IN RESPONSE TO SHARMISTHA CHATTERJEE'S (Sharmistha Chatterjee) COMMENT ON MY POST ... 2
Sugata Bose : Ramakrishna renounced money and must we, his devotees, pursue it by all means? Subsistence is one and surplus quite another.
Sharmistha Chatterjee : Presently gathering and treasuring so much from this discourse of yours which is directed to enlighten us and absolutely aware of such anomalies in the society, I really remain humble and would just like to say that the common householders like us , neither have the ego or the strength or the power but to submit to the vicious circle of the society.
With a wailing heart I pronounce that let me experience the inferno of Hell before I even dare to dream of being proud to do any charity to any of the citizens of the world. However ,I believe each one of us have the heart to stretch out our hands to our capabilities and pull each other more close to one another.
Sugata Bose : No, not at all. We need not meekly submit to a vicious system of human exploitation. We must put up a fight in terms of spreading awareness, living frugal, donating for sure as much as possible for worthwhile causes but never absolving ourselves, thus, of having been party to this malefic exploitation of the masses by the very system we so support.
The entire focus of the conversation needs a shift today in the light of growing awareness of a humanity exposed to universal education and having access to greater understanding of the forces that are in play to keep the masses down for petty personal profit. Economists keep on furnishing new models of adjustment of the forces of capitalist exploitation by way of giving it a human face without understanding the fundamental principles on which phenomenal life subsists essentially.
There can be no apology, thus, for this menace of mass destruction on a daily basis in the form of exploitation by capital, a system in which we blissfully participate as if we are helpless children and then pretend to be practitioners of piety in our bid to stifle our still-beating conscience which spares us not despite our perverse persistence in pulverising it.
Charity is good on the surface but is rotten in essence in so far as lending financial help to the dispossessed is concerned. Why must men be dispossessed of the basic means of healthy subsistence so that they remain exposed and disposed at that to receiving mercy from men who have fared better in this world of terrible inequities?
Men create inhuman inequalities that afflict society and then proceed to reduce them but not eliminate them altogether. After all, if men by the millions be not held down in abject poverty, how on earth will the millionaires derive the satisfaction of handing out the dole to them by way of practising compassion for their dispossessed brethren? What a hypocrisy it is that the very people who create poverty to become prosperous themselves then proceed to reduce the poor people's difficulties in self-subsistence by handing them out this hideous help that in the first place was plundered from them in the name of profit!
Response written to Sharmistha Chatterjee's comment by Sugata Bose
End of Part 2
To be continued ...
Sugata Bose : Ramakrishna renounced money and must we, his devotees, pursue it by all means? Subsistence is one and surplus quite another.
Sharmistha Chatterjee : Presently gathering and treasuring so much from this discourse of yours which is directed to enlighten us and absolutely aware of such anomalies in the society, I really remain humble and would just like to say that the common householders like us , neither have the ego or the strength or the power but to submit to the vicious circle of the society.
With a wailing heart I pronounce that let me experience the inferno of Hell before I even dare to dream of being proud to do any charity to any of the citizens of the world. However ,I believe each one of us have the heart to stretch out our hands to our capabilities and pull each other more close to one another.
Sugata Bose : No, not at all. We need not meekly submit to a vicious system of human exploitation. We must put up a fight in terms of spreading awareness, living frugal, donating for sure as much as possible for worthwhile causes but never absolving ourselves, thus, of having been party to this malefic exploitation of the masses by the very system we so support.
The entire focus of the conversation needs a shift today in the light of growing awareness of a humanity exposed to universal education and having access to greater understanding of the forces that are in play to keep the masses down for petty personal profit. Economists keep on furnishing new models of adjustment of the forces of capitalist exploitation by way of giving it a human face without understanding the fundamental principles on which phenomenal life subsists essentially.
There can be no apology, thus, for this menace of mass destruction on a daily basis in the form of exploitation by capital, a system in which we blissfully participate as if we are helpless children and then pretend to be practitioners of piety in our bid to stifle our still-beating conscience which spares us not despite our perverse persistence in pulverising it.
Charity is good on the surface but is rotten in essence in so far as lending financial help to the dispossessed is concerned. Why must men be dispossessed of the basic means of healthy subsistence so that they remain exposed and disposed at that to receiving mercy from men who have fared better in this world of terrible inequities?
Men create inhuman inequalities that afflict society and then proceed to reduce them but not eliminate them altogether. After all, if men by the millions be not held down in abject poverty, how on earth will the millionaires derive the satisfaction of handing out the dole to them by way of practising compassion for their dispossessed brethren? What a hypocrisy it is that the very people who create poverty to become prosperous themselves then proceed to reduce the poor people's difficulties in self-subsistence by handing them out this hideous help that in the first place was plundered from them in the name of profit!
Response written to Sharmistha Chatterjee's comment by Sugata Bose
End of Part 2
To be continued ...
No comments:
Post a Comment