Rethinking the definition of Slavery

Civilization is funny when it comes to Slavery! It's like the shifting fashion... you wear the same cloth, but by changing the styles. Coz, new styles always look good and old styles look hilarious!

Once upon a time, not very long ago, 'Slavery' was perfectly all right even (or mainly) to the educated people. Now we shiver when we think of that cruelty! We have definitely come a long way from that brutal practice!

Anyway, I recently read a definition of 'slave' in the wikipedia. Sharing it with you, just adding some comments in the brackets to compare how much we have shifted from that medieval slavery to modern servants...

"Slaves are held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase, or birth,...

[that is, when the parents or suppliers hand over the little kids to us as worker, obviously against their will]

and are deprived of the right to leave ...

[some people literally tie them up in the kitchen or in the bathroom... common news in the dailies],

to refuse to work ...

[common news... families beating/burning little kids with hot 'khuntis'],

or to receive compensation in return for their labour ...

[well we do let our little workers sleep from late night to very early in the morning, except when we awake them to bring us a glass of water in the night... does it count as compensation?].

As such, slavery is one form of unfree labour...

[what is a 'free labour' anyway? The labour now we get for almost free from these little kids?]"

Civilization! You do the same thing, just changing the style.

I wonder what the future generation will think of us after hundred years!

Further to my comment on Journalism

[in reply to AsifY’s comment]

When a journalist experience threat from a particular government or security officer, we all accuse the whole government for it. If I have read correctly, the post ‘here we go again’ pointed towards the government for misconduct of one RAB officer. But do we do the same when one journalist does a wrongdoing? Do we point towards the whole community?

In my understanding, when such attack happens to journalists, we should go against the person specifically responsible. If we present the person involved as an individual and have not done this under a government plan, it will also help us to convince the government to take actions against him. On the contrary, when we accuse the government as a whole, we just push the government to take defense and disregard the whole thing!
Isn’t it the same thing (defending) we (say you) would do if someone (say like me) accuses the whole group of journalists for the misconduct of one?

Let me also note here, the Editors also very often remain silent about the misconducts of other editors (except when there is a serious conflict of ‘business’ interest). We only accuse businessmen for becoming politicians, but have we talked much about businessmen becoming ‘Editors’ or editors becoming businessmen?

One clarification about using the word ‘paparazzi’. This is the closest word I found, but for good or bad in Bangladesh they do not hunt the actor or actress, they hunt the politicians, researchers, academicians, foreign delegates (remember how ‘they’ provoked Mahmudur Rahman to file case against five eminent citizens? Believe me, it was the journalists).

The only reason this discussion would fall under the category is that, these issues gives wrong impression about the whole community and sometimes can cause the problems that we were discussing.

[don’t get me wrong about journalists. my only brother, my cosines, my best friends, relatives all are journalists and I share these thoughts with them too]

A Tell of a ‘Backbencher’ Student

I never passed any math exam in my entire school life, and always needed some promotional marks to get promoted to next class. So when my government officer father got transferred from Dhaka to a remote district, he made me admitted in an unknown village school. Ironically it was before the SSC exam.

The new headmaster knew my ‘scholastic achievements’ so far! So he called me the first day and this is what he had to advice… “if you aim at getting passed, you will fail. So concentrate on getting a second class, so that you can at least get a third class.” Shoot the moon to get the star!

I was always a back-bencher… so on the first day at my new ‘village’ school, I habitually went to sit to the last bench. But when the Bengali teacher came, he called me and asked me to sit on the first bench! He introduced me to the whole class as a ‘good student from the capital Dhaka’! It was so embarrassing!

The embarrassment was not over. The teachers assumed that I know everything. So they started asking questions and made me to speak in the class, even though I had no idea what the topic was!

But I knew my limitations. So I requested a teacher to be my ‘private tutor’. In most schools, the teachers usually force the students for such private tuition, as it is a good source of money for the teachers. Surprisingly, the teacher refused me to be my private tutor. In stead, he asked me to consult with him everyday after the class, for free!

It was too much for a backbencher! The teachers were behaving, as if I am a good student! The exam was only couple of months away. I started to sit with my teachers in the after hours (for free)… they showed me where my problems were… and all the time encouraged me to believe in myself. I felt a change in myself. It’s a new feelings… it’s like … I can do it too! Finally the exam came.

I still remember the day when the result for SSC exam was published! How can I forget the tears on my mother’s eyes? Well, it was nothing new for a mother of a backbencher to cry every year he gets failed! She is the one who had to face my angry father and the humiliating neighbors, every time I failed!

But this time it was different! Coz, everyone was congratulating her for her son’s good result! It was the tears of joy!

After that, I did not have to look back… but I do. I always look back and wish- one day all the teachers will have faith on the potentials of their students!

“The dream begins with a teacher who believes in you, who tugs and pushes and leads you to the next plateau…” ~Dan Rather

Don't know whom to believe

[a response to a DP blogpost ]

I have seen how the government officials, political cadres and the so called security forces torture the journalists to hide their corrupt acts. I have also witnessed how brave journalists contributed to Bangladesh’s democratic process by reporting groundbreaking true stories.

On the contrary, I have also observed how the larger part of Bangladesh’s journalists have become a threat in the name of democracy!

- They irritate persons to make them spit a bad word, and when they do, journalists make it lead news.

- Just because most journalists are divided into Al and BNP groups, you never get a true story. It’s always from one ‘perspective’!

- Journalists will report someone saying something in some meeting, where the person was in fact not present (have witnessed number of evidences)

- Journalists blackmail people (nothing new though… you will find it in recent news)

- Journalists report rape cases as if they are writing porn stories, not focusing on the criminal’s detail, but detailing on victim’s part! The list can go on and on...

So, who said Bangladesh doesn’t have paparazzi?

But I guess, the 'lasts of the brave journalists' are our last hope!

Militancy: Prevention is Better than Cure

[a response to DP blogpost]
A softer approach to the militancy- my brain agrees with Rumi, but my soul doesn’t!
But one thing both my brain and soul admits, ‘prevention is better than cure’! And for a better prevention, one needs to find out why a suicide bomber wants to sacrifice his life?

To my understanding, it’s the poverty and inequality, coupled with ignorance.

There is a correlation between the increasing economic inequality and growth of militancy. Take a look at the emergence of JMB… mostly in the northern part of Bangladesh… the area known for its poverty and seasonal famine (monga).

It’s not only the ‘sawab’ in the world and after it, but also the relief of free food and education which provokes poor people to send their children to madrasah. And when these children become adult and enter into the job market, the only option they find is to establish another madrasah and start teaching (beginning a vicious circle of madrasah proliferation). But at one point, when they find that the existing system is not reducing their poverty, it becomes easy to influence them to change the system!

So, we need to change the system too. First, try a fair redistribution of wealth, and second, change the syllabus of madrasah curriculam.

Just remembered… wasn’t it the economic and social inequality why the freedom fighters gave their life to free Bangladesh? Ah! they got it right almost four decades ago!

Three Dilemmas that Ended DMY’s Political Mission

First: Fear of ‘Better Promoting the Worst’
Suppose DMY has formed a better political party, now who would the progressive people vote for? Obviously a considerable fraction (who has been voting for the ‘less-worse’ these years) would vote for DMY. This would mean splitting up and subsequent weakening of the ‘progressive vote bank’.

But it would be hard for a better candidate to divide the voters of the ‘worst’. These voters have all along been voting for ‘the worst’ without thinking of who is less-worse! The ultimate result is a ‘divided progressive vote bank’ against a ‘united retrogressive vote bank’. The Worst wins!

So let’s just say, many critics really did not want another Ralph Nader at this point!

Second: With or Without Army?
Apparently DMY’s initial advocate and potency was the Army. The dilemma is, DMY wanted to capitalize the benefit of this army support, but on the other hand, wanted a clean image of a non-army party? Why would army let the reward go to other’s pocket, when it had to take the sole risk of a legal-coup? Eventually, army had it enough and started showing apathy to DMY (or was it the other way round?)!

Third: Betrayal of the Opportunists!
For last decades, it was only the businessmen and politicians who always thought that the other side enjoys all the opportunities. Towards the end, the businessmen became politicians, and politicians became businessmen.

Then suddenly appeared this new group of ‘wannabes’ (some elite NGO activists, economists, researchers, ex-bureaucrats) who all wanted to become politicians. For these ‘wannabe opportunists’, DMY was a lucrative platform! So, they became the forerunners of DMY mission!

However, a closer look at the lives of these opportunists suggests, they never put their own stake at risk!
They never protested the army-dictators of 70s and 80s (interestingly, they emerged only after the autocratic era); they were not vocal against the post-election attack on the minorities (I hate to use this word though); they did not protest the pre-emergency political anarchy, as they were too busy day-dreaming of a Bangladesh in 2020/21!

No wonder DMY finally realized that, “those who encouraged me will not join politics themselves and will not publicly support me because they have their own problems,"!

Do the ends justify the means?

Can right ends justify wrong means? The believers of deontology would say no. For them, how a goal has been accomplished is more important than what has been accomplished. This means, an action can be wrong even if it results in the best possible outcome. On the contrary, the advocates of consequentialism claims that wrong actions are sometimes necessary to achieve morally right outcomes.
Justifying the wrong actions for a propagated great future has been the most admired practice among the Bangladeshi rulers. Martial law to revive the democracy, rehabilitating razakars to ensure unity, unlawful killings to ensure rule of law are some of its infamous examples. The rulers during the past decades have accomplished their illegitimate intentions by keeping the people hopeful for a future good. As a consequent, we have witnessed how Bangladesh turned out to be a state of anarchy where the ruling party became the kleptocrats and opposition became hostile.
Everyone, especially the incumbent interim government, need to bear in mind this very fact that people have by now lost faith in such ‘wrong means’ no matter how right ends they promise.
Exploiting the lack of independence of judiciary, the previous governments made a mockery of the legal system by using the court to achieve their illicit goals. Who can forget the sarcastic abuse of court by the previous government to snatch the support of a once fallen dictator! The sitting interim government has a promise to bring a change to this injustice. Regrettably, when we witness a warrant of arrest being issued against a political leader on the same day she tried to board a plan defying government ban, and the subsequent withdrawal of it when she failed to embark, we become skeptic. The government must have noted that people, who supported extensive arrest of top political leaders, did not feel comfortable with this injudicious action. People now believe that justice is a means to an end as well as an end in itself.
The continuing anti-corruption drive, which placed the top corrupts under arrest, has generated wider support and brought hope among the common people. However, arrest of criminals is nothing new in this country. What is rare is a fair trial. The more desired and possibly more critical task for the government would be to prosecute these suspects with adequate evidence. People would become cynical if these crime suspects remain imprisoned without trial, which would ultimately question the motive of these imprisonments. Also, people do not want to see any top suspect being captured and then freed under any speculated deal.
People are waiting for the most wanted political party reforms. There should not be a dilemma in choices between reforming the existing political parties and creating a ‘third force’. Even if a third party arises, the existing political parties should go through the reform process. One however needs to bear in mind the previous experiences of army sponsored party creation, which predominantly became amalgamations of razakars, political swingers and opportunists. Such means to reinvent democracy ultimately jeopardized the spirit of democratic values. So, if a third force has to appear, it should be evolved from the political system. For that matter, existing political system needs to be uncontaminated. Without sterilizing the existing political parties, one cannot justify a cocktail made from all these dirty-drinks.
To avoid similar oversights, the over excited ally, not its critics, should be a major concern for the current government. Stakeholders who enjoyed the benefits of the previous political tenures will soon put on new mask and become the advocates of change! It would be more difficult for the government to ignore the deliberate appreciations of the opportunist groups than to disregard the coherent criticisms. However, it’s a console that some advisors have already expressed their concerns about this over enthusiast groups. The current government came to power with the emotional support of the people. There is a risk involved in such emotional support – it goes high with every desired act, but suddenly collapses following a single mistake.
The present government has so much to do and simultaneously so much to be restrained from; so much to think of, on the contrary so much to set aside. It has the absolute power to take the country to the right end, also the absolute risk to get corrupted absolutely. ‘It has the best of times, it has the worst of times; it has the epoch of belief, it has the epoch of incredulity; they have everything before them; if means are wrong, they will have nothing before them’.