Social Politicking and Gross Opportunity
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Oct. 2015
The political forces of social politicking via re-distribution of opportunities seem to be rising again. Such forces generally tend to rise as they promise instant nirvana through re-distribution of opportunities without realization or consideration of its impact on the gross new opportunities.
This is a direct result due to neglect for possibility of 'social mobility' by the political forces who claim to be focussed towards development or creating gross new opportunities for the 'population' to ride the political decision-making ladder.
The 'real personal contribution' of these forces is also in doubt, but let's ignore that for the moment. What happens is the development politicking scenario is that invariably (consciously or unconsciously) they try to protect the 'haves' who can project themselves as bringing in new capabilities/opportunities rather than encouraging open competition and social mobility through creation of level playing field, with the result that the "have not's" feel left out.
The "have not's" then question the value of such opportunity. The rest is all known and needs no elaboration.That the rebalancing or swing of political forces will happen so soon is a direct result of the rhetorical forces on the side of developmental politics. Such forces tend to create atmosphere whereby the under privileged becomes increasingly conscious of being left-out rather than providing encouragement to the forces that tend to balance or level the playing field for the under privileged (read- downtrodden and minorities).
Thankfully technology on itself makes no such distinction and neither does 'game' as advocated by these articles by your's truly. The impact of this is very likely to be in the ongoing elections as well as coming elections and the chances are both the victors as well as losers drawing wrong conclusions or conclusions that suit minority self-interest is very high. And this should be treated as the case for self-interest being equal to political dumbness rather than anything else.
The prime reason being that those who can impact gross opportunities do not want open competition which can result in lack of consolidation of the grip on 'money and power machine'. Let's watch if the 'game' can beat this one, because there aren't really many with the 'game'. It's another matter that nearly 'all' political forces may claim that they are 'in the game'.
That political forces who claim to be 'leading' developmental politics, tend to be convey pseudo-concerns about majority and national values is given since it is required to ride the voter tide. However what is needed is actual performance at the ground level instead of propaganda and the propaganda around pseudo-concerns about majority can easily be seen through in this age of internet and social media especially when public (including the down-trodden and minority as well as majority) is "game".
This can actually be depicted by giving fillip to social cohesion forces especially who tend to create level playing field like Super 30 or Water conservation in villages or minority development initiatives etc. Instead of talk about scrapping reservations, social structures like Super 30 can be planned to "better balance or level" the playing field and ride the social bandwagon and connect with masses.
This would allow focus on increasing the gross opportunities without disturbing the equilibrium, otherwise we will continue witnessing the see-saw of political opportunism, because public is all "game", otherwise the media would not be following these articles.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 23rd Oct. 2015
The political forces of social politicking via re-distribution of opportunities seem to be rising again. Such forces generally tend to rise as they promise instant nirvana through re-distribution of opportunities without realization or consideration of its impact on the gross new opportunities.
This is a direct result due to neglect for possibility of 'social mobility' by the political forces who claim to be focussed towards development or creating gross new opportunities for the 'population' to ride the political decision-making ladder.
The 'real personal contribution' of these forces is also in doubt, but let's ignore that for the moment. What happens is the development politicking scenario is that invariably (consciously or unconsciously) they try to protect the 'haves' who can project themselves as bringing in new capabilities/opportunities rather than encouraging open competition and social mobility through creation of level playing field, with the result that the "have not's" feel left out.
The "have not's" then question the value of such opportunity. The rest is all known and needs no elaboration.That the rebalancing or swing of political forces will happen so soon is a direct result of the rhetorical forces on the side of developmental politics. Such forces tend to create atmosphere whereby the under privileged becomes increasingly conscious of being left-out rather than providing encouragement to the forces that tend to balance or level the playing field for the under privileged (read- downtrodden and minorities).
Thankfully technology on itself makes no such distinction and neither does 'game' as advocated by these articles by your's truly. The impact of this is very likely to be in the ongoing elections as well as coming elections and the chances are both the victors as well as losers drawing wrong conclusions or conclusions that suit minority self-interest is very high. And this should be treated as the case for self-interest being equal to political dumbness rather than anything else.
The prime reason being that those who can impact gross opportunities do not want open competition which can result in lack of consolidation of the grip on 'money and power machine'. Let's watch if the 'game' can beat this one, because there aren't really many with the 'game'. It's another matter that nearly 'all' political forces may claim that they are 'in the game'.
That political forces who claim to be 'leading' developmental politics, tend to be convey pseudo-concerns about majority and national values is given since it is required to ride the voter tide. However what is needed is actual performance at the ground level instead of propaganda and the propaganda around pseudo-concerns about majority can easily be seen through in this age of internet and social media especially when public (including the down-trodden and minority as well as majority) is "game".
This can actually be depicted by giving fillip to social cohesion forces especially who tend to create level playing field like Super 30 or Water conservation in villages or minority development initiatives etc. Instead of talk about scrapping reservations, social structures like Super 30 can be planned to "better balance or level" the playing field and ride the social bandwagon and connect with masses.
This would allow focus on increasing the gross opportunities without disturbing the equilibrium, otherwise we will continue witnessing the see-saw of political opportunism, because public is all "game", otherwise the media would not be following these articles.