India Positive Read online

  Or if someone is killed in the name of religion and you object, you are told: ‘That just shows you don’t love God.’

  These examples show what happens when right and wrong are jumbled together. It’s a potent, deadly combination. The best way to get away with doing something bad is to mix a bit of good in it. At least, that is what India seems to be witnessing these days.

  A case in point is the Supreme Court order that made it ‘compulsory’ for the national anthem to be played before the screening of every movie in privately owned cinemas across the country, with the doors of the theatres closed (though not bolted). The order also prescribed exactly how the national anthem should be played (with an image of the Indian flag on the screen) and how it should not be played (you can’t dramatise it or give it any creative interpretation because, well, the judge said so).

  I am no legal expert, but with respect to the apex court, the order did seem to violate the principle of individual liberty, which is protected by our country’s Constitution. Ironically, this damage to constitutional values was inflicted in the name of patriotism. The idea was, if people are forced to stand in a cinema hall before a movie, they will become patriotic (watching pirated movies at home, on the other hand, is okay).

  Incidentally, when a petitioner tried to get court functionaries to stand up for the national anthem as a rule before they start proceedings, the apex court shot it down. Clearly, it didn’t want the burden of patriotism at its doorstep, although it had no qualms about passing it on to privately owned theatres in a private contract with the movie-going public.

  These kind of arbitrary rulings are the reason India’s ease of doing business rank is so low. Almost anyone in authority can pass such a diktat in the name of the country. If you criticise it, you are asked, ‘Why are you against the national anthem?’ Worse, you’re labelled ‘anti-national’.

  Which brings us back to the basic issue—mix a bit of good with the bad, and you can get away with it. For instance, the intention to create respect for the country’s national anthem at the core of the Supreme Court order cannot be faulted. There is no doubt that every citizen of India should take pride in the national anthem. However, that intention did not justify this imposition.

  Sure, one is free to play the national anthem every morning at home and stand up while it’s playing. Institutions such as schools or private companies could choose to make this a daily practice. However, the moment you force it, you break a key tenet of Indian nationalism—individual freedom.

  Sadly, the imposition would not have encouraged patriotism. There was a real risk that the young generation would begin to see it merely as a chore that needs to be done if you want to watch a movie at a theatre. Some may have used the time to check messages on their phones. Others may have entered the cinema hall late. Does our national anthem deserve to be trivialised and turned into a tedious task? Should it not be played and sung by people of their own free will and choice? A suggestion or guideline to play the national anthem in public places is welcome, but an imposition is not, as it could threaten the core democratic value of the freedom of the individual.

  The order is interim in nature and will be reviewed in February 2017. I respect the Supreme Court and I hope it will reconsider this order.

  One should note that this order was issued by the judiciary, and technically has nothing to do with the government or PM Modi. However, it speaks to the somewhat authoritarian mood prevalent in Indian society today—where you are told what to do in order to be a patriot, and may be branded anti-national if you don’t fall in line. The reason for this is a weak Opposition, rather than Modi or the BJP. The Congress refuses to get its act together. In Indira Gandhi’s time, we saw how a phenomenally weak Opposition created a phenomenally autocratic leader. If we want to save India’s free society, let’s wish for a strong Opposition. We also need reasonable judges who can preserve the core values that constitute the idea of India.

  We should certainly stand up for the national anthem with pride. Equally, however, we should stand up for the freedoms, individual and collective, for which our forefathers gave their lives. We should be careful of authoritarianism creeping into our free society, no matter how wonderful the intentions. Don’t condone something bad, just because it is mixed with something good.

  * * *

  * Post this article, the Supreme Court modfied the order, stating that the playing of the national anthem in cinema halls is no longer mandatory.

  Blame It on the Rain

  Till we begin to take responsibility, Mumbaikars will continue to drown in heavy showers

  First up, apologies for writing about Mumbai. It is, after all, just one of India’s many cities. However, it is also the nation’s financial and business capital. The health of this metro has a bearing on the welfare of the rest of the country.

  So, it’s always worrying when heavy rains bring this supercity to a standstill. For instance, on 2 September 2017, Mumbai received 30 cm of rain in just 24 hours—approximately an eighth of its annual 225 cm average on a single day. This level of precipitation is very high, even though Mumbai has recorded more alarming rainfall data in the past (over 90 cm in a day, in 2005).

  Having said that, this is not a level at which the city needs to come to a grinding halt. Yet, when we hit 30 cm, local trains stopped on their flooded tracks. City taxis, aggregator cabs and auto rickshaws alike went off waterlogged roads. Children slept in their schools overnight. Passengers at local train stations parked themselves in abandoned trains, the only dry places they could find, for hours.

  The response to this avoidable problem followed a standard pattern. In the morning, the media gushed with praise for the gorgeous spectacle of the Mumbai rains. By noon, pictures of waterlogging flooded social media. A couple of hours later, there were reports of Mumbaikars braving the rain and walking home, embodying the ‘unshakeable spirit of Mumbai’ (as if the people walking home had any other choice).

  Then we had reports of compassion, of Mumbaikars serving hot tea and offering shelter to those stranded on the streets. At night, TV news panellists shouted at each other, as if all the screaming would make the clouds drift away.

  Nobody offered any practical solutions. Nobody really knows how things can change for the better. The best hope for Mumbai, which has ramshackle infrastructure even on sunny days, is that God will be kind. Yes, we are a Ram-bharose city.

  We may have stock exchange totalling a trillion dollar market capitalisation. We may have civic authorities with billion-dollar budgets. We may have apartments that cost millions of dollars. However, a few hours of rain, and the city collapses.

  There is no other major city in the world, which also happens to be a nation’s financial capital, with such terrible infrastructure. The local trains are pitiful even on normal days. In many parts of the world, farm animals travel better. Mumbai roads continue to be poorly made, patched up with materials that don’t last a single rainy season. The drainage system routinely breaks down in heavy rains.

  The authorities care little. Mumbai accounts for only a tiny percentage of the votes in Maharashtra, and lacks political clout despite its high profile. Add to this the apathy of its people, who gather in lakhs if their religious sentiments or their guru are insulted, but won’t do the same to improve basic amenities in their city.

  If angry Mumbaikars come out on the streets in large numbers for just one day and demand ‘fix my city’, the authorities will sit up and take notice. We don’t. Instead, we prefer to retweet helpline numbers and share stories of those who offered chai to people stranded by the rains. Well, we get the city we deserve.

  Meanwhile, here are two suggestions that will help—not just Mumbai, but other Indian cities as well. The first is easy and should be implemented as soon as possible. The second is harder, but will truly fix the problem. It is up to the authorities to implement these and the citizens to put pressure on them to do the same.

  One, we urgently need an effective weath