Sunday, September 16, 2018

Should people work to live

There is one common thread in all of the world's religion. Work. Every living being has its purpose. This purpose is nothing but something to be done, work, again. All theologians talk about a super being and all the rules to worship that deity. They just differ in minor ways but the intent is to direct you towards an all encompassing entity. But, religion cannot exist out in thin air. It requires people, alive. How do you keep people alive. How do you provide for this. You make them work. Include passages/writings/rules in the framework which somehow tells this is one way to reach the one. In fact you can afford the path to the one only if you work. It is like a minimum requirement to be part of the religion. In fact work has created rifts among the people over the entire human history and continue to do so. With written knowledge now available to all the human beings, The classification is going to be different in the near future. We are going to have a world wherein everybody will be educated. There will no more be a situation where a select few can read the written knowledge being passed on from previous generations. Suddenly this generation can read all the knowledge generated over all the 20 centuries and is available to everybody with minimum effort. With this it will be difficult to get people to work based on old rules of caste/color/region etc. There have to be other means where you have to create dependency which in turn will force people to work willfully without knowing it. It will be more efficient compared to the older models where you forced them to work.

All the economic theories/political theories are not alien to it. In fact these ideologies talk about work in a direct sense. Working people is the basis of all the present economic/political frameworks. Even Marx's thoery starts and ends with work and workers. In fact it starts to quantify work in the best possible way. Ok...ok, I got it. You are telling me that there have been recent experiments where a minimum amount is paid as a "wage" and the individual is not required to work in the traditional sense. Why are the people in these experiments being paid. This is an ideology wherein the system is expecting contributions from the individual on his own. It is pressurizing the individual to contribute out of commitment by paying advance salary. It is a proven fact that actions/efforts happening unconsciously/willfully takes minimum effort of the brain. This arrangement of work can be utilized to increase the throughput of the effort required to complete a job.

Are we born to work. Should we work to survive. Are we not entitled to live on this planet without doing any work. Is minimum wage the answer for the 1% to keep the 99% working. Should the 99% work.

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

All oppressions start with an idea and dont die

We have all come across news regarding multinationals/individuals/corporations being sensitive/insensitive to human existence/development/status quo etc... Yes, that sentence was a mouthful. I couldn't write it any other way. All those terms are so tightly tied that you can add way more to the same sentence. Why do people do what they do. It all starts with an Idea. Th idea of existence/persistence/growth/identity. now, when people talk about idea, they normally associate it with a huge business/science/technological idea. But these ideas are based on smaller ideas and also the other way. There have been smaller ideas coming out as branches from bigger ideas. The ideas i am talking about here are the destructive ones. The ideas are about taking inputs which are un-ethical. The output will definitely be something valuable in the real world for the oppressor. For the oppressed(input) the result would be devastation. The oppressor will never know and want to know that this devastation will hit him in the immediate future or a little ahead. The idea is so damn shortsighted

Well, what are we exactly talking about here. We are talking everything which is labelled under non-sustainable development. The problem here is two fold. One is the team carrying out the devastation with the core general idea.The other is the devastation surrounding the group trying to correct the whole non-sustainable thing. The thing concerning the core idea is that even if the idea generator gives the whole plan up, the idea is still up for use. The other complication is the branching from this core idea, the subsidiaries. In fact these subsidiaries have more at stake compared to the bigger ones. The bigger ones bail out once the hurdles for returns increase. The smaller ones continue and in fact all the smaller ones can coalesce and form one big juggernaut. These smaller ones never give up. This gives an impression that the problem is bigger and there is only one big oppressor

These smaller ones are like the hydra. You get one another takes his place. This is known by all the stake holders. So, they just continue. The more educated these are the more clean and polished the oppression. What are the roles of the oppressed, the government, the general public, the press and the international community at large to stop this. Who are responsible for stopping this. Who is responsible for the situation in the first place. What are the roles of these people in resolving this. Cant we live without technology which is at the core of this oppressor/oppressed scenario. Can the world be stable without this. Is the world not stable because of this. Is the world stable. Why are the majority oppressed and the minority the oppressor. Are humans such. Are all the animals such. Why is it that equality so difficult to incorporate in living beings. Marx who started with equality had to adjust to the superiority of a few. Wont the superior ones be constrained if they have to maintain equality with the mundane.

If this has to continue, then why question it in the first place. Why show it as something wrong. Why show people who do it as if they are wrong. Does anybody become right by just telling that this is wrong. What is actually "wrong". Do we understand the right and wrong. Are we programmed with points to clearly spell out right and wrong. If we are clear on this why is everybody bearing the wrongs. Why are people doing the wrongs. If a rule is beneficial to the majority is it any excuse for the minority to bear the brunt of it. Both the groups will have their own right and wrong which are totally incompatible.

Until a time every action of all living beings happen for general good without changing the status quo or improvement chances of all living beings.........