Well, it's been awhile since I last had anything to say here in my blog or rather my second 'home'. I've been busy with studies, club and also certain personal issues that arise recently. Anyway, this time around, something very interesting popped out in my mind. Can we actually draw a difference and/or set a mark on what we want and what we don't want? What I actually mean from this is, we may want a lot of things, but have we ever considered the outcome and consequences from what we want? Have we ever weighed in and wondered if those unwanted issues, if any, ever arises, would we be happy and would we be able to deal with it?
1. We want a car so badly, we go and get a loan. Loan is payable say in 5 years time. We enjoy using the car, because it's convenient, saves time and also a little because we can actually have a rather higher 'status' in society. What we don't want is that we have to make payments every month, from the salary we get. Let's face it, if we had the money to get a car, do we need loans? Maybe we do, and that wouldn't be the problem but there's always two sides to look at right? I'm looking at a more realistic and practical point of view. Of course with no interest charged from the banks, we would opt for loans but then again, there are always two sides to look at right? One being able to afford and one maybe not so lucky.
So, wanted = car, unwanted = extra burden every month. 2. Credit card. A very useful item that we can use without fear because we just need to swipe it and put our 'John Hancock' and we are virtually rich beyond our own imaginations. Of course again, there are people who know their limits and use it sparingly and there are also a whole bunch of people whom just can't control and will use it as an unlimited supply of cash. Well, before these people know it, they will only end up being able to pay the minimum and sooner than later, a letter of demand from the law firm will be sent to their humble adobes and that's when trouble starts.
So, wanted = convenience of use of unlimited cash flow, unwanted = having to realise that by the end of the day, what is credited has to be paid and not being to able to pay will result in terrible circumstances. 3. Let's get to something more interesting. Say, change of a government (no particular country in question, just a general discussion). Changes are needed and changes will happen. The only problem here or rather the point of contention would be again what is wanted and what is unwanted. In certain countries, it is reasonable to say that a change is unavoidable and it's good as it brings in different ideas and methods of ruling. It also enhances the idea of democracy and a fair policy of administration. However, when we think deeper, doesn't the above seem very theoretical and we are missing out on the grey areas.
Changes are needed, definitely, but at what expense and cost? Say an organisation and/or government has been there for a number of years and it has been carrying out it's duties in a manner that is not agreeable by the minority and it has come to a time where the people are beginning to feel uncomfortable, leading an effort to change these administrators. One fact that we can't deny is that policies has been there for a long time and for a new group of people to take over the administration role would mean a drastic change. Now, these drastic changes promised and/or manifested would definitely seem to be the best of it's kind and is to suit the entire nation or country. It would seem that finally someone can give us what we want and what we have been fighting for all these while, maybe say fairness and equality.
Perfect ending to a perfect start?
Hmm... Well, let's take things further. In life and in everything we do, is there really a thing called fairness and equality?? It's a known and accepted fact that when one wins, another loses. If we are to fight for equality and fairness, it would basically mean that in the past, we ain't getting them right? So, when we really do get these fair and equal rights and stuffs, wouldn't that mean that someone who has been taking advantage all these while has just lost something?? We are saying that we want equality and fairness, but how could it be fair if someone has just lost something when we won? Is that fair??
Don't get me wrong, I am not taking sides. What I'm trying to do now is to induce a discussion based on logic and common sense.
Ok, back to previous discussion. Say we got that equality and fairness that we fought for in the first place, do you think it will end there and then? Someone has just lost something, like we lost it before, that's why we are fighting for it now. So, wouldn't common sense tell u that those who have lost it would end up fighting for what they think belongs to them, which have now been taken away? I am not saying that equality and fairness ain't right, I am just saying that don't you think that the fight will never end?? It's mainly because now we are at the losing end, and we want to win, which means that the other party who is winning now, will lose. Can't it come to a situation where it will be a draw?
The equality that we seek in the first place is only on name equal but based on what I have just said, it's actually a win-lose situation. For equality to strike, there are mainly two ways:
a) Everyone gets something;
b) Everyone gets nothing.
My opinion on this would be for everybody involved to get nothing and start afresh from the beginning. Yes, it is definitely argued and accepted that by doing this, those that have benefited all these while are losing something as well but by losing this, it would bring equality to live because now everyone has nothing to fight for and everyone is to start from the beginning and 'may the best person win'. If we are to allow those that have nothing in the past to get something now, it would mean that equality is only a mere fiction because now everyone has got something to fight for and as we all know for a fact, one is never enough. It would then turn out to be a fight for who gets the biggest share for giving and/or performing the biggest effort and sacrifice, which can hardly be judged or justified. Therefore, starting from fresh, where everyone gets nothing would see the best option.
Next, what matters to me may not matter to you and what is right for me may not be right for you. This is very true when it comes to discussing about issues on changes, because what is happening now may suit me and if it changes, it might end up suiting you and not me. So, how can we say that we can achieve fairness here? Fairness and equality happens when everyone and anyone gets treated the same and no matter what happens suits everyone. I may agree with the way things are carried out now but may not if a change is to come. Sometimes, promises can be made and it does seem very convincing but then again, when we really think about it, can these promises really be materialised?And, looking at the bigger picture, now that we already have so many disagreements that leads to uproars and discomfort, imagine if a drastic change is to really materialised? Wouldn't the uproars and discomfort be more severe than before? Are we ready to face it and can we stand up for the better once those discomforts are over?
So, wanted = change of government/administration, unwanted = unnecessary uproars and/or unachievable fairness/equality.From what I have mentioned above, I can sense it now that not many or maybe not even a single person out there would agree with me but let's be objective and think bout it properly. I am not saying that a change is not good, but wouldn't a
change from within be more appropriate? Are we saying that just because we are not satisfied with the way things are now, we are getting another party and/or individual to come in with the hope of changing things? No matter what we say or do, it will all remain a hope. Yes, arguable, there's at least a hope, but a baseless one will get us nowhere. Hope based on words uttered are not hope per
se.
The other thing to be remembered is that, 'An eye for an eye, makes the whole world blind'. I ain't saying that fighting for what is right is not a good thing to do. It is good only if we weight the cost and its expense and work towards it in a controlled manner. If even before a change may come, so many discomfort is already happening, picture a time when the change really happens. A change can come but it has to be by someone and not anyone. We are not desperate. Since we really want a change for the better, let's make sure it's for the better and not just simply do it cos we WANT to do it and forget bout all the UN-WANTS. The possibility of risking something for what we think is right, does not blend well with our dreams and hopes in the first place, which is to create and enhance fairness and equality. If we really WANT to achieve that, we have to make sure that nothing is at risk and nothing and no one shall be sacrificed in the path of glory. Glory is only when we can achieve it without having to lose not only a single battle but also not a single body. That is the ultimate glory. If we are to lose, risk and sacrifice something or somebody along the way, I shall say by the end of the day, even if we win, it shall be no win to shout about.
Question to ponder, "If there were 100 people, and one of them carries a deadly disease, which can spread, resulting in the death of the other 100 people, you at the mercy of killing this one person, would you do so?" I shall reveal my answer in my next post. In the meantime, if anyone has any comments, feel free to leave them yeah. =)
Sometimes, we may only focus at getting what we want because we feel it's right and let me tell you, I do agree it's right but only to a certain extent. We may and we shall fight for what is right, only and only if we weigh the consequences properly and say to ourselves, 'Look, they ain't much that we can't handle nor can't tackle. No matter what happens, we are ready for it and we can take it up'. If so that is the case, then so be it, we shall fight for what we WANT. Let's not forget then, whenever there is something or someone which we WANT, there is always something or someone that we UN-WANT or rather DO NOT WANT.
Truly,
CK
- Putrajaya International Convention Centre (Level 1-VVIP Seating Area)
- Putrajaya International Convention Centre (Level 1-VVIP Seating Area)
- Performance by Canada
- Performance by Canada
-Performance by Canada
