Hammer & the tickle-II

The second part of the post on Soviet era jokes... Enjoy!

1. “What is the difference between the capitalist and the socialist trade?”

A.  “Capitalist trade means everything is to be sold.Socialist trade means everything is to be bought.”

2. “What shall we do if suddenly we feel a desire to work?”

A. “Just rest for a while on a sofa. It will pass.”

3. “What is the easiest way to explain the meaning of the word ‘communism’?”

A.“By means of fists.”

4. “What to do if vodka interferes with the job?”

A. “Get off the job.”

5. “Why Lenin wore regular shoes, but Stalin wore boots?”

A.“At Lenin's time, Russia was still only ankle-high in shit.”

6. “Can a son of a General become a Marshal?”
A. “No, because every Marshal also has a son.”

7. “What is an exchange of opinions?”

A.“When you walk into your boss's office with your opinion and walk out with his.”

8. “What is the difference between the Constitutions of the USA and USSR?” Both guarantee freedom of speech.”

A. “Yes, but the Constitution of the USA also guarantees freedom after the speech.”

9. Is it true that there is freedom of speech in the Soviet Union the same as there is in the USA?

A: In principle, yes. In the USA, you can stand in front of the White House in Washington, DC, and yell, "Down with Reagan!", and you will not be punished. Just the same, you can stand in the Red Square in Moscow and yell, "Down with Reagan!", and you will not be punished.

10. “What is permitted and what is prohibited?”

A. “In England, what is permitted, is permitted, and what is prohibited, is prohibited.

      In America everything is permitted except for what is prohibited.

      In Germany everything is prohibited except for what is permitted.

      In France everything is permitted, even what is prohibited.

      In the USSR everything is prohibited, even what is permitted."

11.“Why Solzhenitsyn, Brodsky, Bukovsky, and other dissidents have been exiled from the country?”

A. “Don't you know that the best products are always selected for export?”

12. Yuri Gagarin’s daughter answers the phone.‘No, mummy and daddy are out,’ she says.‘Daddy’s orbiting the earth, and he’ll be back tonight at 7 o’clock.  But mummy’s gone shopping for groceries, so who knows when she’ll be home.’

13. "What is chaos?"

A. "We do not comment on national economics."

14. "Is it true that the poet Vladimir Mayakovsky committed suicide?"

A. "Yes, it is true, and even the record of his very last words is preserved: ´Don't shoot, comrades.´"

15. "Is there censorship of the press and radio in the Soviet Union?"

A."In principle no, but it is unfortunately not possible to go into this question in any detail at the present time."

16. "What will be the results of the next elections?"

A. "Nobody can tell.Somebody has stolen yesterday the exact results of the next elections from the office of the Central Committee of the USSR."

17. "When Nixon visited Moscow, he and Khrushchev had a race around the Kremlin. Nixon came the first. How should our media report on that?"

A: As follows: In the international running competition the General Secretary of the Communist Party took the honorable second place, while President Nixon came in next to last.

18.  What's the difference between a capitalist fairy tale and a Marxist fairy tale?

A: The capitalist fairy tale starts out; "once upon a time there was....", The Marxist fairy tale starts out; "some day there will be...."

19. "Is it true that the Soviet Union is the most progressive country in the world?"

A: Of course! The life was already better yesterday than it's going to be tomorrow!

20. Khrushchev visited a pig farm and was photographed there. In a newspaper's office, a discussion is under way what should be the caption under the picture. "Comrade Khrushchev among pigs," "Comrade Khrushchev and pigs," "Pigs around comrade Khrushchev,"—all is rejected. Finally the editor makes the decision. The caption is "The third from left - comrade Khrushchev.

Foreign policy woes

The issue of whether or not there was a genocide of Tamils in Lanka has been in the news for several days now. On one hand, you have inflamed passions baying for blood to avenge the murder of Tamils in Lanka, On the other, you have supposedly saner voices advocating caution and pragmatism to handle the situation to ensure that justice gets delivered in Lanka. Between the two, is caught our Central government, tottering from one crisis to another, with no vision and maimed by indecision.

The problem  with a hetereogenous nation like ours is that ethnic groups inevitably spill across political borders. There is no difference between a Hindu Bengali in Bangladesh and a Hindu Bengali in PoschimBongo, similarly, there is no difference between a Lankan Tamil and an Indian Tamil. But the stand taken by the government historically has been that India's citizens are her own. Citizens of neighbours, irrespective of their cultural or religious affiliations are not necessarily India's concern. The only exeption to this was when India championed the cause of  Independent Bangladesh- that might have also been guided by other strategic reasons. Had India bothered to take care of the minorities of its neighbours (Neighbours' minorities inevitably make up India's major communities), Hindu population in Pakistan and Bangladesh would not have been decimated to its current levels.

In the absence of a possibility of a population exchange (similar to the one done between Turkey & Greece in the 30s), It is best that India continues to follow the principle of no meddling in neighbour's affairs. It will do us good to guide and encourage neighbours, using our soft power to get the results that we want. Strong diplomatic actions, e.g. boycotting Lanka might only prove counter-productive by pushing Lanka into China's arms. India must use all the diplomacy at its disposal to put pressure on Lanka to implement a just and lasting solution to alleviate the sufferings of its Tamils. 

But why only talk of Lanka to understand the precarious state of affairs of our Foreign policy? On one hand, you have an incensed nation demanding strong action against Pakistan for beheading an Indian soldier in Indian territory and on the other hand, you have the Foreign Minister of India hosting the visiting Pak PM for lunch. In Maldives too, India just barely managed to get away with a diplomatic crisis, when an erstwhile PM sought refuge in the Indian embassy in Male. Look at Nepal, once a dedicated ally, now resting in China's secure arms. Glance towards Bangladesh, where PM's visit and India's image was dented by Mamta Di's refusal to accept a Central government proposal on Teesta water sharing.

Foreign policy of a regional and aspiring global power like India cannot be an instrument of domestic politics. Foreign policy must be guided by the our strategic objectives and not by narrow political interests. India's weight in International politics can not be squandered away to cater to votebank politics. India must emulate the example of China and use its power and influence to meet strategic aims and win allies. India deserves a government that can build a coherent and pragmatic foreign policy that will do us good!

Old Friends

What happens when you bump into an old friend with whom you have not kept up for long? I mean aside from the feeling of joy and pleasant surprise, It is just another meeting with someone you know, isn't it? You've moved on, as has the other person... And other than the "How are you", and "I heard that" and "Good for you", there isn't much to talk about... especially about the present...

But then suddenly you delve into history... And then the conversation flows... It is suddenly all about the "You remember when" and "That was so foolish" and "You have not changed one bit"... Its almost like the past comes back to the present and that chapter of your life, in which your old friend had a role to play opens up again... Its almost like the past never ended... There was just a comma and a really long pause after that comma that the powers that be chose to fill up now...

I somehow always feel that the present dissolves into nothingness when confronted with good memories of the past... The past returns in all its glory, with all its adventures, the silly incidents, the unbelievable fun... The present, with whatever joys and great achievements just fades into the background, when suddenly, you realize it is time to go... The present returns just as quickly as it had disappeared and the past seems so long ago once again...

That is how it is with old friends... You lose contact and get lost in your own life... But then one day, when you meet, it is like the past never ended... And a wonderful feeling it is...

A spring of hopes... An autumn of despair

                                             
Arab Spring has been replaced by dark and cold winter... It may be too early to start penning down obituaries for the Arab spring, but the representative movement that enthused  the masses from Tunisia to Bahrain is definitely breathing its last. Political Islam has thwarted the growth of truly representative democracies that the masses in many Arab countries were yearning for. All that is left in its wake is the Civil War in Syria, the mass repression in Bahrain and the usurpation of power by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Dissent has once again been stifled and the reactionary forces have triumphed in crushing the will of the people.

Iran offers an interesting lesson in history on how political Islam hijacks the voice of the masses. The late 70s was a turbulent period in Iran. The Shah's hold on the nation was weakening. Universally despised for his un-Islamic lifestyle, his autocratic rule and his inability to connect with the impoverished masses, the sun was setting on the Shah's rule in Iran. And so, when protests broke out in Teheran and Esfahan and other cities in Iran, no observer of Iranian affairs was truly surprised. Those protests were mass protests as well, guided by a plethora of organizations whose loyalities lay with Communists, Socialists, Liberals, Democrats and even Islamists. The Shah's rule, everyone expected, would be replaced by a liberal democratic structure with Islam at its heart. But then, Ayatollah Khomeini arrived and with a series of steps that created a Shia version of political Islam, succeeded in excluding all except the Islamists from the political scene. Thus was born the world's first Islamic Republic. And this Islamic republic endures still.

Bangladesh today offers another end of the spectrum. The Arab spring, so to speak has finally washed ashore in Bangladesh. The masses are out on the street, protesting against the betrayal of ideals that had led to the formation of Bangladesh. They are demanding that the ideals that had created Bangladesh- Secularism and Nationalism be reinstated and that the traitors of the Mukti Juddho be brought to trial and justice be done to the millions who lost their lives at the hands of the Pakistan military supported Razkars. They demand true democracy, one that is driven by the masses, not by the fringe Islamist elements in the society. Once again, the reactionary forces, represented by the Jamaat ul Islami are vehemently opposing this mass movement, with the oft-repeated cry of Islam in danger. The government finds itself, precariously placed. It released the forces that protest at Shahbag, but it is weak-kneed when it comes to taking the Islamist forces head on. It is yet to be seen whether the will of the protestors will trump the might of the Islamists.

Political Islam has yet to yield any positive results for the masses. From Afghanistan to Libya, the fields are littered with the bodies of those who were devoured by the so-called Islamic regimes. The attempts of reactionary Mullahs to create a society centered on 7th century Arabia is anachronistic and designed for failure. The time has come for the leaders of the Muslim world to open their eyes to an inclusive and representative structure which guarantees the liberty of the masses. Till such time, every spring will wane into an autumn and disappear into a dark and cold winter. 

Yet another Bossless existence

Yes, you got that right. I find myself in the same boss less position that I was a little over a year ago. The lords in the heavens above have once again deprived me of a caring, understanding boss, with the result that I am left alone to fend for myself. There is one difference from the boss less existence that I am leading now and the bossless existence that I had endured last year. Last year, my boss less existence won me pity and sympathy from all quarters. This year's boss less existence has only earned me a pointed question- Why does this keep happening to you? Some friends, have been less than diplomatic in telling me that "तुम फिर से अपने बॉस को खा गए?" I would have considered this as a friendly banter, had this question been raised only once or twice, but the fact that almost everyone has been asking me the same question means that I am forced to introspect. How is it that any boss who has worked with me for more than 2 months has inevitably abandoned me! 

The following 2 theories are running in my mind to explain this strange co-incidence-

1. My bosses are amazed at my sheer talents and abilities and realize the worthlessness of their positions as my boss. Since they don't get enough opportunities to practice and hone their  bossing skills, they move on to careers where their are better opportunities to improve their bossing-skills.  They move on, not because I am unbearable or something, but as I mentioned earlier, simply because they don't get enough self-developmental opportunities.

While this is the theory that I subscribe to, I can already see my ex-bosses guffawing and rofling! 

2. My bosses are amazed (once again) at my sheer stupidities and realize the worthlessness of their positions as my boss. Since they realize that their performance for the year will inevitably get <beeped>, thanks in no small part to me, they decide to move on to better careers, simply to ensure that they stay employable in the job market and that their standing in the market is not sullied. They move on, to put it simply, because I am a hopeless case! 

While this is the theory that all my ex-bosses subscribe to, I would like to firmly reject all such insinuations!

Irrespective of what is really the reason behind my bosses orphaning me, I would, for once and for all, want to rid myself of this "बॉस- खाऊ " tag. I would want to loudly announce that a hard(ly) working, (in)sincere and (un)intelligent subordinate is available in the market. All he wants is a boss who will work hard, not complain, not demand and not yell! Hence, on this day, I take a भीष्म प्रतिज्ञा that I shall do whatever it takes to retain a boss and redeem myself in this corporate world! 

Incidentally, this is my 150th post! :) 

ठीक नहीं है प्रधानमंत्रीजी

पल पल है भारी जो विपदा है आई 

• देश की राजधानी में लड़कियों का घर से बाहर निकलने में खौफ खाना 
• आपकी पुलिस का निहत्थे प्रदर्शनकारियों पर लाठियां बरसाना 
• राष्ट्रीय दामाद को ज़मीन कौड़ियों के दाम पर मिल जाना 
• 2-G स्पेक्ट्रम में देश के करोड़ों रुपयें गबन होना 
• लोकपाल बिल का ओछी राजनीती का शिकार बन जाना 
• आपके गृह मंत्री का आतंकवादियों के सरगना हाफिज़ सईद को 'श्री' की उपाधि देना 
• FDI  के नाम पर विदेशी ताकतों के सामने झुक कर देश के हितों को बेच देना 
• गरीबों को मासिक 600 रुपैये में परिवार चलाने को कहना  
• आप ही के देश में आ कर रहमान मलिक का 26/11 और बाबरी मस्जिद की तुलना करना 
• देश की सुदृढ़ अर्थव्यवस्था का चौपट होने वाला हाल होना 

और देश के किये इससे ज्यादा विडम्बना की बात क्या हो सकती है  कि आप जैसा सुशिक्षित टेक्नोक्रैट अपनी आँखें मूंदें, ध्रुतराष्ट्र बना बैठा है। आप तो उस नीरो समान हैं, जो, जब रोम जल रहा था, तब वह बांसुरी बजा रहा था। प्रधानमंत्रीजी, अभी भी समय है,  और देश का बेडा गर्क होने से रोकिये, वरना भविष्य आपको कभी माफ़ नहीं करेगा।  

End of the world

You see that bright, shiny object near the horizon? Yes, the one that seems to have grown bigger than yesterday. That is Nibiru. The star, the Babylonians, millennia ago identified as the seat of the Highest God. That star is now hurtling towards one of God's own creations- Earth. In a few days, Nibiru will bring this sordid saga we call life to an abrupt halt. It will end aeons of human civilization and barbarity and reduce this resplendent, blue planet we call home to space debris. All traces of human existence will be wiped off. No one will ever know we existed, much less our travails and our achievements.

If you are worried that the end will be long and painful, bingo! you aren't mistaken. As Nibiru will inch ever so close to Earth, its gravitational pull will wreak havoc on earth. Oceans and seas will rise to kiss the sky and strike land with unimaginable ferocity. We, who so conveniently forget the gentle gravity  that keeps our feet on the ground, will now experience an upward pull that will drive us mad. Atmosphere will thin out as Nibiru tears through it. We will be left gasping for air as Nibiru strikes Earth with all its might and blows it to smithereens.

There will be no day of judgment, no son of God will descend to reward the faithful and damn the disbelievers, No God will appear to rescue humanity, No missiles, no aircrafts, no armies and no governments will save us. We will be all alone, helpless, powerless and yes, very very scared. The end will come slowly, like a blunt knife, making a thousand cuts on the body.  There will be no Noah's ark, no secret hideout where a small race of humans will survive and revive life. There will only be death, destruction and annihilation.

The end of the world is upon us. From dust we came, and to dust we shall return

I read therefore I am!

A couple of months ago, it was 1953 and I was sitting in Stalin's dacha in Kuntsevo. Bulganin, Khrushchev and Beria were there too. There was palpable tension in the room. Something was wrong. It seemed to me that these men knew that they needed to act but were holding themselves back, fearful of the wrath they would incur if they acted. Suddenly, Beria went inside Stalin's bedroom and returned in a couple of minutes. His face was drained of all emotions, yet he seemed ecstatic. He boasted, 'I took him out'. Khrushchev and Bulganin almost fell on the floor. Stalin, the Iron man, the victor of WWII, the father of the Soviet people, their murderer was no more.

A few weeks ago, it was 1812, and I was in again in Moscow, accompanying Napoleon and his Grande Armée as they laid siege to Moscow. The poorly armed, demoralized Russian army was no match for the invincible French forces. They simply fled at the sight of the French. I could see the pride in Napoleon's eyes as he prepared to enter the city and add Russia to his spate of conquests. But no delegation came forth to offer him the surrender of the city. The initial euphoria turned to anxiety and eventually shock and disgust as Napoleon realized that the Russians had robbed him of a significant ceremonial victory by refusing to hand over the keys of Moscow to him. I could see Napoleon's eyes burning with anger and an esprit de revanche as he had been denied what was rightfully his.

Last week, it was 1977 and I was with Indira Gandhi as she sat in her residence cum office, waiting for the election verdict that the masses would give. Outwardly, she appeared confident, but her face was haggard. There were dark circles under her eyes. It was almost as if she knew that all was not well. And then the results started trickling in. Her Congress party seemed to be doing badly in the North, but at least she was leading in her Rai Bareli constituency. A couple of hours later, her lead had narrowed down. By 4 in the evening, it was clear, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was all set to lose in her own constituency. Mrs. Gandhi was shell shocked. Neither Sanjay, nor Rajiv nor their wives had anything to say. Rahul and Priyanka sat close to their Grandmother, oblivious to the goings-on in the household. I could see that Indira Gandhi had aged suddenly during the day. She seemed frail, vulnerable and despondent, A far cry from the Durga-incarnate who had defeated the Pakistanis and created Bangladesh.

And then, just yesterday, I was in Istanbul, with author Orhan Pamuk as he showed me his childhood homes in Nisantasi and Cihangir, overlooking the Bosphorous. He spoke of the Ottoman yalis, the streets in which Turkish Muslims, Greeks, Albanians, Armenians, Kurds and Firangis would roam freely, of Steamships (and later Soviet tankers) that would move up and down the strait, of Sultans and their harems, of Westerners who brought their culture, of Turks who wanted to ape the Western culture, of the First World War and the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire, of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and his Westernizing reforms and of the rich, proud Istanbul of yore with its hüzün and the impoverished, confused Istanbul of today. Orhan Pamuk spoke in tones that made me see Istanbul less of a city and more of a person witnessing history being made.

Well, that, is the magic that books bring. They make you forget who you are, where you are and what you were doing. They take away all sorrows, all worries and transport you magically into places, lives of peoples, times and settings. You lose yourself in the pages of these books and live through the lives of others as you flip its pages. 

Well, the one emotion that I have always felt, when I am browsing through the books in a Crosswords or Landmark, or even on flipkart… "So many books, So little time!"

History Beckons!

Arvind Kejriwal is the man of the moment. He has successfully rallied the masses against the corrupt, self-serving rule of our politicians and has demanded reinstatement of the ideals of liberty, equality and justice, ideals on which this great democracy was founded. The middle class sees him as their saviour. Youngsters see him as their ideal. Many feel that finally someone has raised cudgels against the venal establishment that leads this nation. We are simply wowed by his commitment to his ideals, his recently formed "Aam Aadmi Party" and its impeccably worded constitution. 

I, for one, choose to be a bit cynical. Mr. Kejriwal's statements have been less than democratic on many occasions and I seriously doubt his commitment to democracy. He seems to forget that India, for all her inherent strength, is deeply divided on multiple counts. A 'one size fits all' kind of a approach is unlikely to work in our country. While Mr. Kejriwal's tirade against corruption may have won him support throughout the nation, it is highly unlikely that any policy decisions of his would gain widespread support unless he chooses to pursue the democratic path. What is needed is an emphasis on returning to the democratic ideals of discussion, deliberation and respect for the opposition. Over the past 60 years, we have succeeded in putting strong democratic systems in place, the need of the hour is to strengthen and sustain them. What India needs today is continuous evolution, not a revolution!

Maximilen de Robespierre was a nondescript character who came to the fore at the time of the French revolution in 1789. A skilled orator and an avowed revolutionary, he galvanized the masses, sickened as they were by the misrule of the King Louis XVI into creating a revolutionary France, governed by ideals of "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity". After having dispatched the King to the depths of hell, he turned his attention to the counter-revolutionaries in their midst. A reign of terror was instituted and thousands  of men and women alike were guillotined on flimsy charges. Idealism turned to a thirst for blood. All opposition became counter-revolutionary. The Guillotines in France worked overtime. The revolutionaries were now devouring the masses who had supported them in the first place. Any sign of dissent would land you on the guillotine. How did the madness end, you ask? The revolution ultimately consumed its own. Robespierre was guillotined by his own former supporters for having compromised the ideals of the republic. And the republic, where did it go? It would go down the drain as France, once again would became an empire, under Napoleon in a few years' time.

Mr. Kejriwal is no Robespierre. At least not today. But Robespierre was no Robespierre as we know him today when he first appeared on the political scene. India does not need a revolution today. It seeks stability, continuity and continuous and incremental change. It needs democracy to survive, It needs acceptance of problems and joint efforts for devising solutions. That is the only way forward.

One of Robespierre's quotes that resonates through history: "Citoyens, vouliez-vous une révolution sans révolution?" (Citizens, Did you want a revolution, without revolution?)

The heart of Africa

Dark clouds are gathering once again over the Congo river. The river is once again in spate, unleashing its waters violently across the land that had taken its name. Its once quiet, picturesque, meandering waters are now drowning homes, villages and towns, wrecking havoc like never before.

In a way, the Congo river mirrors the history of the country that has chosen to name itself after the river that brought sustenance to much of the country. Every now and then, marauding armies of rebels surface and challenge the puny government forces and civil war breaks out, bringing destruction and devastation similar to the fury, the river will soon unleash.

They say the Congo was plagued from its inception. An artificial Belgian created colony that overlooked tribal boundaries, its fate in the initial years was emblematic of the misfortune wrecked by naked colonial aggression. Congo was established as a personal fiefdom of the Belgian king who used all the might of his colonial enterprise of rob Congo of its rubber and its mineral resources. Congolese men and women  were maimed for life for failing to meet the colonial rubber quota. The Congo river drank the limbs that were thrown in its bosom, forced to swallow them as bitter poison.

Independence should have led to joy and national unification, but the century of Belgian rule had further exacerbated deep fissures within this artificial entity. Cold war struggles added their own complexities to what as already a boiling pot. Provinces, encouraged by the Europeans, fought for secession. The immensely popular but ideologically dogmatic Patrice Lumumba, the country's first Prime Minister was kidnapped and subsequently assassinated. They say, his remarks to the Belgian King, during the country's independence ceremony, "Nous ne sommes plus vos singes (We are no longer your monkeys)", earned him the ire of the Belgians, who were still in control of the nascent Congolese army. The Soviet attempt to create a Soviet satellite in the heart of Africa fizzled out with Lumumba's death. This paved he way for US proxy-intervention and the rise of the kleptocracy of Mobutu Sese Seko. Lip service was paid to the ideas of Lumumba but Congo was no more. In its place came Sese Seko's Zaire, corrupt and dictatorial. The river lost its identity too, it became the Zaire river and reflected the avarice and the greed of the nation as it devoured thousands in floods which it unleashed at its pleasure. 

And then the civil wars returned. Hutus fought Tutsis in neighboring Rwanda. Kabila fought Mobutu in Zaire as rebel movements sprouted everywhere. A tiny glimmer of light emerged as a government established its authority and resurrected the Congo. However, the joy was short-lived. Wars broke out in the north, the south, the East and the West. Flawed elections fueled public discontent. Rebels gained courage to declare war on the government. They resorted to violence, rape, arson and loot. Children were kidnapped, Women disappeared. The artificial calm that had existed for years was shattered again. Neighbours financed rebels as Congolese fought Congolese. River Congo wept bitterly seeing the death, the destruction and the devastation wrecked by her own children on their own land.

They say the Congo will continue to flood and devour victims till peace returns to its namesake nation. The international community cannot afford to look at the Congo conflict as an experimentation in nation hood. Democracy and the rule of law have to prevail in Congo. The international community must commit itself to that. Congo has been ravaged enough, for its minerals, for its rubber. Now is the time for Congo to join the community of nations as a truly independent nation, standing on its own two feet. The failure of Congo will be a costly affair, there is no doubt that If Congo goes, it will take most of Africa, with its borders cutting across tribal homelands and language groups,  down with it.