Dawn of 21st Century.

The dawn of twenty first century was covered by clouds of economic melt down. The economy which was global and technology helped it to interconnect with each and every corner of the world. Well economy of the world isn’t the only thing that technology has brought together, every other field has been. Culture, agriculture, army, education and worst of all politics, all of them have been linked.

Being an engineer makes it a bit easier to understand the positives and negatives of a larger grid. But understanding is no guarantee that the calamity will not occur. This calamity came with a change in guard, the new CEO of the World Inc. CEO is a better word for ‘the leader’ in this capital driven economy. The CEO has some ‘even better’ board of directors with him, a dream team for devastation. Before we move on lets have a shallow idea of this new corporation called ‘World Inc’. It consists of three broad categories, first ones are the profit making (USA and part of Europe), second ones are non-profit making (ASIA excluding the central part and some sick parts of South Asia) and the third ones are the Charitable organization's (everything else in the form of land on the face of earth). So the CEO is commander in chief of the biggest of all the cats.

I’m not someone who waste’s a single second discussing someone else action. Now the consequence, well the biggest one for me is that I have enough of time after applying for more than 325 jobs that I ‘can’ enjoy blogging. Someone told me that a North American Master’s help. This is post-help era. Looking onto the world now, people were loosing jobs (the first one being Al-Gore, he mentioned this at the DNC’2008) and homes in USA, so was the scenes in countries like Philippines and even Vietnam. Soldiers and civilians were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, so was the condition of India and Pakistan, even for USA. Europe, Asia and America were busy drafting stimulus plans for the ailing economy. Climate change was also not lagging behind. New (and young) graduates like me were spending more time on job search portals. But not everything was bad and not all the changes were negative.

It was for the first time in the history of the world that change of guard in one country was so emotionally and closely watched by the world. The first Afro-American was going to be the chief commander in USA and the new CEO of the World Inc. He bought with him tears of joy in the eyes of millions and a ray of hope for billions. (Although what he bequeathed was debatable). I could see on TV people dancing in Japan, Indonesia, Kenya and definitely USA. A new ray of hope for the young Iranian’s. Someone said on a popular American T.V. show that people are happy for two things; first one being that the new CEO is more affable and second one that the ‘COCKY’ old leaving office (Ex-CEO).

Also, people got more aware about there savings and investments. People gained economic terminology and information, words like foreclosure, investment banking, shares, S&P 500, Dow Jones, e.t.c are no more jargon's. People were more attentive at work (except professors, the extreme case of ‘twisted tail of a dog’). Oh! My God, how can I miss this one, Mr Uniform was also removed finally. Although it might bring a sign of relief for my neighbours but for us, Indians, the noise hasn’t gone down. Still I will count it as a positive, let’s be optimistic. Indians were still having lavish marriage parties, Chinese were a wonderful host at Beijing’2008, American super bowl had the same attraction and attention, and finally slum dog’s were making big (real big, million’s).

Number Theory in Politics [final part]

Recognizing the benefits of having engineers in politics does not guarantee their participation. The engineering personality/stereotype of a practical, analytical, and non emotional person must be first overcome (Florman 1976). Changes in the makeup of the political arena will commence only when several changes are made to engineering education, and when programs are developed to involve registered engineers in state and local governments, and in the global community as well.

Engineering education has moved toward a greater reliance upon theoretical science, and consequently, away from experimentation. Part of the problem lies with the engineering schools and the curriculum provided. If engineering students would select political science courses to fulfill general education requirements, then they may begin to break down the antipathy of engineers toward politics that has traditionally limited their involvement. Additionally, engineering curriculum needs to provide comprehensive information about how politics influences the engineering profession. Professors should integrate contemporary problems, issues, and policies into the technical curriculum. This will ensure that graduating engineering students have a basic grasp of public policy issues, and furthermore, recognize that politics can be a career choice for engineers. Political involvement would allow engineers to directly enhance human welfare, the environment, and society through the use of their specialized knowledge and skills.


The engineer’s personality and education are considered strengths that can contribute to solving society’s problems and enhancing human welfare. However, both may act as a restraint to serving society through political involvement. Minor changes to engineering education and actions by engineering societies could help overcome these restraints. As most engineers do not recognize the benefits of political involvement to society, to the profession, and to themselves, engineering societies need to take the initiative in promoting political involvement. [2/2]

Number Theory in Politics

The epicenter of the world lies in politics, which has all to do with numbers. How can a game, which has everything to do with numbers be devoid of the people always playing with it? What has restricted engineers from getting into ‘real’ world (policy making) and proving there mettle instead of just being restricted to implication machinery. The answer to this is not that trivial as it seems.

Not being a law graduate simply can’t be the answer. Some say if you know law it’s easier to break and that’s what makes lawyer better politicians. This statement has always been a reason for my upset tummy. Engineers, in comparison with lawyers, have a fuller comprehension of the uncertainties associated with technology. Technological innovations provide benefits, but often they also lead to unforeseen problems. Accurately assessing the level of risk and value dilemmas associated with new technologies is imperative to lawmakers, as they often need to compromise and simultaneously make the optimal decision. Engineers are trained in risk analysis and therefore understand better than lawyers the limitations of technology.

Brave people who have crossed the line officiated on there transcripts, have mostly made it big. Some suggest that engineers are very much satisfied with there roles. Firstly, I know many of my engineer friends who have a wonderful transcript but the ‘WOW’ factor is missing from there professional life. Secondly, politics require someone very smart and again most of the corporate people you see around are smart and mostly engineers (again a sad story). Finally, my concern is not there performance but number as engineers are endangered species when it comes to politics. When I was writing this a fellow friend of mine called me up and suggested that it’s simply because government invests too much in them and wants them in the role of engineer for development. I will never buy this idea and my friend could sense that in my tone and hanged up (he is my friend, will surely call again). I’m an engineer and have discussed about this ‘investment’ a lot and its self explanatory from the brain-drain phenomenon. As more people walk through this article I’m sure I will have more supporters.

Coming down to numbers again, the worlds largest democracy has 550 (550+2*) elected members at the house of people (Lok Sabha) out of which only 10 are engineers (current stats 7 proper Engineers, 2 Diploma and for one member I’m not sure why his name appears in the search). A representation of 1.8% engineers, in a country which produces more than 350,000 engineers a year can be simply termed as pathetic (As per U R Rao Committee 2004). Now lets say without loss of generality that 50% of them are from colleges which will never appear on Google (for good reasons), and of which more than 25% candidates were not interested in engineering but were forced ,‘P’ pressure (p= peer, parental, and not to be mistaken with pee). The number that still remains surely outnumbers the H1-B visa cap. So let me rephrase my question again, what is the participation of engineers in policy making, just implementation?

This article by no means is intended to disparage those who are actively involved in implementation. It is about the absence of engineers from policy making cohort. Being an engineer, this can be an obvious issue haunting the little left grey cells. A better explanation follows in the succeeding paragraphs.

Traditionally, politicians have had backgrounds in the field most prominent in the economy of their time. During the agricultural and manufacturing eras, politicians had roots in the type of economy that existed and could make decisions about the economic issues that faced the country based on their experiences. Today, in our technologically based economy, lawyers and businesspeople are dominant in the political arena when one would logically believe that technology-oriented professionals (such as engineers) would be more appropriate. This discrepancy between the recently emerging backbone of the economy and those that make the legislation is detrimental to the country in a multitude of ways. Public policy decisions continually grow in technical complexity forcing lawmakers to seek substantial scientific or technical assistance. Thus, public policies are legislated with second-hand technical input, which is clearly inefficient. Comprehension of the capabilities and limitations of engineering and technology is essential for making realistic social, economic, and political decisions. [2].

Lets take a break……