Recently, I came across a post in Wipro blogs putting forward the old question of morality of capital punishment - whether or not it should continue in today's world. I'll just put forth here the series of thoughts which that post triggered off in my mind.
Every man has his right to live, his right to his own thoughts - and his rights to act upon them.
Just because I think a path is right, something is ‘just’, does not necessarily make that really right or just. What is really ‘just’? No one knows. Your philosophies and principles should change with time. If they do not, you are not learning – you have closed yourself to the world. (Your rate of change of philosophies can slow down with age, but they should never stop.)
Similarly, just because the majority happens to believe in a certain thing, it doesn’t sanctify that thing as the 'right' one. (One's singular ideals have as much chances of being right as the majority's opposite ideals. So, why should one confrm to majority? For stability/security? But does not world become insecure/imperfect for the one who is forced to conform?)
Every man has right to his opinions and ideas. And to act upon them. If, however, I think he is acting wrongly, I’d act against it - but at the same time, I’d uphold that the other should act only in the way he thinks is right. Similarly, if the majority thinks he is acting wrongly, they have every right to act against him. Result? The stronger in might wins. And that is perfectly logical. And that is the only thing which has always happened. That is what actually has always shaped ‘right’ and ‘wrong’. And I think that this is the only acceptable and logical way one can justify any ‘code’ or ‘law’ in society. That the majority – read ‘stronger’ mass – wants something to happen in a certain way. Not by arguments or opinions or ideas or ideals.
And by this code, in the same way that a man has every right to end another’s life if he thinks that is needed according to his perspective of events and is willing to face oppositions from person(s) thinking otherwise (he has actually done so always, and will do so forever), the government can also administer death if it feels threatened from the individual and deems it a necessity (again, has done so always, and will do so forever). It can administer death for its own defense. It does so in war. It can do so in domestic incidents also. Though I personally don’t like it this way - I like winning over the adversary - that only is true power - yet I’d not say that this is wrong if followed.
Along the same lines, I do not have anything against the terrorist himself who believes in what he does and kills a thousand lives who are innocent in my eyes. However, since I think it is not just that the thousand innocent lives be dead, I’ll do whatever I can to thwart the terrorist’s efforts. But I wont - and cannot - say that he is wrong.
Only when the government - the system - becomes so strong and controlling that it no longer fears individual activists (’Brave New World’?) - only then can it afford to think of abolishing capital punishment altogether. Otherwise, death sentences will be needed and are perfectly justified.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
"Intelligent" Authors?
There are some writings which when reading I feel that the author must have had a razor sharp insight and very developed analytical abilities, along with a courage born of common sense and their confidence arising out of the knowledge of their own rationality and clear thinking abilities.
I think the following authors will be among such an "intelligent" lot of authors. I find them intelligent based on some observations they made through their creations. And all of them have the ability to masterly write out their observations - all of them are master storytellers too.
1. Ayn Rand: Whether or not you agree with her philosophy - she is a master storyteller with very true and intelligent observations - and there is no denial of all that she defines as positive in her novels. All that is very true. Though I don't completely agree with her dealings/opinions of the "altruistic" second-rate citizens, she did dissect the general digressive mentality very acutely and correctly, and I find her portrayal of the positive values irrefutable and true to the very core.
2. Leo Tolstoy: He appears definitely intelligent the way he makes his observations or makes his characters act, or manipulates them. And he is really a master storyteller. But I do hate (or maybe admire) his attitude and guts - it looks like he thinks himself to be a God or something - from the way he plays around and manhandles his characters! Very proud he must have been!
3. Arundhati Roy: She came out with only one book - and that too someone else "found" and published the manuscript for her. And what a book it turned out to be! "The God of Small Things" is strewn with comments and observations that are extremely simple yet hits you directly. And you cannot refute their truth.
4. Anne Frank: Ok, she was too young, but what she wrote in her diary at the age of 13 contained some straight simple truths and observations which elders can easily miss. At rare places, her writings showed characteristics of being 'free from the known'. I cannot help wondering what she might have contributed to the literary world had she gone on to live a longer life.
I find the writings of the above authors filled with traces of an intelligent sharp and analytical mind at work - they use their analytical/discerning intellect to create much of the effects.
Authors like Maugham, Dickens, Tagore use more of their "feeling" instincts, insights and observations to decipher human nature and reach the human heart. They are proficient in use of perhaps their own empathy and sensitivity in their understanding of human nature to create their masterpieces. Among contemporaries, I feel Amitava Ghosh, Vikram Seth to be in this later league. And I'm actually looking forward to find out if I can place Rushdie among any of these two classes. But I haven't finished any of his stuff - I was only one-third through Midnight's Children when I lost connection with the book!
Before I end, let me mention as a disclaimer that these are very personal views on the matter, could even be a totally fanciful take on the subject, but somehow I do find this to be so at the moment.
I think the following authors will be among such an "intelligent" lot of authors. I find them intelligent based on some observations they made through their creations. And all of them have the ability to masterly write out their observations - all of them are master storytellers too.
1. Ayn Rand: Whether or not you agree with her philosophy - she is a master storyteller with very true and intelligent observations - and there is no denial of all that she defines as positive in her novels. All that is very true. Though I don't completely agree with her dealings/opinions of the "altruistic" second-rate citizens, she did dissect the general digressive mentality very acutely and correctly, and I find her portrayal of the positive values irrefutable and true to the very core.
2. Leo Tolstoy: He appears definitely intelligent the way he makes his observations or makes his characters act, or manipulates them. And he is really a master storyteller. But I do hate (or maybe admire) his attitude and guts - it looks like he thinks himself to be a God or something - from the way he plays around and manhandles his characters! Very proud he must have been!
3. Arundhati Roy: She came out with only one book - and that too someone else "found" and published the manuscript for her. And what a book it turned out to be! "The God of Small Things" is strewn with comments and observations that are extremely simple yet hits you directly. And you cannot refute their truth.
4. Anne Frank: Ok, she was too young, but what she wrote in her diary at the age of 13 contained some straight simple truths and observations which elders can easily miss. At rare places, her writings showed characteristics of being 'free from the known'. I cannot help wondering what she might have contributed to the literary world had she gone on to live a longer life.
I find the writings of the above authors filled with traces of an intelligent sharp and analytical mind at work - they use their analytical/discerning intellect to create much of the effects.
Authors like Maugham, Dickens, Tagore use more of their "feeling" instincts, insights and observations to decipher human nature and reach the human heart. They are proficient in use of perhaps their own empathy and sensitivity in their understanding of human nature to create their masterpieces. Among contemporaries, I feel Amitava Ghosh, Vikram Seth to be in this later league. And I'm actually looking forward to find out if I can place Rushdie among any of these two classes. But I haven't finished any of his stuff - I was only one-third through Midnight's Children when I lost connection with the book!
Before I end, let me mention as a disclaimer that these are very personal views on the matter, could even be a totally fanciful take on the subject, but somehow I do find this to be so at the moment.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Pune: The Next Chapter
Stationed from Pune, this will be my first post. Yes, I have finally got transferred to Pune - something which I had once very dearly wanted - at the time of induction in Wipro about a year back. But on which I was no longer so keen at the immediate moment. And actually, which I would have preferred to postpone for a month right now if I had the choice.
But I am here, and with that, the next chapter - or sub-chapter of my life begins in this new city.
The situation of transfer had come to me with a strange effect - with this opportunity, of something too welcoming some months back, suddenly dropping in front of me when I was no longer that keen on it. And yet - there was this something left from my earlier desires which was apparently still rendering this opportunity in a special light, making it look attractive. Anyways, the situation had required an immediate decision and I had decided to take the plunge. In the past, I have always had wanted to have an experience of Pune, and if it would come this way, so be it. The incentive of a change is always there - something which I really cherish.
Coming to my experience of this new city, I'm liking the environment here. The climate is pleasant - maybe just 2-3 degrees above Bangalore - but still pleasant. The landscape is often undulating - with some actual tiny hills present inside the city limits. In fact, the place where I am staying at Baner is just beside such a tiny hill. The scenery looks great. From my Wipro office at Hinjewadi also, one is greeted with a sight of hill ranges surrounding about half of the 360 degree view. From the 5th floor of my tower where I work, one can get a nice unobstructed view of the surroundings. I take occasional breaks walking out in the open terrace in my floor and refilling myself with a breath of the vastness and serenity.
There is something about the hills (or seas also) that attracts me so. The vastness, the challenge, the magnanimosity? The calmness, the serenity, the stillness, but filled with the potential of an unmatched force? The seemingly unexplored domains calling to be conquered? Vibes of a 'larger than life' feeling? Probably. But the bottom line is that I do enjoy this.
The only thing which is actually troubling me in Pune is the public transport from my place to office. The available modes of public transport from here are scarce and not that appealing. I'm planning to take a bike soon. Once you have a vehicle, travelling in Pune is a breeze - the roads are nice amidst abundance of vegetation on the sides.
Anyways, apart from the transport thing, it has been a good experience so far. I have put up in a good spacious 3BHK flat here having all facilities (including wifi broadband), shared with 5 other persons - a high spirited 'bindas' bunch. It is a nice and comfortable place with maids to take care of the household work and cooking. I'm looking forward to a comfortable stay here. And I have also been told that in the monsoons, places in Pune become all the more beautiful and enjoyable. I'm really looking forward to that.
I'm looking forward to find out what things Pune has in store for me.
But I am here, and with that, the next chapter - or sub-chapter of my life begins in this new city.
The situation of transfer had come to me with a strange effect - with this opportunity, of something too welcoming some months back, suddenly dropping in front of me when I was no longer that keen on it. And yet - there was this something left from my earlier desires which was apparently still rendering this opportunity in a special light, making it look attractive. Anyways, the situation had required an immediate decision and I had decided to take the plunge. In the past, I have always had wanted to have an experience of Pune, and if it would come this way, so be it. The incentive of a change is always there - something which I really cherish.
Coming to my experience of this new city, I'm liking the environment here. The climate is pleasant - maybe just 2-3 degrees above Bangalore - but still pleasant. The landscape is often undulating - with some actual tiny hills present inside the city limits. In fact, the place where I am staying at Baner is just beside such a tiny hill. The scenery looks great. From my Wipro office at Hinjewadi also, one is greeted with a sight of hill ranges surrounding about half of the 360 degree view. From the 5th floor of my tower where I work, one can get a nice unobstructed view of the surroundings. I take occasional breaks walking out in the open terrace in my floor and refilling myself with a breath of the vastness and serenity.
There is something about the hills (or seas also) that attracts me so. The vastness, the challenge, the magnanimosity? The calmness, the serenity, the stillness, but filled with the potential of an unmatched force? The seemingly unexplored domains calling to be conquered? Vibes of a 'larger than life' feeling? Probably. But the bottom line is that I do enjoy this.
The only thing which is actually troubling me in Pune is the public transport from my place to office. The available modes of public transport from here are scarce and not that appealing. I'm planning to take a bike soon. Once you have a vehicle, travelling in Pune is a breeze - the roads are nice amidst abundance of vegetation on the sides.
Anyways, apart from the transport thing, it has been a good experience so far. I have put up in a good spacious 3BHK flat here having all facilities (including wifi broadband), shared with 5 other persons - a high spirited 'bindas' bunch. It is a nice and comfortable place with maids to take care of the household work and cooking. I'm looking forward to a comfortable stay here. And I have also been told that in the monsoons, places in Pune become all the more beautiful and enjoyable. I'm really looking forward to that.
I'm looking forward to find out what things Pune has in store for me.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
On Parting
Today, I came across an older post of mine, a single short paragraph, which I saved as draft but had never posted. I'll put it up now, just as it is:
Sometimes, very rarely, people would come into your lives, and through seemingly inconsequential everyday commanilities would touch some unknown depths in your soul - without you ever being aware of it - and then leave, stunning you into the abrupt realisation that the person had somehow become a wholesome part of your vision of life. A realisation you never had until the time of depart. And then, you watch - watch in stunned astonishment and painful silence - as the moments of the parting unfolds - as if some unreal scene is being played out on the celluloid.
Sometimes, very rarely, people would come into your lives, and through seemingly inconsequential everyday commanilities would touch some unknown depths in your soul - without you ever being aware of it - and then leave, stunning you into the abrupt realisation that the person had somehow become a wholesome part of your vision of life. A realisation you never had until the time of depart. And then, you watch - watch in stunned astonishment and painful silence - as the moments of the parting unfolds - as if some unreal scene is being played out on the celluloid.
Freedom: Defined by Tagore
What is freedom? What is the ideal free state? What state of environment is 'heaven'? These are eternal questions which have been, through ages, drawing out human endeavours for satisfactory answers.
Tagore has defined freedom, and the state of 'heaven' stemming from this freedom, excellently in this poem:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.
I find that very appropriate. That is true freedom - freedom culminating in a truly progressive society, a society celebrating, and living by, the human magnificience and excellence in its highest aspects.
Tagore has defined freedom, and the state of 'heaven' stemming from this freedom, excellently in this poem:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.
I find that very appropriate. That is true freedom - freedom culminating in a truly progressive society, a society celebrating, and living by, the human magnificience and excellence in its highest aspects.
Justification of Dreams?
Dreaming is easy. Everyone can dream. Desire is easy. Everyone desires.
But to make even the least possible effort, even if a miniscule, towards the practical realisation of the dream, is what will make all the difference.
Thoughts like whether or not traversing the whole path will really be feasible, about all things which 'might' occur to obstruct you, etc - and all such defensive thoughts - will only pull one down, without ever giving any proper solution.
There is only two vital questions to ask oneself - do I really want this, do I truly desire this? Is there anything I can do right now, which would not render me in some irrecoverable position, and which would take me, even if by a miniscule fraction, towards the realisation of this dream?
If the answers to both of these are 'yes', what more is really there to wait for?
Often, we try to justify to others our actions towards the object of our desire, in a perspective in which the other person might understand it - might see it as proper, right or natural from his perspective. And in trying to do so, we get lost in a maze of words and thoughts. Of course, how could it be otherwise? Because, in our hearts, the truest justification of our pursual of that object is our own pure desire of that object, not its being 'proper' or 'right' or 'natural' in the eyes of others. (Now, our desire might have stemmed from such altrustic reasons - that depends upon the psyche - but the bottomline is that we do desire it.) And it needs no other, and would find no other, more proper justification for our pursual of it than our own pure wish and desire of it. Hence it follows that we would never be able to properly put it in same justification and light in which it would have been placed had it been explained away with its true justification - and it is only this justification which actually renders it, through a power of truth and simplicity, in more glory and magnanimousity than ever possible through any other justification.
But to make even the least possible effort, even if a miniscule, towards the practical realisation of the dream, is what will make all the difference.
Thoughts like whether or not traversing the whole path will really be feasible, about all things which 'might' occur to obstruct you, etc - and all such defensive thoughts - will only pull one down, without ever giving any proper solution.
There is only two vital questions to ask oneself - do I really want this, do I truly desire this? Is there anything I can do right now, which would not render me in some irrecoverable position, and which would take me, even if by a miniscule fraction, towards the realisation of this dream?
If the answers to both of these are 'yes', what more is really there to wait for?
Often, we try to justify to others our actions towards the object of our desire, in a perspective in which the other person might understand it - might see it as proper, right or natural from his perspective. And in trying to do so, we get lost in a maze of words and thoughts. Of course, how could it be otherwise? Because, in our hearts, the truest justification of our pursual of that object is our own pure desire of that object, not its being 'proper' or 'right' or 'natural' in the eyes of others. (Now, our desire might have stemmed from such altrustic reasons - that depends upon the psyche - but the bottomline is that we do desire it.) And it needs no other, and would find no other, more proper justification for our pursual of it than our own pure wish and desire of it. Hence it follows that we would never be able to properly put it in same justification and light in which it would have been placed had it been explained away with its true justification - and it is only this justification which actually renders it, through a power of truth and simplicity, in more glory and magnanimousity than ever possible through any other justification.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Miss Mamata Banerjee and the Bengal Communists
A certain topic I was listening today among my friends about the 'lawlessness' of the current society, of the eroding security, and such issues, made my mind wander to politics and political personages. Of core politics, I'll say nothing in this article, since that is not my objective, but the chanced wandering of my thoughts to one of Bengal's political icons - Miss Mamata Banerjee, is what has triggered this article, and of her, and of her opposition – the Communists in Bengal, I shall key in my present thoughts.
I have never been an avid follower of politics. I had always in my past looked at the political headlines with a kind of bewilderment as to why such bureaucratic nonsense attains such importance, as to how come such clashes come up between those 'wise old men' in regard to the question of common good (about which, in my personal arena I had never seen such doubts among people regarding what is progressive and what is degressive), and how come people keep supporting such men after clearly seeing how far they deviate from what they are supposed to be doing, seeing how they get carried away like stupid thick-headed children about their own personal egos! But of course, bewilderment or not, you cannot live without being aware of what goes around, and such is my case. And it is through such slow indirect accumulation of the political accumen over the years, that the opinion I voice here has taken shape.
The Bengal political scenario is divided in two main camps - the 'Communists' (strictly just a proper noun these days) and the 'Congress' (I'm totally lost about the significance of the name) - or rather, 'Trinamul Congress' these days to be more precise. The Trinamul Congress front is led by Mamata Banerjee, and the Communist front is led by Jyoti Basu, Buddhadeb Bhattacharaya, and others.
For many decades, the ruling Communist party had been comfortably reigning over the state. However, the last decade saw some serious momentum being gained in the opposition camp, led by Mamata Banerjee. I have for long been listening (being the silent listener - seldom voicing, but always attentive) to supporters of both parties, to both their sides of arguments, about how the other is absolutely lost. And against Mamata Banerjee, a prevailing general opinion which I have gathered is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. But before going into her as I see her, I'll write out something about the ruling party - the 'Communists' - with whom she is up against.
Who are these 'Communists' in Bengal? It is of no doubt that they had lost credibility and had ceased to be useful at least in the last decade. Anybody can see through it. Yet, why, and how exactly, did they retain their vote bank and support? A popular opinion is that its by 'rigging' and by force, but I refuse to believe that unless a party have a huge chunk of true support, it cannot, however strong its 'force' might be, gain the majority of votes. Yes, it might be able to change 40% to 50%, but even if it has 20% true support, that is quiet a formidable number.
And in my personal circle also, I have found quiet a lot of people truly supporting the party. However, in more recent times, the party has shown certain reforms, and the support opinions I have heard might have been due to this. Yet, then, how come the party stood through the last decade - when it looked really all lost?
The party, when it had started, had its root in novel ideas. It must have had true communism in the heart. Many people believed in it. And true communism effects that people help people. This 'standing out' for others must have grown widely practiced inside the party. The party members took and gave favors to others. This practice must have become widespread. And this giving and taking is what I think brew a very intricate chain of 'loyalty'. So that now, the people if they move away, they would feel troubled by consciousness. And the majority of youth of the 'then' times, having grown older by now, and having thereby lost the openness of mind which happens with age, would naturally find it more difficult to move out. Their mental loyalty chain inhibits them from displacement even when they must be seeing through the fallacies which have been as clear as daylight. And still when someone truly speak for the party, I think it is because their mind having created for their comfort a circle of justifying reasons, which the mind falls to believe much more easily, since such a belief would keep it more comfortable.
Fighting such a system is no trifle. And it is this opposition that Miss Mamata Banerjee is up against. And I think, it is her kind of nature - the one true to herself and others - which can put up with such a situation.
As I mentioned earlier, a general opinion against her is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. This is probably true to some extent. It is true, that many things which she does are indeed futile. It is true that she might give out an image of not being the ideal politician who is always in control and witty. It might be that what she does suddenly might even harm her own party's vote bank. So, then, what is it with which she is formidably spearheading the intricate system of power which has been attained by the ruling party?
It’s her nature. She believes in what she does and says. She feels it. She lives a life true to herself and to others. And it is this quality, I think, which has gained her most of her aides. A rare quality, and a seductive one too. She lives a real life. She has true empathy. She is heavily toiled, yet she still goes on. And because of such truth, she actually make some profound simple observations, can actually see through injustice, recognise it more by feeling than by reason, when there is one and takes certain steps, which being very real and true, naturally finds support from the intellect and the masses. I believe, people would find it easier to stick to her, than to her political ideas. With her, people would feel secure. With her, they would be able to identify. With her, they would feel trusty. And these days, that is a huge incentive. It is with such qualities, and because of such qualities, I think, that she has been able to gather such momentum and loyal aides, and as long as she remains true to these, she will continue to find loyal support, no matter what she does.
I myself don’t know whether I'd support her ideals or not, but I would gladly help her personally if ever she needs such help.
I have never been an avid follower of politics. I had always in my past looked at the political headlines with a kind of bewilderment as to why such bureaucratic nonsense attains such importance, as to how come such clashes come up between those 'wise old men' in regard to the question of common good (about which, in my personal arena I had never seen such doubts among people regarding what is progressive and what is degressive), and how come people keep supporting such men after clearly seeing how far they deviate from what they are supposed to be doing, seeing how they get carried away like stupid thick-headed children about their own personal egos! But of course, bewilderment or not, you cannot live without being aware of what goes around, and such is my case. And it is through such slow indirect accumulation of the political accumen over the years, that the opinion I voice here has taken shape.
The Bengal political scenario is divided in two main camps - the 'Communists' (strictly just a proper noun these days) and the 'Congress' (I'm totally lost about the significance of the name) - or rather, 'Trinamul Congress' these days to be more precise. The Trinamul Congress front is led by Mamata Banerjee, and the Communist front is led by Jyoti Basu, Buddhadeb Bhattacharaya, and others.
For many decades, the ruling Communist party had been comfortably reigning over the state. However, the last decade saw some serious momentum being gained in the opposition camp, led by Mamata Banerjee. I have for long been listening (being the silent listener - seldom voicing, but always attentive) to supporters of both parties, to both their sides of arguments, about how the other is absolutely lost. And against Mamata Banerjee, a prevailing general opinion which I have gathered is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. But before going into her as I see her, I'll write out something about the ruling party - the 'Communists' - with whom she is up against.
Who are these 'Communists' in Bengal? It is of no doubt that they had lost credibility and had ceased to be useful at least in the last decade. Anybody can see through it. Yet, why, and how exactly, did they retain their vote bank and support? A popular opinion is that its by 'rigging' and by force, but I refuse to believe that unless a party have a huge chunk of true support, it cannot, however strong its 'force' might be, gain the majority of votes. Yes, it might be able to change 40% to 50%, but even if it has 20% true support, that is quiet a formidable number.
And in my personal circle also, I have found quiet a lot of people truly supporting the party. However, in more recent times, the party has shown certain reforms, and the support opinions I have heard might have been due to this. Yet, then, how come the party stood through the last decade - when it looked really all lost?
The party, when it had started, had its root in novel ideas. It must have had true communism in the heart. Many people believed in it. And true communism effects that people help people. This 'standing out' for others must have grown widely practiced inside the party. The party members took and gave favors to others. This practice must have become widespread. And this giving and taking is what I think brew a very intricate chain of 'loyalty'. So that now, the people if they move away, they would feel troubled by consciousness. And the majority of youth of the 'then' times, having grown older by now, and having thereby lost the openness of mind which happens with age, would naturally find it more difficult to move out. Their mental loyalty chain inhibits them from displacement even when they must be seeing through the fallacies which have been as clear as daylight. And still when someone truly speak for the party, I think it is because their mind having created for their comfort a circle of justifying reasons, which the mind falls to believe much more easily, since such a belief would keep it more comfortable.
Fighting such a system is no trifle. And it is this opposition that Miss Mamata Banerjee is up against. And I think, it is her kind of nature - the one true to herself and others - which can put up with such a situation.
As I mentioned earlier, a general opinion against her is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. This is probably true to some extent. It is true, that many things which she does are indeed futile. It is true that she might give out an image of not being the ideal politician who is always in control and witty. It might be that what she does suddenly might even harm her own party's vote bank. So, then, what is it with which she is formidably spearheading the intricate system of power which has been attained by the ruling party?
It’s her nature. She believes in what she does and says. She feels it. She lives a life true to herself and to others. And it is this quality, I think, which has gained her most of her aides. A rare quality, and a seductive one too. She lives a real life. She has true empathy. She is heavily toiled, yet she still goes on. And because of such truth, she actually make some profound simple observations, can actually see through injustice, recognise it more by feeling than by reason, when there is one and takes certain steps, which being very real and true, naturally finds support from the intellect and the masses. I believe, people would find it easier to stick to her, than to her political ideas. With her, people would feel secure. With her, they would be able to identify. With her, they would feel trusty. And these days, that is a huge incentive. It is with such qualities, and because of such qualities, I think, that she has been able to gather such momentum and loyal aides, and as long as she remains true to these, she will continue to find loyal support, no matter what she does.
I myself don’t know whether I'd support her ideals or not, but I would gladly help her personally if ever she needs such help.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)