Thursday, August 04, 2005

et tu Nariman?

9 Value-adds:

Blogger Sudheer Narayan said...

Same will happen, when other cities of india become so rich that they start disliking the poor rather than pitying them.

August 05, 2005 1:52 PM  
Blogger eV said...

I'm not too sure if disliking them is worse than pitying them.

August 05, 2005 10:57 PM  
Blogger madatadam said...

ayn rand blares thru ev's words :P
but i dont think its dislike or pity its jus plain ol' indifference

August 06, 2005 1:14 AM  
Blogger Sudheer Narayan said...

indifference does not lead demand for seperate city da.. does it?

August 06, 2005 9:20 PM  
Blogger eV said...

Fart: Under normal circumstances, indifference would'nt lead to such demands - because people dont give a damn about how the state's inaction/ineptness has caused "the others" to live in such demeaning ways.
But God forbid, if in case of a natural calamity the previliged few(or for that matter, even the middle class) have to live without potable water, food and electricity for a few days... it is then that the indifference translates to these demands.

Its similar to how soon after the bpo boom, the media talked about psychological effects of working late in the nite. It was not as if there were no night-shift workers till then.

August 06, 2005 9:49 PM  
Blogger Sudheer Narayan said...

Maybe - it might - but still... how does indifference make them "better-than-the-rest-of-you-and-deserve-better-government-...-elitist"??? wont any person frustu with current govt want to do something which is smaller which is for himself, which is more controllable, something which might give the hope that future migth be better?

August 07, 2005 3:11 AM  
Blogger madatadam said...

the thing is that they want a government controllable by and accountable to themselves because they r indifferent to the needs of "the others".. they dont care what happens to the the nameless man in the street who doesnt have much in terms of opinion or inteligence.. the status quo is much more suited to him.. if there is a change at all it will only help alleviate the problems of the middleclass or higher up in the economic ladder whereas the current govt, being populist, will try to ease his pains to get his votes for the next election.. overall a choice between a bad form of govt helping more ppl or a more intelligent and better form of govt helping fewer ppl.. but of course all political choices are hobson's choices where we just have to take or leave readymade solutions ideaologists offer.. there is very little compromise across economic blocs..

August 07, 2005 3:39 AM  
Blogger Sudheer Narayan said...


One should either firmly believe in either "self-good for everyone will eventually help all" or "forced equality is the way to long term sustenance".. Middle path is too murky to be practical.

Some mumbaikars believe in self-good... whereas those who might not be in a situation to do anything significant to their own self good believe are falling abck to the second funda. Who knows, they might also believe in self-good once they become big enough to influence.

For bombay, moving the over subsidised slums away from city, providing faster better ways of commuting and reducing the obscene skewed land rates between city and suburbs are the way ahead... or else the murky waters of extremely rich and extremely poor alone living in the city will exist.

August 07, 2005 1:02 PM  
Blogger madatadam said...

completely agree - thats what i meant when i said "a choice between a bad form of govt helping more ppl or a more intelligent and better form of govt helping fewer ppl".. the choice is not straightforward and though i say "bad form of govt" i donno which is the worse choice as a whole

August 07, 2005 3:14 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home