Air pollution a national problem

A Greenpeace report shows 90% of cities studied had pollution levels over prescribed standards

Delhi’s toxic air may be making news every few months. But pollution levels across the country are alarming too. A new report released here on Wednesday shows that over 90 per cent of the cities studied had pollution levels higher than the prescribed standards.

According to an analysis of 2015 data for 168 cities by Greenpeace India, 154 were found to have an average particulate matter level higher than the national standard. None of the cities studied had air quality matching the standard prescribed by the World Health Organisation. Hasan in Karnataka came closest to the standard.

Using data from various State pollution control boards, accessed from their websites and through RTI queries, the report ranked the cities based on the annual average of PM10, which are all particles less than 10 microns in diameter. These include the very harmful fine particles, PM2.5.

Top five

Unsurprisingly, Delhi was found to be be the most polluted city, with the annual average for PM10 being 268 micrograms per cubic metre, or over four times the 60 micrograms/cubic metre limit prescribed in the National Ambient Air Quality Standards of the Central Pollution Control Board.

Ghaziabad, Allahabad and Bareilly in Uttar Pradesh and Faridabad in Haryana followed closely, making for the worst five cities in terms of PM10 levels, the annual average concentrations being four times or more than the standard.

While air quality in North and Central India saw dangerous levels of particulate matter, South India appeared to have comparatively cleaner air. All 10 of the least polluted cities were in the South and the East: eight in Karnataka and one each in Odisha and Tamil Nadu.

“Due to the Himalayas and the cooler weather as well as big industrial clusters, the levels of pollution are higher in the North. Southern India has the benefit of the mixing of sea breeze. However, pollution is a national-level problem and has to be treated as such,” said Sunil Dahiya, one of the authors of the report and a campaigner with Greenpeace India.

The main culprit

Looking at the sources of pollution, the report found that fossil fuels were the biggest contributors to the particulate matter. “Whether it is in the transport sector or industries, the uncontrolled burning of fossil fuels is the main cause of air pollution,” said Mr. Dahiya.

Chennai, for instance, though on the coast, had an average PM10 level of 81 micrograms per cubic metre. A diesel-powered public transport system and power plant were to be blamed for the air pollution.

Though the report has looked at average city levels of PM10, some of the cities, like Delhi, have many more monitoring stations than the others. In the report, Greenpeace recommended setting up more monitoring stations in order to get a better picture of pollution levels.

Source: The Hindu, 12-01-2017

GATE 2017: smart strategies to help you get a big score

A well-planned strategy is crucial for cracking any competitive test. For Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE) 2017, it is necessary for candidates to get familiar with the format and consolidate their strong areas. Start with the relevant books for the subject, including the books for fundamental and basic concepts as well as for specific problems. Also go through previous years’ question papers. MV Reddy, course director, GATE, Triumphant Institute of Management Education, says candidates must note down the concepts (definitions, unit, dimension etc.) as well as necessary theories, formulae etc.

“Try to solve a variety of problems from different sample papers. Use logic and tricks in solving problems. Conduct self tests based on various chapters and try to achieve a very good score. Go for self tests based on the whole syllabus. In the revision stage, concentrate more on the selected topics. This is not the time to start reading again from scratch. You need to go ahead with short notes and revise whatever practice questions and answers you have read before. Identify topics which you have not covered at all,” says Reddy.

Sharing her success mantra, Ronika Goswami, who bagged all-India rank 1 in GATE 2016, says, “I started my GATE 2016 preparation from November 2015. My strategy for the test was to get all the basic concepts cleared first. For that, I followed the standard books for all the subjects. The focus in the last two months was on solving as many questions as possible. I started the paper with the general aptitude section as it is very scoring. Then I attempted the two-mark questions as they require more calculations. Then I tackled the one-mark questions.”

As the candidates are not permitted to carry a scientific calculator to the exam centre, they will have to get used to virtual calculators. Make sure you have enough practice of using these calculators. “With the exam going online, a lot of practice will be needed to get familiar with a computer based test. Also keep in mind that the test will have numerical answer questions, wherein you have to enter an answer, instead of choosing between four options. So avoid guesswork,” says Mohit Goel, CEO, Gateforum.

source: Hindustan Times, 25-01-2017

Even in the worst of times, China is no substitute for the US on global stage

As an old West Asia hand, I could hardly have missed the significance of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s trip to the region a year ago, which included stops in Riyadh, Tehran and, perhaps most significantly, at the Arab League summit in Cairo. With American influence in West Asia fading under US President Barack Obama, and Russia taking on a larger role in regional affairs, the Chinese leader seemed to be signalling that Beijing, too, wanted a seat at the table.

At the summit, he surprised (and delighted) the assembled delegates by announcing China’s support for a Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital. “China firmly supports the Middle East peace process and supports the establishment of a State of Palestine enjoying full sovereignty on the basis of the 1967 borders,” Xi said. “We understand the legitimate aspirations of Palestine to integrate into the international community as a state.”

Read | China’s economy grows at 6.7% in 2016, its slowest in 26 years

Xi’s speech, a sharp departure from China’s long-standing foreign policy practice of eschewing intervention on political matters, set off much speculative discussion among those of my ilk. Could it be that Beijing was finally ready to earn its place among the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and actually play a useful role in solving a major international problem? It was just conceivable that China could use its growing economic clout in West Asia to start a new, meaningful process of negotiations between Israel and Palestine, with the approval of Saudi Arabia and Iran — the two other stops on Xi’s trip.

Why should China bother? After all, it had been very well served by its business-only foreign policy. Since a sudden attack of altruism could be ruled out, some West Asia experts speculated at the time that there were compelling economic reasons for Beijing’s venturing into the international political arena. The argument went thus: China depends heavily on West Asian oil and gas, the steady supplies of which depend heavily on the political stability of the region, which in turn depends heavily on American policing; with Washington no longer willing to perform that function, Beijing might reasonably conclude that economic interests required it to shake off its political inertia.

Read | US President Donald Trump to speak to PM Modi as India hopes to build on US ties

There were other signs that China was taking on greater responsibility on the world stage. Its contribution of troops to UN peacekeeping missions had more than doubled, to 2,800 — and Xi had committed to increasing the number to 8,000 troops, or one-fifth of the total. (India’s contribution, in case you’re wondering, comprised 6,750 troops, 900 police, and 60 military experts.) The Chinese president had also pledged $1 billion to create a UN Peace and Development Trust Fund.

I was reminded of the heightened expectations of Chinese leadership last week, when Xi visited the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. It was the first time a Chinese president has attended, and the timing was propitious. The audience of global grandees was, much like the gathering at the Arab League, anxious by the American retreat from responsibility for world affairs. And as he did in Cairo, Xi gave the appearance of a man with a plan. China, he said, would champion the cause of globalisation, in the face of strong nationalist, isolationist political movements throughout the West. Beijing would lead the effort to maintain trade and economic stability, and would do its upmost to prevent a trade war with Donald Trump’s US.

Read | Post-truth and alternative facts: Welcome to Donald Trump’s la-la land

The gathering of capitalists was reassured by Xi’s assurance that they could do business as usual in his country, as much as they were charmed by his quoting Charles Dickens — he described the current state of world affairs as “the best of times, the worst of times”, an allusion to A Tale of Two Cities. Many were apparently willing to overlook some of the more egregious contradictions in his speech; you have to wonder, for instance, what the representatives of Google and Facebook made of his claims to China’s “openness”.

Most of the audience for Xi’s speech have by now returned home to their daily routines, and many will have left their heady optimism at the high altitude of Davos. They will also have abandoned any hope that the new occupant of the White House might temper his language and attitudes upon swearing in: Trump has made it clear that he intends to follow through on his “America First” and anti-globalisation agenda. As the jet-lag from the long trip fades away, the Davos set is left with the realisation that China cannot be a substitute for the US during “the worst of times”.

Read | India ranks low as global influencer while US, UK, Japan remain on top: Report

That’s not to say these won’t be “the best of times” for Beijing. There are plenty of scenarios in which Beijing benefits from Washington’s withdrawal from international alliances, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which was designed to restrain Chinese ambitions. Trump’s isolationism will also allow China to bully its smaller neighbours. But beyond Xi’s rhetoric, Beijing has not yet demonstrated any interest or ability in being a solver of prickly international problems.Which bring me back to that speech in Cairo. In the year since, China’s trade with Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran has continued to grow. But Beijing has done nothing to move the needle on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Beijing has its seat at the table, but as ever, it is content to sup while others suffer.

Bobby Ghosh is editor-in-chief of Hindustan Times

source: Hindustan Times, 25-01-2017

Republic Day Ritual





Does a nation founded by Gandhi really need to parade its military might?

Everybody loves a good parade, but can the Soviet-style displays of military might be dispensed with on India's annual Republic Day parade? Do we really think we can overawe our enemies with tacky tableaux of missiles and ships, along with some real tanks and aircraft, all conjoined with colourful arrays of horseand camel-mounted troops? Not to mention that the tanks and aircraft on display turn out to be advertisements for the Russian and American military industrial complexes, which may be equally keen to sell the same equipment to India's enemies as well.Some say such displays are not meant for the sophisticated but for the simple-minded, for whom they suffice to keep the testosterone pumping.
India is not Finland or Denmark which can flourish in a friendly neighbourhood ­ so goes the argument ­ instead it is surrounded by inimical powers such as Pakistan and China, both of which are security-heavy praetorian states, and it consequently needs a decent intake of young men (and women) to staff its armed forces. In this scheme of things, having a military component to the annual Republic Day parade is an essential device to keep up its morale.
That argument does have some traction; moreover it may be a good idea to bring in some variation in the annual ritual by doing such things as having a French marching contingent (as was the case in last year's Republic Day parade) or one from the UAE (as is planned this year). These are signs of slow change. But sooner or later we must face up to the fact that military march pasts are approaching their sell-by date. After all many other nations also face credible military threats, yet keep their morale up without resorting to
Source: Times of India, 25-01-2017
archaic military displays.

Radical But Loving Vision For A Golden Future

Talk: Osho





According to me, (right now) law is not for protection of the just, it is for protection of the crowd mind; whether it is just or unjust does not matter. Law is against the individual and for the crowd. It is an effort to reduce the individual and his freedom, and his possibility of being himself.The latest scientific researches say that many of those who are termed as criminals are not responsible for their crimes; they inherit that tendency .Now it is almost an established scientific fact that punishing anybody for any crime is simply idiotic. It is almost like punishing somebody because he has tuberculosis ­ or sending him to jail because he is suffering from cancer. All criminals are sick, psychologically and spiritually .
In my vision of a commune, the courts will not consist of law experts; they will consist of people who understand human nature and hereditary and other factors. The wrongdoer has to be sent to the right institution; maybe a hospital, or a psychiatric institution, or a psychoanalytic school. He needs our sympathy, love and help. Instead, for centuries we have been giving him punishment. Man has committed so much cruelty behind such beautiful names as order, law and justice.
The new man will have no jails, judges and legal experts.There will certainly have to be sympathetic scientists; meditative, compassionate beings, to work out why it happened that a certain man committed rape, for instance. Is it because of lack of spiritual dimension and guidance when dealing with overactive hormones, oppressive poverty or some other psychological affliction? Such offenders need to be taught to cool down, calm down.
By punishing, you cannot change his hormones. Throwing him in jail, you will perhaps create more of a pervert. The new commune of man will be based on science, not on superstition. If somebody does something harmful to the commune, then his body has to be looked into; he needs some physiologi cal biological change. His mind has to be looked into ­ perhaps psychoanalysis. The deepest possibility is that neither body nor mind are of much help; that means he needs a deep spiritual regeneration, a deep meditative cleansing.
Instead of courts, we should have meditative centres of different kinds, so every unique individual can find his own way . And instead of law experts, we need scientific people of different persuasions to deal with offenders, because somebody may have a chemical defect, another may have a biological or physiological defect. We need all these kinds of experts, of all persuasions and schools of psychology , all types of meditators, and we can transform people who have been victims of unknown forces ... and who have been punished by us. They have suffered in a double sense.
First, they are suffering from an unknown biological force. Second, they are suffering at the hands of your judges; it is so insane that future human beings will not be able to believe it. It is almost the same with the past.
The new man (in an ideal commune of the future) can live without any law, without any courts and lawyers. Love will be his law. Understanding will be his order. Science will be, in every difficult situation, his last resort.

Busting some UPSC exam myths 

Some mistakes, ‘hacks’ and ‘shortcuts’ to avoid while preparing for the civil services exam.

The challenging Civil Services Examination (CSE) conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is spread over an entire year, divided into three extremely competitive stages, in which anything can go wrong at any stage leading to one’s failure.
This must sound scary to over seven lakh aspirants who will be sitting for the exam. While beginning their preparation, many students have partial knowledge about the exam, its nitty-gritties and preparation strategy. Confused by half knowledge and filled with fear, many of the students start believing in myths floating around. Here are some things aspirants should avoid.
Myth: IAS officers/aspirants should know everything about every topic/subject under the sun.
Reality: No, they do not. But since this is a generalist exam, they are supposed to be generally well read, with a balanced outlook towards issues. Moreover, the syllabus of the exam is huge, covering many subjects. So, an IAS aspirant is generally much more aware than others. What is required is a general understanding of the topic and conceptual clarity. The exam does not require one to be an expert in a topic, rather, aspirants should have general awareness and analytical skills.

Myth: I need to remember a lot of facts to clear CSE.
Reality: No, the exam does not test factual knowledge at all. It tests your understanding, conceptual clarity and analytical skills. However, some facts are considered to be the basis of building perspective, which are important to know. So, you should know a few basic facts such as size of the GDP, demographic data, and so on, but it will be easier to remember them once you understand their significance.
Myth: You need to be a topper throughout to clear the exam.
Reality: Although being a topper helps, it does not guarantee you success in this exam. What is required is general awareness, logical reasoning and good writing skills. If you can develop those, you can clear this exam even if you had a second division in Class X or XII. Yes, you might have to explain in the interview as to why you scored less, but it is not held against you if you have a valid reason.
Myth: You cannot clear the exam without the help of a coaching institute.

Reality: Wrong. In the new era, one can make use of various great resources, such as mobile apps and websites. Coaching centres do have a study plan that they enforce on you, but it cannot guarantee success and they charge an astronomical fee, which many aspirants cannot afford. It is important to first understand where you stand and how much you need to improve. Once you know your study objectives, you can decide between self-study or joining a coaching institute.
Myth: Writing skills cannot be improved, so one should read now and directly write in the exam hall.
Reality: This is one of the biggest mistakes one can make. Writing at home and writing in the exam hall are two entirely different scenarios. There is so much pressure in the exam hall that you can find it hard to think about new points. So, if you do not practice, you would not be able to finish the paper on time. Writing skills improve slowly, hence, it is more important that you practice regularly. Consistent writing practice helps in honing articulation which leads to better expression, and, ultimately, better marks.
Myth: You must attempt more than 90 questions to clear prelims.

 

Reality: This is not true. Another myth that has been made popular by some of the ‘hacks’ and ‘shortcuts’ floating in the market is that if you attempt more questions it is easier to get more marks. It doesn’t work like that. To attempt more number of questions correctly, one needs to have a certain level of “intuition”. And that level of intuition comes from years of reading and internalising information which helps in creating links between topics.While a well-read person may attempt a disproportionately large number of questions and still manage to get them correct, not everyone can do it. So, one should attempt only those questions one is reasonably sure of, and not because someone gave you a hack. You need to practice and figure out a strategy that works well for you.
Myth: One needs to study 16 hours a day to clear.
Reality: Let’s face it. No one can study for 16 hours per day for an extended period and not crash. Moreover, it is not the hours that matter, rather the quality. So, you have people who clear by studying for four to five hours a day alongside a job, and people who have studied for 12 hours per day continuously for months. You must find your balance.
Myth: You need to read many books on a single topic to gain absolute “mastery” over the subject.

Reality: First, “mastery” over any subject is a super ambitious target, in case of UPSC exam. Second, it is always better to understand a single book in great depth rather than reading multiple books to understand a topic. Also, even though you have read and understood something, it takes time to get internalised as you are going to study many new topics. If you don’t make notes and revise, you might not be able to retain them effectively. If you genuinely understand a topic and want to expand your knowledge and/or build more perspective, reading more books can certainly help.
Myth: One must read standard books from cover to cover and make notes on every topic in the syllabus.
Reality: Absolutely not. Apart from NCERTs and some books, nothing is required to be read cover to cover. Though reading and acquiring knowledge is almost always helpful, it is far better to adopt a topic-wise approach. Break down the syllabus in keywords and try to cover them from relevant sources and books. Also, making notes is important. But they shouldn’t become an end-in-themselves. They should aid in your understanding and help in effective revision. Making a mind map is far better, and so is scribbling on the margins, than making traditional notes.

To sum up, we know you face a daunting task. But we hope that you’ll enjoy the learning experience instead of becoming anxious and burning out. Focus on the mantra of “Read, Revise, Internalise.” It is also important not to blindly follow any advice that is doled out to you, including this one.

The writer is head, UPSC exam preparation community, Gradeup.

Source: The Hindu, 22-01-2016

The new right is wrong

It is only the old RSS vision for India recycled 

In a recent article, Rajiv Lall reproduced an almost nine decade-old Hindutva vision of India as “The New Right” (The Indian Express, January 18). Honestly speaking, this should have been titled “The Hindu Right” as he repeated almost all those features which RSS spokespersons or cadres loaned to the BJP have been churning out zealously, about their kind of “Hindusthan” in the recent past.
The first feature he discusses is a distrust of democracy. According to Lall, since in Indian democracy, “the vast majority of voters live in poverty, it is especially difficult to make a politically compelling case for economic policies that favour growth over equality”. This is akin to demanding an elitist democracy, where only the educated and the “haves” run things, disregarding equality guaranteed by the democratic, secular Constitution of India. According to Lall, “growth” and “equality” are antithetical to each other; if Indian voters prefer equality over billionaires, that is bad democracy.
The second is the need for “strong leaders”. Lall admits India’s democratic institutions “have been weakening” but for this, he finds fault with there being no “strong leaders to fix them”. The reality is that India’s democratic institutions have lost relevance due to “strong leaders” like Indira Gandhi in the past and a current “strong leader”, PM Modi. This is corroborated by many strictures which the highest court has passed in just the last two years. There is a general consensus that all government powers are concentrated in the PMO, surpassing even the times of Indira Gandhi. Top BJP brass as well as media are witness to the fact that Modi is becoming India and vice-versa. In fact, this was the vision of RSS’s guru Golwalkar, under whose tutelage Modi was groomed into a political leader. Outlining the nature of the future Indian polity, Golwalkar, as early as 1940, declared that India should be governed under “one leader and one ideology”.
The third characteristic of Lall’s “The New Right” echoes the same old beliefs of the RSS and its fraternity on India. According to him, “the time has come for us to move beyond the tired narratives of syncretism and Mandalism”. Just on the eve of Independence, the RSS’s English organ Organiser in an editorial (“Whither”, August 14, 1947), decrying an all-inclusive, syncretic India, declared, “in Hindusthan, only the Hindus form the nation and the national structure must be built on that safe and sound foundation. The nation itself must be built up of Hindus, on Hindu traditions, culture, ideas and aspirations”.
The dislike for “Mandalism” and the demand for “reservations based on economic status” is also in conformity with a Hindutva ethos. According to the RSS, casteism is synonymous with Hinduism and Hindu nationalism. As a corollary, it demands the promulgation of the Manusmriti text. Unfortunately, the flag-bearers of anti-Mandal politics fail to note that reservation is essential because we live an enormously unequal society with skewed resources and incomes. One solution is the right to work for all, but defenders of “Hindu mythology and historiography”, due to their love for a market economy, will not support that. Lastly, it is shocking that Lall’s “Indic-Hindu civilisational heritage” has no place for Islam and Christianity. But that is also in conformity with the RSS vision of India. According to this, India is a fatherland and a holy land for Hindus only and followers of “foreign religions”, like Muslims and Christians, need to be cleansed. Interestingly, thinkers like Swami Vivekananda, Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar are frequently presented as philosophical mentors of the Hindu Right. But Swami Vivekananda had declared that, “if ever any religion approached this equality in an appreciable manner it is Islam and Islam alone”. He concluded that India could be invincible only with “Vedanta brain and Islam body”. Mahatma Gandhi was killed because he did not subscribe to the Hindutva vision. And Dr. Ambedkar unequivocally declared, “If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country.”

The writer taught political science at the University of Delhi

Source: Indian Express, 24-01-2017