Ten Currently In Production Vehicles that I would Love to own

In no specific order.

1. The 2010 MV Agusta (If it's motorcycles, it has to be Agusta) Brutale 990R

2. The Vespa LX 150

3. The Gulfstream G250

4. The Sunseeker Manhattan 52

5. The Inimitable Bajaj RE 4S

6. The 2011 Tesla Roadster (She doesn't have a 3litre Engine. Not even close. She has batteries)

7. The 2010 Mini Cooper CONVERTIBLE

8. The Seabreacher J - The Dolphin Inspired Submarine -THAT JUMPS.

9. The TREK Cruiser - Retro Inspired Class

10. The Segway X2 Adventure

Public Policy? Really?

This blog-post is a result of a conversation I had at some point in the recent past with Piglet. It's a thought that has spent years germinating in my head, and being refined by all the online-Greenpeace-activism, the VNS Eco-club, the Teach For India CA-ship, and all that other cool stuff, that momentarily made me feel good about myself.

That's the problem with social work. Working at the grass-roots is a commendable task that takes balls and grit - something I'd never imagine having, but that's hardly the point here. The fact is, that grass-roots work doesn't go too far. That one family that you work with might benefit, and in your own little World, it gives you a level of satisfaction, for having helped them. You're elated, because you helped further the cause of human rights, or environmentalism, or educational equality. Or at least, that's what you feel.

Let's admit that a lot of this Social work is happening. Each claiming to be more productive at the "grass-roots". What they fail to understand, is that, well, for a change to be meaningful, and more importantly, sustainable, you NEED a critical mass - the kind that these one-off acts of random kindness can't provide.

Add to this the general attitude of The Community's Little Helpers, and we're asking for a disaster. What attitude? Even if we ignore their holier-than-thou persona, the fact remains, that they fool themselves into believing that they are making a LARGE positive change. They thrive on that high of that one smile.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. "Grass-roots" work, is no more than symptomatic - at best.

If you want that critical mass for sustenance, the issue HAS TO BE tackled at the Policy level. By Government. Now it's easy to argue that these NGOs step in because the Government doesn't do it's job efficiently and all of that. But you can't replace the Government. And forgive me for sounding like I live in a Utopian bubble, but you can't deny that the solution is to better the Government - not try and replace it.

I'll end with a simple example. For two decades at least now, the in-the-know's have been ranting about rain-water-harvesting, about needing to refuel the water table, and about, in general, how construction of infrastructure, as a process, needs to turn green. And may be a few hundred people listened - and these folks screamed with joy, saying, that these few hundred are "a significant start", or "making a statement". The NGOs get lost there. They make it their job to create that scene. Not solve the problem.

When the Government stepped in (on the goading of some Organizations that UNDERSTOOD, that work needs to be at the policy level, not the grass-roots), and made it compulsory to implement rain-water-harvesting, and used recycled steel, people started doing it. EVERYONE did it. It made an impact to the environment. Problem mitigated.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that we should do away with these Social Work Organizations altogether. God knows the State needs a watchdog - but NOT a replacement. All I'm saying, is that they need to change their focus. Public awareness, and "grass-roots" aside, they need to wake up to the fact that a Top-Down approach is what will work in India. Awarenes and activism amongst the policy makers. Not traffic-blocking rallies down MG Road.

:)

Another Blogthings Quiz. Just.

You Are Merlot

Smooth, confident, and popular - you're the type most likely to order wine for the whole group. You seem to breeze through life on your intuition and wit. And no one seems to mind! You're comfortable in any social situation you find yourself in, and you never feel outclassed. And while you live a charmed life, you never let it go to your head. You are truly down to earth and a great friend. Deep down you are: Balanced and mature Your partying style: Surprisingly wild... when you let loose, you really let loose Your company is enjoyed best with: Some greasy pizza

What Kind of Wine Are You?

Blogthings: If Quizzes Are Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Take Quizzes

Pieces for Peace? I don't know, really

The human race is becoming more and more intolerant. This, clubbed with the new feeling of empowerment and independence, is playing out in bemusing ways, on the Governance and International Relations scene. The DPRK now has the gall to stand up to the PRC; the small island states sprinkled across the four oceans that were traditionally US allies, are now opposing its climate change policy. The ugly face of this intolerance, though, is the effect it's having on the World Map. Any sign of civil conflict, and everyone's waiting to tear the country to bits. They want an Azad Kashmir. They got a Kosovo, and a Timor Leste. Darfur Now. What next?

My honest opinion, of the entire referendum concept, is that it breeds, and in a sense provides validation to this intolerance. The SPLA/M never saw eye-to-eye with the Sudanese Government, so they just split? Snowball that idea, and you'll soon have India divided into three new countries - the Red, the Orange, and the third part will simply be Palmed Off, because three parties had conflicting interests, and they tried to sort it out, but failed.

Speaking of conflict. That's the excuse they're using. I'm not denying that the human rights violations in Sudan are anywhere near acceptable, or that the quickest solution need be sought to end what is almost a deja vu of Nazi Germany.

But the question I'm asking here is, will the split, if it happens, really solve a problem?

Look at any population density map of Sudan. Apart from the evident density around that beautiful city that is Khartoum, practically ALL of Sudan's native population, now lives in Southern Sudan. So when the split happens, what we're looking at, is a rich, now smaller, less dense state, with an image of having done everything by the book, and a small, new, dense state, with a reputation to reckon with. Either that, or you have all of that AND a mass-migration (as happens with most of these questions of division) to boot.

Now apart from that, the war that ravaged the county is heavily dependent on labour from neighbouring Egypt, Algeria and the Middle East, for skilled and semi-skilled work. It is rather evident, that these workers will now move to the North, and the South will be left with trained warriors.

Many World leaders, and now myself, have questioned the validity of this move. South Sudan will turn into a hotbed for criminal activities. They wont' be well to do, most of them will have ruthlessly served in a rebel military, and as a state, they epitomize this intolerance that I speak about. Add to that, an object of intense envy, buttressing them up North. And you have a recipe for disaster.

The basic question I'm asking is simple:

Have they recovered sufficiently from the genocide, to be prepared for a plebiscite?

There's always going to be conflicting views on this conflict, and this here is mine. I'm no trained prescient, so Que Sera Sera.

Peace Out.