Nature's Horizontl and Circular Differentiation -Man's Vertical and Linear Enequality

To be frankly speaking though the idea for this post is ready, details are very much at nascent stage and much clarity of thought and material is yet to be developed. The central idea is that all things in nature are different, no two things are similar yet they are at same horizontal plane, are equal and exhibit harmony. On the other hand man made system are hierarchy based, vertical and linear. They are based on unequality though many social reformer unsuccessfully trying to make everything equal- which is against the law of nature.

To illustarte nature's law-in this context- I remember 2 stories that I read in child hood. First , one Rat wishing to become big and stronger- ask boon from a Rishi and in turn, changes form, from rain, air, mountain to become more and more stronger but ultimately again becomes Rat in final pursit of becoming strongest. That is cyclical transformation to reach at original point. Second one also relates to Rat. One day when lion got hold of Rat, it prays to make him free and promises to help lion in case of need. Though lion did not feel that he will need any help from Rat, he sets Rat free. However, one day Lion was caught in a Net, Rat frees him by cutting the Net. Lesson -as per nature all are different but equal and of same importance.
Important thing is that, Nature does not follow rule of similarity. Yet, in its scheme of differentiation nothing is more important and nothing is frivolous. No system is follower and no one is leader. Nothing is big and nothing is small. Every one is dependent on another and every thing is interdependent. Arrangement is horizontal and circular.

Take the example of seasons- summer, rainy and winter ( these three are taken as these are well known to common folk). For nature every season is important, every season's intensity is dependent on previous season. We can not say which season is first and which one is last. And so on.

Against this back drop- where nature follows differntiation- take man made system. Though, every utopian philosopher propagates message of equality. Yet all man made system's are based on inequality and here differences are vertical and linear. It means two ends of system do not meet i.e. top does not meet bottom. Here the person or value (it can be culture or any thing) looks down with contempt the person or value below it and at the same time aspire to become part of system above it. Mumbaikar looks down UP /Bihari - they wants to settle in Mumbai. While Mumbaikar want to settle in USA. The same can be said about caste system. Though presently in the days of reservation and concession- reverse aspiration is also there.

Another example. The king and common man (ruler and its subject) and in between so many layers. Arrangement is vertical and not circular. King does not meet common man. King commands more respect etc. etc and so on. Though from nature's point of view differentiation has to be there and some one has to labour and some one has to organise ( All can not organise and all can not labour). This vertical inequality creates friction.

What is natural- nature's differentiation or man's Utopian attempt to make all man ( and other things) equal. There is vast difference between different people with regard to education level etc. Educationist lament that only 10-15 % of school children enroll in college. If all enroll in college what will happen ?. If all become engineer who will be mechanic. Let us assume with the invention on mobile phone one fine morning every land line phone is discarded and thrown in sea. What a waste of resourcess it will be.With the invention of Rayon, if every one stops using cotton cloth. Its manufacture and use vanishes in thin air. But down the years disadvntage of Rayon surfaces but now cotton cloths are not available. If 15 year old Taxis baned in metros are not used in tier 2 -3 cities , what will be wastage.

If some new concept-thought-technology does not pass through cycle of -theory-reaserch-laboratory-prototype-introduction in small market-mass use-decline -vanish ( This cycle is not restricted to material manufactiring-but apply to every system- be it law-social custom and so on), any wrong untested concept can desroy the human being.

Thus we find concept -that every person, law, technology should be equal is unsustainable uneconomical and impractical. In Political Scince USSR's falure is a example.It will completly eliminate chance of economic use of resources and concept of recycle.What I am trying to explain is that differntiation in values, lifestyle, economic system, political system and every where are natural. They can not be wished away. 50 years back population used to be differentiated based on whether they are having electric connection or not. Today it is based on DTH connection or any other criterion. Earlier we used to lament so many are not going to school today we lament that so many students after finishing school are not going to college. Or as Per Mr. Nilkeni, in 60-70s, deprivation/differentiation and state's effort was to provide masses "Roti -Kapada-Makan", in 90s focus shifted to "Bijali -Sadak-Pani" and presnetly or near future it will be "UID-Bank Account-Mobile".My point is that in human system different layers will always be there. In fact value of many possession is valued by elites because it is not available to masses. They lose value once they are available to masses.

This wrting can go on end less. No Culture or Reformer can abolish this differences. Further we need not feel guilty or be apoligitic for this differences. No one but Rahul Gandhi directly can become PM of Country. Only Mr. Parekh's son can mobilise 750/- cr. in private placement in new company. All we can learn from nature is that no one should steal space or right of others. A metro citizen neither should try to make tribal like him nor feel superior to him nor encroach upon his rights. A owner need not feel guilty for better living as compared to his employee. Only it should be ensured that your wealth is not at the expense or cost of employee. This will ensure harmony and co-existence.

Further higher stage is to connect with the lowest rung of hierchy. It can be by CEO with peon. PM with common man. and so on. There is proverb. Ultimate of Ruling the masses is to serve them.

Lesson from this discussion- at Micro level we need not feel unsatisfied or proud on our position in hierchy. At macro level our culture should allow coexistence of all system as well as mobility from one layer to another one withiout resistance.

From the end of Book Cover.

These notings are from my different books, which I read during 1977-82 for my studies. What I understood of that subject was noted at the end of Book. Many books and notings are lost, but a few notings are torn and kept with me.

The same are reproduced here.

History.

History reveals that every system while growing accumulates seeds of destruction. It may be due to the fact that "All pervasive social system, which can accommodate all natural laws , instincts & desires, is yet a dream". And so system gives us means to live present only. When future turns to present , new system must come up to fulfill the need of new present.

That is why in spite of different characters of different Viceroys, British History can be summed up under one sentence, " (Alternate)Waves for expansion/ consolidation, forward/ neutral policies, one following the other.

This explains why Gandhi , a true orientalist was succeeded by Neharu a Westernised by any standard.

Prakash

2/11/80.

Economic Theory.

You can criticise any organisation ( for economic help) from top World Bank to lowest Primary Co-operative Socity that

1. Its resources are inadequate against need ( As study of economics is study of scarcity of resourecs).

2. Its resourecs are not used properly ( As there will be never unanimous view among different interest groups ,seeking help, on priority). Semueston on difficulty of "proper signal of purpose by socity" in public ependiture.

3. Its benefit were largly cornerened by big units or by those who had already big resources at possession and small needy are by passed. Small and big can be defined , in different context. For Primary socity , small can be land less labourer and big land lord. For World Bank, small is a African Country and big/ resorceful a European country.

As always, small are either not fully aware of opportunity or unable to match required supplemental points for using resources of organisation, while big has both positive points.

Prakash

24/10/1981

Indian Economy

To be brief, Indian economics should / must follow following lines in that order for next 20 years

1. Making agriculture a commercial & perenial activity. ( Absorbing a large no. of disguiesd unemployement).

2. Creating non-agriculture oppertunities at village level. (Absorbing surplus labour from agriculture)

3. Starting consumer industries (To cater the demand arising out of point 1 & 2)

4. Erecting capital & basic industries (To make point 1,2 & 3 possible)

Any other course or change in order of points will be counter productive and will and to our difficulties).

Prakash

27/01/1981.

(After 20 years we see result of not following above lines. Share of Ag. in GDP is down, but percentage of persons dependent on Ag has not gone down, resulting in widening gap between Bharat and India including sucide by farmers.

Prakash

27/04/2010).

Scince and Technology.

Average indian is disillusioned with Scince & Technology and what relevence ( or benefit) it has with (given to) society.

While discussing the relevance of Scince we forget that there is nothing like relevence in Scince: In scince , and many useful scintific discovery/ invention were not sought (like X Rays) or there importance was not relised at the time of dicovery ( relativity).

Of course "relevent" is relevent in case of technology and technology being connected with industry (industry to profit and profit to society) , it can never be irrelevent.

When we blame S & T for some of our problem, like getting "wrong phone number", we acccuse in wrong direction, such problems are managerial not technological.

Prakash

6/02/81.

Pyschology

I am indebted to this Book for clearly differentiating Love ( an act of belonging), sex (biological want) and marriage (social bondage out of security need).

It has helped me in not mixing love-sex or love -marriege concept, which socially seems one and the same . Concepts in separable.

Prakash

6/02/81.

Civics/ Politics/ Constitution.

This writing was done on a book of Constitution but no longer available with me in origin. The same is reproduced by memory and some updates are also given.

India, as republic (people are rular) is new concept for us. We are feudal by mind set where rular is rular and people are subjects.

So many powerful CMs( in syndicate) selects weak PM Indira Gandhi. This weak PM defeats official candidate of her own party and gets elected V V Giri as president. Later many CMs are appointed by High Command. Circle/ Cycle is complete. At one stage "Indira is India and India is Indira" a slogan give by Barua reflects the reality of time.

Further, though there is no provision of changing state govts. on Parliament elections but, Janata Party as well as Congress both did this unconstitutional thing in the name of public wish.

So our set is feudal under the banner of republic.

Some time in 1980-81.

Up dates.

Realising the decreasing controll over memebrs , anti defection bill is brought in by parties to increase the controll. But result is opposite of what was intended. Every ambitious leader floated his own party, and with his / her 1-2-3 memebrs in parliament forces big parties (congress/BJP)to bend on kness /backward . It is given a good name Coalation Dharma. PM has no controll over minister collegue. There is no collective responsibility, every minister takes position according to his/her own party line.

Some one opposes Sonia Gandhi as PM on ground of foreign origin. She makes great sacrfice, declines PMship, but creates National Advisory Council, becomes its chair person a super cabinet and super Prime Minister. All power with no accountability.

All this was common in politics and so while releasing Anderson (of uninon carbide) Arjun Singh's Trust receives donation is no news.

But it seems last hope of republic is also crumbling and a perception is growing that SC Chief Justice might have been influnced by future prospects ( Becoming a Chief trustee to a Trust for Bhopal Gas Victims) while prouncncing verdict on cases related to Bhopal Gas Tragdy.

This difference, what is written what is realty is not restricted to politics, but a realty of every organisation. To survive and prosper you must know , accept and adjust to this. Else only frustration and delusion is your fate. You may get Megassy Award, but you are unfit as Delhi Police Chief. You must resign.

Prakash

15/06/10

Communication.

Every communication does have/must have purpose. It need not be and most of the time it is not true. Communication is always made, taking in to account the target group-may be audience , viewer or reader based on form of communication.

Fame of communication depends on its effectiveness on target rather than its intrinsic truth fullness. In this sense "Geeta" had (has) a objective to prepare Arjuna (common man) for War(life).What is said in Geeta may or may not be true, but its greatness rest on the fact that it changed the mind of Arjuna and effectively changes mind of many many of modern Arjuna. The same can be said about advice of parent to children, scolding of superior to junior and astrologer's predictions. Stated word need not be true but they intend to have desired effect.

If we wish to observe how the communication is based on targeted group, just read the Mumbai News papers in Marathi, Hindi and English, there comments on marathi/ non-marathi issue is meant for there own readers and obviously different. In Mumbai no one dare say that how is that Mumbikar going to USA help built economy there, but Bihari coming to Mumbai destroys Mumbai, as there is no audience for this communication / logic in city. In this sence even celebrities comments are also based on there own target group. The marathi celebrities, which are not dependent on marathi population for their greatness/fame, speak in favour of Mumbai for all. These are Sachin Tendulakar, Asha Bhosle etc. In sixties and seventies, our leaders while addressing Indian population used to tell control population and said development will follow. The same leaders while seeking development assistance at international forum used to say, please donate and help, development will control population. The different position taken by experts ( coming from urban-middle class and addressing their own group) in TV talks on LPG subsidy as against fertilizer subsidy is worth watching.

The position taken by different group/ country to resolve issue can reflect their own position as compared to opponent party. India( strong) states that all issues with Pakistan be resolved with bilateral talks only, while till recently India (weak) took position that to resolve issues with USA talks must be held at international forum. With India's position improving, only recently India has started engaging USA and other strong countries bilaterally. Domestically for the same reason on Ram Mandir issue, Muslim is ready to accept Court verdict while Hindu says it is question of faith and can not be decided by court.

Another form of communication is awards and honours (basically these are reactions) and reaction to other person's qualities. Every individual/ group judges others and makes comment based on own expectations, profit and loss etc. After India opened market for foreigners in 1991 onwards, I observed sudden increase in number of Indian girls winning miss world/ miss universe awards and so on, in short span of 5-6 years.( prior to this probably in 40 years there was only one winner. To say correctly, A Roy became second miss world after a gap of 28 years, and thereafter in seven years we saw four winners ). One reason may be world cosmetic industry's eagerness to enter Indian market and promote there own product by focusing health and buety. Similarly, without undermining the qualities of Manmohan Singh, the honour praise etc received by him is mostly coming from the advocates of free enterprise. These advocates may be capitalist countries or our own chamber of commerce etc, who are benefited by his policies.

Still more dangerous communication is in the form of what is good and what is bad.These are used to modify behaviour of person for the so called good of society. It is in the form of, glorifying the acts that are, against human nature, and what human being will generally hesitate to act upon. In old days worshiping "Sati" comes under this category. Dying for nation is called "Martyrdom". Taking oath of celibacy "Diksha or Nun ship" at early age is similarly glorified in every religion. Saving the "Girl Child" is good. same is with, honouring the highest tax payer. Example can be multiplied in hundreds. What is not noticed by common man is that these good things are not followed by the preachers of these good things. Thus no one from rich/leader family goes for martyrdom or accepting celibacy. All these are reserved for poor and uneducated persons.

There are communication for which there is no proof but there is no opposition for these communication in the group. Thus all human, believe, human life is most valuable and higher form of life (Hindus feel it is due to Punya karma and very rare). But the way humans are easily replicating and others are becoming rare (like panda or Tiger), we may have to revise our opinion. Also, it has side effect of looking down other form of life and generated ego which is destroying other form of life. If we could say all form of life are equal and needs in /by nature, we may have different attitude. Our Prime Minister proclaims that world is appreceating India's growth but apprehends/ fears China's growth (any basis or independent voting ? NO.) Similarly, all Indians are unanimous that Indian Culture and Tradition is great( Though it has so many short comings, which can be subject matter of separate blogg).

One more form of communication is made on fallacy of logic. It is like saying "Sun rises in the sky" , but fact is sun neither rises nor sets. Now a days most common is "Save the Earth". The fact is that earth is not in any way affected by 1-2 degree rise and fall of temperature, (it has survived more severe variation in temperatures) what will be affected is human life, so slogan should be "Save ourselves". Similarly many a times philosopher/ writer propagate new theories to advance there own cause. For example, when Samarth Ramdas started preaching/ writing in Prakrit Marathi, he said "Knowledge is Knowledge ", it should be accepted in any language.

Last but not the least, who speak truth and who communicate lie. It is geenrally believed or said that common people speak lie, and higher authority speak truth. But this is far from truth. The fact is that higher the desire to have communication intended effect higher is the chance of communication being lie. All advertiseemnts come in to this category and we do not take them on face value. But what about state communications. While preparing for War against Iraq, USA propagated Iraq possesing "Arms of Mass Destruction" (an utter delibrate lie ). Hitler proclaiming Aryana pure human being. When Gandhi was muredered and idnetity of murderer was not known, even then Nehru communicted that he is "Non Muslim" just to avert communal vilonce.

History is littered with such false communications which changed the course of History.

world is in danger.

Now and then , I hear and read that world is in danger. Now a days, most vocal warning is about Global Warming (The fact is if earth had not warmed earlier, we would not have come in to existence). Thirty year back it is was Ozone hole in sky or before that danger of nuclear war. We must take note that causes of dooms are changing, it means we are progressing ( To jump from one problem to next is progress).

Another thing these warning etc presume /procalims that humans has become more powerfull then mother nature or natural laws.This I strongly dispute. Inspite of all progress human beings have made, we are stiil struggling to protect ourselves from nature only. This nature has billions of years history and our known history is merely 5000-6000 year old. What ever changes we are recording are just 200-300 year's study or record. Many of these observations are merely 40-50 year old. We do not know for sure, whether there are changes , and if changes are there, they are due to human activity or nature's cyclic change.

It is our only ego to say that we are causing change.

However, I do not belittle the sincerity of the people who care about this country or planet. Nor I do underestimate the message for improvement given by all stakeholders, be it, parents, schools, newspaper, TV, Govt, NGO and so on to save earth.

But taking them seriously can harm your own life and can take away joy out of your life. First thing we should remember, whatever prophets of doom are saying, they are saying for so many centuries and always do not prove correct. In fact no body can predict future of a country or society beyond 5 years. For example, my generation took population explosion seriously and limited family to one child, depriving the child of natural company. And down 30 years, we are hearing population dividend for India.

In fact all predictions assume / have fault logic in 2 way. One , if such and such thing continue, this or that will happen and second their mind comprehends presently available solutions only. Rememebr, nature is always changing and human mind is not able to understand/ imagine what has not happened yet or mind has not experienced it. The best example of this is, when we search life beyond earth, always we link it with availability of water and oxygen. Is it not possible that there may be other life system which may be surviving and growing on any other natural element. Another, just 50 year back who would have thought that intrenet will change the way we communicate or socialise.

So, what is happening today will change tomorrow, and new things will come in to being, not only because of science but because of changing perceptions, laws, religion, politics and economics etc.

To give one small example, take the so called perishable nature of petro products, and the so called shortage of alternative energy sources. It is not that, they are not available. They are readily available, but presently at higher price then petro products. As per economic law, if supply of petro products goes down, prices will go up, and alternate sources will come in to use.

Further, 100 years back also, Mumbaikar must have been crying about heavy population influx, life becoming miserable and so on, but high rise apartments, fly overs etc (not thought over 100 years back) have been built, to accommodate ever increasing population pressure. Fact is that, the day Mumbai will have more problem as compared to opportunity, people will move and settle to any other city.

There is tendency to oppose new development by raising false alarems, which some time seems ridiculous after a gap of generation. That is why when X -ray was dicivered, people thought, it will encroach on privacy of people and encourage porn/ nudity. Similary, when Hydroelectic power came in to existence, media spread/ people believed that after passing through turbines, energy / potency of water is passed / changed to electric power, and such water is useless/ dangerous.

The fact is that continents and kingdoms might have prospered and perished but the history of human being is a smooth history of progress, starting from discovery of fire and wheel to present day space missions. Every generation has faced problems and solved them in their own way. Today, we may complain about shortage of food but copmare it with famines of ninteenth century. Further we may see enequality among different groups but, slave system is no more. Such examples of progress in every walk of life is many many.

Lastly, and most important , as compared to life of nation and society, our own life is very-very short,(and every phase of life comes only once) and for world's imagined problem/ danger or real problems, for which solutions will emerge in course of time , do not waste your life or destroy joy.

Be Happy, Live your life, Act responsibly but do not worry.

Development v/s Nature.

All present day debate about development v/c nature is non- sense and pure noise only. When some one says world is changing for the worst, it only mean, it is changing in such a way that it is adversely affecting his vested interest (in status quo situation). If you are benefitted by change, the development is progress, if you are aversly affected it is destroying nature.

Some one says development should not be against nature. I ask, can development and nature go together. Nature means, things available to all, development means the man made things which can be used for a price (even for free road we have to pay tax to govt.).

Some one says development should not destroy/ change culture. Is it possible ?. In absence of economic activity in rainy season (not connected with town and alternate economic activity), a village does have culture and tradition of religious functions. Or when milk / perishable vegetable can not be sent to market, there is tradition or culture of free distribution. If a road is made and village is connected to town and round the year economic activity is possible, will it be possible to continue old tradition with same faith ? Definitely no. Same is true about, man and woman relations. With education, economic independence and control over birth process being available to woman now, is it possible to continue traditional power equilibrium between male and female.

The fact is that every system be it political, social, ethics, economics, science and so on, affects and get affected by other system. Development in any one system afects other.For example, Social system affects political system, science affects ethics and so on. No system is independent.

Further what is being changed, may not be correct or good in first place. What we call History, is just narration of victorious party, it need not be and generally not true. The present laws, are compromise between different groups at point of making law (highest one being constitution of country), it need not be ethical or just (Parliament / Assemblies have passed laws for reservation for woman in local bodies but not able to implement for themselves). Same can be said of other branches of knowledge. Further every system develops side effects which generates alternate process/ system and destroys old one.

Just think, in a debate over nature against development, had man not destroyed forest and developed the agriculture. If some one had banned paper manufacturing to save forest. Some one might not have cleared forest and made road (Grand Trunk Road, built by Sher Shah Suri, what feeling it evokes, pride of development or shame of nature's destruction ?). Had our forefathers chosen nature against development, what would have been our life today ?.

In this debate some one talks about sustainable development. Limit no one knows ?. Simple yardstick is, What development took place, up to my generation is sustainable but what my next generation is doing/ developing is not sustainable. That is why , Petrol wells are OK but mining at Poles is not.

This all, we decide purely on adhoc basis to suit our own convenience. There is law to punish, even if you cut one green tree of your back yard. But enviromental clearence is possible for building Roads in Himalaya. Logic is , it is defence needs. China has built Air port at the base of Himalaya. Can you now stop other development that will follow.

What is effect of our development activity over nature (negative) and conserving activity for nature (positive) ?. We measure air and water quality of city and interpolate it for whole earth, and say whole nature is being polluted or destroyed. We clean some ponds and say we saved nature. Compare it with the devasting nature of nature in form of Tsunami, Earth Quack and Volcano etc, (latest being eruption of Volacano in Iceland , distrupting Air Traffic in Europe). Similarly, if we just calculate the cleaning power of Solar Energy (This is the mother of all energy sources), through regeneration of biosphere, vaporisation of water and raining ,I wonder whether any day man can pollute the earth that much or his cleaning effort will ever match with nature's cleaning power.

If our effort is to have so little effect either way, why so much noise ?. Remember, every communication has purpose, but it may not be true. Same may be said about communications for and against development. There is marketing efforts of companies that are benefitted by the fear generated through destruction of nature. Developed world says, we have polluted world but developing world should not pollute the world. Developing world says enough of your pollution, now you stop and it is our turn now. Both exegarate damage being done by development, just to stop other party and debate and negotiations goes on just to protect or improve own positions.

To be philosophical and believe Geeta " What we are able to create ?. What we are able to destroy?. Absolutely nothing. We, at the most changing the form of things.Today we are not able to use some changed material but it does not mean it has lost its intrinsic value or utility. Remember, to days coal was nothing but compressed/ destroyed forest, deep buried millions of years back. Just like that, to days waste will also be used in some form in future.

To conclude, nature is too powerful to be destroyed by our development. Development will only bring changes in our different systems.

So, Do not worry and be happy.

It does not mean that we should behave irresponsibly, and stop cleaning rivers, planting trees etc. These are essential to protect or improve our local environment and reduce cost of living for ourselves, but to link it with big concepts like saving of earth etc. is ego of man only.