Iraq...

Given an enemy whose understanding of human rights is non-existent, the American administration only has to blame their moral absolutism for the fact that the world would rather focus on their human rights record, instead of their enemy's. The problem with moral absolutism is that it sets too high a standard: no American do any wrong, ever! And with any large population (the US army in Iraq, for example) you just can't sustain that. David Brook's article in NYT/IHT makes similar points. Praising Truman and Roosevelt's "rugged idealism", he says:

"They took a tragically ironic view of their situation. They understood that America can't defeat ruthless enemies without wielding power. But America can't wield power without sometimes being power without sometimes being corrupted by it. Therefore, America can't do good without losing its innocence."

In the case of Iraq, if America had gotten more people on their side (assuming the others agreed), they wouldn't have to fall in this trap where the moralistic arguments that justify the war, domestically and internationally, limit its ability to *fight* that war. If America had more allies, the need for an overarching moral justification would've been lessened. Moreover, in the interest of a final victory, the numerous allies would've looked away from such sporadic Abu Ghraibs. It does sound cynical, but thats the way it is. Moral relativism is what we all indulge in, ultimately.

[/news] permanent link

Are you laughing with me or at me ?

So the Fandango ad had a desi couple talking in an Indian accent, complete with the Bollywood song, dance, and subtitled-lyrics routine. Da dude talks about the tinge of embarrassment (and, often, indignation) that happens when you see something like this. This is true not just for Indians- I guess most communities/groups have thin skins. Even in America, only black comics are allowed to make jokes about blacks, only jewish comics can make fun of jews and only ads with an all-female cast can show stupid/bumbling females. It is probably an effect of the PC times we live in. This is not necessarily wrong- if you have to choose between being boring or being offensive, being boring is definitely the way to go.

Having said that, I think that Indians are often too insecure and sensitive about others (read: Westerners) commenting on India's culture/society. Bollywood is a particularly sore issue, followed closely by the rat-eaters-and-elephants perception.

I have become less sensitive to TV programs parodying Bollywood routines- I think more and more people are starting to appreciate it as just another style of movie-making, just like those innumerable westerns with their in'juns and gun-fights. I still do cringe, though, when I see a desi movie with a dance sequence shot in an European city with all the passerby gawking at this garishly dressed couple doing weird gyrations.

The second perception- of rat-eaters and elephants- is far more vexing. That has changed somewhat in the past few years but a lot of the perception remains. My room-mate at Stanford told me about this video about India that they were shown in their junior high-school's world history class (or something like that). The video really did have snake-charmers and rat-eaters! And this wasn't too far back- probably the early 90s. Such stereotypical depictions of India should be vigorously fought. For example, had this piece not come from the Onion, it'd have been outrageous. But then again, thats why its The Onion.

[/rants-and-raves] permanent link

IIT Kanpur tops survey of Indian Engineering colleges

Personally, I think IIT Kanpur and IIT Bombay produce the most well-rounded people- haven't had the chance to hang out with too many IIT Delhi guys. Academically, I've found amazingly smart people from each IIT (not counting some new "IITs") so that one is hard to judge.

I wish India Today (and others) would recognize that IITs really are the best colleges in India- not just the best *engineering/professional* colleges. After all, few colleges require everbody to take 3 courses in pure sciences, 3 courses in math, 1 course in programming and atleast 4 courses in humanities (many people take more). And the rest of curriculum has enough electives for you to explore what you want. Thus I got a chance to fiddle with a few physics courses before I was convinced that string-theory really did make my head hurt.

On a related note, IITK's director Prof Dhande is visiting Boston- general alumni relations and faculty hiring trip, it seems. He taught us two courses- engineering drawing (TA101- the scourge of half the student-body) and computer graphics. In TA101, there was this moment when a particularly painful student, in a lecture-room filled with 150-odd students, was belaboring a minor point. Prof Dhande's reply was classic: "yeah, you are right but that doesn't mean I am going to marry off my daughter to you"

[/misc] permanent link