Bi-Pedalism

I love how versatile the bike is in terms, not only, of uses but also in the benefits one accrues from using it on a regular basis. Here's a little known fact- the car is a highly inefficient form of transportation: it is so heavy that 95% of the energy consumed by it is used to move itself and only 5% to move the person. Think about it and this should make sense to you. How heavy are you? How heavy is your car? How much energy would it take to move you? Makes you wonder which genius came up with the SUV.

The bike on the other hand is one of the most efficient forms of transportation. You pedal and it gets you to your destination. And you get there in a much better frame of mind than sitting in those rush-hour snarl-ups. You get to enjoy the wind in your hair more cheaply than buying a convertible. You save on gas and you help the environment stay green. You have the independence to go where you want to go; even to car-free zones. And you end up healthier every time you pedal. What's not to like?

Countries in Asia, like India and China, have traditionally had many bicyclists as it was the most practical and cheap form of transportation available to the common man. But it is seen as the poor person's means of conveyance at this point and everyone is hankering to get to a place where they can own a car or two now. Parts of north-western Europe on the other hand have been moving in the opposite direction. I loved seeing everyone going about their daily life on their bicycles on this trip to Europe. It did not matter if you were dressed special or had your big dog or all five of your kids with you. You could do whatever you needed to do with your bike. Oh, you need to get to work and its far away? Ok, get on the bike, get to the commuter train or tram or bus, load up your bike and go. Oh your work involves carrying heavy stuff? There are attachments for bikes which will allow you to move things around. I loved how much a part of their life the Europeans had made the bike - especially in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands and some of the other Northern European countries have made riding bikes very much easier for their citizens by providing specials lanes for bikers on all roads. These are clearly marked and do not just meander off into nowhere. Even alongside highways, special bike paths exist for those who want to go longer distances on their two-wheels. Children are taught bike-safety and road rules for traffic at school as part of their mandatory class-work. This leads not only to safer traffic all around but also to a lot more children who are independent and can bike to where they want to go.
Imagine how much we would gain in terms of cleaner environment, less expenditure and use of gas, the (mental and physical) health benefits of a physically active lifestyle if we chose to replace our car with the bike as our main mode of transportation.

[I have provided a link to a private website extolling the virtues and weirdness of biking in Amsterdam with some really cool and funny images. Enjoy]

The Power of One

A young woman in India, Pooja Chauhan, took the unusual step of stripping down to her underwear and marching to the police station to demand action and justice. She had previously registered complaints against her in-laws that they harassed and abused her for not bring dowry and for giving birth to a daughter. Her march resulted in a lot of gawkers and some slow traffic in the little town where she lived but it got her results. The police immediately arrested the in-laws and two neighbors (no explanations have been given for how the neighbors were complicit).

Police say a case may be registered against her for indecent behavior however, they will wait till an examination of her mental state has been conducted. One would like to ask that a case also be registered at the same time against the police for the dereliction of their duty that drove this young woman to the extreme measures she had to resort to in order to bring attention to her plight.

Time and again, the forty year old anti-dowry laws have been flouted in India. Every once in a while a particular young woman's courageous protest focuses attention on this social evil. Nisha Sharma was the last such lightning rod. She called the police on her bridegroom even as last minute demands for dowry were being made. The groundswell of admiration and protest she generated is a testament to how many Indians hate this part of Indian culture and yet, we must be a cowardly nation because we allow this heinous practice to continue, we turn a blind eye when others around us make demands and torture their daughter-in-laws and we also ask for dowry ourselves when we have sons. While the Pooja's and Nisha's are few and far between, we have been inured to the more common reports of young brides burnt and killed by in-laws and husbands.

Neither of these young women were from a particularly privileged or remarkable background. They were not surrounded by supporters or well-wishers who egged them on to rebel. They had nothing to gain and quite a bit to lose. And yet, others in their position have submitted to the violence and injustice perpetrated upon them without raising their voices. It takes a lot of courage to be a Pooja or a Nisha. Some may think it futile since social and cultural mores are slow to change. But each Pooja is a beacon of light, a call to arms in the fight for justice and against tyranny.

I am only one, but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something; and because I cannot do everything I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
- Edward Everett Hale

[Photographs courtesy of the Times of India and the BBC. Thanks]

Heading in the Wrong Direction

Governments exist to deal with the complexity that arise from a large number of humans living together. When societies of people arise, the need for a structure for the provision of common goods and services and the need for a system whereby activities may be organized in order to benefit people also arises. Governments exist to serve this need. The primary purpose of a government is to serve the people by monitoring law and order so public and private goods and benefits are secure and the individual can continue to flourish in a societal setting. It can also expand to serve other needs such as providing common minimum standards, education, health and other such services as societies get more complex. The point still remains that governments exist to serve the individual and the society formed by individuals coming together. Governments do not exist for themselves and to flourish at the expense of the individual and the society. And yet, that is what governments across the world can be seen to do today and I am not talking only about the banana republics.

The Supreme Court of the US, always served as a crucial arbiter in the checks and balance system that reined in the powers of the government and in many cases protected the rights of the individual as enshrined in the constitution of the USA. During Bush Jr.'s administration two SC justices were appointed. This has resulted in the court definitively swinging towards the conservative end of the spectrum. Before this point, some justices were swingers on certain issues. Now on many of the issues that are central in the political arena, there is almost no swinging allowing the neo-conservatives to hold sway.

It is with a heavy heart that one watches the co-opting of this institution which in its recent decisions has become less an arbiter and more a tool of the ruling government. Individual rights have received some of the heaviest blows seen in decades at the expense of institutions of power. The government's "rights" have been protected at the expense of the individual. Freedom of speech, expectation of due process, equal rights- these are but some of the areas where the SC has dealt a severe blow to the individual and shamed itself by breaking with precedent and siding with the state and industry.

Any person who serves in the highest court in the land should be able set aside politics, to think for themselves and think back to the final authority- the Constitution. They should think about what it was the constitution enshrined and protected. If even the SC turns partisan, what hope is there for the people? An omnipotent government only serves itself, not the people.

"Inevitable" Deaths in Immigration Custody

Over 60 human beings have died in immigration custody in the last couple of years. Immigration officials claim that some deaths are inevitable! Guantanamo already made it clear to us that human liberty and rights mean little to this administration. But to hear of the same callous disregard for life, in addition, only reiterates the erosion of democracy that this nation is and has been undergoing. Of course, the easy answer to this is that holding non-Americans and not treating them humanely, to the extent of participating in their untimely death, does not affect the democratic status of this country. However, I believe that no democratic nation state can flout its own principles of the dignity of human life and rights thereof.

We live in a time when the most developed nations have set the example of fighting for the rights of their citizens only. This is a shame. A citizen of the United States is in no way a more worthy human being than any other. Everyone is deserving of the same respect and rights. Some of those dead might not have been citizens but they were in many cases permanent residents. Permanent residency is the step before one is granted citizenship in this country. Having attended a ceremony where they spouted a few words and pledged allegiance to a flag would not have morphed these people into better human beings but in the eyes of this nation, it would have made them more deserving of a humane treatment.

Why is it that only those who were related to these people who died are crying and feeling the pain? We should all feel it. Is this too far-removed from you because you are an American? It shouldn't be because there, but for the grace of fate, go you.

Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right

Israel continues its war against Palestinians relentlessly. When I was growing up in India, we learned that the Palestinian people were struggling for freedom and independence under the leadership of Yasser Arafat. India has one of the largest Muslim populations in the world. Having itself borne the brunt of Colonial demarcations foisted on local populations, perhaps India saw in the mid-east situation- where a militarily strong group (the Israelis) supported by the west had not only wrested land from the inhabitants of the land but were continuing to subjugate them- a repeat of the might is right argument. All I remember is the feeling that there were still groups around the world fighting for independence as India had done decades before I was born.

Moving to America resulted in a change in my view-point. I read about the history of discrimination faced by the Jewish diaspora (pogroms in Russia, pre Soviet as well as Soviet; and ghettos all over Europe) eventually culminating in the holocaust. How enterprising as a people the Jews were and how this often lead to their being persecuted and restrained (this from a dear Jewish friend from long ago). And now, here were these same people at last in the place they could call Israel, which is where they originated from millenia ago. They were hemmed in all sides by vicious and opposing Islamic forces and had to fight for their very existence.

It has taken me many years again to see that the colonials tore out a chunk of land where lives were being lived and gave it as their "gift" to a people who were owed compensation for the mistreatment meted out to them collectively by the west (I include Russia here since it does want so badly to be counted in Europe than Asia and aspires to be G8). So how come the Palestinian people, who were at the time the indigenous population of present day Israel, ended up being the bad guys? Palestine has been a festering wound in the middle east that has served as a focal rallying cry. If you were to meet your average Palestinian, they are not fundamentalist. In fact, Palestineans were and are considered more progressive than many other Islamic people in the mid-east.

Palestine has been under siege for a very long time and in all that time, Israel has only kept creeping out of its borders, and restricting Palestinian lives. Palestinians who go abroad to find a livelihood are severely restricted from returning and even lose their residency rights. But what is there to stay in Palestine for? Israel has done its best to try and settle Israeli families and drive Palestinians out through economic, geographical and financial restrictions. The fabric of a whole society torn asunder! Families separated, hospitals destroyed, self-esteems destroyed, checkposts created, children scattered, schools destroyed, guns distributed. You would think the one people who would have learned the meaning of compassion based on their own horrific past would know better than to visit such pain on others.

I don't condone violence. It was wrong for it to have been used against the Jews in the first place. But their historic suffering does not give them a free pass to do violence unto others in the name of protecting themselves. Israel's actions have been egregiously violent and we have not had enough leaders stand up and call it to task for it.

Healthy, Wealthy & Wise

My daily commute from home to work in Birmingham (the original city in the UK) was about 5 miles alongside canals. I would run or bike. When I started out, I was mostly walking or running to work. I bought a car for work since I was expected to eventually carry equipment to GP offices to gather data for the study we would be running. But I did not need the car for well over a year. Frank brought me my bicycle from the States after I had found a place. So some days I would bike and others I would run. It was a form of exercise when I started out, so I'd gear up and then at work, I'd shower change and get to work. Same routine back in the evenings.

On the few occasions that I took the car to work I realized how amazingly pleasant my bike commute was compared to my auto-commute. No stopping and going. My jams were at worst a gaggle of geese who decided to cross the path and were being hissy to protect the goslings. It was beautiful. I slowly changed from seeing the bike ride as exercise to seeing it more as my transportation system. And while that may not seem like a great change to most, it was something that I had to learn from Jurriaan who came from Amsterdam.

To Jurriaan, the bike is a very practical and efficient form of transport for any journey that was about 10 miles or less. And if one did not treat it as a workout, then biking at a leisurely pace not only got you where you were going, but you didn't really have to gear up and change before and after since you would not be sweating like crazy. I decided to give it a try. Wow! To integrate a bicycle into your everyday life is a very liberating experience in more ways than one.

I am in Europe again, this time in Netherlands & Belgium. These two countries are awash in bicycles and cyclists. Everybody hops on a bicycle and pedals off to daily life. To work, to grocery stores, with children to the park, to schools, to pubs... I think the bike-culture is at least one factor in the consistently high ranks north western European nations receive in the best-place-to-live polls. More on how I think this plays out in future blogs. Also pictures! :)

Man the Borders - the Huns are Coming!

In April, I saw a news report where Bush (jr.) was visiting some border patrols facing southern borders and congratulating them on amassing arsenal, building fences and beefing up security. He made a speech about how more needed to be done to prevent others from "sneaking in." I have a serious issue with the tone and manner in which the immigration debate (more like propaganda) has been conducted. This nation stands for freedom and self-determination. Immigrants flock to it to be free of their domestic persecutions and for new opportunities to hew a better life. One could argue that many of these south of the border immigrants have more legitimate rights to be here, given the historically contiguous nature of this region as well as perhaps closer blood-ties to the original inhabitants of the Americas.

Early arriving Europeans wrested this nation from its original inhabitants. Many European Americans feel sad about their history and feel that were mass European migration to the Americas to happen today, perhaps everyone would be treated differently. And yet, this nation's leader seeks to demonize immigrants who might, had the US not been colonized, be moving across this landscape quite legitimately. Where's the hope for redress of historic ills when present day politics continue to make some people the blessed and the others the invaders?

Cross-border immigration is even tied to the war on terror in order to motivate the security forces further. Such rhetoric and propaganda has resulted in spawning vigilante justice along the border where man attacks man in the name of land and law.

Human migrations have existed since humans existed. To me it seems a very basic right that the movement of living beings not be curtailed. There are natural self-correcting mechanisms affected by environmental, ecological and individual conditions to name but a few. In fact, it is these forces that are driving current day migrations just as they did in the past. But today, we have stopped up borders on one side of which lies starvation and on the other side waste.

Here's a fact that is not as well known as it should be. You know that fight against poverty that everyone is talking about? Money being sent by migrant workers to their families exceeds all foreign aid put together. $110bn annually! And remember that most of these guys often work the lowest paid jobs. And in case you are thinking that the transfer of money comes at the expense of the rich nations, think again. I have one quote from a World Bank report on migration and development here: "...free migration could double world income..." (See links.) It takes a different tone from the political vitriol being spewed at migrants in most of the developed, benevolent, western nations.

It seems to me that we like to pat ourselves on the back too much for being civilized and enlightened in the 21st century. As long as national borders exist and people treat each other unequally based on differences, we cannot claim to have moved into a compassionate era of mutual and beneficial co-existence.