How is the royal family still a thing?

Who are the most entitled people in the whole world? The heirs of hugely successful businessmen? The scions of powerful political dynasties? Or maybe a bunch of people who personify the combination of both! The British royal family are the most entitled bunch in the whole world! How they have continued to retain their prominence in a widely democratic and progressive society, is indeed a mystery. While successive generations are often not blamed for their forefathers' mistakes and crimes, its actually a popular practice in contemporary society. How the royal family has absolved itself of its blotted history and duplicitous actions is a secret only known to them! The family actually has the entire country believing that they are a part of Britain's great history and culture, and have therefore convinced the people to accord them respect and authority. In reality, they are undeserving of both. In a democratic society, nobody has the mandate to assume a grandiose position from where they can look down upon the general populace. At least when our politicians do it, we know we've voted for this humiliation. If the British royal family was indeed as righteous and principled as they are often made out to be, they would have disbanded the monarchy and become ordinary citizens. Instead they idle around in sprawling palaces and milk the treasury with their laziness and arrogance. If we do live in a world that rewards merit, the monarchy must be abolished. What has Prince William or Prince Harry achieved that makes them superior to ordinary middle-aged Britons? Nothing! They were born into this family by a mere stroke of luck, and thus have the right to never work and earn as much as they want? The very existence of the British royal family is a slap on the face of hardwork and merit!

The root of the problem lies with the British society who places the family on a pedestal. A family which has given the country extra-marital affairs, many vendettas, conspiracies, and blatant arrogance! You would think that the family might at least try to set a good example in return for the peoples' admiration; but even that is beyond them. As long as the British people accord importance to these people, they shall exist. The fault also lies with former colonies of Britain which continue to be a part of the Commonwealth, and accept its leadership by the British monarch. The Commonwealth was Britain's way of appeasing the imperialists among them; the last remaining vestige of a history of exploitation and cruelty. And it continues to grow, with farces like the Commonwealth games and cultural exchanges. The world needs to realize that the rules of the game have changed, that the royal family cannot bully them anymore, and that there is no point in according them any respect as they are undeserving of it! Sure, they may be good people, but there are plenty of good people in England, but not all of them are paid 82 million pounds annually for waking up everyday! Any pragmatic society would have abolished the monarchy the moment imperialism fell, but Britain's history is quite complex. Many monarchies often given way to democracy after bloodshed and intense rebellions. The example in neighboring France comes to mind. But in England, the people never fought for democracy. The monarch initially appointed a prime minister to rule his kingdom, while he enjoyed the fruits of his DNA; and gradually this prime minister became an elected official. Thus the British democracy can be said to be a gift from their monarchs, which would explain why they have continued to live the life they do. But surely a family with the wisdom and desire to create democracy would have realised the hypocrisy in letting the monarchy continue! Or maybe the copious life, and the undying loyalty was too much to sacrifice! Either way, the times have changed and the monarchy is nothing but a horrific flashback to the wrongs of colonialism and to the British affluence, built on the sufferings of her colonial subjects.

While it seems unlikely that the royals will abdicate power themselves, there seems to be enough people who see the disutility in their existence within the country. Thus any kind of backlash seems unlikely. India's approach to royalty has been a good one. We forced them to sacrifice their kingdoms with promises of rich titles and pensions until Mrs Gandhi felt it was time to boost her popularity and abolished the privy purses. We realised that the source of their riches was the sweat and blood of the ordinary Indian, and thus we broke the Nizam of Hyderabad, once the world's richest man, into a man submerged in personal debt! The royal families of India are very much a part of Indian history, and some of them like Sivaji and Maharana Pratap Singh are indeed very close to our hearts. But we had the acuity to understand that we now had the power to disregard the very people who had exercised illicit control over us, that we had the power to write our own destiny, and not bow before entitled fools with a false sense of superiority and power! Unfortunately, the British population still consider themselves to be the Queen's subjects, as her little playtoys who work hard every day, and pay taxes so that the Queen and her family can live a happy and comfortable life! That this is happening at the birthplace of modern parliamentary democracy is truly unnerving. While my angst might seem directed at the British Royal family, it is aimed at all countries which have preserved and supported their monarchies, and especially to countries like Australia, who actually let the Queen appoint a Governor as their head of state. The country down under seems to hate the Barmy army, but not the Queen! Its important to understand at this point that while the members of the royal family are not at fault for their parentage, and may not be bad people as such, the fact that they continue to leech off the public's money and satisfy their gargantuan need for dominance with traditions like the knighting ceremony is a testimony of their unwillingness to accept progressive thinking and democratic norms, and most importantly....equality before law!

The North Korean Starbucks!

If I had gotten a penny for every time I predicted a Korean bonhomie, I would have been broke as hell! The laws of physics are often considered to be the zenith of rigidity and adherence. But if one thing could have scored higher on the zealousness and rigidity chart, it would have been the North Korean society. Their inherent sense of hatred towards the western civilisation and an unyielding fidelity to their Supreme Leader had made North Korea a very dangerous international player. North Korea is like that random neighbour who has unnaturally high compound walls and an insanely short temper. He hates his neighbours for no reason, and his social life is non-existent. Basically, North Korea is the 'psychopath' among nations. The eccentricity of their leader has contributed to this tarnished image, but the society has not been faultless. There are no leaders in the world who would not love to crush freedom of speech, and rule with an iron fist. Self-importance and narcissism are the most universal hallmarks of all leaders, and only spiritual leaders can claim any deviance from this template. National leaders are often so full of themselves, that their actions and perspectives seem bullet-proof and any opposition to them feels pointless and irrational! Combine this trait with unlimited power and dynastic legitimacy, and you get a dangerous concoction called Kim Jong-Un. Kim exhibits all qualities that a rogue leader must posses- arrogance, blatant disregard for the world, narcissism and most importantly, a keen sense of entitlement. Kim is part of a dynasty that has achieved high-standing in North Korea. His father and his life is the stuff of legends that the North Korean kids grow up hearing. There is actually a generation growing up in North Korea, who are unaware of the Avengers and what Thanos has done to them! The North Korean way of life revolves around the mythical aura that the Kims have created around themselves. There are stories about how a 10 year old Kim lifted a hunting rifle and shot the bull's eye thrice in a row. How this great marksman grew up to be a chubby and ruthless dictator remains to be understood. The North Korean problem, is an outcome of poor administration and a misplacement of trust. People claim that Kim never sleeps, and that he shoots fire from his arse. But none of this points towards how he might be an efficient leader. Or even a pleasing entertainer. Kim allows very little of North Korea to be seen by the outside world. There are regular reports of poor living conditions and draconian restrictions on civil liberties. The press is literally non-existent and the citizens are completely brainwashed. The type of government that Kim runs is based on convincing the citizens that affluence is a state of mind and that he is the guru who shall lead them there. There is no other explanation for the heightened spiritual pedestal that his family is given. It is this vice-like psychological grip that has created loyal citizens in the midst of utter poverty and serfdom. North Korea is basically like Wakanda, but without the technology and the money!

So how does an arrogant spiteful leader like Kim Jong-Un come to the negotiating table. What has caused this abrupt capitulation to western interests? A change of heart seems unlikely, and any sort of compulsion can be ruled out. While the conspiracy theorist in me is hoping that this is all an elaborate plan hatched by the North Koreans, it doesn't seem likely. North Korea has an impressive arsenal of nuclear weapons, which may not have flattened San Fransisco or Portland, but could have most definitely destroyed US allies in the east. So the only reason why Kim might have thrown in the towel, is cause he wasn't the biggest predator in the jungle anymore. Donald Trump is as near a Kim Jong-Un as an elected leader can be. With grandiose statements and an aggrandised sense of his own capabilities, Trump is a character that Kim has never encountered. Both leaders have an insatiable ego, palpable arrogance and total spite for the fate of the world. But as Trump pointed out, his nuclear weapon is much bigger than Kim's. The world's accepted solution to North Korea was a pacifist approach aimed at conciliation and appeasement. They continued to let Kim bully them, while their Gandhian appeal to his conscience made little to no progress. Donald Trump proved to be a different animal. He didn't seem to care whether a nuclear war broke out or not; this was a battle of two egos, and Trump was not going to back off.  To say that Trump was truly concerned with the Korean problem and felt a moral urge to relieve tensions is beyond any sense of reality. The recent events are a classic example of a new bully taking on the old bully, except the new guy is much more powerful. Kim has reached a point where disarmament is his only strategy to retain his country. A nuclear war would devastate Korea and non-cooperation would surely have drawn the American wrath. So the god-like mythical saviour turned out to be nothing but an opportunistic man who crumbled when his existence came under threat. So much for legacy! The Republicans have always had a more decisive stand on foreign policy and their eagerness to exercise the USA's hard power is well documented. Combine this with an egotistic president who wants to etch his name into history, and the present is what you arrive at. While there is no denying that President Obama's carrots only policy had allowed North Korea to fester into a bigger threat, the ramifications of  what is about to happen might be too much for the North Koreans to bear.

Imagine being told day in and day out, that the Americans are Satan's henchmen, only to see your very leader hug it out with the enemy commander. The emotional shock for the people might be too big for Kim to contain. And if North Korea follows the Chinese way of opening up its economy, Kim might find himself out of power very soon. Economic freedom is the seed from which civil liberties are born, the sapling from which the desire to speak one's mind germinates! While the Chinese Communist Party is largely like a caucus, the North Korean communism is based on dynasty and personality trait, two things that never survive the test of time. Western society and western culture bear the hallmarks of freedom and excellence, the epitome of affluence and enlightenment. And the wave of resistance and demands that this shall create in the North Korean society will be too much for Kim to quell. The alluring light of western luxuries has been the coupe de grace to many civilisations, and North Korea doesn't seem different. An exposure to the American dream might be the end of the Kim dynasty. If Kim feels that Trump will adopt laissez-faire once the disarmament is complete, he is completely mistaken. Trump remains a businessmen at heart and he will pressurise North Korea to join mainstream international politics and be party to international agreements and organisations. Trump will try to create a vassal out of Kim, which is unlikely meet a successful end. In the end, Kim's decision to let up on the arms race so as to protect his sovereignty, might have been the worst thing he could have possible done, and it might be all downhill from here for the evil King T'Challa!

Lets scrap the IPL!

Lets look within ourselves for a moment and accept the fact that the IPL is just a platform for rich people with way too much money and time to make fools out of a million people! Sure the first season was exciting. Nobody knew what this tournament would do, or what purpose it would serve. But the IPL has pretty much done it's job. It's made the game more febrile, the players have become household names and club loyalties have been solidified. One would think its time to wind up this charade and get on with some good old inter-national matches, but the BCCI is just too unresponsive. The organisation has a strange allure which creates money mindedness in every person who holds office. The sole purpose of the IPL was to garner support for the new 20-20 format which suddenly gained traction once India captured the World Cup in South Africa. The IPL definitely achieved some great things. Its been a source of livelihood for many out-of-favour players like Gambhir and Uthappa and has introduced new stars like Sanju Samson and Ambati Rayudu. But how long can this go on? Surely at some point these players have to break into the national side and prove their mettle! But how many have done this? And who is answerable for all the money that has come into the game? The IPL has hijacked the game of cricket and made it so attractive, that it has become an obligation to watch each and every one of these matches.

Lets start with the auction process. Even if one is to let the seemingly antediluvian concept of selling people slide, what logic does a pre determined pay cheque make? Think back three years and you'll remember an absolutely appalling performance from multi-million dollar man Yuvraj Singh who was paid upwards of 10 crores for his dismal show. Many guys who were paid with lesser zeroes ended up making a mountain of runs. So at the end of the day, its not talent or performance that earns you money in the IPL, its your reputation. So in theory, a player could bring in 20 crores for himself, and not make even 20 runs throughout the tournament. This logic is lost on me and hopefully many others. The IPL is thus the clash of well founded assumptions made by affluent people on who is likely to make runs or take wickets. In foreign leagues there are scouts who traverse the geography in search of fresh talent. But in IPL, scouting is delegated to statisticians and the new talents are often benched or given a few matches at most. If the idea of the IPL was to win the trophy, then why is there a limit on the number of overseas players. The IPL was envisaged as an effort to develop grass root cricket and discover talent, stashed away in oblivion. But discovering and shaping talent is a long and arduous task, which often collides with the self-serving interests of the team management. After 11 years of IPL, the highest point of many great players' career has been representing their club!

The actual IPL matches have become facetious to the point where the lack of context has become all too obvious. The people of India who ignore their state's Ranji team and yet catch a flight to follow their club are also at fault. Beyond money, there is no loyalty that the players share with their club. Some matches are simply begging for more relevance and sense. The reverse fixtures are often monotonous and the lop sidedness of the teams is becoming too huge to ignore. Come the second half of the tournament, dead rubbers dominate the schedule with table toppers feeding their egos by steamrolling physically and emotionally drained bottom-placed teams. The umpiring standards have dropped this year, and understandably so. There are literally more than a dozen games to be played for each franchise. To put this in context, 20 teams in the La Liga play each other twice. And so do the meagre 8 teams in the IPL. If the goal is longevity, then surely their must be some context. The passion and fervour of the international fixtures is completely absent from IPL matches. Most of the stadiums are occupied by people who are out to have fun. To spend the evening and unwind themselves. But there is nothing unwinding or relaxing when India is playing! The tension is palpable and the crowd is genuinely involved. This fanaticism is what sets cricket apart in India, and the IPL is slowly killing it. The yearly overdose of irrelevant fixtures and nonsensical pre-shows which are basically like a pension scheme for retired cricketers is a dull script which begs to be scrapped. IPL matches need to bring more meaning to the players involved. There must be appropriate incentives for victory and dire consequences for failure. This would probably make the viewers more interested and the players more responsible. With around 14 games to be played, almost every team is bound to win a handful of matches, but with no effect on the overall result.

Almost everything associated with the IPL has become trivial. The cheerleaders look disinterested, the contest winners look like they'd rather be somewhere else, and the stadiums get emptier every year. This brings me to my next problem. The venue of IPL matches. Home grounds are an asset to every team, but the IPL was never like any other sporting league. The La Liga is all about the prestige of the Spanish cities and the honour that comes with lifting the cup. The city based clubs in IPL are only auxiliary to the ultimate goal of improving Indian cricket. Thus home grounds make little to no sense. Bengaluru has a population of 1.43 crore people. The Chinnswamy has a capacity of 40,000. It would take 50 seasons of IPL for everyone in Bengaluru to watch an IPL match. During this span, not only would the population have exploded, the second generation of players after the current crop would have retired. Since making the IPL matches a universal right seems impossible, it would have made a lot of sense for the BCCI to shift games into newer stadiums and smaller cities, where the experience of a live cricket match remains novel. The IPL is not a birth right of all metro habitants! The continuous change in venues would make the tournament more interesting and also socially penetrative. The opening ceremonies are an event in themselves, where Bollywood's overpaid celebrities make it a point to delay the cricketing action with their dance numbers.

The IPL was supposed to be about cricket. To bring out the best in the game that has evolved so much over the years. Sure, the IPL has created a niche for itself in the cricketing world, and yes it has revitalised limited overs cricket, but at what cost? Regular reports of corruption and narcissism, coupled with an unending schedule of exhaustive fixtures, the IPL has made cricket, a mere adjunct to the whole concept. I think its time the BCCI puckered up and decided to scrap the IPL and replace it with more meaningful international fixtures. The Champions League of the past made more sense! The IPL has grown beyond India and the BCCI. It has lost relevance and has become a tradition which is carried out annually. We would do well to take a leaf out of the Big Bash league, where Australians have found some good limited overs cricketers. The IPL still caters to the ego of already established players who have no point to prove. Soon, the IPL will dominate Indian cricket in such a way that international fixtures will loose prominence and the cricket lovers will have to be content with meaningless matchups between genuinely disinterested franchises. The alternative of course, is to scrap the whole thing!