India has 50% of world’s modern slaves

Largest Proportion Of Victims Made Up Of Indians Exploited By Indians: Study

Sixty-six years after independence, India has the dubious distinction of being home to half of the world’s modern day slaves. The first Global Slavery Index has estimated that 13.3 million to 14.7 million people — roughly equal to the population of Kolkata — live like slaves in the country. 
    The index, published by the Australia-based Walk Free Foundation, ranked 162 countries based on three factors that include estimated prevalence of modern slavery, a measure of child marriage and a measure of human trafficking in and out of a country. Modern slavery includes slavery, practices such as debt bondage, forced marriage and sale or exploitation of children as well as human trafficking and forced labour. 
    According to the index, there are 29.6 million people in modern slavery globally. India leads the world, followed by China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar and Bangladesh. 
    These 10 countries account for 76% of the world’s modern slaves. India ranks fourth in terms of modern-day slaves as a percentage of the population, just after Mauritania, Haiti and Pakistan. In Mauritania, 4% of people are regarded as slaves largely because they inherit the status from their ancestors. 
    The study says that in India there’s some exploitation of foreign nationals, but by far the largest proportion of slaves are Indians exploited by other Indians within the country, particularly through debt bondage and bonded labour. India is one of the few countries that has not ratified the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention. 
    The country with the second highest number of enslaved is China, with an estimated 2.8 to 3.1 million in modern slavery. This includes forced labour in many parts of the economy, including domestic servitude and forced begging, commercial sexual exploitation and forced marriage, says the study. Pakistan is estimated to have 2 to 2.2 million in slavery. 
    Iceland, Ireland and the United Kingdom are tied with the lowest rankings in the index. These countries are not slavery-free, with the UK alone estimated to have 4,200-4,600 such people. Iceland has the lowest numbers — less than 100. While Asia and Africa are home to the vast majority of modern slaves, no continent is free from modern slavery. 
    “It would be comforting to think that slavery is a relic of history, but it remains a scar on humanity on every continent. This is the first slavery index but it can already shape national and global efforts to root out modern slavery across the world,” said Nick Grono, CEO of Walk Free Foundation. 
    The index was created in consultation with an international panel of experts and has been endorsed by former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, former British prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, former Australian PM Julia Gillard, and philanthropists Bill Gates, Sir Richard Branson and Mo Ibrahim. WFF was founded by Andrew Forrest, the chairman of Fortescue Metals Group, and his wife Nicola in May this year.

Battle For Budtameez Dils

Rahul Gandhi’s groping in the dark when it comes to tapping India’s irrepressible youth

How you view Rahul Gandhi indicates how old you are. If you’re a venerable, mature sort (as most Indian political analysts are, the assumption being dyeing your hair gives brighter ideas), you might look at Rahul indulgently. You might murmur about his surprising choice of words – ‘nonsense’ which ‘deserves to be torn up’, dalits needing ‘Jupiter’s escape velocity’, et al. But it’s possible you’ll note his sentiments, the apology following his Press Club stop-press, the empathy behind the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe-style analogies. 
    However, if you’re 35 or under – 65% of India’s population today – it’s likely you won’t buy any of that. This is because Rahul’s strategists have addressed this constituency too little, too late, leaving Rahul groping in the dark while thundering 2014 will see a government of youth – how little his advisers understand this youth reflects in many missteps. 
    India’s youth today are unique. Every young generation energetically questions the status quo, but India’s youth does something more. This is a generation typified by the Bollywood song ‘Budtameez Dil’, cheeky heart, with its naughty stereotypes, sequined numbers in nightclubs, kisses in nooks throbbing to a DJ’s beat, the hedonism of youth, all hips and hormones, highs and lows. 
    But what’s special is that every bit of this zest has been earned by young people themselves. The evidence is in roof-shattering school results, girls’ struggles to learn, brave choices to forsake traditional occupations and step into unfamiliar worlds, an IIM Ahmedabad study finding 75.90% young Indians enthusiastically supporting entrepreneurship as a career compared to 66.97% Chinese. Alongside, young Indians are investing more in education while mushrooming malls salute their openness to spend on a good time. 
    Clearly, this is a generation shaking off constraints, its self-determination challenging social norms. More young people are marrying across identity lines and fewer are willing to stay bound, divorces reportedly doubling since 1990. This intense transition mirrors individualism amongst the young, choosing the right to reject in manifold ways, working hard and playing harder. 
    Yet, this isn’t a generation of clichéd yuppies. It has a dil with social concern. One reflection glimmered in the enthusiasm around Anna Hazare’s anti-corruption movement. Another showed in the grief after a gang rape evidenced a callous system that taxes but doesn’t serve. Beating with hope, this heart’s also hurt by corruption, inflation and politicians refusing to reform themselves. 
    This dil lends itself to budtameezi then, meaningful cheekiness, what Slavoj Zizek elsewhere calls ‘jouis-sense, enjoyment-insense’ or ‘enjoy-meant’. This is natural for Indians, apart from being argumentative, are an impertinent lot. But in older days, there were limited forums to cackle at officialdom falling apart. Newspapers had a markedly lecturing tone while Doordarshan smiled mainly during Krishi Darshan. All that’s changed. Today, social media is a vibrant network where news, views, jokes and jibes flow fast and fearlessly. TV shows, radio talk-ins, movies, magazines follow virtual budtameezi, like the ‘Pappu’ versus ‘Feku’ face-off, spotlighting the most engrossing jousts. 
    Such budtameezi isn’t sparing Rahul Gandhi jabs. Rather than personality, this reflects the Congress’s delay in understanding two concerns core to this group – freedom and jobs. The UPA’s record on creating the latter has been so dismal, Rahul couldn’t have seriously addressed the same, but he could’ve spoken for the former to his gain. 
    Opportunities abounded when two girls were arrested for comments online, a young cartoonist was jailed for drawings, an IAS officer suspended for doing her job, when water cannons and batons rained down on those protesting Nirbhaya’s death. Speaking then would’ve helped Rahul understand one ideal budtameez dils cherish. It would have also strengthened Rahul’s own liberal credentials, armour for his forthcoming clash. 
    Instead, opting for 1980s-style photo-ops – dinner in a dalit’s hut, a train across Mumbai, swinging a spade at an MGNREGA dig – Rahul overlooked this chance. Mentioning Kalawati, a widow in darkness after her farmer-husband committed suicide, his oratory swung the Indo-US nuclear deal debate. But the following neglect of Kalawati recalled Rahul’s earlier gesture, opening the Youth Congress to non-dynasts, tanking before you could quip, new card, old hand, leaving budtameezes laughing out loud. 
    This amuses opponents too. At 63, Narendra Modi is an unlikely youth icon but sidestepping the question of individual liberty, he’s capitalised on the second thing young people consider – jobs. Highlighting the UPA’s abysmal show, Modi describes his vision in words that may not bear close scrutiny but throb with passion and cheekiness. The last endears him to budtameez dils, themselves more candid than candied. 
    Not keeping up shows Congress’s lethargy. Ironic, as it was in Rajiv Gandhi’s time that this generation emerged. As the vote went to 18-year-olds, India became computerised and a communications revolution started in an STD booth, all the conditions fell into place to create a forthright cohort. Reforms added fizz to this test-tube, creating a young weaned on Bollywood and B R Ambedkar, Indi-pop and Steve Jobs, RTI and EMI, whose debates and debit cards warm India’s autumnal bones. 
    Poised to vote soon, this generation’s impudence can pressure dynasts to walk their democratic talk and demagogues to listen up. This generation can shred nonsense that must be torn up. This generation can truly change the game with its budtameez dil, jo easily maane na.

Source/ Crdit: Srijana Mitra Das

 

India being infected by Sleazy gurus and muddied politics

The one and only time that I have ever met superstar Amitabh Bachchan in my life – at the launch of a French perfume for men and women named after him, nearly a decade ago – I asked him what I had always wanted to know: why he had described politics as a cesspool when he was a member of parliament and why he had quit even before his term was over.

He, of course, ignored the first query but his answer to the second was very revealing. Bachchan said he had contested the 1984 elections from Allahabad out of his friendship with then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi. Notwithstanding the troubles he was put to by veteran Congressmen like VP Singh who believed Bachchan could cut the ground from under their feet if he was allowed to flourish unfettered (that is probably why he thought of politics as a cesspool), he said he had been on a special aircraft to Guwahati in Assam, which was under tremendous strife those days, as one of the campaigners for the Congress at the forthcoming elections.

Activists of the Assam Gana Parishad, which had not yet come to power in the state, had surrounded the aircraft on the tarmac and were not allowing any of the Congress leaders to get through and enter the city. Ultimately looking at the emotions running high, the authorities decided that in the interest of security, it was better for the Congress leaders to return whence they had come from or risk a real conflagration.

As Bachchan reboarded the aircraft, one of the demonstrators came running across to him and stuffed a piece of paper in his hands. When Bachchan began to read the hastily written letter on the return flight, he was stunned by what that boy said.

“Mr Bachcan, you are my hero. I never miss a single film of yours and sometimes see your films six or seven times each. But I hate the Congress. Please do not make me hate you, too. I do not want to stop worshipping you for endorsing the Congress. Just be the hero that you are and we will continue to love you forever.”

Bachchan said he gave that some deep thought and realised the boy was right – he was primarily a film star and his popularity was owing to that profession. He clearly had no business to misuse that popularity to garner votes for a political party and put his fans into a dilemma like this one.

I noticed that, bar Amar Singh when he was with the Samajwadi Party and with whom he had a personal friendship, Bachchan has steadfastly refused to endorse any political party or leader ever since – including Narendra Modi of the BJP.

There was a recent video promoting Modi as Prime Minister that used Bachchan’s voice-over and the veteran was very anguished in his disavowal of that endorsement. He makes it repeatedly clear that he supports neither Modi nor the BJP or even Gujarat; just that he promotes Gujarat’s tourism.

But so many years later I can empathise with that boy in Guwahati who urged Bachchan not to put him into a position of having to choose between one good thing for endorsing what he thought was a bad thing. I now feel the same about Yoga guru Ramdev Baba whose yoga practices I applied to my own life during a spell of terrible illness.

The swift recovery brought about gratitude but now I am being compelled to look at him as a slime ball – not because he is supporting the BJP or any other pary, which he has the complete right to do so, but because of his rather despicable personal comments against his opposition.

I could forgive him for describing Congress general secretary as an asura (though he called Singh an asuraputra) for Singh is quite equal to taking him on, but I think it is completely pointless and needless to rake up Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru’s friendship with Edwina Mountbatten and give it a sly, sleazy twist, to talk about Mrs. Indira Gandhi’s character — they are both dead and cannot defend themselves.

Also, I do not think Rahul Gandhi’s alleged multiple girlfriends have anything to do with yoga or elections either.

Why should people care about Rahul Gandhi’s girlfriends or not and how does Pandit Nehru’s private friendships of more than a half century ago have any bearing on the country today?

I think it is only a human being of very low calibre who would use such sleaze to score points against his rivals and I notice that though the BJP may be opposed to the Congress bitterly at all the elections coming up in the states this winter, none of its leaders targets any of their rivals in such reptilian fashion.

Barring Narendra Modi, of course who, apart from targetting Union minister Shashi Tharoor for allegedly having a 50 crore girlfriend, once described Sonia Gandhi as a Jersey cow and Rahul as her hybrid calf.

Ramdev should be reminded that the BJP lost that election to the Congress in 2004 and has so far not been able to score any substantial victory over either the Congress or the Nehru-Gandhis.

In my part of the world, Gopinath Munde of the BJP was never targeted by his rivals over his alleged illicit relationship with a tamasha dancer which was common knowledge in the 1990s and even Bal Thackeray was left well alone over his indulgences towards certain people he had no business having relationships with.

Even we, as journalists, followed the rules set by the Congress politicians vis-à-vis their rivals at the time –- keep the personal attack strictly out of the purview of public meetings and election campaigns. They were all cleaner at the time, even if leaders like Thackeray indulged in occasional mimicry of Sonia Gandhi and other Congress leaders like Sharad Pawar.

But clearly now Ramdev Baba is under some tremendous pressure to lose his own character and the ’shuchita’ and ’samrasta’ that were the bywords of the BJP in the decade of Atal Behari Vajpayee and LK Advani is over. Even if they may not be indulging in these kinds of cretinous behaviour, since Ramdev Baba campaigns on their behalf, I believe they should be advising him to restrain or stand in danger of allowing the Congress to be seen as victims and run away with a lot of sympathy.

They should remember what happened in Mahaashtra in 1998 when Pramod Mahajan, at a public meeting in Gondia, equated Sonia Gandhi with Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton’s infamous intern who was making headlines in those years.

The Congress was waiting for just such an oportunity to enliven its campaign and they went to town over the insult to the widow of their late leader. The party won 42 of the 48 seats from Maharashtra that helped the Congress to reach the 3-digit figure in the Lok Sabha.

Else the party would have sunk below the 100-members mark and may never have risen again to form the UPA six years later.

They have the BJP to thank for their resurrection and may just be looking for such an opportunity in states like Madhya Pradesh where they have little chance of a return to power. Perhaps, then, Ramdev’s rantings are a conspiracy against the BJP? After their support to Asaram Bapu what does that tell us about godmen and the BJP?

Souce/ Credits: Sujata Anandan

Money Matters!

Finance is relatively a young discipline and, therefore, filled with opportunities for further discovery, writes Rama Seth, professor, Control and Finance, IIM Calcutta 

It is probably not fair to rank the different disciplines of management as one being more important than the other. The knowledge contained in the entire field comes from potentially intersecting contributions from all the disciplines. That said, if you define finance as the study of forces and dynamics in the flow of money in all its various forms, one could argue that finance can be viewed as a strong platform on which many other disciplines depend.

After all, it encapsulates the learning around money, which was perhaps one of the first tools of co-operation at scale, and in the end, touches everyone's lives.

Finance, when compared to other sciences like mathematics or physics, is relatively young, and is, therefore, filled with opportunities for further discovery, and the moulding of theory and practice in building its foundations. The type of people that should be particularly attracted to finance are those that who want to understand the economic tools at their disposal and how to use them judiciously.

Particularly in light of the last few upheavals in world economics, it has become clear that the invention and use of new tools (complex derivatives, structured finance, asset-backed securities, etc) have not been integrated well enough into the existing system, and the new challenges are in the area of developing instruments of control that can keep the system stable, while still allowing it to function to the benefit of mankind, and maintaining the agility that is required to keep pace with a changing world.

The area of finance can be well served by students from a wide variety of educational disciplines, be it from the hard sciences, life sciences, engineering, political science, history, even medicine: a medical background can be invaluable for someone managing the finances of a hospital chain, or even healthcare for a country. There are numerous prospects for those who study finance.

In India's politics, jail time is a badge of honour

DALTENGANJ: When he decided to run for a parliamentary seat from this impoverished, and mainly low-caste constituency in northeast India, Kameshwar Baitha made no effort to sugarcoat his criminal record.

Obediently, he catalogued the serious charges pending against him, all of which he says are false. There were 17 for murder, 22 for attempted murder, 6 for assault with a dangerous weapon, 5 for theft, 2 for extortion, and so on, a legacy from Baitha's previous career as a leader of the local Maoist insurgency. On top of that was the fact that he was in jail.

But this did not hurt him with voters here, noted his son, Babban Kumar, who hopes to follow his father into politics. With people in this area, who look to elected leaders as Robin Hood figures, it may have helped.

"You have to fight against something, how else can you get into politics?" Kumar said. "Without going to jail, you cannot be a big politician."

New impulses are rippling through Indian politics this year, as a growing, urbanized middle class demands that hundreds of tainted politicians be driven from the system.

In Delhi, crowds driven by internet campaigns have rallied around an anticorruption platform, holding brooms to symbolize the coming cleansing. The Supreme Court, sensing the public mood, ruled in July that it was illegal for politicians who had been convicted of crimes to continue holding office by simply filing an appeal against their convictions. The ruling would disqualify politicians sentenced to more than two years in prison by a lower court. This change, which could uproot formidable political forces, was endorsed this month by the governing coalition's crown prince, Rahul Gandhi.

The effort will meet its greatest challenge in another India - the old one, where voting is still largely driven by caste. In the tribal region that Baitha represents, the vast majority of elected officials face criminal charges, most related to corruption, but many for violent crimes. Voters typically dismiss such charges as trumped-up, one more attempt by elites to crush the champions of the poor.

These are some of the things that allowed Baitha to discuss the subject comfortably in the red-velvet seating area of a government guesthouse, as a ceiling fan turned slowly overhead. He urged his guest to imagine if everyone convicted of a crime were barred from politics.

"The whole Parliament will be empty," he said. "It will become a joke."

A big test of the new measures' effect will come in the case of Lalu Prasad, the longtime leader of the neighboring state of Bihar, who was disqualified from holding office and running in coming elections this month after being sentenced on corruption charges. The case against him had proceeded at a snail's pace for 17 years, as Prasad had thumbed his nose at prosecutors.

A master of populist showmanship who came from a caste of cow herders, he transformed his court dates into political theater. He arrived for one session in the back of a bicycle rickshaw, surrounded by throngs of adoring supporters, and once left jail on the back of a small elephant.

The dance seemed to end with his sentencing. But last week, sitting inside the Birsa Munda jail in Ranchi, it seemed he was perfectly capable of managing his still-formidable political empire. Scores of aides and supporters were clustered outside the jail's iron gate, bearing coconuts and handwritten letters. Prison guards let visitors in and out at regular intervals, as if they were operating a reception center. The Telegraph, Ranchi's main English-language daily newspaper, reported that he had summoned a tailor to his cell.

When a local anticorruption activist filed a complaint, charging that the visits were a major violation of prison regulations, Prasad decided to keep a "low profile" by receiving visitors only after 3pm, the newspaper reported. His visitors all said the charges were false. "People in Delhi don't want the poor people to rise," said one of them, Kumar Lakshman, 28. "Lalu is causing the poor people to rise."

Nationwide, the number of Indian officeholders facing criminal charges is extraordinary: 30 percent of winners in national and regional elections since 2008, according to the Association for Democratic Reforms, a research group based in New Delhi. The reasons are manifold; as India's democratic system evolved, candidates depended heavily on thuggish "muscle men," and later "money men," to influence voters and sweep them into office. Corruption is widespread.

But it is also true that spending limits are so low that virtually any candidate bent on winning would have to be willing to break the law. The penalty for filing false charges is negligible. And India's independence movement was founded on civil disobedience, so lawbreaking is enmeshed in the political culture.

It is not yet clear whether this will change now, said Neerja Chowdhury, a journalist and political commentator. Major parties may steer clear of candidates facing criminal charges, fearful of losing a seat in case of disqualification. But they may also consider the outpouring of popular support extended to Prasad or Jaganmohan Reddy, another regional leader facing corruption charges. "It is a strange paradox, there is huge sympathy for him, and by all accounts he is gaining ground," Ms. Chowdhury said of Reddy. Corruption, she added, "is more of an urban middle-class issue rather than for groups who are in ascendance."

A similar dynamic drove the improbable rise of Baitha, 60, a former revolutionary who received visitors in a snow-white tunic and pajamas, discreetly accepting a packet of chewing tobacco from an aide.

Baitha's region erupted in a peasant rebellion in the 1970s, as Maoist fighters clashed with private armies fielded by high-caste landlords. The authorities have identified Baitha as an expert in explosives who masterminded many attacks. He denies this, saying he served strictly as an ideological leader after his organization was banned by the Indian government in 1986 and never took up arms.

Baitha decided to enter politics after he was jailed pending trial in 2005. With time on his hands, he reread the writings of Mao and Lenin, considered the effects of economic growth and technology on Indian society and began to question the Maoists' confidence that an armed struggle would sweep away the government in New Delhi.

"It was a difficult period for me, but I decided," he said. "I changed my ideology."

He had such high name recognition in Jharkhand, he said, that he easily won the seat without leaving the jail to campaign. There was, however, the somewhat delicate matter of the criminal charges pending against him; of all 4,807 candidates elected since 2008, he had the longest record, according to the Association for Democratic Reforms. Voters made it clear, however, that the charges did not matter, and he said most of the cases were dropped after he was elected to Parliament.

People approached in Jharkhand's capital said the accusations were false, advanced by Baitha's political opponents. Others conceded that there was truth in the charges, but said it had in no way damaged Baitha's image. Santosh Kumar Dube, who holds a municipal office in Ranchi, said he believed that Baitha "fought with arms, and participated in some massacres" during his time as a Maoist. But he added: "All these charges against him were made in the process of fighting for poor people. People are not afraid of him."

For his part, Baitha admitted some anxiety about the changes in Indian politics, which he acknowledged could have prevented him from running in the first place. The new rigor over leaders' criminal convictions, he said, has put a powerful new weapon in the hands of political opposition and has called into question the judgment of voters, who are, he said, perfectly aware who they are voting into office.

"I have this concern, that my political career ends because of these charges," he said, but then he collected himself.

"I have full faith it will not happen to me," he said. "I have faith in the judicial system."

Source: Ellen Barry, NYT News Service