"HIS EYES WERE AN OCEAN OF CALM....."

During my regular random net surfing, I came across a photograph. An image which shocked me and burned itself into my psyche. This post is completely about that one image. I thought of putting it up here because I feel that everyone should see and be aware of it.

Throughout history, self-immolations have been the last-resort expression of protesters, clearly conveying the message that they would rather die than remain downtrodden. There are many instances in history where self immolation by one man has lead to the unification of the oppressed, mass civilian revolutions and downfall of regimes.

In India, Potti Sreeramulu's death after a 57 day hunger-strike lead to the creation of Andhra Pradesh in 1952 and laid precedent to the linguistic basis of state divisions. More recently, in 2010, Mohamed Bouazizi, a street vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest against the harassment and humiliation he had to face from the Sidi Bouzid Municipal Officers. This incident was the spark (no pun intended) which grew into the Tunisian uprising which in turn was the beginning of the Arab springs where the tyrannical regimes of 4 Arab countries were eventually over-thrown. 

   

The photograph I came across is of a similar self-

immolation by a Buddhist monk in Saigon, South Vietnam.

South Vietnam of 1963 was a turbulent place. While more than 80% of the population was Buddhist, the government was pro-catholic, lead by Ngo Dinh Diem. The constant threat of violence and guerilla attacks by the Viet-cong gave the Diem Government a facade to follow its oppressive policies against the non-catholic population of South Vietnam. 

Buddhists were treated as second grade citizens in their home-land with no say in its governance. Catholics were given preference for promotions and other perks in the government services and the army. Catholic establishments enjoyed tax favors and land grants. International aid was restricted by the government to villages which agreed to convert to Christianity. Diem's brother, Pierre Martin Ngo Dình Thuc, was an arch-bishop and commanded a private army which was accused of criminal intimidation and extortion.

The first Buddhist mass protest was against the government legislation which prevented them from celebrating Buddha Purnima. Government forces fired at unarmed civilians killing nine protestors, which was followed by wide spread raids of pagodas and other Buddhist establishments. This further aggravated the crisis and for months Buddhists held protests demanding equal rights. The culmination of the protests was the self-immolation of Thich Quang Duc, a senior Mahayana Buddhist monk.

The act occurred in an intersection in Saigon near the Cambodian Embassy. Quang Duc sat in a meditative padmasana position at the centre of the road, with his prayer beads, while his disciples poured gasoline over him. After a short prayer, he set himself on fire in front of his supporters, government forces and a few International journalists. 

His last message to the government was -  "Before closing my eyes and moving towards the vision of the Buddha, I respectfully plead to President Ngo Dinh Diem to take a mind of compassion towards the people of the nation and implement religious equality to maintain the strength of the homeland eternally. I call the venerables, reverends, members of the sangha and the lay Buddhists to organize in solidarity to make sacrifices to protect Buddhism." 

(I realize that the pic is coming out of the frame a bit but I didn't want to make it smaller and ruin it.)

Throughout the process, the monk never flinched or 

showed any signs of suffering. "His eyes were an Ocean of Calm and a half smile played on his lips while he lit the match" observed Malcolm Browne of Associated press who captured the above image.

David Halberstam of Newyork Times who was at the scene summed it up rather graphically - "I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning human flesh; human beings burn surprisingly quickly. Behind me I could hear the sobbing of the Vietnamese who were now gathering. I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think ... As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him."

The photo was widely circulated and it shook the international conscience. Plight of the Buddhists in Vietnam became a cause which received global attention with this one image. American government withdrew their support for the Diem regime and within months of Quang Duc's sacrifice, Vietnam was witness to a military coup d'état. Diem and his confidantes were captured and executed and a military revolutionary council came into power in Vietnam. 

Now I usually do not support violence even when it is self inflicted. However the composure with which the monk sat through his incineration and the total lack of emotions from his part leaves me intrigued. This might be an instance where the world witnessed the age old Buddhist dictum of 'mind over matter'.

Malcolm Browne won the Pulitzer prize for International Journalism for capturing Thich Quang Duc's self immolation and revealing to the world, the plight of the Buddhists in South Vietnam.

Note : I have taken the quotes as it is shown in Wikipedia. 

REMEMBERING PESHAWAR...

December 16th.

No Indian can ever forget this date. In 2012, it was a day when we as a society failed. We failed to protect a sister from the demons living in our midst. This was the date on which the infamous incident, later dubbed as The Nirbhaya Case, occurred. It shook the conscience of the country and questioned the very foundations on which we function. Jyothi Singh Pandey, a 23-year-old physiotherapy intern, was assaulted, beaten and gang-raped  by a group of 6 men in a moving bus. After 13 days, she succumbed to her injuries in Mount Elizabeth hospital, Singapore. She was immortalized as 'Amanath', 'Damini' , 'Jagruthi' , 'Jyoti'.... as 'Nirbhaya' in all our hearts. The one without fear. 

A little over two years have passed  since Nirbhaya. However,  December 16th,2014  was  witness to another shocking crime against humanity. If in 2012 it was an unplanned assault against an individual, 2014 saw a planned attack by a terrorist organization against innocent children.

A group of 6-8 Militants rushed into the Army Public School in Peshawar region and held around 500 persons, mostly children, between the ages of 5-16, as hostages. The hostage situation eventually turned into an all out massacre with terrorists shooting children at point blank range. A total of 140+ deaths were reported with most of them being children. Taliban lost no time in claiming 'credit' for the attack. Their justification was that the attack was in retaliation to the army bombings in Waziristan area.

I wonder what kind of ideology and what amount of brain-washing could actually make a man  point a gun at a 6-year-old child and pull the trigger. What religion demands this from its followers? Which god would bless these 'holy' warriors? Which heaven awaits them with the promised number of virgins?

While terrorist attacks against civilians in itself is a despicable act, this attack sinks humanity into even deeper despair. In addition to the un-imaginable loss caused to the hundreds of families in Peshawar region, the after-shock the attack would have on the region is even more foreboding.

The mental trauma to the 500+ children caused by the sight of the cold-blooded massacre of their friends is a debilitating  concern. No amount of time or therapy will be able to wash away the crimson that has stained their young minds. The attack would also be a cause of nightmare to millions of other school-going children and their parents all over the world. Humanity seems to have peaked and has started its journey downhill.

The assault exposed how incapable the government machinery is, to protect the most precious resource of the country,  its young minds. When Malala was shot in October 2012, the whole world thought it would be a one-time incident and necessary precautions would be in place to prevent such occurrences in the future. However Taliban, the bunch of modern education and child-haters they are, have proven their utter disregard for humanity again. What is even more disquieting is that the centre seemed to be clueless about the onslaught and failed to protect its youngest citizens from these barbarians.

I do not have anything more to say about Tehrik-i-Taliban. Their actions, as always, have spoken louder than my words (By the way, the word 'Taliban' in Pashto means students).  No cover of religion, no excuse of retaliatory action should spare the perpetrators from the judgment and wrath of the righteous gods and other righteous men. I am aware that this sounds apocalyptic, but this ruthless act will be the beginning of their end. We will never forget Peshawar.

"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."   - Dante                                                                                                     

Is Taliban alone to be blamed? Aren't we all, in some respect, responsible for this? Every time we read a report about religious violence and forgot about it the next day. Every day we allowed terrorist groups to grow unchecked and permeate into the global society. Every instance when some of us thought maybe these fanatics had a point. The blood of a hundred children are, to an extent, on our hands too. A part of our humanity died with the young ones in Peshawar.

So, in retrospect, we are all criminals. We all 
have a hand in what happened in Peshawar. All of society. Some amongst us helped Taliban grow. Some amongst us felt they were correct. Most of us saw what was happening but feigned ignorance. We put Malala on a pedestal and figured we made a difference. We gave her a high decoration. But we never did anything effective to ensure that no child was victimized again. We never actively worked to prevent other Malalas from being born. And we are left with a hundred little coffins to pin our medals to. We are all responsible. We are all criminals.

I end this rant with a word of apology. Not to the people who may have been offended by my words. If you feel offended, maybe you should think things through with a clear mind again. My heart goes out to every victim of terrorism and sectarian violence all across the world. And I am truly sorry that the maximum I can do is sympathize with your loss through this piece. And I apologize to all the children in Peshawar. We, as a society, failed you. We were unable to protect you. For that my head remains bowed in regret...and shame. 

OCCAM'S RAZOR

"Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate"

"Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity"

                               - William of Ockham, Circa 1342

Our life today is like a high speed train running on an endless track. If we are lucky we get occasional rest stops called weekends or even a complete yearly pit-stop called the annual vacation. In this busy life, we are confronted by decisions and choices at every turn of the road. Small mundane decisions like 'should I have that extra slice of cake' to life changing decisions like 'should I leave this job'. And often it is the paths we did not take that give us sleepless nights as opposed to the ones we took. As time goes by, the burden of all these decisions bog us down and we keep moving closer to a break-down. It is usually not a question of if we are going to have a mental collapse, but of how soon it's onset is going to be.

Occam's razor (or Ockham's razor) is an intellectual tool which may help us live a little better by reducing the burden.

                           

William of Ockham was a prominent medieval english philosopher. The essence of one of his more famous works was that we should not make things more complicated than they need to be. We should cut out all the non essential parts of any problem in order to arrive at the best possible solution. With the passage of time, many varying formulations of Occam's Razor was given by different philosophers and scientists.

Scientists like Leibniz and Newton had turned to Occam's razor to trim and improve on their theories. Newton summed it up thus - "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than 

such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances". Occam's razor was one of the tools used to discredit the existence of ether, the all prevalent medium used by early scientist to explain the transmission of light through vacuum. From the perspective of science, one of the most popular formulations of Occam's Razor is "When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one which has lesser inherent assumptions is the better one".

It is clear to any observer that this scientific usage of Occam's Razor is flawed. We cannot assume that everything in nature will always follow the simplest path it can take. Occam's Razor in the context of science is, at best, a scale with which we can compare two solutions which have equal likelihoods of being true. It cannot be used to carve out a perfect theory set in stone. It doesn't disprove the more complicated solution, it only assigns more merit to the simpler solution in a theoretical sense. For example, we cannot really say that ether is nonexistent because that seems true as per Occam's Razor. All we can say is that our current scientific understanding doesn't require something complex like Ether to explain the observable phenomena.

But in our daily life, I think the policy of cutting out the non-essential is an approach we all need to adhere to. Just think about it. The time we spent on decisions which really doesn't matter. Does it matter what brand of soda you get your colleague from the cafeteria? Should u really spend all the time on deciding what color shawl you should gift your least favorite cousin on his/her birthday? You would never know if he/she is going to like it or not anyway. Of course when I explicitly mention them, they seem too trivial to think about. But the sheer volume of such decisions we spend time over in a week is what got me thinking. 

While it may sound like an insipid argument at first, what we have to realize is that when we free ourselves from the burden of a thousand non-critical choices, we are opening up our minds to address the ten critical decisions we really have to think over properly. In effect, Occam's razor as seen in day-to-day life helps us prioritize and distinguish between things we should worry about and things over which we shouldn't blink an eye.

However I have to end this with a warning. When I say we shouldn't spent time on things that don't matter, I am making an assumption that we are aware of what is important and not. It changes from person to person and we should be careful to not overlook things. First lap in our race for success is in being able to rightly separate the critical decisions from the trivial ones. Einstein sums it up best - "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler".

A SLICE OF "SHANTARAM"

"Made like a gun, Goes like a Bullet" - This is the iconic tagline of the British Royal Enfield. Even today, in a motorcycle world dominated by Harleys and Ducatis, the heart of every Indian biker I've met still remains with the off-springs of the Royal Enfield stable. Although the British parent company is now defunct, the Indian subsidiary owned by Eicher Motors Limited is going strong and the Bullet 350cc reigns as the motorcycle with the longest production run of all times.   

I am not a biker. I've only ridden bikes a handful of times that too in uncrowded roads for short durations of time. But the below Description of what a Bullet stands for by Gregory David Roberts from his Phenomenal book Shantaram is too good to be not shared with you all.

"The Enfield of India (350cc Bullet with a single cylinder, four stroke engine) is a motorcycle constructed to the plans of the original 1950s model of the British Royal Enfield. Renowned for it's idiosyncratic handling as much as for its reliability and durability, the Bullet was a bike that demanded a relationship with its rider.

The relationship involved tolerance, patience and understanding on the part of the rider. In exchange, the bullet provided the kind of soaring, celestial, wind-weaving pleasure that birds must know, punctuated by not infrequent near death experiences."

50 SHADES OF WAYNE

"There is a difference between you and me. We both looked into the abyss, but when it looked back at us...you blinked."
                                                      - Batman

All of us have had a favorite super hero from an early age. In my case it is undoubtedly Batman. Initially because it was the show which was being aired at the time I came back from school. But as I grew older, my favoritism towards Batman only grew stronger. I confess that I outgrew my interest in comics a long time ago. But Batman is the last hero who still intrigues and interests my 'Grown-up' mind. 

In most superhero comics, the villain or the anti-hero (as I prefer calling them) is a much more interesting character than the hero. Maybe it is the same logic which makes me sympathize more with Tom (and hope that he finally catches Jerry) which is at work here. In fact I would go so far as to say that the day when my allegiance shifted from Jerry to Tom after realizing what a little prick Jerry really is, was the day I stopped being a child and started being an adult. I am guessing there are at least a few amongst you who agree with me on this. However even with phenomenal villains like the Joker or the Riddler, Batman has always remained the most impressive character in almost all renditions of the series. 

Now, I am only aware of the mainstream superheroes of the Marvel and DC universe. So I am sure at least some of you are going to say that the USPs of Batman I am about to get into are not unique to him. But the very fact that there are no million dollar franchisees or widespread knowledge of the other characters would be proof enough to agree that, all in all, Batman is superior to them.  

Superman is a kryptonian. Spiderman owes his powers to a mutation. Captain America is a science experiment gone right. The Hulk is a science experiment gone wrong. Green lantern's powers are alien. Thor is a god. And then there is Batman. Among all these heroes who have supernatural, accidental or improbable origin stories,Batman stands out for being a normal civilian, albeit a very rich one. Batman's decision to be a savior of his city is solely because he really, really wanted to help people. Don't get me wrong, I do not mean that the other heroes are in it for the fame. But the fact is that they have their superpowers. So, by default, their choice is between being a hero or a villain, while Batman's choice was between being a hero or a civilian. In my opinion that is an infinitely harder call to take.

The sly ones among you would have noticed how I've left out Ironman in the preceding list. Yes I agree that of all the heroes, Ironman has many things common with Batman. But if you think about it, Tony Stark is not really Ironman. The suit is Ironman. Anyone can be in the suit and drive it. Essentially, Ironman is equivalent to the batmobile. Not Batman.

We all remember the moment in the Avengers movie, when Captain America comments "Big man, in a suit of armor… take that away, what are you?", to which Tony replied (now regarded as one of the best come-backs in Hollywood history) : "Uh… A genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist". We all laughed because everyone's least favorite Avenger just got schooled by everyone's most favorite. But the truth remains that Ironman is not a person, it is a really sleek and colorful tool. And another point is that the "genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist" tag goes for Bruce Wayne too, just that he is much more than all that.

Gadgetry at his disposal is never the star in any of Bruce's midnight ventures. They only assist him in tight situations. This focus on the character more than his tools is what really makes us love Batman and makes us want to see a lot more of him. Anyone can (and have) worn the Ironman suit to save the day. But only Bruce Wayne can wear the cape and become Batman. In fact in the comic series, there was an episode were Batman was beaten by Bane and couldn't fight anymore after breaking his back. A new character, Jean Paul-Valley, donned the cape of batman and eventually defeated Bane. However the character went rogue with his power and Bruce had to literally rise up from his medical retirement to take down Jean Paul-Valley and reclaim his rightful burden of being the Dark Knight.

"If Clarke wanted to, he could squish me in an instant into the cement. But I know how he thinks. Even more than the Kryptonite, he's got one big weakness. Deep down, Clarke's essentially a good person....and deep down, I am not."

                                                          -Batman

There is a very human vulnerability to Batman. And he is more than aware of it. He is at the top of his game only by being the smartest person in the room. Physically Batman has been beaten, broken and left-for-dead, but he always came back. There are also demons which he fights in his head. He is not perfect. There are strict codes which he follows when he deals with even the most brutal villains. There is no other superhero who treads so deep into the grey area between being a hero or a villain. Bruce's refusal to kill under any circumstance shows that he is aware of the fact that he is only one step away from turning into the evil he so sincerely battles against. However when push comes to shove, Bruce is not reluctant to unleash the chained demons within him. This gives the whole story line a very dark tinge which goes beyond the scope of just a children's comic.

Now with all this, who would be a worthy adversary for Batman? Among the heroes I am sure almost everyone can physically defeat him. However undoubtedly batman is smarter than them all and his power lies in the anonymity of his personality and the brilliant strategist/manipulative mind he has. Even the batman villains are usually portrayed as intellectual challengers rather than superhuman creatures. All things considered, Batman is a thinking man's super hero. 

As for Batman's greatest weakness, it is definitely his chin. This is the one point which I do not like about the series. I mean, what the hell Bruce! Mike Tyson could finish you off with his vicious right upper cut! Batman really shouldn't be exposing his face so much. Luckily for us and the people in Gotham city, I've never really heard of an episode where Batman's exposed chin lead to his downfall.

I want to end this by thanking Christopher Nolan. The dark knight trilogy remains one of the best comic book adaptations in Hollywood. More than anything, Nolan had a character centric approach to the series which is a rare thing in any superhero movie. In fact, this whole post was inspired by Nolan's portrayal of the dark knight. We can only hope the new crew who has taken over the franchise doesn't degrade Gotham and her watchful protector....

A GREECY AFFAIR

We live in a world which is continuously growing 

smaller. Countries are bound together by trade, security and economic links in an intricate manner. The happenings of one part of the globe has a distinct impact on other parts. In this scenario, it becomes increasingly necessary for us to have an idea about what is happening around the world. I am going to try and explain a news heading which everyone has been seeing for a long time. The Greek/Euro-zone debt crisis.

Greece is historically known to us all for being the birth place of democracy, for its imposing architecture and for having Footballers with names longer than their national anthem (Sokratis Papastathopoulos, Panagiotis Tsalouchidis etc. When they enter the field the opposite team and the commentators shake with fear). But in recent times, Greece has been catching our eyes for being at the centre of the Euro zone financial crisis. I thought of taking up this issue because once you take out all the hard economic terms and the math terminologies (which is why people usually skip this particular news heading), the Greek debt crisis is rather simple and interesting.

I should take a disclaimer that the information which I am about to share is all second-hand. I've spend some time reading up about this issue from different sources and I am going to make an attempt to share what I've understood along with a few of my opinions. In no way is this an in-depth analysis or a comprehensive picture. Please do let me know in the comments if I've made a mistake or if I have left out any crucial details. Moreover I am not going to use any complex economic terms (mainly because I don't know them either) or get into a number crunching exercise to present the issue. I shall try and explain it in such a manner that a middle-schooler can understand the topic. On the off-chance that you are younger than that, u probably should not be on the internet anyway.

To completely understand the crisis, we have to take a brief look into how Europe was. For almost all of its history, European countries have been at war with one another. There have been periods of relative peace and relative turmoil, but except for the last 30-40 years, a feeling of mistrust and dislike have been widespread among all European countries regarding their neighbors. In addition to this, each country had it's own currency and economic policies. Traditionally, these two factors have manifested in huge trade barriers and the geographic advantage of being nearby was never really of much use to anyone.

After the two world wars, the world economy in general and the European economy in particular were in shambles and a greater need for corporation was felt for. In Europe, this lead to a series of talks and discussions which finally resulted in the formation of the European Union (EU) after the signing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993. This opened up the internal borders of Europe and was a promising step towards increased regional corporation in trade and commerce.

However the issue of different currencies remained unresolved. A sizeable portion of the capital was being spent in currency conversion when countries traded with each other. This was to be rectified by the adoption of a new currency, Euro, all across the EU nations. Euro was adopted by the EU members on January 1st, 1999. The individual currencies of member countries were phased out and after a short transition period, Euro became the common currency of transaction. Individual national banks were diluted of their power and a new central entity, European Central Bank (ECB) was established in Frankfurt.

It is necessary for us to understand here, the difference between what is called the  fiscal policy and the monetary policy of a country. Fiscal policy refers to the policy followed by the government related to its expenditure. Things like taxation, public spending, pension policies etc would come under the fiscal policy. On the other hand Monetary policy refers to the policy which takes care of the flow of money in an economy. Things like interest rates, money to be kept as cash in banks (known by the fancy term Statutory Liquidity Ratio) etc comes under the purview of Monetary policy. Within the EU, the Fiscal policy was under the control of individual governments while the Monetary policy was controlled by the ECB.

This separation of fiscal and monetary policies, in retrospect, was an in built weakness of the Union and would eventually lead to the debt crisis. If we look at India, we have RBI looking after the monetary policy and the Ministry of Finance looking after the fiscal policy. However both these agencies work in close contact with each other and play a complimentary role to keep India's economy healthy. However in Europe, it was almost impossible for the ECB to follow a monetary policy which would be in the best interest of all its member countries. This scenario was considered during the adoption of Euro but the increased wealth which the members would accrue by the removal of trade hurdles was seen as a positive which would far outweigh any other losses.

Before the formation of EU, countries like Greece had access to only a limited capital from outside investors. The interest rates on loans were also high. This was due to the comparatively low credit-worthiness( i.e. the ability of a country to pay back its debt) of these countries which were in tune with their economic capabilities. However after adopting Euro, countries like Greece had sudden access to large sums of money at low interest rates. This was due to the juggernaut German economy which also had adopted the Euro. Investors felt that incase of any economic troubles in Greece, Germany would definitely back it up as they shared a common currency. Essentially, this is analogical to Greece getting a credit card with Germany written on it. To give you a perspective, the interest rates for Greece in pre- EU days was around 18%. Later it dropped to almost 3%, i.e. the rate at which Germany paid it's interest.

This lead to a spending spree in Greece and other EU countries. Large debts were incurred as the governments spent money in furthering their political image within their respective countries. Huge pension funds, increased government jobs, salary hikes etc were given out by different parties to keep their voters happy. In some countries like Ireland and Spain, large scale housing and property booms were the order of the day. 

Due to the easing of borders and euro, all of Europe was a close knit economy now. Banks in Spain were lending to companies in Portugal. Investors in Germany were buying up bonds in Greece. French banks were funding public works in Ireland. Weak economies like Greece were basically borrowing more money to pay off the existing debtors. The situation was sustainable as long as the credit kept coming in.

However in 2008, the American housing markets collapsed (this was due to the Sub-Prime mortgage crisis which is too big to explain in a foot-note) and its aftershock shook the global economy. Funds were drying up and this lead to a sudden end to the easy credit availability around the globe. Countries like Greece had run up huge debts and as the money flow stopped, they found themselves in a position where they could barely meet the internal expenses let alone pay of the external debts. The Greek economy was in the brink of a disastrous collapse. It was a sharp wake up call for Greece and it was time to face the music for years of financial indiscipline.

We have to understand that the mentality of countries like Greece towards finance is radically opposite to Germany. While Germany followed a highly conservative and disciplined economic system, Greece's was rather complacent and lacked planning and long term vision. The taxation was inefficient and only 20-30% of the taxes really reached the Greek treasury in a good year. The public sector was filled with non-essential workers who were overpaid. Nepotism and political over-spending was a common affair. However due to the previously mentioned economic linkages, a crisis in Greece was a crisis in all of EU.

The only economy strong enough to help Greece was Germany. Countries like Portugal, Spain, Italy were already teetering on the edges of an economic collapse themselves. Reluctantly, Germany agreed to pick up the tab on the huge debts Greece had amassed. However, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her Finance Minister Wolfgang 

Schäuble imposed strict austerity measures on the Greeks as a pre-condition to their help. The austerity measures called for ramping up the entire Greek system by cutting out non essential workers, reducing salaries, increased and efficient taxation schemes, structural reforms to improve competitiveness, sales of government assets, pension fund reductions etc.

It is interesting to observe why the Germans bothered to help the Greeks as opposed to letting them leave Euro. Firstly, if Greece defaults, this would start a domino effect leading to the collapse of other weak EU countries. This would be very bad for the German economy. Secondly, a Greek exit (a 'Grexit', as some call it) would lead to a weaker Euro which would cause substantial loss to the Germans. As they say, if one of the PIIGS leave the group, the others would soon follow. PIIGS stands for Portugal-Ireland-Italy-Greece-Spain. This would, in effect, ruin the Euro. Thirdly, a lot of German investors had also invested in Greek bonds. The sum paid to bail out Greece was considered lower than the combined losses the German investors would incur if Greece defaulted, left the Euro and rolled back to drachma, it's pre-euro currency.

As of now the third bail-out package is active for Greece. The austerity principles which Germany imposed on Greece was a cause of social unrest and lead to political instability in Greece. Greek civilians viewed the austerity principles as an insult imposed on them by the bossy Germans. The current party in power, Syriza, rode into Athens on a promise of cutting the austerity principles short and restoring the Greek pride. The young new Prime minister Alexis Tsipras and his Finance minister Yanis Varoufakis have their jobs cut out for them in balancing the German demands and the interests of their Greek compatriots. I am not going into the technicalities of the bail-out deals which involves the EU, IMF and ECB (called The Troika). 

The last point we need to look at is how do we ensure something similar to this modern Greek tragedy doesn't play out again in the future. Sadly it is almost impossible to ensure this with the existing setup. Unless the fiscal policy of member countries are also controlled by a central body (similar to how ECB controls the monitory policy) there is no check in place to prevent unbalanced expenditures in EU. But such a central system is almost impossible to be set up as it is equivalent to individual countries giving up their sovereignty (similar to forming a United States of Europe). We can only hope that the other European economies learn from Greece and trust that they learn to live within their means. However, considering the European penchant for grandeur and extravagance, in all probability, our trust is grossly misplaced!   

I.N.D.I.A

There are times when I feel like I've been conned. I 

distinctly despise that feeling. Being a person of above average intelligence it's a point of pride to keep thinking to myself that I am not going to let someone take the better of me. Well, that is something which is easier said than done in India. And I am not referring to falling victim to one of the numerous fraudsters prowling around over here. Oh no, an article on that topic is going to turn into a novel if someone takes the pains to write it.

There are other things, small things, which keep happening day in and day out here. People who respect moral values and politeness are mocked at in every turn of the road. Everyone sees it. Everyone knows about it. But no one really bothers to think about it. A feeling of complacence has set over the average Indian population regarding the loss of decency in everyday life. 

"India brings out the bastard in every one of us" - 

this was one of the wise cracks I heard in my first year in college and along with the rest, I laughed too. I never spared much thought about it because, well, having spend most of my school life abroad I didn't know the way things rolled here.

First year in India to me was like an Industry grade 

siren wailing in the ears of a sleeping child. Cocooned by the comforts of an upper middle-class family settled abroad, my parents had brought me up to be  "The Good Guy". They taught me to respect elders. Help someone who seems to be in trouble. Treat girls with respect and care. Speak gently to all. Follow the rules. What they didn't teach me was that none of this is really going to do me any good in a world of Hypocrites where earnestness and morality is a joke. Needless to say I learned the hard way that 'The Good Guy' doesn't last long in India.

 I was on my way to the movies one day. Like most of the college crowd, my mode of transportation was a rickety old bus. The bus was not very crowded and I found a seat. After a few more halts the bus got pretty packed. As I looked, I saw an old man who was having a hard time dealing with the twists and turns of the hilly roads which lead to the city from my college. I waved at him and got up to offer him my seat. The moment my ass left the seat, it was replaced by the ass of Mr. Mustache  who was standing right by me. The old man gave me a look and smiled. I tried to look at Mr. Mustache but he was religiously looking out of the window and avoiding eye contact of any kind. What surprised me most was the shamelessness of the action rather than the gravity of it.  This was one of the first setbacks in my attempts to live up to 'The good guy' code my parents taught me.

Another concept which is alien to us is the concept of

queues. Public queue system in India is a joke (with the notable exception of wine-shop queues but that is a different story). When a pack of wolves or a pride of lions kill, there is an orderly manner in which all the members claim their share of the meat. Though this is not exactly a queue, it is some form of order in the natural world without which chaos would prevail. In India you wouldn't  find any such order while the most dangerous animal of them all hunts for a rickshaw or a ticket at a railway reservation counter. I understood this after waiting for more than 4 hours in an SBI bank to get my check encashed.

Though all this seems like trivial incidents in a bored

cynic's life, the fact of the matter is that these basic attributes which is expected to be the norm in a developed society, is absent in India. All these have a 'broken-window effect' which ultimately leads to the prevalence of issues of a more serious nature.

Why is it that an Indian is a model citizen in other

countries of the world? Why are women reluctant to walk alone after sunset or as some of the cases indicate, even in broad day light? Why do we turn a blind eye to widespread nepotism and state regulated favoritism? How does our elected leaders have the guts to pull of multi-million dollar scams with our hard earned money? These are grave issues and it would be foolhardy to associate them to a single root cause. That being said, I feel that the falling moral standards among the citizenry of our nation may be one of the main reasons leading up to these more serious plights.

After a year of my stay in India I slowly caught on

the joke. I was given a crash course by life on how things work here. In retrospect I realized that the reason why I never get anything done here in a decent amount of time is not because I did something wrong, but because I did something right. When you try to live up to a moral code in a society that laughs at it, you are bound to run into a lot of road blocks which eat into your time and money. But does this mean you have to change the way you are? Well I guess that is really a personal choice. All I know is I still spend a lot of time in the non moving end of a queue. Most of my bus journeys are on foot and my interactions with others remain (mostly) cordial. I haven't learned anything that Mother India tried to teach me. I am still in on the con, but now at least I am aware of its existence. Not that it feels any better.

I was once waiting in Dubai my connection flight to Qatar. My ever thinning mask of decency was still intact enough, despite my experiences. And that was why I moved my bags from the place next to me as a foreigner was looking around for a seat. We struck up a conversation and he told me he was just returning from a 2 year overseas deputation from a reputed foreign bank which was trying desperately to grow its roots in India. After a few minutes, as is customary,  I asked him how his stay in India was and did he like our country. Being a gentleman he did not explicitly share his feelings with me. He took his tab and wrote down the following.

INDIA : I'll Never Do It Again.

I don't have a solution. But at least I am completely convinced that we, as a nation, have a problem in our hands. Which is more than what can be said for 70% of our so called educated masses. We have to understand that cultural degradation is a problem which requires some serious introspection. Our generation is slowly succumbing to complete egotism. The longer we remain aloof to this, the harder it becomes to pull out of a quickly descending communal spiral.

Me,myself and my first Blog-post

People say the hardest part about articulation is the beginning. They wouldn't be wrong. I guess we would never really know how many Hemingways and Twains the world must have missed out because people just couldn't get the beginning of the story inside them. This  has of course been one of my main headaches too. Stories, opinions, conjectures, poems, mind-palaces have come and gone in my mind having never seen the light of the day. 

Not that I don't write. The truth is I've never really shared it with anyone other than my closest confidantes . The thoughts flow from my mind to the angry hum of my laptop. So, in effect, it is a trip from one cage to another for them. I guess this is the natal stage of my attempt to set them free.

In all likeliness, like countless other 'bloggers' I am going to post a couple of times and then get bored or get caught up with stuff. But then, at the very least, when someone asks me in future' why don't you blog this shit?' I could tell them.... "Well, I tried".

So ladies and gentleman, please return to your seats, put your seat-back and tray tables in upright position. We are ready for take-off