Arun Pandit's Dinner on Chrismas Eve

Pankaj on Chrismas Eve

An Evening with Prof. Bhat

Prof. Chandrasekhar Bhat teaches Indian Diaspora at University of Hyderabad, from where I received my Masters of Arts degree in Sociology. I spent a wonderfully memerable evening with Prof. Bhat and his wife in Sentosa Island. He was visiting Kuala Lumpur for the Indian Diaspora Conference organised by GOPIO. He found some time to visit Singapore, where Amit ji and Rashmi ji gave me the opportunity to meet them and discuss about my time and experience in Hyderabad.

Climbing the Slave's Cave

Yankari National Park, Nigeria

ISA Ph.D Laboratory in Nigeria

International Sociological Association organised its seventh Laboratory for Ph.D students in social sciences at the University of Maiduguri in Nigeria between November 18 and November 24. Students from various parts of the world presented and discussed their doctoral work. It was an interesting and wonderful experience to listen to other people's work and about other countries.

Newton's Law & Nike Advertisement

On the Banks of the River Ganges

On the banks of a holy river
The Ganges winds round and round
Twirling twisting shapes
Rising waves
Floating flowers
A conch shell the distance blows
A call beckoning asleep, arise
Raising rising mantra
Folded hands bowed heads Before the rising lord
Salute the sun
Saffroned splendour
Welcome the birth of daylight
A ray of sunshine joy to bring every life guide

Farewell night a tired traveller
Your part is done moments daylight entered

A lone woman sitting on a rock
Looks into water deep eyes
Searching searching for a silence....

What says the river today
What does she hear

Floating fragments waves bring
Lost flowers a light swimming bravely
Whose prayers are these
Who places a tiny light upon the heart

Of flowing floating river of might
Why do these flowers tremble to touch every ripple of water
Speckled dew, drops her eyes

Reverberating sounds mingled voices
Past and present
Merging streams of sound, waking light of dawn
Many answered dreams float in image waters Ganges
Eyes penetrate hidden depths silent bosom

A land of many wonders
Oceans away
Nestled asleep at the feet of the mighty Himalaya
Ganges rests with her sisters in deep sleep

And when torrid currents overcome an outside world too harsh
Waves of tapestry she lends covering naked bodies of grief.

___________________

@ Kavita in "An Amorphous Melody"

Love

There is a game of life people play
There is no turning back
With love it begins with love it must end

It is a charmed circle of life
From the silence of the womb
To the silent sounds of earth feet tread

Where is the choice
Where is the reason
Where is the wisdom

Who begins this play
Lights the way
Is waiting at the end.

____________
@ Kavita in "An Amorphous Melody"

The Crisis of Global Governance

The former British Prime Minister Mr. Tony Blair delivered a public lecture organised by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at National University of Singapore on “The Crisis of Global Governance: Challenges and Solutions”. According to him, the world is opening up and becoming more interdependent on each other. Each country is concerned about the other and we cannot afford to overlook the situation in the continent of Africa. Africa should be included in the development process. Due to the process of globalization, opportunities are far greater for people today than ever before.

He pointed out some of the basic challenged that world is facing today - economic challenges like poverty and exclusion, environmental crisis and climate change, energy crisis, crisis related to the movement of people (migration) and the humanitarian and economic crisis in the continent of Africa.

According to him, the solutions to these problems do not depend on any one country, but all. The solution today is not protectionism but opening up. The effort in this direction needs to be multilateral. For example, the USA would not sign the agreement on climate change without taking China and China would not sign if it obstructs the growth of the country. He pointed out three basic strategies to solve the crisis of governance in world today - (1) building strong alliances, (2) reforming multilateral institutions, and (3) empowering the civic society.

In his concluding remarks, he mentioned that the solutions to terrorism do not come from governments but from peoples’ of different faith at the grassroots. Democracy, freedom and Justice are the global values that should be respected and upheld by the people for peace and prosperity in the world.

Impossible is Nothing !!

Impossible Is Just a Big Word
Thrown Around By Small Men
Who Find It Easier
To Live In a World
They Have Been Given
Than To Explore the Power
They Have To Change It.

Impossible Is Not A Fact.
It Is An Opinion.
Impossible Is Not A Declaration.
It Is A Dare.
Impossible Is Potential.
Impossible Is Temporary.

Hotel Karalafonia

Onthe road to Trivandrum

Coconutoil in my hair

Warm smell of avial

Risingup through the air

Upahead in the distance

Isaw a bright pink tube-light

Mytummy rumbled, I felt weak and thin

Ihad to stop for a bite

Therehe stood in the doorway

Flickedhis mundu in style

AndI was thinking to myself

Idon't like the look of his sinister smile

Thenhe lit up a petromax

Muttering'No power today'

MoreMallus down the corridor

Ithought I heard them say

Welcometo the Hotel Kerala-fonia

Sucha lousy place,

Sucha lousy place (background)

Sucha sad disgrace,

Plentyof bugs at the Hotel Kerala-fonia

Anytime of year

Anytime of year (background)

It'sinfested here

It'sinfested here

Hisfinger's stuck up his nostril

He'sgot a big, thick mustache

Hemakes an ugly, ugly noise

Butthat's just his laugh

Buxomgirls clad in pavada

Eatingbanana chips

Someroll their eyes, and

Someroll their hips

Isaid to the manager

Myroom's full of mice

Hesaid,

Don'tworry, saar,I sending you

meenkarri, brandy and ice

Andstill those voices were crying from far away

Wakeyou up in the middle of the night

Justto hear them pray

Saveus from the Hotel Kerala-fonia

Sucha lousy place,

Sucha lousy place (background)

Sucha sad disgrace

Tryingto live at the Hotel Kerala-fonia

Itis no surprise

Itis no surprise (background)

Thatit swarms with flies

The blind man was pouring

Stale sambar on rice

And he said

Weare all just actors here

In Silk Smitha-disguise

Andin the dining chamber

We gathered for the feast

Westab it with our steely knives

But we just can't cut that beef

Last thing I remember

Iwas writhing on the floor

That cockroach in my appam-stew was the culprit,

Iam sure

Relax,said the watchman

This enema will make you well

Andhis friends laughed as they held me down

God's Own Country?

Oh, Hell!

㏕he Yeagles

THEMATHIAS"

Developing a Development Mindset

The panelists in the forum on “Bangladesh and Singapore: Developing a Development Mindset” touched upon various aspects of development in both societies. The panel on Singapore began with Mr. S. Dhanabalan who pointed out about three things that resulted in the success of Singapore - (1) political leadership – moral authority, (2) concrete action – pragmatism over ideology, and (3) structure of society. He also agreed with Prof. Yunus’s inaugural talk on defiance and argued that Singapore’s model of growth and development has defied the conventional western methodology. Public housing has not degenerated into slums; trade unions instead of becoming confrontational towards management have become partners of growth and profit.

Dr. Akbar Ali Khan pointed out that both Singapore and Bangladesh have gone through similar process of independence which he expressed through talak, talak, talak – Singapore first from the British and then from Malaysia; Bangladesh from India and then from Pakistan. Singapore followed outward looking globalization policy where as Bangladesh followed inward looking imports substitution policies of economic development. Singapore strictly denied socialist policies where as Bangladesh followed a socialist model of development whose ghost is still haunting it in three basic ways – (1) confrontational trade union, (2) inefficient public sector, and (3) incapability of public sector to provide incentives. He concluded by saying that “God has not made Bangladesh poor. Poverty in Bangladesh is man-made because it could not create institutions and run institutions”.

Speaking about the civil society movement in Bangladesh Ms. Farida Akhtar argued that there are 20000 NGOs in Bangladesh who covers 78 per cent of the villages. Poor people survive neither because of the public sector nor because of the civil society but in their own capacity. Bangladesh has a large NGO sector and constitutes a strong civil society movement in South Asia. However, it should be noted that the NGOs are not homogeneous. They are diverse in nature and are doing diverse things.

According to Ms. Euleen Goh, Bangladesh has demographic or human resources advantage which is required for development of a country and wished Singapore had more. According to her, the reason of Singapore’s success is that it has been able to create an open, competitive environment ease for doing business. It is ranked as the world’s 7th competitive country and ranked 1 in Asia. It has an efficient system, developed infrastructure, secure and welcoming environment, great education system and legal certainty – all of which are conducive for business. Shell Oil established its refinery in 1961 which is now the third largest. Though SingTel began as a government owned company, it is now fully privatized and 50 per cent of its share comes from overseas.

Syed Manzur Elahi spoke about the economic environment in Bangladesh. According to him, the primary reason of Bangladesh’s separation from Pakistan was economic because most of the commerce and industries were located in west-Pakistan. Though the first Bangladeshi government was pro-private in its manifesto, it followed a socialist pattern of development. Public sector could have done better in Bangladesh if the trade unions were not so politicized and if the political parties were not interfering in trade unions. There is an urgent need of transparency and accountability in Bangladesh’s public sector because the private sector needs quick decision-making in this globalised age. The government has to provide an “enabling environment”. It is happening today that all the agricultural land is getting transformed into industrial land which Bangladesh has also to think about. If Bangladesh has failed today, it is because of its “political leadership”.

Dr. Shapan Adnan spoke about the relationship between culture and corruption in society. According to him corruption occurs in that society where immorality becomes a part of society’s culture and where illegality and ethicality no longer is treated as a shame. Corruption is transaction between the bribe payer and the bribe taker. Poverty is not the cause of corruption because most of the corruption happens among high classes. Corruption has remained as a recurrent theme because of utilization of thugs by the political leadership to manipulate ballot for political office. Bureaucrats and tax collectors collect tax not for revenue maximization for state but personal profit maximization. Corruption is not individual but systemic or institutional and leads to unproductive accumulation.

Mahfuz Anam spoke about the mindset and leadership. He began by saying that Singapore has utilized its geography and demography to achieve its success where as Bangladesh has neglected these resources. Bangladesh has 5th largest reserve of sweet water in the world. Its population has turned to a liability from an asset. The government did not educate its people and did not give them hope. The reason of corruption and underdevelopment lies in its confrontational politics that began in 1991 through democratic system. It has two aspects – one, an arrogant government that tries to oppress the opposition, and two, an opposition that is irresponsible. This confrontational politics is fought at the street level through strikes and to oppress the strikes the government hires criminals. The ruling parties pay to gangsters to beat the opposition which has resulted in a strong nexus between politics and crime. Thus good politics in Bangladesh today is not about how to run a country but about how to control streets. As a consequence, a “culture of impunity” has evolved. The ways out for Bangladesh is thus to make a shift from personality based politics to a politics that emphasizes on institutions building.

Defying the System

The Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy along with Institute of South Asian Studies organized a forum on “Bangladesh and Singapore: Developing a Development Mindset” on 2 November 2007. The inaugural address was delivered by Prof. Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Laureate. According to him, the problems our societies facing today cannot be solved by the existing system because it is the same system which has created these problems. The solution to these problems lies in “defiance”. If we challenge the existing system and explore alternative methods, the objective will surely be achieved.

According to him, he started Grameen Bank with a total capital of $ 27. He faced many problems from the formal system and existing institutions. Grameen Bank declared two things – (1) financial system is wrong because it rejects the poor and helps the rich, and (2) banking system is wrong because rejects the women. However, he also faced similar problems. Even though he wanted to help the women and bring them into business, they were very apprehensive. According to him, this denial or “no” is not her voice; it is the voice of history and when the women will say “let me try” that would be the success for Grameen Bank. It took 6 years for Grameen Bank to achieve this success. Though Grameen bank’s policy was 50:50 male-female proportion, in borrowing pattern it observed that money going to the family through women has tremendous impact than money going through men. The obvious question then was why 50:50? Grameen Bank extended itself to reach out to more women and today out of 7.5 million borrowers of Grameen Bank 97 per cent are women.

As policy, Bank tries to implement its 16 decisions in the grassroots through women. Some of them are sending children to school, stop giving and receiving dowry, etc. Today almost 100 percent of Grameen children are in school and 18,000 Grameen student are having access to Bank’s educational loan and pursuing higher education degrees in medicine, engineering and other fields.

He also mentioned that the world is going through tremendous transformation and the world is not going to be as it is today. The next generation would speak different languages and behave differently. Sometimes we may like it, sometimes we may not. This change in relationship will change the society and this change is happening in exponential way. What took Grameen Bank 20 years to achieve may now take 5 or 10 years to achieve the same.

Grameen Bank’s effort has been extraordinary. Today of the 150 million people in Bangladesh, almost everyone has a cell phone. The information technology will change our lives and this is only the beginning. He also mentioned about their success in solar energy among the rural population in Bangladesh.

Answering the questions he pointed out that human being is not a machine for making profit. They are not selfish individuals involved in economic business for profit. They are also involved in what he calls “social business” where personal profit takes a back seat and profit for the people or public profit becomes important; where individual think about common public good and try to include others in the process of development. This development will establish a humane world. This social business cannot thrive on “charity” because in charity you always have to look for funds but in social business you generate money from the initial capital not for personal profit but to be reinvested for common public good. In this case the concept of micro-credit becomes important.

He distinguished between micro-credit and money-lending. According to him, many of the organizations are imposing high rate of interest and still calling themselves as micro-credit programme. He divided micro credit into three categories – (1) green zone where the interest rate below 10 per cent; (2) yellow zone where the interest rate between 10 and 15 per cent; and (3) red zone where the interest rate goes beyond 15 percent. And anyone involved in the social business and charging more than 15 per cent interest are not in micro credit but in money lending process. The primary objective of Grameen Bank was to oppose the high rate of interest and help the rural poor have access to capital with lower interest rate. This will not only remove the poverty in rural areas but also develop entrepreneurship among them and help creating a more humane world. Micro-credit thus has become a tool to defy the conventional wisdom which indeed is the conventional stupidity.

A Peom on Race !!

When I born, I black
When I grow up, I black
When I go in Sun, I black
When I scared, I black
When I sick, I black
And when I die, I still black

And you white fellow
When you born, you pink
When you grow up, you white
When you go in sun, you red
When you cold, you blue
When you scared, you yellow
When you sick, you green
And when you die, you gray
And you calling me colored?
Why ???


@This poem was nominated by UN as the best poem of 2006, Written by an "African Kid"

Selamat Hariraya

Mosque-like Decoration in Geylang Sarai

Hariraya in Singappore

Hariraya or Eid in Singapore's Geylang Sarai

The Legacy of Gandhi: A 21st Century Perspective

The workshop on “The Legacy of Gandhi: A 21st Century Perspective” was organized by the Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS), National University of Singapore at the Orchard Hotel to celebrate Mahatma Gandhi’s 138th birth anniversary on 2 October. It began with an introductory address by the acting director Prof. Tan Tai Young where he argued that India has emerged as a strategic player not only economically but also politically and culturally and is embracing the role of a balancing power in the politics of world affairs today. In such context it is important to examine how the views and thinking of Gandhi has shaped the life and developmental trajectory of post-independence Indian nation.

The first speaker of the afternoon was Prof. Ishtiaq Ahmed [Visiting Senior Fellow, ISAS] who spoke about “Mahatma Gandhi and Hindu-Muslim Relations”. How do we look at the legacy of Gandhi? The British Historian Eric Hobsbawm described the 20th century as the “Century of the Extremes” which marked many bloody wars in the name of nationalism and dominance. Gandhi’s effort of achieving freedom, liberation and rights lied not in using force and violence but in peaceful resistance which brings shame to the oppressor. Many have predicted that the 21st century will be the “Century of Asia” and given the growth and developments, such optimism is justified. India and China have emerged as great engines of economic growth. In such context Gandhian idea of self-sufficient villages and national economies may not sound significant but Gandhi’s legacy is a saving grace for our troubled times. Instead of relying on the politics of confrontation, Gandhi defined civilization in the language of peace. He cherished a peaceful and just social order. Even the architect of Kargil war and Pakistan President General Pevez Mussaraf, during his visit to Gandhi Samadhi in Delhi wrote that “your (Gandhi’s) ideas are needed today more than ever before”.

According to Rajiv Sikri, [Former Secretary (east) – Ministry of External Affairs], though many have believed that Nehru has shaped India’s foreign policy, its roots lie in the freedom movement which is influenced by Gandhi. Indian foreign policy, in reality, was inspired by Gandhi and directed by Nehru. Some of the ways in which Gandhian ideas inspired Indian foreign policy are – (1) Non-Aligned Movement, (2) Moral and Economic support against Colonialism and Racism, (3) Non-violence and Nuclear Disarmament, and (4) India’s role as International Peace Maker. The renowned biographer of Gandhi, B.R. Nanda has written that Gandhi has fought against three things – (1) Revolution against Racism, (2) Revolution against Colonialism, and (3) Revolution against Violence. He has been successful in the first two revolutions and his ideas and legacies are still fighting against the third one. As a legacy of Gandhi and as an example of the relevance Gandhi’s ideas October 2 is celebrated by the United Nations as the International Day of Non-Violence.

How has Gandhian ideas influenced the economic policies of the Indian nation state? Speaking about the economic views of Gandhi Prof. D.M. Nachane [Visiting Senior Research Fellow, ISAS] argued that there were three historical conditions that shaped Gandhi’s economic thinking at the time – (1) the neglect of agriculture by the British, (2) the neglect of textiles by the British, and (3) the checking of Indian entrepreneurship by the British because it was thought as a challenge to British Industrialization. He also mentioned that there were four intellectual influences on Gandhian economics – (1) pastoral romanticism – Rousseau, (2) belief not in materialism but in the morals of the people – Ruskin, (3) values – true economics do not militate with ethics, and (4) writings of Karl Marx which mentioned about the exploitation of labour. However, Gandhi deviated from Marxist methodology of revolution and violence and advocated for “trusteeship”. Based on the socio-historical and intellectual influences, Gandhian economics got expressed in four basic ways –

Swadeshi – which is the outcome of the decline of handicraft industry and colonial exploitation

Opposition to industrialization influenced by his exclusive emphasis on village community as the ideal form against the western individualism and modernity. He operationalized his model through “charkha” and “khadi” and khadi mentality represented the decentralization of production into the villages.

Opposition to technology – he was not against technology as whole but towards “western” technology because it was labour-displacing and labour-degrading. Instead, he advocated for what he called the “appropriate technology” which became the developmental catchword in the 1980s.

Austerity or limitation of wants – he described the consumerist society as the anti-thesis and urged for the voluntary restriction of wants.

Many in the west have misunderstood Gandhian ideas of austerity and thrift with Protestant Ethics. But it was different. While for Protestant Ethics, thrift is meant for higher capital accumulation; for Gandhi, thrift or frugality was not meant for profit. Gandhi opposed centralized planning and heavy industrialization but never opposed capitalism as such. He opposed multinational accumulation of capital but was not against private ownership of capital. Thus Gandhian ideas were reflected in Nehru’s planning and his concessions for small and cottage industries and labour friendly policies. In real sense Gandhian economics was highly implemented during the times of Indira Gandhi and the Janata government. Banks were nationalized to reduce rural poverty; agriculture was emphasized and import substitution policies were adopted during the period. But, Gandhian economics was widely abandoned since 1986 with economic reforms. Though the reforms have generated outstanding growth rate for Indian economy and produced billionaires like Mukesh and Anil Ambani, Ajim Premji and Laxmi Mittal, the benefits of this economic growth has not percolated down to the poor and marginalized and as a testimony to this 30,000 farmers commit suicide every year.

Prof. Partha Nath Mukherjee [S.K Dey Chair at ISS, New Delhi] argued that Gandhi today is not getting forgotten. His legacies did not end with the end of his life. If we are to describe Gandhi in one sentence, it would be the quote that Einstein made – “generation to come, people would disbelieve that such a man flesh and blood ever walked on earth”. It might be true that his idea of communitarian habitation and Swadeshi will not prevail in globalize era but his principles do influence the world. Some of them are – (1) the power of truth and non-violence, (2) participatory democracy – not representative democracy which was the contributions of the west, (3) appropriate technology – because of western technology’s exploitative and alienating nature, (4) emancipatory power of women, (5) rejection of the institutionalized inequality like caste and race, (6) human being as part of nature, (7) rights should be embedded in obligations, and (8) non-western civilizational perspective on “nation”.

One of the central questions Mukherjee tried to look at is how has Gandhian ideas influenced the democratic decentralization process. To him democratic decentralization in India has moved from independence to interdependence through the panchayati raj system and village republic. There are 700,000 villages in India. According to Gandhi, Panchayats or villages will be the “units of self-government”, but paradoxically we inherited the British institutions of democracy and centralized planning which discarded the “village” and adopted the “individual” as the unit of democracy. There were many dilemmas and ambiguities prevalence during the time about the appropriate nature of policies and Nehru was trapped in one such ambiguity between the western modernity on the one hand and the rich civilizational heritage of India on the other. Instead of making “village” as the agencies of change, in Nehruvian period, “state” became nodal agency of social change, development and fast social transformation with “centralization” as the major strategy. However, there has been major shift in development planning over the years. It has been moving from “government programme with people’s participation” to “people’s programme with government participation”.

Despite this, Indian democracy suffers from certain problems which pose challenges before democratic decentralization in India – (1) elite capture of resources, (2) non-elected resource rich NGOs competing with panchayati raj system, (3) rent seeking behaviour, (4) proxy panchayats where husbands of women representatives control panchayat affairs, (5) rigid bureaucracy, and (6) political clientlism.

Dr. Gyanesh Kudaisya [Acting Head, South Asian Studies Programme, NUS] spoke about the global relevance of Gandhi and his legacy in conflict and conflict resolution. He defined conflict not in the traditional way as it is defined in International relations theory but in the way it was understood by Gandhi. Gandhi understood conflict in four basic ways –

conflict between man and man
conflict between man and woman
conflict between man and machine, and
conflict between man and nature

He quoted Salman Rushdie that “Gandhi today is up for grab” indicating the example of Telecom Italia’s use of Gandhi in their advertisement. To him, Gandhi communicated through his body, through his dressing. He was the greatest communicators in the world. Gandhian politics was dialogical that fought against oppression, hierarchy and technology. Explaining the African American struggle for civil rights, he quoted Martin Luther King that “I found in the non-violence resistance philosophy of Gandhi …the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom”. He also quoted Nelson Mandela to explain the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, “we in South Africa brought about our new democracy relatively peacefully in the foundations of Gandhian thinking regardless of whether we were directly influenced by Gandhi or not”. Mandela also mentioned that “man’s goodness is a flame that can be hit but never extinguished”.

He also explained how Gandhian thinking has influenced various environmental and anti-authoritarian movements. Gandhian ideas and views have provided sustainable economic alternatives to centralized development planning. One of Gandhi’s favourite quotes on sustainability is “the world has enough for everyone’s need, but not enough for anyone’s greed”. Ang San Sun Kyi’s resistance against the Burmese authoritarianism is one of the recent examples of Gandhian method of passive resistance against the oppressive forces. Kyi mentions that the younger generation believes that non-violence will not work in the case of Burma. “Some people think that non-violence is passiveness. It is not so”.

The seminar was followed by a question answer session where many important questions were asked. How was Gandhi perceived in the Muslim world? How great was Gandhi (great man’s theory)? Was he a product of his milieu? And what are the failures of Gandhi? The speakers provided many insights on these questions. Dr. Gyanesh Kudaisya defined Gandhi as a “yugparivartak” – who transformed the time of his age not only in the terrain of politics but also in other spheres of social life. To him, though can not be called as a failure, the difference between Gandhi and Ambedkar on the issue of untouchability was important. While he went on fasting saying untouchables as the part of Hindu society, Ambedkar defined them as separate from Hindu society asked for separate representation like the Muslims. Others also provided many insights on these issues. Gandhi was criticized for his failure to communicate with the Muslims and ambiguity on his religious and secular principles. Some others saw his domestic life as strenuous and troubled, especially with his son. Many also argued that the lack of respect for law and the destruction of public property in post-colonial India have roots in Gandhian idea of civil disobedience movements. Some others also argue that one of the major political blunders Gandhi committed was that he betrayed the nationalist cause by not supporting the case of Bhagat Singh due to his over emphasis on non-violence. Gandhi failed to convert the Congress into a mass organization of the people as its leadership was drawn from the landlords and upper middle class populations.

Would India have achieved independence if Gandhi was not there? If Tilak was not there, how difficult would it have been for Gandhi to enter into national movement against colonialism? The social and historical conditions did produce Gandhi as Mahatma. His experience in South Africa and his training in British law had major influence on him. As Marx had rightly said “men create their own history not independently but in the context of existing history and circumstances”. Gandhi thus was a product of history. Had there been no British colonialism and oppression there would have been no Gandhi.

How would have Gandhi reacted if he was alive to see the large gap between two Indias – the rural and the urban? What would have been his reaction to this divide and exclusionary growth process? How is he relevant today? His “never give-up” attitude influence Indians today. His relevance is reflected through movies like Munna Bhai and others which has “demystified Gandhi” and described him not as a great man or leader but as an ordinary man whom we all can follow. He is present, in a way, in all of us.

Run for Hope

Teaching Social Theory

Reading the Dead White Males (Marx, Weber, and Durkheim) of Sociological tradition has always been an interesting thing. But it was a beautiful thing to teach them in an undergraduate class with a barrel pointing at you with questions and doubts. Everyone finds the module boring and keep asking how do you teach social theory? It was a moment to pause and think. I always wanted to teach classical theory not because of my interest in it but because it was interesting to read about Marx, Weber and Durkheim and the way they have explained the social evolution of human history. They are the founding fathers of Sociological tradition and Sociology would be unthinkable without them. The discipline has expanded a whole different way than these people have ever imagined. History might have witnessed unprecedented turn of events but it is experiencing exactly the similar pattern of organization, order and change that these theorists had predicted. Capitalism is sweeping through every nook and corner of the world, and hierarchical structures dominate the bureaucratic offices. However, the point is not how relevant are theories today; rather the point is how to teach theory to an undergraduate class who are unprepared to understand the abstract theorization of social reality. It could begin with contemporary and personal life experiences and gradually go through the abstract things that are intimately attached to the experiences. It may not be called theorization but it is how theory could be taught with relevant experiences and examples from surrounding social and political life. Above all what these theorists were trying to do is to explain what was happening around them in the society – the problem of social order and social change. And today we could put the contributions of these people before the students and ask them to see how relevant they are in explaining the social phenomena and patterns of social relationship. As my first experience shows, teaching theory could really be fun and interesting; what you need to do is just to keep them engaged and talking.