Proud Heritage Structure of Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore

Heritage Structure of Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore

Vidhana Soudha which houses the Karnataka state Legislature and Secretariat is the most magnificent and majestic stone building in Bangalore and perhaps in Karnataka itself. It is said that when a Russian delegation felt that Bangalore was full of European buildings and asked the then chief minister Kengal Hanumanthaiah, “Have you no architecture of your own?”

This inspired Hanumanthaiah to plan a building and the result is the Vidhana Soudha, an epitome of Hindu architecture and a synthesis of Dravidian, Hoysala, Chalukya, and Vijayanagara architectural features. Its construction began in 1952 and was completed in 1956 at an estimated cost of 1.75 crores under a team of experts headed by the chief architect B.R. Manikam. More than 5000 laborers and 1500 skilled sculptors worked on this prestigious project.

Main Dome of Vidhana Soudha The entire structure covers an area of 720 x 360 ft. In the center is an open quadrangle measuring 260 x 250 ft. It is an imposing three storied building with a cellar. Though the building can be approached from all the four sides, the eastern entrance is majestic with 40 ft.-tall columns and flight of steps. The western side has a facade of Rajasthan palaces. The four corners have four towers supporting domes topped by glittering metallic kalashas (inverted pitcher pots.) The main dome is very elegant and has the Indian National Emblem of four Asiatic lions standing back to back mounted on a circular base on the kalasha. Though grey granite is used for exterior, green, bluish, pink and black stones have been used for decoration. The interior of the Vidhana Soudha consists of a banquet hall, Legislative Assembly Hall, Legislative Council Hall, and Cabinet meeting hall in addition to many rooms for the ministers and high officers.

Illuminated Vidhana Soudha in Bangalore

The wood work is another great attraction of this building. Particularly noteworthy are the carved doors of the office of the chief minister, cabinet hall and legislature hall. They show the Karnataka School of wood work at its best which is still a living tradition. Thus Vidhana Soudha is a proud heritage building built in the 20th century testifying to the architectural and sculptural tradition of ancient Karnataka. This building is an eloquent testimony to the continuation of ancient architectural and sculptural tradition of Karnataka as practiced by the Chalukyas, Hoysalas and Vijayanagara rulers. Thus this is a modern building in ancient style of Karnataka. That is the uniqueness of this elegant building.

Any visitor to Bangalore cannot afford to miss this magnificent building, a proud heritage structure of Karnataka, particularly when it is illuminated.

Sam Walton Saw No Need for Unions at Walmart

Pro-Union Activists Protest Against Walmart's Anti-Union Policies

Walmart has always been criticized for its policies against labor unions. Supporters of unionization efforts blame workers’ reluctance to join the labor union on Walmart’s anti-union tactics such as managerial surveillance and pre-emptive closures of stores or departments that choose to unionize. Leaked internal documents show that Walmart’s strategy for fighting to keep its workers from forming unions includes instructing managers to report suspicious activity and warning workers that joining unionizing efforts could hurt them.

Walmart’s management has contended that it’s employees do not need to pay third parties to discuss problems with management as the company’s open-door policy enables employees to lodge complaints and submit suggestions all the way up the corporate ladder. Sam Walton, founder of Walmart wrote in his autobiography:

'Sam Walton: Made In America' by Sam Walton (ISBN 0553562835) I have always believed strongly that we don’t need unions at Wal-Mart. Theoretically, I understand the argument that unions try to make, that the associates need someone to represent them and so on. But historically, as unions have developed in this country, they have mostly just been divisive. They have put management on one side of the fence, employees on the other, and themselves in the middle as almost a separate business, one that depends on division between the other two camps. And divisiveness, by breaking down direct communication makes it harder to take care of customers, to be competitive, and to gain market share. The partnership we have at Wal-Mart—which includes profit sharing, incentive bonuses, discount stock purchase plans, and a genuine effort to involve the associates in the business so we can all pull together—works better for both sides than any situation I know of involving unions. I’m not saying we pay better than anybody, though we’re certainly competitive in our industry and in the regions where we’re operating; we have to be if we want to attract and keep good people. But over the long haul, our associates build value for themselves—financially and otherwise—by believing in the company and keeping it headed in the right direction. Together, we have ridden this thing pretty darned far.

Source: Sam Walton’s autobiography, Made In America

India Will Not and Must Not Become a Superpower

Indian historian and environmentalist Ramachandra Guha speaks of why India will not and must not become a superpower.

I broadly agree with Guha’s analysis about India’s last 60+ years since 1947, especially in the arena of inclusion/exclusion of communities in development process (e.g. tribals being mostly excluded), also the growing Maoism factor, and the polarization of religious communities who, unfortunately can have a foothold in mainstream politics with their religious agenda (e.g. Sangh Parivar via the BJP or the Muslim Parties such as the recently launched one by Akbaruddin Owaisi in Hyderabad).

But Guha is cautious not to completely belittle India’s progress in the last 7 decades and is in fact very hopeful of India’s future. This comes across in most of his writings.

India Flag As for Guha’s reasons why India should not become a superpower his talk mentions something to that effect. He is suspicious of superpowers because the 20th century’s experience with political/economic superpowers (Britain, USA, Russia mainly) is by and large not a good one when you see the record of colonial and post-colonial 20th century. Africa and all parts of Asia were left in tatters and the effects are still unfolding especially in the Middle East and South Asia (Indo-Pakistan conflict/ Hindu-Muslim communal rivalry).

However is it possible to define a superpower differently? Can India become a superpower of a different kind? There is no answer to this question since the model does not exist for the 21st century of such a superpower (EU is a close alternative but EU is historically unique and cannot be replicated). But the model being pursued by India since the last 20 years or a little more does not lend itself to an interpretation that India, even if it became a superpower, will be different from China or USA. And hence my opinion would be in agreement with Guha that India is better off not being a superpower but taking care of its internal issues as best as possible. This does not mean that we cannot unleash Indian potential. The day we unleash Indian potential by and for Indians will actually be the day India might actually claim “superpower” status. (There you go! a new understanding of what it means to be a superpower!)