Job´ber`nowl`-ism

Failure to face reality has been, for the last several decades, the trademark of Kerala's enlightened political thinking. We, greatly influenced by the Marxian thought and enamored of the glamour of that school of thinking, chiseled new contours to the concept of rights and

responsibilities of our people. We, with the air of a highly sophisticated society, wanted our government to be a vain and irresponsible dispenser of the meager riches at its command. Thoughts about replenishing the quickly vanishing resources were branded as reactionary. Not
to be outdone by the red variety of politics, the other political combinations also worked furiously to outshine the Communist party in distributing the largesse. At that time everybody was certain that alone was the route to the voter's mind. No sense in blaming them
as New Delhi was also fascinated by the Hindu growth rate. Delhi, typical of a third-world country, interpreted its economics in such a way that making money was always treated as a four-letter word.

The developed world was running away from the rest, making the whole economic interaction a one-way traffic. Once North decided that new avenues have to opened to further their greed, they conceived the grand idea of globalization which for them was another method to squeeze
the juices out of the already dry third world. But to be fair to them, the new wind of globalization and liberalisation carried prospects of rewards for sensible approach to one's economics and its forceful execution. So, soon the third world was divided into two groups- one trying to exploit the new opportunities thrown open to them and the other still continuing to live like the ostrich. It is a sub-group of this species which is seen in the geographical region called Kerala.
The communist movement which was the first to take note of the distressed conditions of a major chunk of our society, naturally began to respond to them in their own creative way and the credit for whatever improvements we see in Kerala's social life now, should go to them.
But unfortunately, economics was not their strong point. They pushed aside economic realities and principles as cumbersome or unnecessary and proceeded in such a way that production was almost completely ignored. And in the process, all that remained soon for distribution was poverty. Even that they could not distribute equitably!

The communist movement like an octopus had its grip on almost all aspects of our social life and through art, literature, theater etc strengthened its control over the Malayali mind. It naturally was easier to tell a hungry man that the government is yours and the treasury
should be yours to be had. Subsidies and relief without any idea about balancing the income and expenditure, ran riot in the Malayali ethos. The intellectuals for varying reasons never put any pressure on their grey matter to study this assault on common sense and developed a
new seminar culture in Kerala. Every detail of our day-to-day life was discussed threadbare with a predominant stress on the makebelieve world of zero accountability.Soon deficits began to mount and we were about to be swamped by our own foolishness of not paying any attention to the basic concept of there being no free lunch. The cruel but efficient economic entities threatened to sweep us off our feet. It was at the national level that the need to correct this folly was realized. But it took quite some time for the states to accept the reality. A patient carrot and stick policy by the Central government was needed to spur the states to give up their populist economic policies, at least partially. And not surprisingly Kerala became one of the last states to be brought around.
Well, that process still has not taken off properly. We still cherish the sweet thoughts of the glorious money-guzzling state enterprises and the callous bureaucracy which still bleed the people.

We as a society, have developed an attitudinal problem which has to be studied in detail and corrected. For the last several decades, we were pampered by the politician. He told us that we have the right to expect everything on a platter without working for it. Why should you work? What is the state here for if not to feed you, dress you and shelter you! Go to the government office and while away your time, get your salary on time even if it is at the expense of the poor whose welfare was given the go by. You even managed to get raises which meant that gradually the ratio of government spending on salary to development expenditure rose to ridiculous levels. To such levels where the government, at least in certain sectors, spent more on the salaries and other related expenses than on the basic purpose for which this structure was raised. Even now when the ship is certain to sink if drastic corrective steps are not taken promptly, we still continue to pretend to be unaware of the impending catastrophe.

The Left is still strong in our minds. It has become a habit to a lot of us. Its tentacles have spread to more areas of activity by which it cleverly manipulates the average Malayali's mind. By no stretch of imagination will I say that Left is bad. No, I very strongly feel that it has got a role to play. It should be there in our minds as a corrective force to rein in thegreedy politician who would not otherwise hesitate to run with the Big business and share the spoils unabashedly. Our society urgently needs such a break inspector because we have on several occasions proved that we were incapable of responding to even life and death situations to protect our interests. Yes, like the Lord who said he would manifest in our minds whenever we tend to go astray, the Left shorn of its Utopian ideas, should live in us to prevent us from becoming slaves to the satanic undercurrent of the money game.

Firstly, we have to decide if smoking is bad for us. Once we come to that conclusion, we are then morally bound to find ways to eliminate the danger. The fundamental aim should be to bring about an end to smoking. There may be legal issues involved in it. Don't I have the right to smoke my way to cancer? Aren't there several other means to ruin? Is the Government bent on putting an end to all these threats?

Obviously, all these issues have to be studied in detail. Can a man indulge in something which will harm him, even though such an indulgence does not cause any problem to other people directly? Generally speaking, he can, as long as he mentally or physically does not reach a stage where he is a drag on society. Like sitting in his room, looking at the fan for hours or writing down the alphabet repeatedly. All that you may have against him is that he is not contributing anything to the society. Which, he may not have to. And the issue at a subtler level may raise questions about his right to be a weight on the shoulders of the society. Does the society have a duty to take care of such lotus eaters? Non-contribution to society and expecting contribution from society are the issues involved in such cases. You have to arrive at a sensible blend of duty to society and consideration to individual preferences, in order to handle such issues with a humane touch.
Now about smoking. You know that smoking harms you. More importantly, it harms the innocent non-smokers also. The only crime they have done, is not to have demanded any action against smoking. Okay, now you are sure that it is your duty to see that smoking does not harm at least the non-smokers. Administrative measures have to be taken. But does it end there? What are we going to do when the smoker gets cancer or a heart problem? Who is going to foot his medical bills? In some cases, it is the government directly and in other cases, the medical insurance firms and that again affects the premium to be paid by the non-smoker also.

Smoking like most other issues, has two sides to it. Supply and demand. The Government has to initiate awareness campaigns so that people come to know of the real danger involved in smoking. How it harms you and your dear ones. How it drains you financially. Yes, the money spent on cigarettes and later on treatment. Ban on smoking at places where it may affect others should be the first area to be targeted. Then the issue of the smoker's close relatives has to be looked into. Incrementally, more and more obstructions have to placed before him so that he finds it difficult to find a place to take a puff.

But that alone may not win the battle for you. The initial enthusiasm to implement the rules, may wane in due course and cigarettes will pop up surreptitiously and slowly at the most unexpected places. So something has to be done to reduce the supply of cigarettes, if not stop it altogether. This side of law making may run into serious obstacles as it affects the manufacturers, the labor and the thousands of retailers. That could be a strong lobby. But it is this camp the fight has to be carried into if we would like to have any chance of winning the battle. The kind of money we get from cigarettes is not enough to pay for the medical and social costs of smoking. But political will alone can carry the day for the closure of cigarette production facilities will raise the kind of clatter which would make the vote-hungry politician scurrying for cover. Government can do it in phases, perhaps. Initially they can decide against raising the capacity of these units. Then ask them to reduce their production level gradually.
The Government can discourage the cultivation of tobacco in India. And it can impose a heavy duty on tobacco imports. This along with stiff taxation on the finished product could bring down the availability of cigarettes.
It may be, to go by the strictest human rights values, interpreted as a violation. But you can plead not guilty as it is the responsibility of the Government to take care of the health, physical and mental, of the people. And experiencing the travails of a ‘persecuted’ group, may influence the smokers’ sensibilities when they happen to be on the side of the majority on some other issue!

This article was written by father when Pope John Paul II died.

An era is over. Pope John Paul II is dead. May God bless him. Not that such a great soul needs my prayers to help him tune in properly with the Almighty.

I talked of the Pope because his death gave me an opportunity to muse over certain things spiritual in nature. The media repeatedly talked of him as the shepherd of the believers. I have always considered myself to be a believer, of course with my own conditions. But I haven't for a moment thought of myself as a follower of Christianity, let alone the Catholic Church. Let me make one thing clear. I am not attributing any motive to the usage of this expression. I wouldn't even dream of an insinuation that this is a deliberate ploy to bring all believers in the world under the umbrella of the Papal order. No. But the usage of this word opens up some new avenues of thought which may be a trifle interesting.

Let us first assume that most of us believe in something connected with God. To give an example, I am a Hindu. I don't know how I qualified to be a Hindu. Nobody taught me anything about Hinduism. So I can't say I was inspired by the greatness of that religion before I took the plunge. My family being Hindus decided that I too am a Hindu and brought me up teaching me Hindu tenets and an ambience of Hindu thoughts permeated my consciousness. One thing was obvious. There was no pressure on me simply because at such an early age you don't do any great deal of resistance. More often than not, one tends to accept what is offered to him at a stage when you know only to accept things. Thus I grew up to be a Hindu, grabbing a little bit of Hinduism all along. But talking about me, I don't know whether I am a good Hindu or whether my religion is the best that is available in the world. I am destined to live and die as a Hindu blinkered by the absence of any sense of comparative religion. I don't even know if I am happy about it.

But I am sure of one thing. Almost everybody is quite certain that the religion that one is cocooned by is the best for him and more importantly for everybody else. I am sure of one more thing. I don't want to open a can of dangerous worms by making an attempt to break into areas held sacrosanct by the unspoken apostles of various religions. What I am more interested in is on different track. Which also allows me to a walk down the alley of religious options.
When do you become a follower of a particular religion? Opinions, I am sure will differ but that only means that I am also allowed to hold on to my perception and the avenues of thought it opens up. Is it when you are conceived? Or when you are born? Or when some family adopts you? None of these options looks convincing to me. This is not much different from getting admitted to a school quite randomly without any enquiry about the school, its faculty or its infrastructure. Also not much different from marrying someone you meet for the first time. This casual nature of having a religion without knowing what it is, not even its basics is rather naïve if an understatement is allowed. But this is the only major way people and religion are connected. I concede I don't have a clue how this aberration can be corrected. One way might be to allow one to keep in hold his becoming a member of a religion for a while. During this period, a healthy exposure to a comparative study of various religions, may give him a better picture and one can, with a better perspective, choose his religious pursuit. He can refrain himself from embracing any religion also. That sounds a much better idea to me, definitely much better than one's becoming a Hindu just because his father was a Hindu. There could be several more sensible suggestions but I don't for a second believe that birth ought to have much to do with religion. It is as avoidable as your becoming a Republican because your father is a supporter of the GOP.

Where Is Religion Headed For?

Wondering what Jobbernowl-ism means. Jobbernowl means a person who is a blockhead, a stupid or doltish. So the acts of such people is Jobbernowl-ism.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Any this happen to you and me, every day. So ain't it better that I firstly make it clear that every thing that I write in here would be Jobbernowlisms. You don't need to turn around and swear, get them straight onto the comments.


My dad was a journalist. I grew watching him blogging on various topics. I consider him as an encyclopaedia. I used to answers to all my question. I don't know whether all are so. But may be not, because later when i started to understand things on my own,  I realise that all answers which he gave me was correct. A person who reads 11 newspapers and 4 magazines daily, how can he not be like an encyclopaedia? I was amused a few days back when I read that Yuvaraj Singh is out of the Indian Cricket team squad. My dad had told me six years before that Yuvaraj is a better player than Mohammad Kaif , would stay in the team for some time but may be out after some years. He was spot on then.

I am definitely sure that I will never be able to write at least ten percent like him. Remembering him, the first few articles which I post will be from my dad’s collection. You will start to feel the difference when I start writing. Read on...