Jnana - pure knowledge

Scene1:

The Hero and the Heroine are both idealists. The Hero wants to join the publishing house run by a Gandhian and continue his mission. But circumstances force him to join the firm started by his friend. They bring out some ‘cheap’ books which have great demand. They make lots of money. Slowly, the Hero becomes the part of the system. His ideals are lost somewhere. Then comes a time where his morally conscious wife objects to these things. She threatens to move out. At the end, the Hero decides to come out of the system and stick on to his values.

Scene2:

The lady journalist covers the parties of the elite everyday. She has to face the realities like going in local train after attending such parties. She also decides to take up ‘real journalism’ after some time. After doing that for a while, she is sacked because of pressures at work place. The system is culprit again. She has no choice but to do what she hates – cover the parties where people are more worried with their artificial lives. She cannot escape from the system and invariably sticks on to it.

The first scene is from the film “Saath Saath” (SS) which came in 1982 and the second from the recent flick “Page 3” (P3). Both the films look at how an individual faces the system. In the earlier film, there is the triumph of the idealism and in the later there is submission to the system. Comparing both films brings one question in our minds – “Have we lost the instinct and courage of fighting against system? Should we be more ‘practical’ and follow the system?”

In SS, the moral character was his wife. She insists that the hero leave the present system. The hero joins her at the end. But in P3 the moral character is probably, the co-journalist played by Atul Kulkarni. But his advice to her is -“You have to be in the system to change it”. He does not want her to change the profession. And at the end, she remains in the system and adjusts herself to it. She sees that her friends have changed too. It symbolically says that everybody becomes part of the system and nobody escapes from it. Which of the two is more practical?

Have we finally succumbed to the pressures of today’s market driven economy? Is P3 a mere reflection of these falls in ideals? Do we have to adjust and compromise to the system? These are broad questions that P3 raises. Probably, it gives a very negative answer. It fails to motivate people to take up fight against the system. Or can we say that this is the realistic approach for our problems. Today, we rarely see people who revolt against the system. The ground rules are very clear. Work only if you are comfortable. If you are not at ease, move out but, do not bother to change it.

Is this an implication of the large scale globalization that is experimented on us over the years? Probably yes. We have surrendered ourselves completely to the market pressures. Though on one hand everybody claims that customers shape the market it is not so in reality. Some companies create market for themselves. We silently accept this without resistance. The long term effect of this phenomenon will be the erosion of individualistic value system and decline of societal moral order. The solution would be increased customer participation in deciding how market forces are shaped. Small individual resistance can go a long way in realizing this aim. Then probably we can hope that Konkana Sen will not give up her fight so easily. In this aspect Farooq’s character in Saath-Saath is more appealing than Sen’s in Page3.

Recently, the high court of Karnataka gave a ruling stating that ATM machine cannot be considered as a “computer”. It observed that an ATM machine is just an electronic gadget and cannot work without computer. Court suggested that the ATM be considered as a peripheral device attached to a computer. This incident exposes the short comings in the way we understand and apply technology in our day to day lives.

The fact that computers have become an inseparable part of our everyday lives is undeniable. The knowledge of computers is today considered in par with the knowledge to read and write. The American education policy today defines literacy as the capability to read and write in a particular language plus our ability to work with this device (machine?) called computer. But the central question is – what does it mean to learn computers?

Learning computers is very different from learning a language. When we learn a language we study the alphabets, words, sentences, grammar among other things. There is a fixed framework and body of knowledge (BOK) in this aspect. One more interesting observation is that once you have learned a language, it remains with you for your lifetime. Probably, you will learn new words to increase your vocabulary but the basics are the same. But learning computers is no where related to this. There is no BOK, there is no fixed methodology and probably there is nothing that is permanent knowledge in this field. The reason may be that since computer is a machine you cannot compare the both.

But we cannot compare learning computers with learning to master some other machines say- a car. If one learns to drive a particular model of a car, he can drive other models of cars also. Any new car released in the market will not have any different interactive mechanism. But the case is not same in computers. Probably, the way in which we were using Computers before 10 years is very different from the way we are using them now. And definitely, it will change in coming years.

When we teach computers to starters we often teach them not computers, but a particular operating system. Computer manifests itself through OS. This is a serious disadvantage. We associate learning computer with learning a particular OS. There is no other way also. This indeed is the root cause for most of the problems that we face today. When we study computers, we have this idea of a PC and we rarely think beyond this. So when there is a new development like in this case, the ATM, we wonder if it is a computer. Because for us computers have a fixed meaning and defined applications and we are not ready to accept the changes in that thinking.

The real definition for computer literacy can be “the ability to change”. Our competence in adapting to fast changing technology is the measure of our computer literacy. We cannot depend on acquired knowledge for a long time. Continuous up-gradation of knowledge is the competence that one requires in this field. The basics keeps changing here and there is a need to redefine everything with time.

What is the biggest problem in modern day India? Probably we can prepare a whole long list about this. Corrupt political system, aimless education system, senseless public behavior, visionless governance, wrong romance with globalization, failing democratic structure….the list is almost endless. But there is a common thread between all these problems - Our denial to come out of colonial hangover. We are so obsessed with the old raj system that “yes sir” has become a part of our culture.

When we are taught to write ‘formal letters’ in our school days, teachers insist that we address the people as ‘Respected Sir/Madam’ and end the letter with ‘Thanking you… yours faithfully’. It is also taught that we should ‘kindly request’ the concerned people to do our job and wait ‘humbly’ for their response. In addition to all these we repeatedly ‘pay our sincere thanks’ for that person because he spends ‘his precious time’ in looking our ‘earnest appeal’.

We follow these things in letter and spirit during our everyday correspondence. The following of protocols have become so important in our daily life. Rarely do we question the basis for these actions. If you observe the highlighted words in the earlier paragraph, you will observe that those words can be used only by a weak and subordinate person. Any person having at least some self respect will think twice before using such words repeatedly in any letter.

During the raj era, it was important for the rulers that the people be like slaves. So in a colonial system it was ok to draft letters in that way. But even in this world of democracy, we follow this unusual system. Even when we know that government in a democratic system is ours and the rulers in democracy are our people, we rarely put that into practice. We try to project the leaders in a democracy as new age kings and queens. What respect and obedience was showed to kings in previous era is showered on present day political leaders.

How will you explain spending RS. 200 crores just to maintain the protocol system for President of India (POI)? There are more than 160 IAS officers in the Presidents office just to maintain protocol. What do they do? Every morning POI does not get up on his own. A military band will play national anthem softly. Then one person walks into POI’s room and whispers “His Excellency, its morning now. You may kindly get up”. Now its time for POI to get up. Then there are dozens of people to take care of every necessity of POI. If the allotted budget is not sufficient, they can demand more. The Government is compelled to pay whatever is requested without any questioning. The protocols maintained for the queen in England are all followed for POI, who is the head of a democratic country. Can there be a bigger irony than this?

Almost all Governments are now thinking of computerizing their work. Many have completed, some have initiated the process. The idea of sharing the information with citizens is in accordance with the political systems that a country has. Democracy demands such a process be established at all levels. India, being the single largest democracy in the world is rightly working in this direction.

In India, the “Information Rights Bill” was passed very early. The state governments had their own acts to address these issues. The IT Act 2000 also discussed this issues, although not directly. The real pillars of the democratic India are gram panchayats and they were not committed to this matter. Lack of funds, political compulsions and right mindset were the usual culprits in preventing this all important activity. Nevertheless, Government of Karnataka took an early lead in this aspect and implemented some hugely successful projects like “Bhoomi” which enabled people to obtain the property rights documents. Many other states also have implemented some successful programs on the same lines.

As per the UN General Assembly Resolution 56/183 adopted on January 13, 2002, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was organized to address the various issues connected with the usage of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) to address the `digital divide’. India is a member of WSIS. Department of Information Technology under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India has released a “Draft paper on Internet Governance” (Draft Position Paper No. 1/2005 dated 3^rd February 2005). This paper discusses the issues relating to e-governance and need for a framework which can work at an international level.

True to its status as a superpower in IT, these efforts by India are laudable. India is also positioned itself to emerge itself as a leader in South East Asia in this regard. But we have an address an important question. The striking factor about almost all e-governance projects in India is that they are developed using proprietary software. It is well known that this kind of projects demand huge amount of money and it is the tax-payers money which will be spent on this. In addition to the development cost, when these software is used at a local level again we are forced to use specific proprietary software. The question is – Can we reduce this cost?

Countries like Brazil have found a solution for this. There all government software is created using open/free software. While this reduces the cost by huge amount, it also makes a political statement also. The tax payer’s money is not spent to increase the numbers of some software company. Using free/open software also has its own technical advantage also. The philosophy of shared development also promotes the political philosophy which we have adopted in India.

So, its time we the citizens of India demand that all future e-governance projects in India be carried out using open/free software. Simultaneously all NGO’s should also try using the open/free software not only because of economic reasons but also as a political statement. This will go a long way in promoting open/free software movement.