I have never been so confused of the word “success” – I mean obviously I understand that The Brazilian football team had “success” at the recently concluded Federation Cup. And I see how easy it is for us to go ahead and tell the younger generation to follow their methods of bringing “success,” with complete disregard of the Spaniards whose methods in reality brought them bigger “success” as the World Champions. Effectively and quite efficiently we are getting into a lethargic culture of applying the word “success” to celebrate achievements based on predetermined targets, without which the word does not make any sense. A young aspiring football player in the subcontinent or a country with less notable results is more likely to wear either a Brazilian or a Spaniard jersey. He is even more likely to forget the run the Dutch or even the young Germans had in that World Cup, where either team could have easily taken the big title.
Without getting too carried away with football (usually a topic of more sentiments and less logic), my point is, why is it that we are always thinking about success in everything we do. Why are we allowed to so easily conclude that University A is more successful because their graduates receive higher average starting salary than graduates from University B? Our children going to school are placed into a measurement system even before they have any idea of who they are. And we are so actively making rules and standards to complement this system – rules and standards that prematurely diminish any possibility of inconceivable achievements. Essentially, we continue to pursue a system that prevents individuals like Einstein to exist. We easily rule out individuals as failures because they just quite simply “don’t fit in.” While we are in awe of those who succeed based on situation based ideologies that seemed right some ‘1 Earth orbit’ ago, or in other word 365 odd times of a complete Earth spin, during which a million variables would have changed. And being inert to these variables, we are prematurely determining who makes it and who doesn’t.
In Bangladesh constitution, Article 70 states: “A person elected as a member of Parliament at an election at which he was nominated as a candidate by a political party shall vacate his seat if he resigns from that party or votes in Parliament against the party.”
We can complain all about our crippled political system and ineffective parliament, but the fact that a single component in our constitution stands as a key obstacle in preventing democracy in Bangladesh. So the fact that the opposition / minority parties are always “walking out” of the parliament should not be received with any shock, since this provision ensures that whatever bill needs to be passed will almost always be in accordance to the ruling party’s preference. And then obviously it should be any surprise when the oppositions take the streets to protest. Lets look at a scenario.
If a ruling party wishes to put forward a bill in the parliament, say to change the name of the country to premier’s name, then it should be automatically taken that this will pass through. Obviously since the ruling party holds the highest number of seats in the cabinet and each one of them according to the provision are forced to vote in favor of what the party leader decides. And irregardless how much the opposition parties whine, the bill will be passed.
What is most amusing however, is why even the opposition parties never raise this issue? Perhaps they would rather have no voice for a period in order to enjoy full control when they are back in power. In 2009, Dr. Mozaffar Ahmad (Economist & Civil rights activist) suggested that a constitution review committee is formed to review this article along with other provisions, if Bangladesh is to move forward towards a transparent and healthy democracy.
#Bangladesh #Unemployment a liability? Not if we can help it! Follow National #Entrepreneur #Summit 2013 in May.
Billionaires’ fortunes hinder fight against poverty
Riches getting richer because of demands of what they offer is there. The new trend is so called the CSR which they actively pursue. Through CSR they ensure branding loyalty of products people who can’t afford don’t actually need. People end up spending their income on things they usually don’t need. So the math is really simple, the riches get richer and the poor poorer.