Ta da! We have a new editorial in the people's paper. It is called "The Smart Quota".The way forward on quotas is consensus. Cajole, shame, inspire the corporates, don’t threaten.Ah, consensus. A beautiful word. So, let's see here how consensus has historically been achieved. Stalin achieved it rather quickly, so did Mao and Pol Pot. It is hard to present your argument when your head is not attached to your frame. So, you have consensus. The successful nations of today (the jury is still out on that by the way, Madam Roy thinks Amrikka is the most primitive nation), seem to have arrived at consensus in a manner we South Asians do not understand. But like it or not, there is something predictable in those nations. For one thing the farmers over there will shoot you with his shotgun if you so much as suggest suicide to them.
Elsewhere consensus has been arrived at under different conditions. Take China for instance. Mao used students to launch his "cultural revolution" exterminating millions. Decades later, tanks crushed few of those students alive. Goodbye dissidence, hello consensus. Now, China doesn't seem to be as unstable as it should have been. Joe Chinaman knows that Jack Chinaman is screwing him over, but it is better than elsewhere in the world. Better bending over for your own kind. From that experience it would seem that the first condition of consensus is a fairly homogeneous population. Like in India. Except that it really isn't.
We all know how consensus is done here. Just a few days ago a union minister made an open threat to a retailer to get out of his territory - or else. Apparently the retailer would not be so good for the business interests of his immediate community. Under these conditions, where everyone is pissed at everyone else, how the heck do you achieve consensus? It makes for good copy and perhaps you can get laid with any of the libby ladies in the posh circles in New Delhi but it means zilch for the 400 million hungry.
The truth is, you would not need quotas if you had consensus. Quotas are imposed because there is no consensus.
2 comments:
that "separated at the Razor's Edge", indeed, is creative!
your theory of consensus left me flummoxed...
so consensus is not a "unifier" but a "conscious surrender of vocal chords and not so brave *spinal chord"
when we are in a formative phase of life, whether or not we like it, we entertain this tendency na Barb. Unfortunately, spineless individuals form the fabric of the society, which appears to be peaceful an existence, in reality, which is not.
is n't thee central fact about our psychology is the fact of mediation?
I thought you once delcared to the world he lost his sting?
or kinda re-grasping it fortifying it with some essentials...
LOLzz.. @ Chole farts... :))
Tarun tejpal is a paid goonda of Congress, its common knowledge.
Shivam vij, well, he has no brains..
Post a Comment