We are human beings, a basket of imperfections. A common imperfection (I believe this is universal), is to see the world through a lens coloured with our own biases, orientation, and often expectations. One can't take this lens off.
Hence, when someone claims a narrative / analysis to be 100% neutral, I reject that premise at face value. However, I do believe that such imperfection(s) can be largely addressed by upfront disclosing contours of the lens one is wearing. The other party in general should be able to correct the narrative off such biases / orientation of the narrator, if the same are disclosed upfront. In public discourse, such disclosure should not be left to discretion, rather it becomes a necessity. Hence, the below.
As ideologies go, I find myself at a slight discomfort with absolute right-wing ideology (the apparent cornerstone of saffron outfit). To accept permanent social / economic inequality in some form or manner as a given used to make me very disillusioned. However, I also agree that for the society to improve its standard of living as a whole, a section of it needs to lead and hence be rewarded more, such section would do the needful only in anticipation of such higher award - its a virtuous cycle. There is no way around it.
As ideologies go, I find myself at a slight discomfort with absolute right-wing ideology (the apparent cornerstone of saffron outfit). To accept permanent social / economic inequality in some form or manner as a given used to make me very disillusioned. However, I also agree that for the society to improve its standard of living as a whole, a section of it needs to lead and hence be rewarded more, such section would do the needful only in anticipation of such higher award - its a virtuous cycle. There is no way around it.
I am still ok with centre-moderate approach. However, in my opinion, those political parties who talk about embracing (and hence expected to walk along) such ideology are delusional - they don't have an ideology in reality, and continue to resort to opportunism. Still, a few individual leaders stand out in such political parties who continue to work along such ideology.
I am extremely opposed to the leftist ideology as the primary governance model. I just don't see it working in any part of the world, and wherever it has been truly practised results in under-supply and rampant corruption. However, I do advocate a limited redistribution of wealth in a capitalist society, for reasons which don't warrant explanation here.
I am extremely opposed to the leftist ideology as the primary governance model. I just don't see it working in any part of the world, and wherever it has been truly practised results in under-supply and rampant corruption. However, I do advocate a limited redistribution of wealth in a capitalist society, for reasons which don't warrant explanation here.
Given that by and large most political parties do not follow the ideology they publicly advocate and hence are supposed to follow (moderates leading the pack), I have come to cultivate a significant belief in individualistic capability of specific leaders as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are not moderated. Civil language is expected. Extremely abusive posts can invite deletion, however only after having displayed potential to snowball into a slug-fest.