CREATIVITY QUOTIENT

Apple founder Steve Woznaik recently commented that Indians, though studious, lack in creativity. A generalization at best, this comment invited a debate on the creativity quotient of the Indian people. But there is need for a serious introspection. What prompted Woznaik to give this blanket condemnation of the Indian brain has many sides and it may be related to the attitude of a white man. But that apart, there is a need to prove him wrong, as there is a kernel of truth in the assertion. Our problem may be attributed to an inferiority complex due to a cultural conditioning arising out of our long subjugation. In fact, we have still not come out of the mindset that we were slaves and subservient to the superior west. It is this mindset that has to be de-conditioned first.  Of course, it will require a lot of efforts, mental and supra-mental, to disprove this generalization but that is a compulsion, not an option. Moreover, what we need to understand is that why the same Indians make waves in the Silicon Valley, NASA and even the top universities of the world. With due apologies to Shakespeare the fault dear friends is not in our genes but in our history that we are underlings. Original thinking is discouraged in our country and dissent is treason. Unless dissent is encouraged, creating new knowledge will not be easy. We need to understand that change is the greatest antidote to status quo and to welcome change we need to think differently. Our fancy for anything foreign needs to change and we must learn to apply our thought process critically. There is a faulty assumption that anything western is superior. Whether it is a product, or an idea or a process and it is this assumption that has raised our gullibility. The answer to Mr. Woznaik can best come from the Indian universities which must be encouraged to generate thoughts and ideas. It is rather strange that the subcontinent that boasted of the world’s leading centers of learning in Nalanda and Takhshashila is now struggling to find a place in the top universities. While many may contest the proclaimed excellence of our ancient centers of higher learning, they have to understand that the historical accounts of those universities were all given by non Indians. Certainly, when those ratings try to show us the place with regards to higher education, we should also try to see through the game because ratings are business too. And India is still seen as a huge market. That is, though, one side of the story. But we need to think clearly. Just one example- that our centers of higher learning do not merit a place in top global universities is an assertion. But those graduating from these very centers are dons of the universities which ornament the top bracket. Is not it a paradox? We need to see the unseen and hear the unheard, to read between the lines. These are not mere exaggerations. It is a fact that all is not as bad as it made out to be. We too have a legacy we can be reasonably proud of. It is time to assess our strengths and weaknesses and move ahead in the right direction with the right people in the right places. It is this that is important. Our craving for brand West is rather obsessive. We must get rid of this brand-o-mania.

WHO LIVES IF INDIA DIES?

Some of the recent incidents portend the ominous at worst and are certainly undesirable at best. The Bharat Bandh in protest against the Supreme Court judgement related to the SC/ST act that resulted in large scale violence is a case in point. The ire against the judgement was based on the flimsiest of the grounds that the provisions of the SC/ST Act were diluted. There cannot be a bigger misconception than this. The fact is that the law has been kept intact. Only some genuine modifications in accordance with the Principles of Natural Justice have been suggested. And rightly so. After all, no one can be pronounced guilty until proved. The basic premise on which any democracy rests is the rule of law. And the institution that is responsible for maintaining this rule of law is the higher judiciary. If this institution is undermined a democracy will gradually degenerate into mobocracy and ultimately anarchy. The call for Bharat Bandh was an act of undermining this all important institution of higher judiciary. History stands witness to the fact that the Supreme Court has shouldered its responsibility of ensuring the rule of law and protecting the citizens against whimsicalities of the Executive well. It has withstood the tests of time as the Golaknath or the Keshavanand Bharati, or the Maneka Gandhi cases prove. It is time the rule of law is emphasised.  It will be prudent to underscore the essential principle of the rule of law that states that the relationship between the State and its citizens must be a relationship that is regulated by the law. In fact the latest Supreme Court verdict about which so much noise is being made was the much needed course correction rather than a dilution. If India needs to prove itself as a mature democracy there is need for greater respect to the institution of Judiciary. Though all institutions are manned by human beings and their liability to err may not be ruled out, yet in the long run it pays to protect the sanctity of the institution. If institutions are browbeaten by popular political protests it is the very system of democracy that is threatened. The emergence of various sections of the society as symbols of ethnic or religious assertion and identity strike at the very edifice of the democratic nation state for which the rule of law is an essential element. The past few decades have seen an increasing competitiveness in Indian politics leading to the rise of fissiparous tendencies to dangerous proportions. The doctrine of rule of law is the very soul of Indian constitution and the Supreme Court the guardian of that constitution. If we start succumbing to unreasonable popular protests we may soon end up becoming a rule by the crowd than by the law. Human Beings are anarchic by nature and it is the rule of law that restrains them. Justice through the rule of law is a constitutional guarantee that cannot be ensured unless power is given to Judiciary and it is left independent and objective. This was the reason why the founding fathers carved out the constitution with clear cut separation of powers and made the judiciary the final arbiter. Some sections of the society are trying to fish in troubled waters for petty political gains. They need to understand that in order to succeed in achieving their political ambitions they need the country first. After all who lives if India dies.

Batting for the citizenry

The recent judgement of the Honorable Supreme Court on misuse of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act may not have takers in the political class of various hues but they certainly prove a few points. The first and foremost is that the apex court is doing yeoman service to the spirit of democracy by batting for the citizenry. There is one very basic requirement of a democracy — protecting the inalienable rights of the citizens. Democracy after all is government of the people, by the people, for the people. It survives when its institutions are intact and maintain their integrity. Rulers in democracy are not rulers but servants who represent citizen interests and are there to protect citizen rights. It was in sync with this sprit that the first Prime Minister of this country said, “Fellow countrymen, it has been my privilege to serve India and the cause of India’s freedom for many years. Today I address you for the first time officially as the first servant of the Indian people, pledged to their service and betterment”. However, power has its own impact on human personality and rightly did British statesman Lord Acton say that power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. History has stood witness to this axiom time and again. Trappings of power convert rulers into absolute monarchs, and the same streak runs even today. We can observe this in the goings on at our neighborhood. And even many modern day heads of government in strong and well entrenched democracies nurse tendencies towards absolute monarchism. It is, but, human nature that makes one crave for absolute power. It was to thwart such tendencies, and India has seen that in the past, that the founding fathers of Indian constitution created checks and balances through the institution of judiciary, which was given an independent status and ensure that the Executive or the Legislation do not go astray. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr one of the most illustrious Jurists of US had said that the life of law has not been logic but experience. Legal system is an ever evolving system and the basic objective of law is to provide Justice to the people. Naturally, change, and re-evaluation of law is mandated by the very philosophy that governs human existence and development. Change being the only certainty, it must be welcome. It is the experience that brings about the realisation for need for change. Law then must also follow the same principle. What is relevant today may not remain so tomorrow. This is why law must consider public opinion and public sentiment. Vidur, the wise man of the Mahabharata had said that like humans, laws and policies have a life and are rendered invalid beyond that. It is against this back drop that the present judgment and some other recent ones that the Apex court has pronounced need to be seen. In words of Holmes if there is any principle of the constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought, not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate. Law must protect citizens, but it cannot be an instrument of settling scores. When evidences of misuse are legion, it is right to underscore that the law cannot be allowed to be a charter for exploitation or oppression by the unscrupulous or the police for extraneous reasons against citizens. The judgement is welcome.

RAMA AS A LEADER

Today is Rama Navami, celebrated as the birthday of Lord Rama. The occasion is celebrated with traditional gaiety and fanfare in most parts of the country. The name of Lord Rama has significance not just for religious purpose. His life and times have been recorded in many versions of Ramayana in several languages and are read and recited by millions, not just in the country but in faraway places like Fiji, Mauritius, Trinidad, Suriname and many other parts of the world where Hindus reside in sizable numbers. What Rama stands for may have many dimensions, but his leadership attributes can offer many lessons for the modern-day society. Leadership, in fact, is a widely discussed subject in most of the social sciences, particularly political science, sociology, psychology, and management. Yet, the irony is that the concept has been neither understood nor practised in the perspective in which it should have been. Many management theorists are of the view that leadership as a concept has been talked the most and understood the least. Everyone thinks he is a leader and management schools are proud to proclaim that they make leaders. Leadership training is also a big business as trainers, consultants, and self-proclaimed experts are found to advertise copiously about their leadership training abilities. Alas, despite so much leadership talk, the problems of society increase due to leadership failure. Learning from the life of Lord Rama may be an effective way to learn the art and science of leadership practice. Lord Rama’s life itself was a great lesson on leadership. Rama is attributed with five basic leadership qualities. The first is Tyaga Vir, that is, a person who was strong enough to sacrifice personal interests for upholding the right values. He preferred to leave the lure and lucre of the throne of Ayodhya to keep his father’s promise. His second attribute is called Daya Vir, that is compassionate. He possessed a heart full of empathy and is called the Karunamaya — full of love and compassion. The third attribute is Vidya Vir, that is full of wisdom. He was not an egoist like the modern-day leaders and would put larger interest above all. He is also called Parakram Vir, that is a person full of valour, who fights for the right cause. And the fifth attribute, and the most important one, was Dharma Vir, a person who chooses the righteous path, always upholding it. In his actions, he always proved that he possessed these qualities. His wisdom, his sagacity, his humility, his righteousness were all reflected in every act of his. He never forced his way on the people and was a participative democrat in the true sense of the term. Like a real leader, he inspired people, laid down the ground rules and gave full freedom to the people to act. Contrast this with some modern-day leaders, who are more of wheeler dealers, striking deals for personal gain. His humility is worth emulating when the modern world is throwing leaders with bloated egos. Look at the leaders today — full of vanity and arrogance. The qualities of leadership in the people in present day leadership positions compare more with Ravana than Rama. Look the way he dealt with Shabari, or the boat man or even the ocean God — exemplary conduct. Learning leadership is better done by studying Ramayana than attending those highly advertised and costly leadership training programmes that are more about tricks than true spirit.