The Red Blue Divide..

I finally finished reading a book after a long long time. The book is called What's the matter with Kansas by Thomas Frank. American politics has fascinated me for a long time for the fact that in some ways, this country seems to have the most evolved electoral system. I know ,I know some of you are already scoffing at me...telling me to remember Florida in 2000...well, in some ways, what I am going to write based on what I gathered from this book does explain some of the divisiveness of that time as well.

So lets dive into it...if you like politics because of the associated intrigue and what might seem like irrational behavior on the part of voting population, then this book is a fine read. It looks into the evolution of Kansas from a predominantly Democratic state to a state that voted 80% Republican in 2004 presidential elections. The book also looks at one fundamental question: Why do rich folks like in Los Angeles overwhelmingly vote Democratic( despite knowing that Dems would raise taxes for the rich) and why poor folks in loads of red states vote Republican(despite knowing that spending cushion that they specially require is going to disappear under GOP rule). Answer is simple and if you look at, for example, Fox News and folks like Hannity and O'Reilly, you would know what the writer is talking about. First thing to understand is that people vote for people with whom they think they share their values rather than for people who stand for their economic interests. So values seems to override economic interests. Kansas was an experiment state for conservative movement in terms of low taxes for rich combined with social issues like evolution,abortion & sanctity of life( read Stem Cell research), gay rights and gun control( By the way, it is interesting that I read about Kansas because there are good chances that current Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius might be the running mate of Barack in the general election).

So in discourse after discourse, you will see how the discussion is hardly ever on economic issues. Democrats learnt it the hard way when Al Gore went on Larry King before the election in 2000 and promised tougher gun laws..come election time in November, and he lost every state in the south including his home state of Tennessee. Democrats pretty much have reconciled to not talking about gun control too explicitly these days but other big confrontational social issues still remain. Democrats want to keep Roe v. Wade, Republicans want to get rid of it. Democrats are for right to abort, stem cell research and gay union and Republicans are not. In fact, I am sure that recent ruling in California Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage would definitely stir up people on the right and might actually end up hurting otherwise buoyant Democrats' chances in November.

So bottom line, when you are trying to understand where all these folks from right and left are coming from, look at social issues and not economic ones. You will see that a lot of noise would start making sense. The fact that vast parts of America ( specially old economy states like Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia etc.) are all hurting economically but still support less government is really not because they want less government but it is because of value issues...you know how many people in America do not believe in evolution? Take a guess...full 51%!!!!

On Sacrifice and Indulgence: A critique of Samskara

Let me start by introducing Samskara. Its a classic piece of literature written by Sahitya Academy Award winner U.R.Anathmurthy. Originally in Kannadda, you can read it in English....publisher is Oxford University Press.

Samskara as is meant in the book goes beyond the normal meaning associated with the word, i.e. The Last Rites of a Dead Man. This word ends up covering almost all aspects( or so you think, once you read the book) of your code of conduct in everyday life.

For me the book is a beautiful piece of existentialist philosophy. If Mr. Murthy was born in France or some other Western country, he would have ended up bagging a Nobel prize for this work. The book tries to answer one basic question, What is desirable? Sacrifice or Indulgence. In a gripping story, Murthy would leave you in a situation where you would question every foundation of your moral premises. His argument is forceful in its completeness.

One of the two main protagonists, Naranappa, dies on the first page of the book. Naranappa led a life of indulgence and did everything which a Brahmin is not supposed to do. Right on the other side of the pole is Praneshacharya, who is an epitome of sacrifice. The level of sacrifice with him is such that he hasn't had sex with with his wife and they are married for 20 years. The community faces the dilemma of who should do the last rites of Naranappa. On the face of it, no one is ready to do it because of activities of Naranappa when he was alive. The buck stops at Praneshacharya who promises to go through the scriptures and find a solution. In the quest to find an answer, Praneshacharya ends up having sex with the maid of Naranappa. Here starts the fight between sacrifice and indulgence, existence and essence.

The book stresses the fact that for good to exist, bad has to exist. Both are protagonists in a huge drama which gets played around and hence they are just playing their roles. And when you have a role to play, deciding the worth of the role is a no question.

Read the book. I am a huge fan of Samskara.

p.s. I used a similar argument when I was in IIT. I used to tell my batch mates and professors that for all the 9 pointers and 10 pointers to exist at the top, 5 pointers like me have to exist. In some ways, I make their existence possible.

Books to Read in June

1)American Foreign Policy
2)Al Jazeera