TOI : Lead India Campaign and Me, Myself and NGO

There is a huge uproar about the 'Lead India' initiative started by Times of India, a leading English daily in India. Even though the initiative started as a means to boost the sales of the newspaper, it seems like its doing it the right way. With the prizes announced when the campaign rolled in, a year's leadership programme at Harvard and a 50 lac grant towards a project of the winner's choice, they sure seemed to have started on the right note and given the contestants a big platform.

But where exactly are we going with this? Do we really think that a campaign like this can change the destiny of the Indian politics? Or change would be too big a word to use here? So would it atleast give the country's responsible citizens hope to vote for someone they think would lead the nation with the right attitude and approach? Would it?? Are we forgetting that we are in a country where Narendra Modi gives vote securing speeches whereby he approves the killing of an innocent Muslim because he appeared to be a terrorist and the junta applauds him. He becomes the saviour for them. Are we forgetting that we are from a country where Buddhadeb Bhatacharya will win the elections again and rule the people even after he played an ostrich to the trauma that daunted Nandigram and did nothing to bring the situation under control. We are from the same country where a girl will commit suicide because Abhishek Bachchan didn’t marry her. In other words, we belong to a country of blind faith. We belong to a country where more than 50% of the people live in rural areas and are poor. They have no access to the esteemed newspaper The Times of India and neither do they have the knowledge of the plans that our contestants hold for them. They don’t even understand the language that they are speaking in. They will not vote for them.

I have nothing against my country and I am very very proud of it. But what I am trying to indicate is that there is not much one person can do for the Indian politics. Even before the winner of Lead India will step into the mush of our politics, he will have to pave way for his exit. The best that he can do would be the 50 lac project that he would be entitled to start. Yes, that project might do wonders for a particular section of the society or a particular genre. But expecting that one person to do wonders would be asking for a lot.

But then as Kiran Bedi, one of the judges, said, "Imagine what would be the situation now had Lead India started 30 years go". Well, if I were to think so positively then may be it might do us some good. But the diplomacy that is imbibed in our politicians and the agility to manoeuvre through the complex mesh our politics is made of is a tough art to master.

*******

I have personally always wanted to work in a social organisation. I have always wanted to work for the rights of women. That has always been a strong thought sitting peacefully in some corner of my mind. And I know I will some day and that would require a lot of preparation. But as of now I would be satisfied to work for any social cause. I really don’t know why I want to get involved? Co-incidently it has become the latest trend-to work for an NGO. It is considered cool. Your market value increases. Thanks to a number of International B-Schools which consider an applicant's profile with a work experience at a social organisation much more appealing than the one without it. A while back as I was working to search for a good NGO, I stumbled upon one which was freshly started by a 23 year old banking student, who had recently started to work for an esteemed investment bank, and his friends/colleagues. As I read about them and their NGO, I was thoroughly impressed with the fresh ideas and views that they held, all clearly put down in a plan. Their website conveyed passion and a zest to work for the cause that you undertake. I, obviously very excited to have found the right place, immediately mailed them and its been more than a month now that I have not received any response. And even today their website which once appeared appealing and active to me talks of the same things it did a month back. I couldn't conclude anything else other than what I mentioned above.

*******

Ujjawal Bannerjee, one of the contestants of the Lead India campaign and the youngest, works for an NGO - Akanksha. It is a very well known NGO in Mumbai and Pune. It works for the slum children and provides them the right atmosphere to grow and study. It is not an orphanage.

*******

When in Pune I was more than eager to join this NGO. But.....yes, the mighty BUT takes its very elated place......I couldn't and I have no reasons to explain that BUT. I guess I was just too young and I didn’t want to take it up to leave it in between. I guess that is the reason I am so careful about choosing the right one now. Who knows sometime in future I might start an NGO of my own. A distant thought but I sure can make it happen.

Aliens are from MARS and 23 year old women are from the oldest planet in the entire universe!!

What do men want? Isn't that the general topic discussed by all of the fairer sex throughout the world? Yes indeed it is. But very few or actually none of us land up with the most apt answer (mind you, there is NO correct answer).

And your problems soar up even more when you have more than one man in your life (even the 'just friends' men come in this category). If one wants freedom and space, the other demands you to be all over him. If one accepts that he is very possessive of you and you dont like it coz you dont have your independence, the other doesnt talk about possessiveness and you still dont like it as you dont get the attention that you demand. Huh...!! At 23 are things still so complex? Or do we just make them complex to suit us?

23 - the number hits me in the face. I have never felt the surge in growth so much as I did when I completed 23. I suddenly was more mature, more calm and patient, more tolerant, more responsible, more of a monotonous person, more of a person who likes routine. In short, I became OLD.

Anyways trying not to drift from the main topic of conversation and maintaining the continuity - I have always been more comfortable with men (then guys; at 23 I have started calling them men). I have always had more male friends than female. The reasons could be diverse. Either coz I couldn't gel well with the jabbery lot or coz I had something to offer to the other lot (no double meaning intended here ;-) ). So coming back to the point - I gel well with men. I know their psyche. But do I?? I claim to understand them, I claim to have been in close proximity to them for the past 7 years and have observed them closely. But each time I meet a brand new guy, I falter somewhere or the other. My experience and my research always loses to the new something that the new guy has to offer.

At 23, life has taken a full circle and I am again where I was 23 years back. Everything is new to me, everything is a challenge to me, I yet have a lot of ground to prove myself. The only 2 differences being i) that I have forgotten to smile and ii) I don't cry as loudly as I did 23 years back.

Realisation :
As I try to end this post (on a positive note-in sync with my earlier post Happiness), I realise that it is not worth the effort trying to do a Phd in andrology. I actually never have, but I used to put myself in the category of people who are neither andromaniacal nor are they misandrist. But I wonder if that category even exists. Being one half of the most intelligent race on the face of the earth, I would like to believe that they are just fine.
And as far as living life at 23 is concerned, well I must remind myself that its 23 and not 40.

Outside of a dog

"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read." - Groucho Marx

I remember discussing this quote with a friend aeons ago. I argued with him till the time he lost ground to my convincing talks and gave in to my speculations regarding this quote. I never undestood this quote until now. Now that the logical and straight-forward me is lost and I understand the two sides of the same coin with utter simplicity, I do understand this quote. And I also realise that my friend indeed was right.

I would love to call it a 'subtle twist', but its his disembarkation of one thought and introduction of a totally new one though still related that fascinates me. The ease with which two totally different thoughts are connected with each other depending on the usage of the word 'Outside' shows the genius of Groucho Marx.

When you read the first sentence, you think 'outside' has the meaning 'other than' : "other than a dog, a book is a man's best friend". The next sentence changes the meaning of 'outside' to the spatial sense : "inside of a dog's body, it's too dark to read".

It's the unexpected switch from one meaning of 'outside' to another that is the essence of this quote. But I still am apprehensive to imagine "inside a dog". How could he even think of something like this?? This always has been the point of my disagreement. As I said, one cannot be logical here.

When I stumbled upon this quote recently in a newspaper article, I found myself craving for more of this kind. I found none. But here are some of his better ones.

"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five."

"From the moment I picked up your book until I laid it down, I was convulsed with laughter. Some day I intend reading it."

"Money frees you from doing things you dislike. Since I dislike doing nearly everything, money is handy."

"Those are my principles, and if you dont like them... well, I have others." - another one of my fav.

"Women should be obscene and not heard." - well its a good one, but I dont approve of it.

Happiness

They say Happiness is a state of mind. It is not something that comes to you or something can be taken away from you. It is not money. You have to choose to be happy.

Another thought. Happiness is contagious. How many times have I been happy and infused this feeling successfully into my friends? Answer is, A lot.

Recently a friend of mine was preaching me about the much hyped but old 10-90 principle. It says that 10% of life is made up of what happens to you and 90% of life is decided by how you react. I would say very true. Certain things are not under your control but what you can control are your very own reactions. Your choice of being happy determines your state of mind.

Philosophical talks have always sounded inspiring and appealing to me and i guess to most of us. Its difficult to be able to understand life so closely and comment on it. But to me what appears to be more difficult is to implement whats just said. Its one thing to put forth your views but its another thing to be a part of that view.

Why am i talking about all this? I just watched 'Jab we met'.

Blogger's Blog or What??

I happened to read an article sometime back and this is what it said, "Most of the people in the world are lonely. With thousands of them you see on the road, almost all are feeling lonely inside. Why do you think that so many people have fallen to the idea of a blog? They put out their innermost feelings over the internet in the hope that someone would read it and may be acknowledge it. The idea that a total stranger would get to know their intimate details/feelings/ideas does not scare them because in the end they are all lonely and want that little recognition from whoever they can........ blah blah".... and it went on.....

Well i must say that it was in-the-face but very well written. I happen to like such writings which leave me speechless and then my thought process begins. I could debate on this and i knew it would go on and on but i chose not to. I chose to start a blog of my own instead.