There is a new epidemic in the town more dangerous than any social disease in the way it touches people's lives. It affects everyone-the good, the bad and the ugly, the bold and the beautiful-and it is spreading fast and furious. There is no escape from it as the exit route is sealed ironically by you and me.

We want to avoid the menace but we continue to abet it if we think doing so would benefit us. Each one of us is the victim and the predator in turns or both at the same time. Worse, we are not shameful but brag about it at the slightest hint of an opportunity.

So what is this mass culture? It is called Tada-Mama syndrome.

Despite our pretensions to having a democratic society with an administrative apparatus/bureaucracy that is based on the Weberian principles of anonymity, rationality, written rules and objectivity, our mindset is still steeped in the feudal values. We have laws and rules only to be broken at the drop of a hat.

We have so many exceptions to the application of a rule here and there that in practice they (the exceptions) prevail over the original laws in letter and spirit. To us, primordial relations and loyalties are sacrosanct; the legal enactments are only a show-piece and a charade of our supposed rule-based society.

Professionalism, therefore, is an endangered virtue in Manipur. We need not look anywhere for proof. Walk into any government office and you will feel in the air a quality of privilege and patronage that could suffocate you.

It will also strike you that the employees from the lowest rung to the highest hierarchy would seem to wear one badge of superiority over you-the dismissing attitude, the arrogant looks, the affected sermons. We ask the inevitable question: Are they supposed to serve us or hand out alms? A no-brainer that no one will answer, much less be responsible for.

We talk of fake appointments but what about fake attitudes to work? The former can be prevented and the responsible officials held to account for their crime. Poor work ethics, on the other hand, are not as easy to punish but they do more damage to the faith of the public in the sincerity of the government agencies to solve our problems than anything else.

To be fair, this is not an affliction that is particular to Manipuris. Public sector establishments anywhere in India seem to work in the reverse gear. Their work ethic is clearly in sharp contrast to that which exists in the private companies. Though we should not gloss over everything that the MNCs do or represent, there are lot of things that government agencies can learn from them. Service and client orientation is one such important lesson that state employees can inculcate from their private counterparts.

Cynics many may argue that the efficiency of the private sector employees is a ploy used by the capitalists to further their twin motives of making pots of profits and capturing more market share which is possible only if the customers are satisfied. So be it. At least they listen to our problems and treat us for what we are-human beings with dignity.

We are so sure that a government agency will not do a simple piece of work in a straightforward manner that that we have come to believe that the only way of getting it done is by scouting a friendly 'contact' within a department or an office.

An example that comes to mind instantly is our struggle with the officials for such elementary service as securing a telephone connection. We will seek out relatives or friends or friend's friends to speed up the process. If this trend continues, we may not be too far from the day when we will be hunting for a tada/mama in the water supply department so that we can fill our bucket of water (or break the queue) from the public water tap.

Ridiculous as it may sound, we may compete to win a postmaster's mercy and forge a friendship with his near and dear ones-all to get a letter delivered in time. We can think of so many such scenarios that are at once laughable and so existentially real.

How have we come to such a pass? Can't we simply approach a public authority and trust them to transact our business without unnecessary delays and harassments? If we don't have a tada or mama installed in the government, does it mean that we stop all dealings with them?

Another manifestation of this culture is in the way we have let our narrow social identities to dominate over the professional relationships in a sarkari organization. There is still this hangover from the colonial past evident in how the staffers in a government office address each other. Subordinates almost always call their superiors Sir or Madame, nomenclatures which reinforce a superiority-inferiority complex besides complicating the communication process.

There is the ubiquitous peon whose main role is to transport one file from one table to another (including the one lying a few centimeters away), buy tea and snacks and clean the furniture of the Sirs. What comes out is a mentality of servility that defines the dynamics of relationships in our government workplaces, one that smacks of disdain of the dignity of labour.

Contrast this with the professionalism that defines the inter-personnel relationships in the private organizations. Progressive companies have done away with subservient forms of address like Sirs and Madams and made it a point of basic office convention for the employees to call each other by their first names, notwithstanding the hierarchical structure.

Such an open and friendly culture in private organizations does to the employees a world of good, boosts their self-esteem and encourages seamless teamwork, not to talk of promoting free interaction among them as equitable stakeholders. This is also the affirmation of the creed that everyone comes to the office to perform a specific set of responsibilities and not to indulge in mini-wars of one-upmanship against one and all, including the hapless publics.

Fred W Riggs, a political scientist, had known about the curious cohabitation of the modern bureaucratic ideals with the traditional hold of the society in developing societies. He used many jargons to explain this tada-mama culture such as formalism, heterogeneity, overlapping and termed such societies as prismatic societies. Manipuri society without any iota of doubt fits into the description of Riggs' prismatic society.

Which means we have still not learnt to work with objectivity and neutrality, but consider government benefits to be parceled out to relatives and friends to honour our social obligations. We think nothing of bending a rule here and there to accommodate favoured patronage-seekers.

Which leads to the question: what are the rules and laws for? I have no doubt that they serve as a useful guide to our mandarins because without them they would never know what rules to break.

Can we turn this pathetic situation around? We have a ray of hope and a new weapon to battle this-the RTI Act. It is hoped this will empower the citizens and make our babus more conscientious and circumspect.

But it will be a long journey before our government arms transform into efficient and mission-oriented outfits from the bastions of privilege that they are now. For proof, try calling your pretentious boss of your department with his first name and see the reaction.

Two things may happen: All hell may break loose and in the process your head may roll too. Don't tell me I haven't warned you about it.

Welcome to tadacracy or mamacracy, whatever.