As most of you know, for centuries, Indian tradition has given parents ultimate power in deciding who their children marry.  As India continues to modernize, however, marriages based on love are becoming increasingly common.  The long held norm of arranged marriages is being replaced by matrimonial unions based on love, and the often blinding emotions surrounding it.  The institution of marriage, however, is as important as ever, and is still seen as highly honorable.  Quickie marriages such as those available in Las Vegas, are not an option, and divorce is regarded as socially unacceptable.  Parents therefore find it crucial to ensure that their children’s love interests are acceptable suitors for marriage.  For this task, “wedding detectives” have recently become heavily relied upon (Click here for the full story).   

The recent Associated Press story available above, speaks of Ajit Singh, a marriage investigator whose business has been booming.  Because Indian views on relationships have begun to modernize with the rest of the country, families have begun to employ detectives such as Mr. Singh to validate the legitimacy of the potential union.  People are growing desperate to ensure that their childrens’ marriages don’t end in disaster in the face of the complications that love brings about.  Because of this concern that many face in this deeply traditional nation, multitudes of agencies that focus on premarital investigations have sprung up.  Detectives such as Ajit Singh are “consulted to look for signs of trouble: a potential groom about to lose his job, or a potential bride too flirtatious with the neighbors.”  “We start with the house: How many people live there, whether the property is owned or rented, if the subject in question is married or has been engaged before,’’ said Singh. “We talk to drivers, neighbors, neighbors’ drivers, maidservants.’’  Parents hire Mr. Singh to find out if the man in question really has the education and large salary he claims, and if the woman in question is “running around.” 

This story raises a few issues worth discussing about the society we will all be visiting this summer: Is this sort of spying on future sons- or daughters-in-law ethical?  Is it a good or a bad thing that arranged marriages are being replaced by Western-style marriages?  Do you feel that the divorce rate will go up or down in India as the culture shift continues.  Is it fair to assume that there is any more love in “love marriages” than in traditional arranged marriages?

-John Barry

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage_in_India

http://www.pardesiservices.com/tradition/arrangedmarg.asp

http://berchmans.tripod.com/arrange.html

http://marriage.about.co/od/arrangedmarriages/a/childbride.htm

On one hand, you could say that India is a notably tolerant country conversely, many argue that this isn’t so. Conflicts within the country between different castes and classes leave the impression that India is not so tolerant. However, treatment of tourists and foreign immigrants reveal characteristics of a tolerant society. An article in the New York Times highlights some main points about tolerance in Indian society. Akash Kapur argues in an article (NYTimes Article) that despite India’s episodes of intolerance, India is an extremely tolerant society. Looking at the two sides of the argument I couldn’t come to a conclusion on whether or not India could be considered a tolerant society.

As more and more western immigrants inhabit the country you would expect to see cultural clashes and rising tensions. However it doesn’t seem like, this is the case in India. There have been few episodes of hostility towards foreigners. Why is this?

Tolerance is shown throughout India’s history. India is one of the most culturally diverse countries, with over 22 official languages and encompasses people following almost every major religion in the world. Political life in India is based on the concept of secularism, and a complete separation of church from state. Rather than portraying hostility towards religion, India maintains a state of indifference that may play an important part of India’s tolerant disposition. Secularism in India can be traced back to Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India, who rejected the idea that India should form a religious state. It seems the tradition of religious tolerance in ancient India still prevails today. But does it really?

Despite India’s tolerance toward the rest of the world, episodes of intolerance are still present in Indian society. For example, one of the most evident displays of intolerance is the discrimination against lower castes, in additions to communal riots highlighting persistent tensions between religious groups. There have been multiple clashes between Hindus and Christians and between Hindus and Muslims.

In 2002 Hindu-Muslim riots broke out killing more that 1,000 people. In the early 1990’s Hindu-Muslim violence arose as a result of the destruction of a Muslim mosque by a Hindu mob. In the aftermath of the incident, 2,000 people were killed in the riots and the bomb blasts that accompanied the incident. More recently there were protests against a Bollywood star supporting Pakistanis on Indian cricket teams. These protests were instigated by Bal Thackery led Shiv Sena party. These are just a few examples of some of the intolerances that have surfaced within India. Another interesting article I found in the New York Times (Click Here) views tolerance as a weak pillar in India.

In spite of all this, India is engaged and open with the rest of the world and as a result thriving. India has been able to work with other cultures enabling the Indian economy to gain a great deal of strength. Without a general attitude of tolerance, would the country have been able to accomplish its current economic success?

Is India a tolerant society? Can tolerance be the foundation for economic prosperity in India? Is there something we can learn from India’s openness and engagement with the rest of the world?

Additional Sources:

http://www.hindubooks.org/sudheer_birodkar/hindu_history/secularism.html

- Jordan Wente

Addendum from Hemanth

Please consider the complexity of the country when making any judgement. It is still a 60 year young vibrant country with people coming from so many different races and cultures. Before the Indian Union was carved out in 1947, Indian people were never part of what you call an Indian State. There were more than 900 different princely states at that time. There were bound to be clashes given such diversity. Most British Commentators thought that the country was ungovernable and unmanageable. They thought it will break up into 900 different parts again before they even blinked. But Indian state has not only survived but thrived.

We have had setbacks no doubt. Partition of India into India and Pakistan was the biggest of those, and a very challenging one at that because of religious overtones. Thousands lost lives because of the uncertainty over their status after partition. Pakistan turned into an Islamic Republic while India chose to be a secular state in spite of the fact that 80% of the population was Hindu majority. The state itself was founded on the pillars of respect and tolerance for all religions, and why not? Even Hinduism was not a single religion. It was a combination of multitude of religions which existed, clashed, and integrated . So, toleration for all religions was an in-built quantity.  Second incident which tested Indian state’s secular credentials was the Khalistan movement by some radical organizations in Punjab. Third incident which really left a blot on our secular credentials was when historic Babri masjid in Ayodhya was brought down. Hindus considered it a holy place as it was the birth place of lord Rama. When muslim kings ruled India before the British, they destroyed the earlier shrines and constructed mosques right over the sites. Some Hindu fanatics got together in 1992 and incited the crowd to destroy the mosque.  That started a long and bloody communal riot. In 2002 as you have rightly pointed out, another communal riot happened which started with a group of Muslim fanatics burning a passenger compartment full of Hindus chanting “Hail lord Rama”. Aggressive proselytization tactics by Christian groups was met with intense hatred by fanatical groups.  All these and much more, is very much part of Indian History. In fact, I feel these were necessary speed-bumps in India’s progress in national reconciliation and regional power equation corrections.

However, in general, toleration is appreciated, toleration is taught, and toleration is practiced in India. We as India, wouldn’t be existing if not for tolerance.  In fact, I feel India is one of the most tolerant countries in the world, considering its diversity. See its leaders for instance. Dr. Manmohan Singh (India’s PM) is a practising Sikh which is a minority religion in India. Sonia Gandhi is the head of the Congress Party which is in power. She is an Italian catholic lady wed into the Nehru-Gandhi family and she is probably more powerful than the prime minister himself. Our recent president Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, was a Muslim, and he was a very popular head of the state. He was a leading missile and nuclear scientist. In India, like US, religion is not a qualification for success.

Recently the prime minister of India made the following statement at a conclave which I believe very accurately describes India’s progress in spite of the hurdles.

“While people all over were legitimately proud of India’s vibrant democracy, the Government had not been able to deliver in full measure on the enormous promise and potential of the country.  I recognize the frustration well wishers feel when they lament why things don’t work faster or why well formulated plans and policies don’t get implemented as well as they should be.  There is a price India is paying to carry all sections of its people along in national development, but the price is worth paying. “

An Interesting Religious Map of India

Photo: Ville Miettinen

One thing about India that always perplexed me is that cows are seemingly allowed to roam free on city streets and in garbage strewn alley-ways. Why is this? Is this related to cow worship? Is it against the law to eat beef? Isn’t the practice of letting cows roam around dangerous to people driving vehicles? Who takes care of these animals? Who owns them? Who nurses them to health when they’re sick?

My curiosity forced me to research the myths, facts, and controversy about this quizzical practice.

I guess it really all started back in the earliest days of the Hindu religious texts called the Vedas from the second millennium BC. There is no prohibition of the slaughter of cattle in these ancient texts, instead, the slaughter was ordained as part of a sacrificial rite. The early Hindus didn’t avoid the meat of cows; they apparently only ate it in ceremonial feasts that were overseen by Brahman priests.

As the Hindu religion changed over time as a result of socio-economic factors, the practice of cow worship increased. The Vedas from the first millennium now contain contradictory passages. Some passages speak of the ritual slaughter as did those before, while others talk of the strict taboo against beef consumption.

By 200 A.D. the transformation of restricted consumption to cow worship had taken hold. The Brahman priests forbade people to abuse or feed on it. It is called Aghanya - that which may not be slaughtered. The practice of ritual slaughter was removed from religious feasts, and meat eating in general was restricted to nobility.

Today all Hindus are forbidden to eat beef, most people citing the Ahimsa, the Hindu belief in the unity of all life as the spiritual reason for the taboo. It may also be because of the influence of vegetarian practices of another religion called Jainism.

This quick answer seems a little too much of an easy answer though. Other explanations are that maybe the Hindus wanted to further differentiate themselves from the Muslim beef-eaters invading from the north, and that proclaiming that their cows were sacred animals was a way to solidify their ethnic-religious unity. Other reasons for the change of status of the cow might be for purely practical reasons that are related to the preservation of the agrarian society.

It used to be a practice, that a cow would be slaughtered to feed an important guest that was visiting or for the religious ceremony. It would be an insult to the guest or Brahman priest to not slaughter a cow, but to butcher a chicken or goat. The practice of butchering a cow could in reality take the ability to sustain the family away and wipe them out, yet they were forced to perform the slaughter out of social norms. The cow provides many functions to the agrarian Indian family. The oxen till the fields, the milk from the cow is used to feed the family, the butter from the cow is burned for light, and the dung is used for cooking…. by instituting a taboo against the eating of beef, the country as a whole benefits. It seems natural that if there truly is a benefit to people, the priests would support it and evolve their practices in support of this as well. It appears that this may have actually occurred.

Photo: Eli

A common theme throughout Hinduism is the reverence for all things. You can see this common theme of respect for the cow by Hindus rather than true worship as you might worship a God. Cows in the Hindu religion are called Go-Mata (Mother Cow), the one who should be worshipped because of the various graces she bestows on humanity. The “worship” of the cow is not at the same level as Christians worship god. This is evident in the displays that tourists sometimes see when observing cows nosing into a shopkeepers stall.

Westerners expect shopkeepers to respond to these situations with deference due a sacred animal; instead, their response is a string of curses and the crack of a long bamboo pole across the beast’s back or a poke at its genitals.

Mahatma Gandhi recognized this and commented on how sacred cows were being treated.

“How we bleed her to take the last drop of milk from her. How we starve her to emaciation, how we ill-treat the calves, how we deprive them of their portion of milk, how cruelly we treat the oxen, how we beat them, how we overload them.

Sacred animals?

There is a day set aside once a year for the Go-puja or the day for worshipping the cow. This is an occasion that people use to dress them up in costume and treat them with the respect that they are due.

Photo: Dey Alexander

So my next question is this. If so much respect should be accorded to a cow, why are they freely wandering around? In the rural areas, if an extended drought has occurred and the cow stops lactating or becomes barren, which generally happens, the condition may be permanent. A cow in this condition is no longer the asset that it once was and with the taboo in existence, what do you do with a cow like this? It turns out that the local government keeps a public grazing field for just this circumstance. Cowboys are employed by the local governance to care for them (after a fashion) until old age and natural death. If the cow does happen to start lactating again, the farmer has an option to reclaim “his” cow for a small fee, and he’s back on track.

If you live in a city, families don’t have much land and complain that they cannot sustain their cows with their barren land so the cows are allowed to roam the streets, fending for themselves and feeding on garbage and whatever vegetation they can find.

Photo: Leon Morenas                      Photo: Jessica Goldstein/NPR

Unfortunately, this practice of letting cows wander freely has resulted in many cows dying of starvation, In 2000, cows in Lucknow, India were mysteriously dying of some kind of a wasting disease. There was no explanation for the deaths of what were once healthy cows. After being released as usual, into the city’s streets to graze on garbage they became skinnier and weaker, and then died of what appeared to be starvation.

Plastic bags were found to be the culprit. Cows will find edible garbage that was discarded in a plastic bag, and they will eat the whole thing, bag and all. The local veterinarian who performed the autopsies found that there were 50 to 60 plastic bags in the cow’s stomachs that were preventing the food from being digested.

Laws were passed to prevent the thin plastic garbage bags from being used, but the laws were ignored and the cows continue to die. Evidently respect and worship only goes so far.

Some interesting facts:

There are currently over 40,000 cows roaming freely in New Delhi.

To deal with them, New Delhi employs over 100 cowboys.

The National Transportation Planning and Research Centre (NTPRC) reports that the number of road accidents in India is three times higher than that prevailing in developed countries. The number of accidents for 1000 vehicles in India is as high as 35 while the figure ranges from 4 to 10 in developed countries.

I wonder if it’s because of all the cows wandering around on the roads. What do you think?

Works cited:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/7708836/A-Brahmins-Cow-Tales-History-of-Beef-Eating-in-India-by-Hindus

http://www.dancewithshadows.com/beefeating.asp

http://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/things/cow.htm

http://www.indiayogi.com/content/symbolism/answer.aspx?id=3

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91310904

http://www.neoncarrot.co.uk/h_aboutindia/india_statistics_1.html

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040806/science.htm#1

http://sociology101.net/readings/Indias-sacred-cow.pdf

While reading books like The Post American World, and The Elephant and the Dragon, I’ve found myself pondering the serious and easily apparent problems like clean water supplies, extreme poverty, and out-of-control population growth. However, there are business concerns that plague India too, some of which threaten the pace of India’s successful entry into a 1^st world power. Sonal Zhaveri argues in India’s biggest problem – loss and under-utilization of Intellectual Property Rights ( Click Here ) that the under-utilization of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) of Indian born products is preventing India from being accepted as a top tier research and development hub. This is especially true in the pharmaceutical and bio-technology sectors, two sectors that are of particular prominence in today’s world. Not only does India risk missing out on the obvious immediate financial benefits of developing the next great pharmacological wonder-drug or bio-tech breakthrough, but more importantly they fail to receive the recognition and status that comes with proving themselves capable of fostering the great scientific minds and resources needed for these breakthroughs. In his article Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues in Horticulture: An Indian Scenario with Particular Reference to Medicinal Plants ( Click Here ), H. Singh points out that this is currently a problem in the field of Medicinal plants.

However, Singh approaches it from a different perspective, arguing that the proliferation of legal protections slows the pace of innovation. This is evidenced in how developing countries like India, struggle to adhere to the TRIPs Agreement, which obliges all members to provide patents in all fields of technology and also to provide IPRs for new plant varieties. While an important new discovery is made, it may not be shared with the community in a way that allows for valuable collaborative projects. India, as well as the rest of the business world, must find a way to balance the legal rights of inventors, investors, and researchers, while preserving the integrity of the mission: innovation. In order for India to become a true 1^st world country, they must not overlook the importance of establishing the legal infrastructure required to ensure that they take full advantage of each and every opportunity that they create for themselves.

How can India do this without opening themselves up to a very real possibility of being exploited by more advanced countries? Can/should they lead this charge, considering how much is at stake for Indian innovators? Should this take priority over, say improving the physical infrastructure of roads, access to drinking water, and reliable airports?

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 Brasil, 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 Brasil 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