Blog Archives

Finding new meanings through meetings with strangers

Earlier today, I shared my mother’s blog post recalling her assistance to unknown fellow travelers years ago. Knowing her well, I account her actions to a strong sense of duty, a following of the Hippocratic Oath so to speak. Her post has prompted a discussion on whether times have changed and would well-meaning people still help strangers if they find them to be in trouble.

Right on cue comes news about the #Illwalkwithyou campaign in Australia, where citizens are helping Muslims afraid to commute fearing religious backlash and hate crimes following the hostage situation in Sydney. Started by an individual, the campaign snowballed into several citizens tying up over twitter with Muslims to offer them their company while using transit in the city.

Reaching out to strangers in need without fear is an act of bravery, no doubt, but beyond that it is an act of humanity. How many strangers do you, on an average, meet with and interact with? Of these, how many are ‘curated’ and ‘filtered’ through formal and informal processes? I include here surveillance and security mechanisms as well as pre-decided appointments in a business or social milieu that involve some form of deliberate selection. Are there any opportunities, or indeed any desire, to meet people you don’t already know? Moreover, would we be open to meeting strangers across the barriers of class, gender, religion, etc?

As an urban professional, I’m raising two questions that I feel rather concerned about:

1- Are we, as urban citizens, inside a ‘zone of fear’ and averse to initiating contact with strangers?

2- Are urban spaces and systems designed to make meetings between strangers happen?

I find it important to raise these questions, especially in the political climate that we are experiencing in India at this time, where segregation, insecurity and fear are prominent themes. If we are to ‘develop’, I  think these are issues we need to think about and, at least as individuals, deal with.

On a personal level, I try to have meaningful conversations with everyone I meet. Since I’m interested in the urban informal sector and in migration, I make it a point to especially speak to those who offer urban services- auto drivers, fuel pump attendants, vendors, cleaning staff. What I hear from them has a profound impact on how I think and behave; it also informs the way I look at cities and people. And my biggest takeaway is that we are all human. If we lose that sense of humanity, I’m not sure life will have meaning any more.

Hating the “other” is a false cocoon: Let’s fight intolerance- Aug 8, 2012

It’s driven me to despair, these killings in Wisconsin. Of course, the defenses kick in and the mind begins to write it off, but I despair. I despair at how intolerant we are becoming in a world that is increasingly diverse, multicultural, where social chaos is increasing at a rapid rate…And what do we do? We crawl right back into the false safety of the cocoons of our mind. We construct alternate realities where America is for whites, Assam is for the Bodos and Ranchi is for girls who, well, do not wear jeans!

It’s not just about identity. It’s about the false comfort of hating the “other” because we cannot understand the chaos. Amardeep Singh puts it beautifully in his piece for NY Times titled Being Sikh in America. “Would it be any less tragic if the victims in Wisconsin had been Muslims gathering for Friday prayers?,” he asks. He wonders about “how awfully precarious the American dream can be” in the context of thousands of immigrant families who settled in the US admiring of the equal opportunity and economic prospects.

It’s the same everywhere. The dream of prosperity and peace is becoming increasingly precarious and among the many factors sabotaging it, intolerance seems to be the hardest one to fight.

Amardeep claims that we are being naive to expect intolerance and hatred to be countered by education and awareness. That, for me, is truly heartbreaking. I, like many liberals and idealists, hold on tightly to the idea that meaningful debate, discussion, education and the rest of that wonderful stuff will change the world. That is my own false cocoon. I know that.

So where do we go from here? How do we change the game from fighting the “other” to fighting the hatred of the “other”? How do we offer non-violent solutions to frustrated people, which we all are in some measure? I have started by looking into myself and identifying what the “others” are for me and systematically trying to rationalize and hopefully reduce my own prejudices.

We need to address this, somehow. And urgently. For this I know. It’s hatred and intolerance and not climate change that will end the story of the human race!

 

A vibrant construction industry based on shoddy treatment of laborers? Shame! 1 May, 2012

At work, I’m part of a team working to set up a system for certifying affordable housing projects. The initiative is that of the Ashoka Innovators for the Public and we at mHS are working on the aspects of the rating system that would impact the low-income community.

Anyway, during our discussions, we often come to the point where we wonder if the rating should consider whether the contractor uses ethical and legal practices for treatment and payment meted out to labor working on the project. If they use child labor, for instance, or use sub-standard shelter to house their labor, they should drop lower in the ratings, we think.

Today, on the occasion of Labor Day, The Hindu carried an excellent editorial written by Moushumi Basu on the subject. She spells out clearly the Acts contractors and construction companies violate when they pay lower wages, do not build decent shelter, do not ensure safe conditions for work, etc. Moreover, developers and construction companies who have ridden the wave of India’s GDP growth (and continue to do so despite slower growth) have no business to do this at the cost of the labor that works for them. It is a sad tale of mistreatment of those who have no voice. Besides the legality, where’s the humanity here? Would it really hurt to pass on a tiny bit of your profits towards improving the lives of those that made your projects possible, often risking their lives, migrating far from their homes?

So in our ratings projects, we’re really wondering….how do we factor in the humanity/ethics (or lack of these) of developers into ratings for affordable housing, where profit margins are lower than regular projects, when they fail to factor in regular projects where profit margins are decent?

%d bloggers like this: