Corporations: The Necessary Evil

Watched the movie "Battle in Seattle" yesterday and the mind immediately got flooded with a plethora of thoughts.The movie is based on real events depicted through fictional characters and is the story of mass protests at the WTO(World Trade Organization) meeting in Seattle,Washington which ultimately led to collapse of the talks.For a full synopsis(at the risk of encountering spoilers) go to

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0850253/synopsis

However, what I want to talk about is not the movie itself but issues- both core and peripheral- related to it.The protesters are opposed to the WTO because they feel that it's being used by the developed and powerful nations of the world to flood the third world and poor nations with their goods thus destroying any attempts at self-sustenance.All this is done under the garb of sugar-coated slogans of "Globalization" and "Free Trade".The carrot held out is the seemingly easier and cheaper access to goods for the people of all countries.The WTO envisages a single unified global economy but fails to make any provisions for the local farmers and entrepreneurs who would lose their livelihoods in face of stiff competition.Hey wait!How can imported goods come at so cheap a price so as to elbow out these guys?? The answer lies in- subsidies.

European nations and America give billions of dollars in subsidies to their own farmers who are then able to produce at a lower cost and sell cheap. Even so, they make handsome profits.Now, these countries are not agrarian in nature- meaning that only a very miniscule percentage of the population is involved in farming.This makes it easier for the governments to give heavy subsidies per farmer.On the other hand,developing and third world countries have majority of their populations involved in agricultural activities.For these countries whose economies are much smaller than those of the developed countries,it becomes all the more difficult to subsidize farming.This results in lack of usage of modern equipment and techniques in farming which has a direct impact on the quality and quantity of produce.If at all the farmer chooses to use modern machinery, the cost of production also goes up considerably because the farmer now has to pay back the loan taken from the bank to purchase the machinery. This limits his ability to sell below a minimum price.With cheap and better quality goods coming from elsewhere he is unable to withstand the competition. It's true that consumers which form a smaller portion of the population will now have access to cheaper goods but face the risk of becoming overdependent on imports owning to the dying out of local industry. There may arise a situation where owing to poor produce some year the developed country doesn't export its produce.The impact can be imagined. This effect continues up the production chain because the local industry won't be able to produce cheap after procuring the more expensive raw material from local sources whereas industry in developed countries will.The irony is- developed countries in WTO want developing countries like India to stop giving subsidies to their farmers but are not willing to do the same in their own.Clearly, all this is being done at the behest of and in the interest of large corporations which are driven by the profit motive.Infact(atleast as far as the US is concerned) a corporation is mandated by law to maximize profit for its stakeholders and thus can absolve itself of guilt,if any,in the pursuit of its objectives.

Now this is where it all gets damn confusing for me! All right, the corporates world over are driven by selfish motives and are willing to exploit or be involved in the exploit of others in pursuance of their goals.Also,many of us would automatically sympathize with the plight of those suffering as a result.But does that mean we should stop using the products of these companies? Not eat that burger at your favourite multinational joint, not purchase that pair of sports shoes from Nike(in India they are imported from China where its workers are paid a pittance and Nike pockets all the money),not consume products made from imported food-grains(not that ur gonna be able to tell anyway!),not use a laptop or an iPod(the lithium ion batteries use a substance found in abundance mostly in very poor African nations which use child labor to mine it-of course it's the corporations who supervise the mining),not wear diamond jewellery(try finding out something about DeBeers if u can not to mention blood diamonds)? This list can go on for ever,including things you cannot imagine life without-foremost being oil.Probably nothing in the world has caused as much exploitation as oil has. This exploitation has been carried out by both- corporations as well as governments- and continues to this day.Ever since reserves of oil were found in the Middle East at the turn of the century, the world has never been the same.A number of countries have been condemned to eternal hell for their oil,the most recent being Iraq and Afghanistan.Afghanistan itself doesn't have any significant oil but its control is vital for the US to enable it to bring oil through pipeline from oilfields in Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan which will have to pass through Afghanistan and Pakistan before entering the ocean.A Taliban controlled Afghanistan wouldn't allow that although US tried its best to negotiate with this barbaric regime.More on oil politics in later posts.

Even if everyone decided to boycott these goods or decide not to be employed by them what will happen to the workers who might go jobless as a result? The collapse of corporations will resonate throughout the economic chain because everything is interlinked(the current recession is proof).The world economy shall collapse and it will be utter chaos everywhere.And what shall we have achieved? Absolutely nothing.So clearly an outright boycott is not an option. Then what IS?I don't know and I don't think there IS an effective one.At most you can try your best to persuade these people to bring about a change of heart and hope for the best but clearly that doesn't smack like a practical solution.Human greed is too strong to let go of opportunities for the sake of others.Most of us want to be rich and powerful and I personally am no exception.

That leaves taking recourse to legal route as the only option.Tough laws may discourage exploitative,immoral,unethical and criminal practices and force corporations to behave.But again laws are made by governments-which may be democratically elected or dictatorial regimes.In case of the latter dictators aren't accountable to anyone and can therefore rule as they see fit.Naturally corporations would be willing to pay arm and leg to the dictators to bend laws their way in such an atmosphere.In case of a democracy,no one ever heard of politicians winning elections without money to run their electoral campaigns.Who pays the chunk of this money and what do they want in return? Be it either India or the US,time and again we have seen laws being heavily tilted in favour of corporations and the judiciary overlooking violation of laws by them.Organizations like the WTO are brainchilds of not governments but corporations who are eager to expand their reach at whatever price.With the weight of the government behind these guys what choice does that leave you with?

So where do I see myself after college?What do I want to achieve?Like many others I want a high-paying,satisfying,glamorous job and a stellar corporate career.Would I be hypocritical enough to join a multinational?Yes,I would.I've worked hard all my life to the best of my ability to realise my goals.I know there are things which I cannot change and are beyond my control.Besides,there is no corporation which doesn't perpetrate exploitation in one form or the other and given all the arguments in this post do I have a choice if I want to fulfill my dreams?(Assuming that I'm not planning on being an entrepreneur!)

Lazzzzing Around!

Vacation is getting very boring now.Wish it's over soon and I get back to college.All I do is to eat,sleep,read,watch TV n movies on lappie.Currently reading Noam Chomsky's "Understanding Power" but not in a mood to finish it now.Saw three movies yesterday-"Bachna Ae Haseeno","The Deal" and "Wall-E".

"Bachna..." is typical Bollywood fare-the candy floss stuff.Minissha Lamba and Deepika look hot,Ranbir's acting is okay.Timepass movie in short.Watch "The Deal" if you like politics else just another movie."Wall-E" is an animation film from the house of PIXAR.Sweet movie if you manage to sit through the first half an hour.Story is kinda new.

Polyester Prince :The Rise Of Dhirubhai Ambani

This is the name of a book by Hamish McDonald I finished reading a couple of days back. It details the life of the man right from his childhood days till about the time he died and exposes him and Reliance to the world in full. It is only after reading this book that I realised the scale and magnitude of the frauds perpetrated by him and his coterie of friends.

On the other hand, one cannot but help marvel at the sheer genius of the man who took on the whole government and bureaucracy headlong and twisted and manipulated them to suit his will and desire. The state-controlled economic set-up of India(which it was till 1991) had been designed by some of the best minds in the world and yet Dhirubhai outwitted and hoodwinked it at each and every step.That he managed to shine the most when license-raj in India was at its worst speaks volumes about his abilities.At the peak of his powers he could make or break Prime Ministers not to mention other Cabinet ministers and Chief Ministers. His battles with Bombay Dyeing chief Nusli Wadia and Indian Express owner and editor Ramnath Goenka have become the stuff of legend.It is in the most intense phase of this battle that 'years of living on adrenalin' as the author puts it, finally took its toll on him and he suffered a paralytic stroke from which he never fully recovered.

In the course of reading this book a lot of characters and events in the movie 'Guru' began falling in place.Apart from the obvious Abhishek Bachchan as Dhirubhai and Aishwarya Rai as his wife Kokilaben, the character of Abhishek's father as schoolmaster is based on Dhirubhai's father who was also a school teacher, Mithun Chakravarty's character is inspired by Ramnath Goenka who initially saw great promise in Dhirubhai but later fell out with him owing to latter's business practices and Madhavan's character as a journalist in Mithun's paper is inspired by S.Gurumurthy who exposed Reliance and Dhirubhai in Indian Express to the full.Aishwarya's brother as Abhishek's business partner in his initial days is also based on a real life character whose share Dhirubhai bought out after they disagreed on certain points. Abhishek's stint in Turkey is symbolic of the years Dhirubhai spent in Aden(in Yemen) when it was a busy business place. The allegation levelled against him regarding smuggling of machines without paying custom duties is very much true;Dhirubhai is said to have smuggled in a whole factory worth $1 billion by dismantling machines and then reassembling them after their arrival taking advantage of loopholes in customs regulations.It was considered as a punch in the face for the bureaucracy at that time.In another instance he paid duty for 8 machines and installed 12 in his plant by showing the latter as spare parts to the authorities(the figures of 8 and 12 appear in the movie too).The annual shareholders meeting used to be a grand affair with Dhirubhai as shown in the movie and there was an instance when the public turned against him in the meeting and he had to flee. The paralytic stroke shown in the movie(after the disastrous shareholders meet) came much later in real life though.The movie leaves out his most scandalous affairs(Harshad Mehta scam and issuing of duplicate shares)and doesn't even make a mention of his tussle with Nusli Wadia.Guess the producers didn't want to take chances with the Ambani clout.On that note, even this book is not available in India for the Ambanis have threatened legal action against anything they preceive as defamatory in the book!No wonder I never across it before in the press or anywhere else.It's only by accident that I chanced upon a downloadable free ebook version on the net while searching for something else.

The book candidly details all of Reliance's misdoings while acknowledging the genius of the man.In the words of Sucheta Dalal, a well-known business reporter:

The Polyester Prince is an accurate portrait of one of the most colourful, controversial and brilliant of Indian businessmen, who converted into an art; the bending and twisting of the stifling license-permit system to his advantage. It traces his humble beginnings at Chorwad in Gujarat to being in the Forbes list of the world's richest men.

As McDonald says in the book, 'Everything about the Ambanis, in fact, was a good magazine story.' If Anil Ambani's stormy courtship of Tina Munim, whom Hamish describes as 'a girl with a past' has all the ingredients of a Bollywood potboiler, then the saga of Dhirubhai's rise to being among the most powerful men in India is significantly more dramatic and awesome. There is the fight-to-the-finish battle with Ramnath Goenka -- the fiery and fearless proprietor of the Indian Express; then the war with industrialist Nusli Wadia of Bombay Dyeing; the much publicised allegations against some Ambani staffers over a plot to murder Wadia; Reliance's travails during the V P Singh government, which almost brought the business house to its knees, and sundry other controversies over licensed capacities, export manipulation and share switching. It also narrates how Reliance created the equity cult which got the general public investing in equity and investors' reciprocal adulation for the man for over a decade.

McDonald uses his skill as a journalist to paint an accurate picture and to bring in the unsavory aspects of Reliance's dealing with business rivals without attracting charges of defamation. The book candidly traces Dhirubhai's uncanny knack of tweaking and capturing political and bureaucratic power -- Ambani's equation with Indira Gandhi and her family and their powerful minions, as well as the suitcases of cash which Indian business houses used to engineer changes in tariffs and duties for specific products. At the same time, McDonald finally portrays Dhirubhai as a visionary with unconventional ways of fulfilling his mega plans.

Read the full article here: http://www.rediff.com/money/2000/jul/26dalal.htm

He manipulated not only the system but his company's account books as well.By putting up front companies and spinning a complex web of financial transactions here and there he made it extremely difficult for anyone to make any sense of it. As the author says-Probably only Dhirubhai, his two sons and a couple of selected near ones were the only people who had the whole equation in their heads.

Everything else apart, the book makes you realise the readiness with which our politicians do the beckoning of businessmen, the impunity with which they demand cash(for instance,Sanjay Gandhi asked Nusli Wadia for donations to Congress to get a license clearance) and abuse their positions in power.Apart from Indira Gandhi,Murli Deora,the present Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas and Pranab Mukherjee, the External Affairs minister, used their clout in the administration to benefit Reliance and Dhirubhai heavily-both financially and legally. CBI has been shown to be a mere puppet in the hands of politicians and by extension Reliance(the CBI chief's son was the owner of a Reliance factory)- something that stays true to this day.The heads of public sector banks, bureaucrats in the finance ministry,law ministry and officers in the law enforcemnt agencies have been shown as having business interests in Reliance either directly through ownership of shares and debentures(allotted by Reliance for free out of special prerogative quotas in return for their 'services') or indirectly by having franchisee rights of a Reliance company through their family members. A number of bureaucrats accused of favouring Reliance have been shown as taking up jobs with it after retirement.Even the media hasn't been spared.Reliance had a number of journalists in major newspapers and magazines on its payroll to paint a favourable image of the company.It even started a newspaper of its own-the 'Observer of Business and Politics' when the Indian Express campaign started hurting it real bad but it failed to click. But the author does acknowledge that given the opportunity any other businessman does and would've done the same things Dhirubhai did.The only difference with him was the courage factor and the scale on which he did whatever he did. By his own admission he took advantage and worked hard to exploit the opportunity while others remained complacent and therefore had no right to complain. He attributed complaints to the jealously factor he says is so inherent in Indians.

To say that he played a big role in changing the face of Indian politics forever (inadvertantly though) won't be an exaggeration. He got V.P Singh (who was the Finance Minister in the then Rajiv gandhi Government and was bearing down upon Dhirubhai's empire) sidelined upon which the latter resigned and then led to Rajiv's downfall in the next elections.Fearing a Congress comeback he then took the reservation genie out of the bottle which has completely changed the contours of Indian politics forever. The man who had a reputation for honesty and efficiency (as Chief Minister of UP he rid the state of notorious bandits to a great extent) became a villain(or a hero depending on which side of the fence you are) overnight.

Perhaps the most shocking side of his personality was the willingness to take recourse to violence as the last means. At various times he got beaten up his own workers agitating for higher wages and overtime pay, his business rivals(son of Kapal Mehra, his rival in the polyester business)-the latter couldn't be proved in court and got threats issued to a number of people as well(none of which have been proved). A manager of his company Kirti Ambani was arrested for hatching a murder conspiracy against Nusli Wadia and Reliance immediately dissociated itself from his actions.

The author also gives details of the Ambanis association with Harshad Mehta in order to jack up Reliance share prices by manipulation of markets but says that the joint Parliamentary probe was stopped by Murli Deora before it could throw the noose around Dhirubhai.

Dhirubhai's contention was simple-Everyone has a price, whether low or high.His personality is best summed-up in the author's own words-

Dhirubhai Ambani built his company through outstanding abilities and drive on many fronts: as an innovative financier, an inspiring manager of talent, an astute marketeer of his products, and as a forward-looking industrialist. The energy and daring that showed itself in his early pranks, practical jokes and trading experiments developed into a boldness and willingness to live with risk that few if any other Indian corporate chiefs would dare to emulate. His extraordinary talent for sustaining relationships, and sometimes impressing men of standing, won him vital support from both governments and institutions.

The dark side of his abilities was an eye for human weakness and a willingness to exploit it. This gained him preferential treatment or at least a blind eye from the whole gamut of Indian institutions at various times. Over decades in India, some of the world’s best minds had applied themselves to building a system of government controls on capital ism. Dhirubhai Ambani made a complete mockery of it-admittedly at a stage when the system was decaying and corrupted already. The Ministry of Finance and its enforce ment agencies, the Reserve Bank of India, the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Securities and Exchange Board of India and the Company Law Board proved timid and sometimes complicit in their handling of questionable episodes concerning Reliance. The public financial institutions that held large blocks of shares in Reliance and had seats on its board were passive and acquiescent spectators, rather than responsible trustees for public savings.

No Need for me to Write and for u to Read This!

   Saw "The X-Files: I Want to believe" yesterday. Booooooring!!!!!! I'm not even sure I completely understood what it was all about. Two retired FBI agents(a male and a female), a priest with 'visions'(also a convicted paedophile), abduction of a couple of serving FBI agents and lots of bullshit-pretty much sums it all up. Complete waste of time. Better avoided.

 

Battle for the Black Gold

   Saw an excellent documentary yesterday-"The Battle for Oil- China vs the US". It pretty much sums up all the political, economic, geographical and strategic factors at play today over this precious resource and the dangerous future that lies ahead if an alternative isn't found soon.

   The US is the biggest consumer of oil in the world and imports two thirds of its requirements-all this despite being the third largest producer in the world behind Saudi Arabia and Russia-and on the whole consumes one quarter of the total world production. China's economy has grown sevenfold ever since it took the road to capitalism and needs massive amounts of oil to sustain itself.At present 50% of the requirement is met through domestic production and the rest is imported but it's projected that very soon it shall have to import two-thirds of its needs. As a result the Chinese have been on a buying spree around the world trying to ensure long term supplies of oil to feed their industries and have gone out of their way to woo African and Latin American countries. China's main suppliers of oil from Africa are Sudan and Chad and from Latin America it's Venezuela. Unlike their western counterparts the Chinese attach no strings in dealing with these countries. They make it quite clear that all they want to do is business and steer clear of meddling in the internal politics and affairs of these nations. They invest massively in the infrastructure sector- building roads, bridges, railway stations and airports- and provide huge loans on easy terms to these countries. They deal with the government and not its people which leaves the former to use the oil revenues in any which way it might wish. In short, windfall oil revenues are no guarantee of improvement in the lives of the people.If the regime is rogue and corrupt there's little that can be done.

    On the other hand the US has been trying to make inroads in Africa too but since the government is not directly involved the private corporations are unable to match the monetary power of the Chinese who do business through state-owned entities and are therefore able to commit massive government funds. Also the Chinese have been encroaching upon traditional US turf by getting Venezuela to commit a major chunk of its production to China.Before Hugo Chavez came to power in Venezuela, the regime was US-friendly but now the new socialist regime is less kindly disposed towards the US-infact Chavez loses no opportunity to lambast George Bush and his policies in public and is trying to forge an anti-US coalition within Latin America to further harm its interests. On the other hand, China is also getting friendly with Iran which has been at loggerheads with the US for quite some time now over its nuclear ambitions. It has used its muscle in the Security Council to oppose any sanctions proposed on Iran by the US and has in turn been rewarded with oil. China's unique status as the sole Asian country with the veto power attracts the oil-rich anti-US countries to an alliance with it. China has also prevented any action against Sudanese government for its atrocities in Southern Sudan and Darfur. These are the oil-rich regions of the country and government raised, funded and backed Arab Janjaweed militias have been carrying out a vicious genocide campaign against the tribes in this region. These tribesmen are either non-Arab Muslims or pagan worshippers. Either way, the Arabs don't care. Considering that 85% of Sudanese oil is exported to China, the stakes are too high for China to let the international community take action against Omar-al Bashar, the Sudanese premier who has been convicted of genocide by the International Court.

   Another piece in this game of chess is Taiwan. It's an island country whose independence is recognized by very few nations of the world as a result of Chinese pressure. Chad, which formerly recognized Taiwan as an independent country has now changed its stance to support China under diplomatic pressure as well as coercive tactics(China was fuelling insurgency in the border areas of Chad)China has for years been threatening military action if Taiwan were to issue a formal declaration of independence. On the other hand, the US has pledged to protect it in event of a Chinese aggression. More than anything else control of Taiwan is important to China from a strategic point of view. Most of China's oil comes by sea and in the event of a crisis Taiwan would be China's Achilles' Heel and it would be at the mercy of the US navy for the latter controls the Taiwan Strait which lies on one of the main oil routes supplying all of East Asia. Therefore China is not only investing heavily in a blue water navy but also trying to build enough pipeline capacity to bring oil through ground from Russia, Kazakhastan etc. All the same,  control over Taiwan would give it the right to control the Taiwan Strait itself than allowing the US to do it thus eliminating threat of a blockade during war.

    There was also an attempt two years back by a Chinese oil company to take over the US oil company Unocal as a perfectly legitimate corporate acquisition which raised a storm in the US political and strategic circles. It was touted as an issue of national security and was blocked. Having failed to meet its needs through acquisitions China intensified its search of oil in other areas of the world.

   However, some years down the line, with the ever growing demand for energy this quest is set to intensify much more and might even result in wars being fought for control of oil supplies. The US can neither tell China and India to contain their growth nor agree to consume less and leave more for others. The problem is with the pie-its size is fixed and cannot grow. Although rapid advances in technology has made it economically viable to exploit reserves of heavy crude as well, its nothing more than a stop-gap solution. The bottomline is- unless we manage to discover an alternate source of energy capable of meeting all our energy needs, we are staring at a bloody future ahead of us for in the face of dwindling supplies, wars will become inevitable. Already energy security is the prime motivating factor for a number of existing strategic alliances in the world and as new players come into the picture, realignments are most likely to be based around energy concerns. 

Movie Time !!

   Saw a number of movies in the past few days- Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, Eagle Eye, Transporter 3, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom( I know its very old...) and an MTV Fully Faltoo Movie- Ghoom (parody on you know what..).

   'Rab Ne' has nothing much to boast of as far as content is concerned but I liked it nevertheless.The songs were good, acting quite up to the mark (SRK does justice to both his characters) and ahem!the newcomer Anushka has a pretty face too.Moreover saw the movie in INOX rather than on laptop so was a better experience on the whole.

   'Eagle Eye' is a fast-paced, action-cum-thriller-cum-mystery flick. Here's the plot from imdb-

Jerry and Rachel are two strangers thrown together by a mysterious phone call from a woman they have never met. Threatening their lives and family, she pushes Jerry and Rachel into a series of increasingly dangerous situations, using the technology of everyday life to track and control their every move. 

Warning-Spoilers Ahead!

   Story is reminiscient of Terminator with a grand AI system of the US government going out of control but the target is just the US government top brass rather than the whole of humanity as in Terminator and has more of chasing and running around than raw action. Lots of cars have been blown up or crashed for the chase sequences. The climax seemed rather tame though. Connoisseurs of this genre would enjoy it I guess! Personally, I'd rate it higher than its 6.8 rating on imdb.

   Transporter-3 was a bit disappointing though.The action seemed cliche having seen the first two parts only a few days back. Jason Statham continues to bash up umpteen number of goons in his trademark style flaunting his six packs at every available opportunity.Here's the plot from imdb-

Frank Martin puts the driving gloves on to deliver Valentina, the kidnapped daughter of a Ukranian government official, from Marseilles to Odessa on the Black Sea. En route, he has to contend with thugs who want to intercept Valentina's safe delivery and not let his personal feelings get in the way of his dangerous objective. 

No spoilers possible in this case!The plot line pretty much sums up the movie.Statham fans and die-hard action buffs will enjoy it I suppose. As far as action is concerned Transporter-2 takes the cake for me.T-3 action seems tamer.

    Indiana Jones and Temple of Doom is a very old one(made in 1984) and the worst in the series.Boring and factually inaccurate is how I would describe it. (it seems Indians in the British times ate live snakes, scorpions and everything else that crawls or slithers for lunch and dinner!!). Amrish Puri plays the villain who is a devotee of Goddess Kali and brutally sacrifices humans to obtain evil powers from her.Harrison Ford in the role of Indiana is of course the saviour for the potential victims. In short, loads of bullshit as far as the story in concerned.

    The parody on Dhoom was too cheap and I managed to laugh not even once throughout so the less said the better.Quite disappointing considering that their parodies on Taare Zameen Par and Chak De India were much better.My advice- Avoid it!

    Also saw the Kolkata and Ahmedabad auditions of Roadies and completed the first season of Friends.(finally!!) Friends is simply too good!The humour, the dialogues, the acting...everything.Can't wait to get back to college and download the next season!

Why am I an Atheist? -II

     Look around you, you see so many conflicts taking place under so many different pretexts and millions (that's not a hyperbole!) dying that you cannot possibly imagine that a God would condone any of it.Think of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the resulting wrethched lives of those in the Gaza Strip (its being touted as one of the biggest humanitarian disasters in waiting), the even more cursed existence of those in African countries- Sierra Leone, Somalia,Congo,Rwanda,Uganda,Zimbabwe,Sudan...the list is endless. Recall the conditions prevailing in Afghanistan and Iraq, the lives of Tamils in Sri Lanka and if nothing else your own fellow countrymen suffering the scourge of terrorism,naxalism and insurgency in all parts of the country. Doesn't it ever make you wonder why this supposed God isn't putting an end to any of it or at the very least ensuring that perpetrators don't go unpunished?

     A student might attribute his success in exams , a businessman his profits, a college graduate his job and a young man his success in love all to God. Doesn't this God have better things to do?? Why would He (yeah! I'm a male chauvinist) leave millions of poor,destitute,helpless,defenceless humans to their fate and instead indulge all these guys??I guess I've made my point so shall spare you the remaining dialogues.

      On a personal note, even I used to pray for success in exams till about two years back but as I kept getting more and more disillusioned with 'God', I stopped doing so and it has made no difference to me as far as my exam results are concerned.If you prepare well you'll do well, otherwise you won't.It's as simple as that.Period.

     All these religious and spiritual leaders you see on TV or at places of worship; giving sermons on how to lead life, dictating beliefs you should hold and in  general brainwashing you....have you ever cared to find out how much of it they practise themselves?Roman Catholic priests are notorious world over for their sexual harrassment and abuse of kids, Hindu priests in high seats of the order of Shankaracharya stand accused of murders and rapes, Muslim mullahs and clerics are well known for their ridiculous fatwas (shall deal with in detail in a later post) over issues ranging from cartoons and books to women empowerment. Has anyone ever cared to enquire into the finances, profits and expenditures of the various charitable trusts and 'social work' organizations set up by the celebrity preachers appearing on '24-hour bhakti channels'? Some months back there was a controversy over deaths of two students in an ashram run by Asaram Bapu's organization?Does anyone know what happened to the probe? These people trot around in their AC luxury cars, jet planes and enjoy the best money can provide...yet claim to be doing a service to humanity and so on.Whose fault is it that such people are able to thrive and prosper?

      All these factors apart from the cliche -'Science has uncovered no evidence thus far...' do make a potent case for atheism and belief in self rather than reliance on a Supreme Power to take care of all the ills and wills plaguing your and my lives. 

Why am I an Atheist?

Let's ask this the other way round.

 

           Why should I NOT be an atheist?

    Can anyone give me one rational argument as to why one should believe in the existence of a supreme being? Ok!The first argument I can see coming up is people's personal experiences which they term miraculous and attribute the same to the Divine.They may talk of incurable diseases being mysteriously healed all by themselves; financial,family or personal problems getting resolved-again in an inexplicable manner- and so on and so forth.So if you cannot explain something you attribute it to the mercy,kindness and generosity of God.Have you ever wondered how this attitude of yours is different from that of the primitive cavemen who cowered before and worshipped anything and everything they couldn't understand and were afraid of? They had different gods for each and every force of nature,be it rain,thunder,lightening,sea or the sun.Whatever Man couldn't understand he worshipped.

And thousands of years yonder,nothing seems to have changed....

   Have you ever wondered why God would want a world full of gross injustice with one man subsisting on stones(I mean it- residents of a village in Orissa were forced to eat limestone to escape hunger-the village is Kalahandi if my memory is correct) and another having enough to feed an army?I'm not a socialist or a communist but I do believe that a man has the right to atleast two good meals a day.I won't be reeling off any statistics to support my argument...I assume you are intelligent enough to do that yourself. My point- Can a God be heartless enough to let such injustice be perpetrated?I don't think so! Of course! There is this whole philosophy of the cycle of 'karma' which exists in the Hindu philosophical texts but to me it smacks of nothing but escapism.It is just a vain attempt to explain what is glaring enough not to be ignored.A criminal going unpunished and an innocent man suffering are all blamed on 'karma' by stating that the criminal shall suffer in the next birth or that the innocent man is reaping the fruits of his misdeeds in a previous birth.How convenient!I wonder what then is the need for laws,police and courts in our society.After all,'karma' shall ensure that justice is done at some point of time and therefore by appointing ourselves as dispensers of justice,we are committing another crime!Any rational being knows that there cannot exist a society without laws and yet seeks to endorse such paradoxical concepts to explain the coexistence of God and injustice.

    All religions have their own version of how life began on earth, of how man came into existence and yet each and everyone of these flies in the face of scientific evidence uncovered so far.None of the religions say a word about The Big Bang and all of them attribute life to the grace of God.If none of them can be correct about the origin of life how can they claim what the supposed God wants or doesn't want man to do?The Vatican in particular is absolutely against teaching the theory of evolution to kids in school coz it is in direct conflict with the version Bible preaches."Forget all the evidence you've got", it says,"its a sin to even doubt the veracity of what everyone knows is the truth." Maybe I'm exaggerating it quite a lot over here considering that the Vatican has recently changed its stance to suggest the coexistence of both versions(no doubt in the face of mounting evidence in support of evolution) but even this new stance is ridiculous for I fail to see how the two can coexist given what each of them propounds.My point-Everything you know about God has been fed to you by your respective religions none of which can give you any evidence in support of their credibility.Beyond everything your religion tells you, can you find an argument compelling enough to believe in God?

   More on this in the next post....