Skip to main content

 

            Are We Really Pseudo Socialists?


I won’t talk about other nationalities when ‘hypocrisy’ is discussed because I really don’t have any idea about them; but I find Indians carrying dollops of hypocrisy in their conscience. We shamelessly show this in every facet of our lifetime. I would take up this issue out of various subjects to prove my point.  


Firstly I have taken so called “Socialism” to the fore, which I put at top of the list. We tend to become SOCIALISTS depending upon need of the hour. We have not come out of this, even after the economic reforms of 90s. Actually after independence in 1947, our leadership chose to become ‘socialists’ after taking cue from USSR. We accepted it with open arms that government would take care of our lives. Government started taking care of our employment by creating public sector units manufacturing and serving nearly everything which a common man need; even it ran hotels as well. Private entities ran their businesses under licence-quota raj and making profits was considered a kind of curse. Remember a ‘cruel’ मिल मालिक in our old Bollywood movies?


Even coming out of poverty or exponential growth in our lifestyles after economic reforms of 90s which was only possible due to private sectors, we all know. We all have become well to do as compared to the lives which our elders lived. But still we would never like to leave our LPG subsidy. We all love to abuse richest Indian Mukesh Ambani on social media using his cheap Jio 4G network. We would be elated if our children get a nice job in any of the organisations run by Ambani-Adani or any other RICH person; but we still curse them. We are using their products and services to enhance our lifestyle but we will behave like a jealous neighbor when he gets new car. 


Have demonizing rich people or corporate become a fashion?  Answer is Yes.  In childhood, we used to hear the names of Tata-Birla; now they have become Ambani-Adani. I am not questioning the ways of their getting richer by every year? Actually I am not at all qualified to comment on it. Have they become rich six years back? This candid question I put it to everyone. The answer is No.
This is a worldwide phenomenon where corporate world are protected by governments for their political motives. It has always been a give and take. Don’t we see how elections in USA are funded by corporate world?  But if at the end a common man is benefited by their products at competitive prices; what's the harm? Best example in the recent past is that we used to spend a lot on mobile phone services, both in voice call and internet data. The same Reliance group comes in the scene and makes these services within the reach of masses.

Now at the end, the ULTIMATE and HILARIOUS QUESTION arise in every pseudo socialist's mind  ‘आखिर रिलायंस ने कितने पैसे कमाए‘?
That’s what we Indians have become. 😁😁😁😁

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ABSURD THEME OF WAQT (1965), A DELIBERATE PLOY?

In the 1965 film Waqt, the choice of an earthquake as the catalyst for family separation is often cited as "absurd" or "flimsy" because it serves as a sanitized metaphor for the Partition of India. Critics and film scholars highlighted the following reasons for this perceived absurdity in the past as well Avoidance of Political Sensitivity: At the time of its 1965 release, India was in the midst of war with Pakistan. Filmmakers used the earthquake to evoke the mass displacement and trauma of 1947 without directly addressing the politically charged and communal violence of Partition. Dubious reason of Long-Term Separation: Critics argue that while an earthquake causes immediate chaos, it rarely results in family members being scattered to completely different cities (Bombay, Delhi) and remaining lost to each other for decades in a way that Partition-era migration did. Thematic Focus on Fate: The earthquake aligns with the movie’s title (Waqt meaning "Tim...
Post a Comment
Read more

Left Liberal is an oxymoron

In today's politically polarized landscape, the term "left liberal" often finds itself in the midst of heated debates. Critics argue that being a left-leaning liberal is paradoxical due to the inherent conflict between leftist ideologies, capitalist systems, and associations with Islamists. Here I would like to explore whether the label of "left liberal" is indeed contradictory in nature. How they think-- When we identify someone as a leftist, we usually understand them to advocate for social equality, justice, and a more egalitarian society. Historically, leftists aim to dismantle oppressive systems, promote workers' rights, and bring about progressive social change. Now argument is that this ideology inherently clashes with the concept of liberalism, which upholds individual freedom and limited government intervention. However we sometimes equate these people with communist ideology with a heavy dose of socialism. But it is just 180 degree opposite. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Wokeism, Indian and global perspective

To be completely honest, until I started using Twitter, I had never heard of WOKEISM or WOKE people when I first started using social media, which was about 14 years ago. Twitter in fact provided me with a window into what the rest of the world believes. I was unable to find the definition of "Wokeism" in either my preferred Webster's or Chamber's dictionaries. To my surprise, I found it in online on dictionary.com/. Wokeism or Woke Culture is defined as the "promotion of liberal progressive ideology and policy as an expression of sensitivity to systemic injustices and prejudices," according to the statement. Some says, it’s origins rooted in African American Vernacular English. It is actually a Left-Liberal(sic) phenomenon . I first began looking for examples of how Woke people behave in other parts of the world, particularly in Europe or North America. Over there, Wokeism is a term derived from the word “woke,” which initially meant being aware of social...
Post a Comment
Read more