Monday, February 27, 2017

Truth and Logic in a Divided America

After much resistance, a few years ago, I finally got my Facebook page. Now everyday it beckons me to add my photo to my profile, but I ignore the prompt hoping to hold on to an inkling of anonymity in an all too pervasive cyberspace. I am not an avid user of Facebook and rarely "like", "poke",  "tag" "share" or "post" anything. But since the rise of Donald Trump I have found myself engaging more than usual. Facebook is the ultimate echo chamber which in many ways played a pivotal role in this election. And so all I see are things that are aligned with my world view. But every now and then, on someone elses "wall", I do encounter Donald Trump supporters vigorously cheering him on and ecstatic that he is in charge. I have gently tried to lock horns with some, trying to bring reason and logic to bear in an attempt to understand motivations other than mine. After a few rounds of back and forth, I often find a door slam on my Face-book or a quiet disengagement as the perceived gulf is wide or the will to see contradiction is lacking. One recent supporter responded with this diatribe which is telling

"There is WAY more hypocrisy on the left. if Hillary Clinton had won that would be the true low point. the same old liberal pc bullshit of being 'progressive' on easy issues like LGBT and abortion rights, while being in bed with wall street, doing nothing for working class, accepting money from Saudi Arabia for Clinton foundation, antagonizing Russia with no fly zones in Syria, and sending weapons to Ukraine. and this is all covered up with a happy progressive PC face. At least republicans are upfront about it. and with trump the corrupt elite are finally exposed. and you won't get Washington consensus and American exceptionalism being shoved down the throat of every other country".

Its been a month now since Donald Trump ascended to the throne of the American government. Since his inauguration, his continuing antics have dominated the news cycle to a point of mind numbing despair. You could not escape his daily deluge as he began to undo what his predecessors had put into motion by signing executive orders, which were mostly about optics rather than substance. His actions were met with protests mostly in cities with large populations of his detractors.

As he began to violate all established norms it left more and more people aghast. But his supporters found his bombastic methods refreshing as they felt he had not changed. The weight of the office had barely scathed him. And they saw in him a businessman taking decisions and not your conventional politician dragging his feet. He was delivering on all his promises he had bellowed about in his outlandish rallies. And there was only more to come.

When he declared the media the "enemy of the people" and the "opposition party" he received applause from his supporters. Bashing the media was a common occurrence at his rallies that brought cheer to his rowdy mob. Donald Trump it seemed had not stopped campaigning to the delight of many. But as president what he failed to recognize in the process, he struck a blow to one of the four  pillars of American democracy, which could one day become his own undoing.

Children in schools are taught that the American system of government created by the "founding fathers" in their wisdom, consists of the Legislative, Executive and the Judicial branch. Each put in place to keep a check on the other, as an antidote to autocracy. But what they are not taught with equal emphasis is that the freedom of the press enshrined in the first amendment to the constitution, is the fourth and most important pillar of American democracy that holds all three branches accountable. Without a free and respected press, there is no democracy. Donald Trump and his henchmen took the first step in steering the nation in the direction of autocracy by brazenly repeatedly attacking the press.

In the past, many administrations have had an antagonistic relationship with the press. The 37th president of the United States, Richard Nixon, was brought down by the Washington Post, for abuse of power and criminal behavior. Many think the legacy of Richard Nixon has come to haunt America again. Especially in relation to the murky relationship Donald Trump and his associates seem to have had and have with Russia. But this is uncharted territory and only time will tell how far the Executive branch is willing to go to keep cover.

There is no question, much like the government the media has faltered. It fell to its lowest stature during this past election and partly caused this catastrophe which is the present administration. But the corruption of American media started decades ago when large corporations began to acquire media organizations as commercial assets, steering them from public service to profit making entities. When the television landscape exploded with cable news, and the infinite broadcast space had to be filled with entertainment and information, 24/7 news channels were born. What CNN put into motion as a network was followed suit by others. Then the partisanship and opinion making began to dominate the news. Straight analytical reporting was just not enough for ratings. It had to be packaged for the demographic that tuned in. News anchors became news celebrities demanding millions of dollars for their face, book launches and magazine cover poses. They sacrificed their credibility for monetary gain and fame. With the advent of the internet and social media, the lid was blown wide open. The fragmentation that ensued created a frenetic space which became almost impossible to navigate for authenticity. This in no certain terms meant that good journalism was dead. It was just harder to find in the chaos and there was less of it. The noise birthed the phenomenon of "fake news" which spoke to people with predisposed ideas and belief in conspiracy theories more than reality. Donald Trump and his team tapped into this space and saw the broken system for what it was and emerged victorious. And now they are turning the tables on that very mainstream media that underestimated them by calling all those who don't applaud their agenda "fake".

During one of his campaign rallies Donald Trump boasted "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters". Any candidate in any other era would have imploded after uttering those words. But in this age of sex tapes and reality shows, sensationalism sells and only makes those engaged in it more popular. Notoriety is no longer a handicap it is an asset. And Donald Trump proved this fact by climbing all the way to the top.

Watching the first weeks of his administration unravel, it seems like he believes his mission is to govern only for those who voted for him and not pay attention to those who did not. For a man who is obsessed with good ratings, for some reason he has decided not to bother with it for governance. By organizing more rallies for himself where he can feel loved and adored, he has convinced himself that he is wildly popular. Hence his reluctance to acknowledge his loss in the popular vote and his  inauguration having a lack luster attendance.

Or there is another theory that is becoming more and more believable. Advisors who surround Donald Trump are calling the shots and he is playing the mascot. His inner circle headed by Steve Bannon, is laying the groundwork for all the new policies and shredding the old ones with a vengeance. From immigration, the environment, the arts, defense and healthcare, there is a decisive agenda at the core, to fundamentally change course. To steer the nation towards what Steve Bannon calls "economic nationalism". "America First" is the slogan that is used to mask what lies beneath. What Steve Bannon is charting for the country from the pinnacle of power, is antithetical to the conservative values of the Republican Party. The Republicans believe in an unfettered market space, smaller government and all round less regulation and taxes. What Steve Bannon is calling for is an anti-global economy that taxes companies and puts tariffs on nations that do not put what he thinks are America's interests first. Whether such an approach could stimulate growth and create jobs only time will tell. But if growth is created at the behest of higher cost of living, lower wages, increased disparity and a social agenda that is draconian, this experiment could take the nation back decades at the cost of great social upheaval.

It is clear from his speeches, documentaries and interviews, Steve Bannon is an ideologue. His tenure at the ideologically driven conspiracy theory ridden Brietbart News and his association with the alt-right only frames him to be more dogmatic than pragmatic. The problem with ideologues, is that they feel they have the answer to everything and are single minded in their push to see an agenda through. Towards that goal they feel it is justified to violate rules that govern the system within which they operate. As they are convinced they are the anointed agents of change and are working for the betterment of all people, it is just that they don't know it yet. This single mindedness can lead to autocratic behavior which we have seen shades of, in the disparaging of the press and in the implementation of an oppressive immigration policy that is wreaking havoc inside underprivileged communities across the nation. In the guise of evicting illegal immigrants Donald Trump's regime is pushing a whole segment of society into the shadows. The idea that "to live in America is a privilege not a right" is being peddled as the pretext for deportations. But the sentiment here is not all genuine as those who are profiled for deportation are determined by class, race and ethnicity.

If there is one thing that has been sacrificed at the alter of power lately, it is the "truth". In a deeply divided America such as the present one, truth continues to be suspect, and therefore logic has no meaning. All you have are opinions formed on perceived facts. And when those in power float ideas such as "alternate facts" and "fake news" one wonders what one should base ones opinions on? For those who find Donald Trump a mumbling bumbling fool hell bent on self destructing, what is to come may seem enticing and hopeful, but it can only be devastating and dire. For those who see a great future in him, the fall could be too steep to survive. It seems like America today is in a logjam and down stream are rapids and then a steep fall. It is what it is.

Monday, January 9, 2017

Normalizing Donald Trump

On January 20th Donald Trump will ascend and assume control of the United States of America. As commander-in-chief he will have the most powerful armed forces under his command and will oversee the largest economy of the world. He will become, as most people in America like to refer with pride, "the leader of the free world".

As he begins to assume office, the process of normalizing Donald Trump has begun. It began when he summoned media personalities, politicians, businessmen, Silicon Valley CEOs and celebrities to his tower in Manhattan and everyone fell in line in obedience. As he courted some and scolded others, inadvertently the normalization of Donald Trump began. Even though his behavior has shown little change from his brash and obscene campaigning days, there is a broad consensus that the weight of the office will force him to change his ways, in ways even he cannot foresee.

I frankly doubt it. I see a grave danger in normalizing Donald Trump. And if citizens lose sight of what motivates Donald Trump and become complacent they stand to lose more than they can ever imagine.

After the election, I  met several people who voted for Donald Trump, here in New York City and in New Jersey. What was appalling was that they were coy about admitting it. Maybe because they live in states where they are a minority. When asked what motivated them to vote for Trump, they had weak arguments clearly brainwashed inside a bubble. One person I met, said "well I did not think he would get elected!". Couple of millionaire surgeons I overheard in Scarsdale, an affluent suburb of New York City, were looking forward to a tax break. Everyone felt that the media was unfair and biased and the real Donald Trump would emerge once it was all over and he would be gold. They felt an outsider businessman is what we need in this hour to "drain the swamp" and  "make America great again". But few could articulate what really made America great.

What we have come to realize, is that there is only one Donald Trump and he is determined to change not only the direction of this nation, but all rules of engagement and ethics that have been established over decades. He clearly does not believe that America can only have one president at a time and in "elect" mode, he compromised the current president's standing and the nation's security by making outrageous statements on his favorite bulletin board, Twitter. His behavior over the last few weeks has been so egregious that I wonder if half the good people of this nation can see what they have gotten us into, focused on their selfish immediate needs.

His cabinet appointments consist of billionaires and generals with checkered pasts. Jeff Sessions his nominee for Attorney General, is a rabid supporter of the death penalty in addition to voicing controversial views on voting, civil and women's rights. As Attorney General of Alabama his pursuit of executions in spite of racial bias, defendants’ mental disabilities and other injustices raises concerns about how he will oversee federal capital prosecutions. It shows a total lack of commitment to due process and equality. Rex Tillerson, his nominee for the highest office in the cabinet, Secretary of State, is an oil baron with close ties to Vladimir Putin. He was awarded the highest civilian honor by the state for having extensive business dealings in Russia as the head of ExxonMobil, the largest oil company of the world. As he prepares to relinquish his position as head of the company he stands to gain a $180 million payout. Betsy Devos, a billionaire businesswoman is the nominee for Education Secretary. DeVos is a major Republican donor who has focused the bulk of her energy and political contributions on pushing to expand charter schools and taxpayer-funded vouchers for private and religious schools. She has not worked in public education nor served in public office. To top it all Donald Trump has nominated more generals to his cabinet than any president since World War II.

Donald Trump became president of America without releasing his tax returns. The true nature of his  finances are largely a mystery. Even though his voters think he is a businessman with an impressive record no one knows the extent of debt Donald Trump and his businesses carry. By resisting to divest his financial holdings, Donald Trump is poised to run the White House like his family business to benefit himself and his associates. The law does not require Donald Trump to shed his business interests, and he is leading by example. The Office of Government Ethics requires all cabinet nominees to file an extensive form, the 278, that lists stock holdings, business interests, board seats and other arrangements benefiting them, spouses, minor children, business partners or potential employers. This form is to be filled out before senate confirmation hearings. The Office of Government Ethics reviews the form; flags potential problems; and negotiates an ethics agreement letter in which the nominee agrees to divest, resign or otherwise eliminate potential conflicts. The letter helps protect nominees if they are ever accused of gaining financial benefits from their public service. Many of Trump's nominees have filed incomplete forms or have not yet signed their ethic agreement letters. His transition team is trying its level best to railroad senate hearings circumventing this very important procedure that is in the interest of the public.

The people Donald Trump surrounds himself with, defines the way he is going to govern for the next four years. His closest advisor Steve Bannon is probably the most controversial of them all. An extreme right wing hawk, his influence on the president can set a social agenda that can be extremely corrosive and can gut the progress made on civil rights and equality. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, his son-in-law and daughter his closest allies, bring nepotism to the presidency in the most profound sense. Advisor Carl Icahn, the billionaire investor who has railed against government regulation in financial markets, will have the ear of the president at all times making sure the oligarchs have a say in the government. His other advisors include personalities from Fox News and Kellyanne Conway who has been his ardent mouthpiece through thick and thin and her lawyer husband.

The foundations of the Trump administration are rooted in corruption and nepotism. The recent revelations of Russia's meddling in American politics to anoint Donald Trump have been deeply troubling. But it has not dissuaded Donald Trump from supporting Vladimir Putin and shrugging aside intelligence reports as being devoid of hard evidence. His and his supporter's nonchalant response in this matter is unnerving at best. It seems like Donald Trump is leaning towards establishing a Putin style government right in the heart of one of world's largest democracy; a new world order presided over by generals and oligarchs.

Many might think this assessment is far fetched as the American system of government has robust checks and balances in place to prevent any president from amassing too much power. What Donald Trump has proven time and again is that he does not intend to follow the rules. So far he has successfully avoided adhering to any ethics rules and clearly does not see any conflict of interest between public service and personal financial gain. Surrounded by an army of lawyers, there is no telling what other challenges he will pose to an established system that has never been attempted before. Watching the Congress and Senate fall in line, the future of America and the world does seem to hang in the balance.

The only way I am able to make sense of Donald Trump's electoral victory is by framing it is as an "anomaly"; a freak occurrence that has baffled not only his opponents but also his supporters. I am sure it even baffled him. There is no question a vast number of people in this country voted for him for reasons they are still trying to articulate and defend. I have read all the explanations, analyses and  surveys out there, that have tried to rationalize his ascent. For many voting for Donald Trump I presume felt like the most anarchic thing they could do to rage against the machine. To me it felt like the most "unpatriotic" thing to do. But what is to come, only time will tell. People think he will be good for business. But if business means "profit over people" and everything else that we hold sacred, then that is what we deserve.

January 20th happens to be my birthday. Having been observing the Trump presidency take shape, out of trepidation, I for one will not be celebrating.

It is what it is.

Friday, December 30, 2016

Looking Ahead

As 2016 comes to an end, I breathe a sigh of relief.

But what 2017 can bring remains more trepidatious than ever.

As Donald Trump ascends much hangs in the balance.

As right wing forces rise, feeding on fear and insecurity, it feels like the world is regressing

As truth is sacrificed at the alter of social media, and the conglomerate media loses integrity, people become prisoners of their echo chambers.

But we cannot lose hope in this hour.

As to lose hope, is to succumb.

It is what it is.

Saturday, November 12, 2016


I never thought an election outcome would affect me the way it did. I felt physically ill, emotionally drained and unable to sleep. Many friends in my circle felt the same. I realized I was living in a nation, that was profoundly divided. I always knew that, but was not aware of the extent of it.

The polarization that had begun in 2008, when Barack Obama became the first black president of this nation, was now complete. The path Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, The Tea Party and their ilk charted had come to fruition in the election of Donald Trump. The unthinkable was now real. The illusion that Americans can see through lies and distortions was now shattered. The nation voted against its own interest and the status-quo by taking a gamble on an unseemly candidate.

This election was a referendum on the failure of the two party American federal system of elections. Both dominant political parties of this country imploded and through their ashes rose Donald Trump - a Republican by label, but an independent at his core. He blew his own singular horn to victory and danced only to his tune to the dismay and horror of many. Personal traits such as decency, respect, kindness, inclusiveness, humility and humanity did not play a role. One's faith, personal taxes, obscene accumulation of wealth by unscrupulous means, which in the past would have decimated a candidate had no impact. Class, Race and Gender were the only primary positions along which votes were casted and decisions made.

So what went wrong? Why did America fracture right in the middle? Even though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a narrow margin, why could she not seal the deal? At the heart of it lies the underestimation of Donald Trump, his rhetoric and the people he galvanized. The disconnect between a class of America and what we have come to know as mainstream America, was so deep and wide, that it took an election to awaken to. What the pollsters and pundits failed to see in Donald Trump was him resonating with a kind of America, which to a large extent had been relegated to the fringes by both political parties. They were abandoned by the elite left leaning liberals and the Republican establishment who were seen as belonging to the same corrupt ruling class. With their manufacturing and coal mining jobs evaporated by globalization, they felt they had been forsaken by the system. They had had enough of the smug urban centric media which consisted of college educated sophisticated liberals telling them that their values were out of touch with the times. That they were racist, xenophobic, gun totting, white supremacist "deplorables" in complete contradiction to the core values of the constitution and a changing America.

And so they gravitated to the most elite person they could find in the lineup, the billionaire businessman who would "win" and succeed for them where the ruling class had failed. When Donald Trump held immigrants, Muslims, Mexico, NATO, China, India, bad trade deals, crooked Hillary, Washington insiders, special interest groups, environmentalists as the cause for their misery, they thought they found their reason for despair. They figured only a bully like him could go to Washington, and be tough and get the job done with his no-nonsense, politically incorrect direct approach. He would "make America great again" and restore it back to its glory.  For this they were willing to overlook everything unsavory and brash about Donald Trump. To many this was the appeal. His open misogyny was overlooked, with 40% of his voters being women who detested Hillary for being dishonest. His bankruptcies and sexual indiscretions were ignored. Others felt a woman was not ready to be President of America, just yet. He became the man of the hour to many while he was being made out to be the clown of the hour to others.

Those like me, who lived in a bubble in Brooklyn, New York City, were so far removed from what was happening in the heartland, that we were unquestionably lulled into believing the pollsters and media pundits. The flashes we saw of Donald Trump on TV behaving like a boorish child, gave us the false impression and hope, that people would not take him seriously. The large crowds that were gathering to see him, did not seem that large on TV and in our minds. The lampooning of Donald Trump by late night television and the mainstream press was so scathing and direct, many were assured that America could never elect someone of his caliber, temperament and moral fiber. Others thought it was a left conspiracy to belittle him and undermine his candidacy. When President Obama used his bully pulpit to frame him as a man incapable in temperament and dangerous to trust nuclear codes with, it was seen as a further affirmation of a gang up. And so there was a backlash and the rude awakening on 11/9 brought a cloud of despair on a large part of this nation.

As those who did not support him ponder on the uncertain future and feel heavy in their heart, one must acknowledge all this is only politics. Politics can touch us in our daily lives, but its influence is minimal, unless you let it be.

One aspect I found deeply disturbing in this endless election season, was how degrading the discourse had become. While civility was discarded and obnoxious behavior came spewing through our television screens, what was sacrificed was innocence. As it is, in the times we live in, it is hard for a parent to shield their children from violence in popular culture. Some have lost all perspective in an increasingly pervasive environment. Now the election added a whole new layer of violence that was abhorrent. On one hand children were being subjected to a discourse that was deeply unsettling and parents were allowing it to wash over them, by projecting their rabid stance around dinner table conversations. Objectivity was abandoned as clear lines were drawn painting one candidate as evil and the other not. Children were forced to draw conclusions, based on their parent's preference, without knowing what it meant and why they were doing so.

So when the results came, I was shocked to see how disturbed children were. Children whose understanding of politics cannot and should not be more than knowing the processes of democracy, were deeply invested and emotionally shaken. At my ten year old's ballet class, a little girl, out of the blue showed me a drawing, which said "Donald Trump is a turd". The emotional instability around politics of parents had filtered into their children. When they should be reading fantasy books and watching cartoons, they were being sucked into a realm, which was far beyond their grasp, as the world was being dissected for them in the most basic dichotomy of good and evil.

His detractors are now orchestrating what Donald Trump promised he would do if he lost. Protests across the nation have broken out in mostly urban centers where he is deeply unpopular. In Oregon it has also turned violent. The violence that we witnessed in his rallies now seems to have infected the opposing side. If he follows through with his policies the time to protest will come. Anyone who has followed his rhetoric knows that it is inevitable. But to do it now seems like whining for having lost.

Even though Donald Trump did not win the popular vote, playing by the rules, he won the presidency fair and square. The system was not rigged as he proclaimed, and the institutions of America delivered the result in a free and non-fraudulent election. Now a peaceful transition of power is in progress. While he assembles his team, he must know that the way the system is designed, there are limits to what he can do. If he follows through with his promises, Donald Trump can unleash significant damage. It will be the responsibility of the opposition in power to stop him with all their might. There might also be somethings he might do in the interest of the nation. Like putting term limits on congressmen, limiting the reach of lobbyists and getting better trade deals so more jobs can be created in the US. But if he behaves the way he has on the campaign trail as he governs, he will face global isolation and social unrest like never seen before in this nation.

As Donald Trump prepares to move from his golden abode at Trump Tower to the less ostentatious public housing at the White House, he must meditate on this election. He must acknowledge that almost 50% of the eligible voting population of this country did not take part in this election and a majority of those who did, did not pick him. His contemplation needs to be expressed to all people in more than tweets. Or else his legacy will be as short lived as his mercurial diatribes.

In the end, the President we get, is the President we deserve. It is what it is.

Monday, October 31, 2016

Deep Divide

Growing up in India, the story of the nation's valiant struggle against the oppressive British was a constant reminder via schoolbooks, movies, comics and television. The portraits of Gandhi and Nehru adorned every office, dominating and making sure you never forgot the sacrifices made. Politicians dressed like freedom fighters channeled the past for votes and legitimacy. But what was brushed aside as a footnote, was the horrors of partition - a holocaust that claimed the lives of millions.

And so, in part because of these horrors, India and Pakistan remain enemies, amassing nuclear weapons and armies and living on the verge of mutual destruction. Every now and then there are glimpses of reconciliation, but they are fleeting. A terrorist attack on Indian soil orchestrated by groups within Pakistan, reignite tensions. When it subsides, disagreements over Kashmir flare up. The Pakistani establishment often blames the Indian intelligence services for the chaos in their country and India blames theirs. This cycle has been in motion for decades and there are no signs of it ending. 
When discussing the two nations, it is important to shed light on the trajectories they took since their formation. India evolved into a functioning democracy with a robust and diverse social fabric. The armed forces are under the firm control of the civilian government, which is elected every five years by a largely free and fair election. Pakistan on the other hand, has spent a large portion of its existence under military dictatorship. Today the army is a dominating force that sets the agenda, always waiting in the wings with a threat of a coup. The clerics, appeased and empowered in the 80s, have more power than before and practice it with relative impunity. Terrorism in the name of Islam is not only eating away Pakistan’s core, but is also being used as a proxy to spread chaos across the border. Many known convicted terrorists roam free in Pakistan under the protection of powerful entities. India's "public enemy" Dawood Ibrahim leads a life of luxury in Karachi. As a result Pakistan's civil society pays a heavy price as journalists and free thinkers are harassed or killed and minorities are oppressed and cleansed.
While Pakistan is in a state of free fall, lately India  seems to be becoming less tolerant in its diversity of opinion.
Two recent events seem to have hit a nerve in India, which have created a firestorm, where people's loyalties are being questioned based on their opinion. The gulf between the left and right has gotten wider and what is emerging is a disturbing and unhealthy form of nationalism that threatens India's democracy.
The killing of a young militant commander of the terrorist group Hizbul-Mujahedin, was seen as a major breakthrough for the Indian armed forces, who have policed the troubled region of Kashmir with an iron hand, for more than thirty years. When thousands spilled into the streets at Burhan Wani's funeral it was a shock to many. As his body was paraded through the streets, it was clear he was a hero to many and not just a slain terrorist. This soon led to clashes with the armed forces and scenes reminiscent of Palestinians throwing stones at the mighty Israeli army were all over television screens. The unrest in Kashmir prompted the Pakistani Prime Minister to praise the slain terrorist as a "young leader", irking India.
On a September morning, a few miles from the Pakistani border, in a town called Uri in Kashmir, an Indian army base was attacked by a band of terrorists. Several hours later, four militants and eighteen Indian soldiers were dead. India directly blamed Pakistan for this attack and launched "surgical strikes" against militant bases within Pakistani territory. Pakistan denied any involvement in the Uri attack, and said there was no evidence India could provide to prove otherwise, and said it was a revenge attack in response to the violence in Kashmir. They also said India had not carried out any strikes within their territory they could corroborate. The tension between the nations escalated further. The Indian armed forces were put on a war footing, villages along the border were evacuated and the media went into a state of frenzy. 
When the dead soldiers and their wailing family members were displayed on Indian television, emotions began to run high. Politicians and media pundits began to whip up patriotism and jingoism. The case to go to war was being made between talking points. Anyone who did not pay their overt respect to the dead soldiers and not take part in the patriotic fervor, were portrayed as traitors. Politicians openly used the death of the soldiers to further their agenda, and an open call was in place to ban anything and everything belonging to the enemy state.
The broadcast of all Indian television programs were suspended inside Pakistan. A prominent Bollywood film was threatened from being released because it had a Pakistani actor in its cast. A right wing political party called for a boycott and an association of theater owners refused to screen the film. So the director in an emotional public plea, apologized and vowed never to cast a Pakistani every again. The director was also asked to donate a large sum of money to an army welfare fund as reparations for his misdeed. A complaint was lodged against the organizers of the Mumbai Film Festival for screening a Pakistani film. There was a heightened aversion for everything Pakistani or Indian on either side of the border.
In the past the enmity between the countries, was tempered by civil engagement in the arts, sports and science. Acknowledging that Indians and Pakistanis are the same people sharing the same heritage only divided by history and politics.
My first interaction with a Pakistani happened when I moved to New York City in 1996. He was my taxi driver. We spoke the same language and could relate to each other on many levels. When in a sign of camaraderie he refused to accept payment from me, the brotherhood was even more evident. Over the years I have found friendship in many Pakistanis for obvious reasons. Late last year, I was approached by two Pakistani producers to direct a film about a remarkable man named, Abdus Salam. I was surprised how little I knew of this man, who was born in my country of birth in 1926. The more I found out, the more his life’s story intrigued me. I soon realized that as the first Muslim Nobel laureate, Abdus Salam was a national treasure whose life needed renewed attention, especially in the present times.
When I started work on the project with my Pakistani producers, I found many things in common with them. We unequivocally agreed how ludicrous, unnecessary, painful and demoralizing the divide between the nations is. It hinders so much that can be beneficial to both. We faced some of the inconvenience first hand while making this film. Even though I am a US citizen, I was not granted a visa by the Pakistani government to film there, for being of Indian origin. The Pakistani officials were annoyed that my producers could not find a native to direct the film. While filming in London we met many Pakistanis who were married to Indians and could not visit their families because of visa restrictions. The human toll the separation takes is significant and damaging enough in every sense of the word.
It is almost a year now since I started work on this film. While this is a biography of a Nobel scientist, it largely deals with an aspect of his life, when he was exiled from his own country for belonging to the Ahmadiyya community. The Ahmadiyyas, a sect within Islam, were declared non-Muslim by the dominant Sunni clerics, and the Pakistani constitution drafted an amendment to this effect in 1974. Since then they are treated as second-class citizens in their own country prompting many to leave. Abdus Salam was one of the most prominent of them. 
Many in Pakistani civil society are disturbed and deeply worried about the spread of extremism that is eating away at their social fabric. They are as much victims of terrorism as Indians are across the border. A recent film titled Among the Believers, made by an Indian and a Pakistani exposes the true nature of this cancer and therefore has been banned in Pakistan. My film exposes the heavy price people and nations pay when intolerance overruns humanity. When a man like Abdus Salam should be celebrated and his legacy used to encourage science and learning, he is vilified, maligned and discarded in his own country. 
At the moment, with the way things are, I am concerned if our film will be shown in either of the countries. Not because of the subject matter, but because of the origins of its makers. It is what it is.

Friday, September 30, 2016

Hardly A Debate

The year I arrived in this country, an election campaign was in high gear. George H. W. Bush was the incumbent and Bill Clinton his rival. The year was 1992. This is when I was exposed to American presidential politics first hand. On a midwestern university campus in Ohio, terms such as "swing state", "conservatism", "liberalism" were being spoken and I was quickly learning what they meant. It was the first time I found myself immersing myself as an observer of American politics and getting to know the inner workings of the system. Coming from India, which is the world's largest parliamentary democracy, I found some aspects of the process quaint. I could not fathom how there could only be two political parties to choose from and the "Electoral College" seemed like an antiquated system to pick a leader by. But one thing that immediately grabbed my attention was how civil everyone was in contrast to politicians in India. I did see commercials on TV that resorted to mud slinging and taunting, which is to be expected in politics, but there was nothing too acerbic or obscene. The candidates seemed dignified in suits and smiled and shook hands despite the gulf between their world views.

One thing that immediately dawned on me, was how powerful the media was in swinging loyalties. The media machine, which then consisted of radio, television and newspapers, set the agenda and drove the debate by its incessant coverage. The months of campaigning and media punditry culminated at the three presidential debates, which were televised live a few weeks before the election. Since the time Nixon lost to Kennedy in the 60s, for looking awkward on television, TV debates had become the crucible by which candidates were declared winners or losers and optics meant everything.

Two decades later, having seen a number of presidential debates, the eagerness to see the current one, that took place this week, was high. Primarily because there has never been a more contentious and polarized election campaign in the history of this nation. And the rise of the most unlikely candidate Donald Trump, has been controversial since day one, and has only heightened with every passing moment. Even though Hillary Clinton's rise was more predictable, scandal dogged her campaign as well. There are many who still sit on the fence about her candidacy, even though by now it is more than apparent who is more qualified, just based on resume and temperament.

So as the clock struck nine on the east coast, millions of Americans and others around the world, tuned in on televisions, laptops and phones to watch the first great American presidential debate of the season. As Hillary Clinton walked on to the stage in a blinding red pantsuit and Donald Trump in a bland suit and blue tie, the battle lines were drawn. After the customary hand shake, they took to their podiums and the duel began.

The first question posed to Hillary Clinton was about jobs and how her policies would spur the economy, create jobs and put more money in people's pockets. Her response was like any prepared presidential candidate, meaty with policy positions on raising the minimum wage, tax cuts for the wealthy and investing in infrastructure and green technology. When the question was posed to Donald Trump he started his routine of painting a dire image of America and how a "huge" number of jobs were being shipped to Mexico and China and how bad trade deals were hemorrhaging growth. But he did not propose a single policy by which he would create jobs, other than that he would stop them from going abroad. This is when I knew this was going to be less a debate on policy and more of a spectacle of who can "Make America Great Again" with a presupposition that it not longer was. Painting an image of an imploding America, has been the cornerstone of the Republican campaign.

As the duel progressed, it quickly became clear from Donald Trump's body language and facial expressions, that he was rattled. His unpreparedness was apparent. He kept drinking water during breaks, interrupting Hillary with impunity and finally getting to a kind of behavior that he has come to be known for - that of a bully.

And so the debate got reduced to a personal attack shoot out. As Hillary dug into his deplorable history of racism and sexism, he took it personal with unapologetic responses. When called out on not having released his tax returns, which is customary of all presidential candidates to do, he gave his usual lame excuse of being under an audit. Even though the IRS has stated, an audit does not prevent one from releasing one's taxes to the public. When exposed that he had not paid any federal taxes in the past, he applauded himself for calling himself a smart businessman. Today a New York Times report revealed he may not have paid federal taxes over the last 18 years on the millions he has made in income.

The debate got even uglier as he condescendingly accused Hillary of fighting ISIS "all her adult life", and made her responsible for the war in Syria and the chaos in Libya. He questioned her motives behind deleting thirty thousand emails, as though she was covering up something sinister. He then said he would reinstate "stop and frisk" to address inner city crime, which had been declared unconstitutional, as it is racial profiling and has disproportionately criminalized the black community. He effectively alienated the African American community, yet again, by supporting this abhorrent practice. He then went on to reduce the presidential debate to its lowest level in history, by mentioning a childish squabble he had had with Rosi O'Donnell, who he called a "pig", and then justified his despicable behavior by saying she deserved it. As my jaw dropped, so did my expectation of any decency from this man.

When the question was asked about who had the right temperament and the stamina to lead the nation, Hillary quoted her thirty years of public service as First Lady, senator and Secretary of State, when she crisscrossed the globe as a diplomat and survived an eleven hour congressional grilling without taking a break or losing composure. Donald Trump who derives sustenance from insulting people in Tweets, clearly showed he did not have the temperament to be civil let alone be presidential. The verdict was clear.

So what do people find appealing in this man, to put him on a stage that wields so much power and influence? What do people see in him that is presidential? What is it that despite all the scandals and rash and immature behavior, he still garners so much support?

Some say people in America like to vote along party lines, much like they support their favorite sports team no matter what. Many don't cast their vote for the most qualified candidate but for the one who ends up being the nominee of their party. Others say Americans are angry and Donald Trump is feeding into their frustrations. I cannot fathom what Americans are angry about. The American economy is still strong and has stabilized in the last eight years from where it was, and is growing. Maybe not as much as some would like, and not equally across the nation, but at least it is not falling off the precipice like many other developed nations. I think "Americans are Angry" is code for the character of this nation changing and many don't approve the direction it is taking. America is becoming more diverse, power is slightly shifting from the predominantly caucasian ruling class, marginalized groups such as gays and transgendered are finding their legal place in society and non-Christian religious groups are asserting themselves more loudly than before. Movements like "Black lives Matters" and groups challenging Hollywood's implicit racism are questioning the status quo and demanding fair treatment. For many these issues parsed and dissected on relentless social media, seem like a tidal wave hurtling at them, determined to cause a seismic paradigm shift. This fear, restlessness and unease is driving people to rally behind Donald Trump, even though he is part of the very east coast elite and could care less about the interests of a vast majority of Americans. While the Republican establishment see him for who he is, few openly expose him with any conviction. His supporters see him as an outsider, a rabble-rouser who can shake the system which has long been working only for the elite. And they think only a person with wealth and business acumen such as his, can bring the much needed change. There is an amount of delusion, misinformation and a strong belief in conspiracy that drives this mode of thinking. And for obvious reasons his faithful tend to be white and male.

One thing is certain, given the cards that have been dealt, historically speaking, this could be the most important election facing this nation. America has never come this close to putting a person of such character in the driving seat. This nation has had its share of corrupt leaders who have lied, started illegal wars, shown poor judgement and moral fiber, helped the rich get richer and have taken America into the abyss. But America has never had a person with such an openly disgraceful record of scamming people, denigrating women, bigotry, narcissism, personal enrichment, charity and temperament this close to the White House. Hillary Clinton may still seem distant and too much of an insider to many. With two more debates to go and at this moment in time, for those who uphold values of decency and civility above all, the choice is clear. It is what it is.

Wednesday, August 31, 2016


For the past eight months, my house has been under construction. What started off as a four month project has now taken more than double the time, with the end nowhere in sight. While we upgrade our more than a hundred year old Brooklyn home, the task keeps getting more exhaustive and expensive. Anyone who has renovated an old house can attest to the fact, that it is easier and faster to put up a new structure than to rebuild an old one. So for the past eight months my family of four have been living in cramped quarters on the second floor, while the guts are removed and replaced in the duplex below. We have been braving the noise and the dust and the loose floor boards, trying hard to be positive, with the promise that the end will have rewards that will blur the pain. But there is nothing more stressful than living in a temporary shelter. Everything is off kilter and every waking day is a challenge. It is to some extent like living as a refugee.

By no means is my current status comparable to some of the people who have had to leave their homes as a result of conflict or dire economic conditions. Over the last few years, the planet has been facing a refugee crisis on a scale not seen since the second world war. It has particularly exacerbated in the last five years as the conflict in Syria has engulfed the region. To put it in perspective, most people who manged to stay alive through the conflict have left Syria. Many are living in permanent camps in Jordan and Lebanon. More than a million refugees have arrived in Germany, in the last year alone. Mostly from the Middle East, Afghanistan and Africa. Germany has been the most gracious of nations to welcome the refugees, though not always with open arms. Even though Angela Merkel's policy of giving refuge has grown increasingly unpopular, she has held firm. The nation seems to be atoning for a refugee crisis it created a few decades ago. Angela Merkel deserves a Nobel peace prize for her unwavering support of those who have lost everything.

Refugees crossing the Mediterranean on over crowded boats from north Africa have become a common sight. The world has grown numb to images of women and children drowning while trying to make the crossing. Almost everyday there is a capsize, as people meet their watery end in an attempt to find a home and a future. To walk in a migrant's shoes is to walk alongside horror. Yet not many can empathize, as it is human nature to take care of one's own and not bother with that which is uncomfortable and alien. And politicians exploit this feeling to spread fear and a right wing agenda of exclusion and apathy.

In America, the current Republican candidate Donald Trump uses it to pander to those who think they are the original owners of this land. Muslims and Mexicans are branded as terrorists, criminals and illegal moochers. In Great Britain the fear of the immigrant was successfully used to remove itself from the European Union. In France, the ban on the Burkini, and incidents of Muslims being singled out and not served, are a direct response to a sense that Europe is being over run by migrants who are not compatible with their way of life or are there to end their way of life via subversive means.

The reality is, it is not only Europe or the west that is baring the brunt of a mass exodus. Many Afghans have lived most of their adult lives as refugees in Pakistan. They fled their native land when the Soviet army invaded their nation in 1979. Countless have grown up stateless in camps which have become permanent homes. Now the Pakistani government is asking three million Afghan refugees within its borders to vacate immediately. They are being uprooted and torn from their families and are being asked to return to Afghanistan. Knowing that their nation is far from finding peace and security,  many are turning west and taking on a deathly journey. Another humanitarian crisis is brewing in a part of the world, which has only seen chaos turn into catastrophe. This means the numbers of people wanting to arrive in Europe and the United States is only going to increase.

People around the globe have always been on the move. It is but human to look for a better future for yourself and your loved ones. Self preservation is at the core of the human spirit. It is this very fact that led to the establishment of the United States of America. It is a nation formed and built by refugees who we now call immigrants. Yet America is barely doing its part in the current climate.
This week United States admitted its 10,000th Syrian refugee, in a resettlement program announced by President Obama last fall. In 2015, just 2% of the 70,000 refugees admitted were from Syria. In 1979, having literally destroyed the nation of Vietnam, the US provided sanctuary to 111,000 Vietnamese, and added another 207,000 in 1980. Having partially created the crisis in Syria, 10,000 is a far cry from the million Germany has taken in.

In reality, every nation on this planet was built by refugees at some point in time. Humans moved around always looking for better climes and laid roots where they could harvest and form community. That is how civilizations got started and nations drew borders.

Now that we have drawn imaginary lines on our tiny planet, the tribal nature of humanity has come to the fore. With visas and passports, we decide who can live where and where one go or cannot. We have organized systems of governance that decide who gets certain benefits and who does not. Based on respective histories, some nations have established systems that are more altruistic than others. Other nations, have shut their doors completely even though people from their tribe needed their help. Many rich middle eastern nations have done very little to relieve the suffering of the Muslim refugees that are on the run. Other nations have simply ignored the crisis.

To leave a home, where you have found comfort in family and surrounding, is the most disruptive thing that happen to a person. For some it pushes them to find a new home, work hard to make sure a situation like that never returns in their lives, to others it spells death. But these are the people who have the metal to make something of themselves and in the process improve the plight of others. These are the people who have built America and will build Germany and other places where ever they are let in. To make them the enemy and stigmatize them as criminals or alien is not in the interest of humanity or the growth of any nation.

While I go through my relatively benign discomfort of renovating my home which I built as an immigrant to this nation, I do not take the disparaging of refugees and migrants lightly. When people choose to ignore the fact that all humanity is essentially made up of migrants who are just passing through this planet, they loose sight of who they are. It is what it is.