The Tale of Lassi and Mango Lassi

[“Favouritism, cronyism, and nepotism all interfere with fairness because they give undue advantage to someone who does not necessarily merit this treatment. In the public sphere, favouritism, cronyism, and nepotism also undermine the common good.” But do we feel so or use the same unethical tools to get advantage over others.......]

Last few days, Google has been in the news. Larry Page casually tweeted about forming an umbrella company ‘Alphabet’ and appointing Indian Sundar Pichai as the Google CEO triggering a tsunami of discussions in the social media. Don’t know about other places, but surely in our subcontinent.

After Microsoft’s nomination of Satya Nadella as its head, Sundar’s nomination was seen as an emphatic reassertion of India’s’ dominance over the present knowledge industry of the US.

Coinciding with this, Google announced the release of the newest version of Android named Marshmallow (Android 6.0) – in their tradition of naming each version after some sweet, in alphabetical order.

Interestingly, here in India, as if a sideshow, with such release, a vociferous campaign has been raging since 2013 on the social media to urge Google to name the earlier version as ‘Lassi’ which they eventually named ‘Lollipop’. The argument - with so many Indians working in Google, and huge consumer base, this would have been an acknowledgement of India’s role in the success of this company.

And this time also in 2015, with Sundar as the ‘Maibaap’ of Google, Indians staked their claim over the next nomenclature with turbocharged ammunition – ‘Mango Lassi’.

This time the campaign was just not riding merit; it was backed by our ‘Contact and Connection’ with ‘the boss’. The Indians with their unshakeable faith on favouritism were sure that the boss would grant this favour at least. After all it was for a national cause.

Hilarious as it may sound, but this is indicative of a deeper psyche of us, call it - gullibility or complacence; we draw huge amount of strength to back our cause, once we establish some commonality with the person we are going to engage with. Like, we suddenly discover that the present minister is our old school mate, doesn’t matter even if we haven’t met once even in the last two decades; or may be an IAS officer with whom the only connection in the past was that his elder brother used to borrow books from us, or as peripheral as, “he is from our own area or same district” we don’t shy away from making our bid leveraging that connection.

Such is the confidence over building our bridge with a person, based on these considerations, that we completely forget the perspective or position or inability of the party with whom we are building the bridge with. This invariably results in disappointments many a times. For we turn blind to the other persons logic or situation or intent to make a common cause of the issue we are advocating.

People familiar to the power corridors must be familiar with such campaigns - hoards of people having no particular personal interest camping at the capital to submit memorandum to the politically powerful, over inanities like naming a road connecting their village or getting a particular institution established in their area.

I saw this as a disruptive act by a section of people who instead of looking at the logic and rational of a decision, put pressure on the government staking their ego while making such demands. These, mostly are driven by its regional and political interests.

I once narrated this particular trait in us to a friend, she responded by telling that world over people network with the other by discovering such similarities or issues which are mutual. The whole placement of through candidates passing from professional colleges rides on the contacts their alumni. That’s the reason people queue up at exclusive clubs to have access to other members and leverage their contacts. And why see it as just an Indian phenomenon?

This made me think if the people in power or position take decisions solely on the basis of merit or regionalism, caste, language, fellow feelings influence it too?

In the past, if the major project location, new trains, budgetary provisions, establishment of major industries, were not driven by some other considerations than its right rationale. Whether Laloo was the minister of the union looking after the interest of the railways or he was out to please his constituency and state where his own political interests are staked? A trip across India will expose one to such trophies which stand as a proof to favouritism and regionalism and have served its partial purpose too; doesn’t matter if the rationale of the decision was tweaked to favour a section of people and their interest.

So, when were favouritism, cronyism and nepotism was considered unethical? It’s not only accepted but respected as the biggest display of one’s manhood.

Realising this, I from being a critic of the campaign to name the latest version of android as ‘Mango Lassi’ have plans to start a campaign to name the next one as 'Nimbu Pani'.