Merry Together

img_1240

Understanding fulcrums the scales of knowledge and ignorance.

Without it neither knowing nor oblivion holds any meaning.

It builds the foundations of instinctive responsibility.

That goes beyond the ambit of oneself

To connect with the unitary Soul.

That pulses in unison.

Like rhythms of drumbeats,

And raindrops on glass menageries,

Like the crimson dawning sun

Glistening the waning harvest moon,

And reflecting onto a reflective universe

Within ourselves, behind our brains,

By hammers on drums,

And light on cones,

All to become one.

 

Kites over Barbed Wires

img_4556

Our legacy is one of the constant refugee.

Constantly running away from oppression.

Out of fear for our lives and survival of our family.

Our lives become menageries of tragedies.

Latent ones that remain through generations,

Chronic ones that hum themselves in stories,

And acute ones we feel within ourselves,

Where do we really belong?

And while thinking this we sense an unfamiliarity with the ground beneath us,

But it is also strangely familiar at the same time, as it is just as we are – there.

We are strangers in our motherland,

And lesser anywhere else,

Nobles of faraway lands,

We cook and clean, and work with our hands,

And dream with our wings spread wide,

Across demilitarized zones and mines.

We find power in our strife,

To make the best of life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fruits of Mirrors

9112015

Enemies have more in common than friends.

Seeing one in another’s eyes, in that ageless rage;

Fighting for the same thing, from opposite ends.

The man, the mirror, the reflection of him;

Are three different beings; but not to him.

He sees himself; he sees his own enemy.

Then the breaking begins; a hydra of terrors.

In the end no one remembers the mirrors,

Nor the spark that lit the gunpowder plot.

Just a swath, scarred, pillaged – a field of dead.

Boys washed up, girls drilled – plagued forever;

With an indelible suffering that cannot be said;

Nor felt, by anyone other than the lads,

Who see the fights; ingest the sights,

And reflect them back onto mirrors.

And see war-scarred faces of fathers,

And mothers and brothers and friends,

And them – etched into their DNA.

A Story of a People

Wealth

The hottest historical controversy in Bengal has largely remained the same for the last 70 years. The question – how did Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose die – has pricked every Bengali’s psyche at some point in their lives. Recent developments have again shed light on this freedom fighter’s legacy and passing.

And this awakened in me some questions – What difference does it make? Why does it matter how he died? To answer this, I have to answer even broader questions: What does it mean to be Bengali? What is our identity, our sense of loving, humble pride? This requires a quick trip down memory lane.

The geographical location known as Bengal – and as West Bengal and Bangladesh for the last few decades – lies atop one of the most fertile agrarian deltas in the world. Here sediment deposits from the Gangetic river-system – fed by Himalayan glaciers – form the world’s largest silt delta.

In laymen’s terms, anything will grow in this soil with very little work.

Its sister river-system – the Indus – being geographically closer to more arid areas of present-day Middle East, East Europe and North Africa became site of the world’s first migrant nations: The Indus Valley civilization produced Mohenjo Daro and Harrappa, the latter inhabited by over 20,000 in 3300 B.C.

As migrations continued the population drifted further away from the Indus valley, hugging the Hindu Kush mountain range, towards the Himalayan mountain system. Then, following the river systems down from Himalayan glaciers a group of clans from the Caucus Mountains settled in the Indo-Gangetic plain.

They called themselves Arya – noble. These tribes then moved from the tradition oral history to written history and created the body of work known as the Vedas, the Hindu books of life. For the next few millennia the Aryans urbanized the Indo-Gangetic plain, pushing further towards fertile Bengal.

This urbanization included everything from re-education and inequitable reconditioning of the human population indigenous to the Indian sub-continent; implementing Vedic principles as the backbone of civilizations rooted in the Indian sub-continent; starting the caste-system; and advancing mathematics, arts and sciences by leaps and bounds. Major metropolises sprung up on the banks of the Ganges – Varanasi, Patliputra (Patna), and Kotalipara, seat of the Gônggarriddhi kingdom.

Gônggarriddhi – wealth of the Ganges – occupied a significant majority of the Gangetic delta around 300 B.C.; naturally bordered by the Ganges on the west, the Bay of Bengal in the south and the Himalayas in the north, this kingdom expanded to the doorsteps of present-day Myanmar.

Western anthologies first reported this kingdom after Alexander the Great’s excursion into India. After trekking through the plains, upon making it to the west bank of the Ganges – with the Gônggarriddhis defending their keep in the east, with war elephants – Alexander turned back, forsaking from his dream of Asian expansion.

For the next 1400 years Bengal led the Indian sub-continent in agrarian productivity and social progress. Multitudes of small principalities sprung up on the various tributaries of the river-system. Lavish palaces and gardens adorned thriving port cities and inland villages.

In that time Muslim migrants from Persia began moving into the Indo-Gangetic plain. Before Babar sowed the Mughal Dynasty into the fabric of Indian terrain in the 1200s, small Persian tribes had already settled throughout the subcontinent. Being latter immigrants, they gravitated towards the obvious hot-beds: the Indus river system, but more desirably, the up-and-coming Gangetic river system.

By 1600 A.D. Bengal became one of the world’s first peaceful religiously heterogeneous societies. Muslims and Hindus lived as neighbors and friends. Each community maintained a certain distance from the other because of obvious deviations in their respective faiths – Hindus don’t eat cows, for example.

Around that time European explorers landed on the shores of India. The British chose the less busy Bay of Bengal and its port-city of Chittagong. The British crown chartered a joint trade venture with British business guilds known as The British East India Company on the last day of 1600.

In the 17th century the Indian subcontinent was ruled by a collective of princely states that paid tribute to the Mughal Empire – the dynasty that preceded the British. The Mughal Empire had weakened from its height two hundred years earlier, when its borders extended from modern-day Pakistan in the west to modern-day Bangladesh in the east, and a large majority of the subcontinent’s peninsula. As a result, the princely states had reignited political rivalries with neighboring kingdoms.

The power vacuum created by a weakened centralized government allowed the British to exert more influence over business dealings with individual princes and nobles. After all, Britain was at the peak of its power in the 17th century. By hook or by crook, through contracts and loans, by bribes and playing sides, the British government granted favors to some princely states – by incentivizing their business relationships and supplying them with arms and ammunition for their ‘welfare and security’ – while silencing their rivals by spreading religious propaganda amongst their subjects, undercutting social development by destroying and/or ‘exporting’ all of Bengal’s natural and trade commodities to Britain, and finally aiding their ‘allies’ in defeating their neighbors.

This operandi repeated itself many times, beginning with Bengal. It helped the British gain control over all of present-day India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. At some point, when most princely states had either been dissolved or made vassals, the Empire resorted to outright war to overthrow remaining opposition. To do this, the Empire went further into 17th century India’s structure of governance.

Just as princely states paid tribute to the Mughal Empire, smaller noble families that controlled the various agrarian and trade districts – zamindari families – paid tribute to the princely states in exchange for their protection and patronage. From the time of the third Mughal Emperor – Akbar the Great – this de-facto representative form of secular government kept relative peace and stability in the region.

In their final leg of asserting control over Bengal, and thereby the rest of the territory, the British undercut remaining princely states by playing the same game of divide-and-conquer between princes and zamindars. These families, encouraged by bribes, self-preservation and no other alternative, sided with the stronger British. This gave the British near-absolute control over every commodity, since the zamindaris largely controlled the substantive portion of the gross domestic product. After securing its conquest, over the next couple of centuries the British government and business guilds did something unprecedented in world history.

Before British Imperialism many wars were fought, many dynasties and kingdoms rose and fell, many races of immigrants settled, and many indigenous people were displaced as a result. But never before – except for a story in the Book of Genesis – in human history had a friendly visitor come bearing gifts and the intent of depriving its hosts of their livelihoods for the sole purpose of enriching their own coffers. Unlike every other immigrant and invading force, the British siphoned every natural resource out of Bengal – and the rest of the Indian subcontinent – and returned few favors.

Cotton and silk produced in Bengal were shipped to England to be fashioned into clothing; the finer products remained in England while the more common were resold to Indians at inflated prices. Simultaneously age-old cottage industries that wove these fabrics using unique techniques were destroyed – my 85-year old aunt tells me stories of a guild that made cloth that could be folded down to 1/100th its unfolded size; the British chopped off the weavers’ thumbs.

The best rice and tea were shipped to England while Bengalis were left with, at best, second-best. To add insult to injury, the British Empire – after complete annexation – began imposing sales taxes on the products it made from Bengali raw materials and sold in ‘British Bengal,’  unfairly enriching British society at the expense of Bengali lives and livelihoods.

As a result of this gross injustice on the masses over 10 million Bengalis died in the Great Bengal Famine of 1770; a little over 150 years later another 3 million died in the Bengal Famine of 1943. The greatest irony that natives of a fertile crescent starved to death under its rule speaks volumes of the aptitude of the British Empire. After all, they too were British subjects – or at least that was the impression Britain gave the world. In time the British Empire expanded throughout the Indian sub-continent, with its eastern capital in Calcutta (now Kolkata), a major Asian metropolis at the turn of the 20th century.

It enlisted Indians in its every affair, but never as equals.

More than all the material deprivation, more than the torture and violence, Bengal refused to accept this disparity. As the British Empire gained its foothold over Bengal an intellectual movement sparked amongst Bengal’s intelligentsia – The Bengal Renaissance.

This movement produced a vast majority of all liberation propaganda through Bengali art, writing, history and philosophy. It integrated ancient wisdoms from the Vedas and various other schools of thought to build a body of work that strengthened Bengali – and Indian – identity, while subtly sowing the seeds of rebellion and liberation. Netaji was born at the tail-end of this movement and at the height of British governance turned oppression. He went on to becoming the leading gardener of Rennaisance philosophies – strengthening Bengali identity and repelling British oppression with the same hand.

In 1911, faced with an informed and inflamed Bengali populous ready to fight for freedom and equality, the Empire moved its Indian capital to New Delhi, citing its central location and historical significance as the subcontinent’s center of power (various dynasties have governed India from Delhi over the last 2500 years). In the short-term, it made matters worse for the masses. The Empire implemented new taxes; increased arbitrary, cruel and unusual punishments; enlisted Indians in its armed forces during both World Wars; and refused to grant Indians equal status as subjects of the British Empire.

This further incited Bengal’s intelligentsia, by now led by Netaji popularly and Rabindranath Tagore intellectually. Around the same time when Hitler rose to power, Bengal’s intelligentsia was ripe for revolt. To some extent it agreed with Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent approach, but as British oppression intensified, Netaji revived the Azad Hind Fauj – Hind Liberation Army. This army enlisted Indian dissidents of the British Empire and anyone interested in fighting for freedom from the British.

Because this guerilla army could not be established within Empire borders without being condemned as terrorists, nor get any material assistance from India, Netaji reached out to Hitler in Germany and the Empire of Japan while installing training camps in various parts of Asia. Both countries had joined forces and declared war against Britain. From Netaji’s – and every Bengali’s – perspective, the British had systematically exploited, tortured and starved millions of Bengalis over generations solely for the purpose of power and wealth, not unlike Hitler. Except, Hitler did what he did over a decade while the British did their deed for three centuries. So it mattered little to him what Hitler or Japan’s main objectives were so long as they weakened the British. As Britain was being destroyed by Hitler’s forces in the west, Netaji and his guerilla army nibbled away at Britain’s power over India.

Then suddenly, the British changed their diplomatic policy. Historians have attributed this change largely to Gandhi’s non-violent movement. History has forgotten the Bengali Renaissance, Bengali sacrifices, and Netaji – who instilled the very idea of freedom from oppression into the heart of a hemorrhaging nation.

The British Empire agreed to a slow and collaborative transition from British India to independence. The executive team included the British Empire, Gandhi and his followers, Jawaharlal Nehru, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, various other political leaders, and some freedom fighters who were not affiliated with Bengal or Netaji. No Bengali played any role in this diplomatic process.

Netaji had been labelled a terrorist and enemy of the Crown; because of his bold militancy the non-Bengali freedom movement had withdrawn their support of him and the Bengali freedom movement. Bengal was effectively removed from the geopolitical process of carving up the Indian subcontinent.

Against the wishes of Gandhi and Jinnah, the British and Nehru accepted no other alternative but to divide India along sectarian lines. The religious propaganda machine the British employed when they first started their campaign again helped in inciting communal violence throughout Bengal and Punjab. This weakened the age-old solidarity between Hindus and Muslims of India. These provinces at the hearts of the Indus and Ganges river-systems erupted in religious violence as a consequence, giving proponents of a divided India cause to fracture India by deceit and sheer force of ambitious will.

Millions of people were displaced, thousands slaughtered; Hindu businesses and temples burned in the newly formed Islamic State of Pakistan while Muslim businesses and mosques were destroyed in India. My family was among the Hindu refugees ousted from present-day Bangladesh during this time. Over the last few decades religious violence has ripped through these areas of western-structured eastern governance. Terrorism rooted in religious misinformation has cost India and Pakistan billions of dollars – and 70 years after liberation the innate peace of the Indo-Gangetic plain has not returned.

The people of Bengal, left with scraps after centuries of exploitation, scattered throughout the world, continue to struggle under the enormous weight of a fast-paced 21st century; the internet, globalization; and a shattered Bengali identity has weakened a proud People who continue to endure the test of time.

The mystery of Netaji’s demise sits at the center of that shattered Bengali identity. Bengal has not been able to understand how a liberation movement it led popularly and intellectually essentially deserted it and opted for elusive geo-political games with the oppressor. It doesn’t understand how nations that today reap the harvest of Bengali sacrifices could forget about it and the man who led that just cause.

Bengal doesn’t want an apology from anyone, nor reparations. It understands that the British Empire of the 21st century and the India of today would go bankrupt if it paid equitable reparations to the people of Bengal. But it deserves an explanation for the sake of closure; so Bengal can finally close the most painful chapter of its history, regain faith in its own identity, and move forward with a clear conscience.

The British had a reason other than the over-crowdedness of the Arabian Sea for establishing its roots in Bengal. In the 2000 years between Gônggarriddhi and the British, the heterogeneous people of Bengal, through struggles and paradigm shifts, had mastered agriculture, weaving, education, trade, tenacity, and tolerance. Though the British government will never accept it, they had landed on the shores of a civilization far more advanced than themselves; they just didn’t know it. In her well-rounded hubris Empress Victoria failed to look at the history of a People who deterred Alexander. Fifteen years into the 21st century Bengal is still one of the most densely populated areas in the world; Bengalis carry their traditions and stories wherever they go, sharing the essence of Tagore and their motherland – a place English words can never do justice.

 

 

Fine-Print Tax – An Open Letter to President Barack Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Thank you for your service. I am proud to have voted for you and am writing this open letter in the hopes that you will address the issues of income inequality, predatory corporate ideology, and an ever-cumbersome quality of life for majority of America – and coincidentally, or consequently, the world.

I noticed something recently; the cost of living has tripled since 1986. I was four at that time; the cost of my favorite orange Popsicle has tripled in the last 28 years. Today fewer kids can afford it, it has shrunk in size, and corporate profit margins have never been higher.

Interestingly, this Popsicle inflation I speak of has happened in India. But eerily similar compounding inflations have happened in America. Gasoline in middle-America – Danville, Illinois – cost 98 cents in 2000; it has more than tripled. And again, corporate profit margins have never been higher.

I see nothing wrong with capitalist progress and the ‘free market’ economy, nor with the ultra-rich who set trends, hike up prices, and predatorily lure the masses and their wallets. But I do have a problem with the manner in which it happens – the lay person gets tricked by the corporate machine.

Specifically, we get tricked by fine-prints –manipulative advertising and marketing strategies geared to do one thing: grow profit margins for the corporate engine. Fine-prints come in all forms, shapes and sizes. The most infamous among them, sub-prime mortgage fine-prints that nearly sank the global ‘free market’ in 2008-2009. Other fine-prints are less obvious. For example; pricing gasoline at $3.99, and then nearly tripling the font of the dollar amount. This creates an optical and mathematical illusion that a gallon of gas costs three dollars when it actually costs much closer to four.

A more tortuous example is selling food and drink items in flashy packaging that attracts the consumer to the brand, while miniaturizing health hazard warning signs like “Contains Phenylalanine” or “Products contain added Monosodium Glutamate – Not Recommended for Infants below 12 months.” There are some things fundamentally wrong about this. First, it distracts the consumer with advertising gimmicks while practically hiding potentially crucial health information in plain sight. Second, and more importantly, it places a burden on the lay person to find and know about those chemicals and their effects.

You once famously said, “It’s Arithmetic.” You were absolutely right; everything is arithmetic, a set of mathematical calculations. Except, fine-prints create a second, illusory mathematical parallel universe. It makes lay people believe they have bargained for and received a much different product than they wanted, let alone needed. And a father of three earning minimum wage, with a wife taking care of the kids, cannot afford to believe he paid thirty dollars for gas when he actually paid closer to forty.

Nor can a single mother working two minimum-wage jobs afford to take unpaid vacation days to take her daughter to the doctor because she was too overwhelmed to read all sides of the packaging of her daughter’s lunch sandwich. That duty that fine-print imposes on the average lay citizen is villainously inconspicuous and omnipresent in the corporate landscape. And this all happens for one reason: To increase corporate profit margins. Coincidentally – or intentionally – the surplus fine-prints create make the ultra-rich richer while hundreds and thousands of people lose their homes, develop severe illnesses, and cannot make ends meet.

I am not saying the big, bad ‘fine-print’ wolf is the only contributor to a tougher and more stressful way of life for an increasing number of people. But I am saying, it has a major role to play. So in the face of this problem, I would very much like you to discuss the pros and cons of legislating a tax on fine-print.

All businesses that use fine-print in their advertisements, legal documents and product labels must pay a tax. The logic: it unreasonably encumbers the fundamental rights of lay citizens to utilize any and all available faculties for the purposes of pursuing life, liberty, and property.

Fine-prints impose an unreasonable burden on the lay citizen to understand and agree to drastically inequitable and complex business contracts when pursuing such fundamental objectives as getting an education, buying a house, buying a car, saving for the future, etc. It creates an unjustifiable duty for people to find, know and understand that the companies they trust put unnecessary harmful chemicals in their food. It fraudulently tricks cash-strapped people into believing they are paying less.

Our government must strive to make resources that promote general welfare and safety of its human citizens more readily available than corporate tax shelters. It must strive to make the lives of its citizens better. A fine-print tax will not tax an individual citizen; it would, however, impose a rightful duty on businesses to streamline their thinking and execution. And coincidentally – or consequently – bring in revenue from upper echelons of the dollar ladder without directly compromising personal fortunes of the ultra-rich. I hope you will consider. I await your public response.

Sincerely,

FullSizeRender(1)

Oeishik

Ratna

Bharat

Spiders and geckos, and sweet mango pickles;

Roses and lilies, and buses with ruffles;

Lights at odd times, and sounds of all things;

This is the wondrous place of my dreams.

Elephants training and bulls guarding temples,

Weavers of all kinds, and all of their thimbles;

Rivers that rumble, and mountainous streams;

This is the wondrous place of my dreams.

When it cyclones, when it monsoons;

I remember these: clouds will soon disappear,

A sunshine is always near, glimmering through the trees.

Police Abuse

Rise

 

It cannot be that the very institution founded for the general welfare and safety of society turns out to be the oppressive baton slamming down upon innocent students exercising their right of expression. It cannot be that the police oppress the very tenets they were created to protect. This simply cannot be.

But it has become so – because we have allowed it to be. And it has happened over and over again, in shantytowns and school buildings, in Jadavpur University and the Colony Arms Building. An epidemic of institutional abuse has transcended borders and oceans, continents and governmental paradigms.

A police force must only operate to protect the rights of citizens. Any police action that inhibits, suppresses and abuses citizens’ rights and dignities violates that very purpose. And in that instant it loses its credibility, its moral, populace-based authority. And it must be upended and recalibrated.

I asked a friend why and how this can be; he aptly said, ‘because they can.’ The responsibility falls upon each of us to say, ‘no, they cannot.’ No, they must not – because if they do, the society we faithfully call civilized will be humanity’s biggest fallacy. No, they cannot stampede our God-given right to be free.

One World Trade Center

IMG_0266

This will be my first post-2001 September 11th outside America. A few days ago I came across an article about this solemn American day – and the floodgates to my memories rushed open. When it happened, I was not officially American; but we loved one another just the same. We had adopted each other. So the fact that that Tuesday still makes me indescribably sad comes as no surprise.

When it happened all Americans felt a moment’s pause. Everything stopped. For days following the massacre a certain numbness descended into every walk of life. A somberness overcame classrooms; a concoction of melancholy and rage infused into bars and restaurants. Few could see beyond vengeance.

Thirteen years later, through memory lanes of retributions and mistakes, America continues to rebuild its pursuit of happiness. Each year it mourns the murder of innocence; it remembers the fragility of life and the strength of conviction – and then it picks itself up by its bootstraps and goes back to work.

For this, with each passing year, with each memorial and life-story, I become a prouder American. 9-11 did not keep us down; it saddened us beyond repair and enraged us beyond justifiability – but it did not keep us down. We find strength in the memories of those we lost; we find reason to better ourselves.

Dadu

Dadu

Rain drops splattered on red dirt this morning as the abode of peace paid homage to its most beloved teacher, father and friend. I grew up playing in his courtyard as he gazed with a smile that I will never forget. My heart wrenched intermittently at the absence of his laughter. But I was reminded of his omnipresence. He was everywhere – in the leaves and buildings; deep-seethed into fond memories.

He is not gone; he has just become one with the majesty of that which he most adored – Shantiniketan.