Change

It was just one of those days and one of those moments when you are overwhelmed with thought - with that passion surging you to do something, move forward, make a difference etc etc. And there you are, thinking of the days who have spent in the classroom, on the streets, on modes of transport, in strange rooms and lonely places, just trying to figure out what you are meant to do. And you hit one spot after the other, jumping from one solution to another, yet there's a blank. Why?
I watched a movie last night - Swordfish. It's pretty much run of the mill, one of those crazy Hollywood action flicks (you see the money where it actually is!) - bad guy wants money, figures an ingenious way to lay his hands on it, does what it takes to get what he wants and end of story. The film is interspersed with cool bits - magic tricks, concepts like misdirection etc etc. But what got my attention was the concept of change that was the backbone of the film. A self-confessed maniacal patriot who wants to make America so lethal, so deadly and so horrifyingly violent in its dealings with 'terrorist nations' that no one would dare to attack the mightiest nation in the world. Frustrated with the 'lacklustre' apporach of the government, the central character decides to take matters in his own hands - in fact, he manages to amass enough wealth to be able to buy quite a few nuclear weapons, that too at a discount! Change is all he wants.
Are we able to identify with this idea of change? Is this the kind of change that you want? I may touch raw nerves here, but is for example, 'destroying' Pakistan, the kind of change we're looking for? Is a mass genocide of the populace of this 'Islamic nation' the change we want? Will it put an end to the incessant spate of terrorist attacks that the world is subject to? Many people think so.
But again, many people don't. Change for example, is voting for the first time. It possibly wont make a difference - but its a change all the same. Change may be switching off lights and fans when there's no one in a room, or turning off the ignition when your stuck at a red light. Small, miniscule ways of invoking change, but something all the same.
The point is, the first step towards change is to understand change and in what ways it can come about. There are so many myths surrounding the idea of change - it's sad that it has been stereotyped as well. So people who are rich cannot induce change, and those who are poor cannot either - the rich are way too self involved while the poor are the victims, so what can they do? More stereotypes affect the ability to bring about change. Eventually, only those who are in power are entrusted to make a difference. Why?
Why can't victims bring about change? When the tsunami hit South Asia, a few affected communities in a South East Asian country fought off big TNCs that wanted to build 5-star hotels over their villages (a concept better known as disaster capitalism). That was change. If I decide never to use abusive language that demeans women and reinforces the gender hierarchy (behen**** or ma****), that is change. If I decide never to wear leather, that is change.
At the end of the day, everyone can bring about change. I'm attempting to make a difference by posting on this blog. You can live a comfortable life, and yet affect change. It's all a matter of perspective. Change starts with you.

Hi people,

seems like nobody is contributing. Ok. No problem. I have been superbusy lately. Finishing up college work and working up on my transition to a working life. So yeah. But i join work tomorrow finally. Will start covering the MP Lok Sabha polls from Tuesday. So will start writing stuff on that. Lets see if something alternative comes out of it. And well... the blog should be more regularly updated i guess. but yeah. All remains contingent on whether i can access the internet.

Meanwhile i request all of you to please write something. It is a collective blog.

Thanks

Kp chillin

Mahim

Can i have some marijuana with my coffee please?

why drink and drive when you can smoke and fly. Everyone ! Get on board the Gaanja bus...!!

I watched PINAPPLE EXPRESS recently. It is what you would call the quientessential stoner movie. But what i realized was that it was more than that. It is in some ways a post-feminist, almost a masculinist film, if i can use that word. The bonding shown between the three friends is more than just friednship. The climax, or in fact the entire last part, Dale (Seth Rogen) does not even care about his girlfriend. She is not on his agenda. For life, it seems. In friendship, he forgets about the need for a woman. In the last scene, he is shown happy along with his two friends, making promises for life. 

Secondly, it got me thinking about society's reaction to marijuana/weed/pot/gaanja/skunk....or whatever you want to call it. Dale says, in one of his many conversations with a radio showhost, "I don't see the need for criminalising gaanja. It makes everything better. It makes music sound better, it makes food taste better, it makes shitty movies better. And the truth is, everybody is smoking it. So why not decriminalise it." 

Technically it makes sense. Why not? So what explains society's recalcitrance towards it? The only reason that i can think of relates to the political economy of this whole issue. Society wants its members to be productive, in the strict economic sense. It survives on that. Weed, as anybody who smokes it knows, slows you down. It makes you calm. You are tranquilized. Too stoned to work. Too happy to wory about anything. Too dead to remain involved in life. To society: UNPRODUCTIVE. So a substance that can make you unproductive, obviously does not find favour with the custodians of the society. 

Then, weed also makes you indifferent to authority. Now you do not intentionally defy authority, but you merely stop caring about it. And by that virtue, makes you defy it anyway. And so, working with the state police, powered by juridical authority, society gets it banned. Indian societies "traditionally" never had a problem with intoxicants. Ganja, hashish, alcohol, bhaang and all kinds of other psychotropic substances available in nature were also available to everybody who wanted them. 

But even here, the society devises what Max Gluckman called "ritualized rebellion." So bhaang is legitimised on special occassions like Mahashivaratri and Holi. And nobody confronts any sanctions that otherwise would be imposed in response to an intake of similar substances on any other occassion. But with modernity redefining the contours of our society, those who mattered decided to make gaanja into a strong social taboo. 

I say, why ban weed. In Amsterdam and a lot of Eastern European countries, weed is available over the counter. Its on the menu in cafes. You can order it in coffee shops, along with your coffee. That does not mean everybody there is stoned perpetually. People choose to do it, smoke. And thse who don't, don't. 

So why even decriminalise it? Just make it legal. But no. That would probably kill the whole idea behind it. It would defeat the whole resistance inspiring, subaltern spirit of gaanja advocated by a varicolored spectrum of "anti-socials": from aghori sadhus to reggae singers. 

in wonder??

If the whole world ends, will God still exist???