[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: try this one:



ARVIND
--------
>>
>> Does the contractual nature fly in the face of patriotism? Maybe,
>> but isn't patriotism itself a misplaced concept? I would certainly
>> like to know what others think about this - Is it an unnecessary
>> emotion or is it a neccessary ingredient to be able to run the
>> country? I feel it is enough that our actions are not harmful to the
>> society we are part of.
>> Should a person who is indifferent to emotions like patriotism
>> but who contributes to the society be considered a traitor?

GIRISH
------
I think Arvind himself provides the answer to his own question about
patriotism: "Is it an unnecessary emotion...?" by implicitly saying that
persons should contribute to society and not betray it.

Society is a very cryptic word. There can be, and there are, societies at
every level; at the level of  locality,  city,  state, language, profession,
religion, caste, etc. Now, a person belongs to more than one society.
Sometimes, what he thinks is good for one society might be harmful to
another society he belongs to. When a person asks for the benefit of his
linguistic society, he might put national society in danger. Similar is the
case with religious societies, state level socities,etc.

Patriotism is the sense of love and good will for the society at national
level. It's not just saying, "mera Bharat mahan", or shouting at those who
abuse India. It's this feeling which makes one weigh one's deeds and demands
for a lower level society in context of the national level society. With the
feeling of patriotism one sees that one's contribution to
religious,professional and other socities doesn't harm the interests of
nation. I don't say that contributing for good will of one's own
community,profession,religion,etc. is bad, but it should be kept in mind
that these contributions don't endanger the higher level society which we
call as nation. You can see this point in the light of current chaotic
situation in India and decide whether patriotism is necessary or not.


ARVIND
--------
>> As for changing contractors, we have an interesting situation in
>> India - that of Sonia Gandhi? Should she be disallowed to lead
>> the nation just because of her foreign origins?

GIRISH
------
Generalisation is not good. Do you think Mother Teresa would have lost, had
she contested an election? We are not against Indians of foreign origins.
But, they will have to show that they have the love for our country and they
don't just want to benefit themselves. When, our own leaders are shame for
us, we have to think it many times before believing outsiders. And, Sonia
Gandhi's deeds sometimes give negative impression. Singlemost is her very
very delayed decision to go for citizenship of India. Then, is the scandal
which is still dragging the name of his late husband and the country she
originally belongs. It makes one think that aim of her joining the politics
might not have to do anything with India, but to suppress this scandal to
clear the name of her birth country and her husband.
Remember, it's just a counter view so that you can understand why she
doesn't enjoy good acceptance in Indian politics where people like Laloo and
Mulayam are flourishing.


ARVIND
--------
>> There is no reason we should have first rate and second rate
>> citizens just because some other countries have.

GIRISH
------
I agree with that. We should make systems suitable to our society. Some of
our problems are very unique. Blind copying of system from others might ruin
us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list: india_policy@cine.net
Rules, Procedures, Archives:     http://www.indiaconsult.com/indiapolicy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------