My letters on BigB published in newspapers

My letters published on this hype surrounding Mr. Bachchan in newspapers -

The Free Press Journal, March 27, 2010

http://www.dnaindia.com/speakup/report_are-stars-soft-targets-in-a-political-war_1365054

DNA, March 30, 2010

http://www.freepressjournal.in/FPJ/FPJ/2010/03/27/ArticleHtmls/27_03_2010_005_009.shtml?Mode=1

Open Letter to Mr. Bachchan

Bachchan sir,

I am really disappointed with the hostile attitude of the so called "Grand Old Party" of India towards an icon, a face which has represented the country at a global scale. I deeply regret the petty politics which has followed your attendance to the Sea Link event. Being a Mumbaikar I didn't see any reason for you not being fit to be a guest for that event. You are not just a celebrity in the city but more importantly a tax payer from the city and have more right to be on the podium than most of the people sitting there who don't even belong to Mumbai.

I don't think in a Democracy, politicians should monopolize inaugurations of public structures. It is a shame that it has happened in our country and unfortunately in the case of the tallest celebrity of the country who has always been a goodwill ambassador and a face of the country.

The party could have downplayed it but still the fiasco continued in Pune wherein the CM Ashok Chavan suddenly pre-poned his visit by a day avoiding sharing the dais with you and then Ms Sheila Dixit suddenly doesn't showcase AB's audio-video message and forces all his posters to be removed after taking the help of AB to promote the whole event. We on Twitter know how much AB has been promoting the event from the core of his heart.

Bachchan ji, I think there are some things which should be above politics if we need to make this country a better place to live in and dream of becoming a superpower.

Firstly , I feel even if you would have had a political affiliation, it should not have mattered for the ruling party to share the dais with person from the other party, after all even you are a citizen of the city.

Secondly, I feel bad that the party (which always talks about secularism) didn't open their eyes to see that Jaya ji is a nominated RS member by the SP, you Bachchan sir were the tourism ambassador for a BJP governed and a CPI(M) ruled state. And both YOU and AB were attending programmes by Congress CMs respectively.

The latter is fine example of how when it comes to the country, we all forget our religious or political differences and come together of which a prime example have been YOU and your family respectively. This country is going to the dogs if such cheap political gimmicks continue and if a person of your repute can be humiliated so much then just imagine the spate of a commoner!

Regards

Devendra Pai

Mumbai

devendrapai@yahoo.com

P.S. - With you in all times sir

Delhi Tour Jist

Day 1
India Gate
BJP Office
Amit Thaker (BJYM President)
Nitin Gadkari (BJP President)
Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi (BJP Vice President)
Murlidhar Rao (BJP Secy)
Prakash Javadekar (BJP Spokesperson)
Venkaiah Naidu (Former BJP President)
Lok Sabha
Mani Shankar Aiyar (Rajya Sabha MP)


Day 2
Pradeep Jain (Min. of State, Rural Development)
Election Commission
NSUI office
Hibi Eden (NSUI President)
AICC Office
Alka Lamba (Congress Secy)
Ministry of External Affairs
Shashi Tharoor (Min. of State, External Affairs)

Day 3
Sharad Joshi (Rajya Sabha MP)
BBC Office
CSDS

Day 4
Rashtrapati Bhawan
Rajiv Pratap Rudy (BJP Spokesperson)
National Gallery of Modern Art
Satyavrat Chaturvedi (Congress Spokesperson)

Day 5
Qutub Minar
K N Govindacharya (former BJP ideologue)
Ravi Shankar Prasad (BJP Spokesperson)
Indira Gandhi Memorial

Day 6
Purana Quila
Birla Mandir
Planning Commission
Netherlands Embassy

Day 7
Bharatsinh Solanki (Min. of State, Enery)
Manish Tiwary (Congress Spokesperson)
Birla House
Rajya Sabha
NHRC

Day 8
CIC
Prithviraj Chavan (Science and Tech Minister, PMO)

Birthday wishes by AB on Twitter

To be a Leader or a Manager?

As the BJP leadership crisis enters its penultimate hour and the heated debate on the rise of managers in the “party with a difference” still manages to hit newspaper headlines, it becomes vital to understand what separates a manager from a leader. BJP since its inception was known to be a party of leaders and not managers like the erstwhile Congress, but the 90s saw the rise of managers in the BJP as well. It was this which led to the coining of a new term by political analysts - “Congressization of the BJP.” The term sounds trendy but larger and deeper questions remain to be addressed, the biggest of them being – the difference between a Leader and a Manager.

For many, a good leader is the one who successfully manages an election campaign and comes out winning the election. But then the question arises, if this person is the leader then who is the manager? Playing Devil’s advocate will help us to realize that the one whom we had been considering as leaders weren’t actually leaders but managers, who just have a short term objective which in this case was to win the elections. For an ideal leader, the vision replaces the objective making it broader and larger not for the benefit of the individual but for the benefit of the country, for the benefit of people and lastly for the benefit of the party and that too beyond electoral success.

Today, both the terms are interchangeably used without understanding the significance of the either, and more importantly what these two different terms stand for. The definition that clears the air is “Managers are concerned with doing things right, but Leaders are the one who do the Right things.” Also, further in understanding the difference between the two, another major point which one should realize is that the leader is the “problem maker.” Well not in the literal sense of course, but in the sense that it is the leader who actually identifies something wrong and recognizes a problem. This might as well lead us to say, “if it wasn’t for the leaders, there would not have been any problems” as even if there were inconsistencies present they would not have got noticed by managers as managers are the ones maintaining a status quo. In sharp contrast, a leader is the one whose highest desire is to bring about change. Leaders are also the ones who actually believe in empowering people through decentralization of power unlike a manager who would prefer to concentrate power. This leads to managers ending up demanding respect whereas leaders command respect.

Leaders are risk takers as well, who go against the tide whereas managers are the risk minimizers who see to it that minimal damage is suffered like seen in the Karnataka BJP crisis wherein the managers from the party reduced the risk of the Government collapsing rather than taking a risk of challenging the Reddy brothers. A leader is the one who gives the ship a direction while a manager steers the ship towards it. The Ramjanmabhoomi Movement is a perfect example of it where the Charioteer, Mr. LK. Advani was the leader whereas the Sarthi, Mr. Pramod Mahajan was his manager. This also vaguely leads us to derive that in today’s competitive politics, the idealism of a Leader in itself isn’t enough to come to power and hence, it becomes important for the leaders to take the help of boardroom strategists (read managers) to win the race for achieving power. And it doesn’t end here, even as the leaders capture power i.e. their means of serving the people; they still need the help of managers in the form of bureaucrats to fulfill their dream, their vision. Last but not least, a leader’s concern is with “What is Right” whereas a manager’s is being Right. Thus, unlike a manager, leadership is not a permanent role but more of an act which is need based.

As someone aptly put it, “Managers are necessary, but Leaders are Essential”

Dostana

The much hyped film of 2008 was in news for its blatant exhibition of homosexuality. Though the film didn’t ridicule nor did it justify homosexuality, same sex love stood as the USP of that film. Most of us as will admit that when we hear someone say "Dostana" the immediate thing which comes to our mind is homosexuality. Though I do agree that homosexuality was a background on which the film was made to humour the audience and make it a commercial success, but at the same time I refuse to accept that Dostana was a senseless film and an out n out commercial film with no morals or story whatsoever.

If I may point out, looking at the title itself that the film wasn't just about homo sexuality but about "friendship." And the friendship here isn't just limited to AB and John but the trio which included Priyanka. The film talks about how people make sacrifices in friendship and how much important is friendship like other blood ties.

It starts with AB and John joining hands and giving up their ambition to get into a romantic fling with Priyanka in order to not lose her friendship. And they do everything one can to get their best pal back which includes kissing in a club in front of the whole world in spite of them not being gay. They don’t care about themselves nor have any egos but just the desire to have Priyanka back as their buddy is what motivates them for the act.

But according to me the high point of the film lies in the last segment where Priyanka actually gives up her dream man Bobby Deol to get back to her friends who indeed cared and loved her more than anyone else. Even Bobby Deol accepted the decision and it was a mutual decision for Piggy Chops and Bobby to part ways for friendship.

And this was the biggest exhibition of "Dostana" in the film wherein an individual leaves her new found love for her best friends. It was very unfortunate that last week it was Friendship's Day and people failed to remember Dostana. There are several best friends who actually claim and make promises on these grounds that friendship is more important than their romantic life. Haven't really come across some individual who has stuck to such promises made even at a time when there have been years gone in nurturing the friendship while this new found love is just a few months old. But yeah surely there have been people claiming to be the best friends but then there are questions asked, "Should I leave the love of my life (who is just say a few months old) for your friendship (which supposedly years old)?"

This category of people is confused to make a call between old friends or new found love. If the happiness of these friends is more important then why not leave our own selfish interest and do the "right" thing? If one fears breaking the heart of this new found love, why doesn't that individual fear breaking the heart of the best friend? And doesn't this best friend love the individual as well? At times, I think if these people are honest with their new found love (and indeed if this new love is worth the love he/she is getting); it is this new found love who should actually initiate the decision making process because if one truely respects love, he/she should respect love in all relationships be it blood relationship or friendship or a romantic relationship.

I just warn those who actually are in the middle of such a situation to not wait for the "right" time to make their call but decide before it’s too late and their best friends give up on them. It won't just be an insult of those individuals but an insult of "love", "trust" and "friendship". And a new relationship cannot sustain at such a big insult shown to the above mentioned virtues. It might be easy to let go of best friends for the rest of the world but for people like me it is very difficult and painful especially where somewhere even after your best friend shatters your trust, you still wait for that best friend to come back to you in spite of the fact that the individual isn't sure which way to go.

Love i.e. Selflessness - A virtue

Many people try to define "love" and partly do successfully explain what Love indeed is but never have I come across any definition which was able to define love in completeness. Which led me to a quest to understand what "love" indeed is. Maybe it took me to go to the US, to completely understand what love actually stood for. And I know as I have raised the issue of "love" there will be certainly eye brows raised especially when it is Devendra Pai who is talking about it.

Let me take a moment and make it clear that, "love" should not be always connected with "romance." Love is something morre than that. Romance might be a minor part of the "love" between 2 life partners but then

isn't a mothers "love" towards her child - "love?"

isn't a brother's love for his sister - "love?"

It doesn't stop at this. What about the love with which the Warkari community go to Pandharpur with? They go there just because of their love for the God and nothing beyond it.

Does God come and welcome them?

Does God talk to them?

Does God bestow them with riches?

But in spite of all negative answers to the question. The Warkaris go to meet their lord with the same affection which I think only increases by their every experience because their "love" for the lord isn't result oriented and I think if it is result oriented, it would be never called as "love." And it is this time that it struck me that "love" and "selflessness" go together and "love" is incomplete without it.

Think about Ram and Bharat's love where bharat had no intention for being the king or Radha, who continued to love Krishna in spite of Krishna being married off to someone else. And this makes me wonder, why then in the present world have become so selfish and result oriented and then call it "love?" Are they actually being fair to "love"....I had come across a text message saying "I Love you is actually a statement and not a question then why do people expect answers to it."

And it is this western culture of being result oriented rather then being "karma oriented" which actually said "good karma" should be done regardless of any results. If one wins its good enough but then one should not get disappointed with failures. This is what Bhagwad Gita teaches. It teaches that "act" shouldbe done regardless of results for the sake of it and the real result is in commiting the act itself. To stick to the "right" thing. And "Rightness", "selflessness", "justice" and "love" go together in the same direction.

Similar reading -http://divsispace.blogspot.com/2008/03/four-letter-wordlove.html

One on my friends has written a similar piece on her blog. If you liked my article you will like this write up as well.