I subscribe

to the first part of this piece
Not that I follow it. Like the author I myself have some sporting heroes. But they will never move into any arena other than the sport they play. I really don't care if the guy is freak outside. All that matters to me is how he plays his game! However, some of the things they do in their personal life are along the lines of their game. So, its fine!
Anyway!

If this news

on climate change is true it will be pretty bad for the poor global warming researchers (link via barbarindians)

Anatapuram 1980

A tam movie dubbed into Telugu. Very interesting movie!

Viru.. for you

So Viru after his decent knock was at leg-slip when Parnavitharna was batting. The poor batsman asks the umpire how many balls were left in the over. Viry chirps back.. Don't worry just hit it... Then when he plays defense for the next 3 balls he says.. "thats boring man"...

Seems the right way

for free markets to go. There should not be an institution that receives bail out because its too big to fail. Just make sure there are no such institutions! Smart!

Health Care

As the health care legislation passes the House, I was reading up on what the Health Care changes proposed are at a conceptual level. I found this table on wikipedia useful (Full article here)

Nationalized health care proponents:

• In most cases, people have little influence on whether or not they will contract an illness. Consequently, illness may be viewed as a fundamental part of what it means to be human and, as such, access to treatment for illness should be based on acknowledgement of the human condition, not the ability to pay^{[61][62][63][64]} or entitlement.^[65] Therefore, health care may be viewed as a fundamental human right itself or as an extension of the right to life.^[66]
• Since people perceive universal health care as free, they are more likely to seek preventative care which, in the long run, lowers their overall health care expenditure by focusing treatment on small, less expensive problems before they become large and costly.^[67]
• A universal health care system allows for a larger capital base than can be offered by free market insurers (without violating antitrust laws). A larger capital base "spreads out" the cost of a payout among more people, lowering the cost to the individual.
• Universal health care would provide for uninsured adults who may forgo treatment needed for chronic health conditions.^[68]
• In most free-market situations, the consumer of health care is entirely in the hands of a third party who has a direct personal interest in persuading the consumer to spend money on health care in his or her practice. The consumer is not able to make value judgments about the services judged to be necessary because he or she may not have sufficient expertise to do so.^[69] This, it is claimed, leads to a tendency to over produce. In socialized medicine, hospitals are not run for profit and doctors work directly for the community and are assured of their salary. They have no direct financial interest in whether the patient is treated or not, so there is no incentive to over provide. When insurance interests are involved this furthers the disconnect between consumption and utility and the ability to make value judgments.^[70] Others argue that the reason for over production is less cynically driven but that the end result is much the same.^[71]
• The profit motive in medicine values money above public benefit.^[72] For example, pharmaceutical companies have reduced or dropped their research into developing new antibiotics, even as antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria are increasing, because there's less profit to be gained there than in other drug research.^[73] Those in favor of universal health care posit that removing profit as a motive will increase the rate of medical innovation.^[74]
• Paul Krugman and Robin Wells say that in response to new medical technology, the American health care system spends more on state-of-the-art treatment for people who have good insurance, and spending is reduced on those lacking it.^[75]
• The profit motive adversely affects the cost and quality of health care. If managed care programs and their concomitant provider networks are abolished, then doctors would no longer be guaranteed patients solely on the basis of their membership in a provider group and regardless of the quality of care they provide. Theoretically, quality of care would increase as true competition for patients is restored.^[76]
• Wastefulness and inefficiency in the delivery of health care would be reduced.^[77] A single payer system could save $286 billion a year in overhead and paperwork.^[78] Administrative costs in the U.S. health care system are substantially higher than those in other countries and than in the public sector in the US: one estimate put the total administrative costs at 24% of U.S. health care spending.^[79] It might only take one government agent to do the job of two health insurance agents.^[80] According to one estimate roughly 50% of health care dollars are spent on health care, the rest go to various middlemen and intermediaries. A streamlined, non-profit, universal system would increase the efficiency with which money is spent on health care.^[81]
• About 60% of the U.S. health care system is already publicly financed with federal and state taxes, property taxes, and tax subsidies — a universal health care system would merely replace private/employer spending with taxes. Total spending would go down for individuals and employers.^[82]
• Several studies have shown a majority of taxpayers and citizens across the political divide would prefer a universal health care system over the current U.S. system^[83][84][85]
• America spends a far higher percentage of GDP on health care than any other country but has worse ratings on such criteria as quality of care, efficiency of care, access to care, safe care, equity, and wait times, according to the Commonwealth Fund.^[51]
• A universal system would align incentives for investment in long term health-care productivity, preventive care, and better management of chronic conditions.^[67]
• The Big Three of U.S. car manufacturers have cited health-care provision as a financial disadvantage. The cost of health insurance to U.S. car manufacturers adds between USD 900 and USD 1,400 to each car made in the U.S.A.^[86]
• In countries in Western Europe with public universal health care, private health care is also available, and one may choose to use it if desired. Most of the advantages of private health care continue to be present, see also Two-tier health care.^[87]
• Universal health care and public doctors would protect the right to privacy between insurance companies and patients.^[88]
• Public health care system can be used as independent third party in disputes between employer and employee.^[89]
• A study of hospitals in Canada found that death rates are lower in private not-for-profit hospitals than in private for-profit hospitals.^[90]

Free market health care proponents:

• Health care is not a constitutional right.^[91][92] Thus, it is not the responsibility of government to provide health care.^[93]
• Free health care can lead to overuse of medical services, and hence raise overall cost.^[94][95]
• Universal health coverage does not in practice guarantee universal access to care. Many countries offer universal coverage but have long wait times or ration care.^[96]
• The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals andambulance services to provide emergency care to anyone regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay.^{[97][98][99][100]}
• Eliminating the profit motive will decrease the rate of medical innovation.^[101]
• It slows down innovation and inhibits new technologies from being developed and utilized. This simply means that medical technologies are less likely to be researched and manufactured, and technologies that are available are less likely to be used.^[102]
• Publicly-funded medicine leads to greater inefficiencies and inequalities^[101][103] Opponents of universal health care argue that government agencies are less efficient due to bureaucracy.^[103]Universal health care would reduce efficiency because of more bureaucratic oversight and more paperwork, which could lead to fewer doctor-patient visits.^[104] Advocates of this argument claim that the performance of administrative duties by doctors results from medical centralization and over-regulation, and may reduce charitable provision of medical services by doctors.^[92]
• Converting to a single-payer system could be a radical change, creating administrative chaos.^[105]
• Data on liver and heart transplants suggest that access to transplants (especially the sickest patients) and outcomes in the US are as among the best in the world.^[106]
• The extra spending in the US is justified if expected life span increases by only about half a year as a result.^[107]
• Unequal access and health disparities still exist in universal health care systems.^[108]
• The problem of rising health care costs is occurring all over the world; this is not a unique problem created by the structure of the US system.^[96]
• Universal health care suffers from the same financial problems as any other government planned economy. It requires governments to increase taxes as costs rise year over year.^[109] Empirical evidence on the Medicare single payer-insurance program demonstrates that the cost exceeds the expectations of advocates.^[110] As an open-ended entitlement, Medicare does not weigh the benefits of technologies against their costs. Paying physicians on a fee-for-service basis also leads to spending increases. As a result, it is difficult to predict or control Medicare's spending.^[108] The Washington Post reported in July 2008 that Medicare had "paid as much as $92 million since 2000" for medical equipment that had been ordered in the name of doctors who were dead at the time.^[111] Medicare's administrative expense advantage over private plans is less than is commonly believed.^{[112][113][114][115]} Large market-based public program such as the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and CalPERS can provide better coverage thanMedicare while still controlling costs as well.^[116][117]
• National health systems tend to be more effective as they incorporate market mechanisms and limit centralized government control.^[96]
• Some commentators have opposed publicly-funded health systems on ideological grounds, arguing that public health care is a step towards socialism and involves extension of state power and reduction of individual freedom.^[118]
• The right to privacy between doctors and patients could be eroded if government demands power to oversee the health of citizens.^[119]
• Universal health care systems, in an effort to control costs by gaining or enforcing monopsonypower, sometimes outlaw medical care paid for by private, individual funds.^[120][121]

Child labor

There are a number of people calling for a ban on child labor. These request are purely based on humane reasons. However, banning child labor (as it is al ready in India) or banning products from industries that employ child labors will not solve the problem. In fact, it will exacerbate the problem at hand by removing the only form of livelihood these kids have. Before resorting to legal measures it is necessary that the Government provides infrastructure to support displaced children. Else, you will just increase the likelihood of these children becoming criminals and/or prostitutes. Its an issue that needs to be tackled well!
Why did I write this? This article got me thinking.

This article

sums up what the UPA government does (or doesn't)
An excerpt

This is not to say that it is impossible to bring the deficit down. But this task will require large doses of political will. For a government that is unable to resist simple political pressures, this seems to be asking too much from it.

Andre Agassi

I was not a big fan of Agassi when he played tennis. I was a Becker fan. So, when his recent autobiography came out I was not all that excited until I heard about what he wrote. There were two surprises: (1) His relationship with data and (2) His drug abuse (may be 3, if you consider such stuff). Anyway, the American media has gone out of its way to focus on the second one. I agree its an important issue. But for me the way he talks about his relationship with his father wants me to read the book. Some nice articles on this aspect here (prem pannikker's blog). The link has a Rohit Brijnath article that's surely worth reading. Also Prem details his own "clashes" with his father there. Every child goes through phases where s/he believes is doing things for her/his parents. But for some kids the pressures are enormous to the point that its very hard for the kid to stay normal.
Lets see!

is it only me?

Or does everybody find the attention given to the fued between BJP factions in Karnataka a little too detailed for an issue at the state level. I mean when YSR died in Andhra Pradesh, there was a huge power battle between YSR's son and current CM rossiah. However, the national media seemed to ignore it. However, when the trouble is in a BJP state everybody seems to be intent on publicizing the problem. Is this sheer coincidence? Don't think so. There is a much larger issue of media sucking up to the secular party at play I guess!
Anyway!

Can you

disagree with this? Really?
An excerpt

Warmer, wetter weather will improve conditions for the malaria parasite. Most estimates suggest that global warming will put 3% more of the Earth's population at risk of catching malaria by 2100. If we invest in the most efficient, global carbon cuts—designed to keep temperature rises under two degrees Celsius—we would spend a massive $40 trillion a year by 2100. In the best case scenario, we would reduce the at-risk population by only 3%.

In comparison, research commissioned by the Copenhagen Consensus Center shows that spending $3 billion annually on mosquito nets, environmentally safe indoor DDT sprays, and subsidies for effective new combination therapies could halve the number of those infected with malaria within one decade. For the money it takes to save one life with carbon cuts, smarter policies could save 78,000 lives. Mr. Samson has not done these calculations, but for him it is simple: "First things first," he says. Malaria "is here right now and it kills a lot of people every day."

Malaria is only weakly related to temperature; it is strongly related to poverty. It has risen in sub-Saharan Africa over the past 20 years not because of global warming, but because of failing medical response. The mainstay treatment, chloroquine, is becoming less and less effective. The malaria parasite is becoming resistant, and there is a need for new, effective combination treatments based on artemisinin, which is unfortunately about 10 times more expensive.

Mr. Samson is right to ask what spending money on global warming could do for him and his family. The truthful answer? Very little. For a lot less, we could achieve a lot more.

Why will anybody care about Global Warming when s/he just is not sure he will be alive for 10 more years! Shouldn't the world be

solving these problems first?

I am no

expert on ObamaCare, but this does not make for a good read!

An interesting game

See the excerpt below (via Antanu Dey)

An economics professor said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.

All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied only a little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied less than what they had. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great; but when government takes all the reward away; no one will try or want to succeed.

Don't have to say anything more!

Seriously?

Is this guy serious? The fear mongering among the Americans takes immensely ridiculous proportions sometimes.
I mean if Venezuela were building something like that won't the US Intelligence find that out. Moreover, Iran is no USSR. For such Americans why is it always everybody is out to get us! You screwed up Iran enough and let the population forget the monarchy and other clandestine operations US lead. Only then they will you can feel safe!

Why?

isn't anybody held responsible for the anti-Sikh violence!
Well, if Congress orchestrates a violent attack based on a religious profile its not a big deal. It still remains a secular party. Does anybody even care to check what secular means!

Wars?

How useful are they? I don't know!
But reading some books and some articles somehow leaves me despondent feeling that they wont work!See a piece here

Also weird is how people respond to army, the people who put down their lives for some politicians decisions! See this article
This part of the text particularly strikes me as sad!

Late at night, when it was no longer Monday and not yet Tuesday, as I landed at an airport, I saw men in uniform again—this time they were Indian soldiers, wearing the blue United Nations caps, returning to New Delhi after a tour of duty as peacekeepers in Sudan. I went up to them, shook hands with them and thanked them, and said: “Welcome back.” They smiled, genuinely surprised.

Nobody else seemed to care. They had gone to maintain peace far away

Well!

Haha

I might not fully agree with the view expressed here
But I sure can laugh at some of the jokes!

There is a reason the extended family feels nervous about the war on Naxals - after the first war, West Bengal completely switched over to the communists. This is also the reason they feel nervous about Roy. So, don't they care about the violence? Let's just say the set we have been talking about do not bring work to the cocktail parties.

Don't you?

Do you

believe in the American President unconditionally?
May be you ought to read this!

See this

This does stress the secular credentials of the Congress party! (Link via barbarindians)
I am appalled!

Disgraceful

to say the least! Bombay Dosti has a piece on how a local news media acts as a goon in the name of journalism! God knows what we can do against such media!

Cancer

A chilling account of what Cancer patients have to go through! The hospital discussed is the MD Anderson Cancer center in Houston.

A fantastic

article on why India should not take a backward step in climate negotiations here
Particularly facsinating details include:

It is revealing, to see why India is already pursuing a low-carbon path in comparison to both the US and China:

• Renewable energy's share of total electric capacity is more than twice that of the US, and India is among the top five countries in renewable capacity.

• India's carbon and energy use per unit of GDP are both already below that of the US and China, and seem to be on a decreasing trend.

• India had about 12 vehicles per 1000 people in 2007 compared to over 800 in the US. Bus, rail and non-motorized modes of transportation continue to have the largest share of passenger travel, unlike the US, where substantially more carbon-intensive modes such as private automobiles are dominant.

• Industrial electricity tariffs are the highest in the world, on average. Gasoline and diesel prices are higher than those in the US and China, even in market exchange terms.

• Indians consume only 1/11th of the meat eaten by an average Chinese and 1/25th of that eaten by an American, implying correspondingly lower greenhouse gas emissions associated with the sector

Umpires

Cricket is such a wonderful game that attracts different personalities to different roles. See Daryl Harper's interview here! Simply awesome!
Some excerpts

What's the best compliment you have got from a player? 

I do feature in the opening chapter in Adam Gilchrist's autobiography, where he recorded a comment I made to him about the manner in which he played the game. I was standing in his final Test, and I said, "When you see your parents next, tell them they got it right, they shouldn't have done anything different." In other words, that he turned out to be an outstanding person. He used that in his book.

On another occasion, in an ODI at home, I called a wide down leg side and Gilly protested the decision momentarily, as he thought the ball had deflected off the pads. Then he looked up at the replay and as he passed me at the end of the over, he said, "Sorry about that. I guess that's why you are a world-class umpire and I'm a player.

A sensible article

urging abandoning the usage of the post of governor for political mileage!

Health Care

I am no expert on the health care situation in the US. But there is one thing I surely believe. Government intervention, in the magnitudes suggested by Obama team, will only worsen the situation. Its not because I don't want the changes to happen. Thats how things are. Any analyst forecasting costs will ensure s/he can arrive at numbers that will allow the bill to be passed (esp. if the president wants the bill to go through). So, the benefits will be over estimated and simultaneously the losses will be under-estimated. Overall we have a rosy picture of future costs. At the end all this will fail and we have a larger deficit in the budget than expected. Of course, we can implement it and see the result the hard way or take a glance at the numbers from the past. (See some figures here)
Some excerpts

In 1965, Congressional budgeters said that it would cost $12 billion in 1990. Its actual cost that year was $90 billion. Whoops. The hospitalization program alone was supposed to cost $9 billion but wound up costing $67 billion. These aren't small forecasting errors. The rate of increase in Medicare spending has outpaced overall inflation in nearly every year (up 9.8% in 2009), so a program that began at $4 billion now costs $428 billion.

The Medicare program for renal disease was originally estimated in 1973 to cover 11,000 participants. Today it covers 395,000, at a cost of $22 billion. The 1988 Medicare home-care benefit was supposed to cost $4 billion by 1993, but the actual cost was $10 billion, because many more people participated than expected.

The b***a*d is at it again

Kapil Sibal wont stop screwing up IITs.
See this (full article here)

Teachers are the best judges of academic requirements. If they decide on a certain cut-off point in marks required to compete for an entrance examination, there are good reasons for that. Politicians are not equipped to make such decisions. Yet that is what Union human resource development minister Kapil Sibal wants to do.

He wants to increase the percentage of marks secured by students in class XII for them to be eligible to compete in the joint entrance examination (JEE) conducted by the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs). His argument: students spend more time preparing for the IIT entrance test than studying for the board exams.

Why the hell cant this a**h**e mind is business and let them be on their own!
My guess for why he is messing up with IITs is that he could not get into IITs when he was a student. So, now he is trying his al mighty best to screw the system that he could not get into!

May be

I was too generous regarding governments plans to promote reform! See the article here that identifies their motives
An excerpt (emphasis mine)

The proceeds (from disinvestment) will be deposited in the National Investment Fund (NIF), which was created in 2005. Seventy-five per cent of the income of NIF is to be used to promote education, health and employment, while the remaining 25% is to be used for meeting the capital investment requirements of profitable and “revivable” public sector units. That is where the problem lies.

This is the surest way to fritter away precious money. Given its current priorities, the Union government is likely to use the money to bridge its ballooning fiscal deficit or pump it into schemes such as the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). While there are many reasons for India’s huge fiscal deficit, which is estimated at 6.8% of the gross domestic product for 2009-10, financially reckless schemes such as NREGS are a major contributor to the mess in India’s public finances. Keeping that in mind, even if this money is used for plugging the fiscal deficit, it will be implicitly funding NREGS.

Last week, India signed loan agreements to the tune of $4.2 billion with the World Bank. Of this amount, $2.2 billion is meant for infrastructure financing and power development. Why can’t disinvestment money be used to fund these ventures? Why must it be frittered away in NREGS and other forms of consumption? Social sector spending has powerful advocates and if the government feels that such expenditure is essential, then it must find alternative sources of funding. Selling of stakes in public sector units that were created by taxpayers’ hard-earned money should not be a source of funding for political projects.

God knows how we can change this mess!

Finally some reforms

in the public sector! Lets wait and see how these are implemented.

Stunning event from the past

What can I say?
Congress and their MPs have manage to do it all the time. See this report on "A historic non-impeachment" from 1993. There are infinite number of instances where Congress has managed to support their people. Yet Congress is the party to vote for in India. Its utter nonsense. The Congress party is successful in India because their motives once they come to power are very very clear.
"Ensure we stay in power"
Simple. They will undertake policies that will strengthen their financial/political clout even if they are bad for the country or the economy. Even with a cabinet of eminent educated people Congress manages to do that. Oh I forgot these eminently educated people do not have the balls to stand up for what is right.
After reading this article I might physically harm "Kapil Sibal" if he ever talks about IITs and other stuff. The bastard who supported a corrupt Judge is one of the most respected cabinet ministers today. Oh yes, he was smart to suck up to congress and guess what sucking up to congress pays you very very well. Thats the irony in the India of today. Its the bloody truth.

See this

and respond to the damage you have caused Mamata banarjee! Talk about exploiting people for political mileage. This is just ridiculous and proves that for people are not why Political parties act on their issues!
Lets see what the future holds for these people.

Will

anybody listen? Even if they do will they ever act?
I don't see much hope on the either front!
But still I hope! I know its stupid.
May be optimism is a stupid thing!

What motivates Taliban?

Here you go! The article identifies what are the issues with US handling of their war on terrorism. Pretty good read.

NREGA

can only get worse now!
See this piece that documents how Congress will now ensure that NREGA will be run by its henchmen.
God knows what else will they do now!

If free speech

is so difficult in a developed country like Britain, what hope is there for other developing countries. Read the full story here!
An excerpt

In August 2006, Trafigura dumped a shipload of toxic waste on Africa's Ivory Coast. Some 100,000 Ivorians sought medical help for breathing problems, vomiting and skin eruptions; according to a UN report, 15 people died. Trafigura maintained repeatedly that the material discharged was harmless. A few months later a British lawyer started legal proceedings on behalf of the victims; the oil company paid £100 million to the Ivorian government to pay for removing the waste but continued to deny liability. The legal case dragged on.

Fast forward to 2009, when reporters from the BBC and theGuardian newspaper assembled evidence pointing to a company cover-up. Carter-Ruck launched a libel suit against the BBC, and obtained a super-injunction preventing the Guardian from mentioning an expert report commissioned by Trafigura in September 2006. Now here's the part that was "secret" until yesterday: The report confirmed the "likely" presence of compounds "capable of causing severe health effects," including "headaches, breathing difficulties...unconsciousness and death," in the caustic tank washings dumped around Abidjan. In other words, Trafigura's own scientific consultants had clearly suggested that the "slops" were potentially dangerous--but the company continued to insist that they were not. The document, known as the Minton report, has been available for some time on the internet from the open government and anti-corruption group Wikileaks and on the website of Greenpeace in the Netherlands, which is pursuing legal action against Trafigura for manslaughter and grievous bodily harm. But until yesterday no description of its contents could be published in Britain

What can we do!

A sad episode for

Trescothick. But his effort needs to be applauded as Andrew Miller writes here.

More on

Indo-China relationship issues documented here by B. Raman
He brings up very relevant issues that Indian government needs to address! Lets see

Every cricket fan

begins in this way. In company of esteemed gentlemen (who have very little idea of cricket technicalities) talking as if they know everything. In an innocent way of course. That makes it so much fun at that time and even later when you know that all they were talking wasn't true yet wonderful in a special way!

This attitude is best summarized here

A misfield would result in, "Amarnath should be sacked immediately", causing my young mind to conjure up pictures of BCCI officials hurriedly running on to the field to convey the bad news to Jimmy, who would then sadly trot off and play no further part in the match. A good catch would result in, "He is the only fellow who is playing for the team. Sack everyone else and make him the captain", a suggestion that essentially meant that the athletic fielder would be skipper of a team that had no other players. I can only hope that my uncle's management style at work did not reflect his cricket team selection views - it would have resulted in a number of junior managers at TVS losing their jobs because they had forgotten to bring their pens or neglected to berate the peon over his shoddy footwear.

The uncles' favourite players were also expected to be granted immunity from being dismissed leg-before. If my father's opinion of every single lbw decision given against Sachin Tendulkar is to be taken seriously, his (Sachin's, not my father's) Test average would be 66.87. Include close run-out calls, dodgy caught-behinds, and catches close to the ground, and it inches closer to 75. If my dad could figure out a way to somehow introduce an element of doubt to the times Tendulkar has been out clean bowled, his average would probably be around 3269.53. Well above that pesky Bradman, who only played against mediocre attacks anyway.

Those days were fun!

BCCI and Transparency

Well, I know that the two words should not be even in the same sentence forget being next to each other. The selectors brought in Dravid for the Champions trophy and now have dropped him. I mean this is ridiculous. The selectors are not allowed to discuss why this is the case because there is a gag order on them by BCCI. See here for more.

Then the BCCI terminates the contracts of Robin Singh and Venkatesh Prasad. Thats not my issue. My issue is they had to learn of thier dismissal through the media. This is a huge problem with how BCCI operates. Prem Pannikker expans on the issue here.

Indo-China relationships

Over the last 3-4 weeks there has been intense conflict over the Indo-China border in Arunachal Pradesh. There have been numerous articles written in this connection. I found a very interesting piece connecting the psychology of both countries based on historical context here and here
An excerpt from the second piece

From the earliest times, India lacked interest in the balance of power outside its own national frontiers. While China was continuously watchful of developments across its land frontiers and had developed a very efficient system of diplomatic relationship on a continental basis, the Indian idea of diplomacy was confined to states within the geographical limits of India. Within this area, at different times, India developed a system of international relations and diplomatic usage. But so far as areas outside the physical boundaries of India were concerned, we were content to live with the attitude of complacent ignorance.

Now about China (excerpt from first piece)

China, on the other hand, sees the world divided between the civilised world centred around itself, the Middle Kingdom, on the one hand and the world of uncivilised barbarians on the other. At the periphery of the Middle Kingdom (and still within the civilised world) lay the states who paid tribute to the Chinese emperor and professed to be in awe of its great civilisation. What this meant in practice was that the Han Chinese Middle Kingdom expected its neighbours to be tributaries—the concept of a sovereign equal simply didn’t exist.

Views of a commander on the situation

“Common sense” according to Admiral Sureesh Mehta, “that cooperation with China would be preferable to competition or conflict, as it would be foolhardy to compare India and China as equals. China’s GDP is more than thrice that of ours and its per capita GDP is 2.2 times our own.”

It is very interesting to see how the knowledge of past history and attitudes might have important implications for today's geo-political equation.

More material on similar topics here, and here.

Is this paranoia or genuine protectionism?

You decide for yourself based on this article on NYT regarding a kid suspended from school because he took to school a fork that can be used as a knife too.

An interesting article

on Obama's Nobel on Wall Street Journal.
It is different from the many articles criticisizing Obama's Nobel because it is constructive and makes a statement at Peace Nobel itself. I necessarily do not seem to agree with everything there but its an interesting perspective!

Indian Cricket

Finally people have started taking notice of some issues I have been cribbing about Dhoni's captaincy. See Jagadish here

Sources within the BCCI are extremely pissed off that this attitude hides India's actual on-field performances, including some bizarre captaincy against Pakistan where the skipper MS Dhoni hid himself at #5 during a chase of 300+. In Yuvraj's absence, Dhoni was clearly the side's best batsman. So why he sent Kohli ahead of himself and Raina was difficult to understand.

This wasn't the first time he showed a lack of leadership though. During the T20 World Cup, he batted at 4 against Bangladesh & Ireland, and went in at #6 against England.

Make no mistake Dhoni is a genuinely smart captain. In the initial stages he ensured that he used it to for the team. Of late, since he established himself beyond criticism he seems to be using the smarts to ensure his record becomes better. Can you believe that he has the best batting record in the last year when India has repeatedly failed throughout the year. We have seen this exploitation of captaincy for personal benefit in the fag end of his career in Ganguly. But, Ganguly did it after leading India for 6-7 years not a small 1-2 year period. I hope Dhoni can get back to his old team ways and not try to exploit the situation for his benefit. In addition to the above instances I can recollect a number of other instances where Raina was sent ahead of Dhoni when the situation demanded quick runs. However, if we were batting first Dhoni routinely walks in at three. I always disagreed with this strategy to hold himself back when its crunch situation and come out to bat when there is an option of free runs especially when youngsters would have been better off with such easy run opportunities!

Now with the setting up of the Delhi clique it will not be a cake walk for Dhoni. It is no secret that Sehwag and Dhoni are not on good terms. Sehwag, in a smart move, has abdicated his interests for captaincy and started promoting Gambhir for the captaincy role. Viru gets along with Gautam. In fact they are best buddies. So, he has no issues with Gauti being captain in place of Dhoni. Moreover, the Delhi group is growing in size with Ishant, Amit Mishra, and Muaf Patel.

Lets see what the future holds for Viru and Dhoni!

Congress and The PSU

A very nice piece on how Congress is working for its personal profit by resisting privatization of the PSU's by Sauvik.

Today

seems to be the day of amazing WTF. Here is another one

You have got be kidding

I thought it was some kind of a joke. But well it isn't. Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Seriously? You know for what?

for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples

Is it some kind of a joke or what. I mean I agree he is a great orator and his speeches are awesome but how is that effort to strengthen diplomacy. I am not sure! Anyway

Muslim Demographic Map

Pew research center's forum has come up with a new Muslim Demographic map (link here)

A celebration of the human spirit

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
William Kamkwamba
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

A nice

article on the preparation for the cricket match by Aakash Chopra here

A chemistry Nobel

for an Indian (or more accurately should I say a man born in India)

Books

I have started reading a number of non-fiction books over the last 2-3 years. Some of them do make a lasting impact on how you perceive things regarding different countries, cultures and lifestyles. For example, I read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" and created a mental image of how Iran exists with so many of the women under pressure and so on. Then today I started "Iran: A People Interrupted" and the author introduces the book saying how he wants to counter the argument made by neocons (or America appeasers) regarding Iran. The first book he wants to contest is the "Reading Lolita in Tehran" one. Well, this puts me in a bind. I mean I am no expert. The only way I learn is from reading books that are critically acclaimed. However, critically acclaimed is so subjective you read books based on what you want to believe in at that time of your life. So, now how do you really know if you ever get a real picture of history? I mean I read a Nehru fan's version of history and Patel fan's version of Indian history it is surely bound to paint a different picture. Is there a way to understand what is the true version? Are we really seeking the true version? Do you really want to get the true version? Is it at all possible for anybody to get a true version of history uncolored/unaffected by the author's life and experience? How many accounts of the same history does one have to read to remove these biases? These are some of the questions that are bombarding me currently. Well, all I can do is read whatever I come across and learn not be judgmental about it. There is always another side to the story. There always is! This is unnerving for a person like me who believed life can be viewed as "right" or "wrong". Lets try to open our eyes wider to accept the possibility of being somewhere in the middle. Somebody does not have to be wrong! The sooner the world (that includes me) accept this the sooner the world will be a better place!

Well, where did I start and where did I end!