Tech talks

I used to love programming when I was in college and still do. Having started with C and C++, I fell in love with Java- that language where everything is built in with so many layers of abstraction that the developer only has to have a vague idea as to what the APIs do and of course everything is just a ctrl+space away(if you are using eclipse). I have to accept now- Java is not my cup of tea. The language has plenty of jargon though and hence plenty of scope for extensibility when it comes to creating silly humor. Here’s some which I can think of-

1. A guy goes to a function and spends some time there. After a long time he finds that he is not able to come out of the function. Why? – No one asked him to return

2. A student goes to an art class. He finds that none of the students there have a pencil, paper or a paintbrush. Surprised he asks the guy sitting next to him- “How come you guys don’t carry any stuff?”. The guy says- “This is an Abstract Art Class. No objects allowed”.

3. Guy1-”Hey you heard what happened to Joey? “
Guy2-”What? “
Guy1-”He was filling this form for an interview. They asked him his religion and they had check boxes corresponding to Jew,Christian etc.
Joey is an atheist. Finding no option the genius wrote something like – “(new Checkbox(“Atheist”)).setSelected(true)” next to the other check boxes.

4. “C’mon Dave, where do we hide the loot. I am not able to think straight.”
Dave (with his eyes shining)- “Ok, I have done this before. Gimme the cash. See, I write private on all of them and then we dump them in this here auditorium down the lane. And when a public function happens there we get our hands on them.”

5. Guy1- “Hey, what’s your dog called?”
Guy2- “Actually I have a lot of dogs.I got tired of naming them. So I have a list for them. They are like members of my family so I call them- myDogList. So when I call them I say something like- “Heel myDogList.get(i)”.

6. In the future when machines take over the world and recreate Forrest Gump-
Class Forrest extends Thread {
public void run(){
system.out.println(“Run Forrest Run,Run Forrest Run”);
//Forrest runs here
}
}
And of course Forrest f=new Forrest();
f.start();

7. Criminal- “For the last time, I am warning you, hand me over your wallet or I will fire. I am not kidding.”
Guy-”Take your best shot”
Criminal pulls the trigger but nothing happens. “Oh damn, my gun is not registered for fire events“

8. When Java jargons meet-
Interface -”Hey hey how come you get to do all the action stuff eh?”
Impl- “Not all the stuff goddamn it. Some times (with emotion) they extend me. They say they are protecting me. But I know they just want to override me.”
Collections- “I am sick of HashMaps getting all the action. They get to have keys and objects”
Iterator- “Look at me slogging all day going over all you goddamn lists and maps and when I am done you just leave(exit) without saying goodbye”
final- “I am an oxymoron. Final my foot. They put me before every variable”
Variable-”Hey don’t you bring us into this. We don’t even get to choose
our names. Some possessive humans prefix our names with “my“. Sadists. They give us data and just when you think you might make it to the end of the program they take it away and give us null“
Class(hysterically weeping when the program is about to end)- “No you can’t do this. My objects, my objects. Please, for the love of God don’t, you will destroy my….(program exits).Oh well, I will wait for “new()” again”
finally- “Will they ever choose me before catch and try?”
i-” I have the power…………”

The return of the kings

Posting here after a long time. I went into one of those lulls when you can’t think of anything worthwhile to write. I am feeling a bit sleepy as I write this courtesy of the champions league semi-final between Barcelona and Chelsea which I watched yesterday or rather early today morning. It was at least worth the wait unlike all those  matches which Arsenal lost despite me cheering them on late into the night and into the wee hours.

Any soccer fan who loves free flowing attacking football interspersed with  lovely first touches will agree that justice was done today when Barca beat Chelsea. There seems to be a jinx on teams like Arsenal and Holland which makes sure that they mesmerize the audience with their play but refrain from winning when it matters. It is very logical for an Arsenal supporter to have Barcelona as the fall back team to support and so I cheered Barca today when they played Chelsea at Stamford Bridge.

I actually switched on the TV pretty early to watch The Fellowship of the   Rings. All the three movies in the LOTR trilogy are masterpieces of film making and will probably be hard to beat for years to come. The movies have a superb cast, awesome visual effects and a sound track which will never fail to give you goosebumps. I was toggling between the movie and the match, but the match didn’t seem to be very interesting with Chelsea netting the first goal. When the movie ended I switched to the match with about 30 minutes to go. Barcelona were attacking with their silky passes but they failed to make any in roads into the Chelsea defense. Chelsea on the other hand were frequenting Barcelona’s penalty box.  Barcelona still had the majority of the possession and some luck too with the referee  ruling out some valid hand ball  cries from Chelsea inside Barca’s penalty area. Abidal was sent off when the referee judged that he had  tripped Anelka.

Barcelona continued to attack with ten men. Messi and Iniesta exchanged   good passes and released Alves on the right whose crosses were frustratingly poor. I watched with bated breath hoping that Barca would net that crucial away goal and prevent an all English final.

When Iniesta scored in the 3rd minute of stoppage, I was overjoyed for yet another boring English side was knocked out and the kings of soccer had returned.

What ifs

I haven’t watched Valkyrie yet. The trailers haven’t attracted me much. World war 2 freak that I am, I don’t feel very excited about the movie. I can’t digest Tom Cruise playing Von StauffenBerg, though I liked him in a Few Good Men. Maybe I will like it when I watch it. After all it is about one of those events which could have changed the phase of the war.

The second world war is an event simply unparalleled in human history. Battles were waged across continents, lives were lost in the millions and at the end maps were redrawn. The war true to its name touched every corner of the world. The world perhaps progressed technologically in this period like never before. ENIACs which evolved into the present day computers had their birth during the war in an attempt to intercept traffic and break codes. The Jet engine, the infamous A-bomb and RADAR resulted from massive investment in science and technology by the allies and the axis powers.

I can’t think of any single event which tilted the war in favor of the allies or might have tilted it in favor of the Germans and their allies. I can think of a handful which together changed or might have changed the course of the war.

Pearl harbor comes to mind immediately. The Americans might have entered the war irrespective of this, but it certainly triggered their slumbering factories into war production and hastened their entrance into the war. The American public were never enthusiastic about supporting their cousins across the Atlantic and so the attack on Pearl harbor helped lend more credence to FDR ’s Lend-lease plan without which the Russians would have fallen in Stalingrad and the British in North Africa. Pearl harbor also turned America’s concentration on the Japanese whose navy was far more superior than the American’s. Perhaps if it hadn’t been for Pearl harbor, the Americans might never have entered the war leaving the Japanese and the Germans to annihilate the allies. But I am pretty sure America would have felt unsafe amidst the two axis powers and would have opted to join the war eventually.

Consequent to Pearl harbor came another turning point- The Battle Of Midway during which the Japanese Imperial Navy was dented by the American navy at Midway atoll- a strategic place for both parties. The Japanese were blitzkrieging through Asia having humiliated the British at Singapore. Though the battle at Midway did not defeat the Japanese altogether it was the first allied victory in the pacific and in that sense it was a major morale booster. From here on, the Americans dominated most of the other naval battles.

The battle at El Alamein in Egypt forced the Germans out of North Africa. The ingenious Erwin Rommel who was riding upon a wave of victories was finally stopped at El Alamein. A victory here for the Afrika corps would have meant access to the Suez canal and hence to the oil fields of the middle east. It gave the British the first major victory of their war campaign and more importantly opened another front for the Germans in addition to Stalingrad. What if Rommel had defeated Montgomery? What if he had been better supplied with tanks and fuel? Hitler was damningly stringent and refused to budge to Rommel’s continued pleadings for supplies. Had the British been defeated here the Germans might have raced across the middle east where the Arabs would have welcomed them and then they might have reached India.

With “not a step backwards” as their motto the Soviets battled the Germans at Stalingrad. The combination of the cruel Russian winter and the patriotic zeal of the Russians sucked the Germans into one of the most savage battles of world war 2. The Russian campaign in general and the battle at Stalingrad in particular was a war of attrition for the Germans. With the British in North Africa and a threat of an allied invasion in the western front, the German lines were stretched already. And with Stalingrad, the Germans suffered massive losses and gave the Russians a much needed sniff of victory. A German victory here would have devastated allied moral and would have helped Hitler concentrate on the western front. Even with the defeat at Stalingrad the Germans did have a chance to regroup and attack if it weren’t for Hitler’s constant intervention in the tactics employed by the Wehrmacht.

D-day June 6 1944, of course was the knock out punch to the Germans. It wasn’t a course changer but something which was waiting to happen.

What if Hitler hadn’t attacked Russia? The attack on the Soviet union seems like one of the most ridiculous decisions by Hitler. Why would he attack the one great ally he had? It is true that their ideologies were conflicting. But I can’t comprehend why he chose to attack the Soviets at such a crucial time. Maybe the explanation is in his Mein Kampf where he talks about Lebensraum and his feelings towards Bolshevism. This is THE turning point for me.

The Germans and the Japanese lacked coordination in their moves. The Japanese after their invasion of Singapore were breathing down India’s neck. If the Germans led by Hitler had agreed to bolster and attack with their forces in North Africa they might have blitzkrieged across the middle east and surrounded the allies.

Consequent to the occupation of France, the Germans had a plan to invade Great Britain (Operation Sea lion). Already invigorated by their victories across Europe, they might have made short work of England if they had crossed the channel.

Von StauffenBerg’s paln, if it had succeeded might have saved lives. The allied invasion was already in full swing but still the allies might have agreed to the German surrender. So this event is a course changer in the sense that it would have saved lives but not the final outcome .

The gravity of some situations…

I was fascinated when I read about the expedition to the south pole by Robert Falcon Scott in 1912. Scott’s team were beaten by Amundsen’s in the race to the pole by some weeks. It made for a very interesting read in the National Geographic magazine (edition- 1987). When I think about the poles, I invariably start imagining people falling off the south pole. Yes, I know it’s very ridiculous. The Earth is round (but a bit uneven and bulged, they say). So, when I visualize our world as if I were in outer space, I can’t for the world imagine huge water bodies sticking to the surface. And what about penguins? All their blood must flow to their heads. So goes my bizarre train of thoughts.

My poor grasp of gravity is evident. Gravity always acts towards the center. And here the center is the center of the Earth. So objects on the south pole will be attracted towards the center too. Maybe when I thought about people falling off the south pole I was subconsciously assuming that objects on the Earth too would be subject to a gravitational pull, not from the Earth but from the region that encompasses the Earth. Analogy: Placing grains of sand on a ball suspended from a rope, where the grains are analogous to us and the ball is analogous to the earth. But here there is nothing to pull the Earth. Of course other planetary and celestial objects exert gravity on the Earth but the Earths pull towards it’s center must be sufficiently strong so as not to support my “falling from the south pole” paradox.

I stumbled upon a site which supports the Flat Earth theory. It makes use of such arguments like the “oceans sticking to the surface” and the “falling off” problem to prove that the Earth is flat. For my part, I always have these amusing ideas creeping in. I guess most of us shun the complexities underlying our world and get on with life. I bet most of us would have wondered as to “how on Earth” (hehe) all objects stay on the surface instead of sliding off. Our minds try to draw parallels between a suspended ball on Earth and the Earth itself in space and thus encounters these paradoxes. But the moment it does, it is confronted by existing theories about gravity and space and it opts not to tread over such difficult terrain and thus accepts what is easier to follow.

I wonder what meanings our existing phraseology would take if people fell off the Earth. “Man, he is totally out of this world!” or ” Hey you know, the folks at the south pole fall for each other”.

P.S: The harsh climate and terrain has ensured that literally no living being can survive on the south pole.

Time to change

It’s now more than a week since the attacks on Mumbai. Invasion would be a better word, I think. Anguish is still prevalent amongst the masses and so are resignations from politicians, which have become something routine since the attacks. It took a night’s sleep and some gossiping amongst my colleagues at office for me to realize the enormity of the terror. I was aggrieved and shocked at not only the scale of the attacks but also at the pathetic governance in our country.

I will spend time on the background of terrorism in general and the attacks this year on Indian soil in particular since they are the continuation of the same filthy ideals.

The cause…

Almost every major city in India has faced attacks this year. And at the core of all of these attacks are Islamic extremists. There is no denying the fact. I don’t have anything against the religion nor the people who follow it, but the fact is every major terror attack today is planned,executed and motivated by ideals which are interpreted from the Quran (or rather misinterpreted) and whose objectives are to avenge societies which supposedly mistreat Muslims and to make Islam the only faith on the planet. I am sick and tired of the pacifists who raise their voice when an accusation is made against an outfit like SIMI, following a terror attack. To blame the entire Muslim populace in India is of course despicable and not in accordance with our secular ideals. But I don’t give a damn as to whose sentiments we hurt when we round up on and punish criminals responsible for attacking our country. Let me make it crystal clear. This is not a fight against Muslims. It is unfortunate that some followers of Islam are spreading terror throughout the world but to class all Muslims with terrorists is something which should not be done and has not been done till now. Deep down we all know when we view the aftermath of a bomb blast that Islamic terrorists are most probably behind it. And in most cases we are proved right. So, Muslims in India should understand this (I hope they already have) and not be offended when investigations lead to Islamic terror outfits. I agree that our police and investigating agencies are driven sometimes by political ideals but even they cannot get it wrong every time.

It ain’t war…

Fighting terrorism is not like conventional warfare. There are no rules of engagement. Terrorists are driven by ideals which cannot be defeated through negotiations. In war armies face off in a battlefield. The enemy is visible (most of the times), their locations are known and they are predictable in the moves they make. Most countries will have a plan to attack a neighboring nation and to defend themselves in case of an attack. The armed forces are sometimes implicitly thought to be highly secretive. But the fact is no soldier will disguise himself when there is no war. He has no reason to. A country’s military might including locations of command centers is usually public knowledge. So a strategy can be devised to defend and attack a nation. The same thing cannot be said about terrorist organizations. The coordinates of the camps are generally known. But what about the hidden face of the terrorist? Even these might reside in the databases of some Intelligence agency. There are two problems. Terrorists feed on some ideals (whether justifiable or unjustifiable). So do nations when they attack. But with the defeat of the armed forces the ideals die down. But extremists are dispersed. And even if all the terror camps are wiped out new ones will come. Second, they have sympathizers who support and are ready to hide and shelter them. The root cause seems to be the ideals which drive them. These probably will die at some point but I don’t see that happening in the near future.

No negotiations…

Negotiation is futile. When was the last time you saw a mail from terrorists proposing peace? You most probably saw a mail predicting doom to all the infidels or a mail congratulating all those who killed innocents. Sometimes I tire myself thinking about what these terrorists want. Have we inflicted so much suffering on them than they have on us? Are their causes real? The world is a violent place. Every faith will have faced some persecution at some point. Jews are not craving for German blood to spill, Christians don’t want to avenge 9/11 and other attacks by killing Muslims nor do Hindus propose that the Muslim invasion of India centuries ago be avenged now. The LeT and the Al Qaeda have no cogent cause. Their attacks on the US and Europe are not retaliatory as they claim for US aid to Israel and European support to the US. And for our part, it is no use blaming the US for its hard nosed approach in dealing with them nor rambling that the US fostered the Mujhaideen in the first place. We all know that their intent was to fight communism not to nurture Islamic extremism. So why do terrorists target the west? I can only think that it is because of a combination of a infrastructure in ruin in the middle east (you just need to know how the land that the Israelis inhabit today was before they started migrating in the 19th century) and other “stans” (like Pakistan) and an inherent tendency towards violence in these regions for centuries. It is very easy to direct your anger and frustration against civilizations which are much better and progressive than yours. I am no expert on the Quran. The concept of fighting against the infidels is from the Quran or it might be something the extremists have managed to convolute to suite their needs. The attacks on Indian soil are time and again justified by the terrorists for the Babri Masjid demolition and the Kashmir issue. Parroting something repeatedly and using it to justify killing of innocents will not fool people for long. The fact is they have no intention of living in harmony with the world. Hence they must not be negotiated with.

Fight fire with fire…

In the aftermath of the massacre of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympics at Munich, the government of Israel authorized the assassination of all the perpetrators. It took time. But eventually they got all of them. Why is it that we have been so tolerant to terrorism? In most of the cases we spend time arguing for and against taking action and end up doing nothing. Most of us (including me) have this feeling of fatalism. We just accept things as they are and get on with life. This is reflected in our reaction to violence against our nation as well. Pursuing and bombing terrorist camps might not be a permanent solution. Fighting terrorism is a war of attrition. For every camp which is destroyed others will come up. This is not a justifiable reason though for inaction. It’s analogous to cutting our nails. We cut them and they grow back. But we don’t stop cutting them do we? It’s time we instilled fear into their hearts for a change.

Security and Intelligence…

We are the seventh largest country with a population of over a billion. Safeguarding such a huge land mass is difficult. I have no clue as to how we must go about achieving this. But achieve it we must. Identifying probable candidate places for infiltration might be a good way to start. Forming special forces and stationing them in such places is the next step. With such a huge coastline we must also invest in our navy so that our waters are patrolled strategically. Being indigenous in developing arsenals is important. It reduces dependency on other nations. It also might improve the general scientific temper in the country and popularize our defense research organizations which at present struggle to roll out inventions and are least attractive when it comes to career options.

Our intelligence agencies should meet more often and collate their pieces of information. A proposal is already in place to set up a federal agency. Intelligence agencies should make better use of science and technology and collaborate with foreign intelligence. Counter intelligence has to be beefed up and it must have transparent communication with the security outfits. Authorizing covert black operations might be unethical but we are dealing with an enemy which is devoid of any morals. We have to keep tabs on local extremist groups as well if we are to combat terrorism at home.

The aftermath…

The politicians have been at the receiving end of the nation’s anger in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks. I don’t see how they are the only ones to blame. Didn’t we elect them in the first place? Didn’t we know all along that they were incompetent? We derive satisfaction in deriding our politicians by pointing out that they are corrupted and that they are incapable of discharging their duties. We joke about these issues and get on with life. As a nation we have always been ready to accept issues which are obviously detrimental to the nation’s progress instead of standing up against them (again, including me). Electing politicians to office doesn’t mean we are freed of our responsibilities towards our nation. Let us stop this blame game. Let us reorganize the bureaucracy within our political structure. Let every politician earn his place. We all have to meet a plethora of criteria to gain employment. Why not politicians?

Mad about squirrels

I am not sure how it started. It must have been during one of my vacations at my grandparent’s place in the village. An adult squirrel was clumsily moving across the ground. I approached it cautiously and expected it to scamper away. I was surprised therefore when the squirrel continued to amble. I picked it up instantly and stroked it. Joyfully I showed it to my mom and grandmother. They squealed together in unison. “What on earth are you holding. Drop it immediately and wash your hands”. I protested in vain but left the creature where I found it. I guess that was the first of my many tryst with squirrels.

At my house in Bangalore there were some trees in the backyard. I wasn’t prone to observing nature. But when all my friends moved their houses (I lived and still live in an apartment), I was left with nothing to do but gaze at trees and insects. Squirrels fascinated me. I watched for them all day as they jumped from trees on to the compound wall surrounding my apartments and then on to the ground to feed. Some days when I didn’t have school I would spend entire days sitting on a stone ,watching them. I got intensely curious about their daily wanderings. Where did they sleep? Where did they build nests? At least for three years I spent most of my free time observing them. Gradually I was able to identify individual squirrels. I wanted to tame them badly. I would hold crumbs of bread or biscuits in my hand all day and wait for them to approach me. Squirrels are one of the most sensitive creatures. They are very alert and at the first sign of movement (even a sudden intake of breath) they will scamper away. And so I had to remain still and inanimate when they approached me. Eventually one or two squirrels agreed to be hand fed. I dared not stroke them, knowing that they would run the moment I raised my finger to do so. But still the satisfaction of seeing them feed from my hands was not enough and I vowed to tame one.

Young Squirrels were my best bet. Especially those which were orphaned or lost. At least three times I got my hands on them. Once I ran behind one which was running pathetically on the ground. For some reason I didn’t feel like keeping the young one as it squeaked incessantly in my hand and so I let it go. The second time was calamitous. Crows and squirrels seem to ignore each other. But crows relish young squirrels and frequently attack them at their nests in coconut trees. On one such attack a small Squirrel fell from a tree. Adult Squirrels of course have little trouble when they fall from great heights. Their bodies are lithe and nimble and they can take such falls with minor bruises. But this was a young one. It wasn’t moving. It was still alive though. I picked it and placed it in a shoe box. I provided the box with some cotton to make it more comfortable. To feed it I sucked in some milk using an ink filler and expected the Squirrel to suckle it with zest. I was wrong. The Squirrel was obstinate to the point that it refused any kind of food. I feared that it might die out of hunger and the injuries it had sustained. Throughout the night the Squirrel chirped. Young Squirrels have a characteristic chirp to call their mother when they are lost. I usually came across young Squirrels by listening to this. My worst fears were realized the next day when I found that the Squirrel had died. I sorrowfully disposed of the squirrel along with the box. The third instance had a happier ending. This was an adult Squirrel which was struggling to grip trees and compound walls. It was desperately trying to get away from the ground were it would be easy morsel for cats and crows. I picked it up expertly and once again resorted to the ubiquitous shoe box which had housed pups and kittens. I couldn’t diagnose what was wrong with the creature but it seemed happy to accept food. The next morning I found it in the box. I wanted to take it to a VET but I knew I had to attend college. I decided to bunk a few classes. I took the squirrel in an auto to the vet’s.

A few cows gazed stupidly at me and chewed contentedly on fodder inside the vet’s compound. I was very confident that the doc would cure the squirrel. But when I showed it to him he seemed surprised. “We don’t treat wild animals here. I am sorry”. Wild animal my foot. I was anguished. All the shows on animal planet showed docs caring for lizards and snakes with love. I cursed the pathetic treatment to which animals are subjected to it in India. Why is it that we don’t give a damn about animals? Well, I am digressing. I took the squirrel back and offered it to a kid who lived above my house. After a few days he called me when he was releasing the squirrel back. It seemed to have recuperated for it quickly started climbing up a tree.

Snakes used to be frequent visitors in my backyard

There have been other instances of course. I remember the time when a young squirrel slipped out of my grip and sped into my house. The funny thing was my grandmother who hates all animals was reading a magazine and didn’t notice me as I struggled to catch the squirrel. Squirrels aren’t just cute animals. They are highly intelligent. They communicate constantly with each other by rubbing noses. Most people cannot distinguish one Squirrel sound from the other. I was able to identify three basic Squirrel sounds. The noisy type which is characteristic of them to alert other squirrels in case of a large predator like a cat. The slow and soulful sound that young squirrels make to call their mothers. And this one is my favorite. Like monkeys and birds, squirrels alert each other when there’s a snake in the vicinity. The sound they use for this is a short squeak which is repeated after a few seconds gap. On numerous occasions this has led me to snakes which otherwise would have slithered away unnoticed.

For a few rupees more

On most days I don’t pay much attention to the many articles that are published in the Bangalore Times (a supplement that comes along with the Times of India). There are enough eye catching distractions in this paper and it would take supreme self control to divert yourself from these and read mundane articles. On Saturday, November 1st though I came across an article in the Bangalore Times about a book fair at the Indian Institute of World culture. Apparently this was an annual event and attracted many book lovers. The books were supposed to be dirt cheap. There was also a good chance of finding some rare books and magazines. Recently I had acquired an interest in reading National geographic magazines – old and outdated ones. I hoped I would find these at the fair and set out in my bike.

The Indian Institute of world culture looks like an old mansion from the outside and it is one. When I reached the place, many book lovers were already coming out with their booty. I was afraid that I might be too late, for the fair would close at 15:00 and it was already 13:00. I expected a neat arrangement of books with sections categorized over a wide range of topics. Well I had hoped too much. The hall – for that was where the fair was held- was strewn with books. The ground was littered with torn magazines and books with people trying to dodge them as they navigated their way through the rubble. How difficult is to get a set of tables to arrange these books, I thought. There were essentially three rows. You could imagine a typical Indian eating occasion with people sitting on the ground in parallel rows. Well this was similar to that. Only there were no plantain leaves. I had to make the best of this though. For I had an intuition that I might find an intriguing book. I love stumbling upon old books with obscure subjects. To search for a book and finding it is one thing, but to accidentally come across a gem of a book is like finding treasure.

I browsed through the rubble and found some old magazines. Some like the Popular mechanics for kids dated back to the early 1990’s. Finally I found a bunch of National Geographic magazines. But I wasn’t satisfied. I continued my search in the hope of finding an interesting read. Maybe a book on Evolution or Roman history. After an hour or so I found a book titled The capitalist economy. I have very limited knowledge of world economics and was literally left in the dark when there was talk of the Wall street collapse. I picked up another book related to economics. These along with two magazines titled Current Science, a German magazine and the four National Geographic magazines formed my booty. At the billing counter I was apprehensive of the amount that I would be charged. But to my relief I had to pay just 150/-. I was overjoyed.

For all the awe that bikes are held in when compared to other two wheelers, there’s a serious disadvantage in owning one, especially if you want to carry a pile of books. I was more concerned about my bike’s looks and chose not to fit it with any special luggage carrying box when I bought it. But now I was stranded, with a large pile of books and a bike that could travel at more than 100 kph at my disposal. I contemplated going home and getting a bag. But then the security guard at the fair agreed to tie the books together. I then tied this to the bars protruding just before the wheels of my bike. I have missed out the objective of this narration though. Just before I came up with this idea, along came a sour, curious middle aged person. I was in a very good mood having bought the books for a meager price. I was ready to converse with anyone. So, this person asks me: “How much did you buy those books for?”. Me (happily): 150/-. He: “Oh why did you pay so much. I bought these (pointing to two huge sacks of books) for just 350/-. You should have bargained”. I gave him a sheepish grin. Inside I was boiling with murderous rage. This ** my rich vocabulary of swear words** man had ruined my day. Some people like this person derive consolation in knowing that they have clinched a better bargain than others. A few rupees more might not be much but it is enough to bring a feeling of smugness to one and chagrin to another.

To fight or not to fight

The other day I had an argument with my friend. We were discussing the holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis. Around six million Jews were believed to be killed during the holocaust. The Nazis embarked on a systematic pogrom to eliminate the Jews from Europe. Perhaps it is one of the most well chronicled slaughter in history. The persecution of the Jews might have heightened to a gruesome extent during world war2, but they were always kept in a state of apathy in some parts of Europe in the centuries prior to the war. When Hitler became Fuhrer after Hindenburg’s death he initiated more stringent norms in accordance with the ideologies of the National Socialist party. Initially, so called Dissidents were sent to concentration camps. As the Nazis tightened their hold on Germany the Jews were showcased as the bane of the Reich land. They were gradually segregated from the main stream. Then came more stringent laws. Jews were banned from civil services. Jewish works were ostracized. “Juden Verboten” signs appeared at public places.

Well, back to the argument.My friend was of the opinion that the Jews should have put up some kind of resistance against the Nazis. I was trying to rationalize their stance by pointing out that they were up against a vastly superior foe and they would try to cling on to whatever little hope they had of surviving. Hitler came up with the final solution proposal in 1941. But Jews were mass murdered in camps even before this. Concentration camps were set up in Poland and some parts of Europe. Initially Jews were lured by the prospect of rehabilitation. Only when they reached the camps did they realize their plight. The non-Jewish population didn’t help the Jews either. A few cases apart they seemed content to turn them over to the SS. Eventually the Jews must have realized the fate that awaited them at the camps. So why didn’t they fight then? I think it would have been suicidal to have fought the Germans although they were destined to die either way. But they must have had some hope of surviving. I believe there is an inherent feeling in humans ( also in the animal kingdom) to claw at any straws of hope they can. To have fought the Germans directly would have meant that the Jews no longer believed in surviving the war. Maybe they trusted the allies to learn of their state and come to their rescue. That didn’t happen of course. A Jew sympathizer actually managed to smuggle information about the concentration camps to the allies at a neutral country (Switzerland I think but not sure). But his information was ignored as too implausible.

Jews being transported to the camp at Treblinka

It shouldn’t be thought though that the Jews didn’t resist. They were active in many resistance movements including the Dutch resistance. Extermination camps also witnessed some resistance. Brutal though the system was in the camps, there were some acts of defiance. They might not have been physical. Resistance in the camps was all about maintaining their dignity without succumbing to servility. Escape attempts were made at camps though their chances of success were slim. The most well known is the attempt to escape from Sobibor. The event which was published as a book and eventually made it to the screens took place in October 1943. Jewish and Russian POWs escaped from the camp but not many survived. They were either betrayed by the Poles or were hunted down by the Germans.

Physical resistance was rare and is not hard to see the reason behind this. The Jews were struggling to make a living in downtrodden ghettos. They strove to maintain an atmosphere of normalcy utilizing the scant resources available at their disposal. There are accounts of dramas and social events being organized in ghettos. The Jewish council or Judenrate in charge of each ghetto was forced into submitting to the Germans. Often the Judenrate were left with no alternative but to surrender one of their own for rations. The young members of the ghettos were more prone to fight the Germans. Eventually some ghettos chose to oppose the Germans in a hopeless war. One such uprising is the Warsaw Ghetto uprising which took place in January 1943. Although the Germans squashed it in May of that year it must be noted that an impoverished bunch of inhabitants held out against an armed force for 5 months. A true show of spirit. I agree such uprisings did not take place throughout Europe. But hell, the enemy had annihilated Poland and marched through one of the supposedly toughest defense lines into France with ridiculous ease.

Outnumbered and with little support from the rest of the world and up against a regime whose very ideology was the destruction of the Jews they could do little more than they did.

How patriotic am I?

I stood up for the national anthem as did all the people who were at the cinema hall to watch a movie.Most theaters air the national anthem before the movie begins nowadays.Your patriotism would most probably be questioned if you didn’t stand. As I sat down after the anthem ended, I wondered as to how many people stood out of pure love and respect for the country or patriotism as most would say. One of the things which has evolved in parallel with our progress in civilization is liberalism or freedom. Freedom of expression is prevalent today like never before. Daring audacious comments can be made about those concepts which were taboo a decade or so back. Humor feeds on such censorious topics like sex,race etc. But if there is one thing which is not to be meddled with it is patriotism.Of course you can poke fun at the pathetic state of governance in your country, bad roads,poor infrastructure but you would always refrain from saying you don’t love the country.

Love and/or devotion to one’s country.Thats patriotism by definition. What is a country? It’s man-made in the sense that man created all the demarcations which resulted in the 200 or so countries. Let’s trace this evolution. First there would have been early men and women(i don’t know how many years back). Then small families.Naturally there would have been some bonds within families. Instinctive love between mother and child and so on. Then families might have grown or a group might have come together to have better chances of survival. They would have established themselves in habitable places. Territoriality which is nothing new in the animal kingdom would have led to groups of people fiercely guarding their regions against enemies. Logically extending small groups to a larger number would have led to countries and states. So, for now a country is just that- a region on earth with humans inhabiting it. In the early days when the world was war torn, Kings or the ruling monarch would have needed the help of the citizens to defend the nation(forget about civil wars for now). The best way was to instill a sense of loyalty towards the country and appealing to people’s fears about their livelihood to unite them. Of course there would have been those who would have signed up to defend the nation or out of pure love. I have just taken war as an example.That doesn’t mean to say that war is the only thing that can unite a nation but it is a very effective means of doing so.

My intention above was to show how the concept of patriotism might have come into being. It might have been purely because the survival instinct within us drove us to unite at times of difficulty.As time went on it might have been realized that it was beneficial to remain united irrespective of peace or war. Competition amongst nations would have played an important role too. Nations compete on every stage. In sports, in economic growth,military might etc. A common reason would be required for the layman to identify with his country’s actions. Enter patriotism. A concept which not only unites people but also gives them a sense of belonging- an identity.

I confess that I have never written something so confusing as this.But I will go on with my conjectures.From the above statements patriotism boils down to this. It is here today because of a combination of three reasons. Reason one is that leaders of nations found patriotism as a convenient tool to unite the people. Reason two arises from our own need to belong and be a part of the state’s activities. Reason three can be derived from reason two. It could be that people use patriotism because it suits them to be so or because it is just not right to be unpatriotic. So they feign it.Or it could be that people genuinely have a feeling of pride and love towards their country.This would be an inherent feeling and it’s reason would be hard to explain and so I won’t investigate it further. My problem is with the people who feign it and with the people who think it is a sin not to be patriotic. It is clear that patriotism is something we have created. So do we have any obligation to love our country? Is it ungrateful if we don’t? I love my country.I respect and admire the men and women of the armed forces who get paid far less than us for putting themselves on the line of fire while we call ourselves patriotic and seat ourselves comfortably in a couch and cheer our nation at the olympics with patriotic fervor.So how patriotic am I then?

You either love your nation or you don’t.It is difficult to grasp this concept of loving something which is inanimate and is yet teeming with lives.But more importantly if you were to understand the principles which your country stood for which in effect influences the way you go about your life then you would learn to be proud and love your country. But should it be expected of everyone and forced on everyone?I might come back to this question.But for now I give up…

The waiver…

A week or so back India’s isolation with respect to Nuclear commerce with the rest of the world came to an end. It was an end to an isolation that began with the Pokhran test in 1974. A lot has been said about the NSG waiver that India clinched. “A historic moment” is what most would say. The NSG waiver means that India can go ahead with the Nuclear deal with the United States.The fact that most of the nations supported India in getting the waiver means that they understand that India is a rapidly growing country with rapidly increasing energy needs and therefore it is assumed that India will use Nuclear energy primarily for civilian use. As a country we have an impeccable non-proliferation record. There will be discontent amongst many nations, for India is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non proliferation treaty(NPT) .Hence we seem to have been accorded some special status courtesy- the United States. This make me a bit uneasy.Almost as if you got some kind of special attention because you were the teacher’s pet with all the other kids staring with envy at you. But on a more serious note it signals that we have finally arrived on the world stage.

There has been a marked difference in the way the United States has treated us since George Bush assumed power or rather since 9/11. Gone are the days when we were viewed as a rouge state(for having tested a nuke). There are many reasons for this shift in attitude but are not of importance here. The NSG waiver means we can engage in Nuclear trade with the likes of Russia, France and more importantly the United States. Our increasing energy needs will be met in due course. At a time when awareness of global warming and use of clean renewable sources of energy is at it’s peak we have decided to take the nuclear path. Many questions have been raised about this. Should we have opted for solar energy? Most of the nations which are at the forefront of harnessing nuclear energy are having second thoughts about building more nuclear plants. But I think it wouldn’t be fair to equate India with other countries in this case. For a country with more than a billion people with the majority hungry and destitute, with industries growing at a rapid pace, the energy requirements need to be met quickly.Solar and other “green” sources are still seen as budding and haven’t quite reassured people as to their potential.

The waiver faced some opposition from Austria,New Zealand and some other countries including notably a last minute effort by China to thwart the deal. India is disgustingly submissive when it comes to dealing with China. We seem to take every blow thrown by the Chinese as if it were their birth right to do so. The Chinese fear that with the waiver and N-deal soon to follow there will not be anything to stop us from increasing our N-arsenal. And increase our arsenal we should without giving a damn about the Chinese. Let’s face it.We live in a troubled neighborhood. If towards the north-west we have a nation that shows no sign of ceasing attacks on our soil then we have a behemoth on the other side which lays claims to Arunachal Pradesh and has no scruples in proliferating N-technology to Pakistan while being a signatory to the NPT. But such opposition is understandable and is part and parcel when it comes to lobbying for privileges on the International arena. But opposition at home… that to me was the sad part. At a time when the political parties should have stood together and supported the government, they chose to use this as an opportunity to attack the ruling party. The reason cited was we had surrendered our right to further our N-technology development. Either I am ignorant about the NSG waiver details or the Left and other parties think they can take the public for a ride. For the NSG waiver means we are allowed to buy N-tech from other nations. That the waiver would be terminated if we were to conduct a test is understandable. The NSG isn’t a charitable organization that grants both the technology and the rights to develop more nuclear weapons. It is both a means of allowing nations to transfer N-tech and to make sure they use it for peaceful purposes. If it does come to a make or break situation then the seriousness of the situation would outweigh the benefits accorded by the waiver .As Abdul Kalam put it- When the nation’s supreme interest is at stake then no clause will be able to prevent it from conducting a test.