Myths around chip making- Where we are ?

 

Semiconductors, or Chips as we popularly call, is perhaps the most complicated and high-end technology product invented by the human civilization till date. Without chips inside it, every electronics device we use in our daily lives, whether it is for communication, defence, data processing/ storage etc will be reduced to a simple metallic or plastic box without any substantial use.

                                      TSMC Fab in Taiwan (PC- The Next platform )

However, such chips are not designed or manufactured everywhere. The entire value chain in the chip manufacturing is so complex and so costly that a handful of companies from selected countries enjoy the complete monopoly over its value chain.

 

Many of us would not have even heard about a company called TSMC, headquartered in Taiwan. Interestingly, this company, have a near monopoly on the fabrication of most advanced chip available in this earth, sub-10 nm chips.  It’s only near competitor is Korean headquartered Samsung, which too have significant, still marginal presence in advanced chip manufacturing.

 

However, there are a handful of firms that manufacture chips based on yesteryears technology, ie which are mostly used in household and consumer electronics, automobiles etc. Companies in China, Malaysia, etc does that. Interestingly, in India, Chandigarh based, Government owned, Semi-Conductor Laboratory or SCL, fabricates chips, mostly used in Indian space and defence programs and projects.

 

Even though, Chip fabrication or manufacture itself is a very complex engineering, more complex is the manufacturing of Machines that used in Chip fabrication. Here, a Dutch based company called ASML is an near absolute monopoly in that sector. It means, if anybody wants to start a chip manufacturing unit, it has to purchase the machinery from that company alone.

 

ASML is critically depend on a handful of firms in US and EU for manufacturing its advanced Chip fabrication machines. This machine called EUV (extreme Ultra violet) Lithography machines, was developed by 2012 after decades of research in different labs of US and EU. Its most critical component is supplied by Zeiss, which is a German based optical systems manufacturing company. Because it’s many other critical components and chemicals are manufactured in US, ASMC cannot go against the instructions and interest of US government and recently they refused to supply these EUV machines to China.  Thereafter, China’s dream for becoming a advanced Chip manufacturing powerhouse got completely shattered. Much of the Trade war between US and China was around restrictions imposed on Chip technology and in that China had to eat the humble pie.

                                       EUV machines by ASML (PC- New York Times )  

 

Another critical aspect of its entire value chain is Chip design. Here in this case, Intel is the industry leader even though it does not have a monopoly over it. Apart from Intel, there are a handful of companies in US, UK which includes, AMD, Qualcomm, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon etc and even Chinese companies like Huawei are leading chip designers.

 

Amongst these, apart from Intel, all others are Fabless Designers, ie they don’t own chip manufacturing facility, and get their chips manufactured at TSMC’s fabrication units in Taiwan. Even though Intel has its own fabrication unit in US, its struggling and lags far behind TSMC in terms of productivity and profit. Samsung is the only Asian company who is a key player in design as well as fabrication. It is also to be noted that TSMC don’t design their own chips. It’s a complete end to end fab company and does not compete with its customers like AMD, Huawei, Apple, Amazon etc.

 

Where India stands?

 

Answer is very simple. We are nowhere. All our critical requirements of Chips are sourced from TSMC / Taiwan. We may not be directly importing substantial number of chips because, we are importing the goods in finished format or in CKD wherein which chips are already embedded. But, like any other developing country, in case of any supply disruption of Chips, we will be a simply helpless bystander. In case, US wishes to imposes any sanction upon us, we will face critical shortages and will be very much vulnerable in our defence/communication/ data analysis requirements.

 

That’s why, India is pursuing an ambitious program for Chip manufacturing. It had announced $10 Billion subsidy for those who wishes to set up Fab units in India. The first one under this scheme was cornered by a joint venture between Vedanta and Foxconn. This unit is going to be on Dholera, Gujarat. The second one is also a Joint venture between Mumbai headquartered ISMC and one Israel chip design firm. The proposed location for this venture would be near Mysore in Karnataka.

 

However, there are a large number of challenges that India has to overcome to be a serious player and to become a part of global chip eco system. There is no way that India can build most advanced and cutting-edge chips at least in the near to medium term. It’s completely monopolised by TSMC and their US partners. Our next best possible option would be slow and steadily entry in to yesteryears technology where we will be able to build chips that are used in household items and low-end automobiles. (ie not in computing devices or smart phones, ie chips of 180 nm or more.). Here our challenge would be about manufacturing those products in an efficient and at globally competent price points, where we will be competing with firms in China and Malaysia which already have decades of experience in this arena.

 

Somebody might ask, why can’t we invite TSMC here in India and ask them to set up their fab units here? Let us not forget that, till date, apart one single fab unit in mainland China, TSMC had not built any Fab units outside Taiwan. This is because, TSMC is a crown jewel for Taiwan and Taiwan rightly believes that it offers a ‘Silicon shield’ for them in case Chinese attack their territory. If anything happens to Taiwan and TSMC get shut down, the entire Electronic and digital industry will come to a grinding halt. If no chips are churned out from TSMC, it will have devastating impact on global economy and hence nobody wants it to happen.

 

Under US CHIPS Act of 2022, and with multibillion subsidy (approx. 50 billion US $) both Intel and TSMC are building huge Chip fabrication unit in US which will start churning out most advanced chips by around 2025-26. However, TSMC will still keep its critical fab skills and most advanced technology in its own home Country, ie Taiwan and the fab in US will act as its subsidiary. Therefore, it would be naïve to think that one day, TSMC will be ready to invest in India and we will have TSMC Fabs here.

 

Chip making is not just an economic activity like any other manufacture. It’s criticality and high entry barrier ensures that State support is crucial for its viability. Nation who controls design, fabrication and supply of this crucial product can control how we can communicate, analyze our data, and secure our territory. Given this being a reality and constraint, we have to optimize our choices and priorities to tune with the way in which our Chip Nationalism will be promoted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aspirations Vs Promises- Who won and lost Bihar 2020 ?

 

 

The Bihar election 2020 was fought primarily on Job narrative. Both the coalition were promising the creation of ‘millions’ of jobs and were blaming each other for not able to create enough jobs for the youths. Earlier agendas like Bijli/Sadak/Paani/ Inflation/law and order issues were conspicuously absent. So, what is the larger lesson to learn? Let us see.

 

For human beings, there is no full stop to aspirations. Our aspirations are like a Hedonistic treadmill in which once got fulfilled, we end up in pursuing the next higher. Hence, for most of us, life is mostly about the catching up with the next level of ambition and we are very unlikely to remain happy with our present status for long.

 

Similar can be said about society as well. It can be well explained in the framework of the Hierarchy of Needs, as enunciated by Abhram Maslow.

 

The primary need of society is the physical safety and security of its individual members and the state should, therefore, be able to exercise its monopoly over violence. In other words, nobody would like to live in a Hobession state wherein anarchy prevails and people distrust each other as it was during the Lalu era in the 1990s. Fed up with it, people voted out Lalu in 2005 and then started Nitish’s era.

 

In the Post Lalu era, Nitish could somehow put an end to Lalu sponsored the Hobbesian state of affairs and could re-establish the authority of the State. People started feeling safe and secure and could venture out of their homes at night and could do business without fearing their children being kidnapped. Therefore, the Safety Needs of the people got more or less fulfilled. 

In the next level, people wanted to have Bijli-Sadak in their homes and villages.  To a large extent, Nitish could fulfill this need of the electorate as well. This can be equated with the Physiological needs’ of Maslow s pyramid.

 

Aspirations, once fulfilled, are taken for granted and are thus become a new normal. Having more or less satisfied with the physical security needs and sadk/bijli issues, people are asking ‘what next’? As a next step, people want to fulfill their ‘Esteem needs’. People need a dignified and meaningful life and don’t want to lead a wretched life. The first requirement of the Esteem need is that they need to have a  reliable source of income through gainful employment.

 

Having crossed the safety and physiological needs, voters are now looking towards leaders who can fulfill their next level of aspiration, ie, Esteem needs, through Jobs. Now, who is promising this stuff to the electorate? The son of a leader who was primarily believed to be the key architect of Jungle raj.

 

Tejaswi Yadav was more coherent in his ideas; He understood that after fulfilling the first two needs, what people now need is Jobs and the sense of dignity that is coming along with it. Hence he promised to provide 10 lakh jobs in Government services. For an ordinary Bihari, a secure and stable Government job is the best available thing for life. Naturally, many fell in love with that idea of a government job.

 

But things were not that simple. The big question was the credibility of that promise and the untrustworthiness of the person who happened to identify with an old regime. Hence not all were enthusiastic about the ‘promise of jobs’ and many wished to continue with the status quo rather than opting for uncertainty under a non-tested leader.

 

Nitish Kumar sincerely believed that people will reward him handsomely because he is credited with ending the Jungle raj and built new roads and provided electricity. However, what he forgot was that people shall not be grateful to him forever. You delivered the promise and you got the reward in the next election cycle. To win another election, you need to fulfill a different set of promises. In other words, a fulfilled promise/ aspiration is a cheque which can be en-cashed only once.

 

It’s a lesson for all politicians. Your promise should be on those unfulfilled aspirations that voters actually aspire for. It may not be the physical needs always. Self Esteem needs are the one that comes up once we fulfilled the physical needs. However, Self Esteems needs are not just about Jobs alone.  Empowerment of a particular community (ies) which may be underprivileged, underrepresented, or having specific grievances vis a vis another competing community is also an ‘Esteem Need’. What we often dismiss as ‘communal /casteist agenda’ are these specific psychological needs of a section of the population who are angry at the present state of affairs. An astute politician will be able to identify such needs and if articulated and communicated properly, will be able to reap a substantial amount of electoral dividend.

 

But the issue is far more complex. The needs and aspirations of the targeted electorate will be usually lying at different levels of the ‘hierarchy of needs’. Hence parties usually don’t make a single promise, but a basket of promises, each targeted to different sections of the society and individuals whose different kinds of aspirations they are promising to fulfill. The one leader who makes such a rainbow of promises will win the day.

 

 Politics and electoral completion is an arena where leaders are trying to outsmart each other for fulfilling and promising to fulfill an unmet and hierarchal nature of aspirations of a society or a part of it. The winner in this game will be the one who creates a basket of promises and a rainbow of a coalition with which he can gain more support than that of his rivals. However, the actual skill of a leader lies in identifying and articulating the needs and aspirations and thereby stitching together this support base into an electoral arena.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No one who lived longer

This is third part of my sequel on how better we are. In the first part, we discussed about peace and the second was about prosperity. This one is more about health and longevity of our generation.

Any casual discussion on our general health and diseases would most likely reach in a curious ‘consensus’. That is, our great grandfathers had enjoyed a better health, they were less prone to diseases, they lived much longer than us, they ate good food, did physically demanding jobs that strengthened their body etc. In contrast, we believe that we are not healthy enough, and would die at an early age.

Since this belief is widespread, including amongst doctors, let me try to explain the facts in detail.

Firstly, did they live longer? Yes, perhaps. But, only few of them. The average life expectancy of our country when we got independence was just 33 years. Ie, on average, a man was expected to live only till that age. Few fortunate children, who happened to survive till 5 years, could live up to their 60 th or 70 th birthday if they were lucky enough. But many perished even before turning 5.

Now let us speak with data. As per World Bank data set, in 1960, only 30% of a cohort of new born children would survive up to the age of 65. Meanwhile, that figure slowly increased and in the year 2000, it was 58.8% and in 2017 it is 68.2. It implies, your grandfather, in 1960, if he happen to alive above the age of 65, it was because he was in the luckier 35%. In other words, 70% of his schoolmate would have already died before they celebrate their 65 th birthday.

Now let us see what World Bank data set says in matters related to child births in 1960. It says, in the year 1963, 232 children out of 1000 born, would not have reached their 5 th birthday. However, this figure reduced gradually to reach 91 in the year 2000 and now it is at 36. It implies, a baby born in the year 2017 is less likely to die than his uncle who born in 1963 by a magnitude of 8 times. Similar is the figure for his mother as well.

Were they free from ‘life style diseases’ like diabetic, cholesterol etc? Most of us tempt to believe that these diseases are new and hence our grandfathers were free from these malaises as they lead a non-sedentary life style. However the truth need not be that way around.  We, most of us, are not sure of how our great grandfather died. We only know that it was a natural death. But these ‘natural deaths’ may be because of a massive heart attack, because of a leaky heart valve or fat accumulation in his arteries. Since there was no regular medical check up in those days, most likely this would have gone undetected and he happened to drop down to death in one fine morning.

Because he died due ‘natural death’, and he was taking no medication for ‘life style diseases’ we safely assumed everything was perfect at that time.

Now, let us what data says. As per World Bank, from the year 2000, to 2017, there was a drop from 26% to 23 % , of the people between age 30 and 70 who would have died because of Cardio vascular diseases, diabetic, cancer which grouped as ‘Life style diseases’. Unfortunately, we don’t have data of pre 2000 years. But seeing from the trend and interpolating it, we can safely assume that in the year 1960, percentage of the people died due to this kind of diseases would not have been lesser if not higher.

Hence, it can be safely argued that our grandfathers could have equally died of ‘Life style diseases’ if not more, than the present day generation. It sounds quite logical because, these diseases were less likely to be detected on time and far less likely to be treated with right kind of medication. Hence we can safely assume that, contrary to popular belief, they were equally vulnerable, if not more, to any kind of lifestyle disease than we are.

We take absence of evidence as evidence of absence. Hence we carry false set of  believes.

In terms of communicable diseases, the figures are really shocking. People died in droves due to plague, leprosy, smallpox, typhoid, yellow fever, to name a few. People were more prone to snakebites, dog bites, drowning, and many similar causes.

Let us also look in to some other interesting data.

a)       Rate of immunization for DPT, Measles etc which was just in single digit till 1980s. Now it almost reached 90%.

b)      Take prevalence of stunting, wasting, or under fed children. Over last few decades, it had substantially reduced. It implies, our children are far better fed and cared than our grandfather when he was a kid. Similar is the data regarding anaemia, pregnant women getting pre natal care, post natal care etc.

c)      In India of 1960 s. only a 0.3% of the total population was men of 80 years or above. Now, 0.8% of total population is 80 plus. It implies, we have more share of 80 + population today. Similar is the data for people above 65 years of age. Still many believe that people in the past era lived longer.

The reason why we held this false believes were that, in India, till a few decades back, there were no proper recordings available for the number of deaths and the possible cause of death. We were right when in the case of first order logic, ie my grandfather was alive at the age of 85.   But the problem in this argument was many such ‘would be grandfathers’ would have already perished much before and we choose to ignore that cohort. 

This is called Survivor-ship bias. We overestimate about those which are visible to our eyes while underestimates what we don’t see. This lead to a completely wrong conclusion about the health conditions about our past generation.

Someone can argue that even if they lived shorter, they had a healthy living. However, it happens because we ourselves choose to live longer. Given a choice, we prefer to remain alive by medication rather than dying. Perhaps our grand parents too wanted to live longer, but they had no choice other than to die pre-maturely.

Modern medicine, scientific discoveries, related technologies helped us to lengthen our lives and thereby enabling us to spend more quality time with our children, grandchildren, and even with our great grandchildren. It made our life more wonderful and richer than the past. Still it is unfortunate that many amongst us believe in the myth that, everything was better in the past and we are a spoiled generation. It is all about our inability to think critically. We think conjectures as truth and confuse correlation with causality. With some anecdotal evidence, some coincidence here and there, we build a theory upon it that, in the past, people lived longer.

Hence the truth is simpler. World which we live, is far better than world which our grand parents lived.

Peace and prosperity. Part 2

In my previous blog, I was talking about how our world is turning better in terms of reduced violence and by reaping peace dividend. In this piece, as a sequel to it, I am trying to prove that in today’s world, how rich, comfortable and prosperous we are, in comparison with our older generation. I will also try to indicate the pathways with which we had progressed and its implication for the future.

Ordinary mortals sincerely believe that the present day generation is unfortunate to inhale polluted air, forced to eat unhealthy food stuffs, drink contaminated water and so on. We keep romantic belief of how our great grand fathers were fortunate to live harmoniously with nature, having good air to breath, had healthy food, did ‘worked’ a lot and hence lived long. We assume that, for them, their village life was much simpler, healthier and pleasant.

 However, contrary to that, for those mortals, life was never been simple and pleasant as we wish to assume.  In reality, they could afford to have far less food, fuel, and fibre than today. Both because of unavailability or un-affordability, they starved, sometimes died, stayed in darkness, died due to unknown diseases and many perished in fury of nature.

300 years back, a British thinker cum Economist called Thomas Robert Malthus infamously predicted that world will soon go over populated and many millions can’t feed themselves  hence will die. He theorised all along that world can tolerate only a certain fixed amount of human population and rest will have to perish if they happened to born.

However, what he underestimated was the human ingenuity to create more out of existing resources through knowledge and technology and find solutions to existing challenges. Contrary to Malthusian predictions, humanity didn’t perish due to famine. It prospered and could feed all.

Instead of Malthusian apocalyptic scenario, what exactly happened?

Poverty – How much poorer are we now? It is surprising to know that just 9% of the world’s population now lives in absolute poverty. In 1809 AD, this figure was almost 83 %. It implies, despite humongous growth in population over last 2 centuries, we pulled billions of people out of poverty in to prosperity.

Cheaper goods -Four basic human needs, ie food, clothing, fuel and shelter, had grown cheaper, (compared to our income), in the last two centuries. Many of us believe that prices of these goods are increasing. But data says otherwise. For most of us, a pair of dress would be costing not more than our two day’s income. Food we consume in a month may not cost more than 25% of our monthly income.  In earlier times, the same food and clothing would have incurred much higher share of our income. So with cheaper goods, more disposable income we have, and more pleasure hunting and more enjoyable our life is.

Less drudgery, more pleasure - We spend far lesser time in doing things which we don’t like. Most of us don’t have to wash our cloths using our hands. We spend much lesser time in our kitchen and inhale much less toxic gases than our grandmothers used to do. We have more leisure, more movies and TV shows to watch, and more time to read and pursue hobbies. We travel a far lot than our grandfathers used to. Life is easy. Is it not?

Machines work for us –Visit any modern factory floor shop and compare it what it was few decades back.  Much of the manufacturing is mechanised now. All dirty and risky jobs are done by soulless machines and humans are sitting in comforts of their Air-conditioned rooms. Yes, our workmen are getting far higher pay by working far lesser than what his grandparents used to have.  

 Are rich people getting richer? – Yes of course. Our Ambanis and Adanis are getting richer, but not by making us poor. They are getting richer by making things cheaper for us, example – data and voice by Reliance Gio. Similar is our innovators, entrepreneurs and scientists. Men who developed LED bulbs helped us to cut our electricity bills substantially. Pharmaceutical company Cipla made HIV drugs less than a $ a day and saved millions of lives.

Again, over the last 20 years, proportion of the world population living in poverty got almost halved.  While 85% of world s population was poor in 1800 AD, it was 50% in 1966. Now it is just 9%. Yes, you heard it right, 91% of the world s population are either rich or middle class.

Not just poverty let us examine few other parameters.

a)      Number of battle death per 10000 populations in a year, is just one today. It was 200 in 1944.

b)      Our world had 64000 nuclear warheads in 1989. Meanwhile, there are just 15000 in today.

c)      1660 thousand tons of Ozone depletion substances were released in 1970. Now it is just 22 thousand.

d)      971000 people died due to natural disaster in a year in 1930 s. In the last decade, only 72000 died in a year.

e)      148 countries had small pox infection 150 years back. Now it is ZERO.

f)       Nearly 15% of the world’s surface area is protected as National parks and forest reserves. It was just 0.03%, a century back.

g)      Yield per hector of cereal production had almost tripled in the last 50 years.  It means we need far less land to feed our mouths, rest of which we can turn either in to forest or to a shopping mall.

h)      In our world, nearly 80% have electricity connection. Most of our grandfathers lived in darkness.

These are not exhaustive but an illustrative example of human progress in the occurred in the last few decades. 

Besides, whether it is number of movies produced, number of Pianos sold, or number of tourists visited, we are at all time high.

Despite this hard facts and figures, why we are still feeling that ‘things are getting bad’? Is it because of our negativity instinct which increases our tendency to notice bad more than good? Possibly. We often tempt to mis-remember and have romantic notions of our past. This romanticism stops us from cool thinking.

We often consume a lot of negative news. Our journalists often do selective reporting. For them, millions of people pulled out of poverty are not news. Stories of gradual improvements are not stories at all. They print stories which are dramatic in nature and hence these ‘boring’ ones are almost never getting reported.  Hence we have an illusion of being in a bad world.

I am not saying that everything is good in this world. there are many thongs which we don't like and want to get it changed.However, many of our problems are actually problems of plenty. Ex, Obesity is there because we have more things to eat, traffic congestion and pollution is there because more people can own a car now. Yes, there are many things which we need to be worried. In due course of time, human ingenuity will help us to find a way out as well.  What I am trying to point out is that despite things which appear to be bad; things are better, better than it was few decades back. It can be bad; still it can be better as well.

 If today is better than yesterday, there is every reason to believe that tomorrow would be even better. This is the message that I would like to convey through above said narratives and facts.

Data references and ideas from-

a) Factfulness-  by Hans Rosling-

b) Rational Optimist- by Matt Ridley

 

  

Violence and peace- Where are we heading to ?

Talk to anybody in your neighborhood, office colleague or Uber taxi driver about the present day world. Most likely, we all likely to get a similar world view that, things are not going well in this world, violence is all-pervading, human life is at peril etc. People offers an even more pessimistic view about the future, predict that the world will witness more violence, more sufferings, much more terrorism, etc. Majority of us would like to believe that a bleak future is waiting for the humanity in the coming decades.

Having noticed this phenomenon, I would like to make a proposition that the world we are living in, is the most peaceful and far less violent than the one our fathers were living.

To prove the above point, I would like to bring out some unidirectional changes that happened in the last 30-40 years, in our lifetime, which is too visible to us, yet we ignore its relevance.  All these changes are proving that we had done away with many implicit and explicit forms of violence in the last couple of decades itself. Many things would look small, but its cumulative impact is much bigger than we imagine. 

a) Caning and child beating-

30-40 years, it was normal for a school teacher to cane children. Parents themselves were advocating physical punishments (read, beating with sticks). Not anymore now. We have strong rules and regulations against canning, protection of children, a slew of legislation like POCSO Act, etc which makes sure that our children face much less pain today.

b)  Ragging and bullying 

  People who were in Colleges and Universities in 80 s and 90 s must have been either a victim or a perpetrator of campus violence and inhuman treatment towards juniors called Ragging. This barbaric practice was legitimized in the name of ‘better interactions’, making junior students ‘tough’ etc. However, in the last few years, we realized that it is to be ended and we armed ourselves with better rules and stringent enforcement. The result- Ragging got almost vanished from our campuses.

c) Animal sacrifices and self-inflicted acts of violence-

Gone are the days when we used to kill animals in the name of god and inflict violence on our own body for propitiating gods and goddesses. Not anymore. Our gods are happy nowadays with our monetary offerings and they don’t ask for ‘blood’ anymore.

d) Domestic violence-

      Beating your wife and starving her was believed to be the right kind of response when she indulged in something which you didn’t like. 

     However, if you wished to be the same, you would have already landed up and rotted in jail.  Our legislatures were enlightened enough to pass laws against Domestic violence to see that violence even inside four walls of your home itself will not be tolerated and women are to be treated with dignity. Similar is the case with marital rape.

e)  Capital punishment –

     

     Capital punishment had been banned in most of the modern Nations and in many others, it remains only in paper. Even in our Country, even though it is still in the statute, it is given only in ‘rarest of the rarest case’.  It implies human civilization had moved away from impulsive, retribution oriented punishment towards a more humane one.   

f) Lockup torture, violence perpetrated by Police, etc-

     

     Earlier, Police were seen as an instrument of violence. They could perpetrate any amount of violence against citizens if they wish to do so. Not any more, particularly in states like Kerala, etc. Police are now coming under Human right watchdogs and any deviance would be treated as a dereliction of duty and will not go unpunished. 

      g) Our pets and animals

     We treat our pets and domestic animals far less cruel than one generation before. Laws are there in place on how to transport animals, how they should not be paraded in festivals, circus, entertainment, etc. Recall how our Courts banned Jallikkattu and restrained elephant parades in festivals like Poorams in Kerala. Again, laboratory tests on animals are much regulated now and our school children don’t dissect mouse and frog anymore.

)     f) Reduction in recreational violence –

The consensus here is that one cannot inflict pain and misery on animals just to make ourselves happy. Hence, you can’t hunt animals in the forest, kill tigers for their skins, and shoot an elephant for their tusk. Similarly, shark fins are banned and killing the shark for their fins is prohibited in most of the countries. So, sharks are safer now than what they were earlier.

      

The above-mentioned changes are not exhaustive but an illustration of how things are moving and in what direction. Similar things can be talked about homicide, rapes, burglary, etc even though data is not readily available. Collectively, here we can see that any and all kinds of violent behavior is losing its legitimacy and social approval. 

I am sure that these kinds of changes are happening not by accident even though I am not certain why it is happening. Still, I can point out some plausible reasons why things are moving in this direction.

There are a few socio-political and technological forces that had a modernizing effect on human behavior. Firstly, we are all valuing lives, limbs, and dignity of strangers much more than what our grandparents used to bother about. This is because we humans are seeing each other as much more valuable economic agents with whom we can trade, exchange ideas, work with, and co-create value. As author Yuval Noel Harare says, it is now more profitable to do trade with strangers than raiding and killing him.

Increasing feminization-

Does our society go feminine? Yes. As per author Steven Pinker, both sexes had become increasingly feminine. Ideas like chivalry, self-respect, revenge, social shaming, etc are having a different set of meaning than what it used to be in earlier times.

Campaigns for rights-

 Social groups are actively involved in protecting and safeguarding the rights of sexual minorities, children, prisoners, animals, and many other groups who are believed to be incapable of articulating themselves. These volunteers are instrumental in identifying cases of violence and are making critical public policy interventions to take suitable remedial actions.  This was not the case earlier.

State and its policing forces too are gaining more capabilities now and are less tolerant towards violence unleashed by non-state actors.

My conclusion here is simple. It is not that everything is perfect today. Many things are yet to do. Still, we are living in a far better and prosperous world than what our fathers and grandfathers used to live. We are better fed, better employed, and better educated than any generations who lived before us. Our lives and limbs are far safer and our chances of getting died or mutilated in a violent incident are far lower than any point of past.  Many times, we don’t fully appreciate undergoing changes that resulted in the reduction of violence, and once changes got entrenched, the process was forgotten. We take it for granted, without realizing that changes have indeed happened. 

Therefore, there is no reason for us to complain about the present and compare it with the past.  Even though we often get romanticize with our past and have fear about the future, the truth is exactly the opposite. Extrapolating the trends and trajectories, it is quite sure that in the future, our children will be in living in a world which would be better than the one we have. There is certainly no case for being pessimistic and worried.

Righteousness of electoral choices

India’s perhaps most polarized election in its recent past, concluded with a thumping victory for India's right-wing forces lead by Sh Narendra Modi. Its electorate sidelined Indian National Congress, which primarily positioned itself as a Left to center political ideology. Congress tried to become a ‘champion of poor people’ promising ‘justice’, yet it got much less support than its rival rightwing party.

Both Left and Right are equally defensive about their ideologies, philosophy, programs, and agendas. Why are that seemingly intelligent people, who are all likely to well-educated, still having sharply different political ideologies? Why such people don’t sit across the table and debate amongst themselves to find policies that are consensual so that Policymaking would be faster and easier. ? But in the real world, it can’t happen so. We will examine why and how both Left and Right are essentially different and hence any argument between them would be like a dialogue between dumb. Let’s examine why it is like that.

We all support a political ideology essentially because we sincerely believe that it is the right thing to do for the betterment of the world. We, most of us, support either left or right, not because of our selfish interest, but because of our sense of Self-righteousness. We also tempt to believe that our opponents are selfish to the core and that is the reason why they oppose ‘my righteous’ idea.

This disbelief is more acute for Leftists than to Rightists. Leftists are least bothered to know why many people are outside its fold and why these people believe in ‘backward-looking, regressive, fascist’ Rightwing ideas. Their sense of self-righteousness is so strong that they always demonize and even de-humanize anybody who believes in ‘Rightist’ ideas. They are at disbelief that how ‘educated’ men can embrace the party of ‘evil’. This is because; they deny that there is an alternate moral world which has a certain set of values those Leftists dismisses altogether. The truth is that both Rightists and Leftists live in a different moral universe.

To understand why Leftists and Rightists have different kinds of ‘Righteousness’ let’s look into some aspects of Moral Psychology. According to Jonathan Haidt, author of the book ‘Righteous Mind’, we vote for a party/idea which we sincerely believe as right and that sense of righteousness comes from some set of moral foundations. Accordingly, he opines that we, humans have 6 foundations of Morality. They are

a)      Care Foundation

b)     Fairness foundation

c)      Liberty  Foundation

d)     Loyalty foundation

e)      Authority foundation

f)       Sanctity foundation

While Leftists focuses only on first 3 foundations of morality and rest 3 are irrelevant for them, Rightists consider all the 6 moral matrices but focuses more on the last 3 without ignoring the first 3.

Moral values based on Sanctity Foundation is the most important one to understand the crucial difference between the Rightist and Leftist preferences. For Left, Nation is nothing but just a land mass to be used for human consumption.  People living here are just human beings, who happened to born here and acquired citizenship thereby. For Rightists, this Nation is not just a land mass but a divine entity, worthy of worship. People living here are not isolated, unconnected, selfish human beings, but belong to a Moral community. ( For Rightists, even if you are a legal citizen, but does not have belief and sense of  belongingness  to this Moral community, you may be  called as Anti-national ) Individuals are not of prime importance, but the moral community which is bonded together by a certain set of divine values that should get primacy over individuals.

Rightist war cry of Bharat Mata ki Jai, Jai Shriram etc is an attempt to reinforce believes that this land and its gods are not just utilitarian objects but are sacrosanct. They know that people have deep-rooted believes in these ideas and hence they bring Sanctity foundation of morality into these ideas.

Let us come to the main focus area of Congress party which essentially is a Leftist oriented party as of today. It focuses on NYAY or Minimum Support Income, farmer welfare, compassionate leadership. (in contrast to Masculine leadership style of Mr Modi ) etc,  which is nothing but moral value system based on Care Foundation. Again it talks about simplified GST, taxing rich more, etc which is based on Fairness foundation.

BJP or Mr Modi talks about a tall leader who can bring order and discipline in this country, which is about moral values based on Authority foundation. Again it talks about anti-India forces ( tukde- tukde gangs), Maoist insurgency, Kashmiri militants etc which they believe is a threat to the unity and integrity of this country and hence need decisive leadership to lead this country. Again, it questions the loyalty of these people to this country and brings Loyalty foundation of morality.

This does not mean that Rightists completely ignore the Care and Fairness foundation. Mr. Modi often talks about LPG cylinders, toilets, houses for poor, etc to emphasis on his ‘Care’ aspects. He also talks about his poor backgrounds, his contempt towards entitlements, privileged classes etc which in reality is his ‘Fair foundation’.

In conclusion, it can be said that Leftists care only about Care, Fairness and Liberty foundation, but Rightist top up it with Sanctity, Discipline and Loyalty foundations of morality.  So Rightists have more ‘Right things’ to talk about, while Leftists have limitations and fewer things to discuss.

We also see how a single incident was viewed by both of them. For Rightists, Pulwama killings were not just a human tragedy but also an assault on Nation (Sanctity and Loyalty foundation). But for Leftists, they were seeing it through the prism of Care foundation, ie people got killed and their families became orphan, etc. Similarly, Rightists in India view Cow as divine (Sanctity Foundation) and hence to be protected, while Leftists see it just another animal. Similar issues of conflicts between the two are those issues which both sides see it through different Moral foundations. Hence seemingly irreconcilable differences between the two groups, in reality, are those in which both of them use different Moral foundations to see through.

These six foundations of morality upheld by a Rightist politics gives it a superior competitive advantage to its rival Left-wing politics which mainly focus on Fairness and Equity Foundation.

It is a delusion that people’s voting preferences are decided exclusively by Care and Fairness foundation. Conventional wisdom says that poor people bother mostly about their livelihood issues and do not have the luxury to think about other moral values. However, truth is that people are bothered to think about all six foundations of morality and not just the first two. Rightist politicians are intuitively aware of this aspect and hence try to reach to all the six foundations of morality and not just the first two as foolishly done by the Leftists or Congress. Hence, Rightists are having more issues to talk about and can get extremely popular amongst a large section of the population. However, the only condition is that there should be one super efficient messenger who can take this message to the people and whose credibility is beyond question. That explains the secret behind the stupendous victory of Mr. Modi and his colleagues.