Interview with Mr Udaya Rai, Head of Migrant Trade Union (MTU), South Korea

Interview with Mr Udaya Rai, Head of Migrant Trade Union (MTU), South Korea

This interview was conducted on February 2014.  MTU, established in 2005, is a unique labour union catering to migrant workers. It is affiliated to the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions. MTU provides counselling to migrant workers facing workplace issues, conducts educational programs on Labour Laws, Korean Language, etc., and campaigns to stop deportation of undocumented workers and for rights of migrant workers. The current chairman of MTU, Mr Udaya Rai, is from Nepal and has been living in Korea for over 8 years. He speaks fluent Korean.

 

SD:How many migrant workers are there in Korea?

Mr. Rai: As far as I know, there are well over one million immigrants in Korea of  whom 700,000 are migrant workers. There are various systems of visa for migrant workers, one of which is the Employment Permit System for 15 Asian countries under which around 250,000 workers are present in Korea.

SD: Where do the migrant workers work in Korea?

Mr. Rai:Migrant workers are almost always employed by Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). They are employed largely in the agriculture/ fisheries, manufacturing, waste management, construction, and marine industries.  

SD: What is the process for a migrant worker to enter Korea?

Mr. Rai:Under the EPS system, all prospect workers have to enter through government channels. Tests are held in home countries to select eligible applicants and they need to undergo some training, particularly language training, before entering Korea. Here, workers don’t need to pay agents in their home country like they do to get a job into Singapore or other countries. Once inside Korea, in case they want to get a new job, they can pay local employment agencies here to search a job for them. At one go, a worker can stay for 3 years in Korea.

SD: How is the compensation system for migrant workers in Korea?

Mr. Rai:In Korea, migrant workers are covered under the minimum wage scheme which mandates 5,210 Korean Won/ hour. But in the agricultural and fisheries sector, this is problematic because people work dawn to dusk and are still paid only on an eight hour basis. In other sectors, also migrant workers are not properly compensated for overtime work. My estimate is that only 10% of migrant workers get proper pay slips. Some employers provide dormitory accommodation for migrant workers; in other cases, the workers have to arrange for it themselves.  In case of injury, the workers are usually covered under insurance but many times, their SME employers send them to small clinics instead of a proper hospital and don’t claim insurance out of fear of increase in premium the next time they apply for coverage. In these cases, the workers end up getting inadequate treatment.

SD: What is the state of the migrant workers in Korea?

Mr. Rai:It’s all good when things are going fine. The thing is that it’s the employer who has all the power. Migrant workers cannot change jobs without the consent of their present employer. In such a case, the only option is to wait till the contract ends.  Also in South Korea, migrant workers are not allowed to unionize, strike, or bring in families. Korea has long been a homogenous society and I am not sure if they view migrant workers favorably yet. Migrant workers suffer frequent verbal and occasional physical abuse from their employers and fellow Korean workers.

SD: Is there any support system for migrant workers?

Mr. Rai:Migrant Trade Union always voices their concerns and fights for their rights. We are mainly fighting for three basic labour rights for migrant workers – Right to unionize, Right to bargain and Right to strike. Other than us, many lawyers and lawyer groups offer help to migrant workers. There are also counsellors and religious groups. Many city administrations have set up Migrant Services Centres to help migrant workers in various ways.

SD: Any final comments?

Mr. Rai: Korea has been saying that its EPS system is the best system in the world. But in practice, it’s not working and is heavily in favor of the employer. We need to change the Employment Permit system to a Work Permit System which will allow workers to bring in family members, change jobs, and longer residency.

Interview with Michelle Granas; Author of "Zaremba, or Love and the Rule of Law"

Book description: In Warsaw, a shy and high-minded polio victim lives a life of seclusion caring for her odd family until a chance encounter plunges her into the intrigues of dirty politics. Zaremba, a wealthy businessman, is about to be arrested on trumped-up charges and only she can save him. Swept along by events, Cordelia finds her feelings increasingly involved with a stranger for whom she is both rescuer and victim. When Zaremba is implicated in terrorist activities and disappears, Cordelia is painfully uncertain if she has been abandoned and must overcome surveillance, corruption, the media, and mounting humiliations and difficulties to learn the truth.

This is a story about love between a man and woman, but also love of family, country, and justice. Although set in Poland, where the CIA had a black site, it is a story that could happen anywhere, in a world where young democracies struggle against the temptations of covert operations and older democracies sometimes lead them astray.

Shivaji: Tell us something about your background and what inspired you to write this novel

Michelle:

In addition to being a writer, I am also a translator and often work on texts about international law, foreign policy, or sociology. I am American, but have been living with my family in Poland for many years. Some time ago, when Lech Kaczynski was president and his twin brother was prime minister, the government appeared to be extending its power in improper ways. These occurrences joined a worrying trend by America - and the international community - increasingly to ignore international laws and human rights that had previously seemed unassailable (outwardly, at least). It seemed clear to me that smaller countries might follow the lead of more powerful ones, and that given the tentacles of US agencies, 'security' activities could form an excuse to get rid of inconvenient persons or to settle scores. (And the CIA did have black sites in Poland and elsewhere and engaged in kidnapping in European countries). In 2007, events had become worrisome enough that my husband - who loves Poland - had begun to wonder whether we might have to leave the country. The idea for the novel came to me in the autumn of 2007 and I wrote most of the first part without knowing how the elections in that year would play out. (The Kaczynskis' party lost.)     
 

Shivaji: Your book in essence is a cautionary tale about government overreach. In the last few years, we have been hearing more and more such stories: NSA snooping for instance. Should we really be concerned? After all, the message out there is that all this is being done for our own good.

Michelle:

Well, I think of my book primarily as a love story between two rather unusual characters. But it is also about government abuse of power. The point is that when power is unchecked, it will inevitably extend into the lives of innocent people. We know this from history and human psychology. Every totalitarian or authoritarian regime claims to be acting for the good of the people, and for their security from outside threats. These are claims that should instantly ring alarm bells. American and UK governments continually trumpet the dangers of terrorism within their countries, but when the claim is investigated the threat disappears. Consider for instance, the number of Americans killed by terrorists last year: far fewer than were killed by policemen, fewer than were killed by falling furniture, miniscule numbers in comparison with random gun deaths, traffic accidents, or influenza, anyway. The American government knows this, so why is it putting in place enormous mechanisms of control and secrecy to deal with a comparative non-issue?

Yes, we should be very worried by the activities of security agencies, including the NSA. Investigations (by the Senate Intelligence Committee, for instance) have shown that their spying has not contributed to preventing any terrorist acts. However, the possibilities for using private information about citizens to control a population should be obvious and very frightening. How can journalists write their stories, lawyers communicate with their clients, or ordinary people speak to their acquaintances without fear that their words might someday be used against them -- because of their politics, or their preferences, or for no reason at all -- in devastatingly harmful ways? We already know what can happen to journalists who object to American policies. Unless we all speak out and make our objections to surveillance clear, the bar of allowable speech will eventually lower until we are all silenced.

Shivaji: As your novel also shows, getting a hyper-sensitive media to react in one's favour has become very important to win the battle. And the hyper-sensitive media has an addiction for stunts. Is it the only way left to fight for justice?

Michelle:

No. I think one of the very encouraging trends of recent years is the degree to which ordinary citizens have been able to come together to produce change or stop an injustice simply by adding their name to a petition, sending emails, or standing in a square. The internet has made it possible for many more people to become aware of what's happening in the world and to participate in shaping events. But we all have to make our voices heard - if only by making that click of the mouse - for justice, and peace, and a better world. 

 

Shivaji: In many authoritarian countries, we are also seeing how governments act in response to majority opinion. Whether in China, Central Asia, or South East Asia, the government scrupulously tracks the flow of public opinion and reacts accordingly. Whether it is anti-gay legislations in Nigeria, or Sharia law for non-Muslims in Aceh province of Indonesia; what chance do minority rights or individual rights have in such a context? 

Michelle:

The only chance that individual rights have is if all of us who are aware of their importance work to spread this idea to others: If anyone's rights can be violated, it means that yours can be too; the rights that protect one person protect everyone. In short, the security of the majority lies in the security of the minority. The alternative is a society where no one is free and dissenters are severely repressed (as once in Eastern European communist countries) or situations of civil strife and violence (as we are seeing in many parts of the world today). 

 

Shivaji:

The recent events in Ukraine have shifted fault lines. In a way, the context of your novel was also an outcome of a similar shifting of fault lines when Poland was trying to extract itself from the Russian sphere. Poland turned vindictive; digging out deep corners of it's past to vilify individuals. Will Ukraine or other East European countries tread the same path or was it a uniquely Polish inevitability?

Michelle:

I don't think anything is inevitable. Authoritarian practices or regimes can be brought down by non-violent action, and democracies won't stay democracies unless their citizens are vigilant.

Poland teetered for a while toward authoritarian practices, but then righted itself, and is today a healthy democracy, I would say. Hungary embarked on a similar course toward improper state control and is having more trouble. Russia, after the downfall of communism, never attained real democracy. I do not know what will happen in Ukraine; one sympathizes very strongly with the Ukrainians' desire for change, and hopes that in the process the rights and wishes of Ukraine's minorities are not disregarded. 

 

Photoblog-Korea: Old man and his ice cream stall

This is a picture I took in Seoul where an old couple was selling ice cream. The wife was playing the lead role while her much older looking husband (one in the picture) just gave her company. The idea of an old couple supporting in each other in this fashion is rather tender. But the circumstances that made them do this are probably not so. And this may be the future for most of us. Eventually, all governments will realize that pensions are unsustainable given declining fertilities and rising life expectations. So governments would rather spend on healthcare, the sorts that increase working age. But it would be immensely difficult to sustain brain power at old age by medical means. So governments would rather spend on sustaining the physical capacity to do work. As a result, the old would take up most of the physical labour or low skilled ones well into their 80s and 90s. Voters would love it as the old people from their own race would replace the much hated immigrants for doing these jobs. Governments would be delighted as they would then be able to do away with costly monthly pensions, spending just one-off from time to time on spine support, hip replacement, etc. As for the old, a maximum age for voting like the minimum age for voting would be institutionalized sooner or later (on same grounds of ability to make wise decisions). Hopefully for them, anti-depressants would go off-patent soon.

Who won the recent elections in India….

Certainly not the 51.75% of the population who didn’t vote for the coalition that will now be forming the government at the centre. The short-sellers anticipating a hung assembly were not the winners for sure. The organizers of the biggest event Neither did the exit poll companies who maintained their consistency in incorrectly predicting outcomes; though I have a feeling that they do this intentionally to benefit from stock market bets. The telecom companies also did not win as the election committee is yet to follow the Indian Idol model to let people vote for their preferred candidate over phone. The higher educated middle class Indians, the ones who hate poor immigrants, the ones who silently hope for people from other religions to be killed, the ones forming community clubs in local neighborhoods, the ones who believe that lower caste people deserve their fate, those who demand third-party sacrifice for the sake of their dumb and extreme patriotism, the lot that hides their extreme conservatism behind their laptop screen viewing eyes; they didn’t win either. And the Left, not only did they not win, they lost the most, in a world which is decidedly turning leftwards (USA, South Africa, France, El Salvador…). These self styled ideological purists who withdrew support from the previous government under the unintelligible pretext that it was getting closer to imperialist USA while participating in the paradox of an utterly bourgeois democracy of India, didn’t even see it coming.

So who won? It was claimed to be a victory for the poor as it had stunned the “India shining” party of traders and their parasitic priests. But the rich knew it was their victory as the winning party was super effective in promoting their cause by paying lip service to issues such as land reforms. It was claimed to be a victory for the Muslims as the party supposed to hate them had lost. But most Hindus knew that the winning party will never stop them from carrying out another pogrom of the Muslims just like the good old days. In short, it was a victory for status quo without the explicit veil of ideology. After all, isn’t human history too short to empirically prove the superiority of any ideology?

Is trickle down the only solution?

In this age, when having a socio-political opinion can harm career and relationships, most people may just offer a shrug to this question. Many would also say that it is not possible, that all progressive endeavors (particularly communism) have failed, and that the current dominance of conservative values together with state-insured capitalism (the US bail-out) is the only way to improve living conditions, even if it works at a rate comparable with radioactive decay of Uranium-235. And a risk-averse belief in God and that poverty and inequality are his will has helped even educated professionals to turn a blind eye to that two year old child begging for money at the streets.

But why did all progressive endeavors fail? One of the key factors has been the lack of willingness of the masses to be free, something that has troubled revolutionaries perennially. Che found it unbelievable that the rural peasants, for whose well being he was betting his life, were ever so willing to betray him. Gramsci explained this as an outcome of the cultural hegemony of the bourgeoisie. So the likes of Bukharin and Rousseau opined that the masses have to be coerced into freedom. But while Carlos Marighella proposed to achieve exactly this through struggle by a few proletarian “heroes” in his Minimanual for the Urban Guerrilla, such strategies when deployed in practice by the likes of Baader-Meinhoff Gang or India’s urban Maoists, failed to gain any measure of traction. The fact is that the underprivileged are as human as anyone else and have the same gene expressions that lead to feelings like selfishness, self-preservation instinct, herd mentality, class and caste consciousness, prejudices and greed.

The second is the problem with the progressive movements and their flag bearers themselves. The proponents of these movements, particularly the Social Democratic parties lost all credibility as they made one compromise after another, the biggest mistakes being declaring religion a private affair and participating in elections that gave enormous power and benefits to a few individuals. The Communist countries also suffered from lack of support from a general public who were still ignorant and seeped in age old prejudices and irrationalities. The fact that power was so concentrated in the hands of a few individuals in these communist countries also led to oppression and widespread resentment. Also, many of these organizations suffered numerous splits. While this was to be expected as by nature, progressive ideas, that try to shape the future, are bound to have many possibilities and therefore the resulting divisions. All the same, such splits have successively weakened their positions.

Of course, progressive movements had to also encounter the massive force of inertia and comfort provided by a traditional (known) way of life. But all the same, it may be too early to write them off. Weren’t republics considered a dead idea after monarchy prevailed over Rome? But the idea of the republic became irresistible after 1800 years following the French and American revolutions. And the groundwork for this had been the heightened awareness about individual rights brought as ideas of Renaissance pioneers and the likes of Martin Luther and Spinoza spread among a sizeable mass of people. In fact, history of mankind has been one of increasing awareness and availability of rights.

So as education and critical thinking becomes more prevalent, the foundation will be laid for the success of the next round of progressive movements. Developments in science will make everyone understand better the injustice of inherited wealth affecting the life story of a man. Science will also help iron out the genetic differences that result in different intrinsic capabilities for us. As you can see, such groundwork will take time, but the conclusions are inevitable. When everyone realizes that circumstances beyond one’s control have so much influence on one’s life and that there is no such thing as God to make it this way, will they still be able to turn a blind eye to that two year old child begging in the streets?

Taking stock of feminism

It’s always risky for a male to write about feminism or women issues. Whatever stance one, takes, he is likely to offend everyone. But has the feminist movement ever been so close to its goals? Sarah Palin has filled the airwaves around the world after taking the baton from Hillary Clinton and Segolene Royal. Tizipi Livni is well set to become the prime minister of Israel while Gloria Macapagal Aroyo has held on to her post in the Philippines. In India, Sonia Gandhi, Mamata Bannerjee and Mayawati are the people defining the political landscape while even at grassroots level, elected female candidates are playing a greater role in local government (despite unsubstantiated claims of benefits only accruing to wives or daughters of the powerful males). Norway has passed a law asking companies to have 40% representation by women in their boards. Around the world, women are well on course to perform better than boys particularly when it comes to higher education. Women in Saudi Arabia can now drive cars. Middle class women worldwide are having what from the outside seems to be their greatest time ever with freedom to shop, freedom to leisure, and freedom to use botox.

Indeed, while feminism has come a long way from the suffragate era of the Pankhursts to stand today for a woman's right to have orgasm first, are all these signs of real emancipation? Political emancipation has been only experienced by a handful of women and has not translated into any benefits for the majority, especially in developing countries. Women are still near to absent in the lists of top management in corporations, or institutes of higher education (especially in countries like India). Worldwide, women still marry a male who is older and at a better stage in terms of economic status, thus continuing the female’s status as the inferior partner. The institution of family, described by Engels as the key barrier to emancipation of women, continues to put chains on her career progression (despite availability of long maternity breaks and child care centers). And even after significant advances in the area of medicine, women have to continue with the disadvantage of being physically weaker than men and the emotional and physical stress of menstruation. Porn, the industry that split apart the feminist movement during the 1980s, continues as the most successful industry of the internet age. Female infanticide continues rampant in the northern states of India resulting in astonishing sex ratios. Despite widespread availability of IVF methods, ideological lesbianism continues to remain at the fringes of society. Women in Turkey face limitations if they choose to wear a veil while those in Saudi Arabia can still venture outdoors only in company of male relatives. Rape of women, as always, continues to remain the favorite method to demoralize the vanquished, as seen in recent events in Congo.

Feminist movements have lost the high decibel power of the movement because of ageing or death of the legends of the feminist movement like Robin Morgan or Simone Beauvoir. But, feminism or women centered activism continues to remain relevant. This is because as Francisco Ferrer had observed, the conservative nature of women is a strong stabilizing force in society. So if any progressive idea, that could potentially improve the lot of human beings, has to be successful, it has to be instilled in women to gain the required mass and inertia . This has been proven time and again; case in point being recent studies in India that have shown that the key to better health for kids and higher school enrolment lies in educating their mothers first (source EPW). So any progress for mankind has to go hand in hand with emancipation of women.

So what’s the future for feminism? As science advances, it will become morally imperative to develop testosterone suppressants so that women don’t have to adorn veils. Physical differences, attributable to sex, would become more a matter of choice. All the same, development in cloning, stem cell research and incubation technology will eventually make sex irrelevant.

Phone cards, money transfer, foreign exchange and poor immigrants

In a world where there are supposedly so many differences of opinion, almost everyone agrees to one thing: that immigrants, only of the poorer variety who are typically laborers or their family members are harmful to society at large. All sorts of economic and social ills are blamed on them. They are known to be dirty, to be lacking in social manners, to be carrying diseases. Poor immigrants are claimed to be ones who eat disgusting food, quarrel loudly among themselves, and breed like mosquitoes. They are also known to be the first ones to invent crime in a land mythologized by locals as being hitherto land of peace before the coming of these poor immigrants.

The richer immigrants, who come as businessman or professionals, look upon their poorer compatriots as an anomaly, a shame to their country’s reputation, and a group people, who together with their habits are to be avoided to prevent getting grouped in the same bucket. In social gatherings, these richer immigrants typically are the ones who make the most fun of their poorer compatriots and their praxis. This helps them to prove that they have marched so far ahead, that they are beyond petty nationalism, that they can be accepted by the local society without any inhibitions.

Anywhere in the world, governments set up tough rules for them while police don’t think twice before acting tough on them as majority opinion in any country agrees on harassing the poor immigrants. Trade talks between the global powers ignore them as being an exception to the spirit of laissez faire that they pay constantly pay lip service to. In other talks between the global powers, strategies are discussed to track and repel poor immigrants.

In such a world where it is natural and morally correct to hate immigrants of the poorer variety, only the sellers of phone cards, money transfer services and foreign exchange services treat this people as humans, giving them the respect due to each human in the form of promotions and advertisements targeted at them.

Come lord, invest in thy kingdom

Every emerging economy is out with the begging bowl to seek foreign investment. They run full page adverts in even magazines like Vogue, make their heads of states kowtow to low level executives in global companies and sometimes in their zeal announce mega deals even if they are not actually sanctioned (Dayanidhi Maran-Intel episode). But with so many countries begging with the equally earnest faces in such times of global recession, it has become difficult for these hyper-competitive economies to attract investors. So out of my famed kindness, I decided to prepare an elevator sales pitch for countries to distinguish themselves.

Come invest in our region.

Our country offers an extremely stable political atmosphere. Our legislators have recently voted to restore monarchy. The monarch would also be provided with the best healthcare in the word to ensure policy stability for at least the next 80 years.

And what can we say about our own labor force? They are so well suited to your company’s needs. After all, as part of our manpower development programs, we have made it compulsory to cane students for 10 minutes everyday to train them to bloom into servile well-rounded worker bees.

Our country offers excellent infrastructure, around the areas where you plan to set up your office. We have undertaken ambitious plans to set up high walls so that our slums are not visible to your company’s executives as they commute from their homes to your offices.

Our country also has a very favorable regulatory regime. We have proven track record of never pursuing any litigation against foreign owned corporations.

We also understand that your company and your employees are special. As such, we have established special economic zones where our laws don’t apply. These special economic zones are also well provisioned with the best liquor and women from our country to satisfy your employee’s needs.

And one final word about the great cultural similarities shared between your and my countries. After all, we both originated from Africa a few hundred thousand years ago. To build on to that, we have modified our English syllabus to incorporate the latest innovations by Denzel Washington instead of persisting with that Samuel Johnson. Accordingly, we have made it compulsory that every textbook used in our schools have at least three instances of the word “Motherf*****” in all their sentences.

So yes, motherf*****, come invest your motherf****** money in our motherf****** country.

The India-US nuclear deal for dummies

With the left parties withdrawing support from the central government on the issue of the nuclear deal, the political scenario in India has certainly become rather sophisticated. Just when we came to understand that we could leave behind issues of the future and focus more on issues of the past like who built Ram Setu, suddenly people are talking about things like India’s energy security. All the same, the common people have no clue about what the whole nuclear issue is all about. So here’s a crash course on the key aspects of the deal.

Does India really benefit from the deal: This is really debatable and the left parties are right about it being unnecessary as India already has a huge amount of nuclear fuel. During mythical times (Ramayana, Mahabharata), famous warriors had a huge arsenal of nuclear tipped arrows (Brahmastras). One of the largest stockpiles of these arrows was with Ashwathama who is reportedly still alive and has been seen around Delhi many times. The government just had to track him down and confiscate the enriched uranium in his stockpile instead of kowtowing to Bush.

Will the deal make India’s foreign policy subservient to that of US: No way, the US is least bothered about Biharis or North Indians in general staying in Mumbai. As such, they are unlikely to influence India’s foreign policy towards neighbouring countries like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

Should I be livid about the deal: Yes, but only after you have got past the traffic jam and found a parking space.

Why then are the communist parties so livid with the deal: That’s natural; after all, most communists are Bengalis. You see, in Bengali, the United States is known as Markin Yuktarashtra. No other country has such double names in Bengali. As such, it’s natural for Bengalis and the communists to distrust the Americans as deceitful.

So what is this deal is all about: Very few people know; including most of those who support it and oppose it. So if you can’t understand what all the fuss is about, don’t worry, no one else you know does. If the issue comes up for discussion in your social gatherings, take one side and defend it zealously. Then end the discussion by saying, “Anyway, all politicians suck” to prove your knowledge of current affairs.

Ok, this post is not really useful; so where can I know more about the deal: For that, you can check out this youtube video of Indian Idol contestants on “Deal ya no Deal”

Media and the selection problem

For the last couple of months, the international media has been swamped with reports on Tibet and Zimbabwe. Every day, the BBC declares that it has unearthed a new scheme by the Mugabe government to kill opposition supporters or rig election results, “substantiated” through interview with one person whose face is blurred out. At the same time, every media from the NATO block has been publishing interviews by Tenzin Gyatso, ever happy to give interviews, on how China is spoiling Tibetan culture by building trains. Rather strangely, these newspapers and TV shows rarely showcase the other perspective. The British run Economist reports strong display of public anger against a supposedly biased Western Media as a manifestation of anger with the Chinese government only!!!

The British outrage against the Mugabe government is understandable given that white farmers have been dispossessed of their land holdings by his government. But all said and done, Zimbabwe did have an election where the authorities did admit that the incumbent had lost the first round. The NATO media has been rather silent about recent outrageous elections in Egypt or Georgia.

Like human rights organizations, media organizations also suffer from selection bias, but in an opposite manner. What is focused on by the media is often determined by the readership. As such, English media in India rarely touch upon tribal issues since they are of no interest to their middle class readers. No wonder most Indian newspapers in English have a separate section on property in metro cities while they never bother about covering market prices for transfer of land to bargadars under India’s current land reforms legislations. May be that’s also why the British media focuses so much on Zimbabwe as opposed to Egypt. Religious sensibilities of the readership also plays a part, a reason why Darfur (Muslims fighting Christians) gets so much attention as opposed to eastern Congo (Christians fighting each other).

However, in the case of the usual tirades of NATO block media against Russia or China, a subtle and invisible hand also seems to be at work. Why else do the media criticize the theocratic aspect of the Taliban regime while eulogizing the theocratic basis of the Tibetan government in exile? They are also typically silent about lack of any political rights in the kingdoms of the Middle East while taking an ambivalent stance on how Gaza has been punished for electing Hamas by democratic countries. The British press has also been surprisingly quiet about the attempted dumping of the investigations on the BEA-Saudi bribery scandal at the pretext of national security.

But in most occasions it is the sheer lethargy of going to a harsh country to cover, as a result of which the media commissions some local person to provide reports on a wide range of issues. Take coverage on India for example, public view in the west about Indian issues is largely shaped by the thoughts of just a few columnists such as Surjit Bhalla, Anklesaria Iyer and Vir Sanghvi.

And finally, selection bias creeps in because of the need to fill in pages. Try filling up a page with an article on the impending war between Djibouti and Eritrea, most readers will skip the entire story after just reading the headline, saying, “It’s always the same with Africa”. However, a story on Sarkozy and Carla Bruni can be nicely beefed up with multiple even recycled pictures of the couple to cover multiple pages. Even if it’s always the same with celebrities.

Elections in mature democracies and parenting

The nomination season for the Democratic Party in the USA keeps going on as the contestants get nastier with each other and the rest of the world. However, the race provides a good indication of how people’s representatives are elected in mature democracies where ideologies of the contestant parties differs as much as one Original Whopper sandwich differs from the other. As such, personal factors and personality traits become the key factor on the basis of which voters make up their mind. So while the American dream supposedly makes space for everyone, when it comes to contesting for elected bodies, being a Mormon or a Hindu becomes a significant disadvantage. And if a candidate is an atheist, she might as well settle down in China. Also, for someone to have a chance as a candidate, she needs to have a life story that has never diverged from the prevalent mood of an average American at any time during her lifetime. However, in a few occasions, exceptions are made. A case in point is that even if most Americans supported the Iraq war when it started, it is now a virtue if someone says he opposed it that time.

Given that this election has resulted in scrutiny of even kindergarten essays written by contestants, parents have a crucial role to play to ensure that their child adheres to the median even when her consciousness is yet to be fully developed. And there is enough incentive for parents to make such efforts given that there are a lot of elected posts at different levels making politics a very realistic and attractive career option. Parents should therefore follow every survey that appears in newspapers or other media and cultivate in their child those aspects that are most favored by the majority of the people as indicated in those surveys. Parents need to also groom their children, the potential candidate, to be tough. It’s not necessary to be physically tough even though an army stint during the career does earn a few extra points. Often it’s enough to know the names of a few opponent nations and the nastiest weapons so that when they are contesting, they can combine these two and say “I will not hesitate a moment to nuke Iran” a few times. It’s also good to get any cosmetic enhancements done right at young age for looks do matter and later attempts to enhance appearance may draw flak as seen with John Edward’s $400 haircut. Budding contestants should also be taught by parents to know how to decouple cause and effect so that a non-controversial and ambiguous stance of political correctness can be maintained. For example, as a candidate, it is essential for her to be pro-choice but anti-abortion, pro-economic development but anti-free trade, pro-global poverty eradication but anti-immigration, and pro-democracy but anti-democratically elected Hamas.

And one last thing; till March, Obama had raised $234 million Clinton, $189 million and McCain, $76 million for their campaigns. Given such astronomical figures, it may not be a bad idea for parents who would wish to groom their children as potential candidates to start raising funds for the 2052 elections right now.

Tibet and Olympics: The return of the torch

For many things that were so common in the 80s, obituaries for their mass use have already been written; for all such things as telegrams, typewriters, matches, safety pins, and torches. Yes, torches, one no longer buys them in developed countries unless they are working for Jeff Corwin’s crew. But suddenly, torches have been in the news as the Olympic torch was being carried all around the world amidst violent protests. Several protesters came out in the streets to fight for the freedom of Richard Gere, Sharon Stone, Harrison Ford and Tenzin Gyatso as they tried to throw the torch relays into disarray.

Predictably, in India, Sachin Tendulkar got an injury before the torch run which was being explained by some as a subtle political message. But the fact is that Sachin was never known to have any political views and is known to have got injuries before critical events consistently. All the same, the Olympic committee selected a totally wrong set of people to carry the torch. For instance, in India, they should have selected the lead characters of the tele-novellas to carry the torch. Come on, who can match the immense experience of the likes of Tulsi, Kksusum, Prerna and Parvati of the Saas-Bahu serials in protecting the flames of diyas (lamps) in front of El Nino and Hurricane Katrina?

Outside India, the Olympic authorities could have tried working with Facebook. One torchbearer could have “passed on the torch to you” to the next bearer, all over Facebook without giving a chance to disruptions. If things really got desperate, they could have sent spam scare mails with pictures of the Olympic flame saying “Pass this mail with the picture to 5 people you know within three days, else your mother-in-law will become alive”.

All the same, the Tibet issue is a difficult one. Are the protesters fighting for a just cause or are they looking to re-establish a feudal order? Is Tenzin Gyatso the true representative of the Tibetans or is he just a glorified person selected through an obscure and irrational dream-based procedure that is far from being democratic? Were the reports of the Tibetan riots in the western media unbiased, if so why was there so little coverage of the initial riots when Tibetans reportedly damaged properties of ethnic Chinese? And with most of the leading characters associated with the freedom movement being foreigners, there is skepticism over how much the movement is in touch with the reality in Tibet?

Anyway, the moot point is that torches are back in the limelight and the future is promising for them. One just has to view any movie from the Star Wars family to know that the battles of the future will be using torches (Lightsabers) only. The skirmishes over the Olympic torch relays just prove that point.

Ramblings on Nepal

Contrary to all projections by mainstream media, Maoists seem to be well on their way to power in Nepal, through a democratic process. And they have already announced that the monarchy will be abolished within three weeks and the palace wealth nationalized. It remains to be seen whether “The Prachanda Way” will transform lives of the common Nepalese who live in wretched poverty and face severe caste-based discrimination, but it is certain that the days for the king are numbered.

What awaits the king? Given the prospect of international pressures, it is unlikely that he will meet the fate of Louis XVI. But Maoists will surely think twice of letting him hang around in Nepal. They must be wary from the case of that wily fighter Sihanouk who kept on shifting sides and coming back to power in Cambodia. It is also possible that the common population may get wary of Maoist secularism and opt for the ritualistic comfort of a Hindu king. Therefore, may be the Maoists should think twice. Kings, when they are not sucking blood, could serve quite a useful purpose. The Maoists could maintain the King as a useful if ceremonial figure just as the military dictator Sarit Dhanarajata used Bhumibol in Thailand to maintain legitimacy. Also, if the public relations and myths of the royal family are nurtured carefully, as in Britain, they can generate a steady source of employment and income for common people through tourism and media gossip in the poor country.

And what are the king and his palace troupe thinking now? Are they having great feasts anxious that the food of future may not be so lavish? Have they already transferred most of their wealth to overseas bank accounts? Have they already booked their tickets to fly out of their country? Have some of them already started memorizing Mao’s “Little Red Book” as they prepare to switch loyalties? Or have they bought huge life insurances?

Well, all of them will probably find easy refuge in India, used to housing feudal lords and lamas. Anyway India is in the trickiest position, having backed the king for so long, and then supporting the democratic process, only to see Maoists come to power. But till the king of the hill escapes, he could surely be asked to give helping hand to cultivate rice, with all the inflation around.