Politics, Economics, Development, Terrorism

Race, Caste and Breed Most people agree that all humans belong to the same species -- but some insist that we belong to different "races". This is often done in a flippant manner, without defining what is "race" in a biological sense. There are many "average" differences between Tamil Brahmins as group and a Kashmiri Brahmins as a group. Can these average differences be used to categorize them as belonging to different races (in a biological sense)? If not so, then what is the threshold of "biological difference" that would place a person in one "race" rather than in another? Biology has NOT found such a definable threshold.  What about dog "breeds"? Why are these breeds NOT called dog "races"? Different breeds of dogs have huge differences in external appearance, size, intelligence etc (much more so than between African humans and Caucasian humans). Yet, all dog breeds are biologically grouped in the same biological...

Compared to the many other parts of India, rationalist movement took roots much earlier in Kerala. This development also intersected with leftist ideologies that emphasized social justice, equality, and scientific temper. This collaboration helped in gaining wider popular support for rationalist principles in the early 20th century. However, the movement has undergone sharp ideological cleavage in last decade (as indeed, many nuclear families have!) The group identified mainly with Dr C Viswanathan views irrational beliefs as something that afflicts all religions, as also some atheistic political ideologies. In contrast, the other group that idolizes Prof C Ravichandran seeks to target Islam in particular -- often supporting aspects of the Muslim-baiting agenda of the RSS -- such the UCC, opposition to Reservations, support for the criminalizing of "Triple Talaq", CAA and so on. A Left Vs Right split! Mulling on the above scenario, I have had some insights that I wish to shar...

Most people agree that all humans belong to the same species -- but some insist that we belong to different "races". This is often done in a flippant manner, without defining what is a "race", in a biological sense. There are many "average" differences between Tamil Brahmins as group and a Kashmiri Brahmins as a group. Can these average differences be used to categorize them as belonging to different races (in a biological sense)? What can be the threshold of "biological difference" that would place a person in one "race" rather than in another? Biology has NOT found such a definable threshold. What about dog "breeds"? Why are these breeds NOT called dog "races"? Different breeds of dogs have huge differences in external appearance, size, intelligence etc. (much more so than between African humans and Caucacian humans). Yet, all dog breeds are biologically grouped in the same biological category. Whereas different gr...

I ntroduction: Suffering and Social Structures In our complex and often troubled world, millions grapple with exploitation, oppression, poverty, inequality, and illness. These pervasive issues beg the question: what fuels such imperfection in our society? Religious doctrines have long offered interpretations. Hinduism, for instance, sees suffering by individuals as a consequence of past misdeeds. Christianity attributes it to sin and disobedience towards God, while Islam views it as a test of faith. Buddhism, on the other hand, believes suffering stems from greed, hatred, and delusion, advocating meditation as a path to nirvana. These perspectives converge on a critical point: suffering is seen as a result of individual actions, with personal effort as the key to overcoming it. While there is merit in emphasizing personal responsibility, such interpretations overlook a crucial factor. This essay challenges the conventional wisdom by spotlighting the "elephant in the room": th...

We do get a gloomy picture on the state of the world we live in, when we look at things from near. Then, we get to see the flaws, and tend to miss (may I dare to say?) the beauty in the way societies have progressed across hundreds of years all around the world! Of course, we do not live in a perfect society. But we are slowly and steadily moving towards the better, from the worse. This path is not linear. At times, and at places there is regression. Yet, if we look at the past 2000 years, we live in better times today than at any time before in recorded history (definitely in Kerala, but also in India)! In the attached video, Steven Pinker looks at one factor, violence, across centuries. But it is possible to look at almost any other aspect of social life, and the findings may not be too different! https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_the_surprising_decline_in_violence?language=en

  I suppose that no one would prescribe "violence" as a solution to a problem -- unless reasonably assured that this would serve the intended purpose. Thus, violence as a solution to a problem would mostly appeal to those who believe (rightly or wrongly) that their side would emerge the clear winner -- and within a reasonable time frame, and without too heavy collateral damage. Violence may also sometimes appeal to some, despite being assured of grave injury or death as a result of this. I suppose this is possible only when such persons are under the grip of a "higher" motivation -- such as one of attaining heaven, or martyrdom in defense of a principle, dharma, religion, nation or whatever. Coming to more practical situations... What if some one slaps me? Do I slap back, or do I show the other cheek? Is there a "fit-all" response that would apply under all circumstances where some one may get slapped? Let us consider a few such circumstances…. A grown-up ...

I am consistently opposed to death penalty -- even when this is awarded by a Court of Law, consequent to a fair trial (whatever may be the crime). And yes, for this very reason, I strongly condemn the killings that did occur under the regimes of Stalin and Mao. However when people say Stalin/ Mao "killed millions", we ought not to miss out the exaggeration; and the underlying political propaganda. For example, the millions killed in Soviet famine of the 1930s; and in the famine in China during the Great Leap Forward; are routinely counted "as instances of mass killing underpinned by genocidal intent".  [ Reference: Williams, Paul (2008), Security Studies: An Introduction, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 978-0-415-42561-2 ] If the same standard is applied for the Bengal Famine of the 1943, we would need to say "Churchill killed millions"! And this was not the only famine in the British Empire... The term "red Holocaust" was coined by the Munich Institu...