top of page

By:

Kiran D. Tare

21 August 2024 at 11:23:13 am

A Scientist beyond Mockery

While Indian politics has never been particularly gentle towards intellectuals, it was unusual even by Parliament’s standards for the Director of one of India’s foremost technological institutions to be dismissed with a sneer. Opposition leader and Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra shameful reference to Professor Veezhinathan Kamakoti, Director of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, as a “gaumutra expert,” reduced a lifetime of scien tific accomplishment to a sarcastic political...

A Scientist beyond Mockery

While Indian politics has never been particularly gentle towards intellectuals, it was unusual even by Parliament’s standards for the Director of one of India’s foremost technological institutions to be dismissed with a sneer. Opposition leader and Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra shameful reference to Professor Veezhinathan Kamakoti, Director of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, as a “gaumutra expert,” reduced a lifetime of scien tific accomplishment to a sarcastic political label besides exposing dynastic arrogance. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government and charged with recommending robust, transparent, and leakproof measures to overhaul India’s public examination systems following widespread paper leak controversies. But rather than engage with solutions to problems that have resulted in the controversies, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra chose the path of cheap theatricality. Snickering from her parliamentary perch, she dismissed Prof. Kamakoti as a “gaumutra expert”. The remark immediately drew a scathing open letter from over 200 university vice-chancellors and eminent academics, who rallied to Kamakoti’s support and condemned her for diminishing scholarship itself. More fundamentally, Vadra’s sneer exposed the deep-seated pathology of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty: a reflex of aristocratic condescension toward self-made intellect, combined with an ingrained disdain for India’s indigenous traditions. Unlike Priyanka Gandhi, Professor Kamakoti is not a beneficiary of ancestral political inheritance but an intellectual titan forged entirely by merit. Holding an M.S. and Ph.D. in Computer Science and Engineering from IIT Madras, Kamakoti has spent decades on the front lines of information security and VLSI design. His crowning achievement was in leading the team that engineered Shakti, India’s first industry-grade, open-source RISC-V microprocessor that fundamentally reshaped the nation’s technological trajectory. Shakti provided India with a blueprint for true silicon sovereignty. Kamakoti’s work extends to aerospace-grade chips designed alongside ISRO, over 150 peer-reviewed international papers, and pivotal roles on the National Security Advisory Board. Under his directorship since 2022, IIT Madras has consistently held the No. 1 position in engineering in the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF). Yet Kamakoti’s genius also lies in tangible wealth creation. The IIT Madras Incubation Cell (IITMIC), nurtured under his leadership, has spawned a portfolio of over 540 startups valued at approximately Rs. 74,000 crore ($8 billion), generating more than 11,000 direct high-tech jobs. Kamakoti’s record speaks of a scholar who stayed in India to forge its critical infrastructure and empower a generation of young innovators. The point is why Priyanka Gandhi Vadra felt entitled to mock him? The controversy stems from remarks Kamakoti made regarding ethnoveterinary traditions, where he cited scientific literature discussing the antibacterial, antifungal, and anti-inflammatory properties of bovine bio-fluids - a field actively published in peer-reviewed global journals, including Nature. It seems that for the Gandhi family, any intellectual inquiry that touches upon ancient Indian heritage or traditional knowledge systems is an immediate target for ridicule. For decades, the Congress hierarchy has operated under an unearned superiority complex that views Hindu traditions as some backward superstition to be mocked from the high towers of westernized privilege. The contrast between the scholar and the dynast could not be starker. Professor Kamakoti is a world-class computer scientist who earned his platform through decades of gruelling research, building microprocessors and billion-dollar startup ecosystems. Priyanka Gandhi is a political heir whose primary qualification for public office remains her surname, possessing a portfolio of inherited political capital and a distant diploma in Buddhist Studies. When the academics signed an open letter in support of Kamakoti, while warning that such dismissive labelling risks undermining the constitutional duty to develop a scientific temper, they pinpointed the heart of the issue. True scientific temper means testing hypotheses with rigor, regardless of their cultural origins. True ignorance is mocking what one lacks the intellect to understand. The sharp public backlash against Vadra’s comments also reflects a profound shift in the Indian electorate. The era in which hereditary elites could belittle self-made scholars without accountability has come to a close. In a modern India driven by chip designers, space missions, and digital enterprise, the nation’s true heroes are men like Kamakoti, builders who create value through pure intellect, and not platinum-spooned dynasts whose sole claim to power is ancestral pedigree. In attempting to humiliate an eminent scientist, Priyanka Gandhi did not diminish Professor Kamakoti; she merely laid bare the intellectual vacuum of her own political lineage. When forced to choose between a self-made technocrat advancing national sovereignty and a political heir armed only with arrogance, a rising India has already made its choice.

Dangerous Departures

Updated: Oct 30, 2024

Dangerous Departures

In yet another shocking incident adding to Mumbai’s infamous tryst with stampedes, chaos erupted at Mumbai’s Bandra Terminus following a weekend stampede that left at least ten persons injured, two critically so. A crowd surged toward the Gorakhpur-bound train with nearly 1,500 people vying for seats in 22 unreserved compartments, leading to the stampede. Several others narrowly avoided tragedy, with some even pushed onto the tracks. This is not a unique episode but rather a recurring theme in Mumbai’s bedevilled crowd management, one that has haunted the city’s public spaces, particularly as festive seasons magnify the crowds.


Mumbai is no stranger to stampedes. A horrifying incident in 2017 at Elphinstone Road Station left 23 people dead and nearly 50 injured. The cause was a familiar one: an overwhelming crowd confined to a narrow footbridge during peak rush hour. The tragedy sparked an outcry, with promises from authorities to upgrade infrastructure and enhance safety protocols. Yet seven years on, crowd-related incidents continue to be a constant danger. Today’s incident reveals a similar lapse—a lack of foresight in managing the thousands who gather on platforms ahead of Diwali, eager to return to family. That the Gorakhpur Express was unreserved and heavily crowded was predictable.


The issue lies beyond simply crowd density; it is emblematic of deeper systemic negligence. The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), responsible for local public safety, along with the Railways Ministry, bear responsibility for ensuring order at such high-risk hubs. Although the BMC acknowledged the “festive rush,” it appears little was done to pre-empt it. Swift action could have been taken to either disperse the crowd or reroute passengers. Instead, chaos prevailed.


Political reaction has been swift but uninspiring. Aaditya Thackeray, son of Uddhav Thackeray, launched a scathing attack on the Union Railways Minister, Ashwini Vaishnaw, branding the incident a result of the minister’s “incapable” leadership. This hardly addresses the immediate need: a substantive plan to manage crowds and prevent similar incidents.


Mumbai’s transport infrastructure remains sorely outdated. Platforms are undersized, signalling systems frequently falter, and crowd control mechanisms are grossly inadequate. Despite repeated accidents, there has been little investment in comprehensive crowd management systems or the deployment of personnel trained in emergency response. While railway footbridges were widened after the Elphinstone tragedy, Bandra’s incident demonstrates that such incremental changes are insufficient. Mumbai, which sees a swelling populace during festivals, demands a robust strategy to address its vulnerabilities. This should include technology-driven crowd monitoring, clear communication channels to inform passengers of platform conditions, and additional security and medical staff on high-demand days. It is essential that crowd management training for personnel becomes a priority rather than a reaction to tragedies.

Comments

bottom of page