Sparsh

Now is a good time to re-read Tim Snyder's observations and advice in On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century . Here are observations from On Tyranny that seem especially pertinent. 1. Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do. 2. Defend institutions. It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Do not speak of “our institutions” unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions do not protect themselves. They fall one after the other unless each is defended from the beginning. So choose an institution you care about—a court, a newspaper, a law, a labor union—and take its side. 3. Beware the one-party state. The parties that remade states and suppressed rivals were not omnip...

I was watching the movie ' Full Metal Jacket ' yesterday. The movie sparked the issue about violence in my mind. Why did authorising state take its stand more violently against dissidents than democratic states? The contents which authority is unaware, that is treated as treasonable due to fear of the losing power by unknown. There are attempts to de-legitimize and criminalize all dissent and opposition to its policies. Bounding of law to maintain order without even hearing voices of dissidents create havoc situation in the society. Christopher Hitchens summarises dictatorship governance as : The true essence of a dictatorship is in fact not its regularity but its unpredictability and caprice; those who live under it must never be able to relax, must never be quite sure if they have followed the rules correctly or not. Thus, the ruled can always be found to be in the wrong. The ability to run such a "system" is among the greatest pleasures of arbitrary authority. T...

Question- How do society cope with its problems ? Answer - In the first step, Intellects of the community discover the malpractices going in the society. They are noticed by all but not viewed as problem in the general conscious of the group in the authority (monetary and political in charge). Intellects present the problem so that its long term ill effects can be understand by the individuals. Then in final step, they modify or replace the practice with the new one. Hence, society moves from one processing system to other till the existing one corrupts. But this minority of intellect of the society breeds in the environment where rational voice is not suppressed by the fear of violence of authority or extremists. Thus how society evolve and their idea of justice expands. All human rights & social equality movements have given value to this freedom and democracy of the human life. The basic condition of the peaceful co existence in diverse society (each group is diverse in th...

Note: [You can read my view points about religion here to get the grasp of my thinking. ] There is a film named ' The White Ribbon ' directed by Michale Haneke. He expressed his views on the themes of the film: " I was interested in presenting a group of children who are taught absolutist values, and the way they internalize this absolutism. My point was to show the consequences – that is, all sorts of terrorism. If absolutism is applied to an ideal, then that ideal, either political or religious, becomes inhuman. I had considered calling the film "The Right Hand of God." These children believe they are the right hand of God: they have understood the laws, and follow it to the letter. This makes them become the punishers of the others, who do not obey the same ideals. This is how the terrorism originates. The film should not be considered as a comment on fascism alone." [ Source ] These lines cane be source of brilliant debates for any society ready for...

I was talking to my flatmate yesterday. We had a small argument about intercaste marriage. He will not do intercaste marriage due to his family and community background. Thats, ok reply for me. Then, I fired next shell on him, " What about your daughter in the future?". He replied that he will go for intracaste marriage if the girl does not opt for the love marriage (consider it against his wish). I was astonished by his reply and blaming his impotency to stand on this issue on his family and community. I can imagine the upbringing of the girl (daughter) in that environment very easily. So full of prejudice and what more to say.. Most of the people who support intercaste marriage openly, they are not going to do that. They said that just to show people their pseudo open mindness. At the juncture point, they don't have guts to do that. And latter justify that he/she can't marry intercaste girl/boy because of there parents and relatives, community. The neutral accent ...