Election Day

It is finally here - February 9, 2016.

It is always so thrilling to vote - it is exhilarating to see democracy in action!

Young, old, white, black, asian, everyone was there, and from all walks of life.   I saw my plumber's truck, neighbors, people with walkers, my former state representatives.  Ah, democracy.  Lots of families came to vote with their young children.   I think the turnout is going to be huge.

My voting precint was buzzing with activity, with several news media folks (I recognized a few).  Just as I walked in, Kasich was leaving, which was probably why the press was there.

What fun!   Looking forward to seeing the results tonight.

Organizing for Hillary

My friend and I drove to Milford to an Organizing for Hillary rally, where Bill Clinton was going to speak.  The event was scheduled to be from 2.30 – 5.30, but I didn’t want to stay for 3 whole hours.  I imagined lots of surrogates would speak before and after.  So when I saw in The Telegraph that Bill Clinton was going to be there at 3.30, I was keen to go only at around 3.30, and happily my friend felt the same.  My only concern was parking.  If we went late we were sure to have to park somewhere far away and walk.  The Clinton campaign was probably organized enough to ensure parking for everyone so we would at least get parking.

It would be exciting to see the press.  Maybe I would see PBS’ Judy Woodruff who was in NH for the weekend.

We got to Milford Middle School, and the number of cars didn’t seem that many.  We were able to park close to the entrance.  Inside, they would not let us get beyond the welcome table without adding our name to the signup sheet.  I didn’t want to sign up, I was just there to hear Bill Clinton speak, but I just couldn’t get past the table.  We signed in and went in, and I was surprised by the size of the room.  It wasn’t all that big.  And it was only about half full.  And among the people there, half of them seemed to be either the press or core Hillary volunteers.

We were a little taken aback.  We had expected a much larger crowd. 

Bill Clinton was introduced by Mayor Jim Donchess of Nashua, and then he spoke.  As usual he was eloquent, describing various Hillary achievements.  The crowd clapped but was overall subdued.  The sense in the room was, to my mind: “We are the team that supports the all democratic causes.  Hillary has done so much, accomplished much that is dear to democratic hearts, and has an agenda we want.  Why is everyone with the other guy?”

Jeb Bush

Jeb Bush was coming right here to Broad Street Elementary School, about 100 feet away from my home.  Well, I figured this is an event I should go to, just for the fun of seeing retail politics up close.

 

It was more elaborate than I expected, with the full Bush entourage in tow.  Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins, Bush, his wife, his son were all there.  Lindsey Graham spoke first, followed by Susan Collins.  And then Bush spoke.

It is always surprising how more cogent their arguments appear when heard in full, and not as snippets  on TV.  And one’s own analysis always has new insights for one rather than just reading the op-ed writers.  The audience was surprisingly moderate, and Jeb Bush was surprisingly moderate.  A question was, “do you agree there is climate change, some people seem unable to accept that?”  Jeb Bush’s response was, “yes definitely there is climate change, and one of the reasons is human impact.”   Wow.  I didn’t think Republicans agreed to even this much.

It was a standing room only crowd, and I found a spot at the back.  The group standing next to me were clearly neighbors and knew each other.  They talked about another neighbor who was going to vote for Sanders, but without the derision I would have expected, especially when compared to the anger with which they spoke of Hillary.  “She is liar,” he said flatly, and went into details of the Benghazi incident. “She will lie about what she ate for breakfast if it suits her.”

Most of the questions were moderate (except one on immigration), including one on from a pastor from rural Pennsylvania who forcefully described poor people (“138% below the poverty line, they were ‘dying’ with lack of healthcare”) who had been able to get healthcare from the Affordable Care Act, and wanted to know what the answer was for them if that was changed.  Bush actually listed a couple of things he liked in the ACA (coverage for pre-existing conditions and coverage till children are 26) and said he would keep them, while changing other aspects of the law.  And he talked about keeping costs down, etc. etc.  Another question was from someone who works with a literacy non-profit and demanded to know what the answer was for the poor today.  “When you and I were young,” she said, “everyone had chance.  What can I tell them now?”  Bush called out to his sister in the audience, who runs a literacy foundation, and talked about various changes needed in the education system.

His primary focus education system is the lack of testing and lack of any measure to see whether a child has learnt what he or she should have learnt in that grade.  He talked about the testing measures he had introduced in Florida, and one questioner called him up on that, and asked him isn’t that a runaway train with no control?  Wasn’t it too much testing?  Bush stuck to what he said about testing being important to ensure that every child learns.

His biggest applause came when he said, “on the first day of office I give you my word that I will not blame President Obama.  Unlike the president, who blamed my brother for everything.”  Moderate though the crowd was, they clearly strongly disliked Obama.

The next biggest applause came when he laughed at Trump, and said (in response to Trump’s comment at the debate last night), “no, Trump, _you_ are the loser.”  Lots of other anti-Trump lines brought forth applause as well.

The third biggest applause was when he took a dig at Hillary Clinton. 

The audience was almost liberal, except when it came to America’s position in the world (and approval of Obama).  They were very much for a notion that “America should lead,” America knows best, and America should resolve conflicts, etc. etc.  

The most interesting conversation was with an Asian woman in a smart green jacket standing next to me.  She had come all the way from Florida to volunteer for the Bush campaign.  She had been in Iowa as well.  She said he was the best governor they had had.  I asked her specifically what she liked.  One, she said, was that he made government more efficient.  She and her husband have two small businesses, LOCs, and she made it so much more easier to do things after Bush made some changes.  In places like California and Delaware, she said, there was so much more paperwork, and one had to mail in forms, whereas in Florida now they could do it all online.  “He made things efficient with IT, like he says on the campaign trail!” she said.   “It made our lives so much easier!”  I nodded, and asked for more.  The next big achievement to her was education.  She said her son’s best friend, an African American, was in a poor neighborhood, and consequently in a poor school.  He was about move to a charter school and was now doing extremely well.  “What about the idea that en masse movement of students from public schools further hurts the poor schools?” I asked.  “Anyone who wants to leave can leave,” she said.  “You know, anyone can leave.”  We talked some more on the topic, and she believes in taking personal responsibility, which is in line with what I have observed in Asian families.  They work hard, take nothing for granted, do everything for their children to help them succeed.  She proudly mentioned her son who goes to Philips Academy in Andover, MA (an elite private school).

She and her husband were going to South Carolina next.  It was hard to fault her for her support of Jeb Bush.  It had worked for her.

The 2016 Election

After all my excitement and involvement in previous primary seasons, I mostly sat out this election cycle.  The Republicans were all repugnant, Hillary seemed the anointed democratic nominee.  I wasn’t inspired to even attend rallies.  Sanders coming on the scene was interesting, I knew him as a liberal and an Independent, but I did not expect him to win.

Week after week I looked presidential candidate visit schedules, but just couldn’t motivate myself to go.  They never said what they meant.  They just said things to get votes.  And if they won, other influences took over.

I religiously followed the debates, which is as entertaining to me as football is to some.  And I generally followed the race.

And then, after seeing Sanders in debates and reading about him I began to Feel the Bern.  The Iowa results and speech clinched it.  I would have voted for him anyway, but that made me Feel the Bern!  I began to feel a bit of the old spark.

President Obama: Your support for Prime Minister Modi

Dear President Obama,

I volunteered for your campaign, and voted for you.

I am not naïve, I understand that real change is hard.  I understand that you have to balance multiple factions and multiple interests.  I know that an emotionally stirring speech cannot change the world any more than the wave of a wand can.   I understand that Republicans in Congress have been against you every step of the way.   I understand that you have to compromise for political expediency.

But I thought you would not fundamentally go against your character.  Which is why I do not understand your endorsement of Indian Prime Minister Modi.

Maybe you had to ignore the blood on his hands from the 2002 Gujarat riots because the US needed to engage with India when he became prime minister.

But your continued warm encouragement, endorsement, and ‘friendship’ with him is not acceptable.

The right wing pro-Hindutva groups are gaining more and more prominence.  He and his administration support their actions, turning a blind eye to even the most inflammatory events.  Free speech is being eroded.  Heads of key institutions are being changed.   He and his supporters want to re-write history and change the fundamental fabric of the nation as a secular country with great tolerance for every culture and with a voice for everyone.  It attacks the very foundation of India.  This will impact India for generations to come.

As one example, here is a recent article in a well-respected newspaper (which also highlights his silence on the lynching of a Muslim in September):  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/world/asia/india-writers-return-awards-to-protest-government-silence-on-violence.html?_r=0

Your endorsement carries great weight in India.  You chose to visit India under PM Modi on Republic Day, when the Modi administration policies are attacking the very values enshrined in the constitution that made India a Republic.  Your welcome of him in Spring 2015 played a large role in India’s excitement with Modi.   These actions are cited by Modi supporters as Modi’s successes.  Your support of PM Modi in the Times influential people’s list, by writing a warm personal profile, was the last straw. These actions shut the voices of people who are trying to highlight actions by Modi and his administration.  

You might have to engage with him as a leader, but to support him as warmly as you have been doing?

You once said if you had a choice to have dinner with someone it would be Mahatma Gandhi.   At the dinner Mahatma Gandhi would have asked you, “My dear Barack, how can you endorse him?”

I hope it is not your character that says you should support him, but your politics.  I would be even more disappointed if you truly believed that PM Modi is a great man.

It is good that you are not running for office again.   You have lost my vote.

Strange ...

It is really rich that Republicans are talking about income inequality.   And they have the cheek to say that it is Obama's policies that have resulted in the top 1% benefiting from the economic recovery!!   This after they stopped Obama at every step, on any measure he tried to take to address serious inequality.  And have severely eroded resources that enable equal opportunities for all.  What do they think we are all smoking?  

On 60 minutes on January 25, 2015 (paraphrased):

Interviewer Scott Pelley: Do you support raising taxes on the wealthy?
Republicans Boehner and McConnell: No.

Interviewer: Do you support the President's initiative for free community colleges?
Republicans: No.

Interviewer: How about raising the minimum wage?
Republicans: Bad idea.

Interviewer: Do you support increasing the child care tax credit?
Republicans: Well ... we will think about it.

How in the world can we address inequality without access to education, a living wage, and a host of other things?

How?

Republicans speaking about income inequality is the most blatant political shift ever.

The View is Different Depending on where you Sit

The excitement among Indian immigrants in the United States on the election of Mr. Narendra Modi as Prime Minister of India is nearly eclipsed by the exuberance on his visit to the United States this week.  Welcome carpets are being rolled out as Indian organizations and communities fall over themselves to welcome Mr. Modi to the United States.   Giddy at the thought of the United States inviting Mr. Modi after rejecting his visa 9 years ago over sectarian violence, my Indian friends and acquaintances, Indian community leaders, and Indian immigrants young and old are reveling in the excitement, seeing it as a personal triumph.

“Proud to be an Indian,” is a repeated sentiment on Facebook pages and websites devoted to this visit.  “Strongest PM of India,” “a true patriot,” “strong leader” are equally popular themes in community dinners, Indian conversation circles, news articles and social media.  The community event planned at Madison Square Garden is packed to capacity and promises to be a mega event with high profile community members in attendance.   Almost every day the last few weeks I have found an email related to this event in my mailbox, or come across an article in an Indian news outlet, or heard someone I know mention it with glee.

Mr. Modi is seen as the leader who will raise India up to be an economic power by accelerating the pace of development.  He is seen as a strong leader, who will brook no opposition from anyone, and who will crush any effort to stop India’s march towards its rightful place near the top of the hierarchy of nations.  Detractors like environmental activists and advocates for the poor prevent India’s progress, these supporters of Mr. Modi argue.  We need an iron fist ruling India, otherwise we will be mired in stagnation, they say.  Some go to the extent of saying India needs a dictator, who keeps moving ahead no matter what.

Closely aligned to this desire for India to be a superpower is the glittering promise of a Hindu India.  The notion of Hindu India, engineered and propagated by Mr. Modi’s party, is seen as rightfully reflecting the majority of the country (India is 80% Hindu, if all the strands and layers of Hinduism are counted as one). It is perceived as a long overdue recognition that values and ideals born of Hinduism should define India.  This push towards dominance of the majority Hindu community necessarily puts down minorities, in particular Muslims.  Pro-Hindu goals go hand in hand with anti-Muslim sentiments.

This is paradoxical.  And hypocritical.

The Indian immigrant community in the United States is very successful at many levels.  They are a minority – including all people of Indian descent they number at just over 3 million, or about 1% of the US population.  The Indian immigrant community (first generation immigrants) is even smaller. Like most immigrants, they are hardworking, have a strong work ethic, have an unshakeable belief in the value of education for themselves and their children, and have close-knit families and communities.  These values, which they bring with them to the United States, are building blocks for a foundation that has led to success in many fields.

This foundation, and the consequent success, has been built on the bedrock of some quintessential American values.  There are two values of significance here.   First is the multi-cultural ethos of the United States that accepts people who are different, and at a personal level is warm and embracing of people from other cultures.   The second is the recognition of the importance of minority rights.  Anyone living in the United States, whichever community they come from, has the right to follow their values, practice their religion, define their own identity, and educate their children the way they wish to.

68% of Indian Americans voted for President Obama.  The percentage of first generation Indian immigrants who voted for him is probably much higher.  Immigrant communities generally support democrats, in addition Mr. Obama was popular since he was not from the majority community.  Indian immigrants welcomed him as a fellow minority.  But paradoxically, in the country where they grew up they support a leader from a party whose ideology is based on stamping out minorities and rallying around a “unifying” (dominant) identity.   Electing Mr. Modi is in many ways like electing Mr. Rick Perry to be the president of the United States.   I suspect very few Indian immigrants would vote for Mr. Perry, yet they are excited about Mr. Modi leading India.  Several Indian immigrants who volunteered for Mr. Obama’s campaign eagerly took the lessons learnt in grassroots campaigning and new technology based tools to campaigns in India – but to campaigns that supported Mr. Modi on the right rather than candidates on the left.

When President Obama celebrated Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights, in the White House, jubilation erupted in the Indian American community.  “Mr. Obama lighted a lamp in the White House!” they exulted.  “Imagine that!  We have arrived – Diwali in the White House!”  Yet when Mr. Modi, for the first time in independent India, chose not to celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr by hosting a dinner for fellow Muslim lawmakers, breaking a time honored tradition, there was virtually no comment. 

Every region in the United States with an Indian population has centers for children to learn Indian languages, Indian history and culture, and the Indian fine arts.   Weekends find many an Indian parent ferrying children from dance class to music class to language class.    The desire to keep their children connected to their identity runs deep. The parents welcome multiculturalism in American society, and the ability to have an Indian (or Hindu) identity even if they are a small minority.

An avowedly Christian America would be alarming, but a Hindu India is not.  Public education is secular in America, so the children here are not under pressure to conform to the dominant religious identity.  I can just imagine the outcry from the Indian community if public schools became predominantly Christian and began infusing values considered Christian.  Yet they see nothing wrong bringing in a distinct Hindu bias to education in India.   Particularly egregious is the subtle introduction of Hindu values under the guise of helping educate the severely disadvantaged, as in the case of education of tribals (aboriginals), a minority at 7% of the Indian population.  It moves them away from their roots, their culture, their identity.

Indian parents welcome choices their children have in the United States, and yet, when Mr. Modi’s government attempted to make it mandatory for all children to listen to his Teacher’s Day speech, no one seemed to think anything was amiss.

Indian immigrants enjoy the benefits of an open and pluralistic society where they can thrive while maintaining their identity, where the law declares everyone is equal and institutions protect that most precious law for majority and minority communities.  They see how they can further their hopes and dreams when public infrastructure benefits all, not just the majority, and does not require them to lose their identity.   They take to heart Lincoln’s words, “…dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

Yet in India, where they identify with the majority, they forget that everyone is equal is enshrined in the Indian constitution too.  They forget the great lengths the founding fathers of modern India went to embed rights for minorities in the fabric of the new nation.  The struggles of competing interests, the vital part of any democracy, is seen as something that is holding India back.   The rights of minorities is seen as infringing on the majority.  The sacrifices of the less powerful and smaller in number for the greater common good is expected, often demanded.  For instance, for water in Gujarat hundreds of thousands of tribals were displaced by dams across the Narmada river.   But the majority of Indians in the United States consider the decades long protest by the tribals much ado about nothing, and something a ‘strong’ leader like Mr. Modi should fix.  A dictator can ‘fix’ it indeed!

Campaigners of Mr. Modi’s party have gone so far as to say people who do not agree with Mr. Modi should leave India.   If Mr. Rick Perry is elected president of the United States and conservative Republicans ask immigrant communities who do not like his policies to leave, the Indian immigrant community would be the first to make use of every avenue offered to them in this democratic society to fight what was unfair to those who didn't toe the line of the majority. 

The view sure looks different depending on which window you look out of.

The final irony is that multi-culturalism is not a new concept in India.  With over 800 languages, innumerable cultures, ten major religions and scores of smaller ones, India has been the home to thousands of groups, who have lived together, worked together, influenced each other, and learnt from each other, for millennia.   In much the same way that Indian immigrants appreciate what the United States has to offer for everyone, India is a place where minorities have lived harmoniously with the majority.

Almost a century ago my grandfather, with no assets to his name, started a business in a new town.  He knew no one, as there was no one there from his community.  He was a “minority” in that town.  He first rented a piece of land from a Muslim businessman, who also gave him credit because he instinctively trusted him.  My grandfather’s honesty, intelligence, and business acumen so impressed this businessman he took him on as his protégé and they became fast friends as long as they lived.  My grandfather’s family sent over plates full of sweets on Hindu festivals and on Muslim festivals received dishes heaped with lamb and fish delicacies.  They respected each other till the end and did business together.  The town continues to have Muslims, Hindus, and people from other communities.  I remember waking up to the Muslim call for prayer when I visited as a child, and Muslims and Hindus peacefully negotiating prayer times at the temples and the mosques in town.  India has had its share of strife - the horrors of Hindu-Muslim riots in 1947 and the violence in Gujarat in 2002 are just two examples - but it also has plenty of towns like my grandfather’s town. 

That is the view to look for.

Voters and Town Hall Meetings

Every town hall meeting seems packed. Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, New Gingrich, Rick Santorum all draw full audiences (though of course the respective campaigns carefully choose venues depending on the expected crowds to ensure the venues look full). Even Jon Huntsman is drawing decent crowds. Looking at the events, one would think this is a multi-way race, and that all the candidates will get similar number of votes.

But the key point is not all voters attend town hall meetings. Most see some ads, look at some news, look at endorsements. And they cause elections to turn a certain way. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone who voted attended a town hall meeting? An informed voter is the best voter.

Some time ago when we had a local community meeting to decide whether we should have a rotary or traffic lights at a nearby intersection, folks who attended really knew the pros and cons. They had done their research. It was a lively and informed dialogue. It is a pity that all voters are not able spend the time understanding all dimensions of issues and candidates. A democracy can only work well when everyone is equally well-informed and invested in the process! I can't blame it all on lack of interest - people who need 2 or more jobs to make ends meet simply do not have the time.

Pride

People have such pride in their country. A veteran at a Newt Gingrich meeting asked for an autograph on a photo of himself and Newt in 1995. He choked in front of the whole group, so proud was he of getting his picture with the speaker of the house when was in service.

With pride comes the real deep concern that the country they take so much pride in is changing to something they are not familiar with, to something different. The country they grew up in is what they are familiar with, and they so firmly believe that that is the right way. They might not know much about other models. They want to elect leaders who will continue the country they take pride in will continue to be the same.

This veteran had pride in his country and leaders, it was sad to see how un-leader like politicians really are. Concerned only about themselves, not the country and the people.

Fear. Strength. Best place in the world.

Fear works miraculously well in an election. Nothing attracts a voter to a leader like the feeling that that leader will protect them in a dangerous situation. To feel the warmth of protection, one has to feel fear first. So, Iran.

Strong is another word that resonates. We should not be weak, but should be strong, parrot politicians. Strong, standing up to bullies, bad people. We should be able to stare down people over the barrel of a gun. We should not be seen as weak in the eyes of the world, but strong. Strong, so that noone dares to do anything against us.

Prosperity for children and grand children is good, but nothing like the feeling that we live in the best place in the world to achieve it. It is not nice to think that there are other countries in the world which might more successful. We are the most successful people. This experiment, America, is by far the most successful country in the world. How can it possible go wrong or need changing? We won't face that.

The Republican Primaries are in New Hampshire

After all the action in Iowa, the candidates have all landed in New Hampshire. The action here has been mostly muted till now, probably because Romney is the perceived front runner, given that he was the governor of Massachusetts. Jon Huntsman has been living in the state, and the local Nashua Telegraph interviewed all the candidates, both the well-known and the lesser-known ones (this time they held some interviews at Nashua High School, with students organizing the whole thing and telecasting them live on the internet - pretty cool). Standard primary stuff, but the buzz was missing, the buzz of having most of the state and also national attention focused on the race.

After Iowa, the buzz is here. The fun begins for primary watchers like me!

January 4, 2012.

Great speech

I thought this part of Obama's Labor Day speech at Milwaukee was brilliant. “They drove our economy into a ditch. And we got in there and put on our boots and we pushed and we shoved. And we were sweating and these guys were standing, watching us and sipping on a Slurpee.And they were pointing at us saying, how come you’re not pushing harder, how come you’re not pushing faster? And then when we finally got the car up -- and it’s got a few dings and a few dents, it’s got some mud on it, we’re going to have to do some work on it -- they point to everybody and say, look what these guys did to your car. After we got it out of the ditch! And then they got the nerve to ask for the keys back!"

Simply and crisply makes the point.

However some bloggers have pointed out that this could alienate voters as it presents a picture of the economy having only a few dings .... for some people it is a lot worse.

Still, a good speech. I wonder how much input Obama gives to his speech writers - how much creativity come from him and how much from the speech writers?

Questioning candidates

It is amazing to me that the Tea Party candidates refuse interviews and choose to speak to only "friendly" reporters. Is it because they don't have the confidence in their views to have a dialogue on them? If they cannot discuss their views with a reporter how will they listen to alternate points of view if and when they govern? My first thought that it is extremely unacceptable for any candidate to refuse questions from any reporter.

But then is the point that reporters are partisan and the media will spin things out of control? Did I want candidate Obama to be interviewed by Rush Limbaugh and have him quoted out of context for a zillion news cycles?

When you look at it in the abstract, it is unfortunate that detailed dialogue, especially with people who hold an opposing point of view, is avoided while running for office. It reminds me of a situation when a co-founder of an organization I volunteer for was severely criticized for speaking at event organized by a group many didn't approve off. His answer to them was that he saw no harm in speaking at any forum he is invited to speak at - whether it is to the left or the right or somewhere in the middle. Any forum is a place to talk about his views, and answer questions on his views. That seems mature compared to political candidates refusing to answer questions from people they don't agree with.

I think it at least partly comes down to the fact that voters do not take the time to go through the fluff and logically discuss issues and weigh candidate positions. They get carried away by media storms.

Tea Party Momentum

I have been telling friends and family that the Tea Party enthusiasm is going to backfire on the conservatives. The Tea Party might be successful in getting their candidates win primaries, but in the general election this will help the democrats because mainstream America will simply not vote for the Tea Party candidates. They will either stay home or vote for democrats. But then comes the news that in the last quarter the republican candidates (including the Tea Party candidates) have raised more funds than the democrats and the democrats are really struggling ....Is my faith in mainstream America misplaced? I would be surprised if 'mainstream America' has moved this much to the right.

Local Elections

My father had assumed that I would vote in the local elections (equivalent to the municipal elections in Indian cities). He was surprised that I came home without voting, and that I had not talked about it much. "You always jump about when there are elections, you get so excited", he said.

I didn't vote because I just didn't have the time to read up on the candidates. I didn't think it made sense to vote when I barely knew anything about the candidates.

Why didn't I have the time? I just got busy with work stuff. My corporate world encroached on my citizen participation. Democracy is time-consuming. Does unbridled capitalism leave time for real engaged participation in democracy?

"It is not flashy, but election might change power in city", as the local paper The Telegraph put it. I should have participated.

Uplifting SlumDog Millionaire

Uplifting. This term is being used fairly commonly to describe the movie SlumDog Millionaire. The movie is ‘uplifting’ because in spite of all the trials and tribulations Jamal undergoes the movie ends happily for him, causing people to leave the theater on a high note. But I take serious issue with that particular happy ending. My friend put it well when she said, “Everything bad that happens to him is because people do bad things to him. But everything good that happens to him is by accident”. In other words everything is against him; he only escapes his difficult childhood because 'it is written'. To me this implies a message that you have to be lucky to aspire for a different life than the one you are born into. If one accepts that thought, then one accepts status quo when it comes to the disadvantaged and underprivileged people in the world today. There are millions of people are being exploited, but there are always people who will escape their circumstances through sheer luck. I volunteer for Asha (http://www.ashanet.org/) because I am not happy with the small number who escape through sheer luck – I want everyone, or as many children as possible, to have the opportunities to improve themselves.

As the movie progressed all I could think of was the millions of children in similar circumstances who are not going to win the million dollars. Many have complained that the movie focused only on the negative side of India, and some wonder whether all that indeed happens in India. Asha volunteers know that nothing in the movie is inaccurate. We work with organizations that fight the powerful channels that supply young girls to men. We work with organizations that are fighting the begging mafia. And we work with organizations that deal with the aftermath of riots and work towards preventing more riots. We know all that happens in the movie happens to children, day after day. But we also know that one kid winning a million dollars is not a solution in any shape or form. I think the movie does a disservice to the problems it so starkly portrays by leaving viewers with an uplifting feeling. I wonder how many people run out of the movie theater wanting to do something. To me the movie’s end trivialized the solution to the problems the poor face.

It is of course the filmmaker's choice. He is not making a documentary, but an entertainer. But the challenges that Jamal faces to me were too realistic to be entertaining. Feel-good movies in general are not so starkly realistic when they portray the difficulties of the hero. The hero typically undergoes some difficulties and then something nice happens to him and the movie ends happily. Even if the difficulties are realistic, they are not the difficulties of a multitude of people. They are the difficulties of one hero and a few like him and he gets past them and lives happily ever after. The fact that this movie was so realistic in its portrayal of the difficulties, and then becomes so unrealistic in portraying how the hero's life changes for the better, really disturbed me. How can people find this uplifting? Or entertaining? Friends tell me I am taking the movie too seriously. But then the difficulties that kids like Jamal face ARE serious! And real!

Stark. That is what the movie felt like to me. Real situations where hope is represented by the very, very, VERY long shot of winning a million dollars.

Voting

I managed to get to the polls relatively early (by my standards). The birds were chirping as I went along, as if they were heralding this momentous day. There was hardly a line at my polling station and I picked up a ballot and went to the little enclosed space to mark the ballot. As I stood there and looked at the names, a wave of emotion swept over me. It surprised me completely and I was taken aback. I had increasingly become a strong supporter of Obama, but was somewhat detached, content to observe the campaign from the outside (unlike my eager involvement in the Howard Dean and John Edwards campaigns). I do not know why the act of casting the ballot today made me emotional. Was it because the questions and thoughts Obama has in his first book about bringing about social change echoed my own sentiments as I struggled with similar issues as an Asha volunteer? Was it because a President Obama embodied the fact that the United States of America was truly a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country? Was it because it is amazing and humbling that after 9/11 and after Saddam Hussein is known as a reviled dicator the US can still elect someone called Barack Hussein Obama? Or was it simply that the election of Obama would finally bring to an end to the appalling governance of President Bush?

Perhaps it was all of the above. What I know is I was moved to tears.

Taxes

I think this would be a good non-profit to start (if one does not already exist that does something similar). A non-profit that explained the purposes of taxes, and how taxes can help provide infrastructure that will help taxpayers and their children in the long run. Let us take one example, education. The US has an education quality crisis in schools, and it has to do something to have more youngsters get a college degree. The jobs one could get out of high school are rapidly diminishing and if they want to compete with people outside the US who are working on outsourced projects more and more Americans have to really become part of the knowledge economy. All this requires an investment in education. Subjects like basic Science might not appear to have an immediate monetary benefit and thus cannot be left to private enterprises to manage. Government intervention is necessary. Such intervention is also necessary to guarantee quality education for all as a basic right. It will help the families of Joe the Plumber and Mary the Waitress if an investment was made in education. Of course the taxes have to be fair and reasonable. But the anti-tax folks don't bother to even look at the nature of the taxes - they just say, "we don't like taxes!".

Anyway, a non-profit that focused on discussing this with the people from the grassroots on up would be very beneficial. Then maybe people would not get swayed by sound bites during the general election.

(Amazing how the election has become all about sound-bites, this has been the case pretty much after the two conventions. This is why primaries are fun - issues are discussed. In the general election the targeted voters all seem to be people who don't have the time or inclination to do in-depth research and serious thinking, but are instead be swayed by a convincing speaker who has a good screen presence.)

Socialist! Socialist!

'Socialist' they call Obama - in almost the same tone they would call someone 'thief' or 'a fraud'. If they can successfully make that stick, then they would indeed get some traction, since Americans don't like socialists. Growing up in India in a socialist environment I can see the good things of 'socialism'. But for someone who has grown up in the US that word, and anything that can even be remotely connected to the notion is such anathema. Bred as they are in the environment where wealth is 'infinite' and can 'continue to grow', where supposedly anyone can come up if they work hard, they are opposed to the socialism with a vengeance. It is all a matter of what you are exposed to growing up!

Similarly, the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was considered a liberating group, a group fighting for freedom when I was growing up in India, because of the Indian government's policy at that time. It came as quite a surprise to me that the PLO is considered a terrorist organization in the US. So much of all of this is just what one is subtly influenced to think.

Going back to socialism, portraying someone as socialist also seems to be one way of portraying someone as the 'other', as someone different from yourself. Instead of saying, "he is black so he is different", the refrain now is, "he is socialist so he is different". People don't want to vote for the 'other'.

Spreading the Wealth Around

Overhead a Dutchman say on my flight to Amsterdam a few days ago - "We spread the wealth around." And he went on to say, "the gap between the rich and the poor is much less in The Netherlands than it is in the US."

"No country in the world has succeeded with socialism", says Palin at rallies. I wonder what she would say if she went to The Netherlands.

Oh, and while we are talking about The Netherlands - it is such an public transport friendly country that we could not get a taxi back from the customer site back to Amsterdam airport. The customer was not particularly apologetic, and pointed us to the train station, where we had to take one of the frequent, very comfortable trains to Leiden and change there to a train straight to the airport. While my colleagues were trying to find a taxi at the train station a couple in their sixties went merrily cycling by. It was raining, but no matter. They wore raincoats and cycled on. It is good exercise too.

It was such a delight when I bought something at a store and the storekeeper did not give me a plastic bag but default.