Gender equality, the freedom struggle way

The movement empowered the women, but also feminised the men

In this time of toxic masculinity, we must recognise and learn from the successes of the past. Mahatma Gandhi consciously feminised India’s freedom struggle to win against the brute masculinity of British power.

He saw his mother Putlibai and his wife Kasturba (in picture) use peaceful resistance against patriarchy at home. His mother would fast to put moral pressure on his father, and his wife would refuse any act that he asked her to do if she did not agree with it. He personally experienced the power that resists rather than destroys. He incorporated this knowledge into a political tool,satyagraha, that combined civil disobedience with constructive action. Not only was each activity in civil disobedience possible for women to do, because it was non-violent, but each act of constructive action was especially suited to women.

The Champaran trigger

When on the famous day of April 16, 1917, Gandhiji was asked by the British sub-divisional magistrate to leave the district of Champaran, and cease recording the plight of indigo farmers, he refused and wrote two letters. In the first, he asked a friend for volunteers, especially educated women volunteers, for the constructive action of running schools and ashrams where girls would be educated and hierarchies of caste, class and gender would be overcome. Everyone would spin, weave, stitch and wash clothes, grow and cook food, and clean and maintain hygiene.

In the second letter, he stated his own civil disobedience: he would not leave Champaran without recording the plight of the farmers. By April 17, thousands of people were standing outside the court, watching Gandhiji say he was willing to pay the price for disobeying the law by answering a higher law: the voice of conscience. By November, he had opened three girls’ schools and ashrams in Champaran.

With the sustained help of these ashrams, an increasing number of volunteers completed and submitted a report on the pitiable condition of Indigo farmers to the British, who were forced to withdraw the unjust laws and offer some redress. Frailty became a strength in India’s freedom struggle. Women began to see the impact of their constructive action. Emboldened with their success in the running of ashrams and schools, women during the freedom struggle began to participate in protest politics. They began to organise public meetings, unionise mill workers, picket liquor shops, boycott foreign goods and court arrest.Each call for a negative action was matched by a call for a positive action making politics a spiritual force for women. Satyagraha swept aside old taboos and customs. Organising public meetings meant stepping out of the boundaries of home, unionising mill workers meant overcoming the purdah, boycotting foreign-made cloth meant spinning your own, going to jail and running ashrams meant overcoming caste restrictions.

Even the poorest and uneducated of women could spin yarn at home. Millions of volunteers, especially women who could not leave home, could participate. The independence struggle entered every household.

India’s national movement included an unprecedented number of women and ended up creating an unmatched number of women leaders. Eventually, these actions changed the women, but also feminised the men, who too learned to cook, clean, wash, spin, weave and stitch. This role reversal embodied the possibility of women doing men’s work and men doing women’s work; a shared humanity that replaced the gendered polarisation of the dominant and the dominated.

Ruchira Gupta is an anti-trafficking activist and founder of Apne Aap Women Worldwide

Source: The Hindu, 21-05-2017

Where the jobs are: on the unemployment rate

News reports over the last few weeks suggest that the Central government may finally be starting to think seriously about jobs. Chief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramaniam recently pointed to the need to achieve higher economic growth, in the range of 8% to 10%, to solve the problem of jobless growth. In particular, he flagged the underperformance of the information technology, construction and agricultural sectors, which earlier served as huge job-creators for the economy. It is worth noting that India added just 1.35 lakh jobs in eight labour-intensive sectors in 2015, compared to the 9.3 lakh jobs that were created in 2011, according to Labour Bureau figures. The rate of unemployment grew steadily from 3.8% in 2011-12 to 5% in 2015-16. Union Labour and Employment Minister Bandaru Dattatreya has downplayed the gloomy job situation as being a temporary one. His focus instead is on the new National Employment Policy which, he says, would be released later this year and focus on shifting jobs from the informal to the formal sector. NITI Aayog too has dismissed concerns over jobless growth, saying the real problem is underemployment rather than unemployment. Nevertheless, this month the government set up a high-level task force headed by NITI Aayog Vice-Chairman Arvind Panagariya to obtain reliable data on employment trends to aid policymaking.

The focus on jobs is obviously vital. However, higher economic growth alone will not solve the jobs problem. Jobs can be created when growth comes from the transition of labour from informal sectors like agriculture to the more formal manufacturing and service sectors. Such extensive growth, however, runs the risk of stagnation once the available stock of informal labour is exhausted — as some Southeast Asian countries found out the hard way in the late 1990s. On the other hand, growth can come about without any substantial job-creation in the formal sectors of the economy, but through improvements in productivity. The growth record of several developed economies even after the modernisation of their labour force explains such intensive growth. India should aim at growth that is driven both by improvements in productivity and modernisation of its labour force — especially since better jobs are crucial to improving the lives of millions who are employed, indeed underemployed, in low-paying jobs in the farm sector. Ironically, achieving both those objectives will first require labour reforms — ones that can both boost labour mobility within the formal sector and bring down the barriers businesses face in hiring labour. But incremental labour reforms alone won’t work unless these are combined with a step-up in government spending on asset and job-creating areas such as infrastructure, which in turn inspires private investment. Job-creation needs to be an essential axis along which economic and social policies are formulated.

Source: The Hindu, 19-05-2017

50 years of Naxalbari: Fighting for the right cause in the wrong way

Owing to their opposition to development, the Naxalite movement is losing its way. Apart from disrupting government projects, they consider roads their greatest enemy. The soldiers attacked in Sukma were overseeing road construction.

One morning, while going to school in Allahabad, I read a slogan in Bengali reading: “Aamar badi, tomar badi, Naxalbari Naxalbari.” It means, my home, your home, Naxalbari.” Many years later, while passing through Almora, I again noticed slogans propagating the message of rebellion. What was common both times was the symbol of hammer and sickle next to the slogans. A question came to my mind: Down the generations, which milestones have the Maoist revolution crossed?

It is the appropriate time to discuss this subject because May 25 will commemorate 50 years of the violent Maoist uprising of Naxalbari.

Let me inform the younger generations that during a meeting in West Bengal’s Naxalbari area in March, 1967, a decision was taken to embark on an armed rebellion in order to bring in a regime that would uphold the rights of peasants and workers. The brain behind this rebellion was Charu Mazumdar. On May 23, during a meeting called with this objective, the police and the revolutionaries clashed with each other. A policeman was killed in the violence. This was just the beginning of the turmoil.

Two days later, on May 25, the police laid siege to a mammoth farmers’ gathering in which nine women and children lost their lives. Jyoti Basu, who was the state’s home minister those days, asked the police to strictly carry out the orders.

Earlier this month, after the killing of 26 CRPF personnel on April 24, some people thought the Maoist movement was still going strong. But the truth is that the movement, which began in the name of fighting exploitation, has lost its way. On March 17, 2017, Union home minister Rajnath Singh told the Lok Sabha that the number of districts affected by Maoist violence had reduced from 106 to 68. Before that, its influence was spread over 20,000 square kilometres. It has now shrunk to one-fourth of this. It has been an incremental decline over the years. In 2009, the then home minister told Parliament that around 223 districts of the country were affected by Naxalism. In 2011, this number stood at 203. Of these, 84 districts were witnessing violence and 119 districts were influenced by Maoist ideology. Three years later, 80 % of Naxalism-related violence was taking place in only 26 districts. Still, seven states of the nation were affected. At present, just six districts of the country are said to be affected the most by Naxalism.

Some experts give the credit for this to MGNREGA. Also, some state governments assisted by the Central government paid attention to development, along with launching anti-terror operations in the affected areas. Naxalites appear to oppose all kinds of development work. Apart from inflicting damage on all projects carried out by the government machinery, they consider roads to be their greatest enemy. The CRPF soldiers attacked in Sukma were supervising road construction.

The way the imperial Roman armies did it, Maoists, too abduct innocent children. The Romans used to train children to be gladiators even as Maoists glorify them by anointing them ‘soldiers of the people’s revolution.’ Those innocent children, who are oblivious to the theories of ‘people’s awakening’ and ‘people’s war’, are made to indulge in violence and carry out detective work . Beating up people and mutilating them is, in a way. part of the training regime of Naxalites. The boy who first participates in a massacre is applauded. The advocates of a violent struggle provoke these children to become bloodthirsty: If you don’t have the instinct to kill enemies of the class, then you are not fit for the movement, they are told.

No wonder the number of comrades disenchanted by this movement is rising. If 394 Left wing extremists surrendered in 2011, the number rose to 1,442 in 2016. Similarly, 1,840 persons associated with Maoist organisations were arrested last year. A surrendered Maoist militant told the police that he wanted to get married, have children and lead a normal life. He said his dreams had been shattered and he had discovered that ‘those people’ were not waging any struggle. Just this month two of their area commanders have given up arms. This is the other face of the Maoist slogan: Jal, jangal, zameen, izzat aur adhikar (Water, forests, land, respect and rights

That is the logic which gives peaceniks the assurance that despite Sukma-like attacks, violence is the last stop in a one-way street. Why don’t the Maoist guerrillas understand that they are waging a war for right cause in the wrong manner?

Shashi Shekhar is editor-in-chief Hindustan

Source: Hindustan Times, 21-05-2017

Managing Relationships

SADHGURU JAGGI VASUDEV





When you live in this world, there are various types of complex interactions happening. As your field of play increases, the complexity of interaction also goes on increasing. If you're just sitting in a cubicle with only one other person, you need only a little understanding. But if you're managing a thousand people, you need a vast understanding of everybody . If you want all these people to understand you, then you're not going to manage anything. You need to understand the limitations and the capabilities of these thousand people and do what you can only then will you have the power to move the situation the way you want it to go.The closer the relationship, the more effort you should make to understand them. If you're expecting the other to understand and comply with you all the time while you don't understand the limitations, the possibilities, the needs and the capabilities of that person, then conflict is all that will happen. Unfortunately , the closest relationships in the world have more conflict going on than there is between India and Pakistan. India and Pakistan have fought only three wars. In your relationships you have fought many more, because your line of understanding and theirs is different. If you cross this line of control, they will get mad and vice versa. If you move your understanding beyond theirs, their understanding also becomes a part of your understanding. You will be able to embrace their limitations and capabilities.

Newcastle University GREAT Scholarships, India 2017

Newcastle University demonstrating its commitment to the Indian students has announced exclusive scholarships for India in conjunction with British Council under the GREAT scheme. Newcastle University is offering their GREAT Scholarship Scheme to five Indian students and invites graduate and post graduate students from India for a scholarship award of £5,000 payable towards the first year of tuition fees. The students need to meet the conditions of the offer for a place on one of the courses in Newcastle University.

In order to be eligible to apply for the scholarships the candidate must satisfy the following conditions:

For under graduate students:
Must be a Indian national and have been assessed as international/overseas for fees purposes
Must hold an Unconditional offer on any Undergraduate degree programme at Newcastle city campus
Must intend to register to start your studies during the 2017-18 academic year
Should be self-funded student and not in receipt of other University or external awards
Must have achieved an overall of 80% in standard 12th OR AAB in A levels OR 36 IB points

For post graduate students:
Must be a Indian national and have been assessed as international/overseas for fees purposes
Must hold a Conditional or Unconditional offer on any master’s degree programme at Newcastle city campus
Must intend to register to start your studies during the 2017-18 academic year
Should be a self-funded student and not in receipt of other University or external awards
Must have an average of 70% or above in your Bachelors degree. If you are yet to complete your degree we will assess you on the basis of your results to date, providing you have achieved an average of 70% or above and you are expecting to maintain/ increase this in your final semester/year. Students with CGPA scores can also apply if your percentage equivalence is 70% and above.

The candidates have to submit their application online before May 30th, 2017 to qualify for the scholarship.

For more information, please contact:
Preety Bansal, County Manager India, Newcastle University, UK
Email: india@ncl.ac.uk

Source: Indiaeducationdiary, 18-05-2017

Culture Needs A Plan

Institutions for the arts need professional managers for a turnaround

This paper reported earlier this month that state-funded cultural institutions have been asked to generate revenue amounting to 25-30 per cent of their budget initially and “eventually” achieve “self-sufficiency”. The idea will remain utopian unless professional cultural managers are inducted to lead these institutions.

The government needs to create a cadre of professional cultural managers which calls for professionals with a host of skills and training, among which is the requirement to be sensitive and knowledgeable about the wide, diverse and complex cultures and traditions of the Subcontinent. Such persons alone will be able to create business plans for these decadent institutions, provide a vision to connect them to audiences and “markets”, evolve practical strategies to conserve traditional knowledge skills and creative expressions. Only then can these organisations create self-sustainability and have renewed relevance. In their present form, these are white elephants.

Most of these institutions are now led either by artists (performing or visual) who have no idea of or training in administration, policy or management. Or, they are run or controlled by non-specialist bureaucrats. The few professional cultural managers are not motivated to join since they are unable to provide appropriate remuneration and, most importantly, ensure functional autonomy. The dearth of professional cultural managers is unlikely to be addressed soon; not one eminent management institute in India offers a programme in cultural management.

Most state-run cultural institutions across India have been unable to chart a meaningful functional role for creative communities or the preservation of their cultural traditions. Relevant outreach programmes have also not been created. Cultural ecosystems are rocked when a cultural skill or knowledge dies. It is similar to what happens when the tiger is endangered — the impact is felt all over the ecosystem. Several knowledge systems related to performing arts, crafts in India and communities that practice them now face the threat of massive deskilling and marginalisation.

There is no cultural policy that offers a holistic and realistic approach to this complex, contested terrain. Committees to formulate policies are mostly formed with artists and cultural academicians; rarely are cultural management professionals or cultural economists invited to join them. Not surprisingly, these committees are unable to evolve strategies to ensure sustainability and conservation of creative communities, and other manifestations of our rich cultural heritage.

In the absence of professional cultural managers, bureaucrats in charge of these institutions take up the task of making India’s great cultural heritage visible on the international map. For example, the Festival of India model has not evolved since its inception in the 1980s. Those in leadership positions can’t grasp the international discourse on culture as they are unfamiliar with its vocabulary. They fail to address conceptual frameworks while keeping in mind the Indian context and Indian artists’ interests.

For instance, there is great attention given these days to ideas like cultural mapping and the conservation of intangible heritage, both by government and non-government institutions. However, there is a dearth of people who actually understand these complex issues or have the capacities to collect such data, which will involve large sums of public money. There is also a shortage of persons who are equipped to develop strategies to use the collected data in a manner that the welfare of the bearers of tradition, many of whom are living in poverty, are addressed. Just passing directions to recreate themselves as sustainable organisations will not generate the desired results, nor will a choice of leasing the land and infrastructure of these institutes to corporates provide a new functionality to these cultural institutions.

There are, of course, people committed to the field of cultural management and economics. The question is, if the government will induct them as professionals, as they do with scientists, health professionals and economists? If the cultural sphere is not addressed in a systematic, detached and professional manner, we risk to lose huge capital. Culture is too precious to be left Ram bharose!

The writer is vice-president, Centre for New Perspective, an organisation that works on areas related to traditional skills and sustainable development

Source: Indian Express, 18-05-2017

What lies below the district?

Despite all the talk of decentralisation, nothing does. Nobody owns the planning and development functions in panchayat samitis and gram panchayats.

The oldest existing statute is the Bengal Districts Act of 1836. It is a statute with a single sentence and says the following, “Power to create new zilas: It shall be lawful for the State Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, to create new zilas in any part of West Bengal”. This is the text as it stands today, not as it was in 1836. There have been amendments in 1874, 1903, 1920, 1948 and 1950. The parallel legislation still exists in Bangladesh.

Two questions follow. First, why is such an old statute still on the statute books? Aren’t old laws being cleaned up and scrapped? The answer has to do with Article 372(1) of the Constitution. The Bengal Districts Act of 1836 will have to be repealed by the West Bengal Assembly. Second, why does Bengal (West Bengal) alone need a specific statute to create a zila (district)? Other states have sufficient powers under relevant land revenue legislation to create and define districts, sub-divisions of districts and even villages. The answer probably lies in the way land revenue legislation evolved. Since states can create and change districts, the number of districts varies. The 2001 Census had 593 districts, the 2011 Census had 640; the number has crossed 700 now. With that 2011 base, Uttar Pradesh had 71 districts and Lakshadweep had one.

Though not explicitly stated, more districts are presumably created for administrative convenience and delivering public goods and services better. Take the Upper Dibang Valley in Arunachal Pradesh. In 2011, this had a population of 7,984 and a geographical area of 9,129 square kilometres. This makes it India’s largest district, but one with the lowest population density. The district headquarter is Anini and you can imagine the distance of other parts of Upper Dibang from Anini.

When deciding on new districts, there are obvious criteria like population, geographical area and the distance from district headquarters. But the right answer isn’t always obvious. Once revenue laws have determined districts, government development programmes work through DRDAs (District Rural Development Agency), at least on the rural side; there are also elected representatives, through zila panchayats or parishads (ZPs) or district councils, further down to blocks and villages. The number of ZPs is 618, a little lower than the number of districts, because there are urban districts too. (All such numbers change, depending on the year.)

Once there is a new district, barring time-lags, there will also be a new ZP, through the relevant state election commission. Think of various entities involved in a district’s development — the district collector/district magistrate/district Commissioner, the DRDA, the MP, multiple MLAs and ZPs. Unless they work together, a lot of resources, not just financial, will be frittered away.

Because of the DRDA structure, it probably works at the district level. I am not suggesting it works perfectly. For instance, making the ZP president the chairperson of the DRDA doesn’t necessarily mean the ZP works in tandem with the DRDA. Below the district level, I don’t think it works at all.

There are 6,603 intermediate-level panchayats and 2,49,016 gram panchayats. At the district level, one can at least argue the DRDA chairperson has oversight about the district’s development and MPs or MLAs are part of the DRDA. In principle, it should be possible to work on district-level planning. That’s true even if the DRDAs are replaced by something like rural development cells in ZPs, to function as district planning committees.

However, I don’t think one can be that unambiguous at the sub-district level. Going back to the 1950s, government development programmes are through community development blocks (CD blocks), under the overall charge of a BDO (block development officer). Let’s take Andhra Pradesh as an example. The sub-unit of a district is a revenue division and the sub-unit of a revenue division is a mandal. I don’t need to give instances from other states since the point is a simple one. In different states, it is called a mandal, circle, tehsil, taluka, sub-division, CD block, but there is often a revenue division or circle above it.

Other than the BDO, there is the tehsildar/talukdar and the intermediate-level panchayat, variously referred to as the mandal, taluka or block panchayat or panchayat samiti. Sure, the BDO, MP and MLAs are members of the panchayat samiti. But there isn’t a sense that there is a coherent governance structure at the panchayat samiti level, straddling the elected, the executive and land and revenue administration, the last specifically mentioned because development typically requires land issues to be sorted out. Stated differently — no single entity is clearly responsible for a block’s development.

That argument extends lower down, to the gram panchayat, and these have got a substantial amount of resources, courtesy the Fourteenth Finance Commission. I am not merely making standard points about capacity, a lack of devolution of functions, funds and functionaries, convergence and separate cadres. Perhaps those are prerequisites before one can answer my question. Decentralised planning is meant to start from below and “below” doesn’t mean the district. Gram panchayats/gram sabhas are supposed to have several “planning” functions. The intention is to make planning participatory. But unlike the district, and like the block, we don’t have a coherent governance and administrative structure. Unlike even the panchayat samiti, there is no direct link between the executive and the elected in the gram panchayat.

Thus, unlike the district, who “owns” the planning and development functions in panchayat samitis and gram panchayats? I don’t think anyone does. Hence, whenever we talk about decentralised planning, we tend to think of districts — and nothing below.

The writer is member, Niti Aayog. Views are personal

Source: Indian Express, 18-05-2017