Pakistani Martin Luther King

Interesting what a google chat with my friend Daniel does. He sent me the following video, lamenting “how would our leaders react to something like this?”

My take on great leaders is that national crisis produces, or brings forth, great leaders. People in general, and leaders are no different, rise to the occasion. During “normal” times there is nothing much to rebel against, or fight for. Yes there are always issues to worry about. But how many would dharna or do satyagraha against everyday pettiness and stupidity of our societies. This is why we resort to internet petitions which is to be sent directly to the PM’s office for immediate attention.

So may be, if you believe there are no great leaders in India today, it is a blessing in disguise. We are having a good time, relatively speaking. We can sit in front of the TV and snicker at the CWG, Adarsh or some other scam. Tchch, Tchch under our breath. Shake our heads if there are others around so we can show how concerned and disgusted we are about the state of affairs.

Or if you are like me, I switch channel often. From “Shimmy” where beautiful, skimpily clad women do yoga. Or go to Star World to watch some fantasy detective show. Or BBC to see what is happening in Moscow. Or TLC to see what some outrageous chef is up to while traveling around the world to exotic locations. Or what the genius Brigette the blond bimbo has to say about some faraway exotic beaches.  Or watch how to kill someone who attacks me on Discovery or National Geo. Or live vicariously through Bear Gilles. Quickly skip through NDTV, CNN-IBN or TimesNow to make sure I am not missing any of the circus. Enough about my shameful existence.

Another friend of mine twittered (is that a verb now?) Pakistan’s Road to Disintegration on Takshashila.

With all that is happening in Pak, I wonder will the next great leader like Martin Luther King come from Pak or the Islamic world ? They and we badly need one.We because Pak has nukes. Otherwise Pak, as Cohen points out, is not very relevant. I am not a very belligerent man. But in this case I say thank the people in the Indian Defense and Foreign policy establishment who allowed Pak to get nukes.  Great strategic blunder for their sake and for ours’.

Indians who care about India should show great empathy towards Pak, unlike pseudo-Patriots. Pak is a deeply divided society, not a monolith. If we don’t lend a helping hand and more (let your imagination be your guide as to what more) to the liberals of Pak while they sink, there will be no one on the other side to talk to.

One more point on this subject. I made this to the Takshashila friends when we met at the Bangalore conference. Extremists and terrorists are not logical and rational people. They don’t think like us. (We may be irrational in other ways. Not to give too much credit to our side). The war we have going between us and them (the crazy irrationalists) is going to be a very long drawn out one. We have to be prepared for the long haul. (cliches, cliches ..)

From what I have read into the minds of the Crazies, if I were one of them, I would be very actively, day and night, without sleep or hunger, looking for a nuke or two. And delivery systems and all the shiny objects that goes with it. (Think outside the box friends).

The day I get one, I will surely use it. Where to use it would be part of my planning. If he was a smart Crazy, which I think is rare and not possible, and I will explain soon, he would use it strategically. To achieve some long term goal like building a nation-state that is of my liking. But Crazies being Crazies this may not be the case. Killing millions would be the only result.

Not using the nuke, after having laid my hands on it, would make me crazy in my sane world. (This is like the movie Inception.) A Crazy’s world is sane to him. So him being crazy in his world makes him sane in our world, which would make him a traitor to his Crazydom, etc. Get it?

Why can’t the Crazies think strategically? This is a long topic. But here is a question for all of us. Can a leader of the Crazy achieve what US achieved after they dropped the nuke on Japan? Ask yourself what it takes to do what the US has done in Japan in the last many decades after WWII. Can Osama or someone like him achieve this? My gut tells me – NO. Something to think about.

It is a long war. There will be blood. And plenty of it. Death, destruction, and worse. But in the end Crazies will fade away and will be replaced by another set of Crazies. They are fighting against nature and they cannot win. That is the nature of Craziness.

Obama wins Premature Prize

I am a big fan of Obama. I have taken enough beatings from my Libertarian and Conservative friends for saying so. I have scars and emails to prove.

But Nobel for Obama? Come on! For what ?

I too like some of the attempts his administration is making to improve relations with other countries including Iran and Cuba. But these are just attempts and good intentions.

Problem is, my kids are now going to ask for rewards every time they have a good thought or intention. No results required.

Unfortunately this may even back fire on his efforts. Expectations were high anyway, but now it has been raised to unrealistic proportions.

Bad decision by the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

Who succeeds in politics?

It is election time. Every one and their dog has an opinion on how the nation should be run, who is corrupt, who is not, etc. This election has been a bit different as it seems like another direction changing election. This, even though it appears to be a very bland election, at least on the surface, with no real issues to debate.

One interesting direction changer possibly is the number of new candidates contesting the election. Some kind of a barrier has been broken. Probably an Obama effect being felt in India. Yes, even a novice can! seem to be the refrain. Which may be a good think, in the short run.

It is easy to forget how hard Obama worked and for many years towards the Presidency. That brings me to the matter at hand. There is an annoying trend especially this election cycle. Annoying, but hopefully not very harmful. This annoying trend seem to be fueled by the ease with which people can email and send documents over the internet. The educated and the elite among us seem to take politicians and their profession very lightly. To some it seems like–all you need is a good man or woman to contest and win, every thing else will fall into place.I don’t think we reserve this kind of naive contempt for any other profession.

So here is my thought on who succeeds in politics, if at all. I believe only two kinds of politicians succeed — either a Karunanidhi/Jayalalitha (K/J) type or a Rahul Gandhi/Rajiv Gandhi type. (For this discussion it does not matter whether you vote for them or like them or not).

What does it take to succeed in politics, assuming you have the natural abilities? You need a vast array of teams, organisations, contacts, networks, etc. etc. How long does it take to get all this? A very long time indeed. It takes years of toiling, speeches, plotting, begging, cajoling, coercing, etc. to even have a shot at doing anything worth doing in politics.

K/J, for example, have been in politics for years. Both are considered accomplished politicians, good administrators, nationally respected players. But they got here after spending much of their time in isolation, in opposition, sometimes even declared politically finished. Yet they have survived and stayed relevant. In power or in opposition, they have complete control, or as much as humanly possible, over their party, the state machinery, etc. They have to use all these just to stay relevant, but they also have to constantly work to expand their base, party, network, organisation, etc.

Now ask yourself, with all this–natural ability, control over the machinery and party which are absolutely required to get anything done–are they able to get all that they want? Clearly a big no. In fact I would be surprised if they are able to deliver a fraction of what they probably dream of doing.

The point is, it takes a lot of deliver even a little bit. Especially in a complex, chaotic and democratic society like India. Come to think of it, it takes a lot to deliver a bit in any society. Otherwise all dictators would be delivering amazing societies. (I am just playing along with people who think politics or govt can deliver everything in society, if only we had good political leaders. Govt/politics has a very important yet limited Or limited yet important role in society. There is only so much it can or should do. Even though there are things it must do and do well.)

Now take the example of Rahul or Rajiv Gandhi. It may be too early to judge Rahul Gandhi. But Rajiv Gandhi (RG) we can judge. RG was not the most naturally gifted politician of his times. Yet he did succeed in many ways. Much of the reform, IT revolution in India, talk about youth and twenty first century started when RG was Prime Minister.

He succeeded because what K/J worked to build–party, network, contacts, power, etc.–RG inherited. Which means even if he does not know how to do something, there would be enough competent veterans around him, at his service, to get the job done. Of couse this is not to take anything away from RG or other similar politicians who inherit. It takes talent to manage anything, especially a massive organisation like the Congresss or the Prime Minister’s office.

The moral of the story as I see it is, if with all this power, K/J or RG can deliver only so much, how much can some middle class or rich, more importantly Independent candidate deliver? Have you estimated the time it takes for a group of middle class citizens, with no prior experience in politics, to establish a new, functioning and election-winning party. (By the way, in my opinion, with all due respect, if your party cannot win elections, then it is no different from any another NGO.)

These are some serious questions all arm chair politicians should consider seriously. Otherwise we cheapen politics and the fact of how difficult it really is to succeed in politics.

Chekhov was Indian