Rise of Patriarchy - Sustenance

I wonder if there is a term for the people who instead of blaming the social situation for their victim status, in fact claim that that situation doesn't exist in the society that's why they are victims.

The other day, I heard a person complaining, if patriarchy had existed in the society then men also had the option of staying at home and becoming homemakers!

This person also had the opinion that machoism doesn't exist in the society and if it exists only a small percentage of families actually show it (basically, his definition of machoism is overt physical aggression).

This person also had the opinion that marriage is a curse for men as they can't get sex anywhere else but a boon for women.

Even though I initially wanted to tackle this case in the post from an angle how people misunderstood patriarchy, I couldn't overlook the fact that many of them have internalized the prejudices.

The first one on the list, ie., men becoming homemaker, is probably the only thing where his expectation was correct. But what he said was basically the definition of patriarchy. Everything is gendered and woman is considered lower and a man, wanted to take up a role defined as feminine in patriarchal terms, is viewed as effeminate. Basically, here an individual is a victim of patriarchy but this guy has turned the meaning on its head.

In the second case, ie., machoism, the lack of physical aggression among many middle class Indian families is taken as a common phenomenon. But India is still a brutal place for women in general and men who go beyond socially accepted norms.  In fact, when it comes to women I suppose even developed countries aren't far ahead of us. There are too many microaggressions from privileged castes and classes. His male and privileged self might have escaped any such hostility but that's just a privilege blindness.

The sexual repression is an unpleasant experience for many Indian men. But I believe that could be the situation with women too. However, privileged men by heredity in olden times had no problem with this as the patriarchal rules always accepted their sexual indiscretions in different terminologies. Also, in olden times as people married in their childhood(or immediately after puberty), they never had to face the long period of sexual abstinence that the present generations of Indians have to face. So basically sexual repression is a new phenomenon in the last 50-100 years as we moved away from child marriages but didn't completely adopt the concept of sex without marriage in our society. But I suppose this is a transition period. But the way he considers it as a male only phenomenon shows a complete lack of appreciation for female sexuality and also a dream of playboy sexuality without any responsibility but only entitlement(this has given rise to many feudal liberals).

Basically, I could summarize that his sense of victimhood is built upon;

- Misunderstanding of patriarchy

- Male and caste privilege blindness

- Prejudice with female sexuality 

You can rebel against the existing social norms if you are clear about the reasons behind it. But what happens in this case? I believe people who themselves are victims become inhuman about others' plight (this guy is a libertarian) is because of this reason. Instead of bringing down the phenomenon that made them victim, they are rooting for it. And these are above average people. Nobody can explain them anything.

True Capitalist Society - V

There is something inhuman about libertarian economics.Today, I was told MGNREGA scheme increased inflation. There could be many drawbacks of MGNREGA scheme. But the way fans of libertarian economics view it, is completely distasteful. However, I'm not sure whether they really understand what libertarian economists like Milton Friedman wanted to convey.

I checked what Milton Friedman had to say on this. In this video (posted below), he mentions minimum pay rise for workers. He, in fact, maintains the minimum pay rise is justified as it is basically driven by inflation and not the cause of it. Now, let's compare those union workers with unorganized labourers who benefit from MGNREGA scheme.

It's obvious that the latter's economic situation is far worse than those of union workers. Let's say the price of commodities have increased in commensurate with their income. In the worst case, their economic condition is as good as it was before. But what about social conditions?

The barbaric landlords can't exploit them by paying very low wages to work in their fields. The barbaric real estate developers can't get the work done by giving only food. The barbaric families can't keep them as slave domestic help.

In India these social conditions matter. I would think MGNREGA is a much needed idea in a poor and feudal society like ours. What we need is efficient implementation. Even with its present 15% efficiency, we are curbing exploitation by that much amount. But the fans of libertarian economics have lost all their humanity and can't see social conditions. Did people like Milton Friedman ever think their fans would be bunch of barbarians?

Rationale for Caste Reservations

I heard this story when I was young. There were openings in a bank and many girls from a college appeared for the test and the interview. To the utter surprise of many, one girl not particularly considered bright or even average got the job whereas some of her smarter friends didn't. Few people in the college inquired about it. From the bank insiders they came to know that, the girl came from a Brahmin family which recently lost their lands because of land reforms and were in dire condition financially. So, some people influenced on her behalf(as banking along with most of the other sectors were dominated by Brahmins). The story ended with a sarcastic remark that some of the girls that lost out came anyway from dirt poor families and since they were traditionally poor, they wouldn't feel the pain unlike this nouveau pavre girl.

The story can't be verified. However, I wonder whether there is any truth in the impression that people observe poverty in groups that are traditionally prosperous and wealth in groups that are traditionally poor.

For many years, I keep hearing from many Malayali non-Brahmins, how Brahmins in Kerala lost out:  they didn't take up British education quickly unlike other Brahmins; they weren't smart enough to control their landholdings when they had the maximum landholding compared to any other caste etc... I've even watched a movie on their pitiable situation. There was a sexual exploitation news involving a Brahmin girl which again highlighted their sorry state of affairs in the media. All these made me wonder whether they were indeed an exception to the typical caste situation in other parts of India. But later I came across this study by K C Zachariah (Religious Denominations of Kerala, 2016).

These are the rankings from the study with regards to Hindu castes.

Working in government/semi government jobs proportionate to their population;

1. Brahmins

2. Nairs

3. OBC Hindus

4. Dalit Hindus

Educational attainment:

1. Brahmins

2. Nairs

3. OBC Hindus

4. Dalit Hindus

More importantly, ranking by prosperity(or least number of people living in poverty):

1. Brahmins

2. Nairs

3. OBC Hindus

4. Dalit Hindus

The caste hierarchy structure is still reflected in these rankings after all the social justice measures (including reservations and land reforms).

I don't think there is anything wrong in this. The idea behind social justice initiatives was that social and cultural capital would help the privileged castes and they would never go down. It has been proven correct in Kerala until now. Also, Kerala has the highest HDI, and none of the social justice measures (some of the oldest in India) seem to have adversely affected the society in general as all castes have moved up. Education and prosperity which used to be the monopoly of the privileged castes have been spread across. Even though ideal equality of the castes haven't been reached, the gap has been reduced considerably.

Now I wonder why non-Brahmin people still worry about Malayali Brahmins. In fact, they should be more bothered about their own people (most of these worrying people come from OBCs and Nair castes, so I don't think they have much consideration for Dalits). That makes me wonder whether an odd poor Brahmin invokes more sympathy not just for himself but for his whole caste because he himself was and is an anomaly. A rich Dalit getting benefits of the reservations sets tongues wagging, - even though, the caste altogether always struggle to fill their justified proportion in education or job- because a rich Dalit is an anomaly. Thus those individual cases are generalized for the whole Dalit castes.

Reference:
Religious Denominations of Kerala, K C Zachariah

Tayi and Bayi

When I was going through the article on Swati Tirunal (see my previous post), what surprised me was the association of 'bai(bayi)' with the females of royal family. The term 'bai' is commonly found among Marathis. I guess the popularity or influence of the Maratha kingdom where the royal females had 'bai' attached to their name probably made this Malayali royal family to adopt the term as a honorific.

However, even though Marathi is an Indo-Aryan language, the root of 'bai' appears to be Dravidian (not a surprise as majority Marathis plausibly lapsed Dravidians). The term 'ayi' means she/mother. The masculine term is aya (Te: na+aayana -> my father). The masculine term for 'bai' is 'bua'/'bava'. I guess 'ua'/'ava' is more likely -ava/aya another Dravidian term for he/father.

In Kannada, aayi is mostly used in the formal term for mother, tayi -> tan (self) + aayi (mother). But what does the prefix 'ba' in Marathi mean? It doesn't seem Dravidian. Could it be some Indo-Aryan term meaning  self or my?

Update:
In Kannada and Telugu, the term 'bava' means cousin(male)/brother-in-law. What does the prefix 'ba' mean in Kannada and Telugu?

Sri in Malayalam and my great-great grandmother

Sri, the honorific addressing term in Sanskrit (equivalent to Mr/Ms in English), has its own forms in different Indian languages. In Tulu and Kannada, it's 'siri' though not used as a honorific (Sri is used instead), it's used in compound terms. In Tamil, it's 'tiru'. I was wondering about the equivalent in Malayalam.

My maternal great-great grandomother's -whose mtDNA and maternal lineage I carry- name was supposedly Chirudeyi (from an official record), where 'sri' is part of the compound name. However, her descendants remember her name as Chiridevi(Skt: Sridevi).

Now if I ask the Malayalis who speak the standard dialect they claim neither chiru nor deyi is part of Malayalam. I couldn't find any references online (where most of them use Sri).

One example I could refer was the name Swati Tirunal. Now, is that 'tiru' a Tamil import or part of Malayalam? If latter is the case, how about 'chiru'? If we consider my other relatives' pronunciation, chiri, which sounds closer to Tulu term 'siri' and the other part 'deyi' which is the same as Tulu equivalent of devi (devi -> deyi) then we can conclude that Malayalam 'tiru' became 'chiru' in region closer to Tulu. But my relatives use the Sanskrit term 'devi' instead. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Malayalm equivalent of 'devi'.

Random Thoughts - Love_Lust

If you go through this article then what strikes you strongly is that many of the asexual people are heteroamoural. It further reinforces the fact the feelings of love and lust are mutually exclusive.

So the present list includes:
Heterosexual-Heteroamoural -> Anna Karenina (Fictional, Anna Karenina), Max Weber
Heterosexual-Homoamoural -> Nick Carraway (Fictional, The Great Gatsby), Tom Daley
Heterosexual-Inamoural -> Emma Bovary (Fictional, Madame Bovary)
Homosexual-Homoamoural ->  Uncle Frank (Fictional, Little Miss Sunshine)
Homosexual-Heteroamoural -> Francis Bacon, Freddie Mercury, Chirlane McCray, Brandon Ambrosino
Homosexual-Inamoural -> ?
Asexual-Heteroamoural-> Emy, a French woman, Devi, Gill, Jon and Ian from UK
Asexual-Homoamoural -> ? 
Asexual-Inamoural -> ?

Muslim appeasement and Congress

The barrage of Hindutva propaganda and the Congress’s present leaders’ political immaturity has rendered us incapable of objectively evaluating many accusations against them. One of such accusations was that the Congress appeased Muslims presumably for political gains. In fact, I too had this opinion, though I qualified that they had appeased other communities too wherever it suited them in the past. But analyzing the so-called Muslim appeasement with the existing political situations of that age and evaluating some of the words of its own ministers in the past made me wonder whether that’s indeed such a straightforward case or not.


When the Congress had appeased Sikhs or Christians, it was very state specific where Hindus were a minority. On the contrary, there was an example in Kerala, where the Congress could rely on Christian and Muslim votes, the party appeasing the majority community (which traditionally voted for the Communists overwhelmingly) in the case of Sabari Mala temple entry for women. These examples don’t exactly qualify as ‘minority appeasement’ but that tells one important factor that as a national party the leaders saw themselves as Hindus. This factor again comes into picture when Arif Mohammad Khan made a statement that Hindu Congress leaders felt they would be seen as communal if they went against the Muslim laws and supported the Supreme Court verdict on Shah Bano. We need to bear that in mind when we analyze whether any acts seen as Muslim appeasement were intended for political gains or not.


The first accusation is related to Uniform Civil Code. While Congress leaders enthusiastically reformed Hindu personal laws and set the stage for emancipation of Hindu women, they did nothing in the case of Muslims. Did they do it for political gains?


The reformation in Hindu laws was implemented immediately after independence. Even with zero percent Muslim vote there would have been no stopping of the Congress winning the parliamentary elections for the next two or three decades. So any suggestion that it didn’t reform because it thought the loss of Muslim vote meant loss of power sounds preposterous if we consider the existing situation.


Another greatest blunder or copy book Muslim appeasement appears to be in the case of Shah Bano. According to Subhashini Ali of the CPI(M), the Congress which had overwhelming majority in the parliament scared of losing power because of VP Singh’s rebellion and the Muslim protests triggered by the Shah Bano verdict. On top of it, Rajiv Gandhi’s senior figures told him they would lose the elections if they lose the Muslim votes. Since a communist has made those allegations it does sound correct about the Congress. If we dig further, however, one could observe that the supreme court verdict was overturned by passing an Act in 1986 but VP Singh’s crusade against the corrupt industrialists peaked in the late 1986 and he was shunted (or promoted) to defense ministry in 1987. So the argument that the VP Singh’s rebellion responsible for this Act appears bit shaky. Also, Arif Mohammad Khan, a strong proponent of Muslim reform and who was initially supported by Rajiv Gandhi to give a favourable speech in support of the Supreme Court verdict and left the party along with VP Singh to form their own party, didn’t consider VP Singh as one of the causes. He directly blames Hindu leaders of the Congress(along with some opportunistic Muslim members) who wanted nothing to do with the Muslim laws. Between Arif Mohammad Khan and Subhashini Ali, I would think the former would have had better idea of the situation being an insider.


Arif Mohammad Khan’s account gives consistency to the Congress policy since the independence. It’s a Hindu party and had no business interfering with the Muslims’ personal lives. Of course this is true only in the decades when it didn’t have to count on Muslim votes to win the elections. But now its quest for Muslim votes is hampered by the Hindutva narrative of Muslim appeasement harking back to an era when it was irrelevant for them to get the Muslim votes to win elections.


Nevertheless, its reluctance to interfere with the Muslim personal laws even without the consideration of Muslim votes doesn’t of course make that correct. What was the logic behind this thought process anyway? I remember reading a senior Congress figure(whose name unfortunately I have forgotten but who migrated to India from the present day Pakistan during the partition) that the Congress always expected the reformation to come within the Muslim community itself as had happened with Hindus historically (though he probably meant after the British rule). Again he probably identified himself as a reformed Hindu overcoming the bitterness of the partition.


In hindsight, that kind of thought process of all these Hindu leaders of the Congress has proved to be flawed. If we observe pure Muslim countries of the Arab lands, the reformation was forced by dictatorial or military power with varying degrees of success. In fact, even in India it was the reformed Hindu class that made these reforms possible as the average male Hindu was typically under-educated and backward thinking around that time. With no political power to make their own rules or the military might to force it, for the Muslim reformed class in India, this would have always been a non-starter.


References:
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...
https://scroll.in/article/730642/ar...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_M...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._P....

Random Thoughts : Ayurveda, Cancer and Keralites

From Pharyngula:

According to a study published Wednesday in Science Translational Medicine, traditional components of herbal remedies used throughout Asia are widely implicated in liver cancers there. In Taiwan, for instance, 78 percent of 98 liver tumors sampled displayed a pattern of mutations consistent with exposure to herbs containing aristolochic acids (AAs). These are carcinogenic components found in a variety of centuries-old herbal remedies said to treat everything from snakebites to gout, asthma, and pain.

Because of their toxicity, some (but not all) of the herbs and plants known to contain AAs have been banned in Taiwan and other places. These flora tend to come from the genera Aristolochia (e.g., birthwort, pipevine) and Asarum (wild gingers). The Food and Drug Administration has also issued several warnings and advisories over AA-containing remedies.

 There is already an old study similar to this which includes India too.

Herbal medicines are causing millions in India to develop kidney failure and bladder cancer.

So we have couple of studies consistently showing the relationship between cancer and herbal medicines. My understanding is that the incidences of cancer are on the rise among Keralites. And Keralites probably are one  of the biggest consumers of Ayurvedic medicine in India. There should be a proper study on this and we need to bring Ayurvedic medicines under proper scientific scrutiny. 

Lessons from Hillary's defeat - II

From Harvey Weinstein's episode, I would think many women didn't vote for Hillary as she didn't take a stance on Bill Clinton's sexual indiscretions which he could carry out because of his power and gender. For many women she was just a symbol and not a saviour against patriarchy. In developed countries like the USA women already have freedom to do almost all things. It's not the religious, cultural or legal diktats but the sexual harassment and sexism are something that still push them back. I believe many women didn't think Hillary could be of any help in this regard. In Bill Clinton's affairs with younger women who were under his power, she might have come across as someone who would maintain the status quo for other benefits. For them the glass ceiling wasn't the presidency but the last of remaining patriarchy in the form of sexism and sexual harassment.

Rise of Patriarchal Society - notes

I was reading this blog post at Pharyngula, then the following research by Mark van Vugt caught my eye.

They also suggest that this imbalance might have evolutionary roots and point to an idea called the male-warrior hypothesis, which states that men have evolved to form strong bonds with other males in their group because in the past this enabled them to defend territory from hostile attackers.

“Men are more ready to cooperate with genetic-stranger males to form these fighting coalitions,” says Mark van Vugt, an evolutionary psychologist at the Free University of Amsterdam who first suggested the theory in 2007.

 I had proposed  in a blog post in 2006 that men bonded at community level and women didn't in our hunter-gatherer past, which was one of the reasons for the rise of patriarchy.

Men -> community; woman -> family

Well, that's what I think. The men formed community and a woman formed a family. During our hunter-gatherer past men bonded but women missed(Are all women individualistic?).

But I'm not making any is-ought fallacy here. I'm not saying women are incapable of bonding but only that it didn't happen in our past and that's one of the reasons for the rise of patriarchy.

Gorakhanatha - a blast from the past

After I wrote “Tragedy of Mangale”, coincidentally, a person connected to the Natha cult is now in this region. The Gorakhnath Math is supposedly named after Gorakhanatha, the disciple of Machchendranatha, who spread the Natha cult in coastal region. Though as an independent movement it isn’t visible (I’ve heard there are few families part of this cult live in Tulu region), it’s supposed to have influenced Hinduism in this region(Malabar + Tulu). But what also fascinated me was how many religions and cults influenced this region in the past.

Like most of the regions in India or South India in particular, the dominant native cultural and religious trait of this region was spirit worship and fertility cults. But the literate superstitions of Hinduism, Jainism, Islam and Christianity soon dominated the illiterate superstitions of the Dravidian tribes subsequently also giving them different identities.

The most dominant religion, Hinduism, assimilated and made the spirits subordinate to their superior gods. The fertility goddesses were sometimes identified with the superior goddesses and at the same time were used to spread the patriarchal propaganda of ‘finding good husbands’. The core of Hinduism was imposition of the caste system, so it never had to confront the faceless cults of the local tribes.

Islam, which is the second biggest religion, didn’t really assimilate the local worship but turned blind eye to the spirit worship practices of the converts. Probably, the rise of fundamentalist Islam has moved the Muslims away from these traditions nowadays but in earlier times many of them used to be active participants. 

Jainism basically accommodated the spirit worship. It’s said that the “atheist” Jinaism had no issue with the worship of Yaksha-s and Yakshini-s (basically spirit worship). I don’t have much idea about this. 

The Dravidian Christianity is a very recent phenomenon in Tulu and northern Malabar region, so, I do not know much about them. But generally, Christianity frowned upon illiterate superstitions of the “pagans” and preferred their own literate superstitions.

Basically, two north Indian and two west Asian religions determine the religious identity of the people of this region. I wonder if that’s always the case with the spirit worshipping regions around the world.

I’ve read mostly about other Asian countries. It appears spirit worship in Mongolia, China and Japan lived along with Buddhism. However, in China the spirit worship tradition could become a literate superstition in the form of Taoism. Basically, Taoism includes the illiterate traditions along with philosophies. It looks like Chinese became literate and developed a philosophical tradition without any outside influence and that is reflected in their religious tradition too. 

Considering all four religions didn’t have to use force (though the caste system was imposition but the tribal chieftains/kings had typically invited the Brahmins), I wonder if there had been a literate tradition of the spirit worship whether there would have been a population with an independent identity like Taoists. Also, in spirit worship the priest/ess isn’t special or his/her position isn’t exalted. He/She’s just a medium for the spirit to communicate. This is unlike the position of the priests in literate religions. As literate followers, I wonder, how this idea of a commoner priest would have affected society in general.

Anyway, now north India’s literacy advantage is no longer there. So, any kind of overawe that the Dravidian tribes of the yesteryears felt is no longer the case. In fact, in literacy rate, the spirit worshipping and fertility cult regions of Tuluvas and Malayalis fare far better than the North. However, there are many ways to influence people. I wonder Adityanath’s chances in leaving a lasting impression here like the legendary Machchendra and Gorakha even though for entirely different reasons.

Tragedy of Mangale

As with most of the Hindu festivals, the celebration of Navaratri and Vijayadashami varies from place to place. While this is not a surprising feature as each region had their own unique traditions and ethos which were subsumed in the caste system, the interesting part is how the stories/myths are interpreted at later time. Today is supposedly Mangala Devi’s day (the city of Mangaluru was named after this goddess).

The legend of Mangale (or Pingale) that I know is as follows. Mangale was a queen of some Malayali kingdom in Malabar(northern Kerala). The kingdom was described as ‘Pramila Rajya’ (ruled exclusively by women). She fell in love with a disciple of Machchendranatha, exponent of the Natha cult. As these were ascetics, she renounced her kingdom, followed them to Tulu region as a common woman. In due time, she gave birth to two children. One day, when Machchendranatha was doing penance, he was disturbed by the loud noise of the children playing. He asked his disciple to calm them down so he could concentrate. The disciple felt that the children were a nuisance to his guru and so he murdered them by smashing their heads against a boulder. Mangale, when she came to know the death of her children, was broken-hearted and died. She was deified by the local people.

The story of Mangale was basically a tragedy. By present day standards, one could fault her for falling for a patriarchal man even though she was from a matrilineal/matriarchal group. But it all depends on between sacrifice for love or sacrifice for identity, which, one views as a nobler cause. The deification of such tragedy figures was generally a defining feature of underprivileged castes who recognized tragedy more than they could recognize triumph. Generally, the popularity of such local divine figures ensured their entry into the caste Hinduism. But as usual even this also got reinterpreted according to Brahmanical ethos.

You can read the Brahmanical version here. Apart from the mandatory Parashurama entry, one can observe that there is hardly anything about the deity itself. Then there is a patriarchal bit about finding 'good husbands'. When I read about the description of this goddess in a forwarded message recently, I felt the write up was commissioned by Jewelry shop owners.  It describes how resplendent she is with all the decorations, wearing a crown, full jewelry and a pink sari in those ten days of the festival. Mangale, in the above legend where she did have a back story, had renounced everything to be with her love.

The Natha cult, I suppose, wasn't part of the Vedic tradition. So the story I heard would be most likely the version they created. The bare bones story could be an unknown woman losing her children violently and dying in sorrow. Such tragic figures are deified in the local traditions. I wonder whether the purity of their pain makes them special. But this is not the story the descendants of those local people of bygone era would like to know.

I suppose Max Weber, pioneer in Sociology, observed that the descendants of the privileged people view the past with nostalgia whereas descendants of the oppressed people look to the future with sehnsucht. But when I read the forwards sent by the underprivileged castes, brainwashed by Hindutva, I don’t see sehnsucht but the nostalgia of the privileged castes. The tragedy of Mangale continues.

Foraging behavior of man

If you are a man, you will mostly have a corner in your cupboard (or elsewhere at home) where you store things that are generally termed as junk. It can be packing material, wood shavings, screws, old pens, old locks whose keys are misplaced or keys whose locks are missing for years etc. etc. which are better thrown away.  When something needs to be fixed at home, you go to this corner and try to find something that fits the bill. Recently I broke a tap and had to close the hole using a polythene cover and an old pen till the plumber came and fixed it. Once the tap was replaced, the old pen went back to it's old place.

I think what I am displaying by collecting all junk is a vestige of the foraging behavior of our ancestors. Cavemen, when foraging for food, would also pick stones that they plan to chisel into a knife like tool or a piece of wood that can make a good spear. When things were difficult to find, storing things made sense. Today, when everything can be easily bought off the shelf, I think it's just a habit that's coded in the genes. (I'm sure women don't do this, they have gotten over this.)

Idea of a Nation - vi

I wonder whether hardening of anti-immigrant sentiments in the developed countries portend similar social curve in India too. Or are the social dynamics entirely different so that India would be insulated from it? What are the social dynamics in India now anyway?

In many states of India, the proportionate of the population looking for non agricultural jobs has grown substantially in recent times because of improving literacy. However, as the country makes a transition from socialist economy to Keynesian(?) economy the government job opportunities have come down substantially.

Because of huge population, the effective population that applies for jobs is also huge. The poorer states have bigger population than relatively prosperous states. So, the effective competent population from poorer states that fight for jobs is always going to be higher. Unfortunately, such dynamics exist in case of the castes too.

Comparing with the situation in developed countries, one could observe that some of the states in southern India, without reaching the level of prosperity or the quality of life of the European countries, show common factors like low birthrate and immigration. If you compare with Britain, where the immigrants would anyway adopt English, the dominant and privileged position of Hindi in India would hinder the assimilation of the immigrants with the local population (along with the caste system, which though divides the local population itself).

With this background, I wonder whether anti-immigrant voices would become dominant in the states that have job opportunities but aren't developed as much as some of the European countries.

In Europe, the anti-immigrant feeling goes hand in hand with right-wing mentality. However, that's not so in case of southern India. In fact, regional identity is anathema to Hindutva right-wing scheme of things. Nevertheless, the anti-immigrant feeling would be identified with linguistic right-wing thought.

There lies the tragedy. The population that would feel insecure would be overwhelmingly from OBCs and Dalits in any state. In fact, they would even fear the immigration from any other states, north or south divisions notwithstanding. So a set of population, which took generations to come to the mainstream, now finds itself in the kind of competition which the privileged castes never faced when they moved to civilized and scientific world with the advent of modern education in India. Thus while the privileged castes have the means to overcome the competition with that cultural capital, the OBCs and Dalits might struggle thus continuing their overall situation.

I wonder whether one of the solutions to this could be creating an Indian Union with autonomous states. True, the European Union gave rise to anti-immigrant feeling in Britain. However, this is still a good solution in Indian context, if you consider the fact that autonomous states will have a bigger government also providing more representations to the locals in various fields. Thus an autonomous state could act as an employer to a greater number of local people.

This will also ensure that we'll have a single currency, market and open borders. In case of India, a single military too.

An Indian Union will curb  or at least delay the development of linguistic right-wing thought in our society.

Random Thoughts - Education System

Many of us have to make up our mind about the field we are going to chose for the rest of our lives after 10 years of schooling. I believe some (if not  most) of us are confused or lack the passion for any particular field at that age. Nevertheless, we are forced to focus on certain fields even though it may include few topics which are there for students to choose more than one field. Also, once you complete two years of PUC (+2), you choose a field based on your marks. This sort of creates an academic class system.

Instead we need to have a 'Chaos University' where every subject under the sun are taught. So, you have engineering topics sharing space with law and history, pure sciences with arts and vocational courses and so on. Students are allowed to take credit courses in any random order until the day they decide whether they want to become a linguist, musician, scientist, mathematician, engineer or doctor. Maybe, mastering one or two (depending on number of  years of their stay) vocational courses might be made obligatory. A student can stay a maximum of 10 years in the university. Basically, I'm trying to realize MOOC in real world.

I think one can join the university immediately after their 10th. I don't see why there should be additional two years in this system.

Random Thoughts - Scientific temperament

The following experiments could be a total waste for any practical purposes but to improve the scientific temperament in our country are totally necessary.

1. Getting a job with or without praying 

 - Praying group along with preparing and appearing for the job interviews went to religious places regularly and made vows if they landed one

 - Control group only prepared and appeared for the job interviews

2. Having a child with or without praying

 - Praying group along with trying different fertility measures went to religious places regularly and made vows if they had one

 - Control group only tried different fertility measures

Usefulness of Genetic Horoscope - IV_a

According to my SNP based traits, I'm a morning person. However, in my opinion, I'm neither. Now, another research says, morning persons are more likely to see 'the dress' as white and gold. Well,  I indeed saw it as white and gold. Time to change my life routine completely then.

A Tulu Spirit and contemporary incidents

For some reason, the life of Radhika/Rohith Vemula reminds me the legend of one of the Tulu spirit(daiva)s, Kordabbu (Kodi Kandala Babbu).

Babbu was born in an underprivileged(Dalit) family but was adopted by a privileged(Bunt) family. But unlike Radhika Vemula’s adoptive parents(relatively privileged), Babbu’s parents actually took care of him. His nature blossomed in the nurture of his privileged family and he grew up into a brilliant man. However, just like Radhika/Rohith, Babbu couldn’t escape the reality of being a Dalit. His excellence in life wasn’t tolerated by the privileged castes and they tried to kill him. His adoptive parents were helpless.

Many spirits in Tulu and Malayalam regions have similar stories. Men and women from underprivileged castes becoming victims of the caste prejudice. Since the spirit media mostly come from the same castes, Marxists theorists opine that, it’s a way for underprivileged castes to create a safe space for themselves in the casteist oppressive regions. While Brahmin priests controlled the evil ghosts to have a hegemonic control over the population, Dalit spirit priests, created benevolent/malevolent spirits to protect themselves from privileged caste oppression.

In Tulu regions, Spirit is also called ‘Satya’ or truth. I suppose it’s about the words that the spirit says through the medium. However, the stories behind these spirits in fact opens us to many ‘Satya-s’ about the society.

Sometimes I wonder whether the legend of Kordabbu is just a case against casteism or something more. 

As I mentioned above, the privileged caste tried to kill Babbu as they couldn’t stomach a Dalit excelling in life. They threw him into a well and covered the top with a stone. He cries for help. A woman called Tanniga Maniga comes to the rescue. She destroys the stone and throws her sari down for him to climb up. She asks him not to look at her uncovered body. However, he does. Later, he accepts his mistake and undergoes punishment.

So even though, Kordabbu becomes a spirit or daiva, he’s not blemishless. The story doesn’t end as a mirror of casteism, it goes further. It shows even the champion of the anti-casteism isn’t beyond committing sexism on his own. Reminds me the allegations against the director of Sairat.

I suppose the truths of casteism and sexism that those Dalit thinkers of the yesteryear wanted to convey through these daivas had lost in their utilitarian purposes.

True Capitalist Society - III

When Ian Grillot tried to intervene in the racist attack against two Indians, he wasn't giving blue prints for free market economy. He was Chernyshevsky's ideal male at that point of time.

The ideologies of present day society require new terminologies. The traditional right and left no longer holds good to describe the present political structures. The terms like centre-right, centre-left or centrist make no sense. It's as if, they are a compromize when in fact they represent evolved ideologies.

Previously, the right used religion to control the poor and supported free market economy. The left used economic disparity to organize the poor and working class and strived for secular socialist society. Now, the left has adopted a Keynesian economics (though nobody knows the tenets of capitalism in the first place, apart from the uncontrolled greed) and the right has added populism to their religiosity to bring the poor and the working class to their fold.

Usefulness of Genetic Horoscope - IV

The DNA Land guesses some of the traits based on the SNPs. It's a mixed bag for me.

1. Circadian rhythm: I'm  'likely a morning person'. In my opinion, I'm neither.

2. Coffee: It says 'lower than average consumption'. But I'm not sure whether it asks me to consume fewer cups or I'm destined to drink fewer cups(which I'm not). However, I cut down my coffee consumption after I came to know that I metabolize caffeine slower than the average (which is bad for cardiovascular health, supposedly).

3. Educational Attainment: It seems my genes predict 14.1 years of education(which is actually lower than the number of years that I've put, 18). However, I tend to agree with the prediction here. I tend to believe I do have interest in learning things but not in the kind of education system that we have. However, I don't clearly have the alternatives too.

4. Neuroticism: I've a 'low tendency towards neuroticism'. By definition,

Neuroticism is one of the personality traits included in the commonly-used five factor model and is defined as having a tendency to experience negative emotions, such as anxiety, depression, excessive shyness and self-consciousness, and difficulty dealing with stress. 

 Not sure. I think I do feel 'guilt' and 'anxiety' even though not to the extent that disrupts my life but which certainly hinders me to undertake anything that involves risk.

5. Eye Colour: I'm 'likely to have brown eyes'. If by brown they mean black then it's correct.

6. Height: It says I'm 'likely to be short'. I agree. Then they go on putting a number to that, 152cm, with a 'fair' confidence. I'm just euphoric. I've beaten that by a good 19cm.

7. Nearsightedness: As it predicts I'm 'slightly nearsighted'. The number they put is -1.7 diopters. This is close to my right eye power (-1.75) whereas my left eye is -0.5.