Friday, May 22, 2009

Intellectual opinion

Getting fed up by doing work which are mostly iterative types in the lab, we need some change. Generally we walk to the staff canteen and have a cup of tea sitting under the tree. We used to delve either into some entertainment stuff or into some political, social issues. Today my colleague criticized the action of social activist like Arundhati Roy and argued that their net input to the development is zero. I personally felt that their agitation is not baseless even they are motivated and directed by some tycoon. Common men have grievances and hence they are coming behind these people who are trying to give them voice. Now it is the duty of Gevernment to adress these issues properly. Instead of negotiating these leaders, if Government would have wooed people, it is really difficult to organize such agitations.

My dear friend made a very good point. "For the safety of village is it acceptable to sacrifice a family?" he asked me. I said yes. Taking inference of this logic he justified the destruction of some villages for the welfare of the nation. Suddenly one logical but counter thought propped up in my mind and I thought I should write to preserve this.

There is difference between the two issues, issue of security and issue of development. Everyone feels his duty to sacrifice his life for the safety of his community. His sacrifice was seen with respect. Basically people are motivated to sacrifice for their community rather they were pushed by giving some incentives. On the other side, if we deprive someone for the benefit of others, that may cause a resentment which might be harmful for the society. We can not justify for keeping someone hungry so that others would get two pieces of bread. As I personally think that it is more logical that distribute lesser amount of bread to all so that the last one would not have to sleep without bread. On this logic Government should have to provide proper compensation to the people who are getting affected by the development programs by imposing more taxes on benefactors.

No comments: