Nostalgia: from Disease to a Tonic

In November, I attended a reunion of the former employees of British American Tobacco, Poland. I had lived and worked in Warsaw between 1999 and 2002. Last month, I met many ex-colleagues after a gap of fifteen years. Men had become plumper, greyer, balder but easily recognisable. Girls, however, have a fantastic ability to not change. They were just slightly mature versions of those I had said goodbye to fifteen years ago.

We spent a delightful evening, which began with a film specially created using old photos, brands we sold and campaigns we ran. We recalled incidents and flashbulb memories from the good old days. In conversations, and later FB comments, the term ‘nostalgic’ was frequently used. In this week’s diary, I want to analyze what nostalgia is and why it makes us emotional.

Nostalgia a disease

Strangely, for centuries of its existence, the word nostalgia referred to a medical disease, a psychiatric disorder. In the 17^th century, Swiss mercenaries were often hired to serve in foreign armies. They possessed proven battlefield expertise. (Even today, the Pope and the Vatican are protected by the Swiss Guard). Young Swiss soldiers, stationed in Italy or France; on seeing a tree or terrain that reminded them of home; on hearing a familiar Swiss melody, often became ill. They complained of giddiness, high fever, pain in the chest or stomach, indigestion. In extreme cases, some of them died. A Swiss PhD student Johannes Hofer called it the Swiss illness (mal du Suisse) or Nostalgia. Nostalgia was coined by combining two Greek words ‘nostos’ (homecoming) and algos (pain). In English it can be loosely translated as ‘homesickness’.

We must remember that in the 17^th century, going abroad was very different from today. Swiss mercenaries who left for Italy or France took months to reach their foreign employers. They had no phones or Facetime. They knew or suspected they would never see their homeland again. That made their yearning for home unbearable. The only known “cure” was to return home, and many tried to, only to be punished by death for deserting.

For the next two centuries, nostalgia remained a disorder in medical parlance. Only in the last fifty years or so (in times of relative peace), research has begun to focus on its positive aspects.

Nostalgia versus homesickness

In modern times, nostalgia has a much broader meaning than homesickness. ‘Saudade’ is another word, in Portuguese, that represents a state of profound longing for an absent person or thing that one loves. It’s a beautiful but sad word, often implying that the object of longing would never return. It can be translated as missing-ness or emptiness, love that remains after someone/something is gone. The premature death of a close family member produces Saudade.  

Nostalgia, as understood in the 21^st century, refers no longer to a “physical”, but a ‘metaphorical’ home. If you imagine our ‘past’ to be a home that is different from our ‘present’, you will appreciate why we become so happy in revisiting the past. It’s time travel. The longer the distance (time gap), the more happiness this homecoming generates.

When I met my Polish friends/colleagues last month, all of us were transported back in time. I revisited my “home” that I had shared with them more than fifteen years ago.

Smell, taste, music, photo albums

Smell, taste and touch are capable of making us nostalgic. If you visit your school after 30 years, you may recall some smells you never experienced thereafter. Or you may unexpectedly eat something you haven’t tasted since your childhood. Taste and smell can make you nostalgic. However, mankind has still not managed to record those sensations. Our access to them is rare and accidental. We can’t run a Google search for a smell, nor send it to a friend on whatsApp. Which is not the case with music. Or photos. We can capture them, search for them or forward them. We can lose ourselves going through old B &W photo albums.

Music is known to be a powerful nostalgia producer. Research has shown that music heard during the age 12-22 leaves the strongest emotions within us.  Music is capable of re-creating a certain period of our life. For people my age from the English speaking world, the song ‘those were the days’ by Mary Hopkin may bring back their youth and romance. Its video clip is aptly black and white.

Television arrived in Bombay in 1972. The signature tune created by the sitar maestro Ravishankar represents the B&W television era in the minds of Bombay tele-viewers. A clip of a few seconds makes them nostalgic, hugely happy but also sad about the time to which they can no longer return.

I think distance in time, and distance in geography both matter. When I lived in Europe, some Indian songs made me deeply nostalgic, to the point of tears. The bhelpuri I ate in London or New York made me sentimental. When I hear the same song in India or eat bhelpuri in Bombay, they don’t have the same emotional impact. That is the reason emigrants always look for things from back home. In that, they are like the Swiss mercenaries. They no longer fall ill or die like the Swiss soldiers, because if desperate, they can always take a flight and visit home. 

The same can’t be done when you travel back in time, particularly revisit your distant past. When someone married thirty years ago looks at his wedding album, it brings back all related memories from that time. He is amazed at how young everyone looks. He looks with admiration at his hairy head in the photo. The pleasure is tinged with the pain of our inability to turn back the clock, of the good old days that will never come back.

Personal vs collective (historical) nostalgia

Your wedding album is essentially your personal nostalgia. It is unlikely to create the same emotions in a stranger. On the other hand, the Bombay TV signature tune or the Mary Hopkin song is a collective nostalgia. We share a common past with our friends from school, from university, from our workplace, with our fellow-citizens, and finally as global citizens. Now that we use smart phones, pictures of old phone instruments, typewriters, or heavy cameras make us nostalgic for things unlikely to make a comeback.

Facebook cleverly uses nostalgia for a commercial purpose. It focuses on both your personal nostalgia (We thought that you’d like to look back on this post from 10 years ago- FB) as well as the collective nostalgia (your year in review, please share with your friends-FB)

Political tool

It is believed ‘nostalgia’ is the reason Trump and Brexit have happened.

Older people who predominantly voted for them longed for the good old days, when America was great, and Britain was truly sovereign. The blue British passports didn’t have European Union on the cover.

Using the slogan “Make America Great Again,” Trump didn’t simply invoke the idea of an idealized past. He provoked the anxious feelings that make nostalgia especially attractive — and effective — as a tool of political persuasion.

Nostalgia often filters the bad memories out, leaving only the good moments that make us feel warm. BAT, Poland had its share of corporate politics, nasty bosses and unpleasant arguments. However, last month the bad blood from the past was forgotten. We mainly remembered the good times. (Those with overwhelmingly bad memories don’t turn up for nostalgic meetings).

In communist countries like Russia, many people have forgotten how bad life used to be: the queues, the shortages, and the paranoid police state. They now focus on the State support and zero inflation, the two positive things from Soviet days. One reason for Vladimir Putin to be in power for such a long time could be the nostalgic desire of the Russians to have stability, security and a superpower status like in the Soviet times.

Benefits of nostalgia

Recent research on the subject of nostalgia has pointed out many of its benefits.

a.      Gives an overall sense of enduring meaning to our life. By acting as continuity between past and present, it alleviates existential threat.

b.      Nostalgia generates positive effect, increases self-esteem, and fosters social connectedness.

c.       Counteracts against loneliness, boredom and anxiety.

d.      Makes people generous to strangers, more tolerant to outsiders.

e.      Couples feel closer and look happier when they share nostalgic memories.

f.        More than one research say nostalgia literally makes us feel warmer in cold days or in cold rooms. Nostalgia makes us more human.

g.      When the present is distressing, people often look to the past for support.

In short, in your cleaning drive, please don’t throw away old letters, photos, documents, particularly the handwritten stuff. All of them are capable of injecting a dose of nostalgia in you – it can act like a drug that produces euphoria.

Don’t lose an opportunity to meet friends from old times. Those reunions are bound to make you happy. If you are feeling miserable, if the weather is cold, listen to your favourite songs from your teens. Visit places from your childhood, go back to your school building, and meet your ex-colleagues several years after changing jobs. It’s a guaranteed recipe for feeling happy.

Ravi 

Hadiya and Love Jihad in the Supreme Court

This week, on Monday, 27 November 2017, the Supreme Court of India directed Hadiya, a 24-year old student to resume her studies, and appointed the Dean of her college as her guardian. The case was launched by Hadiya’s husband, Shafin Jahan, against Ashokan K.M., Hadiya’s father. Hadiya was trapped, against her will, in her father’s house. It was hoped the Supreme Court would let the 24- year old woman reunite with her husband. That didn’t happen. Indian and British Media called it a ‘love jihad’ case and expressed shock at the court’s decision.

The story of Hadiya

For readers unaware of the case, here is a brief synopsis of the sequence of events as reported in the media.

Hadiya was born Akhila Ashokan, a Hindu. Her father Ashokan K.M. is a communist and accordingly, an atheist. Akhila is his only child. She was a homeopathic medical student in Kerala. She shared a house with two Muslim friends, Faseena and Jaseena. On 6 Jan 2016, Akhila disappeared. Her father filed a missing person’s case at the police station. She was found after a few weeks.

As it turned out, Akhila had left the college and joined a two month course to study Islam at the Therbaithul Islam Sabha. Converted to Islam, she had assumed Hadiya as her new name. She started covering her head, wearing a hijab, and reciting prayers. An organisation ‘Markazul Hidaya Sathysarani trust’ was looking after her. Hadiya was found living in the house of A.S.Zainaba, the president of the National Women’s Front. This body was founded to fight for women’s rights. This house was a good 240 km away from her home town.

Shocked, the father filed a habeas corpus petition (one that alleges a person has been unlawfully detained by someone) in the High Court of Kerala. Hadiya, however, testified her conversion was voluntary, and that she was living with Zainaba out of her free will. Since she was an adult entitled to exercise free will, the High Court dismissed the petition.

In August 2016, the father filed another petition in the same court, this time claiming that his brainwashed daughter was likely to be taken out of the country. The High Court passed an interim order to keep Hadiya under surveillance. She was directed to move to a women’s hostel, but Hadiya continued to live at Zainaba’s house. She had no passport, how could anyone possibly send her abroad.

On 21 Dec 2016, Hadiya appeared in the High Court with her husband, Shafin Jahan. Their marriage had taken place two days before, on 19 Dec. Shafin Jahan’s mother was in the Gulf, and he was looking for a job there. (It was possible Hadiya would go with him abroad, as feared by her father.)

In May 2017, the High Court of Kerala annulled Hadiya’s marriage and sent her to her parents’ house. Since then, she had been living there against her will. Indian media and public opinion criticised this judicial tyranny of separating a married adult from her husband and confining her to the parental home against her wishes.

What is ‘Love Jihad?’

Love Jihad is either a conspiracy (if proven) or ‘a conspiracy theory’ (unproven) where young Muslim boys lure Hindu girls by pretending love, and make them convert to Islam in order to marry. The conversions expand the Muslim population. Some people, such as Hadiya’s father, attribute more sinister designs to these acts, such as making the girls join ISIS or other extremist groups.

The Girl in my Gym

Yashvi was a young girl, around 25, whose gym timings coincided with mine. We knew each other for more than three years, and occasionally chatted before moving from one workout machine to another. She said she was planning to get married in a few months.

‘Congratulations!’ I said and asked who the lucky boy was.

‘He is a Muslim’. She added after telling me his name.

I congratulated her again on her courage. Though I had not met her parents, I suspected they wouldn’t be the happiest lot.

‘I’ll have to change my religion.” She said.

‘Why?” I asked. ‘India allows people from different religions to marry under a secular law.’

‘But his family doesn’t allow that.’ Yashvi said.

‘You’re not marrying his family. You’re marrying the boy you love. Why isn’t he converting to Hinduism?’

‘No. It’s a pre-condition for marriage. We’ve already discussed this. He said his family won’t allow him to marry a non-Muslim girl.’

‘Well, you can refuse to marry except under a secular law. That can be your pre-condition.’

‘We’ve already been through this a few times. For me, the choice is to convert and marry him, or not marry him at all. Anyway, he says it’s only a formality. I’m not expected to wear a burqa.’

In India, certain surnames carry an aura of wealth. Yashvi’s surname was among them. It was obvious she came from a rich family.

‘That makes your decision even more courageous,’ I said to Yashvi. ‘You may no longer be entitled to any of your father’s estate.’

‘What do you mean?’ Yashvi asked.

‘You see, as Hindus your family is subject to the HUF (Hindu undivided family) law. As soon as a family member changes her religion, she becomes disqualified. Your Hindu sister would be entitled to inherit everything.’

‘That’s not possible.’ Yashvi said.

‘Well, I’m not a lawyer. But you better check those things.’

After a couple of months, Yashvi told me her impending marriage had been called off. She was willing to accept Islam for love. But her fear of losing a share in her father’s estate was stronger than that love.

I personally consider religion as man-made fiction. Religion classifies people just like citizenship does. A Hindu girl converting to Islam for marriage is like an American girl marrying a Cuban boy, by giving up the American citizenship and accepting a Cuban one. Love often extracts a heavy price from naive young people who fall in it. Yashvi is a sweet, modern girl. I was glad she wasn’t forced into conversion for the sake of marriage. But the fact she was ready for conversion was surprising for me.

Yashvi’s case is common in India. India has 190 million Muslims. It is inevitable that some of them will marry Hindus. Except those from the elite families, most Muslim boys demand Hindu girls are converted as a pre-condition to marrying them. I am not sure the reverse happens. Apostasy (leaving the religion) is still a crime in many Islamic countries, in some countries (Qatar, Yemen etc) punishable by death. 

Love Jihad is unsubstantiated. It is possible for a Muslim boy to genuinely fall in love with a Hindu girl, and not for converting her. A civilised couple should marry under India’s secular law. When that is not followed and the converted girl needs to abide by Muslim customs, cover her head or recite prayers; that can make the girl’s family uncomfortable. No wonder Ashokan K.M. was shocked to see his daughter wear the Abaya, reciting prayers five times a day, and refusing to attend her own grandfather’s funeral because it was conducted as per Hindu customs.

Husband goes to the Supreme Court 

Anyway, to continue the Hadiya story: incensed by the High Court verdict annulling their marriage and sending Hadiya to her parents’ house, Shafin Jahan filed a case against Ashokan K.M. in the Supreme Court. Hadiya and he were adults, lawfully married. They must be allowed to live together. Hadiya hated living with her parents. The Kerala High Court had forced her to live with them.

The Supreme Court bench was made of India’s chief justice, Dipak Misra; Ajay Khanwilkar, and Dhananjaya Chandrachud, three of India’s best judges in terms of calibre, integrity and experience. They indeed freed Hadiya from her parents’ custody. She has been sent to her college. The Dean has now been made responsible for her, not her parents.

What about the husband who filed the case? He can meet his wife at her hostel with the Dean’s permission. The hearing about the annulment of the marriage will take place in the third week of January. The Supreme Court has let India’s National Investigating Agency continue its Love Jihad investigation.

The Indian media has expressed anger at the order. The Kerala High court forcibly sent a married adult woman to her parents’ house. The Supreme Court has now sent her to college for studies. Where is justice?

*****

The High Court judgement

The Supreme Court judges said this case was one of the most challenging in their career. Despite all of them having a long and distinguished career.

Having read the headlines in popular media, let us now see what the High Court in Kerala has to say in its judgement. The 95 page judgement is available in www for anybody to read.

Hadiya’s conduct

Akhila alias Hadiya has repeatedly lied on oath. In a 2015 affidavit she had put ‘Aasiya’ as her name. In 2016, she renamed herself as Adhiya (in a writ petition) before settling on Hadiya. The court said it couldn’t be sure she didn’t have or won’t get a passport if she had so many names.

She claimed a monthly income of Rs 2000 as a homeopathy doctor’s assistant. It transpired she hadn’t completed her education, so she was not qualified to work as an assistant. She wasn’t working, and wasn’t earning what she claimed to.

She continued to stay at Zainaba’s place even when the court had directed her to live at the ladies’ hostel until the disposal of the petition.

Hadiya deliberately concealed her association with members of the SDPI, the political arm of the Popular Front of India, an Islamic fundamentalist organisation.  

The Kerala court, surprisingly bluntly, describes Hadiya as an ordinary girl of moderate intellectual capacity, who is gullible.

Hadiya’s husband

Shafin Jahan is an accused in ongoing cases, where he is charged with rioting, mob violence, restraining others. His Facebook posts show his radical inclination. He is a member of the SDPI and Popular Front of India.

The Kerala High Court had said they would issue an order to send Hadiya to a ladies’ hostel. To avoid that, two days before the order, the marriage happened. While the marriage registration said people from both sides attended the marriage, not a single person from her side attended. The High Court concluded it was a ‘sham’ marriage effected to bypass the possible court order. In all court hearings, not a word was mentioned about Hadiya’s planned marriage, and suddenly on 21 Dec 2016, Hadiya produced a husband in the court. The Court was unhappy about it.

The court called the marriage ‘null and void’. The judges did not annul it as portrayed by the media; they simply said it didn’t happen.

The expenses

More intriguing is the amount of money that has been spent on Hadiya by complete strangers. She was able to live and travel without parental support and own income for months. The lawyers who represented her side in the High Court were expensive.

The lawyers in the Supreme Court, including the senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Ms Indira Jaising are extravagantly expensive. Where did Shafin Jahan get the money to pay for them?

It is evident that right since her conversion Akhila alias Hadiya has been supported with huge amounts of money by strangers. This defies logic.

Not Love Jihad

This is not a ‘Love Jihad’ case. The judges clarify that a marriage between a Muslim boy and a Hindu girl is not uncommon. If the girl converts to Islam, it is her prerogative, and the court has no right to interfere. In Hadiya’s case, she had converted much earlier. The organisational support by strangers has raised doubts in the court’s mind, not love jihad.

Spirit of the law

One can, of course, say it is none of the court’s business to enquire as to where the support money came from. (Leave it to the Income tax authorities). However, spirit of the law requires that judges handle cases not pedantically, but humanely. A father files a petition suspecting the daughter may be radicalised by extremists. Judges are bound to ask questions, and if anything is suspicious, take steps to protect the girl, whether she is a minor or otherwise. There have been enough cases in the world where gullible young girls, technically adult, have been enticed to commit crimes. (Read my diary: helter-skelter).

Media and sloppy journalism 

The case is important not only because of its complications, but because it shows how media manipulates us, the readers and viewers, through sloppy journalism.

Here is the 95-page judgement of the Kerala High Court. In places, the language is patriarchal and conservative. However, this document clearly shows that judges base their judgment on the evidence available before them. Since they invest their time and expertise into the case, often they are the best (or only) people to judge. A responsible journalist should read the judgment and then criticise it. What media has done in Hadiya’s case is to not bother to read the judgement, but criticise the superficial sensational points. Each case is different, but a newspaper’s agenda is the same.

We will now wait for the January 2018 verdict. The Supreme Court will need to decide what to do with the marriage the High Court said never happened.

Ravi  

Checks and Balances

Power is intoxicating. It is capable of corrupting the noble; of bringing out the worst in men. Men like Hitler and Stalin were born human; power turned them into monsters.

In democracies, people delegate political power to their leaders. A well-designed democracy dilutes that power by dividing it. The trick is to create many power centres which can regulate one another. Like in a truly democratic household; the husband, the wife, and the children all have their say in a debate. The master of the house will sometimes have the last word; at other times his wife may overrule him. The children can often persuade or force the parents to give them what they want. This power struggle is evident when the family shops together or decides which movie to go to.

On a national scale, restrictions are placed on powers of a single leader or a group to minimise or eliminate the possibility of a dictatorship.

Civilised societies have five centres of power, each controlling the others and acting as a counterbalancing force.

1.       Legislative: The lawmakers. The Congress in the USA, parliament in the UK or India, ‘Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union’ succeeded by the ‘Federal assembly of Russia’ are all examples of bodies that have the power to make laws. Such legislative bodies can be split into an upper and a lower house. In the UK, the lower house is the House of Commons, similarly translated in India (Lok Sabha). Though called a lower house, it is more powerful than the upper house, the House of Lords (Rajya Sabha). The Senate is the upper chamber in the USA, and House of Representatives the lower. ‘Soviet of the nationalities’ and ‘Soviet of the Union’ were the odd-sounding Soviet equivalents. Their successors are the ‘State Duma’ (lower) and ‘Federation Council’ (upper). The two-house system was historically introduced to offer one chamber to the aristocrats and the other to common people.

2.      Executive: Donald Trump, Theresa May, Narendra Modi, Vladimir Putin and their cabinets belong to the executive branch. To confuse everyone, India has a President who is the Head of State. I suspect this was in lieu of the monarch (UK’s Head of State) India lost at the time of gaining independence.

3.      Judiciary: The courts. While legislative branch makes the law, and the executive branch enforces it, the judiciary is responsible for interpreting it. Soviet Union had and Russia has courts that look similar to courts elsewhere. I will discuss later what makes them different.

Legislative, executive and judiciary are the three official power centres in the modern civilised world. At one time, Religion as represented by the clergy was a key power centre. Only a few Islamic societies like Iran are still ruled by theocracy.

4.      Media: Television and press, although not official, can be extremely powerful. Through reports, investigation, stories and at times persistent campaigning, media is capable of damaging the reputation of or bringing down anybody.

5.      Social media: This is a relatively new power centre, born after the internet revolution. Social media represents public opinion. Joined as a force, people are capable of counterbalancing another power centre.

In India, due to overpopulation, human beings and vehicles are constantly fighting for space on the roads. When a mob patiently waiting to cross the road reaches its tolerance limit, it simply decides to cross. The vehicles capable of killing them stop and wait until everyone crosses. Sometimes a similar ‘people power’ is exercised by groups (activists, lobbyists) to provoke actions from the government or parliament.

United States of America

United States of America is a great, possibly the greatest, country in this respect.  In a mind-bogglingly complex but beautiful design, the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches are given power over one another so that no action can be unilaterally taken. Trump repeatedly issued executive orders to ban entry of people from seven Muslim countries into the US. Various courts stayed those orders. Trump pushed through the health bill to replace Obamacare. His own party members in the Senate rejected it. On the other hand, Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, tilting the balance in favour of the Republicans. A Supreme Court judge is nominated by the president and grilled by the Senate before approving him. The president may veto laws made by congress, and the congress may override the veto. Confusing?

While all this is happening, CNN is running a sustained campaign to topple Trump. Late night comedians are now full-time anti-Trump and their shows are posted and shared on Twitter and Facebook. FBI is investigating the Trump family’s connections to Russia and the election fraud. To top it all, in an unprecedented move, the Air Force General John Hyten said a week ago that he will resist any illegal nuclear strike order from Trump.

This is one country where the checks and balances work in practice. There is no way Trump can become dictatorial or get anything nasty done during his term.

The maximum term of eight years for a president is another thing the Americans should be proud of. UK and India don’t have it. Mexico has only one term of six years. It functions so well that since 1934, each president has enjoyed six years, not a day more, not a day less.

As far as I know, only Uganda had an upper age limit of 75 years. Its current president is 73 years old. In order to retain power, he has managed to scrap the upper age limit this year. It is to America’s credit that the 8-year term has not been violated (even when it was felt that retaining Obama would have been better than electing Hillary or Trump).

India

I don’t think any other country has as many political parties or candidates as India. An election can be won by a candidate getting 5% votes, outsmarting the other forty candidates. Coalition is the norm. The partners bicker, fight, causing a downfall of the coalition at times.

The current Indian government has a strong mandate. They have managed to push certain reforms that weaker governments couldn’t. This is excellent.

However, over the past two years, India’s ruling party (BJP) has attempted to remove or dilute the checks and balances. The finance minister long argued that the government should be authorised to appoint the judges (like in the USA). The Indian judiciary has preferred to appoint the judges itself. This inbreeding is not good in itself, but is a lesser evil compared to a political party appointing them. (Ideal would be a third party, a committee of independent competent assessors, appointing them).

The Governor of the Reserve Bank of India was supposed to be independent. In 2016, the independent governor was let go prematurely, and was replaced by a yes-man who allowed the blunder of demonetisation to take place. Checks and balances didn’t work in practice.

The two year emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi in 1975 had to be signed off by the president of India. He signed it, and allowed India to fall under dictatorship. The post of the President of India has failed to control the executive branch. It is aptly called a ‘rubber stamp’. India should consider abolishing the post.

Free media and a very vibrant social media, therefore, are India’s saviours. No other country on earth occupies so much space on Facebook and twitter, or so overwhelmingly criticises their own government.

The independent judiciary, though occasionally incompetent or corrupt; the aggressive media; and an overpowering freedom of expression on social media make dictatorship in India improbable.

United Kingdom

United Kingdom similar to the USA has many checks and balances. Brexit was fought tooth and nail by the public (Gina Miller), the courts (The Supreme Court in Jan 2017 made parliamentary approval mandatory for triggering article 50). The UK parliament has now ensured it will scrutinise the final draft before approving it. Theresa May’s plan to usurp power and push for a hard Brexit is already foiled by the competing power centres.

The anomaly in the UK is that a monarch is its Head. In theory, the Queen is above everything. The courts, the church and the government report to her.

One acid test to verify whether the checks and balances work is to see not its theoretical formulation, but practical functioning. The queen could have stopped Brexit by not signing. (Read my short story: The Royal Assent).  Not only she, but all the queens and kings in the last 300 years, have signed every document they are asked to sign. The institution of monarchy doesn’t function as the Head of the State, it’s a farce. Monarchy should be abolished not because republicans want its abolition, but because it has become a farce.

Soviet Union

Little to write here. Soviet Union was a totalitarian society, where the power of the General secretary and politburo was unchecked and unrestricted. Frightened by the cruelty of Stalin and whimsical autocracy of Khrushchev; Brezhnev and his successors tried to enforce a “collective leadership”. This is attempted in China as well. Collective leadership generally means the group of leaders (politburo) backing the opinions of the supreme leader; in the case of the Soviets, the General Secretary. 

Russia

Yeltsin was a democrat. He still ruled by decrees and when the occasion demanded silenced the parliament by bombing it.

In Putin’s Russia, the parliament and the judiciary conform to the president’s line. If an opposition candidate (e.g. Navalny) is uncomfortable, a speedy court process holds him guilty and gives a minor sentence that is major enough to disqualify him.

Putin has abandoned the principle of ‘collective leadership’. His politburo has frequently changed.

Russian media is state controlled. Except a radio station ‘Ekho Moskvy’, and a few small-circulation newspapers, the media rarely speak against Putin or the government.

On Facebook, the only Russians who criticise the political rulers are those living out of Russia. Fear is in the DNA of older Russians. And the younger Russians, like the young anywhere, are not interested in politics. (They will be if Russia were to become totalitarian again, but by then it will be too late).

Violating the two term restriction by making Medvedev a puppet president for four years was an unconscionable deception. Extending the consecutive maximum from 8 years to 12 years was a political fraud. I don’t know why the Putin critics think he will step down in 2024. He is a fit judo player and will be only 72 in 2024. He can once again invite Medvedev for a brief period before assuming presidency himself. When no checks and balances exist, this process can be continued till the end of his life.

To decide if today’s Russia is a dictatorship, it is irrelevant how competent or conscientious or great Vladimir Putin is. Political power is concentrated in his hands with no checks or counterbalancing power. 

It is indeed unfortunate that 100 years after the revolution, the Russian state continues to be classified as a dictatorship.

If the choice is between ‘progress under dictatorship’ and ‘stagnation under democracy’, I personally prefer stagnation, even chaos, under democracy. (Worse is stagnation under dictatorship, which is what happened in Brezhnev’s time). 

Summary: (a) Essential to study the checks and balancing power centres that exist in your country.

(b) Fictitious power centres such as the British monarch or the President of India contribute nothing (as a control mechanism), but are a huge cost centre. They should be scrapped.

(b) Concentration of power in the hands of a single person or a small group is dictatorship, irrespective of how good or competent the person is.

(c) Social media, the fifth power centre, is one the common man has access to. For those willing to maintain democracy in their country, that power centre should be used by fearlessly writing against dilution of checks and balances.

Ravi