As mentioned in the previous post, the truth is out there. But yet, no one is managing to do anything about it. If the truth was exposed, then wrong things like War and killing of civilians might not have taken place. In most religions, it is mentioned that killing innocent human beings is sinful, yet there are a lot of instances where killing is mentioned. The context could be domination or aggression by fellow man on others.
Regardless, the truth may need some re-definition in today's time. The world is made up of multiple ideas, multiple cultures and to a massive extent covered in zones of Grey. These zones are the conflict that man faces in the broader society in economic, moral and materialistic terms. An example of the economic terms could be the rich poor divisions in several countries. The poor may want to be on an equal footing with other sections of the society, but is constrained by either poor economic resources or government apathy.
Moral Grey zones could be the lack of justice and enforcing of the law. Societies with a high crime rate is either an expression of lack of values in society or disparity on the economic front. Crime arises when there is desire for a particular thing and it remains unfulfilled. It is compounded when people create a dead end in their minds. The factor of desperateness gives rise to crime, and further erodes morality in society.
Materialism is the concept of judging life on material aspects of consumption and money. Temptation is used in excess to change people's real desire. Money is used as the tempting tool by which ambitions of the heart get crushed.
When all these things are around, how can individuals arrive at a truth? The nature of truth is such that it needs a black and white scenario to be determined. When truth is exposed, people start to have an innate fear of outraging the majority, because the majority find comfort in truths that appeal to their immediate and innermost fears. The trend in the world of today is clear. Things are seen, but it is interpreted in a different way, and suited for personal convenience. Truth is a bitter pill to swallow, and the problem with majority of society is that now people do not want to swallow. They want to have something sweet and satisfying, thus enjoying the grey zones present in materialism, economy and morality.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
Things seen, but nothing done
Sometimes when the truth comes out into the open, action is taken. However, the times now are so Grey that the very nature of truth is disputed. Because of this, we cannot figure out who is right and who is wrong. In that scenario, priorities are vague among institutions like the media. The case of 9/11: Seeking the truth is a classic case of priorities being vague in the case of media. Who would they want to back and who would be in scrutiny?
9/11 is a classic example. If somebody perceives a fact different from the official version, they are ridiculed. Now, there are some cracks appearing, but the damage has already been done. On the basis of this event, the US has indulged in disastrous campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many call it a lie and a fabrication, but I rather would not want to go into that.
The factor of fact and truth has to be explored and re-defined in today's time. Multiple facts and Multiple truths give you multiple realities and lies. What can be the concrete arrival to truth and justification in politics and terror? This will be explored in the next post.
9/11 is a classic example. If somebody perceives a fact different from the official version, they are ridiculed. Now, there are some cracks appearing, but the damage has already been done. On the basis of this event, the US has indulged in disastrous campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many call it a lie and a fabrication, but I rather would not want to go into that.
The factor of fact and truth has to be explored and re-defined in today's time. Multiple facts and Multiple truths give you multiple realities and lies. What can be the concrete arrival to truth and justification in politics and terror? This will be explored in the next post.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Demonstration of people power
If change has to be the motto of society, then ordinary people have to express themselves. Change cannot be in the hands of a few who wield power, but a collective expression of desire from ordinary individuals. The examples of people powere were demonstrated in the collapse of communism in the eastern block in 1989. Now, the recent example of Nepal gives people an indication of the demand for change.
India can take a leaf out of Nepal's books. We may argue that there is no autocratic rule in India. Unlike the communist dictatorships and economic stagnation of Eastern Europe, there is plenty to cheer about in India. Economy is thriving, the country is establishing itself in the global arena. But, there is the growing inequality in economic and societal terms that pulls back India.
All the while when we are portraying our growth on the outside, we are disintegrating on the inside. It is not a rapid disintegration, which is why people can work towards change, but at the same time, if this slow disintegration is not stopped, then we could face irreversible damage in social and economic terms. At the same time, the mindset will be more pertaining to the status quo, rather than to change.
Nepal fought monarchy and aristocracy, India needs to fight an inherent battle with the bureaucracy and vested interests of elitists in social, political and economic fields. Industrialization and modernity are inherent, but only if it convinces the citizen that ordinary people are not affected. It is then the job of the media to highlight a pros and cons aspect of the situation, regardless of commercial pressures.
This is easier said than done. Commercialism is such that the same thing benefits one person but does not benefit the other. In such fragmentation, it becomes imperative that honesty and vigilance is exercised by the media in particular and the citizen. If the need for change and moral outrage is great, then it is a natural reaction that people will come out on the streets. Barack Obama, the possible US president, is talking about change, but it remains to be seen if he manages to bring change to the US.
Change should be all encompassing, meaning a ratio of 70:30. It is a lenient ratio, considering in India that 70 percent is rural. But, at the same time, if change brings about egalitarianism, as was the perceived result in the Eastern Bloc, then change it shall be. But, people have to show themselves, because then change is not possible. The phantom public, as mentioned by Lippmann, is seriously not desired for change.
India can take a leaf out of Nepal's books. We may argue that there is no autocratic rule in India. Unlike the communist dictatorships and economic stagnation of Eastern Europe, there is plenty to cheer about in India. Economy is thriving, the country is establishing itself in the global arena. But, there is the growing inequality in economic and societal terms that pulls back India.
All the while when we are portraying our growth on the outside, we are disintegrating on the inside. It is not a rapid disintegration, which is why people can work towards change, but at the same time, if this slow disintegration is not stopped, then we could face irreversible damage in social and economic terms. At the same time, the mindset will be more pertaining to the status quo, rather than to change.
Nepal fought monarchy and aristocracy, India needs to fight an inherent battle with the bureaucracy and vested interests of elitists in social, political and economic fields. Industrialization and modernity are inherent, but only if it convinces the citizen that ordinary people are not affected. It is then the job of the media to highlight a pros and cons aspect of the situation, regardless of commercial pressures.
This is easier said than done. Commercialism is such that the same thing benefits one person but does not benefit the other. In such fragmentation, it becomes imperative that honesty and vigilance is exercised by the media in particular and the citizen. If the need for change and moral outrage is great, then it is a natural reaction that people will come out on the streets. Barack Obama, the possible US president, is talking about change, but it remains to be seen if he manages to bring change to the US.
Change should be all encompassing, meaning a ratio of 70:30. It is a lenient ratio, considering in India that 70 percent is rural. But, at the same time, if change brings about egalitarianism, as was the perceived result in the Eastern Bloc, then change it shall be. But, people have to show themselves, because then change is not possible. The phantom public, as mentioned by Lippmann, is seriously not desired for change.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Easy Money
The ambition of people today is to make fast and easy money. Although there are millions of ordinary people who work hard and earn money, we see another million earning money in an easy way. The easy way being through illegal and possibly immoral ways. These include drug trafficking, arms trafficking and human trafficking.
There are others on the list, which i would not like to mention. The reason being that there are Grey areas in which these terms fall into. The question of morality or immorality is deliberated. However, the above three terms have no Grey areas, only black and nothing else.
Drugs have been the cause of mayhem in society. Laws are taken for granted, and in the 70's in particular, there were the drug wars in Latin America which spilled over into the streets of the US. Miami was under the grip of the drug wars, and even today, the Colombian conflict, involving the Colombian government and the FARC Guerrillas, is all about stopping the drug supply. Afghanistan is another hot-spot for drug wars. The money generated from selling these drugs in the market are used pre-dominantly to fund terrorist activities. Drugs have led to conflict, to loss of life and destruction of society, yet no one can stop the drug peddlers from minting millions of dollars of money.
Human trafficking is an evil, where illegal immigrants are promised dreams, but land up in a nightmare. The case of the Coyotes in the US and other instances of human trafficking in all parts of the world for various purposes is indeed a despicable act. The common thing linking drug and human trafficking is the human determination to make easy and fast money. In the case of human trafficking, the victims dream of big things. They allow themselves to be blinded by people who offer dreams. Many of these cases involve people who have no education or knowledge, and thus the problem persists. No knowledge, but the need for money is persistent.
But, the greater evil among the two mentioned is off Arms trafficking. The biggest evil, of which states are guilty, is off demand for arms. The amount of money generated by Arms Manufacturers is enough to wipe out poverty in at least a dozen or so countries. If developed nations can shun arms deals and trade, the money saved can be used in providing better health care and treating the poor. The US and other nations of the west have poor health care systems, with the problem of inflation in today's world. If wars are not conducted and weapons not purchased, then these problems may not exist.
Arms companies and manufacturers have to be destroyed, because they have caused the biggest insecurity to the human race. Arms have always crippled nations, and bought about the demise of sovereignty and societies. Individuals will not be corrupted if they have the presence and thought of arms in their mind. The desire for easy money is responsible for all the three evils manifesting together in most societies.
Weapons have to be destroyed, drugs have to be liquidated and then humans who subject humans to injustice have to be thrown out of society. IF arms are destroyed, then drugs should be the next target. With the destruction of these two, society can dream of equality financially. Nations will respect freedom of other nations, hence preventing the specter for wars. As far as human trafficking is concerned, human beings are not perfect. This can only be curbed, not eliminated, as the human mind itself is perverse.
There are others on the list, which i would not like to mention. The reason being that there are Grey areas in which these terms fall into. The question of morality or immorality is deliberated. However, the above three terms have no Grey areas, only black and nothing else.
Drugs have been the cause of mayhem in society. Laws are taken for granted, and in the 70's in particular, there were the drug wars in Latin America which spilled over into the streets of the US. Miami was under the grip of the drug wars, and even today, the Colombian conflict, involving the Colombian government and the FARC Guerrillas, is all about stopping the drug supply. Afghanistan is another hot-spot for drug wars. The money generated from selling these drugs in the market are used pre-dominantly to fund terrorist activities. Drugs have led to conflict, to loss of life and destruction of society, yet no one can stop the drug peddlers from minting millions of dollars of money.
Human trafficking is an evil, where illegal immigrants are promised dreams, but land up in a nightmare. The case of the Coyotes in the US and other instances of human trafficking in all parts of the world for various purposes is indeed a despicable act. The common thing linking drug and human trafficking is the human determination to make easy and fast money. In the case of human trafficking, the victims dream of big things. They allow themselves to be blinded by people who offer dreams. Many of these cases involve people who have no education or knowledge, and thus the problem persists. No knowledge, but the need for money is persistent.
But, the greater evil among the two mentioned is off Arms trafficking. The biggest evil, of which states are guilty, is off demand for arms. The amount of money generated by Arms Manufacturers is enough to wipe out poverty in at least a dozen or so countries. If developed nations can shun arms deals and trade, the money saved can be used in providing better health care and treating the poor. The US and other nations of the west have poor health care systems, with the problem of inflation in today's world. If wars are not conducted and weapons not purchased, then these problems may not exist.
Arms companies and manufacturers have to be destroyed, because they have caused the biggest insecurity to the human race. Arms have always crippled nations, and bought about the demise of sovereignty and societies. Individuals will not be corrupted if they have the presence and thought of arms in their mind. The desire for easy money is responsible for all the three evils manifesting together in most societies.
Weapons have to be destroyed, drugs have to be liquidated and then humans who subject humans to injustice have to be thrown out of society. IF arms are destroyed, then drugs should be the next target. With the destruction of these two, society can dream of equality financially. Nations will respect freedom of other nations, hence preventing the specter for wars. As far as human trafficking is concerned, human beings are not perfect. This can only be curbed, not eliminated, as the human mind itself is perverse.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The impact of photos
"Pictures speak a thousand words"; this cliched but effective statement has been on the back of every media personnel for years. For writers, pictures can spell the end of their careers. I came across this feeling today, when i viewed my friends photographs on a recent trip. The pictures were indeed mind-boggling, one which makes you question the effectiveness of words.
The only thing that goes for writers is that texts are a form of conversation, giving shape to certain sets of ideas, while a photo can be prone to multiple of interpretations. Of course, in several of her photos, it is the obvious of what it is trying to signify, but there are millions which are not so lucky.
At the end of the day, it is up to people to choose what appeals them aesthetically. I am clear in my mission statement of not using photographs, because they may morph the ideas that i may want to convey. In this case, i gladly would play second fiddle to the photographs. They give you a sense of the true beauty that exists, because beauty is abstract, conveyed brilliantly by photographs.
For people to view these photos, just go to this URL http://www.orkut.com/Album.aspx?uid=13290525912740128313&aid=1212448512
The only thing that goes for writers is that texts are a form of conversation, giving shape to certain sets of ideas, while a photo can be prone to multiple of interpretations. Of course, in several of her photos, it is the obvious of what it is trying to signify, but there are millions which are not so lucky.
At the end of the day, it is up to people to choose what appeals them aesthetically. I am clear in my mission statement of not using photographs, because they may morph the ideas that i may want to convey. In this case, i gladly would play second fiddle to the photographs. They give you a sense of the true beauty that exists, because beauty is abstract, conveyed brilliantly by photographs.
For people to view these photos, just go to this URL http://www.orkut.com/Album.aspx?uid=13290525912740128313&aid=1212448512
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Suppressed Cultures
In this era of globalization, there is an emphasis on the homogeneity of cultures. But, we are also witnessing the emergence of certain unknown cultures. For these cultures, globalization can prove to be a double edged sword. One of the unique cultures that I came across today was the Hazaras. These people have been part of Afghanistan for the past 1000 years, but their plight only came to be known during the persecution by the Taliban. The destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in 2000, along with their persecution, made us aware of their presence.
They are now creating a niche identity for themselves. They have put out several stuff on the web, and have outlined their history and future adequately. One such website is www.hazara.net, which gives us an idea of their culture and their history. Once flourishing, once persecuted, warfare at intermittent intervals and now the re-establishment of their identity following the end of the Taliban, life has come full circle for the Hazaras.
In some ways, the Hazaras are like the Tibet of China. The difference being that unlike China, the Tibetans were not subject to the threat of extermination. But, they are facing the same problem. The state, under the guise of globalization and homogeneity, is suppressing their identities and imposing their own form of cultural hegemony. In the case of Tibet, the hegemony is forced, while in the case of the hazaras, it may be indirect or slow to take off.
The sociology, on the surface, seems to be that cultures that have suffered persecution, dont open up so fast. While the case may differ with respect to the hazaras and the Tibetans, the key here is whether the people want it. Globalization may not be all rosy, with the backdrop of global conflict. But, with technology and knowledge, it may open them up with ways to improve lives.
The Hazaras and the Tibetans are only one among the millions of suppressed cultures all over the world. The Amazon tribes may be almost wiped out, due to sheer brute power of the economy. The Red Indians, along with the Inuit of northern Canada, are on their last legs and may not last beyond the first half of the 21st century. Globalization is a good thing, but there is the other side where identities are blurred. This blurring leads to a loss of identity, and thus the uniqueness of culture and of man vanishes.
They are now creating a niche identity for themselves. They have put out several stuff on the web, and have outlined their history and future adequately. One such website is www.hazara.net, which gives us an idea of their culture and their history. Once flourishing, once persecuted, warfare at intermittent intervals and now the re-establishment of their identity following the end of the Taliban, life has come full circle for the Hazaras.
In some ways, the Hazaras are like the Tibet of China. The difference being that unlike China, the Tibetans were not subject to the threat of extermination. But, they are facing the same problem. The state, under the guise of globalization and homogeneity, is suppressing their identities and imposing their own form of cultural hegemony. In the case of Tibet, the hegemony is forced, while in the case of the hazaras, it may be indirect or slow to take off.
The sociology, on the surface, seems to be that cultures that have suffered persecution, dont open up so fast. While the case may differ with respect to the hazaras and the Tibetans, the key here is whether the people want it. Globalization may not be all rosy, with the backdrop of global conflict. But, with technology and knowledge, it may open them up with ways to improve lives.
The Hazaras and the Tibetans are only one among the millions of suppressed cultures all over the world. The Amazon tribes may be almost wiped out, due to sheer brute power of the economy. The Red Indians, along with the Inuit of northern Canada, are on their last legs and may not last beyond the first half of the 21st century. Globalization is a good thing, but there is the other side where identities are blurred. This blurring leads to a loss of identity, and thus the uniqueness of culture and of man vanishes.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
The phenomenon of Gandhiism
Mahatma Gandhi was a phenomenal man. His achievements speak volumes of his achievement. It is even more remarkable that he achieved what he could by two simple philosophies of life. Non-violence and Truth. These two terms made him the Man among the millions that were there. In previous posts, i had argued about Bhagat Singh being a revolutionary which the youth idealizes nowadays. But, in the back of man's mind, there is still a Gandhi who tugs at our heart. He just asks us to face life and its difficulties by using these two methods of Truth and non-violence.
In more ways like one, Mahatma Gandhi and Bhagat Singh represent the two forms of Cricket. While Gandhi represented Test Cricket, Bhagat Singh represented T20 Cricket. The comparison is crude, but appropriate. Test Cricket calls for application and concentration of a player's skill at a high point most of the time. T20 cricket is all about flash, energy and playing only for the moment. Tests end in draws, while T20 guarantees results. It was perhaps this philosophy which separated Gandhiji from Bhagat Singh.
Bhagat Singh's philosophy and actions is now being portrayed as achieving results. It has no doubt achieved awareness that societies cannot be divided along caste, religious and cultural lines. His aim of egalitarianism was appealing when combined with violence and fear. But, the dynamics of violence is such that man can use it to destroy the system. It should not have been expected from Bhagat Singh, but it can be only be speculated.
The British were thrown out fortunately, but one wonders how a violent upheaval may have shaped the India of today? Egalitarianism is like any other ideology, good on paper but very very difficult to achieve. Bhagat Singh's upheaval of a system would have possibly resulted in chaos, if one looks at hindsight at events after independence nationally and globally. Mahatma Gandhi focused on the intrinsics of man, not of the state and society. His simple notion of first individuals must improve, only then can the state improve. The conscience has to be clean, only then can the human body be healthy. Such could be the comparison of Gandhi's philosophy.
As the world lives on a fast pace today, Gandhi is instantly dismissive. The US has painted the world white and black, thus making man suspicious towards fellow man. Fast pace combined with suspicion makes Gandhi's philosophy of Truth and non-violence dismissive. The mental makeup of the people today is violence is rationalized to make the whole of society perfect. Truth is subjective, meaning there are multiple truths. The Mahatma's sayings have always targeted the conscience of man, arguing that man is complex and that he has to strife from within to achieve good things.
Nowadays, Truth and non-violence goes against the makeup of democratic or autocratic states. Without these, a state is perceived to be vulnerable. Men like Gandhi are dismissed as fools, and that truth and non-violence are only myths good for speaking. I guess it is up to individuals to learn the hard way, after this experience will they be patient enough to fight and strive for truth and non-violence. This moment is taken to remember a simple man, who had extraordinary thoughts and who even for me is a hero.
In more ways like one, Mahatma Gandhi and Bhagat Singh represent the two forms of Cricket. While Gandhi represented Test Cricket, Bhagat Singh represented T20 Cricket. The comparison is crude, but appropriate. Test Cricket calls for application and concentration of a player's skill at a high point most of the time. T20 cricket is all about flash, energy and playing only for the moment. Tests end in draws, while T20 guarantees results. It was perhaps this philosophy which separated Gandhiji from Bhagat Singh.
Bhagat Singh's philosophy and actions is now being portrayed as achieving results. It has no doubt achieved awareness that societies cannot be divided along caste, religious and cultural lines. His aim of egalitarianism was appealing when combined with violence and fear. But, the dynamics of violence is such that man can use it to destroy the system. It should not have been expected from Bhagat Singh, but it can be only be speculated.
The British were thrown out fortunately, but one wonders how a violent upheaval may have shaped the India of today? Egalitarianism is like any other ideology, good on paper but very very difficult to achieve. Bhagat Singh's upheaval of a system would have possibly resulted in chaos, if one looks at hindsight at events after independence nationally and globally. Mahatma Gandhi focused on the intrinsics of man, not of the state and society. His simple notion of first individuals must improve, only then can the state improve. The conscience has to be clean, only then can the human body be healthy. Such could be the comparison of Gandhi's philosophy.
As the world lives on a fast pace today, Gandhi is instantly dismissive. The US has painted the world white and black, thus making man suspicious towards fellow man. Fast pace combined with suspicion makes Gandhi's philosophy of Truth and non-violence dismissive. The mental makeup of the people today is violence is rationalized to make the whole of society perfect. Truth is subjective, meaning there are multiple truths. The Mahatma's sayings have always targeted the conscience of man, arguing that man is complex and that he has to strife from within to achieve good things.
Nowadays, Truth and non-violence goes against the makeup of democratic or autocratic states. Without these, a state is perceived to be vulnerable. Men like Gandhi are dismissed as fools, and that truth and non-violence are only myths good for speaking. I guess it is up to individuals to learn the hard way, after this experience will they be patient enough to fight and strive for truth and non-violence. This moment is taken to remember a simple man, who had extraordinary thoughts and who even for me is a hero.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Osama did not do 9/11?
The statement above is only a speculation, not a theory. For years now, we have been bombarded with the images of the planes crashing into the towers and into the pentagon during 9/11. Osama Bin Laden did it, that is what the Bush administration said. He used that as a pretext to bombard Afghanistan and Iraq. Now, the basis upon which this whole missions were organized has been questioned. Iraq exposed it, and some people are now openly saying that 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB.
A documentary titled 'Loose Change' has given out systematic and detailed facts about the events. By the method of Science, logic and common sense, he has given out an impression that 9/11 was an inside job. The planes, the concept of 19 Hijackers ploughing planes into the WTC and the Pentagon all have been dismissed. But, before jumping the gun, it is nowadays dangerous to even speculate. The media have thoroughly managed to brainwash the fact that Islamic terrorists carried out 9/11, and there is no other alternative truth.
This alternative truth portrayed in loose change can be dismissed instantly as Propaganda. No one in American Society and in the world media would acknowledge that 9/11 could have been an inside job. A person, who advocates this alternative truth, is dismissed as a traitor or a terrorist. By watching and recounting those events, it does give you a sense that the whole thing was deliberate. The events that occurred after this incident seemed planned. The administration was hell-bent in pursuing its 'colonial' agenda.
Loose change, the documentary, only shows us the alternative reality. It is up to individuals to base their judgments and conduct their behavior towards cultures and religions. It can be a lesson for administrations and governments that pre-emption should not be an option. Pre-emption leads to social and world destruction, and films like Loose Change should be viewed as a tool for fighting against Pre-emptive action by a power hungry government.
A documentary titled 'Loose Change' has given out systematic and detailed facts about the events. By the method of Science, logic and common sense, he has given out an impression that 9/11 was an inside job. The planes, the concept of 19 Hijackers ploughing planes into the WTC and the Pentagon all have been dismissed. But, before jumping the gun, it is nowadays dangerous to even speculate. The media have thoroughly managed to brainwash the fact that Islamic terrorists carried out 9/11, and there is no other alternative truth.
This alternative truth portrayed in loose change can be dismissed instantly as Propaganda. No one in American Society and in the world media would acknowledge that 9/11 could have been an inside job. A person, who advocates this alternative truth, is dismissed as a traitor or a terrorist. By watching and recounting those events, it does give you a sense that the whole thing was deliberate. The events that occurred after this incident seemed planned. The administration was hell-bent in pursuing its 'colonial' agenda.
Loose change, the documentary, only shows us the alternative reality. It is up to individuals to base their judgments and conduct their behavior towards cultures and religions. It can be a lesson for administrations and governments that pre-emption should not be an option. Pre-emption leads to social and world destruction, and films like Loose Change should be viewed as a tool for fighting against Pre-emptive action by a power hungry government.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
