I like to read about - articles and interviews - successful people. In any field - sports, movies, arts, business. It is a much better learning experience than reading self-help books, listening to motivational gurus, or worse, following any Godman. Genuine achievements give semblance of authenticity and trust to what successful people say, unlike in case of others, where it may be empty talk. Also, there is greater objectivity as there is scope of judge, in my mind, the veracity or lack thereof of what such public personalities say.
The quality of an interview depends on the the questions asked. Many interviews are sycophantic, turning into advertisements. They are structured to glorify a cause or the person. Or the interviewer is subservient, fearful of posing uncomfortable questions. This is emphatically true in case of the Indian media, partly as a result of our tendency to accord divine status to celebrities, thus above all reproach; as well as our innate difficulty in challenging authority - deserving or perceived.
Now that I have rambled, let me come to my core issue. When I see interviews of successful people, I wish the interviewer would ask a personal question - “How do you handle power, money, and pride”. Facets of money, power and the arrogance that comes with it engrosses and perplexes me. A famous quote goes “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.
Power is the ability to influence or to control. As per me, power has three possible sources - a) Money, b) Position, and c) Knowledge, talent or artistic skill. All the three sources of power that I enlist can be used constructively and for ‘greater good’, if there is such a thing. The power derived from ‘knowledge’ or ‘talent’ has fewer instances of being abused - Hiroshima bombing being a real-life example apart from all the mad scientists in Marvel comics. But power derived from money and position is summarily abused. The thing is that the line between good use and abuse of power is blurred. It is a difficult balance, to me, almost beyond the control of humans.
Over time, the societies have come to accept abuse of power as human nature. It is an elevated level of thought and consciousness to not implicitly accept abuse of power. I am not sure if any society has achieved that level of consciousness. Indian society has indeed not. The extent to which we expect and accept abuse of power is startling. Some part of it flows from the fibre of this society where people in power are exalted - what I call the ‘mai-baap’ syndrome. Indian population can be extremely subservient to those in power which induces abuse of power (just like how many famous rock stars easily fall into the trap of womanising because female fans willingly throw themselves to them). And the expectation of power-abuse has only deepened over the years. It is assumed that a politician would use his time in power to amass disproportionate amount of wealth; that near and dear ones of those holding prominent positions would secure jobs/contracts easily. It is only when power abuse goes to criminal extent that we are jolted (that too not always), else we are ok.
I find the Indian society increasingly obsessed with money. While there are communal and geographical disparities to this, the community I inhabit has nauseating obsession. Money is important - to have material comforts, for good health, for peace of mind, for freedom, both mental and physical. I don’t deny that poverty is a bane. But the distinction is not between poverty or absence of it, it is rather about the greed for more wealth. Indian society is increasingly placing greater premium on wealth above all virtues. Virtues like honesty, integrity, determination, courage, knowledge, wisdom, benevolence, lawfulness, charity are losing importance to the power of wealth. And increasingly, the society is comfortable with it. There seems to be no conscious repentance for this behaviour. Again it is not about willingness to live in poverty, instead it is about senseless greed. The line between the two is thin and it is hard for a person to know when he has transitioned from running away from poverty to chasing wealth. As the lifestyle expands with wealth, the definition of poverty changes. What was luxury yesterday becomes a necessity today. Nevertheless, I believe that man, as a conscious being can distinguish between the two. But there is a another aspect to this - whether your society places wealth at the high pedestal, it judges those without it as non-ambitious or failure. Then an individual’s choice is limited but to get into the race.
In the world I inhabit, it is very usual and expected that any interaction between two individuals entails each judging the other person’s wealth. Cues such as attire, gadgets, jewellery, vehicle, address etc. are closely noticed. Because wealth can be so easily quantified, analysed, trended, it is a much better tool (than other intangibles) to compare people, to rank order, to compete, and to define success and failure. To many Indian readers, this may seem like harping on the obvious. I have met so many people who get appalled when I mention this, the look on their faces saying “Isn’t it obvious?”, “What’s wrong with it?”, “You are naive”. Indeed, I feel naive very often. But I have read enough that this has not always been the state of affairs. Many societies - Indian and others - have at some point attached importance to ideals other than money. Infact, amassing wealth had been viewed as abominable by many.
The hatred of chasing money can have two interpretations - a) genuine hatred and belief in valuing higher virtues, and b) false hatred emanating from weakness of character - hatred for money or money-grabbers because oneself is not capable of it. I am not sure where I fall.
Agree that there is a degree of virtue also in chasing money - it gives birth to ambition, which can be the seed for many good things including progress. Many industries, and businesses owe their existence and success to somebody’s desire to become rich. These businesses serve the needs of the society as well as uplift people out of poverty. It is hard to imagine how the civilisation would have advanced had the humans not been greedy. At the same time, I have two counter arguments -
- At the heart of most progress is the desire to solve a problem, to innovate, to make things better and to help humanity at large. That is when society gains the most.
- Even if greed is at the heart, it should stop up to a point, after which other virtues should take greater importance (similar to the ashram system proposed in Hinduism). What that level is highly subjective and difficult to define for most people.
To expand the second point above, the problem is not with chasing money - it may be a greater travesty to not do justice to one’s ability. The problem is chasing money at the cost of higher virtues. Chasing money inherently breeds vices, narrows thought, weakens and distorts people out of their natural form, takes pleasure out of life as it is, consumes mental space with constant comparison and envy, prevents appreciation of non-material virtues in others. All a result of the power that the money allows them.
Power, as I said, can also come by way of a position or rank and that too is an attraction for many. Many positions in bureaucracy or in state-owned companies do not give great financial rewards (at least not legally) but compensate for the same by way of positional power. The universal love for recognition makes people crave a position of power, often not realising that the appreciation or acknowledgement that they are getting is just for the position and not for the position-holder. While positional power and monetary benefits go hand-in-hand, but holding a position of influence can be intoxicating even without any monetary gains. Just having control over other people, to be able to make decisions which can significantly impact lives - make them or mar them, can be heady. So many despots have been driven purely out of obsession to decide others’ fate.
Development of my consciousness - reading of history, state of current politics, personal experiences and ruminations - has made me hateful of power. Consequently I am wary of having any power, or appearing to exercise any power, at the expense of appearing meek, and naive. Still I got a position of power - chairing a committee in my organisation. The committee enjoys a fair degree of authority - people make presentations to this committee on which it makes decisions - cross questioning presenters, and having the luxury to disregard their opinions. I have been a presenter in front of such committees and was conscious of the arrogance that creeps into the committee members at times. So I was very wary of how I conducted myself when I became the chairperson of the committee. It has been more than a year and I am not happy with how I have done. Despite my best attempts, I get swayed when I am sitting in that committee. I would get aggressive, challenge the presenters, or other committee members, get angry, irritated and restless. While I can fully defend the intent and rationale of my conduct, I cannot defend the conduct itself. I want to be more measured, control, and in more control of my emotions. But I have not been successful. In the end, this constant duality of trying to behave in a particular manner but still getting influenced has made me detest the committee. The fact that I, despite being aware of it, am not able to control abusing it, has made me more conscious of how difficult it is to manage power, especially for those who have much more of it then me.
With power comes pride - one of the seven deadly sins. The latin for pride is Superbia and it has both positive and negative connotations. The difference between the two is thin and it is difficult to maintain the balance. At its worst, pride is downright ugly. Better words to describe the ugly connotation are hubris, conceit, haughtiness, arrogance, superciliousness. Arrogance comes readily even from the perception of having power. And this perception can be immediate as well as transitory. Few people have absolute certainty and confidence in themselves, irrespective of the circumstances. Mostly, the sense of power is relative. So, in India, people are usually arrogant to those who serve them - in restaurants, toll booths, flights etc. - driven by a sense of material superiority because they are paying for the services. Despite understanding it, I am never able to accept the arrogance that people acquire when they think they are in power. Few people are able to maintain humility and grace even when they hold any power. And talking about virtuous behaviour, one can go beyond humility. Instead of chasing more power for oneself and at the expense of forsaking virtues, setting poor examples for others, it would be refreshing if powerful people used their power for public good. In India, this seldom happens, my favourite examples being - big film stars not willing to stand behind genuine causes or to promote their craft, sportsmen not voicing opinions freely when they see rampant corruption in sport administration, businessmen not promoting fair practices or doing enough for upliftment of the society. Most powerful people in India fail to realise the inherent responsibility of power, basking only in its privileges.
