Two Assassinations

"Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country"

- John F. Kennedy

I was recently on a road trip in which among several popular locations, I covered two assassination locations which perhaps, not only changed the face of US, but also the entire world. Though I had read a lot of material regarding both, Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) and John F. Kennedy’s (JFK) assassinations, visit to the locations did highlight an extra point or two which I previously missed out.

While visiting Dealey Plaza, in Dallas, Texas, I decided to let go all the conspiracy theories (read this article for conspiracy theories on JFK assassination) and focused on the official version. On the fatal day of November 22^nd, 1963, JFK was shot dead by Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone. The official version suggests that this act was done to express displeasure over JFK’s favoring the civil rights movement. Soon after his death, rioting began in most parts of the country. At this time, MLK was instrumental in bringing calm by asking people to focus on, “what killed the president?” rather than “who killed the president?” This approach not only restored peace, but also gave a clear vision in the days to come, as to what the civil rights movement really meant.

Just as the nation had coped up with JFK’s assassination, barely within 5 years, on April 4^th, 1968, MLK was assassinated at the Lorraine Motel, in Memphis, TN. And here too I focused only on the official version of the turnout of the event. It was concluded that James Earl Ray, a white-supremacist, killed MLK with intent to put an end to the civil rights movement. Now, more than 40 years into this event, we all know how people with ideas of James Earl Ray are perceived in the society.

History has taught us and provided clear evidence that no one has ever been successful or championed a cause, just by killing a person with right intentions. However people of conviction and good intentions have changed the history of mankind, forever. It is said that MLK once quoted, “Christ gave me the message and Gandhi gave me the method.” Going by the current outpour of reactions, I seriously doubt whether people still fervently believe in the path, shown by Christ and Gandhi or not? Though I hope people will remain committed to both, the message and the method. 

A Tale of Two Farmers

Long years ago, there lived two farmers. The almost owned identical sizes of land, before the first one, Dave, managed to use some muscle power to acquire some extra land. The other farmer, Deepak, was contented with what he had. Dave, the sharper among the two, always worked on ways to increase the productivity of his land and multiply his belongings. Deepak cared least to increase productivity of his farm, but instead emphasized on the fact that he was being more ethical than Dave. 

As they grew older, Dave started hiring laborers from same village to work on his farm. But Deepak opted to have many kids of his own, to work on farm, as he felt making others work on his farm might impact the sanctity of his farm. Some even say, he had sixteen children, while Dave had just two. Life went on these lines and it was the time for next generation to take over.

Dave’s next generation had it easy. Following their father’s footsteps, the two divided the original piece as well the added land in equal proportion, and continued their trade of farming. The situation was slightly different in Deepak’s case. Dividing the land in sixteen parts was not a wise option, so some of the smarter children took up managing others, while the less privileged ones had no choice but to sweat it out.

In generations to come, the problems got more and more complicated in Deepak’s lineage. More people were competing for decreasing amount of resources. There was chaos, and unfairness in abundance. While for Dave’s lineage, resources were in plenty and the people entitled to that were very few. Naturally each one had easy access to resources.

This is exactly what separates a developed country and a developing country. Less people competing for more resources in one, while ironically, more people competing for less resources. Addressing the problem of population explosion, along with modern approach to the society, would add certainty for better life. Did you too draw the same conclusion?

Importance of Religion and other effects

“The tendency to turn human judgments into divine commands makes religion one of the most dangerous forces in the world.”

- Anonymous

I begen to write this article with an assumption that religion is still an overwhelmingly accepted practice across the world. So, I decided to analyze some of the indirect effects religion has had on some countries.

Below is the list of countries twenty countries, sorted in increasing order of importance of religion. I created this list by using the entire list from here. I selected the top 10 and bottom 10 which from this list. Then, I added other parameters such as ‘per capita income’, and ‘literacy rate’ of these corresponding countries.

Country	% Population Religion NOT important	Literacy rate	Per Capita income (USD)
Estonia	78%	99.8%	$21,942
Sweden	83%	99.5%	$41,300
Denmark	80.5%	99.5%	$40,990
Czech Republic	74.5%	99%	$ 26,046
Norway	78%	100%	$61,882
Hong Kong	75.5%	93.5%	$49,990
Japan	75%	99%	$34,295
United Kingdom	73%	99%	$34,495
Finland	70%	100%	$38,094
France	69.5%	99%	$34,933
Tanzania	3.5%	69.4%	$1521
UAE	8.5%	77.9%	$48,222
Qatar	4.5%	96.3%	$88,919
Bahrain	3.5%	94.6%	$23,691
Bangladesh	0%	56.8%	$1788
Indonesia	0%	90.3%	$4668
Sri Lanka	1%	61.1%	$5620
Egypt	2%	72%	$6324
Congo	5.5%	66.8%	$375
Somalia	1.5%	37.8%	$547

There are several conclusions one can draw based on the above data. However, to avoid inviting arguments or clarifications, I will withhold my conclusions. So, I will leave it to the reader’s wisdom to draw the suitable conclusion.

Exaggerated Numbers

"Exaggeration is truth that has lost its temper"

 - Khalil Gibran

The first part of this article is mostly based on a TED talk (this) and second part is based on application of the concept this talk introduces (Yeah, I do some homework before writing).

Most people tend to perceive that the current world is truly global and boundaries are fast shrinking. Well, let’s try our belief with some statistics. And here are some of the numbers based on the following components that would normally represent a global world. a) Phone Calls b) Immigrants c) Export GDP

Take a guess at the percentage of all call-minutes made in the world, of which would be international calls. Like you, most people guessed it as: 28%. And now take a guess at the percentage of first generation immigrants to the US. A guess, which sounds reasonable, is 8%. And now, finally take a guess at the percentage of Export GDP of all countries put together, for last year. Most people guessed it as: 30%. Now let’s do some fact checking. The total percentage of voice call-minutes made last year, summing up all the international call minutes is: 2% (YES). The total percentage of first generation immigrants to the US is about: 0.33% (Oh, YES). Finally, the global export GDP of the world last year was at 19% (somewhat near to the guessed number).

I further applied this fact checking method on two scenarios, which people have confidently spoken about with me. Let me rephrase the below two sentences in a generic way. The first one, “Of the total number of doctors in the US, doctors of Indian origin must easily be about 40%”. My light reading of an article about American doctors and percentage of people by ethnic groups revealed that this number is about 5%. Of course this is an over-representation, considering the fact that people of Indian origin amount to only 1% the US population. The second one, “In India almost everyone speaks English. At least 50% of Indians speak English”. It is an outrageous statement and only if you are one of those elitists, you would make such a wild guess. The reality, just about 12% Indians speak English. More than 99.99% of this 12% speak it as a second language, not first.

It is fairly clear to me that we all tend to conclude the situation, based only on our surroundings and less by taking into account the facts. And this exaggeration of numbers is not just restricted to people from one country, but for each part of the globe.

PS: I didn’t make up these numbers. I spent nearly three hours reading from official sources. You can either trust these numbers or do your own research J

Justice, Equality, and Fairness

"In the absence of justice, what is sovereignty but organized robbery?" - Saint Augustine 

A few days ago, while I was travelling by local transport, I met a felon. I mean, this is perhaps the reason why the ‘well-to-do’ and the ‘educated’ classes seldom take the mass transit. Anyway, we picked up a conversation that not only kept me off from falling asleep, but also made me rethink about justice system of our society.

This man, seated besides me, was put in prison for two years, after he was convicted for a crime related to drugs. Well, you may now wonder, what is wrong with a system in which, a guilty is brought to books. So, here is the flip side. He was raised in crime prone, poor neighborhood. Secondly, his trial was fast and having no money, he could not hire a good lawyer, who would have helped him get a reduced sentence. And what has this period of serving the sentence done to him now? For beginners, he is not even interviewed, let alone hired, by most employers. He manages to survive by doing odd jobs, and feels that he isn’t given a fair chance to reform and rejoin the society.

Pondering through this conversation, few questions struck me. The first one, what if he could afford fees to hire a good lawyer? Does the justice system favor the wealthy? And if this is a reflection is justice system of a country like the US, which claims to stand for justice, is justice really fair? Finally, if this is not fair, how would a perfectly just society look like?

As I’m not trained in political science or moral philosophy, I did some research and most of my points are based on the works of two of the greatest minds of our times, in these fields, John Rawls and Amartya Sen.

Rawls in his book, A Theory of Justice, introduces a concept called ‘Justice as Fairness’. Claiming, justice-as-fairness to be political, and not metaphysical, he explains the two fundamentals it comprises of, a) Liberty and b) Equality. Liberty is fully understood, only if the  circumstances bring in the right awareness. And equality is hurt by several factors beyond ones control. Say, whom you are born to, or how much you could afford to pay, are unacceptable forms of inequality. These factors indirectly give a license to the high and mighty, to treat justice as a system, skewed in their favor.

Amartya Sen’s book, The Idea of Justice, helps in understanding how a perfectly just society would look like. In one sentence, it would be a society in which almost everything would be worked by a reasoned social agreement, to mutual content. And as human nature is flawed, a pragmatic goal should be, enhancement of justice and reduction of injustice, from this world.

‘How could this become a reality?’, is a million dollar question. I don’t know the answer for this question, but would not hesitate to guess that giving up on the sense of entitlement, emphasizing on moral education and ethics, rather than social status, could certainly help. Another open question I would like to leave you with is that ‘is this trend of people trying to accumulate wealth, making the system of justice, slightly unfair?’

Tolerance

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” – M. K. Gandhi

If there is one disturbing trend that has become increasingly prevalent in our society currently, it has to be intolerance. We see people responding in a violent manner to criticism or comments, which may or may not be true. Either a criticism is right, in which case the concerned people should do their level best to address it, or it is wrong, in which case the concerned people should choose to ignore it. Mainly the criticism or comment, directed against people in power or people who have a religious following, invites such response. How to handle such a situation is probably best illustrated by a story about Buddha, which I read recently. Here’s how it goes:

Once, Buddha was in town to spread his message of peace and non-violence. There were several who did not approve of this. One such person, who disagreed with Buddha’s view on patience and tolerance, decided to teach him a lesson. It is said that Buddha would start his day by taking a dip in the pond at the dawn, to signify physical purity. While he was walking out of the pond, the cynic who was determined to teach Buddha a lesson, spat on him. Buddha smiled and went right back into the pond and took another dip. Again while he was going back, this misanthropist spat on Buddha, with an expectation to start a verbal tussle. Buddha again smiled and went right back to the pond and took a dip once more. This happened more than fifty times, before one of his disciples; saw this disturbing occurrence again and again. He came to Buddha’s defense, by trying to fight the cynic. Buddha said to his disciple that “It is his determination to make me physically impure and it is my determination to keep myself physically pure. My aim will not be achieved by fighting him, but by being determined to what I am doing. Allow him to do what he is doing and allow me to do what I am doing. Let sanity prevail.” Realizing that Buddha would not fight back, the cynic continued spitting on Buddha, until finally Buddha had taken his ritually established dip, for the 108^th time. That is when he asked Buddha, “How come you don’t want to stop me? Why don’t you react? I am feeling frustrated about your inaction, and have no further desire to spoil your ritual.” Buddha said to him, “You answered your own questions. By not reacting, I killed your desire to disturb my ritual. By fighting, I would have merely stopped you from disturbing my ritual. So, I have accomplished a greater task by my approach of tolerance.” It is said that the same man became one of Buddha’s foremost disciples, and continued living the rest of his life, practicing and preaching non-violence and tolerance.

I think the world would have been a better place to live in, had most people focused on transforming or reforming a person than merely trying to curtail a person from doing wrongs, using brute force. When I started writing this article, I thought this story was apt for the current times. However by the end, I realized that there is a timeless lesson elaborated in it.

Misinformation: A Social Media Menace

"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices"

- Voltaire

As social media is becoming increasing popular, its downside is increasingly becoming apparent. Well, I’m not going to accentuate those pitfalls, but would suggest some options to avoid becoming a victim of or contributing to, this misinformation.

To make my point, here’s a brief incident which is widely circulated in the social media.

Bill Gates was at coffee shop:

After having his coffee, he gave $5 to the waiter as a tip. Waiter picked up the money, but with an evil smile on his face. Gates realized this and asked, “What happened?” The waiter replied, “I'm just amazed because in the same coffee shop, your son gave a tip of $500 and you, his father, the richest man in the world, tipped only $5.” Gates smiled and replied with the meaningful words, "He's the son of the world's richest man, but I am the son of a wood cutter”

The moral of this incident is: NEVER FORGET YOUR PAST.

Are you wondering why I am taking offence to this incident? Well, for beginners, Bill Gates is not a son of wood cutter (click here for proof). He was born to fairly wealthy parents. Now you may say, even if the incident is a made up one, the moral is good. Think about it this way. Five years down the line (assuming I will be making more money than what I am making today), if I tip a bartender $1 and claim, “five years ago, I was a struggling grad-student”, it is only likely to invite those harsh glares from the bartender. People would quickly (and rightly) draw the conclusion of my parsimonious nature. Point is, use common sense and don’t accept the morals concluded by someone else. Don’t we already have religions which have often created such legends to glorify particular practices? Why take social media in the similar direction?

It is not too hard to verify the authenticity of incidents posted on social media. Here are some pointers:

1. Don’t be a monkey on computer keyboard and hit the ‘share’ or ‘publish’ buttons. Please use common sense.
2. Don’t believe any information unless it is from official (or reputed) sources. It may take a few extra minutes, but you will be doing social service on social media by improving the quality of content. Learn to distinguish between opinions and facts.
3.  If you see a clear agenda behind any post, it is likely to be either exaggerated or untrue. Use your discretion, unless you too have the same agenda. In which case, you are degrading the quality of content on social media.

I’m not a big fan of censorship on social media. But it is responsibility of every user to understand that no freedom is absolute. In the US, freedom of speech is guaranteed by the constitution, yet shouting fire in a crowded theatre, is not permissible. One has to show some self-restraint. If not, in future more people are less likely to participate in social media.

The Art of dealing with Teenager’s issues

"We change, we grow up, we goof up, we love, we hurt; we’re teenagers. We're still learning"                     -Anonymous

I first thought of writing a self-help-style article targeted at teenagers, but gave up on that idea quickly, realizing that it would not go down well with my targeted audience. So I decided to write this post for parents with teenage kids and others who have well crossed the teenage, and may soon find this article useful.

The western society has been well aware of the clichés associated with teenage, such as curiosity, rebellion and, believing views of others in the same age group to be truly righteous. Perhaps these issues could have been easily neglected in India, about two decades ago. But our country is in a transition state, a migration from feudal system to a modern industrialized society. That being the case, these issues have become extremely relevant to the Indian society, especially in the large cities.

Observing these signs in teenagers itself, doesn’t imply understanding the situation. What is crucial here is to understand the reason why these issues remain prevalent. The first reason is the physical changes that teenagers undergo. Without acknowledging this fact, we can do little or nothing to help them cope up with this phase of life. The second reason is their developing the ability to think on their own, but with little or no experience.

To help the teenagers deal with this sensitive phase, as adults we need to be patient and understand, and hence the word, ‘art’ in the title. It is certainly tempting to punish and apply the phrase, “spare the rod and spoil the child”, when things don’t go our way. However research indicates that punishment may help change their behavior only temporarily. Instead of punishment, a positive reinforcement technique, where an individual is rewarded for displaying a particular behavior or habit, is more beneficial.

Also talking to teenagers seriously helps you win their confidence. Showing interests in their hobbies and keeping up the tastes of current generation may be a little demanding, but can be rewarding. And finally, treating them like grownups would help them understand their responsibility. An example of this would be: If they fail to keep their end of a commitment, do not keep your end. This will help them realize that you take them seriously.

The previous generation, perhaps, did not have the need to think through this as seriously as the current generation. That is purely because the teenagers are well equipped, curtsy Internet and other technological advancements. Depriving and punishing should not be among the options, as these would fuel the already existing rebellion tendencies. 

An Inspiring Life

"The way to gain a good reputation, is to endeavor to be what you desire to appear".

- Socrates

I spent most part of the last Sunday, writing and editing the below article. It is based on a series of incidents in a life of a professor, which were narrated to me by one of my former professors.

If you google the name Gene H. Golub, besides his personal webpage at Stanford University, you are likely to come across numerous theorems and research papers. Like most professors, he too had a tremendous track record, both in terms of teaching as well as research. However that’s not my focus of writing. The manner in which, he led his life, is what inspires me.

In his twenties, after obtaining a PhD, Prof Golub got an opportunity to travel to University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, for carrying out further research. While at Cambridge, one day he came across a beautiful young lady and immediately got attracted to her. They say computer scientists and mathematicians can never be that guy at a bar, who can just go and talk to a girl and impress her. This is probably the reason why Prof. Golub could not express his feelings and few months later returned to the United States, making a firm decision that he will never marry any other girl.

Probably this decision worked in his favor. He continued doing great research all his life and shaping many students’ careers. He built such good relations, especially with international students, that they would even live with him, as his house guests for several days. Likewise, when he travelled abroad, he would be hosted mostly by his former students.

Nearly thirty-five years later he again got an opportunity to travel to Cambridge. And guess what? He again came across the same lady, who was probably as beautiful as then, but certainly not young. However this time around, Prof. Golub expressed his feelings openly. As she had been widowed this time, she did agree to marry him. By the time when most people in his age group retire, he continued to work, as he was newlywed and had to deal with the starting expenses of new life.

Some years later they separated and Prof. Golub continued devoting more time to his teaching and research. He worked till he died at the age of 75, in the year 2007. He did great work, got whom he wanted to be with, and amidst of that he was genuine do-gooder. Now isn’t such a life awe-inspiring?