Alexander The Gained

Once upon a time, there lived a remarkably determined king named Alex. As a child, he had grown up believing that the world was flat and that the last enormous empire located at the edge of the earth was this fertile land with a unique culture. Its rulers were powerful, and its citizens were prosperous.

 

While the rulers there had made no such claims, Alex was told that only the one who ruled there could claim the world as his. 

Thus, as a young prince, Alex had set his eye on the throne there. 

As soon as he inherited the kingdom from his father at age 20, he set about riding his favourite horse with his vast army marching toward the East. They had a singular aim of conquering this legendary land. 

It would help him in his quest to claim the world as his own.

Over the next ten years, the adolescent king fought innumerable chieftains and kings along the journey and defeated them all. These were all battles, but no great war was worth mentioning. 

He defeated them all and kept advancing until he finally reached India. 

He instantly met his match in Porus, whom he attacked with all his might. 

However, Alex was in for a big surprise.

His cavalry horses were terrified when they encountered colossal elephants. He and his entourage marveled at the exquisite beauty of the intricate architecture adorning magnificent structures. The scholars and astronomers who accompanied him were humbled by the vast knowledge available to the Brahmins. They learned here that the world was not flat, as they had believed, but spherical. 

This revelation was a turning point in their understanding of the world. 

Alex now wondered if his victory would lead him to the world's edge. 

Alex could not defeat Porus even in asymmetrical warfare. 

That is so because Porus fought fiercely, even when attacked by Alex unannounced. Finally, with the help of Porus's jealous cousin, Alex defeats him, and Porus is captured alive. 

Alex felt like he was on top of the world. He felt like he was the master of the world! 

Alex wanted to make an example out of Porus, the defeated emperor of the most famous, influential, & prosperous empire, in front of his generals. As per the prevalent practice in the West, Porus was to be killed in full public view.

To his utter surprise, when Porus was brought into his presence, he appeared calm and composed despite being defeated, captured & shackled. Far from begging for his life, like the many defeated leaders he had captured in the past, Porus looked anything but scared.

"How should I treat you?" Alex asked his prisoner.

Porus replied defiantly, "As a king would treat another."

Alex was not prepared for such a reply. This man sounded different. He did not know how to react to the fearless Porus.

When he regained his composure, he exclaimed angrily, “I defeated you!"

Porus exclaimed, "Defeated? You did not even send your envoy to announce your wish to engage in a battle.” 

Alex’s expression revealed that he didn't understand what Porus meant. 

Hence, Porus explained, "In this part of the world, we avoid war at all costs. You are expected to send a message explaining exactly what you want and the reasons behind the demand. Perhaps I may have given it to you without a fight. Maybe we could have agreed upon a compromise. War may be considered inevitable only after exhausting all peaceful options. Even then, both parties should agree to a date and place to battle. This venue is generally barren land outside the city limits to minimize loss of public property. Finally, a code of conduct is agreed upon before engaging in battle.

Alex hailed from a region where they believed everything was fair in love and war. 

He was puzzled by what Porus had just explained. Dumbstruck, he questioned in bewilderment, "Who decided these war guidelines?" 

Porus smiled and replied, "The wise Brahmins, who act as advisors to kings." 

Alex frowned, "And what gives them the authority to advise kings? My men tell me that these Brahmins do not even belong to the royal class." 

Porus proceeded, "Brahmins are our teachers. They are also students of all natures, including human nature. Over time, they have gathered huge insights into human beliefs and the resultant behaviour. They have analysed human behaviour patterns for centuries. They have provided meaningful codes of conduct for all key events, like birth, marriage, and death, as well as for housewarmings, the inauguration of a new business, and during wars. After deep contemplation, they have laid down guidelines for preserving and sustaining society and the larger humanity. This makes them qualified to guide the mightiest of kings on how to wield their power."

"How?" asked a very interested Alex, sliding to the edge of his seat.

"In our society, the status of the wise Brahmins is higher than that of royalty. The mightiest emperors bow down to the Dharma Guru who regularly reminds the royals of their Dharma – the principled duty," said Porus. 

Alex asked curiously, "… and what is that principled duty?"

Porus continued, "The kings must use their resources to establish a welfare state and serve their subjects so that prosperity reigns supreme. That should be the sole objective of anyone in authority. Every king strives to achieve peace. The best creativity occurs only during peaceful times, and society thrives.” 

Alex liked what he heard and implored Porus to continue.

Porus warned, “If this is not followed, human conflict becomes inevitable. The service to people keeps rulers away from an overzealous expansionist mindset. The army ensures peace lasts and merely serves as a defence mechanism."  

After hearing this sound wisdom, Alex became deeply introspective.

 

All his life, he had been a proponent of unbridled expansion. That had led to violence. He had begun to feel a bit uneasy about his life choices. In fact, he felt remorseful. Behind all the outward bravado was a tired man. His army, too, was on the verge of mutiny. Just a few weeks back, he had lost his favourite horse, which had been his companion since childhood. 

Despite winning against Porus, Alex felt no real joy. On the contrary, To Alex, Porus looked like he was at ease. 

Alex was left facing the real question for which he had no answer—since the earth was round, what if conquering this land did not make him the ruler of the world? 

He ordered Porus to be unshackled. 

Alex queried, "You had said there is a code of conduct for wars, right? Can you please elaborate on that?"

 

Porus sat beside him and continued, "If conflict becomes inevitable, the code of conduct is to minimize death & destruction. Only the royal class, comprising the king and the army men, fought on the battlefield. The other three classes of the society, i.e., the teachers & scholars, the traders & business folks, and the workers & city up-keepers, do not participate. The society continues to run as it is, unaffected by the war which takes place outside the city limits."

Far from making a spectacle out of Porus, Alex found himself in the company of a wise king beyond words. After hearing Porus, he became aware of his wrong outlook. Amidst a supposed celebration of the grandest of all victories, Alex felt his heart sinking. He felt vulnerable. Far from appearing like a mighty and victorious king, he now wore an expression of a child being reprimanded. 

He sat there absorbing the lesson of his life from a noble teacher.

Strangely, he had no hesitation to do this in the presence of his men. On their part, Alex's top generals were equally engrossed in the unprecedented scene unfolding in front of them.

Porus spoke sagely, "The victorious king deeply respects the defeated king because he, too, was simply doing his job. In fact, in our society, even the dead soldiers of the enemy are given an honourable funeral. The defeated king then becomes the minister of the victorious king and pays a small royalty from his tax collection to the victorious king. In this manner, civil life goes on smoothly despite any war."

Porus admonished, "If we do not abide by these regulations, there would be constant wars, and victory & defeat would lose all meaning. The world would become a dark and gloomy place."

Alex, who had been on a war path from the moment he had ascended the throne and had only seen death and destruction, could now understand the futility of bloodshed. His eyes were moist with tears of repentance. He begged Porus for more.

Porus cited, "The king's primary duty is to use his power towards establishing welfare in the state. His job is to keep his subjects safe and secure. The king’s pride lies in the happiness of his subjects. He does not believe in ruling them but yearns to serve them. This can happen only when there is stability. Kings, too, cannot function ably in a state of perpetual fear. He is unable to act constructively if he is constantly engaged in fighting. What good is a maimed populace, a fractured society, or a destroyed city to the victorious king? What, then, is the difference between victory & defeat?"

Alex began to see more light as he sat there pensively. As if Porus read his mind, he put his hand across Alex's shoulder and implored, "What have you built? How have you served your people? As I see it, you have never really sat on a throne and used its power to establish peace. All your life, you have only sat on horseback. Aren’t you tired of it? Even the grass you trampled upon on the way may have grown back. You haven't built any tangible legacy. You have not created anything but destroyed everything in your path."

Alex realized in vain that he had travelled so far, only to learn that he had inadvertently wasted himself away. His heart sank, and he was gripped with fear. He found himself in a state of despondency. He began trembling in realization. He bowed his head, begged Porus for forgiveness, and thanked him for showing him the way.

Porus pulled him up, smiled, and said, "Past is dead. You cannot change that, but you can certainly work on your future. Please don't live in guilt, as it only saps energy. Start afresh. Rise again. Go back. Build a legacy for your people and claim the future."

Alex was full of gratitude. He promised Porus that he would follow his dharma as a just king and dedicate his life to his subjects, his principled duty. Alex had gained a lifetime's worth of wisdom in his conversation with Porus. 

Porus accompanied him to the border of his kingdom to bid him farewell.

While bidding farewell, they hugged each other for the last time. This was when Porus whispered in his ear, "Unprepared as I was when you attacked me without warning, you still admired my tough resistance. I am amongst the smallest of kings here. I am not the emperor of Bharat. I am not located at the edge of the world. My kingdom lies in an insignificant corner of another massive empire. Compared to them, I am merely like a sentry guarding the fort gate that houses a huge army. They are several times bigger than me."

As they were about to part, Alex said bye. Porus exclaimed, "My friend, I hope to see you again!” Once a relationship is established, we do not say bye. In fact, in our language, there is no word for it."

As fate would have it, Alex passed away during his return journey. 

In his last thoughts, far from feeling like a great conqueror of lands, he was nonetheless grateful to have conquered his own mind. He understood the concept of Karma and felt blessed to have set foot on this sacred land, which had helped him evolve into a better person. 

Unfortunately, the wisdom he had gained from this part of the world was lost without being delivered to the West, from where he came.

When his people back home found out he was returning without conquering the vast empire at the world's edge, they still decided to posthumously confer the title of Alexander the Great for his daring attempt. They believed he had to be hailed as the greatest hero from which future generations could draw inspiration. 

Alexander ruled only for 12 years and died young at the age of 32. 

Several places were named after him. Groups dispute whether they have an inheritance to his legacy. Impressive structures and artifacts built before and after his reign have stood the test of time. 

However, there is absolutely nothing worth mentioning that he built!

Muslims of India are no Blacks of America

Race is indeed an issue in American.

Those Liberals that have begun comparing Black-White race relations problems of America with Hindu-Muslim issues in India, need a severe reality check. 

Sure, every society has some or the other fault lines but each are unique. 

The Blacks were brought in as slaves & families were separated. Further they were officially segregated in the American society till the 1960s & unofficially discriminated beyond.

Nothing like that has ever happened to the Indian Muslims.

And yet the Muslims become the quotes for the Liberals who demand an equitable society in India. 

The Muslims didn't enter India as slaves. They came in as invaders with a religious zest, converting people along the way & in India. They have in fact ruled large parts of India for over 500 years. 

At the time, atrocities if any, have been on the non-Muslims in terms of forced conversions by the Muslims, accompanied by the destruction of Hindu places of worship. 

They demanded a seperate & independent Republic of Pakistan & unfortunately post-partition, the Indian Muslim leaders still took to playing the victim card to fulfill their political agenda.  

And that continues today, with the English speaking & Western influenced Liberals, all who are marinated in some immature morality, becoming their mouthpiece. 

What they fail to acknowledge is that some Muslim parents even fail to teach their children - that there is solace in societal achievements and not in being a claimant of perpetual victim-hood by it. 

Thus the Muslims remain behind in every economic aspect with their narrative being: What has the country done for me lately?

So while the Black problem needs to be undone by the designer of same i.e. the Whites, the Muslim issue must be resolved by Muslim themselves. 

Building a positive brand is a great starting point; being identity centric & giving endless explanations for their backwardness is definitely no remedy. 

As strength recognizes strength, the politically inclined Muslim leaders need to resonate with and be inspired by the likes of say the Khan trio Bollywood superstars or A R Rehman the master music composer or Bismillah Khan the instrumental music ustad or Sania Mirza the tennis ace or Azharuddin the cricket captain or IH Latif the ex-air force chief or Ahmedi the ex-justice at Supreme Court or Syed Akbaruddin India's permanent UN representative or Abdul Kalam the revered former president of India - to just name a few of the Muslims, that have negotiated with their personal space to reach great heights & become entire India's favorite. 

They need to be cited regularly for the youth to emulate. 

Post partition, the overwhelmingly Hindu dominated Constituent Assembly unilaterally rejected an idea of India that is exclusively of, for & by the Hindus in response to the formation of a theocratic Islamic Pakistan. 

It may be noted that cultural secularism, as opposed to just a constitutional one, is in the Hindu psyche and so the earliest of mosque in the world was indeed built by the Hindu king.

That large hearted-ness of the Hindus combined with the contribution of these iconic Muslim personalities need to be constantly called out by Muslim parents to impress upon their youth, so they remain inspired by the accommodative character of India,  be appreciative of their Hindu countrymen & believe in their own capabilities. 

It should be in their active cognition that this perhaps makes India the most unique country in the world where a minority community has not only been accommodated,  but has been given a space & so has achieved so much & in so many spheres.

It is time for Muslims to destroy their baseless & imagined anxieties and instead make all attempts to assimilate rather than ghettoize themselves. 

It is also time for the ordinary hard working Muslims of India to reject their supposed spokespersons, irrespective of the sect & instead to express assertiveness in the reverse direction - that they are collectively around 15% of the population, more than 150 million in absolute numbers and have been sons of soil for more than 1,000 years!

Further, that they are very keen to look for opportunities to contribute & volunteer in building a modern India and don't need any minority rights whatsoever. 

Finally, that they're capable of taking care of selves and on the contrary providing positive guidance, including alms to the underprivileged - not just to the deserving of their own community members but also to whoever else is worthy of it. 

That alone can be a true Muslim pride & not just being the data points for the limousine Liberals to use or quote, with whom they have nothing in common whatsoever.

No tail should ever wag the dog

Let's be clear, stupidity is secular. 

It waz, is & will always be the case, that a few will be deviant in every group, tribe or community.

At the earliest instance, the job of the many from the group or community then, is to condemn those few who have gone rogue. 

That as much as an instant reflex due to the deep sense of both anguish & embarrassment and also a mature thoughtful response.

And at that delicate moment, those from outside the community trying to give justification on why some apples have become rotten, achieves opposite of the intent especially when there's a risk of a negative reputation for the entire community reaching global proportion. 

A clue can be taken on how the Sikhs did not allow the Khalistani brand which had reached as far as UK & Canada, to stick on the community.

One can also learn from them, on how they fought the mistaken-for-Taliban identity in foreign lands. 

Barring the fringe, most were always aligned to the mainstream, but the few had the potential to damage the reputation of the entire Sikh community.

But the wise Sikhs themselves, through the clarion call of their elders & religious leaders, became consciously aggressive in positive posturing everywhere in the world. They didn't remain mute spectators to the forming narrative but took it head on. They set themselves up as powerful positive examples for others to emulate. 

A 2020 PEW Research survey showed that 95% of Sikhs are proud Indians. 

Had the elders not done their jobs, those few deviants would have got encouragement to march on & set the tone for the many to be influenced by the negative propaganda, especially amongst the gen-next,  and that would have given a bad name to the entire Sikh community. 

Today the Sikhs are instantly stereotyped as - those folks who are at the forefront of national security & those who don't ever beg, but on the contrary selflessly serve wherever they go. 

The confirming deeds then cements the stereotype into a positive reputation & with consistency, it further ripens to becoming the brand. 

No wonder the turbaned Sardar today is a proud & solid global brand !

Democracy ..... really?

Thank God there's no democracy in running homes, schools, offices, courts, or religious cults, nor is there total freedom of speech there.

But in running the country, India has more democracy than it can handle. The nation is infested with many parties and independents staking a claim to rule the people. Unfortunately, they are willing to sacrifice the country's well-being for their own self-interest. 

That democracy is good and all dictators are evil has become the default starting point of all popular discussions. Frankly, it is the Goebbels’ law that makes us feel that way. In reality, it’s the other way around. The law states that a big lie, if presented as an idea and if repeated long enough, most people will eventually believe it.

Evil dictators are far and few but are regularly quoted, making them the favorite strawman’s argument. And let us not forget that Hitler, who was evil and cruel, was a product of democracy.

Ironically, Joseph Goebbels, was a Nazi propagandist!

Sure, in theory, democracy can be the least evil system. But a visionary dictator is far better than the best democracy, proven so empirically.

Why can’t the starting point be: Given that the elite intellectuals are a minuscule minority, whenever the majority wins, mediocrity also wins?

Democracy is not recommended in any place where the population is poorly engaged in regular sociopolitical conversations, as democracy requires real awareness and longterm thinking among the people. That doesn't exist even in developed countries. There is low awareness of what is good in the long term, and thus selection of the leader, too, is poor.

Voting rights are akin to giving lollipop-sucking kids the power to choose their own babysitter. Such caretakers dole out populist candies each time the kids demand attention so that they are left alone. Then, they begin to take care of themselves and not the children. 

Over time, democracy becomes an excuse for rulers and the ruled to escape accountability. 

Democracy with a strong, vigilant opposition leads to internal checks & balances, is indeed a brilliant hypothesis. In a system where, in the name of vigilant opposition, it is observed that the obstructionists with vested interests gain. To overcome that, one must do hyper-marketing to stay in power. That demands mega funding activity repeatedly. The ruling parties have no choice but to take bribes (cash or kind) from some and return favors to few, i.e., seek "donations" and produce policies to benefit the supporters, respectively. 

The other issue is that a quid pro quo model between the business and the ruling class develops over time. Often, that leads to companies funding all key political parties across the spectrum, and so an informal and indirect soft cartel between the significant ruling parties takes shape. They sure do compete but tacitly cooperate in selective areas, much to their personal gains and the detriment of the public.

One could not say a word against the monarchy. Now that we have elected leaders, we sure can criticize them; should we? Venting against the ruling dispensation has become a national pastime, with each group looking at them through their own lens. It is so absurd that even with limited knowledge, the groups are distracted and fighting each other like the proverbial blind men describing the elephant.  

The more the press, the mainstream or social media warriors scream negatively against their own elected government without offering viable, workable solutions, the more marketing expenditures the ruling class needs to create a self-serving counter narrative and assert its relevance.  

We try to apply our hearts anchored in idealism and minds aligned in morality to make a case for democracy from the comforts of our living rooms, even when that system fails to deliver its fundamental objective, namely, a welfare state.  

At best, democracy may be implemented only once a nation's GDP per capita crosses USD 8,000. No country in the world has had a smooth transition of power below that threshold number! Maslow's theory of needs applies here, too.

Those who give the example of America, well, democracy there evolved into a mature democracy only after 150 years, which is far from perfect. In fact, it is stretched at the seems. And yet, the Western world kept pushing their erstwhile colonies to go for democracy, using their influence and financial power from the loot to extend coloniality.

Sadly, India offered political freedom immediately after independence in the form of an adult franchise even when most of the population did not have financial freedom. Not known to most, all Indian women voted in all elections before all American women did! India continued to remain dependent on the Western world. The first Indian PM, Nehru’s first speech, delivered in the language of India’s erstwhile oppressor, even when 96% of the people did not speak English then, is symbolic of just that.

The consequence is that even after 75 years, India, like all countries that have had premature delivery of democracy, remains poor & backward on many parameters. The West thrives, not necessarily because of democracy, but by exploiting the global trade and commerce mechanisms.

Is there still hope? 

 Hopefully, India will soon have a single-party democracy. One can hope that, in the next general election, the BJP, a nationalist party, emerges as the single largest party with a pan-India presence and disproportionately large control of both houses of the parliament. That indeed would be a blessing.

India has great potential and a possible domestic market waiting to be unleashed. All that will likely produce close to double-digit growth for years, as it did in Singapore, Malaysia, or Indonesia when single parties ruled for almost two to three decades at a stretch. China, sans democracy, has, for the most part, successfully eliminated abject poverty at a breakneck speed and, for all practical purposes, become a developed nation. Some of the Middle Eastern kingdoms are worthy of envy, where you can’t bad mouth the royalty, but nobody is hand-to-mouth.

 A strong multiparty democracy produces the opposite of the intent & 'democratic development' remains India's proprietary oxymoron. 

 Some would argue that a single-party democracy such as that of a city-state like Singapore cannot be compared with India, and instead, a strong democracy would ensure checks and balances.

The past has taught us enough that what we have doesn't work.

Now it's time to implement our learning & move away from the status quo.

On the contrary, City states can do with a bit of inefficient distribution, be it - messaging out policies or delivering goods & services.

Think, how much harm can it do?

 The government of Singapore or Dubai has a ‘line of sight’ across the city, and corrective measures can be taken quickly. One could physically drive across the city if it came down to that!

 Even after decades, India is really lagging in several aspects and has a lot to do in terms of catching up—so it needs bullet-train speed in implementing projects and not obstructionist democracy.

 For a vast subcontinent like India, there is all the more reason to have fewer hurdles or distractions from all corners in the form of mini mutinies posed by selfish regional parties. The perpetual dispute between the states and the center must ebb.

We must end politics driven by opportunism and coalitions of convenience and free the administration from the clutches of parties that lack any ideology except a self-serving one.

 We need compelling central leadership, effective control, and distribution under the oversight of empowered and enrolled CMs, with minimal implementation lags.

 The least we can do is weaken democracy, if we are not comfortable in eliminating it.

The press may still be free but should remain subservient to the cause of India’s integrity. The independence of the Election Commission and Supreme Court is possible. Under our current demo-crazy, they are not. The integrity of India should be their underlying fundamental responsibility of all the entities.

The single party must still seek the people's confidence once every five years. Failing that, any rejuvenated smaller party can rise to the occasion and pose as a challenger to the incumbent.

This alone can resurrect the India of our dreams.