlines for domestic travel - seriously.
Even after being repeatedly told not to come - my oldest bud was there waiting at the gate with another friend. So now time for reactions. I was expecting that I look fat, maybe fair and a darkhorse was more umm smart or something but Kaani gave me a googly - he says I look tall !! he he he
And then came the moment I was waiting for a long time.. meeting my family. I will skip the details.
I was afraid everything would turn unknown and things changed but not too much. So after being forced into bed I wondered should jet lag hit me now .. well I tried to sleep for 3 whole hours, seeking the aid of music, that generally helps but not this time.  Got a lot of things to do & people/places to visit - should be a good trip. Gonna get some shut eye somehow.
I think I will keep the rest of the entries as personal notes, not post them.

Musings on relationships - III

This is another of those subjects which comes up due to the inexplicably complex constitution of the female mind and the weird behavior we poor men have to put up with. So I will start from the basics instead of talking about the issue which will eventually be led to this fundamental question - what do women want? Come to think of it - it is so very confusing a topic - they even made a movie of the same name :D
Anyway they want a guy to be firm and respectable, basically one who cuts a miserable figure, one who is persistent is seen as one without a backbone and/or self-respect. So this sounds good for both sides - men get to maintain their pride and the women get upright companions. But the problem is not as simple - they also want to be pampered - these same woment. If there were two kinds of women and each had their particular choice of men - it wont be a problem, but the same woman wants a guy to pamper her crazy. She wants him to call her 10 times even when she doesn't return his calls - to constantly ask her out even if she is non-chalant about the whole thing. So what do poor men do? Do they make a remote for themselves and give it to their ladies to switch from the two sides back and forth? On a serious note there needs to be a solution for this which is less fantastic and more practical. Whether we will be able to find it anytime sooon is doubtful though. I see it as a dilemma as you do not want to bring ego when it comes to love and then again you should not lose your pride for anything or anyone.

Musings on relationships - II

Someone told me to write a sequel to one of my articles. So then there are some people more free than me so as to actually read the crap. The article in question was on how not to give the right to hurt you to someone in a hurry. It is required of me to outline the steps for actually identifying such a person whom you can give this right to. I promised I will give it a try so I will though I don't believe I can. So we know that for us such people are relationships that are not done for any gain, it is something we do unknowingly - basically you do not really have control over the choice of people. What you can best do is to delay things till you are sure. So I change the question as to when can you be relatively sure. Well once you think you have reached that state you need to evaluate - and think about our relationship and see if things are  as sweet as they seem or are you doing some wishful tihnking. So you spend a lot of time together, you go out a lot. But this doesn't mean anything. Any relationship is two way (feelings are one way) and you have to see that there is give and take from both sides. Now when I say give and take I mean that in terms of things like money, love, affection, power, protection or any amenities or privileges. And certainly there is no measure involved, no need to match gestures. All there is needed is an intent to give and to care from the person you take. Now it is not an easy task, and I don't think saying what I have said really helps much. There will be a lot of difficult signs to read still and to interpret them. I guess I am at most (hopefully) pointing people (at least one person who asked me to write this :D ) in the right direction.

Musings on relationships - I

How and why humans interact and develop relationships is a largely unknown and unpredictible thing and the insignificant knowledge that psychologists claim to have developed is very esoteric and (I believe) largely erroneous. So here I will try to pen some of my thoughts and see some things become progressively clearer and perhaps even share some of my attempts to conquer this befuddlement. I don't care about how or why you tend to like some people and not others. But after you realize you like someone, they tend to constantly occupy your thoughts and on rare occasions even alter your decisions and thus your life. But the trouble is deciding the level of the relationship or giving it a name. You can be employer-employee, acquaintances, friends, buddies, bros (I see these last three as levels of friendships :D ) or in love (there might be degrees to this feeling of love too which I am yet to discover, I somehow feel it would be just one level for this kind of relationship) and possibly many more that I can't think of right now.
I don't think there is anything interesting enough to discuss in the employer-employee relationships - but for the others there are some things to be said. Sometimes when you meet a person you can develop a liking for him/her instantly, but there might not be an equal reciprocation. So does that mean you fret over it or let the friendship go? No, you tend to adjust your degree of interest and likeness and let things evolve - basically get to a common page somehow. I reckon this is such an obvious thing that we do it subconsciously most of the times. If we dig deep into our memory, we will find people we liked and wanted to befriend but are just acquaintances with or sometimes the other way round too! The issue becomes more serious when there is love involved - if one of the people develops romantic feelings for the other and there is no such feeling from the other side - it spells misery for both and their relationship. What we don't realize is that when there is mutual liking between two people, it is a bridge connecting them, whether the bridge is a shear one or collosal and strong one doesn't matter as much as long as there is a connection. Or to say it more simply as long as the relationship exists, the name of it matters considerably less. So what I mean is - if you love someone, and there is no reciprocation, having a relationship of friendship should make you happy as well.
Thinking more practically, girls are such complex creatures that there is constant confusion over their behavior and you find it difficult to be sure of what level you are mutually connected with them. Added to that they are very good at losing their temper, so if you misinterpret anything there is bound to be retribution. So even at the cost of not being understanding, you need to ask them to make explicit the goings on of their heads. Thats not a panacea but then everything in life is too realistic to be idealistic and hence no formula can be derived for any part of it. This is just one of the solutions that I think should be tried once in your attempts at breaking from the state of befuddlement !

Suicide

Why does someone kill himself. Most of the people we hear about kill themselves out of want for something - whether it is the student not able to cope with the educational pressure or the poor soul who cannot feed his family or a rejected lover who cannot find a way of carrying on without his beloved. The rest are termed as suffering from mental illness depression or something similar which basically means that he who killed himself was not in his right frame of mind to have taken such a decision. I believe there is another very important category of people that people either cannot understand or choose not to. Aren't there amongst us a whole many who just cant find a place to fit, people for whom there is no joy in the living and a whole lot of suffering. And to choose death over life would be a very profitable decision for the kind. How cant such a person be out of his mind when he can be lucid enough to identify each choice and the consequence of each of them. There are people who would want to kill themselves but do not do so just because they feel there is are responsibilities on them that they cannot just overlook. They have to live for the few people who love them and to repay kindness they might have received, do repay a loan that they have on their soul. These people think of new ways of suicide everyday - almost everyday and the reason for not taking the plunge is not always fear - it can be one of these chains that the world has put on them. For courage is something that the person can gather over the years - after all it takes just one moment of courage to end it all and a whole lot more courage to carry on. The problem is that such people are not very different - they look the same (or 'normal' which is the term in use most frequently) as any other person, the only difference is that their zest for life is non-existent and they hate every moment of life forced upon them. I know my last few statements are somewhat vague but then so is the state of mind of such people.

The old chicken - egg question

I have talked a lot about agnosticism before but today I feel like doing a case by case analysis. So there are n no of religion, with each saying that their God, Bhagwan, Allah etc is the creator of everything etc.

Now let us hypothetically assume it to be true - so that one or more gods either separately or jointly created the universe and humans and everything. Or perhaps there is only one true god and maker and the rest are imagination. Now the question for all people agreeing to this is who made this hypothetical God or Gods. I mean is there a hierarchy God makes man and Earth, God's God makes Gods and heaven. So where does it end? Now there can be no meaningful end to this side of the discussion.

Then comes the idea that there was no God. Well ok then how did we come into being ? Scientists talk of a Big Bang theory, but that hardly is an argument that applies here. How did the matter to go through this Big bang come from. There is no valid argument in either case. I saw this side of no sides a while back and that was the day I became a peaceful agnostic, I respect the problem and have no shame in accepting that  I am not upto finding a solution for this.

P.S. This is basically the same reason I am never afraid in air travel - reason tells me that if there ever be a problem mid air it is only the pilot who can do anything about it and my worrying over something that I have no control over is not going to help in any way.

Pakistan .. why is it what it is ?

We all have been watching from the fence as Pakistan is being ripped apart by a monster of it's own making. But how did it come to this.. at the time of the partition Pakistan tried hard to get a lot of territories to accede to them but they were defeated largely - in the name of leadership they had just Jinnah while India on the other had Patel, Nehru and Gandhi to contribute in different ways. While Patel was the action guy, Nehru was the public face and Gandhi was the mass leader .. Jinnah had to do all these roles by himself. So while Jinnah could hardly match Patel's acumen and planning he also was definitely way behind as the loved leader of the masses - Gandhi was after all 'the father of the nation'. Also due to the tendency to align with the stronger side, most rulers wanted to accede to the seemingly more moderate/considerate Indian leadership and at the same time wherever public opinion counted Hindus (the majority) didn't think of going to Pakistan. There were two critical states that created all the mess that is here today. While Hyderabad had a Hindu majority with a Muslim ruler, Kashmir had a Hindu ruler with a predominantly Muslim population. Now these were vital and India could not afford to lose either while Pakistan was dying to get them. Patel eventually outsmarted Jinnah and wrested both of them out of his hands. Given this humiliating defeat, Pakistan was never bent upon being a friendly neighbour. Also with India's pivotal role in the Independence of Bangladesh - animosity between the neighbours was sealed. Now while India and Pakistan were both in poor shape in terms of technology, finance and defence while India took help from the erstwhile USSR to build itself to what it is today Pakistan for some reason sought to be under the umbrella of USA and never tried to build its own factories, infrastructure or technology etc.. It's leadership was more bent upon wresting over Kashmir from India. Even if they were successful  or are in the coming future - what is the result of it all going to be. Is it going to help even a single person on either side of the border or even in Kashmir? Not really... 
But regardless of basic logic Pakistan continued to fund insurgency and foment terrorist elements in the name of 'liberation of Kashmir'. Well it forgot one basic thing - terrorist are not patriots .. they are professionals. Just as any other professional they want to be employed and they would gladly turn back on their own master rather than be jobless. So now with Pakistan trying to be good and helping USA in the fight against al-Qaeda etc.. the taliban has nothing else to do but turn their AK-47 and bombs to Pakistani cities. I wish I could say 'As you  sow, so shall you reap' but such is not true in case of countries, for leaders mess up and the poor public suffers. 

What's wrong with India

India has over the years proved itself the best place for corruption, inefficiency and incompetence to thrive. Why is it that the law in the country seems so decorative and perhaps even a tool for the rich to wield against their enemies and not one for justice? Numerous events in the current news have made me realise that the worst thing and the root of all the problems in India is none other than the lax judiciary in India. Like a parent that spoils a child and never punishes the brat for mischiefs, so are the officials in every department in India. Just yesterday the pitch for a cricket match was made so poorly that the match had to be abandoned. How is this possible in a country that invests so much in the sport and is a world leader in it? How is it possible for a stadium in New Delhi to fuck up when even countries like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh can manage well every time? And if it is not acceptable why are we seeing just a blame game, possibly an enquiry and no heads on the table ! And the funny and sad thing is that the people are satisfied with just shouting (pelting bottles on the ground in this case) and then going home to crib more on the state of affairs. There is no interest in the public to see the culprits / incompetent officials punished.
The Ruchika case under so much media hype is another sad example of the same. The attention is on why was the accused given so mild a punishment, there is no focus on why did it take 19 years and when there are public statements proving a motley of politicians and civil servants involved in shielding the accused, there is no move to prosecute them. At least suspend them for the time being !!
Such is the sick state of affairs that there is no sense of pride anymore in living in what we call 'Saare Jahan Se Achcha'. This seems to have acquired a sarcastic tinge in such circumstances for me at least ! All I can say is that I will still say 'Saare Jahan Se Achcha Hindustan humara' but without conviction and with a hope that it someday becomes true.

Preconceived notions and discrimination

We may try and say that we do not discriminate, but we know that we actually do have some pre-conceived notions and may at times discriminate. First of all what is discriminating - nothing but unfair treatment to a fellow based on our prejudices and obviously this includes rascism, casteism, sexism etc. I don't think there can be a valid argument towards any kind of discrimination as it comes out of neither logical nor compassion. What, on the other hand does having preconceived notion mean. It is a lukewarm feeling towards a thing you are not very sure about. As I see it, it is nothing but applying probabilities. If you have been many-times lied to by a person, you will have the notion and natural instinct to not readily believe that which this person says. This is very much understandable and this behaviour comes out as a natural defence mechanism and seems to come from logic. But there is a certain blur, a muddiness in the meaning of preconceived notions. This does not include that you act on those notions - notions are just a means of putting you up on your guard. To have doubts about the certain facts/people etc.. and not to have a negative opinion. It is this blurriness which make people act more as discriminators than they really are. So the idea is simple doubt from past experiences/statistics, but verify and then believe

Holocaust - The greatest tragedy ever ?

The topic is pretty vast and disputed and needs some background. I am afarid I will digress quite a lot. First of all what is the holocaust - it basically refers to the genocide of around 5 million people of Jewish religion by Germany led by the Nazi leader Hitler in the early 1940s. Then another important thing is the creation of the state of Israel. Since biblical times Jewish were promised a state of their own called the 'Promised land' and Moses led them from their enslavers in Egypt to this land through a horrendous and painful journey over vast deserts. In modern times the Jews, being tradesmen, had immigrated and spread around everywhere specially europe. Now with Hitler coming after them baying for their blood in such a way as he did, made fleeing the only option for the ones that managed to escape the gas chambers. Some fled to the American continent and others saw this as an opportunity to return to their 'Promised land' which is now Israel. At the time Jews were being turned away by almost everyone. The european countries did not want the refugees to return to their homes and Palestine - the site of the 'promised land',  which was ruled by British at the time did not like the million odd Jew refugees settling there. They finally managed to establish an independent state carved from within Palestine and called it by the name of Israel and thus ended their suffering - well at least temporarily.

Now what did the holocaust actually mean. The number of Jewish deaths is a huge figure and the intolerable Nazi cruelty make this period of time one of the most shameful in the annals of mankind. But does that mean that it be a bargaining chip for all future generations of Jews? There are now elements in the Jewish society just exploiting the holocaust memories to get away with just about anything. Now it is a well known fact that USA is one of the strongest allies of Israel and has been strengthening its arms by fair and unfair means and even looking the other way as Israel continues to wreck havoc on Palestine. I can't pass a ruling as to which side is right/just and which is not, but Israel is definitely the stronger one; and it has time and again used it to do some cruel acts on the relatively weaker Palestinian state. Now what is the reason that USA, which is the self acclaimed messiah of all the world, has not tried to set things right and does in fact support a strong nuclear armed state? The obvious reason is that the diaspora of Israel is one of the most powerful sections of the american community. In fact it is more powerful than the majority christian community I would say. Money lending was a traditional Jewish occupation since long back and even now the majority of banking families are Jewish. The Rockfellers, Rothschilds and many others who run the financial institutions, banks and media worldwide are Jews. So their influence is definitely worth quite a bit. Now there is a lot of noise in the conspiracy community that these Jew banking families have a plan to enslave the world etc etc.. I do not subscribe to that in the face of no definite proof - but still the fact remains that there is an imbalance of power and power is not something that humans have been build to absorb without causing a lot of collateral damage around them.

So the overall fact is that with the backing of the powerful financial strength and using the memories of holocaust as an excuse and baraining chip Jews have done whatever they wished to and gained power in all forms. There are I would guess anything from 5-10 movies made on the holocaust and there seems to be a concerted effort to never let this awful piece of history to fade away into distant memories and to make the Christian community sorry for their 'atrocities'. I fail to understand why are other such horrible tragedies not as bright in the spotlight of our memories? The US bombing of the two Japanese cities for example though not equal is number is an equally brutal crime - both the genocides targetted the innocent civilian population yet the Japanese tradegy is a distant memory now. The Armenian massacre of  1915 left more than a million dead. As I see it the idea is to keep this very much alive and project the wrongs on their society to enable them to do wrongs of their own. Holocaust may or may not be the biggest tradedy of human making but it certainly is the most appaling misuse of a tragedy.