Book Review- 'Irrationally Passionate' by Jason Kothari

Frankly speaking I have read many autobiographies and biographies. I learned a thing or two from those biographies although I always believed that achievers have some extraordinary qualities as well as extraordinary situations to excel. I have stopped reading many biographies midway with a sense that those are not my cup of tea.

‘Irrationally Passionate-My turn around from rebel to entrepreneur’ by Jason Kothari is also an autobiography for me (although selective incidents of his life in a particular context is written) and interestingly kept me engaged till the last. Every incident was written there connected to me on my life story. There might be a difference in the script but everyone has faced such situations in their life. When Jason is analyzing his story or some incidents, it naturally compelled me to analyze my life stories in that context. I have read many stories/fictions/thrillers but no book engaged me the way ‘Irrationally Passionate’ did. I started reading late due to many compelling reasons, but once started, I completed it within no time. 241 pages, eleven chapters, all in just two days.

The titles are also the crux of that particular chapter. And you know, if you recall your life story you will find those titles somewhere fits also. Maybe we have never analyzed the way Jason Kothari did. Many of us weren’t true to our passion, never considered a mistake as learning. In many phases of life, we never draw a borderline between fantasy and reality and sometimes we let the situation prevail upon us.

I am not an entrepreneur. But then everything was written by Jason Kothari connected me. You know why? Because we are entrepreneurs in our life. It doesn’t matter what’s your profession, but entrepreneurship in the business of life always makes you successful.

A simple yet lucid way of presenting the events makes the book very interesting and engaging. It gives satisfaction that how simple incidents motivate you to for some risks and how too much excitement ends with a failure.

I am always a poor evaluator (in giving star-rating) but then I would give this book five out of five as I got immense pleasure in reading it. I would ask everyone not only to read this book but also to connect with your life story. You may not have bargained for a chess board but then there would be something you have bargained.

This book is not about only tips on how you can succeed. It’s also a thriller along with humor and yes some actions too. Should it be a movie also? What you say? First, read then answer.

I wish all the success for Jason Kothari and his incredible life experiments.

Rating- 5/5

Nirbhaya Convict hanging is alright but what about others?

Once more the black warrant against Nirbhaya convicts stayed because, the mercy petition of one of the convicts named Pawan is pending. The mercy petition filed today post SC quashing a curative petition. As per Jail manual, execution of capital punishment can’t be done in case there’s a mercy petition pending. Further if there’s several people convicted for a same crime then they all ought to be hanged at once and not separately. Thus, Pawan’s filing mercy petition saved some days for all four convicts.

It’s no doubt that the advocate of the convicts took advantage of present law system to buy some more time for the victims from the noose. People, media and many other are angry on this tactic of presenting one after another option to delay the execution of the convicts . But the law says that the convicts with capital punishment have the right to use all legal options available to them. You may say, the system is bad, but then if that’s the law, then you must give that benefit to the convicts and their legal counselor.

Many say that after President rejects Pawan’s plea then there will be final death warrant and convicts won’t have any other option. But I won’t be surprised if the lawyer of convicts finds out another way to delay the execution. If those are as per law of the land, then I think we must have to accept it.

I can understand the pain of Nirbhaya’s mother. In a first-tract court if the case didn’t get into its logical conclusion after more than seven years, anybody especially victim and her relatives will be pained a lot. Thus, although her demand appears to be a death cry, one can realize the trauma and frustration she might be going through. Justice when delivered in reasonable time, people trust on the system, else justice delayed becomes justice denied.

But then I regularly observe the media’s hysteria on this case. Loud debates are going on in the TV studios and people blame the loopholes of the system. I understand that Nirbhaya had undergone through a brutal assault and perhaps the scale of the crime shaken the conscious of the entire society, but then I wonder why media never questioned about other convicts of death penalty? There are number of convicts with death penalty mercy petition of whom either rejected by the President or pending with President for years and even decades. The below is the statement sourced from Wikipedia.

There are many cases where President commuted death sentence into life imprisonment. There also many cases where although President rejected the mercy petition but SC commute to life imprisonment because of delay in disposing the mercy petitions. It’s also complained that many mercy petitions dealt with a political interest. Even some also complained that some executions are done purely on political reason bypassing the earlier convicts with death penalty.

Let me be frank here. Death Penalty always given in rarest of the rare crimes. Thus, whoever are on death penalty row are no less criminal than the convicts of Nirbhaya case. If there’s death penalty is the law of the land, then it should be executed without any bias. You just can’t execute some convicts selectively while ignoring or delaying other convicts of death row.

The bottom line is that India must have an unbiased Standard Operating Procedure in handling the death penalty. For example, once the lower court gave a death penalty and High Court confirmed it, then the appeal process should be a time bound one so is the deadline of applying for mercy petition. There should also be time limit for disposal of death penalty. In case President couldn’t disposed a death penalty by the deadline then it will be considered as rejection of death penalty.

Point is if there’s a death penalty, it should be done with right earnest and without any bias or selectiveness. Else abolish death penalty. What is the point is keeping a punishment which is executed selectively most of the time because of political reason?

Decimation in 2019 but landslide win in 2020-The curious story of AAP in Delhi Assembly Election 2020

AAP’s tremendous win in the 2020 Delhi Assembly election, in fact, made the opposition camp very encouraging. Even foreign media discussed this result and considered it as Narendra Modi’s defeat. Is it really Narendra Modi’s defeat? Is this a news politics that gave Kejriwal a third term (frankly it’s a second term if we ignore the 49 days government in 2013)? Is it this the beginning of the end of Narendra Modi style politics? Is it time for Arvind Kejriwal to spearhead the anti-BJP politics even in national space?

Such questions, expectations, and many future predictions are doing round in social media. As a neutral observer, we must decode first how AAP really won and what this election result gives the message. But before that, let’s briefly discuss Kejriwal’s politics since the beginning.

In 2013, Arvind Kejriwal began his political carrier forming a new political party ‘AAP’. The party was an outcome of very impressive anti-corruption agitation led by Anna Hazare. In its first experiment, it got 28 seats in the 2013 assembly election with a vote share of 29.5%. The reason for such an impressive performance was many folds. Sheila Dikshit, although the tallest leader of Delhi, was suffering from double anti-incumbency (15 years of Delhi government and 10 years of UPA government at center). She herself lost to newcomer Arvind Kejriwal while her party reduced to 8 seats with a vote share of 24.5% from its 2008 vote share of 40.3%. BJP maintained its vote share of 33%. That was the time when Narendra Modi entered the national polity. Thus, the default alternative was BJP. But Indian voters always vote differently in state government as well as central governments. That’s why, although people were very much keen on Narendra Modi’s candidature as Prime Minister, at the state level many wanted to try Arvind Kejriwal led AAP. Thus, there was a hung assembly.

After some initial hesitations, AAP formed the government taking outside support of Congress. Then there was an issue of ambition. Kejriwal and his colleagues thought that India is ready to accept Kejriwal as Prime Minister of India. Thus, they dissolve the assembly just after 49 days and went for general election 2014. Arvind Kejriwal contested against Narendra Modi at Varanasi and Kumar Viswas contested against Rahul Gandhi at Amethi. The public really taught the party a lesson that unless there’s performance, people are not going to give bigger responsibility. AAP didn’t get a single seat in Delhi or any other place except Punjab where it bagged just four seats. In Delhi, BJP swept all the seven seats with 46.40% vote share while AAP remains in the second position getting 32.90% whereas Congress languished with 15.10%. That was an indication for AAP leadership that they need to perform first else public is not going to give them an opportunity.

That’s why in 2015, Arvind Kejriwal apologized for quitting the Delhi government and promised to concentrate on Delhi state. People of Delhi realized that an immature Kejriwal perhaps became very ambitious. Thus, they have pardoned him and voted him to power with a landslide mandate of 67 seats with 54.3% vote share. BJP without a credible face (Kiran Bedi was para-dropped at the last moment) although maintained 32.3% vote share but managed to win just 3 seats. Congress drew a blank along with a reduced vote share of just 9.7%.

But then, Arvind Kejriwal led AAP government did start almost street fight with the BJP government at the center. The blame game, in fact, annoyed Delhi public. Because of such things Delhi people retained BJP in MCD election 2017 giving roughly 37% vote share. AAP remained second with 26% vote share whereas Congress regained some of its lost vote shares and increased it up to 21%.

AAP should have realized that time as to why people gave such a message. But that didn’t happen. Promised to do a different politics, Arvind Kejriwal deviated from his promise and started to make friends with all other anti-BJP parties such as TMC, RJD, JDS, DMK, SP, BSP and more. Kejriwal himself used strong words against Narendra Modi forgetting that a major chunk of his voters is also an admirer of Narendra Modi. Even just before general election 2019, AAP was desperate for an alliance with Congress which was finally not possible. Anyway, the 2019 general election gave a strong shock to Arvind Kejriwal. BJP again swept Delhi with 56.58% vote share which proved that even if an alliance of AAP-Congress was there, the result wouldn’t have been different. But the important development was that Congress got 22.46% vote share whereas AAP trailed with just 18% vote share.

That was perhaps the time of realizing the wrong strategy. From May 2019. Kejriwal changed his politics differently. It supported the dilution of article 370. It didn’t say any harsh word against Narendra Modi. In fact, it didn’t attack Narendra Modi at all. It started improving its deliverance. It didn’t stand with Shaheen Bagh openly nor oppose CAA, 2019 vociferously. It focused on its promises, and its campaign also focused on development. People of Delhi saw a remarkable change in Arvind Kejriwal’s approach. They find Congress’s situation is precarious and as usual BJP’s weak organization at Delhi and lack of a face. So, they trusted Arvind Kejriwal again because compared to any other leader of Delhi polity, Kejriwal still is much better. Then Shaheen Bagh did a polarization due to which BJP vote share increased but then AAP’s vote share too increased at the cost of Congress as Congress’s vote share reduced to less than 5%.

I don’t think the latest politics by AAP is anything new. Many in social media say that Delhi public sold their votes against freebies. But that’s not true. In India, there is a sizable people who can’t afford their day to day life struggle or can wait for long so that Indian economic improvement will bail them out. The poor section always needs a day to day tangible reliefs. Some units of free electricity, free water and a free ride to women can’t be considered as freebies. These are the necessary welfare measure by any government. Many such schemes were running by the Shivraj Singh government at MP, Raman Singh Government in Chhattisgarh, Navin Patnaik in Odisha or Jayalalithaa government in Tamil Nadu. Many other governments also provide cheap food, cycles to girls for education and such other things which are not freebies. Even Narendra Modi providing the free gas connection is another example of a welfare initiative.

The above is how AAP won the election. What this election gives the message to AAP? Well, it’s simple. The public reposed faith on him to focus on various issues of Delhi such as pollution, sanitation, communication, and such other issues. There’s some improvement in education and health but not enough is done. Thus, Kejriwal must focus on such things. Another lesson Kejriwal must learn that it can’t afford enmity with central government especially in Delhi like half state. He should learn from Navin Patnaik, KCR and Jagan Mohan of YSRCP how to get the most assistance from the central government for own state. If you fight, you will make your state suffer.

The next test for Arvind Kejriwal is in 2022 when MCD elections will happen. We all are hopeful that this time he will transform Delhi.

Amid CAA Politics, The Original Issue Is Lost

More than three weeks after Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 got the assent of President of India, people are now understood that CAA has nothing to do with Indian citizens (that includes Muslim community too). Some anti-CAA group still argue that the act is unconstitutional as it discriminates a particular religion.  On this my one-point straight answer is, if it’s unconstitutional, then wait for Supreme Court’s decision which will hear such pleas on January 22^nd 2020. If it’s unconstitutional then SC will be struck it out. Why then so much protest marches that ultimately leading to vandalism and violence?

 Kerala assembly passed a resolution against CAA act 2019. Unfortunately, citizenship is a central government subject and only Parliament has the power to enact any law on it. Thus, politics is so bitter that Kerala assembly ignored the dignity and sanctity of Parliament while violating the decorum of federalism of this democracy.

Then comes NPR. Interestingly NPR was already exercised in 2010 by UPA government. During its enforcement then UPA minister, P.Chidambaram said that NPR is pro-poor. The same thing is claimed by BJP government now whereas Congress leader Rahul Gandhi says that NPR is a tax to poor. I am yet to understand why then UPA did that exercise in 2010? Or whatever UPA had done if repeated by BJP government becomes a different matter? There should be a limit to duality.

Then NRC. PM Narendra Modi said that nothing has been drafted yet on NRC. Yes, NRC is one of the electoral promises by the BJP government. But it’s amply clear that BJP is not in favour of SC monitored the NRC method implemented in Assam. Thus, there will be some different method which will definitely be under scrutiny when it comes to the table. If it’s against Indian citizen and unconstitutional then we have Supreme Court which will strike it down. 

We have a Constitution which has necessary checks and balance to take care of any arbitrary and unconstitutional acts. When we vow for Constitution, why not trust in Constitutional Machinery such as Supreme Court?

My point is simple. In this perception game of politics, somewhere the real issue had been lost. The fact is that in our neighbouring Islamic countries, religious minorities are severely persecuted. At present everyone knows about Pakistani cricketer Danish Kaneria. Just imagine, why people from these countries are leaving their home and property and came to our country as a refugee? Have we ever realised their precarious conditions?

It’s not that the anti-CAA group not know regarding this. Mahatma Gandhi during partition said that the religious minorities from undivided India (or say Pakistan then) should be settled here in India. As per official records, former Prime minister Manmohan Singh and Former CPM chief Prakash Karat demanded to give citizenship to these religiously persecuted people (who are refugees).

Dr Udit Raj, former BJP MP of Delhi tweeted that CAA is anti-Dalit. I don’t know why he is thinking so, because he hasn’t given any reason. But then many refugees belong to the Dalit community. CAA will help them. Thus, I don’t think it has anything to do with either Dalits or Muslims or anyone who is an Indian citizen.

Mr Owaisi loudly claims that the Indian Muslims are not in India by chance rather in India by choice. No one is denying that. Yes, Indian Muslims by their choice stayed back in India on the assurance of secularism. I don’t think Indian Muslims are persecuted in India rather they have more political power (per se) because of strong vote bank.

But then let’s realise the condition of religious minorities of the neighbouring Islamic countries. Do they ever ask partition on religious line? Do they ever want the neighbouring countries to be an Islamic republic? They were part of undivided India and now a victim of partition that based on religion. It’s a political decision in 1947 for which they have suffered a lot. Many of them forcibly converted and many are massacred. Doesn’t Secular India have any responsibility towards victims of undivided Indians due to political decision of partition? 

What is secularism? As per dictionary Secularism means ‘no concern with religion’. This is a western concept. In Indian concept, the secularism means no persecution to religious minorities by the majority community. In India irrespective of religion or caste, everybody is at par citizen. In fact, there are some privileges guaranteed by the Constitution to the oppressed community of India along with minorities. How can India not sensible to religious minorities of the neighbouring Islamic Countries which were part of undivided India? The Islamic Country means the constitution of that country acknowledges Islam as the only religion. Thus religious minorities don't have Constitutional safeguards in those Theistic countries.

I wish better sense prevails on all politicians and activists. Politics is a game of perception no doubt, but then the smokescreen shouldn’t be dragged too much. The present public of India is smart and mature. They can see through the intent and design behind the game (of perception) and knows how to punish the conspirators electorally.