It seems that the political, social, and economic goals with which Mao Zedong ruled China with, in 1943-1976, still resonates strongly today except, this has nothing to do with China. I’m talking about the Maoist rebels of India. These rebels have been fighting the Indian government for over 40 years, with the newest batch of radical Maoists springing up in 2004. Although these rebels use deadly force to help get their points across, they believe in many of the same ideals that the Chairman himself espoused. These insurgents can be found in 20 of the 28 Indian states and the size of the group is estimated around 20,000. Violence has been ongoing for decades, yet the Indian government and military forces have been unable to put down this “terrorist organization”.

Just as recent as the 16^th of February, 24 policemen were killed in an attack on police forces by rebels wielding machine guns on motorcycles and trucks. This attack took place 105 miles south of Calcutta and similar attacks have taken place in the rebel stronghold of Northeastern India. The insurgents and the military forces have been in constant back and forth battles, with each side suffering casualties. These rebels are targeting officials such as military, police, and political figureheads. The Maoists are trying to fight for what they believe in, but isn’t using deadly force just invalidating their political legitimacy?

After learning more about the Maoists, they have certain points that they believe in the following:

• Land to the poor and landless. Later on cooperative farming is to be established on voluntary basis.
• Forest to the tribal people.
• End of the rule of the rich and the upper caste in villages and the uprooting of the caste system. Uproot all discrimination based on gender and religion.
• Seizure of the ill gotten wealth and assets of multinational corporations and their local Indian partners.
• Self-determination for the nationalities, political autonomy for the tribes.
• Establish a state by the poor and for the poor, where the present day exploiters would be expropriated.
• Participation of people in day to day administrative work and decision making. Democracy at the true grassroots level with people having the power to recall their democratic representatives.

The Maoists are mainly comprised of the extremely poor citizens, including Dalits (untouchables) and tribal peoples. They want to ensure freedom and equal rights for everyone, regardless of religion, social, economic, or geographic status. Albeit their cause seems noble, violently killing the people that could possibly help them in the long run seems like the wrong way to act. There have been small instances of violence all around the country, and as we prepare for our trip, every precaution must be taken to prepare ourselves for any and all skirmishes. How does a country like India solve a crisis that has been going on for over 40 years? Is there another alternative to fighting?

I do not want to sound like the harbinger of bad news or the one who is overly worried about security issues; I only want to highlight current events that are taking place in India. I’m positive that every precaution will be taken and that, we will be taken nowhere near any form of violence. With that said, I am looking forward to an excellent and safe adventure in India. Click here for Article 1 and Article 2.

-Jason Silver

Addendum:

A very important topic that should be included in any analysis of India is the effect of nuclear weapons in the region. Both India and Pakistan possess these weapons and the capacity to deliver them to the other country within ten minutes, tops. It is inevitable that if nuclear weapons were even deployed by one of the two countries, because of the close proximity of their citizens, both Pakistan and India would be dramatically affected.

In the event of war, both countries have pledged not to use nuclear weapons as a first resort. India, as the dominant military power and the victor of all three wars between itself and Pakistan, claims it would not use nuclear weapons preemptively (No-First-Use Policy). However, Pakistan will not take such a position. Pakistan covets its nuclear weapons dearly, as it should. India’s conventional military forces dwarf those of Pakistan, prompting Pakistan to view its own nuclear capabilities as the major deterrent to an Indian invasion.

As a side note, here is a link to a possible scenario of what might happen if India and Pakistan ever went to war: Click here. As a quick and dirty summary, India’s navy would severely dominate the seas and would cut off Pakistan’s main port of Karachi, both air forces would sustain major losses with India’s likely prevailing, and the strength of any land campaign is questionable (though both would sustain heavy damages – possibly more to Pakistan who would likely fight a defensive campaign). Keep in mind this is only a possible scenario, but it seems like a good deal of thought was put into the analysis (also consider that it was written about eight years ago). Overall, according to this view, Pakistan would likely sustain heavier losses, proportionately.

It has been estimated that Pakistan and India possess about 10-100 and 50-150 warheads, respectively. In addition, while Pakistan declared that it has detonated around six nuclear devices, India and the United States place the actual number around two, and believe that the devices were about two to three times weaker than the strengths Pakistan claimed the weapons had.

Every so often, little skirmishes occur on the Indo-Pakistani border. Is it possible that one of these could escalate into a full-fledged war, as in the Gulf of Tonkin incident? How far do you think either of the countries could push before nuclear weapons would be called upon? Do you think either country would ever use these weapons? Could Pakistan merely be bluffing with its nuclear claims?

-Jay Ponto

I was watching an episode of “Undercover Boss” the other night in which the President of Waste Management (one of the largest solid waste handler in the U.S.) went incognito, to work side-by-side with some of the company’s employees who handle the most gruesome, laborious, and stressful tasks of the business. Watching this episode really got me thinking about waste. For residents of developed countries, our waste is quickly and neatly sequestered from us and our living environments. We put our waste bins on the curb, and during the twilight of the early morning hours, faceless municipal servants arrive in a big, loud truck, and magically, the refuse disappears. With a single flush, raw sewage is removed to the bowels of the underground sewer lines. In America, waste removal and disposal is a finely tuned system, perfected over a couple centuries and transformed into a money-making machine. It is integrated into our public infrastructure and operated by private businesses, yet ironically hidden from sight.

But consider India. In most images of densely packed Indian cities or slums, one of the first things you notice is profuse amounts of garbage strewn over the landscape. One can’t help but wonder why India hasn’t taken more progressive steps to fix this blatant problem. With such huge population densities and burgeoning ingenuity, you’d expect the government to have come up with some sort of solution for this problem. And even if the government didn’t step up to fix the problem, the private sector should see this as an opportunity to make some serious money, right? Click on these links to read some interesting articles on the subject: Article 1, Article 2.

Well, the private sector certainly has stepped up, but not in a corporate sense. The business of trash is a serious one for many of the poor, and it is a relatively lucrative source of income. According to Bharati Chaturved, author of the article, “Ragpickers: The Bottom Rung in the Waste Trade Ladder,” one out of every 100 residents in Delhi engages in trash recycling. With a population of roughly 12 million, that works out to be about 120,000 residents (some estimate as many as 150,000) that serve and create the market for waste processing and recycling. It is estimated that this ad hoc waste management force saves Delhi’s three municipalities a minimum of $12,000 a day. According to Chaturved, it has also been estimated that a single piece of plastic increases 700% in value from start to finish in the recycling chain before it is reprocessed!

However the work of a “rag-picker” is extremely demanding. Most live in slums or dust bins with little or no access to clean water and food. Rag-pickers are very territorial, and they fiercely guard their scavenging areas. Most of them wake up by 4 am before all the good pieces of trash are plucked away by competitors. In areas that have the most lucrative trash bins and streets, middlemen often extort bribes from pickers in order to allow them unfettered access to the bins or alley ways. If caught by the police, they are sometimes beaten or taken into custody and assigned to cleaning the police stations. Some get lucky enough to get access to landfills, the gold mines for recyclable materials, and they have to often pay hefty bribes.

Once the pickers get the trash, it must be cleaned and dried properly or they will not be able to sell it to a middle man. If the cleaned material is too wet, or too dirty, they stand to lose a huge percentage of the redemption price or not be able to redeem the material at all. Allergies, cuts, respiratory ailments, and exposure to deadly biohazards are the primary risks associated with this type of work. Another article titled “The Human Scale of Recycling in India” by K-Fai Steele, also discusses some behind-the-scenes details of this informal waste management system. Steele writes that many of the trash pickers dig through piles of rotting food, dirt, and human excrement to gather the paper, plastic, glass, and metal scraps. While this sounds repulsive and desperate, this industry processes 59% of Delhi’s waste and supports the livelihood of countless families.

So what do you think about Delhi’s waste management system? What do you think would happen if the city were to implement a more efficient, highly industrialized and systematized method of waste management? How would it affect the quality of life for all of the city’s citizens? What would it do to the economy? Do you think this is an efficient way to handle recycling in a big city like Delhi? I am curious to see what you think the long range net effects would be if Delhi adopted a waste management approach like that in the U.S. Would it do more harm than good?

-Erika Bylund

Well, not really… I just decided it would be fun to follow Dr. Carr’s lead with the preposterous blog titling.

I received my February issue of National Geographic in the mail (proud subscriber!) and was excited to read about 27th generation blacksmiths – they actually do exist!  This month’s feature on India shined light on yet another one of India’s subcultures – the ‘Lost Nomads’.

As always, the pictures are my favorite part. If you aren’t going to read the article (Click Here), I recommend you at least take a look at the brilliant photography (Click Here).

The nomadic groups highlighted in this article take the idea that each person is born into their own destiny one step further - you are born into both your profession and your nomadic lifestyle. The Gadulia Lohar (literally “cart blacksmith”) built weapons for royalty in the 16th century. Flash-forward 500 years and their iron-working skills are irrelevant and have been outsourced (to China, likely). Nowadays, they travel and sell spoons for 65 cents.

How long can these people continue on with their family’s legacy? Is there a point at which they just decide to settle down?  Or maybe are forced to settle down and “join” society? As they do not have a mailing address, they aren’t provided with schooling, government welfare, or any of the benefits that are being provided to the modern society.

As we begin the 2010 US Census this month, we are reminded of just how many citizens wander and have no address at which to be found. Nomads are seen in all cultures, but it is staggering to find that nomads make up 7% of India’s population.

NatGeo writer John Lancaster concludes his article with the phrase “their forges had all gone cold.” Visibly and metaphorically, this is a statement that speaks volumes of the plights of these nomads and others like them.

-Catherine Kristensen

This post originated as a response to the “60 Minutes” segment - “Out of India.” I remember seeing this when it first aired in 2004.  India is the first developing country to achieve modern growth using a knowledge economy.  Again, India’s growth is not only a product of its talent, but also its work ethic- its hustle- if you will.  The more I reflect on this video, the more I see it as a preamble to a broad discussion on globalization.

Globalization has a negative connotation in circles on both the left and the right.  The argument against globalization’s virtues is grounded in either the loss of US jobs, or the exploitation of developing countries.  At the University of Montana, I ran with a crowd who abhorred the players in the WTO/World Economic Forum and turned to movements like the World Social Forum (WSF).  The WSF has been held several times in Brazil, once in Kenya, Pakistan, Mali, Venezuela, and in 2004 – Mumbai, India.  Well over 75,000 people attended the Mumbai WSF.  Though not quite as compelling as Noam Chomsky speaking in Porto Alegre Brazil 2003, Joseph Stiglitz was a highlight speaker in Mumbai.

The movement originated as a response to the Washington Consensus and policies of the IMF and World Bank, which were seen as gouging the developing world.  The premise of the organization is described as follows on the World Social Forum India website: “The World Social Forum is not an organization, not a united front platform, but ‘…an open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and inter-linking for effective action, by groups and movements of civil society that are opposed to neo-liberalism and to domination of the world by capital and any form of imperialism, and are committed to building a society centered on the human person.’”

However, globalization viewed closer to the center, has many benefits as well as negatives.  It’s difficult to determine the net impact.  According to the 60 Minutes segment, “Out of India”, it is clear that globalization is improving the quality of life for millions- if not billions- of people in emerging nations like India and China.  It is also allowing multinational corporations to enforce trade agreements that may override local governance and law.  The verdict is still out concerning the benevolence of globalization, but its reality is undeniable.  Polarization on the issue, like many issues, will not be beneficial in moving forward.  However, concessions on both sides of the argument are necessary to ensure the undeniable reality of globalization progresses, for the benefit of multiple stakeholders.

-Kirk Story

With the Winter Olympics now in full force, it got me thinking about India’s involvement in the sports. I got excited, dreaming of a Cool Runnings’esque situation with amazing athletes running on ice or skiing down the slopes.

Sadly, only three men out of India’s one billion plus population made it to the winter Olympics in Vancouver this year. I have to say that I was very disappointed, given all the hype over athleticism in India, particularly over the unbeatable skill of the cricket players. After a little more digging, I discovered that it wasn’t the skill (or even the snow) that athletes in India were lacking, but rather the money. Athletes in India do not receive money from the government and rarely see endorsements from companies in India’s booming industry unless they work for these companies themselves. Even in the case that they are working, they consequently have little time to train. Furthermore, they probably won’t be seeing money from Stephen Colbert anytime soon.

However unfortunate the situation may be, Indian athletes have hope—in the railroad industry. In the article “In India, Many Top Athletes Work on the Railroad” by Elliot Hannon of the New York Times, the Indian Railways is providing Indian athletes a secure income that supports their athletic endeavors and a flexible work schedule that allows athletes to train (no pun intended, Click Here). The Indian Railways even sets aside jobs specifically for top athletes to give them opportunities to represent their country. They give them this support in exchange for their hard work in their respective sports. And in the off chance that one of these athletes decides to slack off on the field, they bear the consequence of having to work full time, a slight impediment to their training schedule. When the railway athletes bring home a medal, as a few do in the summer Olympics, they come home to bonuses and promotions rather than endorsement deals and advertisement opportunities.

Even though the railway is a great chance for athletes to achieve their dreams of becoming an Olympian, I still see the Olympics as a missed opportunity for India. Seeing as the Olympics are a great source of pride for the United States and countries all over the world, why aren’t the Olympics as highly valued in India? The country offers a wealth of amazing athletes in astounding numbers, but how is it that there is so little support for them in a time when India is becoming such an industry giant that’s so heavily focused on improving its economical image?

- Danielle Steussy

“I say this to everyone: Our fantasies are about earning a good living,” he says. “Having maybe a car — not two. Getting an education for your kids. Our fantasies are not about getting to be president of the country, to sit in a rocket and go and break a meteor. Our fantasies are very real.”

Shah Rukh Khan, one of Bollywood’s biggest film stars speaks of the difference between American and India films in an interview with NPR just prior to the release of his new film, “My Name is Khan.” Now, I must admit, my first experience with Bollywood was on an Air India flight from Chicago to Frankfurt nearly six years ago and I vaguely remember it being much more than a love story with lots of singing and dancing. Oh yeah, and there was this other time that I find myself on a tour bus with an Indian film crew in Lauterbrunnen, Switzerland, but that is whole other story I won’t get into. Since then I have watched only bits and pieces of Bollywood films, outside of American releases such as, Slumdog Millionaire, Monsoon Wedding, and The Namesake. However, Khan’s comment made me reanalyze my experience with Indian films to discover that he makes a very good point…a little singing and dancing is nothing outlandish compared to aliens taking over earth and a super hero spitting spider webs from his fingers.

Khan describes Indian films as being very real, scripted after real India fantasies like getting an education, owning a car, and earning a living. Not all American films are super fantasies, in fact there are thousands of American films telling tales of love, family hardship, and personal success stories, but when was the last time you heard of an Indian film about heroes in outer space stopping a giant meteor from hitting the earth?

Are our fantasies much different or has our film industry just tainted the minds of our viewers with extreme entertainment? How do you think our dreams in America differ from those in India? Of course, we are not battling equivalent poverty levels as in India, but there are thousands of Americans scrapping for pennies and living in substandard conditions. As children and students, don’t we dream of making a good living and being successful? What do you think is the driving force behind many of the extraordinary American films?

Though some argue the Khan is performing outside of his typical role in his upcoming film, he affirms that he is once again acting out an India fantasy that few Indians get to realize…he is going to America.

To see the movie trailer for “My Name is Khan”, click here.

Check out the full article on NPR here.

- Emily Schaapveld

I love “Thursday Nights” on NBC. Every week my wife and I meet up with some of our married friends and watch our favorite shows: Community, The Office, and 30 Rock. Every now and then, we watch “Parks and Recreation,” but it is not one of our favorites. Yesterday, it occurred to me that all four of these shows feature something that few other television comedies do, but something that seems to be part of a growing trend; they all have Indian characters in their casts.

For instance:

·On “Community,” Danny Pudi plays Abed Nadir, a pop-culture junkie who aspires to become a director and is currently taking film directing classes at Greendale Community College. The character of Abed is Palestinian descent, but the actor Danny Pudi is of Indian descent.

·On “Parks and Recreation”, Aziz Ansari plays Tom Haverford (born Darwish Sabir Ismael Gani), a sarcastic, underachieving government official for the city of Pawnee.

·On “The Office,” Mindy Kaling plays Kelly Rajnigandha Kapoor, the office chatterbox who likes celebrity gossip, and one-sided conversation about trivial teenage matters.

·On “30 Rock,” Maulik Pancholy plays Jonathan, Jack’s loyal and overprotective personal assistant, who at times appears to be in love with Jack.

What I think people find most refreshing about these characters is how they defy stereotypes, which is always healthy. They don’t assume the more typical roles of doctors, engineers, lawyers, IT workers, or worse yet, convenient store owners like Apu from “The Simpsons.”

Perhaps these casting choices are evidence that Indian culture is making massive headway into U.S. pop culture. After all, Indian clothing, food, music, and religion have been growing in mainstream acceptance and maybe Americans now know just enough about Indian culture to laugh at its portrayal on TV. Or perhaps it is the American ignorance concerning Indians and Indian culture that makes it such a funny element to include in television comedy.

One of the main themes in the humor associated with each of these characters is how ignorant, insensitive, and out of touch their white American counterparts are to their ethnic background. For example, who can forget when Kelly won the “Spicy Curry” Dundie Award on “The Office” or when Michael started talking in a horrible Indian accent and tried to offer her some of his “googy googy” on “diversity day?” Another theme is how out of touch the Americanized Indian characters often are with their own ethnic background or the struggles they have separating themselves from stereotypes.

Two new television shows are taking this Indian infiltration even further. “Never mind Nirvana” on Fox is said to be like “Everybody Loves Raymond “only with all Indian characters, and “Outsourced” on NBC is about a customer service manager training call-center employees in India. I haven’t seen either of these shows yet, but am curious to see what they are like and how popular they become.

So what do you think? Is it coincidence, political correctness, globalization, or are American audiences simply opening up? Has anybody seen “Nevermind Nirvana” or “Outsourced,” and what is your take on these shows?

-Phil Hamer

I thought I would follow Dr. Carr’s attention-grabbing title with one of my own, except this one actually has to do with the topic of my post…….well, sort of. Last week, Boa Sr. of the Great Andamanese Tribe died at the age of 85, which marked the end of a tribe that survived for thousands of years on a remote island off of India (Click Here). Boa was the last speaker of an ancient tribal dialect called “Bo”, and to me, her death was a blessing in disguise to find a topic to write about. Boa spent her life on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, which are actually closer to Thailand than India, but they are territories of India. The islands intrigued me. So I tried to research them and all I found was grainy tourism videos, and vague descriptions of tourist destinations. It made me wonder why isn’t India capitalizing on this territory the way U.S is capitalizing on Hawai’i?

The Andaman and Nicobar Islands are tropical islands with pristine beaches, and perfect weather for amazing fishing, and epic surfing opportunities. They are also home to some of the oldest tribes in the world, which leaves some of the islands and land off limits to visitors to preserve their culture. The land that is open to tourism is for the most part, rustic and undeveloped. I did find one resort that would be considered a five star resort, but the rest were small cabanas on the beaches that put the word resort on them to make them seem more appealing.

This makes me wonder why India is not pumping money into the Andaman Islands to develop parts of the island and make them more tourist friendly. Paving roads, distributing power, increasing electrical production, and providing drinking water could go a long way in making the islands a romantic getaway for the large middle and upper class Indian citizens or foreign tourists that have some time to vacation. When the US took over Hawai’i, the islands had few paved roads and little electrical distribution. Now, a person can rent a car and travel around an island in a few hours. This occurred because the US military needed a rapid transit system between bases in Hawai’i, and it made the islands more accessible, which acted as a catalyst to increase tourism.

Granted the Indian government has no need and no desire to make the Andaman and Nicobar Islands a military outpost, it could benefit from another tourist destination. The tourism from the islands could generate jobs and increase revenue from the islands. Its location could interest tourists in both India and Southeast Asia, due to its remote spot in the Indian Ocean. The islands could act as an alternative getaway that wealthy Indians and foreign tourists could use to relax and let loose.

Imagine the possibilities! Rather than the end of “Slumdog Millionaire” in which Jamal Malik wins a million dollars and gets the girl, think of this. Jamal wins a million dollars, gets the girl, and then goes to the Andaman Islands! Well, that doesn’t have as good of a ring to it as I thought, but I am sure it will, if there is advertising and further development to make it a destination. For a country that is emerging as a power in the world, do you think this a possibility or is the idea just a little too American for India?

-Fred Peemoeller

I assume that anyone with even a remote interest in business and the global world at large has been loosely monitoring the recent WWF pissing match between the Chinese CCP government and US firm Google.

See/read the below January 30, 2010 Wall Street Journal article on this topic (be sure to click on the “Comments” link at the top of the article and peruse some of the comments that were posted in response to this article):

Battling the Information Barbarians: China Often Views the Ideas of Foreigners, from Missionaries in the 17th Century to 21st-Century Internet Entrepreneurs, as Subversive Imports.  The Tumultuous History Behind the Clash with Google.

Ring a bell from your admission essay question when you applied to the program?

Were you aware of this historical tension between China and the West?

See also/read this nice blog post from David Wolf of the always insightful Silicon Hutong blog, based in Beijing, Why Global Internet Companies Fail in China and his really, really good Ad Age article cited therein, The Internet Does Not Rise Above Nations and Cultures.

Books will be written on this dispute and much dust still needs to settle before any sane writer takes on this subject and starts to write these chapters, but what are your early thoughts on this dispute for now?  Did Google to the right thing?  Did it take the right approach?  Why did it do what it did?  How do you predict this will all end?