The role of a government in a pandemic

 What is the role of an elected government during a pandemic?

Is its role to protect each life or make wide sweeping decisions for the greater good ? How much of such a decision making policy have to do with out cultural context ? Let's say, we as Indians have always been more skewed to the collective rather than the individual. So is the government also more skewed towards protecting the many rather than the individual ? 

I'm going to make a disclaimer here and say that I have nothing for or against the current BJP government- both centre and state- in this particular topic. 

My questions are about the vaccines we have and their approx 0.61/million chance of killing anyone who takes them. (Clots post vaccination ). This percentage  seems to be still under debate, but we know that it is not zero. Some people, very few people, are developing clots and even fewer still - to the tune of 6 people out of 1 crore of those who take the vaccines are dying. And we are 140 crore people in this country. Even if we manage to vaccinate half the population we are talking about 400 odd people dying due to the vaccines.

So, in the interest of protecting a larger number of the population from dying, this is effectively government approved death of a smaller number of people. And we have to pay for the chance to die- the vaccines are not even free! for the 18-44 year old group.  

Our government is not alone in making this hard decision of using an imperfect vaccine, several others have chosen to continue with the available vaccine - Astrazeneca or other easily available vaccine- than waiting for a perfect vaccine- which will not have the risk of death associated with it. Some European countries have halted the use of the clot-risk vaccine for the section of the population with highest risk of clot development. Some developing countries have also stopped the use of this vaccine. Is it because they are places where the individual good is more important than the collective good? Are those the places where every single life is important?  Why is every single person's life not important in India? Is it because we have a lot of disposable population? Where if a few extra people die, it is thought to be okay? 

This is a pandemic- and all solutions should be welcome. There is no perfect solution. There is no perfect vaccines. All vaccines come with some side effects. I agree with all these statements. So, we should use the vaccines we have. But can't the government restrict its use in the population group where the clots are occurring more and mortality is the result. Why can't they spend money and political effort to get a vaccine that doesn't kill people? Where deaths can be avoided, we should avoid them, no?

The slow demise of the die-hard Rajini fan

I saw Lingaa recently and it was at  multiplex in Bangalore and maybe the location played a role in my experience, but I don't think it did. I think the whole Rajini movie watching experience has been changing slowly but surely over the years. And here I'm not speaking about the first day-first show( many first shows, given the advent of the multi-plex) experience, where  no matter the quality of the movie, the joint mob-feeling of euphoria and screaming establish the atmosphere of the movie-watching experience. I'm  talking about going to the theater a week after the film has been released, because you want to enjoy a thalaivar movie without the noise and really enjoy the punch dialogues and the masterful way in which he subdues the villains, helps the needy and the poor and basically gives you a warm fuzzy glow while exiting the movie hall, like Arunachalam, Basha, Shivaji, etc did for us.

I'm guessing that a lot of people are thinking this after watching Lingaa, but only a few are saying it, maybe because of a lingering sense of the years of hero-worship that they have done for the Super-Star of Tamil Nadu stops them from uttering such sacrilegious thoughts- It's time that our Thalaivar hung up his hero-role boots and do what actors do - act in roles instead of being the role the movie is written for and around.

Sonakshi Sinha is younger than both of Thalaivar's daughters and I guess that Anushka Shetty is about the same age, or at most, a year or two older than his eldest. It is quite disheartening to see him dance around with these young girls. One might argue that many heroes of the past have done the same, but that does not mean that it was tasteful or easy to consume for the fans. Those heroes who did it in the black and white era got away with it easier because of the forgiving nature of the technology in those times. But with extra high definition picture quality available these days, the camera is unforgiving in its capture of every skin crease, fold and frailty in movement, especially when trying to bust a move that the hero might have pulled off with elan twenty years ago.

Fans of this era who are more aware of alternate offerings of entertainment might choose to consume those than watch a Thalaivar movie. What Amithabh Bachchan learnt with his last few movies as a hero is what our Rajni Sir needs to learn, but I really don't want to watch our Thalaivar go through that painful experience. I wish that he would understand it by having watched his friends and switch over gracefully to roles that suit his age and gravitas. And that means eschewing young heroines completely in his movies, unless it is a movie like Cheeni Kum where the story mandates an older man and a younger woman falling in love. Else, unless his directors cast age-appropriate leading ladies, his movies are going to disenchant first and then slowly lose him his fan base.