Thursday, March 24, 2016

भारतके मुसलमान: पाँचवा कास्ट

भारत में मुसलमानो को पाँचवा कास्ट बना के रखा गया है। बहुत गलत बात है। मुसलमानों का अपना एक अलग धर्म है। जातपात मानना ही है तो आप उसको अपने धर्म तक सीमित रखो। दुसरों पर लाद तो नहीं सकते।

दलित को चौथा कास्ट। मुसलमानो को पाँचवा कास्ट। दलितों और मुसलमानो के प्रति व्यक्ति आय में वही दिखता है।

दलित को चौथा कास्ट और मुसलमानो को पाँचवा कास्ट बना के रखे रहो तब तक भारत विश्व शक्ति बन ही नहीं सकता, संभव ही नहीं। कास्ट सिस्टम ख़त्म करो, गरीबी ख़त्म करो, तो विश्व शक्ति बन जाओगे। कास्ट सिस्टम भगवान का नहीं इंसान का बनाया है। इंसान ख़त्म भी कर सकता है।

मानव अधिकार तो भारत के संविधान में सुरक्षित है। कोई भी व्यक्ति या संगठन या फिर खुद सरकार ही मानव अधिकार का हनन करे तो भारतका कोई भी नागरिक पुलिस और कचहरी कहीं भी जा के नालिस कर सकता है। एक नागरिक काफी है। अगर कोई एक भी आदमी आगे नहीं आता तो ये तो संविधान की कमजोरी नहीं। अपनी रीढ़ की हड्डी जरा मजबुत करो। Legal Defense Fund खड़े करो। कानुनी लड़ाई लड़ो।

जन धन का सुरक्षा एक आधुनिक राज्य (state) का प्रथम दायित्व होता है। लोकतंत्र में gender violence, caste violence, religious violence के लिए कोई जगह नहीं। दंगे नहीं होने चाहिए। जिस तरह cyclone के लिए Early Warming System होती है, उसी तरह दंगो को बिलकुल नाकाम किया जा सकता है। ये एक law and order problem है। अगर कहीं दंगा होता है तो हुवा कि पुलिस अपना काम नहीं कर रही।

हैदराबाद के जो ओवैसी दो भाईजान हैं उन्हें मैं कइ महिनों से बड़े गौर से देख रहा हुँ। मजलिस का नाम सिर्फ वही एक शब्द नहीं हो सकता क्या? पुरा नाम तो एक ब्रांडिंग प्रॉब्लम है।

दुसरा बात है अकबर ओवैसी साहब को कहुंगा, आप इतने अच्छे बोल लेते हो। लेकिन एक जगह मैंने यूट्यूब पर सुना आप ने कहा, १५ मिनट पुलिस रस्ते से हट जाओ सिर्फ और तब देखो। तो वो तो वाक स्वतंत्रता नहीं हुई। लोकतंत्र में हिंसा भी allow नहीं है और हिंसा के लिए आह्वान करो मंच पर से, वो भी allow नहीं है। लोकतंत्र ही तो ताकत है आप की। लोकतंत्र को मानो। बल्कि मंच पर से बोलो, कानुन अपने हाथ में मत लो, सशक्त होना है तो संगठित हो जाओ।

मजलिस की लोकतान्त्रिक संभावना विश्व राजनीति तक है। लोकतंत्र का सन्देश दुनिया के सभी मुसलमानों तक पहुँचाना है। वो काम मजलिस कर सकती है। लेकिन उसके लिए लोकतंत्र को मानना होगा।

गुजरात, उससे पहले भागलपुर, और तो और खुद पार्टीशन के समय ---- बहुत हताहत हुवे। अपने कौम का दर्द महसुस होना एक अच्छे नेता का खुबी है। लेकिन उस दर्द को शक्ति में बदलने के राह पर चलो। और रास्ता है लोकतंत्र का। अहिंसा का।

संगठित हो जाओ। सशक्त हो जाओगे। शिक्षित हो जाओ। समृद्ध हो जाओगे। बस। अल्लाह का ये जो क्रिएशन है उसको appreciate करो। Appreciate करने का रास्ता है math and science.

मजलिस का और तो और खुद हैदराबाद में मेयर नहीं। खुद अपने राज्य में मुख्य मंत्री नहीं। कमसेकम हैदराबाद में मेयर अपनी पार्टी के बना के दिखाओ। भारत भर के मुसलमान पहले ये देखना चाहते हैं कि आपकी पार्टी govern कर सकती है कि नहीं। एक दो बड़े शहरों में सरकार चला के तो दिखाओ।

मुसलमान समुदाय से राजनीति शुरू की अच्छी बात है, लेकिन एक बड़ा शहर चलाने के लिए सभी समुदाय को अपील करना होता है। तो करो। कुछ आएंगे, कुछ नहीं। उनकी मर्जी।

लोकतंत्र, मानव अधिकार, गणतंत्र, संघीयता, समावेशीता
सुशासन, शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य, संरचना, सुलभता 
E for Education, E for Entrepreneurship, E for Energy

दुनिया के तीन में एक गरीब भारत में है। भारत ही तो है सारी दुनिया को गरीब बना के रखे हुवे है। मजलिस के पास विश्व राजनीति हिला देने की सम्भावना है।






































Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Negotiating With Terrorists

English: World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 1...
English: World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 1996 - Peres, Arafat & Schwab (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Arafat said that. What is ISIS? Is it religious fervor? Is it a state? Is it mafia? Is it a terrorist organization? Is it organized crime? Is it Islamic revival? Different people can have different opinions.

ISIS took responsibility for Brussels, as for Paris before that. Both times it has claimed it was merely getting even for what is being done to it in its own territory. That back and forth only ends up in a much bigger war.

There is a saying in democracies. Never negotiate with terrorists. Those whose only ways are the ways of violence are not seeking political solutions. And so don't negotiate.

I think it is possible to negotiate, but only if ISIS were to agree to a wholesale ceasefire. If ISIS were to cease all plots of global violence, if ISIS were to cease all acts of violence in its own territory (some have reported small scale genocide), if ISIS were to cease all acts of sex crimes, if ISIS were to accept mediation over the same, if ISIS were to allow international observers who would oversee that the ceasefire indeed is being respected, then negotiations are possible. Remember, no political issues have been discussed yet. This would be a ceasefire whose only basic requirement is that all violence and all sex crimes to an end. If ISIS could do this much, it might even be possible to carve out a new country for the territory that ISIS holds.

That country's boundaries would be a political decision taken collectively by all parties. The current line of control could end up the final boundary. As to governance in that territory, there would be need for a constitution. Elections can be held to a constituent assembly. The only rule would be the constitution may not clash with the Human Rights Charter, and to that end there would be international judicial oversight. Other than that there would be no rules. Maybe ISIS will become a political party. Its armed members will get pulled into the country's police and army. Maybe ISIS will emerge the largest and the ruling party.

Pan Arabia is an option. If all Arab countries attempt a political and economic union, then why not? But that would be a non-violent, political act. If Europe is any example, the process is not easy, and it is supposed to take time.

Islam is a valid religion. It is as valid as Christianity. But any message against peace, justice and kindness are invalid in all religions.

ISIS in its current form comes across as a mindless, fascist, blasphemous, criminal organization. There are lawful uses of force. Currently ISIS can legitimately be at its receiving end. But a ceasefire could change that. Is there a mediator that ISIS would accept?



Tuesday, March 22, 2016

The Issues And The Donald

This is a weekly 30 minute TV show I am proposing. There is a King Arthur's style round table, with The Donald chairing. The rule is he may not prepare beforehand, he may not be briefed. He just has to show up.

He is president. The cabinet sits around the table. The rule is cabinet members may not have any background or expertise in the departments they are chairing.

And they talk the issues of the day.

At the end of each show, he is required to fire one cabinet member. It is survival of the fittest. It is political Survivor.

The Donald gets paid top money for the show. It starts in February 2017 and goes to November 2024.

And they have to finish one pizza per show.




Paris And Brussels

At what point is it Pearl Harbor? There is a threshold.

One Final Battle
Mecca To Jerusalem
One World, One Government

Explosions at Airport and Subway Kill 34 in Brussels

Monday, March 21, 2016

If Robots Can Do Surgery

English: The mdonalds logo from the late 90s
English: The mdonalds logo from the late 90s (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
If robots can do surgery then becoming a surgeon should be less complicated than flipping burgers at McDonald's. Massive rises in productivity can mean the average wages go up dramatically, granted political innovation keeps pace with innovations in technology.

When you use a computer today, do you do it because you understand how all the machine parts work? Do you care? Do you use it because it is slower than you?

Cars and planes are faster than human beings.

Assume 90% of the products and services are not even here. If the human brain is the pinnacle of evolution, then public policy should treat every human brain on earth like it were a gold mine, which is precisely what it is. I don't see the investment happening right now.

Don't blame robots for failures in public policy.

One person, one vote, one voice is a powerful concept. It just needs to be taken to its logical conclusion.

If racism is a Christian thing (colonization, slavery, segregation) then Christianity, the religion, is nothing to do with Christ. Any message against peace, justice and kindness is invalid in all religions. The temple needs to be cleaned up on a regular basis.

We are to create Heaven On Earth. Massive rises in productivity are to take us there. But Godless "visionaries" throw visions of hell on earth. Instead of an age of abundance they talk about abundant poor and useless people.

Artificial Intelligence can help us achieve one person, one vote, one voice 24/7, it can help us do away with the need for literacy. It can give us the perfect communication that a theoretical perfect market economy needs, one where a monopoly simply can not happen, and there is almost always perfect competition.

Technology is supposed to empower. Instead some prophesy helplessness for the masses. They are wrong.

Sunday, March 20, 2016

In The News (4)

Productivity And Political Innovation



The computer as we know it has changed relentlessly over the past two decades. And not just one part. It is not like the processing power has gone up and up and up but everything else has stayed the same. And we don't struggle with it. We have expected all parts to get better.

But now, with all this talk of tremendous gains in productivity that awaits us, we only focus on the productivity gain part brought forth by innovation. But we don't expect political innovation to keep pace with it.

Humanity needs to stay on top of all this. It needs to organize itself through the one person, one vote, one voice principle taken to its logical global conclusion. I think we are looking at a future where We The People own 5-10% of every company, collectively. As in, companies don't just pay taxes. They also share some equity with the public.

If you take the masses out of the equation, very soon those productivity gains don't matter. Let's assume 90% of the products and the services of the future are not even here. Well, we will need people to be able to purchase those products and services. The per capita income will have to go up and up, not just in poor countries, but also in the rich countries.

What does the Moore's Law of political innovation say? Where are we in 20, 30, 50, 100 years?

I see species level political structures. A world government would be a good start.

Taking the masses out of massive productivity gains is not possible, not desirable. We need to tweak the political system a little.