Corruption has many similarities to Cancer

In early 1950s, Sydney Farber ( Pathologist  ) and Mary Lasker ( Social activist) launched an Anti cancer movement with much fan fare to eradicate cancer. They managed to bring in huge money to fund this initiative. In 2011, Anna Hazare ( social activist) and Legal experts launched Anti-corruption movement to eradicate 'corruption'.

Both movements had one striking similarity : Both movements concentrated on curative remedy, at the expense of preventive remedy: cancer movement concentrated on chemotherapy ( post-cancer) while anti-corruption movement concentrated on legal measures ( post-corruption). Both made the same mistake: Despite the knowledge that cancer , like corruption, is heterogenous (there are different type of cancers and therefore different causes); both marched on to find ONE UNIVERSAL CURE.

Despite pouring billions ( not millions) of dollars to find this universal cure, cancer remain 'undefeated' according to the Bailar report of 1994.  After 60 years, we know that several successes in cancer cures have happened due to one reason: Researchers identified and studied specific cancer pockets and found appropriate strategies to address it.

For example, colon and cervical cancer cures were reported due to early detection caused by new methods of screening. This is preventive remedy. Leukemia and lymphoma cures resulted due to better methods in chemotherapy. This is curative remedy. On the other hand, breast cancer mortality rates improved due to the mix of preventive ( mammography) and curative remedy ( surgery and chemotherapy to remove remnant cancer cells).

The reduction in lung cancer mortality happened due to preventive methods, which are beyond medical field. The reduction happened due to political activism ( FTC action on warning labels on cigarettes), inventive litigation ( cases to rope in tobacco companies) and counter marketing ( anti-tobacco advertisements)

What is one-liner lesson for us? That anything as big as cancer is heterogenous by its nature. It is necessary to identify self-contained individual pockets ( lung, cervical and other areas), study the causative factors in each of the pocket, and devise an appropriate mix of preventive and curative remedy to address that pocket.

Promise of universal cure, despite all the activism or good intention, cannot solve the problem.  It just wastes money, efforts and drives away the motivation. Mary Lasker, the activist, was not active in anti-cancer at all when she died in 1994.

If we do not have to sit after 60 years and mourn that nothing happened due to anti-corruption drive, what should we be doing?

Corruption, like cancer, is heterogenous.  It is important to identify self contained pockets, study them individually and devise appropriate remedy for addressing it. Tackling corruption at Passport and RTO offices require different mix of preventive and curative remedies than tackling corruption at 2G License grants. Every pocket of corruption requires a different mix of preventive and curative (i.e legal) remedy. While Company law corruption could be reduced by e-enabling of company registration, the same remedy cannot be applied to granting of non-agriculture land approvals. In pockets similar to lung cancer, such as anti-dowry or RTO police, we may have to adopt social activism to change laws and people's habits , and extend the remedy to include social activism.

Let us not 'simplify' the monster of corruption and believe that it can be tackled by one social activist and legal specialists. Let us become realistic and sane. Howsoever it may be tempting to get into action mode and do something, we must control our impulse and take meaningful actions. As Betrand Russell writes: Thoughtless action and Actionless thought are equally bad.

Source of inspiration: Siddhartha Mukherjee, The Emperor of all Maladies ( the biography of cancer)

Can a law arrest corruption?

Today I read in the newspapers about Anna Hazare's victory in his battle over 'Corruption'. He managed to convince the Government to have a bipartite committee over formulating the Lokpal bill. This Government's willingness will indeed allow to make an effective draft of LokPal bill. But can a bill/law enable a society to arrest corruption?

If law was enough to arrest a social evil, anti-dowry bill would have stopped dowry long time back. Anti-foeticide laws would have arrested the drop of female/male rate. Effective Road traffic laws ( RTO) would have increased the usage of autos and taxis.

However we all know that dowry in different forms is still rampant. Infact various innovative ways are devised to bypass the anti-dowry law ! We also know that Female/male ratios are alarmingly decreasing in the most developed states like Maharashtra. And despite all the regulations of RTO, every day citizens still fight with auto/taxi drivers as they refuse to ply at regulated rates. Infact this auto menace also has created uninintended consequences: Citizens have resorted to using own vehicles which is increasing the road traffic beyond manageable proportions.

We all know that such social evils ( embedded in social fabric) cannot be countered by formulating laws and bills. These laws can become effective only if rest of the supporting elements are also 'synchronised' with it. For instance, female/male ratio can be lowered only by support of another element: Education of women. One can easily see the influence of this Education in female/male ratio of a state like Kerala, where literacy rates are the highest in India.

Therefore, although we must hail Anna Hazare's victory ( that will help us formulate better Anti-Corruption law) we should not stop at formulating just this law. We need to understand the 'dynamics of corruption' and identify those elements which we can influence. We should tie these different elements together: some with law, some with advocacy, some with awareness.

Thomas Friedman's book Lexus and Olive tree has very interesting insights on this phenonomenon, which he calls as 'Kleptocracy'. In short, more thought is needed to identify and 'synchronise' these elements if we are serious about arresting corruption in India. Only good intentions and uncordinated actions will not help.

Orissa collector shows the way to fight terrorism

Today, I saw the news on TV about the release of Vineel Krishna, District Collector of Malkangiri, Orissa. The news showed huge crowds standing outside the house of Collector, waiting for him to arrive..

It was reported, that when Vineel Krishna was abducted 7 days back, the shops were shut down and call of bandh was given. No leader was involved in coordinating the crowd. Crowd just spontaneously came together. Two days back,tribals planned to attack Maoists hideout where the collector was supposedly held. Vineel Krishna has been reportedly working deep inside the district and has changed the face of district by implementing various development schemes. Some people in the crowd were vociferous about the work Krishna has done in Malkangiri. The spontaneous support of the crowd clearly gave signal to Maoists that they are fast losing their support base.

The news also reported that the collector and the engineer were freed by Maoists because Government have released a Maoist on bail. If development is offered to people through what the collector has done, what can freed Maoists do really?

This is a lucid example of how terrorism can be fought. It is time that Americans learn from this. Instead of spending huge amount on warfare, they could achieve their objective at far lesser cost, if they do it in right way. Or may be, the way is known, but we ignore the right way because it takes far more effort and pain to stick to the right way!