Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Death of Left
This post is after the crude shock that i have had looking at the turmoil in Nandigram. The left that once used to be the champion of the poor working for a classless society seems to have got it all wrong or should i say that they have finally got it right, communism + capitalism is the way to go. To understand this I think one needs to understand the communist ideology . If you look at the state of various countries who adopted communism as a political tool for creating a socialist equitable society, they have failed (communist Europe), disintegrated (USSR) or move to capitalism. Similar is the case with Nandigram. The left after toiling with the communist\socialist ideology has finally realized that it is the capitalist economic model that works best with communist politics clearly picking a leaf from their bosses in China. I think it is a new type of land reform where the poor, the farmer, the labourer is forced to vacate his land for some MNC, the rest will be taken care of by the cadres of Buddhadeb. Further looking at the case of Taslima Nasreen and the way Nuclear deal has been handled it makes me feel that we are moving towards a political system very similar to the United States where the choice between political groups is just symbolic with the same ideology and same policies. There is no left left in India, the right is left the left is right, and they both are wrong.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Living a thousand lives
Ever been on a trek so steep that you slip a step and its eternity. Ever took a curve so deep that a grain of sand would be enough to take your breath away, literally. Ever put a snail on a steel blade and saw it crawling for survival on every next move. We spent out entire life consciously or unconsciously waiting for that one moment when life cheats us. Ever thought of cheating death, ever thought of cheating your biggest fears, ever took a risk larger than life, this is what living on edge is all about, this is what life is all about, this is about cheating death, this is about living a thousand lives and trust me the snail always wins because he does not have a choice.
Friday, November 2, 2007
On the contrary
It has been a month of charity here at Microsoft, events, auctions, stalls and campaigns all for charity undoubtedly with very good intentions. I used to be involved in charity contributing in terms of money until last year, but since the last few weeks it has been an ideological dilemma. It started with a discussion with one of my friends and very soon I realized that charity is not the way forward.
Before I comment on charity it becomes very essential to understand my perspective of human nature (I stand by neitzsche) and why charity as a concept is totally against the human nature. Nothing, indeed, is more apparent than the essential selfishness of man. In so far as they are able to defy or evade the moral code without shame or damage, the strong always exploit the weak. The rich man puts up the price of the necessities of life and so makes himself richer and the poor poorer. The political boss opposes the will of the people for his own advantage. The inventor patents his inventions and so increases his relative superiority to the common run of men. The philanthropist gives away millions because the giving visualizes and makes evident to all men his virtue and power. Every slave would be a master if he could. Therefore, why deny it? Why make it a crime to do what every man's instincts prompt him to do? Why call it a sin to do what every man does? Very clearly every action of ours is an act of selfishness and charity is not beyond it for it gives a false sense of happiness to the morality striken individuals and makes them think that they are done with the cause that they are morally obliged to.
Now for those who feel that charity is a solution or atleast a way forward I think they should step back and see if there is any good that charity has really done in the past. Has it been able to remove hunger, poverty and at the core of it did it any way bring about an equitable distribution of wealth or has it been more of a tool for the larger nations and larger religious institutes to carry out their propganda and their agenda. Thankfully here atleast i do not doubt the intentions but I certainly have reservation about the method. The first thought on this line is self sustenance. Every year I see the same organizations lined up for charity, it clearly shows that there has to be an alternative, a permanent solution, and certainly charity cannot be one. The next important thing that I feel is that it demeans the guy who recieves charity and clearly establishes a relationship that is not of equals. One might have very strong opinions on my previous statement because all charity is voluntary, but if you look at it from an expectation point of view this becomes very clear. Charity creates exceptions so in a group of underprivileged people it is only a handful (the best among them) who reallly benefit from charity and as soon as they achieve their desired goals they tend to move out of the group and the group loses the most potent spokesperson of its cause.
It is evident to me that at the core of us lies a very self-centered individual for whom charity is just another way of saying "Hey I am done with my moral duty of contribution, and I do not care after this."
I strongly feel that it is not in the capacity (or should I say desire) of an individual for the betterment of the downtrodden or society. But If anything that can be done has to be done by the state (or society). The most important thing is to do with their rights, it is quite evident that because of their handicap they have limitations but should it not be the purpose of the Government to provide a platform for equal opportunity? The platform can be anything from Social Security to Reservations to a Sustained Income. Very clearly the objectives that charity wants to attain in most cases are flawed, what is required are policy changes that would enable the deprived and the disabled a platform for growth, income and self sustenance On the other hand what charity does is quite the contrary. And to all those morality striken individuals, if there is something that you really want to do it is this cause that you can take up to but I know you won't because it hardly serves any of your selfish ambitions.
Before I comment on charity it becomes very essential to understand my perspective of human nature (I stand by neitzsche) and why charity as a concept is totally against the human nature. Nothing, indeed, is more apparent than the essential selfishness of man. In so far as they are able to defy or evade the moral code without shame or damage, the strong always exploit the weak. The rich man puts up the price of the necessities of life and so makes himself richer and the poor poorer. The political boss opposes the will of the people for his own advantage. The inventor patents his inventions and so increases his relative superiority to the common run of men. The philanthropist gives away millions because the giving visualizes and makes evident to all men his virtue and power. Every slave would be a master if he could. Therefore, why deny it? Why make it a crime to do what every man's instincts prompt him to do? Why call it a sin to do what every man does? Very clearly every action of ours is an act of selfishness and charity is not beyond it for it gives a false sense of happiness to the morality striken individuals and makes them think that they are done with the cause that they are morally obliged to.
Now for those who feel that charity is a solution or atleast a way forward I think they should step back and see if there is any good that charity has really done in the past. Has it been able to remove hunger, poverty and at the core of it did it any way bring about an equitable distribution of wealth or has it been more of a tool for the larger nations and larger religious institutes to carry out their propganda and their agenda. Thankfully here atleast i do not doubt the intentions but I certainly have reservation about the method. The first thought on this line is self sustenance. Every year I see the same organizations lined up for charity, it clearly shows that there has to be an alternative, a permanent solution, and certainly charity cannot be one. The next important thing that I feel is that it demeans the guy who recieves charity and clearly establishes a relationship that is not of equals. One might have very strong opinions on my previous statement because all charity is voluntary, but if you look at it from an expectation point of view this becomes very clear. Charity creates exceptions so in a group of underprivileged people it is only a handful (the best among them) who reallly benefit from charity and as soon as they achieve their desired goals they tend to move out of the group and the group loses the most potent spokesperson of its cause.
It is evident to me that at the core of us lies a very self-centered individual for whom charity is just another way of saying "Hey I am done with my moral duty of contribution, and I do not care after this."
I strongly feel that it is not in the capacity (or should I say desire) of an individual for the betterment of the downtrodden or society. But If anything that can be done has to be done by the state (or society). The most important thing is to do with their rights, it is quite evident that because of their handicap they have limitations but should it not be the purpose of the Government to provide a platform for equal opportunity? The platform can be anything from Social Security to Reservations to a Sustained Income. Very clearly the objectives that charity wants to attain in most cases are flawed, what is required are policy changes that would enable the deprived and the disabled a platform for growth, income and self sustenance On the other hand what charity does is quite the contrary. And to all those morality striken individuals, if there is something that you really want to do it is this cause that you can take up to but I know you won't because it hardly serves any of your selfish ambitions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)