Private space travel once belonged in the realm of science fiction—but today, celebrities like Katy Perry are booking tickets on Blue Origin, and billionaires are launching rockets. In this episode, Dhruva and Utkarsh explore the growing role of private companies in space exploration and whether the shift away from government-led missions is cause for celebration or concern.

They delve into the tension between public and private funding: Should space exploration serve collective scientific goals or market incentives? Is "move fast and break things" the right ethos for a domain where failure can mean catastrophe? And as access to space becomes commercialized, who really benefits?

Supporters of private spaceflight argue it accelerates innovation, lowers costs, and inspires a new generation. But critics warn of widening inequalities, neglected public priorities, and the commodification of what many view as a shared human frontier.

Beyond rockets and revenue, this conversation grapples with deeper questions of purpose, responsibility, and who gets to write humanity’s next chapter among the stars.

In this episode, you will learn

• What is disability and ways in which our society discriminates against people with disabilities

• What can do about it
• Ways to deconstruct "I am not your inspiration"

In The Anti-Ableist Manifesto, Tiffany Yu highlights the myriad ways in which our society discriminates against people with disabilities - and what we can do about it. Foregrounding disabled identities that have too often been rendered invisible, she demonstrates how ending discrimination begins with self-reflection.

From recognising biases to understanding microaggressions, The Anti-Ableist Manifesto teaches us how to deconstruct ableism at work, in our communities and within ourselves.

About this Podcast

• What did European missionaries misunderstand about Hinduism when they first arrived in India?

• How did colonial power and missionary pressure help reshape Hindu identity from within?

• Could the rise of modern Hindu nationalism be traced back to these early cultural and religious encounters?

When European missionaries arrived in India in the sixteenth century, they entered a world both fascinating and bewildering. Hinduism, as they saw it, was a pagan mess: a worship of devils and monsters by a people who burned women alive, performed outlandish rites and fed children to crocodiles. But it quickly became clear that Hindu ‘idolatry’ was far more layered and complex than European stereotypes allowed, surprisingly even sharing certain impulses with Christianity.

Nonetheless, missionaries became a threatening force as European power grew in India. Western ways of thinking gained further ascendancy during the British Raj: while interest in Hindu thought influenced Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire in Europe, Orientalism and colonial rule pressed Hindus to reimagine their religion. In fact, in resisting foreign authority, they often adopted the missionaries’ own tools and strategies. It is this encounter, Manu S. Pillai argues, that has given Hinduism its present shape, also contributing to the birth of an aggressive Hindu nationalism.

Gods, Guns and Missionaries surveys these remarkable dynamics with an arresting cast of characters – maharajahs, poets, gun-wielding revolutionaries, politicians, polemicists, philosophers and clergymen. Lucid, ambitious, and provocative, it is at once a political history, an examination of the mutual impact of Hindu culture and Christianity upon each other, and a study of the forces that have prepared the ground for politics in India today. Turning away from simplistic ideas on religious evolution and European imperialism, the past as it appears here is more complicated – and infinitely richer – than previous narratives allow.

Selective admissions have long defined access to elite universities but a number of scholars are challenging this model, arguing that it reinforces privilege and entrenches inequality. In this episode, Dhruva and Utkarsh examine the case for replacing selective admissions with a lottery among qualified applicants. The discussion draws on John Rawls’s concept of the veil of ignorance, and Michael Sandel’s critique of meritocracy, which highlights how systems of selection often obscure privilege and foster a corrosive hubris among so-called “winners,” who come to believe their success is entirely self-made.

Advocates of the lottery system argue that it could democratize access, reduce stress and competition, and promote a more just distribution of opportunity. Critics counter that such a shift risks undermining academic standards, devaluing individual achievement, and replacing one set of biases with another.

This conversation goes beyond admissions policy and raises deeper questions about fairness, equity, and justice.

Foreign aid and reparations are terms often used interchangeably, yet they embody distinct principles and purposes. In this episode, we discuss the differences between these concepts, exploring their definitions, the potential risks of conflating them, and the implications of such conflation.

Foreign aid typically refers to financial or technical assistance provided by one nation to another, aiming to support economic development, humanitarian needs, or disaster relief. Reparations, however, are compensatory measures acknowledging and addressing historical injustices and systemic exploitation inflicted upon a nation or community. While both involve the transfer of resources, their underlying motivations and intended outcomes differ significantly.

Conflating foreign aid with reparations can lead to several risks. It may allow former colonial powers to sidestep genuine accountability by framing aid as a benevolent gesture rather than a responsibility. This conflation can also perpetuate power imbalances, as aid often comes with conditions that may not align with the recipient nation’s interests, undermining the reparative intent of acknowledging past wrongs.

To illustrate these complexities, we examine the historical and ongoing debates surrounding the United Kingdom’s colonial legacy in India. Indian politician and author Shashi Tharoor has been a vocal advocate for recognizing the economic and social damages caused by British colonial rule. In his 2015 speech at the Oxford Union, Tharoor argued that British colonialism led to the systematic deindustrialization and impoverishment of India, asserting that reparations are owed for the exploitation endured.

Tharoor’s subsequent book, An Era of Darkness: The British Empire in India, delves deeper into these issues, providing a comprehensive analysis of the economic exploitation and cultural suppression during colonial rule. He emphasizes that while foreign aid from Britain to India exists, it does not equate to reparations, as it lacks the acknowledgment of historical injustices and is often guided by the donor’s strategic interests rather than the recipient’s reparative needs.

Through these discussions, we aim to shed light on the importance of distinguishing between foreign aid and reparations.

Tariffs—taxes on imports—have long been a powerful tool in economic policy, shaping global trade for centuries. But are they always harmful, or can they serve a strategic purpose?

In this episode, we trace the history of tariffs from the British East India Company to modern trade disputes between the U.S., China, India, and Europe. William Dalrymple, in The Anarchy, writes about how Britain used tariffs to cripple India’s textile industry while strengthening its own, showing how trade policy can be a tool of both economic growth and exploitation.

The debate is complex: tariffs can protect domestic industries and address unfair trade practices, but they can also raise consumer prices, stifle innovation, and provoke retaliation. Are there cases where tariffs have strengthened national economies, or do they always come at a cost?

Join us as we explore the pros and cons of tariffs, their historical impact, and whether they still have a place in today’s interconnected world.

In this debate, we explore the tension between structure and spontaneity, discipline and serendipity, as it plays out in the lives of ambitious professionals.

For young professionals navigating packed calendars, hustle culture, and the constant pressure to optimize every minute, the debate is real: Does saying “yes” to unexpected opportunities fuel growth, or does it lead to chaos and burnout? Does strict scheduling drive focus, or does it suffocate the very creativity and innovation that lead to breakthroughs?

Gustave Flaubert once said, "Be regular and orderly in your life, so that you may be violent and original in your work." He has a point but is being regular and orderly in life a luxury for most people? Think of young parents or caregivers who need to balance work with many other equally important priorities.

Perhaps the answer is a bit of structure and a bit of spontaneity. Tune in to find out.

Elon Musk’s $56 billion compensation package from Tesla sparked intense debate and legal scrutiny. Approved in 2018, the performance-based package hinged on Tesla reaching ambitious market and operational milestones. As Tesla’s stock price soared beyond expectations, the package’s value ballooned to $101.4 billion by 2024. Notably, Musk would have earned nothing had Tesla not achieved these metrics at the time, few could imagine the company’s stock crossing $400. Was Musk simply rewarded for creating shareholder value, or does this case highlight deeper concerns about executive compensation?

While Musk’s package is an extreme example, the broader debate persists. In 2023, CEOs of S&P 500 companies earned an average of $17.7 million, 268 times more than their median employees.

In this episode, we explore the ethical and practical implications of capping CEO pay relative to lower-wage workers. Would salary caps promote equity or hinder performance incentives? We turn to the philosophies of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls to examine concepts of justice, fairness, and equity in compensation structures. We also look at historical efforts to tackle income inequality and debate how organizations can balance rewarding leadership with ensuring fair treatment across all levels.