I met a friend, lets call him X, a couple of weeks ago. Spent a long time chatting with him, a conversation laced as always with pessimistic, offensive and infuriating comments and observations from him and rather inadequate replies and rebuttals from me. We spoke about a lot of things, but one in particular struck a chord and that's what I am writing about.
He mentioned some woman who was fiercely and vocally anti MNC and dressed in a fabindia kurta, levi’s jeans, adidas shoes and sporting ray ban sunglasses. (The reason why he chose to mention this to me is not lost on me either.) So that you see is the oldest argument under the sun, or should I say under the post liberalization sun, in this country. And it is one that I am not entirely in agreement with, nor unfortunately do I have a cogent or lucid enough argument against it.
However with my limited intelligence and even more limited understanding of the situation, let me say this: do I have to feel guilty about enjoying the fruits of a system because I am opposed to some aspects of it? Do I have to denounce a whole system because it is malfunctioning? Or is it possible to point out and protest against the aspects that are offensive and indeed demand changes, without having to boycott the resultant goods. It might sound hypocritical but to my mind, it is not. And people who say it is, like no doubt, my good friend X, seem only to be twisting the argument. Their point of view amounts to demanding that we, of the anti MNC views, should be in favour of amputating the fingers because they are infected. The idea is to be able to get rid of the infection and not the fingers.
Or is that too simplistic a view? I have often found that solutions to the most complex problems are ingenuously simple, but difficult, sometimes impossible, to implement because of social, economic or political compulsions; in fact, usually a complex web of all three. To my mind however that is the way; what the world needs today is for MNCs to have a human face, and not just as lip service. They can’t have policies that are environmentally destructive and financially crippling for the Third World, for the sake of pursuit of profit, and then redirect a miniscule part of those profits in ‘corporate social responsibility’ programs, which are, in the long run, a joke compared to the price the world has to pay to keep the same companies afloat in the first place.
The world has outgrown capitalism just as it has socialism. Neither, we have to admit, has been either wholly successful or without ills. What we need then today is a new kind of ism, one that realizes the benefits and the strengths of capitalism without losing sight of the equitable goals of socialism. Is this possible? I’m sure the cynical amongst us will say not, as also the intellectuals who understand the workings of economics better. I for one, wish that more of us would turn creatively revolutionary because unless we do, there is no hope…
He mentioned some woman who was fiercely and vocally anti MNC and dressed in a fabindia kurta, levi’s jeans, adidas shoes and sporting ray ban sunglasses. (The reason why he chose to mention this to me is not lost on me either.) So that you see is the oldest argument under the sun, or should I say under the post liberalization sun, in this country. And it is one that I am not entirely in agreement with, nor unfortunately do I have a cogent or lucid enough argument against it.
However with my limited intelligence and even more limited understanding of the situation, let me say this: do I have to feel guilty about enjoying the fruits of a system because I am opposed to some aspects of it? Do I have to denounce a whole system because it is malfunctioning? Or is it possible to point out and protest against the aspects that are offensive and indeed demand changes, without having to boycott the resultant goods. It might sound hypocritical but to my mind, it is not. And people who say it is, like no doubt, my good friend X, seem only to be twisting the argument. Their point of view amounts to demanding that we, of the anti MNC views, should be in favour of amputating the fingers because they are infected. The idea is to be able to get rid of the infection and not the fingers.
Or is that too simplistic a view? I have often found that solutions to the most complex problems are ingenuously simple, but difficult, sometimes impossible, to implement because of social, economic or political compulsions; in fact, usually a complex web of all three. To my mind however that is the way; what the world needs today is for MNCs to have a human face, and not just as lip service. They can’t have policies that are environmentally destructive and financially crippling for the Third World, for the sake of pursuit of profit, and then redirect a miniscule part of those profits in ‘corporate social responsibility’ programs, which are, in the long run, a joke compared to the price the world has to pay to keep the same companies afloat in the first place.
The world has outgrown capitalism just as it has socialism. Neither, we have to admit, has been either wholly successful or without ills. What we need then today is a new kind of ism, one that realizes the benefits and the strengths of capitalism without losing sight of the equitable goals of socialism. Is this possible? I’m sure the cynical amongst us will say not, as also the intellectuals who understand the workings of economics better. I for one, wish that more of us would turn creatively revolutionary because unless we do, there is no hope…
2 comments:
the post reminds me of three things.. firstly, an article i had read about indira gandhi many many years ago .. she was talking about how there was this huge "swadeshi" movement in pre independence india .. one day a lot of folks gathered togther to burn foreign articles like clothes, utensils, and pretty much anything firang they could lay their hands on .. unfortunately, someone noticed a baby doll in young indira's hand, snatched it, and burnt it .. she never forgot it .. said that that is the point of time when she started hating all these self proclaimed swadeshis .. the article was very striking because of its simplicity and of course, its impact on india in the future years .. : ) .. another incident that comes to my mind is from malgudi days .. swami is caught in the middle of a swadeshi movement, and to save his ass, throws his topi into the flames, claiming that he's swadeshi too .. his dad is not too happy to hear that, given that it was a pure khadi cap!! .. :D .. finally, the most important point .. i've been reading all these reports of pharma companies not investing in drugs because of the cost involved .. one was a cure for cancer!! .. imagine how beneficial it would be to the world .. shouldn't there be some law around this to force these companies to do pro bono stuff? .. but who can force a researcher to do research anyways ? .. and why can't the US govt. invest a few billions into this research instead of a trillion in iraq ? .. : ) .. then there's this case of novartis, which is trying to renew a patent after 20 years of milking the world dry through exorbitant prices .. how does one deal with such companies/countries ? .. go swadeshi ? .. or burn everything videshi in sight ? .. how about a third option of making our goods and products superior to the videshi ones so that no one buys them at all .. of course that would involve a lot of sacrifices for the concerned ppl in our desh .. burning firangi stuff and claiming riddance of evil is always an easier option .. : ) .. hey .. looks like the comments section is going to be bigger than the blog itself .. haha .. proof positive that this blog does trigger a lot of thoughts ..
Well, what can I say, you're asking the same questions, aren't you... Let's keep asking, and maybe someday someone will start coming up with some answers...
And hey, do keep forwarding to me any articles that you think might be of interest to me.
And thanks for reading the posts with such depth...
Post a Comment