Free Electoral Promises - Signs of a decaying society

Free food, free medical access, free education, free retirement plans - the lure of the free stuff is overwhelmingly compelling to the voters. So it is with awe and admiration I look at political systems where the debate has not degenerated into who can promise the most stuff free.

The path of "free" is also the shortest path to poverty of a country and its economy. What's more, societies with a lot of free promises are also the societies with the least freedom. That politicians still promise free stuff after the failed Soviet experiment (communism is the epitome of a society with free promises and the least freedom) speaks to how quickly collective amnesia takes over a society.

Now we can all agree that everyone should have enough to live a healthy and productive life. The only question is how do we make that possible at a societal scale. Some (many?) argue the way to be to just give the stuff away - make everything a right - food, housing, medical care, education and so on. This is all very hearty but what you get is East Germany, USSR, even India pre-liberalization - where everything is free and nothing is available.

The other approach is what USA showed the world - you want stuff, you work for it. At some level, this is cold-hearted and doesn't jive with the goody mushy feeling we yearn for. But this system produced the most prosperous society on earth in merely a couple of hundred years of its existence (and yes among other and some horrible things as well but not unlike other societies that have had their own issues). Compare that to societies that are hundreds and thousands of years old, and are still trying a way to figure out a way to bring mass scale prosperity to their societies or are looking at slow but sure decline in living standards in decades to come.

It is in this context that I fear the whole democratic party rhetoric currently underway. Their platform and message is simple and goes along the lines of "you should have a right to a good life and we will fulfill that by making things free for you." Never mind that they have no clue about where they'd get the money from (except that they will raise taxes more). I sure hope they are sane enough to appreciate that people (doctors, nurses, teachers, farmers) won't just show up for work without being paid, just in the name of the greater good of the society.

You would think given the Democratic rhetoric, it would be easy to pick the Republicans with their commitment to fiscal discipline, small government and focus on economic activity as an engine of wealth generation. Alas, they have done their best to portray themselves as the party of people leaving in cuckoo-land. In this day & age, what mainstream nitwit politician advocates against women's right to make decisions about their own health, and against gay rights. Whatever small government they want, they want that meddling in women's affairs. The so-called pro-lifers need to get a life. The travesty of the GOP presidential debate was not the tough questions Kelly asked Trump, it was that she didn't expose Walker and Huckabee for the regressive positions they take on abortion. "I'd like you to keep your legislative hands off my body" would have been a nice straight line from Kelly.

Please America, don't lose your working soul. Don't be under any illusion that you are somehow special - you are not. Your system and work ethic is what makes you special. Barter that for the promise of free stuff, and you get nothing but a society of moochers. 

Je suis CHARLIE

Over the last few days, it has been encouraging to watch the mainstream international/western media debate. It appears as though the liberals are finally realizing that ignoring or dancing around an issue doesn't make it automatically go away. In fact, it can come to bite them (and all of us) as it did in France. The sad part is that it took out the bravest amongst the media.

There have been attempts to paint Charlie Hebdo as a racist, right wing organization. It was/is exactly 180-degree opposite - this group is so far to the left, it is actually one of the most trenchant critic of Marine La Pen and her right wing French party. The fact is that Charlie Hebdo is one of the few LIBERAL media organizations in the truest sense of the word - they regularly lampoon the powerful, and regularly challenge the authority of the most powerful opium the human race ever had - religion.

It hasn't even been a few days and there are already apologists popping up for the cowardly massacre. And this group is an eclectic one - from Financial Times to OutlookIndia columnists to the so-called (a few) religious spokespersons. Excuses vary but here are the major ones I have come across in media so far:

Excuse 1: Charlie Hebdo had it coming when it chose to publish beyond the boundaries allowed by religions. It is such a medieval argument, it almost seems like we still live in a theocratic society, not secular one.

Excuse 2: Charlie Hebdo murders are a result of Western invasion of the Middle-east, or segregation of minorities or something else, anything but what the murderers expressly said during the attack - they were avenging printing of cartoons (not fighting for Palestine, not fighting for better social conditions, nothing). We have to start challenging the victim-mindset put forth by the apologists. One can only blame the world so much.

Excuse 3: Charlie Hebdo is racist. No, it is not. Charlie Hebdo lampoons religions, not races (two entirely different things). It's cartoons are filled with caricatures of multiple religious figures. And while it is perfectly alright not to agree with them, to ignore them or to lampoon Charlie Hedbo in return, physically harming in any for, least of all by murdering their staff has to be criticized unreservedly.

The event is so appalling, it has been condemned by major religious leaders of all denominations, as it should. But my clearest ray of hope actually came from the President of Egypt, when he talked to the religious leaders about the need for a religious revolution, no less. He gave that speech before the Charlie Hebdo attacks. Alas! His message didn't reach the French brothers soon enough. Here are some excerpts from his speech

Freedom of Expression is not and cannot be a grey area. Putting it in a grey area harms not the powerful but the very weak. Answer to a satire is another satire, answer to a book is another book - not guns, machetes or bombs. Charlie Hebdo is a grim reminder - we must all defend our freedom of expression actively and not leave it to just the few among us to carry the weight for all of us lest we want them to keep getting buried under that weight.

Religious Conversions - The Capitalist Way

A religious conversion, for all the hullabaloo around it, is nothing more than changing a service provider, like changing your mobile carrier. And so it is only fair that they compete just as hard for our business as these companies do. And if we are not happy with their service, we should be able to switch from one to another.

Now many religions spend billions on promoting (marketing) their religions and luring people to come to their fold. They deploy all the classical marketing tricks - word of mouth, material inducements, even going as far as promising a better after-life (something that no other service/product industry does today). With all due respect though I'd submit that the religion marketing has fallen behind the curve. What they need is a focused hiring effort of the best and brightest MBAs who can then design marketing promos.Being a proud MBA myself, I couldn't resist the urge to suggest a few ideas but I am sure there are far more and far better ones:

Creamy Caste - Feel good about yourself immediately and get the right to look down upon hundreds of millions of people simply by joining us right at the top of our vicious caste system.

Sainthood Surprise - Get sainthood in five years flat (fast track available for enough dough). May require a trip and short stay in some third world country, and some imbeciles who can attest to the magical powers you obviously possess, like healing cancer with your mere touch.

V for Virgins - 72 of them when you join us and then kill some infidels. Especially targeted towards young college grads having a tough time getting a date. Special promo season could be just after Valentines Day.

Bring Your Own God - Not happy with your current God. Well, join us to choose a God of your own from the existing 330 million we have. You can even create your own. More the merrier - we are good in numbers.

One is not enough - Not happy with just one wife? We understand your medieval tendencies and especially designed our religion for you where you can come and enjoy as many wives as you want. Fine print - you may have to leave your country and relocate. We are working tirelessly to make polygamy a universal rule and are currently fighting our opponents around the world.

Pedophile's paradise - We understand your love for children and have special jobs designed just for you. You can brainwash the parents, have their children and be respected all at the same time. Deal?

An open market for religions would also bring out some much needed competitive intelligence. Religions can hire investigative journalists who can shine light on what promises are actually being fulfilled and what are simply hogwash. Imagine a headline stating "9/11 attackers denied their virgins - God ruled that the killings were haraam" or "A convert promised moksha re-born with village buffoons as parents, God ruled he must study Science in this life to improve his chances". Oh the possibilities are limitless, just like our universe.

Like I have said before, I am all for conversions. In fact, just like I can chose either Pepsi or Coke or both depending on my mood, I should be able to change and chose my religion based on what's best suited for the moment - need to eat beef for lunch, become a Muslim; want that bacon for breakfast, embrace Christianity. As a deeply religious man who never does things proscribed by his religion of the moment, my moksha, with a place in all heavens and with all their accouterments seems certain. The worst that can happen is I might be asked to leave one heaven for the next from time to time - seems like a good deal, it will keep away the boredom. Wanna join my Just in Time Religion?

Are Atheists smarter than people believing in God

Innumerable debates have been organized between champions of atheists and people believing in God. Watching them, one almost feels sorry for the people representing God because invariably the organizers bring some religious leader to represent people believing in God.

Is religion the only way to represent God?

Atheists have a field day making fun of religion and some of the ideas/stories that form their foundations. Rightfully so. The foundations are so shaky and ridiculous - virgin birth, denial of evolution, sexist and violent books - that they are simply indefensible in any debate.

The real debate, which I am yet to come across, should be between Atheists and Agnostics. It may also be a difficult one since they would agree on so many things except on one question - is their a higher power guiding this universe?

The scientific quest for the origin of universe continues. It is simply awe inspiring to hear people like Lawrence Krauss talk about what we know about the origins of universe, could universe have started from NOTHING, what happened during the Big Bang etc. The question that no one has answered yet is what was their before the Big Bang, or what was beyond the boundary of the object that exploded (Big Bang), where is universe expanding to. There is so much that is unknown today. Atheists like Richard Dawkins have admitted repeatedly that they dont have the answers and that they are working on them. It is here where Agnostics can state that while even they don't have the answers, a belief in a higher power devoid of any religious baggage is perfectly rational. God in this case would be a hypothesis which cannot be proved or disproved. Your final position/inference will be exactly the same as your initial hypothesis.

Now a belief in Agnosticism, one can argue, can lead down a slippery slope. If you believe in a higher power, what does it do, how does that power affect your lives, why was this universe "created", what's the purpose etc. There are obviously no answers yet but perhaps more importantly, there is no good reason to believe that the higher power is even bothered with our Milky Way, much less about our solar system, or about Earth or about humans as a species (of the millions that exist). It is simply conceited to think ourselves as the center of anyone's attention, higher power or not.

I am very open to hearing arguments that disprove the existence of a higher power beyond a reasonable doubt. Until them, I must say it is a coin toss.