Drawing an analogy!
 

Ajay Kalra


It has been quite some months now since the last issue of Pediascene was published. Since then much has happened.

At the national level, we have had medals in Olympics and Oscars for Slumdog millionaire. We have proved our worth in chess, cricket, hockey and tennis. But then, we have also had the Mumbai 26/11 and Satyam. The elections are approaching along with lollipops. At the level of the IAP, we have had activities, elections and some good fighting. Enough material to write on.

The National Scenario

We have in place a democracy where not more than 50% people vote. Where people do not feel necessary to vote and thus invite the worst for themselves and others. In the process, the democracy gets hijacked by those with a strong lung power, muscle strength and capable of intimidation. What vision would one expect from a local bully who gets elected to the seat of power and then becomes a role model for us to follow. Such a scenario does not inspire anyone.
 
India, as they say, is a country of paradoxes. We have the richest people and our contribution to the amounts stashed in Swiss Banks is more than that of all other nations combined. The fleet of cars with red and blue lights, with all the display of power and money is awe inspiring. On the other hand one fourth of the world’s children suffering from hunger are in our country. We use poverty as an excuse to get for the country huge funds in the form of loans to be gulped by the few. We perhaps have the maximum PhDs in the world and the maximum illiterates also. We talk Gandhi and practice violence, degradation of human rights (remember fellow Pediatrician Binayak Sen languishing in jail for years without even being charge sheeted ?), untruth and dishonesty at every step. Every attempt is made to justify a wrong action rather than making efforts to undo a wrong. We have mastered the art of projecting every vice as a virtue and every failure as an achievement.

Merit, competence, efficiency and rules are no longer of any consideration. A person’s ability to compromise is increasingly becoming a major criteria to rise up the ladder. Not only appointments but even promotions and awards are as per these parameters. Rules, we are proud to say, are meant for fools. They make ourselves feel very uncomfortable. They are meant to be thrown on the face of others to show them their place. Jobs needing technical expertise are manned by the domestic helps of the “all-mighty”. It is not the icons in the professional fields who get the awards but the “try to find me who I am”. Yet, it is the hard working majority which keeps the nation running, the rich happy and the powerful content. This silent majority does not have the time to vote or apply its mind on how they are exploited. Does all this inspire confidence ? With this background, what else would we expect, except Satyam and 26/11. Not once, but many times over. The blue blood is too cold to feel the pain.

The IAP
Do we not see reflections of the above scenario in our academy. Quite often it does seem so. We too have a democracy with 30% voting. From such politicking as writing anonymous e-mails and manipulations we are into mud slinging, regionalism, appeasements et al to win elections. We are more into elections than academics. As happens in other spheres of social panoramas, the baseline denominator is power and/or money. We are also getting into the mode of justifying all wrongs even using threats of physical intimidation and verbal assaults. After all, a weak case requires a lot of noise. However, a lot of noise or aggressiveness makes even a strong case weak. In the process, it scares many into withdrawing from being actively associated with the association.

Paradoxically again, from the close observation that I have had as a member of EB for two consecutive years, I have also seen democracy also working in the association. A lot of discussion takes place, quite often heated. But, after the initial excitements, saber rattling, intimidating tactics, what eventually prevails is the saner voice and advice of the majority.

The lesson learnt is that it is very necessary for everyone to remain vigilant and participate conscientiously in the affairs of the academy, as well as the nation.

The IAP needs a vision which will help it to launch not only good academic programmes but also crusades against issues like environmental sanitation, cruelty against children (even at the hands of parents), their exploitation, the negative impacts of media exposure, the need to provide children at least primary education and ensure all adequate health inputs. This would need long term programmes say for about five years. Unfortunately, IAP still seems to work on adhoc basis – to fulfill the one year agendas. After that one year, that agenda is given up to be replaced by a new one. After the year has passed one might not even find any record of it. In fact, it is difficult to trace records even of the resolutions passed in the EBMs or GBMs from time to time. We need to open up and do so fast. It need be, we should consider appointing a whole time management person to manage the affairs at the Central Office.

Yet another issue which I wish to dwell upon is about granting travel assistance to faculty for Pedicon. With all the money generated in the Pedicons, we are not willing to pay for that faculty whom we would love to hear, but who can not afford to attend. This case has been very brilliantly brought out by Dr. Varinder Singh at the last two GBMs. What Dr. Varinder Singh pointed out was that there are three players in the field : 1) the Organizers/Academy which handles the money and builds a good corpus for itself, 2) the members who attend the conference of which 80 – 90% are sponsored by pharmas and 3) the faculty many of whom find it difficult to attend without any financial support. It is ironical, he says, that while those who come to learn get financial support while those who come to deliver knowledge have to pay from their pocket. He has also worked out that if this faculty is paid reasonable amount (say, Rs. 10,000) for its traveling allowance, it would cost the conference just peanuts as compared to the savings made. It is a sight to see the initial unanimous negative response of the members at the GBMs getting converted into virtual endorsement of the demand after Dr. Varinder Singh’s exposition. The members, however, wish that the faculty selections be made more transparent. I do not know whether the committee which went into this point considered all these things before deciding against giving TA to the faculty. As such the matter has remained unresolved.
At the end, few words of great appreciation of the way the Bangalore Pedicon conference was organized. Every thing was perfect – the ambience, the session managements, the food, the cultural programmes, the time management and floor management - be it at the time of different ceremonies or of the lecture halls. Above all one could see the utmost humility and coolness of the organizers. Congratulations Dr. Shivananda, Dr. Nisarga, and all the organizers of the team as well as the volunteers and managers of the show. The only hiccups were at the GBM (which was beyond the control of the organizers) where the heat generated made many wonder whether the organizers in future will need to arrange for marshalls and security personnel in the years to come.

-Ajay Kalra, Agra




To reflect and... Act.
The difference between the poor and the rich countries:

-The difference between the poor countries and the rich ones is not the age of the country.
-The difference between poor and rich countries does not reside in the available
natural resources.
-Executives from rich countries who communicate with their counterparts in poor countries show that there is no significant intellectual difference.
-Race or skin color are also not important: immigrants labeled lazy in their countries
of origin are the productive power in rich European countries.

What is the difference then?
The difference is the attitude of the people, framed along the years by the education and the culture.
On analyzing the behavior of the people in rich & developed countries, we find that the
great majority follow the following principles in their lives:
1. Ethics, as a basic principle.
2. Integrity.
3. Responsibility.
4. Respect to the laws and rules.
5. Respect to the rights of other citizens.6. Work loving.
7. Strive for saving and investment.
8. Will of super action.
9. Punctuality.

In poor countries, only a minority follow these basic principles in their daily life.
We are not poor because we lack natural resources or because nature was cruel to us.
We are poor because we lack attitude!!
We lack the will to comply with and teach these functional principles of rich and developed societies.