Re: [ALOCHONA] Volunteerism is in Question
- Dear Alochaks,
I have been following this thread with some interest.
Volunteerism has always been a middle class quest for recognition and self
pride.It obviously fulfils some social functions and obligations of
community participation and upto this point it is all fine.
However to expect or even hope volunteerism has anything to do with changing
the lot of common people or expediting social change is a false premise and
the earlier it is dispelled the better.
The only difference between now and the decades 70's or 80's is that Bengali
middle class is more selfish and bankrupt now then it has ever been in the
past and that has shown itself in the degeneration of moral values and
lowering of standards and ethics in all aspects of our public life.
Liberation never comes through voluntary work, it comes through a sustained
purposeful effort to change a rotten social system.
In response to:
Alochoks do you agree that volunteerism has always been a middle class quest for recognition and self pride?
Moreover, if as per alochok Haroon liberation comes through a sustained purposeful effort, then what should be the pre-conditions for such effort?
Lets be realistic. The government staff has a family to feed. Who knows, probably in addition to his immediate family he has his old parents, brothers, sisters�to bear their expenses.How much salary does he get? Can he even pay his house rent with the salary ?
When you give a person a job knowing that the salary won�t even meet his minimum requirment are you not facilitating in his crime. The same is true for our police and other govt. services. One might argue: why then most university teachers don�t do corruption? The answer is: they don�t have any scope or ability.
Our �atlectuals� (so called intellectuals) still think corruption stems from some sort of moral decadance whose remedy is �preaching� and strict law!!!
In the west economists and social researchers have written a plenty of literature about corruption and suggested its way out. But as our politicians talk all rubbish from their whim most of our �atelectuals� talk from their commonsense.
Unless some rational guidelines are being offered corruption will continue to carry on.
In response to:
Thanks to alochok Manzur for raising the most practical other side of the coin that we most often missed.
He said at one point, "One might argue: why then most university teachers don�t do corruption? The answer is: they don�t have any scope or ability."
Some may answer the reason that university teachers have other opportunities in terms of doing consultancy and part-time teaching in private universities that ensure their solvency so they might not have to think of corruption.
Is there such part-time opportunity exists for our government staff in general?