Parsing Information on the Internet - What's true and what's not

Credit - The Inquirer (philly.com)

There is a LOT of information floating around on the internet these days. With more and more exposure to this information and increasing integration of normal people like you and me with digital media, it is very easy to be misled by random chunks of information floating around through FB pages, WhatsApp groups or blogs/pseudo-news sites. An example is how Cambridge Analytica purportedly used personal information from FB to influence the US electoral process by bombarding propaganda at targeted demographics. While the jury is out on this one, what is clear is that it has become very easy to mislead the normal public and very easy to make/build opinions in the digital age. We simply cannot control what information we are bombarded with, but we can definitely control how we react to that information and how we let it influence us. With that in mind, here's a few simple things that all of us can take care of when digesting information floating on the internet - 

1. Avoid trusting a quote or a statement unless the source is quoted along with additional details on said quote or statement. For eg - "we've found out from reliable sources in the ministry that. . ." might not be genuine. On the other hand, "in his statement to the press dated dd/mm/yy, so and so clarified that . . ." is a more reliable statement because you can check for that press interaction. 
2. Avoid trusting a number or statistic unless there's a citation. A citation will always have the source of the data and a contact where you can validate that data. It can also be a link to an online survey, but then you have to take online survey statistics with a pinch of salt. In either scenario, with a citation, (at the very least) you'll know where a number is coming from. For eg - a random statement like "65% youth unemployed" is a bogus statement. On the other hand, "Unemployment rate for Mar-18 in India stands at 3.46% according to the latest set of data released by ILO (International Labor Organization) published on tradingeconomics.com" is a more trust-worthy statement. 
3. Avoid trusting random WhatsApp posts, random FB pages unless their provenance is verified. A good way to assess this if you can contact the admin. As Mr Weasley tells Ginny, "Never trust anything that can think for itself if you can't see where it keeps its brain". If you can't contact admin on an FB page or forward is anonymous and random; more often than not, it will be untrustworthy.
4. Avoid digesting information without proper numbers/statistics to back it up. A reputed news house or information outlet will adhere to points 1 and 2 above so that you can assess the authenticity of the information you are being served. 
5. Always know the political leanings of the media house which you are reading / watching news from. Most media houses have some political leaning so you can gauge and assess for yourself what level of slant they bring in and in which direction it is. Most print media is anti-establishment (for eg the daily paper "Sakal" is owned by Mr Pawar) whereas a higher proportion of digital media has leanings towards the establishment (eg - swarajyamag.com). You can find out similar information about TV channels as well. NDTV has a bias against the establishment whereas Republic TV is more pro-establishment. 

As educated citizens of India, it is our duty to think rationally and critically about what we read on the internet, build opinions after due diligence and express our own opinions carefully. Let's be safe out there! 

A Birthday Bash to Remember

A small cosy crib. Yellow and bright. Blue bedding inside. A small toy kept neatly by the side. This sight greeted us at the very entrance. A small cosy crib where people could abandon their children to face the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. It was neatly done up; and completely macabre.

We were here to celebrate a colleague’s son’s first birthday. People who know me will be surprised since me and birthday parties (especially for kids) don’t really go together. In fact, I avoid them like the plague. But this party’s (if you can call it that) theme was a novel idea and I’d like to first take a moment out to shout out a sincere thanks to my colleague (who wishes to remain incognito) for this sterling message and for allowing me to tag along. Certainly inspired me, and that’s why my wife and I were there accompanying him for this . . . party (for lack of a better word). From what I understand, a 1st birthday bash is a pretty big thing in most households. There’s a party, relatives are called over and there’s a lot of food and events and whatnot. I’ve even known a few parents to go all-out and book a venue for this. Essentially, we’re saying that some kids (or rather; their parents) invite more people to their first birthday than I did to my wedding. Well, that’s besides the point. My colleague wished to do away with this senseless waste of money. His rationale was simple; there’s a lot of inequity going around without us throwing an extravagant bash for an act that was basically an annual recurrence. Do away with it. So he decided to spend an equivalent amount of money and time here at Vatsalya instead of amongst meaningless baubles and a vacant celebration that would teach nothing to the child or the parent.

We entered to the chimes of some “aarti” and an idol of Ganesha right by the main gate. Atheist that I am, I hung back while everybody showed their respects and we moved up the stairs to the office with all the stuff that he’d bought for the children. My colleague started a conversation with the coordinator who was ensuring that a tally was kept of everything that was being handed over. A systematic receipt was given to us detailing all items. Once this was done, we took a short tour. It was perhaps the single-most shocking experience of my life to this point.

We went upstairs to the second storey where the kids stayed. This was segregated by age group. We had a room where a few toddlers were sprawled about, another room right beside that for kids a little younger, and a third for kids who were “differently abled”. The aya there told us the difference and mentioned that these kids are born with a “minor defect” which is why parents abandon them. Their adoption rates are low too since nobody wants a “defective child”. These were the words she used. As if they came off an assembly line. She did this with a wry smile. And with a lump in my throat I moved away. So did Sylvia. We were dumbstruck. Well, the nightmare was just beginning. We went one storey further up and were greeted by a crib with a life-support system hung by its side and a really tiny baby sleeping away to kingdom come. I didn’t dare enquire what had happened but the aya pressed on regardless. This baby was abandoned at the Vatsalya doorsteps in the first week of her life. She had a congenital heart defect and things were grim. I couldn’t imagine a scenario where someone would do that. But from what I gathered, it was quite common. I’d had enough. The lump in my throat was joined by a knot in my stomach and I moved away. My wife was close to tears. She’s a sensitive soul and this was not what we’d expected. Nor had we been prepared for this. My colleague had done this before and all he could offer was a sympathetic nod and an assent for our request to go back down. 

Downstairs we were joined by Mr Srikant Joshi who ran us through the gamut of activities that Vatsalya is involved in. For more information, anybody can take a gander of their website at www.vatsalyatrustmumbai.org. To quote their own website, “Vatsalya Trust, Mumbai was born on 8th February 1983. The founders were Smt. Sanjivani Raykar, Late Dr. Shivram Athavale, Shri. G.A Damle and few others who felt a need for starting a charitable organization dedicated to the care and rehabilitation of destitute children. ‘Vatsalya' a Sanskrit word meaning affection was considered appropriate for naming the proposed Charitable Trust.”. The main thrust of their activities revolve around the following three pillars - 

• Taking care of destitute and abandoned orphans
• Promoting and facilitating their adoption
• Teaching them self-sustenance by making them employable

Inequity . . . that’s what it all boils down to. On one hand we have children so privileged that they get driven to school in chauffeur-driven cars and a bevy of household help for every whim and fancy. On the other hand we have children who are abandoned as soon as they come into existence. They have no clue who their progenitor is and they have no support system to face the travails of existence with. Let’s take for example a small initiative started by Vatsalya - “Infant Financial Adoption Scheme”. People donate INR 4000.00 to Vatsalya under this scheme. This amount is used for furnishing the expense of milk provided to one infant for the duration of one year. Let’s look at this amount from two perspectives. In our daily lives, we don’t think twice about spending this amount, though we don’t realise it. Let’s take the classic example of a movie and a dinner date with one’s partner.

Expense	Amount
Dinner @ Mainland China	₹1,800.00
Movie @ Cinepolis	₹800.00
Popcorn/Coffee @ Cinepolis	₹350.00
Drive to Queen's necklace and back	₹400.00
Dessert @ Badshah	₹300.00
Total	₹3,650.00

Just a normal dinner date with the wife. Something we do at-least once a month. A dinner date that costs almost the same amount of money that would provide nourishment to a child for an entire year. Let’s take another example. Vatsalya also has a scheme to sponsor the financial education of one child for one year. People donate INR 4500.00. and this takes care of the basic education fees and critical essentials for one girl child. Let’s compare that with a short weekend trip that we take at-least once a quarter.

Expense	Amount
Accommodation around Mumbai	₹4000.00
Petrol and/or transport	₹2000.00
Food and drinks	₹3000.00
Total	₹9000.00

Whether it be Lonavala or Igatpuri or any other weekend destination around Mumbai; 9000 bucks about covers the trip for two people. That would sponsor two children’s education expenses for a year. One weekend we spend amongst the mountains in a leisurely resort would provide education for a year to two children. I let that calculation sink in when I did it first. I do both these things without thinking. Movie-dates, weekend-excursions, drives, the works. I do it without a second thought. And therein lies the rub of the problem. 

It was a day that was spent in a haze. After we came downstairs and after we had a chat with the coordinator; I don’t remember too much till we got home. It was all kind of a daze. Thoughts tumbling on top of other thoughts. Call it a healthy dose of reality, or a slap in the face for us as a society; but there’s definitely something wrong about our modus operandi as a society. We create circumstances where parents have to abandon their child and we also create circumstances where we hinder their adoption and subsequent assimilation back into society. We force them into destitution and we keep them there. We give them life and we callously take it away. 

We don’t know how to solve this problem immediately. But we can definitely support and appreciate the efforts that people like my incognito colleague and the Vatsalya team put in to ease this inequity in some small way. 

Hat’s off.

On Occasion of Republic Day

I see all around me a fervour. A zing in everybody's step. 26th Jan 15 is Republic Day for India, and all Indians are proud. Today is the day when the constitution of India came into force 65 years ago. I see parties, celebrations, events, flag-hoisting ceremonies and patriotic songs (interspersed with the occasional Bollywood item number). I see Facebook posts, photos of the tri-colour, selfies against national backdrops, images with the tri-coloured theme as a meme on WhatsApp, nationalist sentiments everywhere. I see group admins change their group display pictures on WhatsApp, I see cover pages updated to reflect the tricolour on Facebook, I see profile pics on Google undergo a transformation into suddenly renewed "Indian-ness". I see a deluge of nationalist pride everywhere online. All good so far. 

But personally, I also sense the need for introspection. The constitution of India was a document that was drafted in a 2-year period from 1947 to 1949. 

At the outset, let me state (for the benefit of those fringe groups who take affront at leaves falling from trees) that the Constitution of India is an exhaustive and well-drafted document. It covers a vast gamut of legislation that was critical and needed. It is carefully researched and in no way do I intend to contradict that. The point of this post is different. The Constitution is a huge document that calls upon various legislations in the past (primarily the Government of India Act 1858, Indian Councils Act 1861, Indian Councils Act 1892 and the various amendments and modifications done thereto between the late 1800s and the early 1900s). Essentially, in 2015 we are celebrating a constitution created in 1949 (around 65 years ago) based on laws originally promulgated in the late 1800s (around 150 years ago). I'd say it's time to revisit this document and prune it wherever required.

Some glaring areas of opportunity where I see an urgent need for complete rehaul are - 

• Articles 15 and 16 of the constitution which talk of allowing governmental bodies to make reservations based on caste. 
• Article 44 which talks of the duty of the state to implement a uniform civil code. This is still a pipe-dream and needs to be picked up urgently for any social reform to happen. 

Let's go into each in a little bit more detail. 

Reservations - 

Part 3 (Fundamental Rights), Articles 15 and 16 of the constitution specifically talk about equal opportunities for all citizens. Sample extracts are as follows - 

3.16.4 - Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. 

3.15.4 - Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. 

All points in both these articles talk about various public facilities, employment opportunities, other public amenities and the sanction given to the government to make reservations or special provisions for "backward classes" of citizens in order to protect the fundamental principle of equal opportunity therein. All good so far. But the fact of the matter is, reservation is an obsolete concept and caste-based reservation even more so. It has been misused and taken advantage of. The results of course, are there for all to see. Sub-standard teachers have churned out sub-standard students, sub-standard professionals have churned out sub-standard services and the rot is setting in deeper with each new added quota. I'm all for equal opportunity, but not at the cost of meritocracy. What is needed is to change the definition of "backward classes". Currently defined on the basis of caste, it needs to discard this framework and take into account financial standing. The poor can become the backward class irrespective of what caste they belong to. They shall enjoy privileges in order to ensure equal opportunity.

We need to take a second look at both these articles (and related articles, clauses and sub-clauses interspersed throughout the constitution) to discard the reservation/quota system and replace it with a framework that gives these rights to the poor and the financially challenged. 

Uniform Civil Code - 
The need for a uniform civil code is enshrined in the directive principles of the Constitution of India (Part 4, article 44)

4.44 - The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.

 This has never materialized. Such an explicit statement as article 44 has been ignored and relegated to the back-burner just to serve the vested interests of certain communities and people. The Shah Bano case showed us how critical it is to have all communities follow the constitution. Till some communities operate outside the constitution with impunity, we shall never have equality in any form or manner. The Constitution of India has to supersede any religious laws without exception. I have expounded on this topic exhaustively in a previous post. You can check out the full text here. 

Having said that, I am sure that if a panel were to be constituted along modern principles of jurisprudence to analyze the entire Constitution of India, it would throw up some interesting findings other than the two sections I have highlighted above. 

I feel we should take the occasion of Republic Day to think about the Constitution of India in a new light. As the world's largest democracy and a global power at the centre of the world stage, it is our duty to lead the way to reinvention of our own principles as a means to adapt to our constantly changing environment. Celebrating Republic Day is all very well. But it is also our duty as citizens of this country to introspect on our own tenets, analyze our own codes and improve them in order to ensure that the fundamental principles of democracy in particular and humanism in general are upheld.

Jai Hind.

The Other side of the WTO Trade Deal

There has been a lot of furore about how the Indian government in general and Narendra Modi in particular has blocked a crucial trade deal and how our current "nationalist government" has played spoilsport to an international treaty that would increase global cooperation and create a new framework for a unified trade consortium. On the other hand, I also read about a few small voices that supported India's stand. As an educated Indian and a concerned citizen, I wanted to find out more. 

In this post, I intend to set forth before my readers the essentials of this controversy in understandable terms and why we need to take into consideration what the Indian government is saying seriously and why it cannot be relegated as mere bull-headedness. This post is as much of a revelation for me as for you. The deeper I went into the clauses of each agreement and the history of the WTO, the more there was to unearth. I'm no Amartya Sen, but I can read and understand English. So I tried to get to the root of the whole issue. Here goes my take on the whole mess. What does the WTO controversy consist of?

• The WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement which India is not willing to ratify UNTIL
• The WTO Agreement on Agriculture terms which it seeks are agreed upon. 

In order to better understand the situation, we must understand the relevant sections of both (the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement, hereafter referred to as TFA and the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, hereafter referred to as AoA). 

The WTO TFA was discussed in December 2013 at the 9th ministerial conference of the WTO held in Bali. The ministerial conference is the apex decision-making body/platform within the WTO and since 1996, there have been 9 of these (once every two years). 159 member countries of the WTO agreed to (in principle) take a better look at the specifics of the trade facilitation agreement which (if ratified) would mean - 

• Expediting movement, release and clearance of goods (including those in transit) from one country to another. 
• Increase cooperation amongst members (classified into economic status from developed to least-developed)
• Recognise the needs of aforementioned "developing and least-developed" economies and facilitate help from the developed nations to the latter category (termed in the ministerial decision document published on the WTO website as "enhance assistance and support capacity-building endeavours"). 

The WTO AoA was also discussed in the same conference and entails - 

• Member countries making a commitment of reduced domestic support
• Any such domestic support to be in the "green box" category. 

Here's all the relevant documentation. 

• The Bali Package Summary - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7129797/WTO%20TFA%20Mess/The%20Bali%20Package%20-%20Summary.pdf
• The details of the trade facilitation agreement - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7129797/WTO%20TFA%20Mess/Draft%20Ministerial%20Decision-TFA-Bali.pdf
• The details of the food stockholding decisions - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7129797/WTO%20TFA%20Mess/Draft%20Ministerial%20Decision-TFA%20%28Stockholding%29-Bali.pdf
• Definition of domestic support - http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/agric_e/ag_intro03_domestic_e.htm

What does this all mean? Essentially, to explain in layman's terms, the TFA is a treaty that seeks to ease customs and other regulations and facilitate the movement of goods from one country to another. However, it involves certain commitments that member countries HAVE to make. All member countries HAVE to abide by certain reporting norms (articles 1-3), HAVE to upgrade their technologies in order to fully do that (article 8.1) and HAVE to ensure that they follow certain standardized practices in case of legal disputes. All straight so far. However, at this conference in Bali; there was also a discussion on trade regulations relating to agricultural products (which falls under the AoA). The AoA states that though the ministerial body recognizes the need for member countries (particularly developing and least-developed) to promote domestic support (through various measures which we shall come to in a bit), said measures should not "disrupt" international trade. The ministerial body has then classified activities which any government can undertake into boxes. Activities like agricultural research or training to producers (farmers) are "green box" activities while activities like buying food-grain or equivalent produce at a guaranteed price are "amber box" measures. In language that you and I can understand, AoA seeks to limit the manner in which governments can intervene to help their producers (in our case; farmers). If we want to comply with the AoA, we need to reduce domestic support or ensure that said domestic support is of a non-disruptive (to international trade) nature. 

The TFA is a crucial deal for developed countries. It shall ensure that developing and least-developed countries HAVE to comply to certain standards and to certain reporting regulations. It shall save everybody (mostly developed nations) money to the tune of USD 1 trillion (as per an article on india.com) However, the TFA only talks about best-effort activities that the developed countries MAY or MAY NOT take to help enhance supply in developing and least-developed countries and to assist in capacity-building measures. If you check the actual verbiage, it is cleverly worded as "member countries are encouraged to share best practices . . . ". There's no obligation through. 

Since both discussions (the TFA and the AoA) happened in parallel, we saw this as a golden opportunity for negotiation. What the Indian government wants is to ease the regulations on the AoA. It wants to increase domestic support to ensure that it helps farmers grow more produce. It wants to buy that produce at guaranteed prices to give the farmer a better deal. It wants to ensure that its vast poor population is fed through subsidized produce. Just before the recently concluded elections, the Congress government (misguided and moronic though it was) pushed through the food security bill which entails enormous trade-disruptive practices that the government MUST adopt if it wants to bring this bill to fruition. At the 9th Bali conference, we negotiated hard. We wanted to ease regulations in the AoA if developed countries wanted to have their cake and eat it too in the form of the TFA. 

As soon as India took this stand, the western media must have swung into action. Through it's tentacle-like reach and its mass user base, it spread the word. India was the cause of the TFA to fail. India reneged on its original promise. India is to blame. Check out the sample headlines and you'll see why I call it either an orchestrated attempt of the media to spread misinformation or sheer laziness to do basic research. The headlines painted a very bad picture of the Indian government. 

• Deutsche Welle - What will India's veto of WTO deal cost global trade? 
• Reuters - Disappointment, uncertainty after India blocks WTO trade deal
• Wall Street Journal - Modi is acting like an economic nationalist by blocking the WTO agreement 

I expected the Indian media to swing into action and defend the government. After all, here is a government that is trying to ACTUALLY help the poor. A government is trying to bring to light a scatter-brained idea of the Congress which they (the Congress) never hoped to implement successfully and is going all-out and taking a stand for its own people. At the center of this controversy is of course Modi. The man is a leader. He's the champion for the underdog here. It's a sure-fire winner of a story for the media. But the media failed. It stuck to the tone that the western hemisphere was taking. Maybe it did not understand the issue. Maybe there's money involved in mainstream media houses and we can't afford to antagonise the big guns. Maybe the Indian media was just plain scared. Whatever the reason, our own people did not support Modi. When they should have.

There's a lesson in here for us. For you and me. That information can be represented anyway we want. but to sift through all the information that is available to us, we need to take effort. We need to rationally think our way through misleading words and evaluate facts. More importantly, we need to take a stand after evaluating those facts. A moral stand. In this case, the stand that India's poor need to be fed, need to be supported. The small and marginal farmers in India need to be given economic assistance by assuring them a minimum support price. 

I don't know whether our media will bring to the general public this side of the story. I don't know whether our media houses will decide that journalistic integrity also means taking a moral stand for the sake of the nation and bringing to the public attention the courage that it took for Modi to take this stand on an international forum so soon after taking charge of the country's affairs. I also don't know the global ramifications of this stand and why our media is not supporting our own government. But I do know that in this day and age of information, I shall be doing my little bit by spreading this word. I do know that a government's first and foremost duty is towards it's citizens. 

I do know that if by supporting such a stand, I am labelled a "nationalist" (as the media is so self-righteously labelling Modi and the government), so be it.

Debunking Astrology - Why it's a complete load of tosh!

Firstly, let me start off this communique with the proclamation of its stated goal – debunking the complete fraud that is astrology. No more and no less. Let me tell you why it is necessary.

The modern Indian is steeped in superstition. Urban or rural. Names are decided based on the “patrika”, marriages are arranged and are based on stupid assumptions in some chart laid out by unthinking frauds, dates for important occasions are based on even more idiotic assumptions, gold is bought on certain dates because it is considered auspicious to do so, vehicles are washed and cleaned on particular dates because it is considered auspicious to do so, machinery is cleaned on particular dates . . The madness is unending. I know of so many people who –

• Wear particular stones embedded in rings on their fingers believing they act as counter-balances to some fictional influence in their lives as determined by a horoscope made at the time of their birth.
• Consult an astrologer to decide on an auspicious date for important functions in their lives. 
• Consult a horoscope when deciding their own or their progeny’s marriage. 
• Actually believe that some zodiac sign is a typical representation of the population therein.

Before we even go into the technicalities of astrology, let us clear the air about its very basic premise. Astrologers believe that the position of stars at the time of your birth somehow determine your characteristics, your actions and thereby determine your future. Apparently, there is some “attraction” or “effect” that stars and celestial bodies have on human beings. Complete boloney. Here’s how.

The gravitational force exerted between two bodies is calculated according to Newton’s law of gravitation. This has been SCIENTIFICALLY proved to hold true. Newton's law of universal gravitation states that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Essentially –

Let us take the case of an average human. We know all the quantities involved; as follows –

Notation	Unit	Value	Remarks
G	N·(m/kg)2	6.67×10−11	Gravitational constant.
m1	Kilograms	75	Mass of an average human
m2	Kilograms	7.34×1022	Mass of the moon
r2	Metres	384400000	Distance between the moon and earth

From the above quantities, we can easily find F; or the force that is acting between these two bodies. The calculation comes out to 0.0024864 Newtons. That is completely miniscule. There are two factors that render this force negligible –

• The earth’s gravitation. The earth is exerting MUCH more force on us for the 0.002 N influence of the moon (less for any other star or celestial body as the moon is the closest to us) to have any effect on us whatsoever. To take an example, the force exerted by the earth on an average sized apple is approximately 1N. The force exerted by the earth on a 1kg object at sea-level at any given point on the surface of the earth is 9.8N.
• We are surrounded by stars, planets, asteroids, meteors and other celestial bodies. At any given point of time, it is VERY safe to assume that in any direction mapped with our own body as the origin of a Cartesian coordinate system (0, 0, 0); there are an equal number of celestial bodies. Therefore any force that each of these celestial bodies may exert on us will be cancelled out by each other. Simple common sense.

This is taught in colleges and schools around India. Yet it is astonishing how no educated graduate amongst the gazillions teeming in India have ever really sat down to do this calculation before consulting a horoscope to fix their own marriage. Or to do any of the activities that I have mentioned in the beginning of this communique. Sad state of affairs. Be that as it may. Let us move on to more of this nonsense.

Hindu astrology is based on 9 “grahas” or “planets” or “influencers”. These “grahas” are supposed to influence the thoughts and actions of mortals depending on their position in the sky. Here’s a chart of the 9 grahas and what we now know them to be –

Graha	English Name	Actual Category
Surya	Sun	Star
Chandra	Moon	Satellite
Mangala	Mars	Planet
Budha	Mercury	Planet
Guru	Jupiter	Planet
Shukra	Venus	Planet
Shani	Saturn	Planet
Rahu	Ascending lunar node	Orbital point
Ketu	Descending lunar node	Orbital point

• The sun is not a planet. It is not a “graha”. We (and most people who have studied till at least the 5^th standard) know that it is a star.
• The moon is not a planet. It is not a “graha”. We now know that It is a satellite and orbits the earth.
• Hindu astrology knows only 5 planets correctly. No doubt that is because these were the only planets visible to the naked eye before telescopes were discovered. Hindu astrology does not know of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto or the recently discovered tenth planetoid – Poseidon. 
• Rahu and Ketu are orbital points in the sky where the moon’s orbit crosses the sun’s orbit. There is nothing there. They are basically points of empty space. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that they can be exerting any influence whatsoever on anything because they are nothing. No mass, no matter, no waves, no energy – just points of empty space. Much like our minds when we choose to believe in this nonsense. 

Hindu astrology is based on what is called the “sidereal zodiac” chart in which stars are considered to be the fixed background against which the motion of the planets is measured. We now know that not only do start move but they also revolve. The universe is constantly expanding. Not just all stars but all celestial bodies are moving away from each other. Additionally, stars are revolving around the centre of their respective galaxies. We may not see stars moving, but they are. In the grand scheme of things – everything is moving away from everything else.

Another moronic concept used in Hindu astrology is the concept of a “muhurta” or an auspicious time for commencing any important activity; be it a family function or a wedding. In astrology, a “muhurta” is basically a unit of the day. The day is thus divided into 30 “muhurtas”. Assuming that sunrise happens EACH and EVERY day at 0600 IST, the “muhurtas” are 48 minutes in sequence. For e.g – the first is from 0600 IST to 0648 IST, the second from 06:48 IST to 07:36 IST and so on and so forth. We believe that certain “muhurtas” are auspicious for certain events. The fallacy in this concept is so obvious that any free-thinking child could point it out. Unfortunately, Indians are neither free-thinking nor children. We are insipid morons. Sunrise does not happen every day at 0600 IST. Each unit is taken as 48 minutes. Nobody knows why. Out of the 30 divisions of the day, 20 are considered as auspicious and 10 as inauspicious. Nobody knows why. One particular division (1624 – 1712) is not auspicious on Sundays but auspicious on other days. Nobody knows why. One particular division (1136 – 1224) is auspicious except on Mondays and Fridays. Nobody knows why.

I could go on and on and on. I could write volumes on how astrology is complete pseudo-science and how it has no basis in fact whatsoever. I could cite numerous famous scientists that have called astrology complete hogwash. The best example is India’s very own Hawking – Jayant Narlikar. He has written a definite essay on astrology titled, “An Indian test of Indian Astrology”. You can find the actual article here. He has definitively show how astrology is nothing but nonsense. Amongst other tests, he’s done this by asking a team of 27 astrologers to predict a human’s intelligence (which they claimed to be able to do). The results? No surprises there.

In this day and age, it is frustrating to see our society go deeper into the dark ages instead of progressing towards a scientific thought process. It is frustrating to see young children influenced by their elders into believing this nonsense and propagating it onwards. It is frustrating to see people wear rings on fingers to ward off ill-omen instead of working hard towards their goals. It is frustrating to see marriages break up because of some idiotic astrologer who doesn’t know the difference between a star and a planet. Again, I could go on and on. It is frustrating to see the government actually considering the prospect of a graduation degree based in astrology. It is frustrating to think that I may actually see B.Sc (Astrology) as an educational qualification.

But there is hope. I hope that future generations to come see this nonsense for what it is and steer clear of it. I hope that enough noise is made to ensure that people are educated about this silly superstition. I hope that we as Indians rise above this and aspire towards bigger and better things and realize that there are many other bodies of knowledge worth acquiring than astrology.

I do feel there is hope. But I’m not going to consult an astrologer to make sure. :-)

State Vs Religion - Why India is not a Secular Country

Article 44 of the Directive Principles of India makes the implementation of a Uniform Civil Code (hereafter referred to as UCC) the duty of the State. But since Independence, nobody has managed to implement it. Not just implementation, but our very narrow and limited vision does not see the urgent need of separating religion from state.

Broad aspects of the UCC are as follows –

• ·         Marriage
• ·         Divorce
• ·         Inheritance
• ·         Adoption
• ·         Maintainence

What the UCC seeks to do is to remove all religious laws pertaining to the aspects above and bring in ONE UNIFORM law that shall have no basis in religion.

Foe e.g – in marriage, we have the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, The Indian Christian Marriage Act 1872, Muslim Personal Law 1937 and if one chooses to marry in an irreligious fashion; the Special Marriage Act 1954. The UCC directive of the Indian constitution seeks to replace all these with one standard law to govern all religions. What this would do is separate religion from state. Why do we need it? Because religion fails to take morality into account. Religion is obsolete and immoral when it comes to legislation. A widely used example is the Shah Bano case. Quoting wiki -

“Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985 SCR (3) 844), commonly referred to as the Shah Bano case, was a controversial maintenance lawsuit in India, in which Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim, daughter of a police constable and mother of five from Indore, Madhya Pradesh, was divorced by her husband in 1978 but even after winning the case at the Supreme court of India was subsequently denied alimony because the Indian Parliament reversed the judgement under pressure of Islamic orthodoxy.”

In essence, Islamic Law has limited provisions for the protection of women’s rights in a divorce. Amendments to this law have provided for a lump sum to be paid as protection but that too needs a lot of reform in how said lump sum is calculated and how this law could be effectively implemented to begin with. In fact; under Islamic Law divorce can be unilateral (decided by the man with no say for the woman). Shah Bano was denied lawful alimony and maintanence because of religion (In this case Islam).

The UCC seeks to replace all these archaic laws with laws based on morality. The Hindu and the Christian set of laws have their own idiosyncrasies too and the UCC seeks to replace and uproot them just as much as any other religion. An example is the case of Roop Kanwar in Rajasthan. She was a Rajput woman who was immolated as late as 1987 after her husband’s death and then hailed by idiotic Hindus as a “sati mata” or a “pure woman”. Though 45 people were charged with this crime, only 11 were booked and those too were acquitted in January 2004.

In actual fact and in my personal opinion, the UCC should not only dissolve and uproot religion from the aspects (marriage, divorce, adoption etc.) mentioned above but also apply to ALL laws of the land. Religion and State should be completely separate. In a modern and enlightened world, we need to see the harm that religion is doing and keep it out of governance and administration. Reservations and quotas are another huge example of how religion has subverted the judicial and the legislative systems of India and has ruined meritocracy in almost all aspects of our lives; right from admissions to colleges to government jobs to even the private sector (which Nandan Nilekani is rooting for so loudly).

India is not really a secular country. We just pretend to be. With most of our laws having a basis in religion, there is no point in calling India a secular country. Secularism is a word that is so misused in India that it has lost all meaning whatsoever. Let us analyze what it really means.

Sec·u·lar·ism  [sek-yuh-luh-riz-uhm] – noun.

·         Secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.

·         The view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.

Note the glaringly obvious fact – Secularism DOES NOT mean appeasing any particular religion over another. That is idiocy. Secularism DOES NOT mean quotas. That is plain myopic. Secularism DOES NOT mean treating all religions equally. That is common sense. What secularism DOES mean is that religion and state needs to be separated. It means that religion has NO PLACE in administration, governance, law-making and ANY aspect of implementation thereof. We seem to have forgotten that in our rush to be proclaimed secular. What secularism currently means is nowhere close to what it was intended to be by our founding fathers. Going by the etymology of the word itself; the meaning has been subverted in our very minds.

We need to realize how this pseudo-secularism is hurting us and bring in an overhaul. Not just by implementing UCC in law but in our own behavior on a day-to-day basis. By realizing that religion needs to be kept behind closed doors. Our social conduct with our fellow men needs to be devoid of religion. Devoid of prejudice and devoid of the currently narrow and myopic thought-process all of us employ.

A small step in that direction will be the implementation of the Uniform Civil Code.