Nanooooooooo!

Let me clarify on thing right away: Mamta Banerjee isn’t one of my fav netas, in fact the only place I would REALLY like to see her is inside the Bigg Boss madhouse. Admittedly, I do not know much about her brand of politics, but she does come across as someone who’s a professional party pooper.

However on the issue of the Tata plant at Singur, and her allergy to the little car, I must say, very secretly I hope Mamta is able to give enough labour pains to the car maker so that they are compelled to seek new avenues, and the birth of baby Nano gets pushed by a year if not more. No, I am not anti-capitalism, far from it. Being an ad man, free market trickery runs in my blood. And more so, I have the greatest regard for Ratan Tata.

The reason I am rooting for the fiery politician is that I have serious worries about Nano, and would ideally like the whole project scuttled. As I had mentioned in a previous post, and let me shout this out again: NANO WILL NOT BE THE POOR MAN’S CAR IN URBAN INDIA, THAT’S A FALLACY. IT WILL BE THAT LOKHANDWALA DUDE’S FOURTH OR FIFTH OR SIXTH CAR, MEANT FOR ‘ROUGH USE’.

Which is why I am a firm believer that Nano should only be sold in small towns and rural areas, indeed that’s where it will serve its honourable purpose. The lower middle class folks of big cities aren’t gonna touch Nano cos these folks have NO PARKING SPACE IN THEIR RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

Which basically means post Nano, a root canal surgery would appear more appealing than a drive on city streets, and I am appalled that the citizens of metro town aren’t able to foresee the impending doom.

Sure, no one can stop Mr Tata from doing his business where he wants in this country, but a lakh plus car will be a real nightmare in our lives. And that’s why I am cheering Mamta in this battle… the further she can push the project, the more time it gives us to plan our lives. The irony of the whole thing is that the day Nano gets launched in Mumbai, I will say tata to my car. And relocate to a hill station.

Let the brat go

Vir Sanghvi has written an outstanding column in today’s HT, for the first time I have read views on Kashmir that make huge sense. He basically suggests if the Kashmiris do not want to be a part of India, that if every incident out there becomes a call for secession, then the time has come to hold a referendum out there, and allow them the right for self-determination.

If we leave the factors of ego and pride out, clearly that’s the most sensible, logical way to go. Let me highlight what Sanghvi is saying with a parallel that all of us might find better to connect with.

There’s a large house with a joint family. Despite the usual sibling rivalries and other financial problems, the family is doing okay and prospering as a whole. Now, the youngest child, who is the most pampered of the lot, showered with the most love and money, treated better by the parents, is always unhappy, and keeps threatening to leave the house. He not only uses the ‘I wanna go’ card to blackmail the family into pouring largesse on him, he never misses a chance to abuse his parents and his brothers and sisters.

This dude has become a serious problem for the household… apart from draining the limited resources, he is forever bringing great agony and stress to the entire family. He doesn’t even miss a chance to physically harm his brothers and sisters. Despite years of molly-coddling, he feels closer to the neighbouring family, and prefers to be with them.

The only reason the family wants to keep him in the house is because of the old fash virtue of being seen as undivided, and the fear of the so-called badnaami that happens when a child leaves. This false sense of pride is costing the entire family dearly… no matter what it does for the brat, he is always unhappy.

Now any sensible, modern, educated family would much prefer that the pissed off child leaves and carves his own destiny. Maybe the ouster might open his eyes to how harsh the outside world is, maybe one day he will return a reformed man. Maybe he will discover that the neighbour’s family will actually kick his arse, or maybe he will find true happiness, which is great for all concerned.

Yes, it’s time to be matured and pragmatic about the brat, it’s time to let him go.

Farewell, dear Kashmir.

Comatose winner, haha!

Something really funny is playing out on the TV even as I write this, and no, it isn’t about Ms Rakhi Sawant’s latest gripe.

It’s the way the media is gunning after the golden boy, Bindra. And the poor chap appears sleepy, droopy, drugged, bored, sullen and lost. It’s clear all the chap wants is a large glass of Horlicks, and then crash into bed for the next six months. I have damaged my couch laughing at the way the harried reporters are sweating to get fiery sound bytes from Bindra, and all he can manage is, I am happy, I am humble (sic), I am glad, I am proud. And after reluctantly uttering each such gem, he makes a gesture to flee. Hiyuk, hiyuk. Because the next questions are about his impending marriage and Bollywood plans, more hiyuk, hiyuk. Reminds me of the time when as a child I tried milking an ox through an error of biological judgment.

No, don’t get me wrong, I ain’t trying to mock this rare talent, it’s the media that’s keeping me in splits. Used to chatting up such motor-mouths as Rakhi Sawant, Amar Singh and Suhel Seth, the poor journos have no idea how to deal with this taciturn dude. Here’s the deal, people: Methinks the secret of Bindra’s success could well be his comatose persona. The near catatonic schizophrenic character could be one of the key factors that helped him achieve success in his sport, rifle shooting is a skill that perhaps needs such a drowsy mind. Maybe you need the stupor to be able to focus sharply.

So the best thing to do is leave him alone to his Horlicks and bed. Any more questions on marriage, and we run the risk of converting a champ into Rakhi Sawant. Yes, he’ll still be shooting, but only from the hip, hiyuk, hiyuk.

Sorry, but I stick to my view!

First of all, many thanks to all of you who left comments on my previous blog… given the volume, it’s clear we have a highly debatable matter on our hands.

After reading each comment, and after careful thought, I have decided to stay with my opinion, yup, at the great risk of being perceived as a rabid bigot.

Let’s examine the core argument: It’s the mom who’s left holding the baby, the rest of us will vanish in time, so only the parents should decide: Yes, we already have. The media for instance is already ODing on the Olympic winner, Nikita has disappeared completely. And that’s to be expected, especially given the superficial media we have created in this nation (and I am a part of it). But that still doesn’t change the fact that the issue concerns the nation at large, you change the law for one individual, it changes the world we live in. While there are compelling arguments put forth… that why must parents give birth to a potentially unhealthy child and suffer along with it for the rest of their lives… the hard truth is that I HAVE seen in my lifetime babies with serious heart problems go onto living perfectly reasonable lives. Sure, some won’t, but we can’t say that for sure, so why not give life a chance? My worry is with the obsession of today’s parents to produce the so-called perfect child, cos that is a myth. Forget physical disabilities that show up later, what about the mental sicknesses some people are born with? Ergo, WE CAN NEVER BE SURE what we are bringing into the world, so why not give nature a chance? Finally, having seen such cases from close quarters, there is no greater joy in life than helping turn around the life of a challenged child. That joy is far greater than any professional success. Using tech to abort dicey fetuses to me is a cop-out, a loser attitude. And yes, the law will be mis-used by people, we are like that only. As someone pointed out, millions of female fetuses get illegally aborted, and there’s zilch we can do about it. Look where technology has got us, and now we want it to cause further damage!

Mind you, I am not against tech per se, I am not some hard anti abortion campaigner. But tech should be used to make our lives better, to heal us, to treat us. And not to kill an individual’s right to live, just because the unborn has no say in the matter. When we choose to produce babies, we have to accept there’ll always be that element of risk, but we gotta live with that. Sorry, but I am not the sort of person who runs away from problems. If that makes me an old fash, tech challenged relic, so be it. Perhaps my mom would have aborted me if tech had told her I would turn out to be such a fossil.

No right to kill

Some observations on the late abortion debate.

• I think the moot problem is that the law must redefine the stage at which life comes into being. To suggest that happens only after 20 weeks of pregnancy (one is legally allowed to abort before that) is fallacious. I think life comes into being the moment the egg is fertilised… the couple becomes a threesome FROM THAT POINT. Therefore all decisions the parents take must take into account the third life, and its right to live.

• Which means there have to be compelling reasons for abortion at ANY point, because one is cutting out an individual’s most basic right to live. And these to my mind are: The parents are way too poor to rear a child. The pregnancy is the result of rape. The to-be mom is a minor. And for no other reason must the abortion be termed legal, yup, even when the girl gets pregnant after a hectic dandiya night. Sure, in the last instance, the lady would visit the shady dai maa, but the law must make it illegal, so at least she knows the abortion is a violation of the Constitution. That perhaps might encourage her to be careful during the dandiya raas.

• Under no circumstances must technology be allowed to come in the way of Mother Nature. No matter how unhealthy the foetus is, NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO DECIDE ITS DESTINY, not even the parents. We have heard stories of abnormal children going on to to live perfectly healthy lives. The parents must use the high tech to HELP the child live a healthy life, rather than nip it in the bud.

• Think about this: the moment one couple is allowed to decide to get rid of abnormal children, and with the rapid advancement we are seeing in medical science, here’s what the future will hold for us. We would see abortions for the weirdest of reasons: one finger missing, abort. Poor eyesight, abort. Too dark skinned, abort. Crooked nose, abort. Which is why I am totally with the HC judges on this. Nikita and Haresh CANNOT be allowed to kill their child.

• Lastly, only two entities are allowed to decide on someone’s right to live. God. And murderers. Since we cannot be gods, let us not turn into murderers.