At the end of the day sports stars, movie stars and other celebrities are all in the business of monetising our emotions. They convert our adulation into wealth for themselves
The smarter ones give a small portion of that money back to the community.
+
It’s an investment - that money then generates more adulation which they can monetise further.
Some use their platform for genuine good, but that’s the exception not the norm. Most just raise their voices when they know that will generate more adulation at minimal cost
+
When there is a cost involved to raising their voice, they weigh it. Carefully. Is angering a authoritarian government in India worth the adulation it will get you? If it isn’t, they don’t speak. An elephant in an opposition ruled state is an easy win- so they speak.
+
Farmers, mishandled pandemics, the CAA NRC, Kashmir, all clear nos. Even amplifying distress messages come at a cost- it goes against the “things are not that bad” narrative.
+
I rage at this often but maybe the answer is to just hold on to our adulation. If watching them perform makes one happy, let’s pay only for that. Skip buying their products, don’t engage with them online.
Treat their talents just as cynically as they treat your adulation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On March 3, 1921, Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Shaukat Ali visited the Nankana Sahib Gurudwara near Lahore. They dropped everything relating to non-cooperation on receiving a wire that informed them of the massacre and rushed to Lahore.
Gandhi spoke to the congregation.
"It seems almost unbelievable that not a man died at the hands of the Akali party. Did not the brave men who were armed with kirpans and battle-axes retaliate even in self-defence? If they did not, it is an event that must electrify the whole world."
"I hope that you will not take the credit of the bravery for the Sikhs only, but that you will regard it as an act of national bravery. The martyrs have died not to save their own faith merely but to save all religions from impurity."
Looking at the stories coming out of China, it’s increasingly clear that we were rather shortsighted in 1999 in fighting to keep labour standards out of the mandate of the WTO.
In 1996, in the inaugural WTO ministerial in Singapore the US tried to introduce what would be called a “social clause” in multilateral trade agreements. This would make certain labour standards mandatory in all member countries.
+
The motion failed in Singapore. It was defeated mostly by developing countries who saw it as a means to negate their low cost labour advantage. They argued it amounted to using labour standards as a form of protectionism.
It basically starts from the belief that an electoral mandate legitimises all legislative actions by the government.
It doesn’t. First, we have anti- defection laws and limited scope for MPs to vote against the party position on anything.
+
Second, consultation and convincing stakeholders (ideally prior to enacting the laws) is an important part of the any legislative process which should never be skipped or bulldozed, no matter what the majority is.
Ok, quick question: how many people rely on the PDS today? 67% of our population - that’s right. Over 900 million people. Anything that affects this is pretty terrifying, right?
Read on
+
(Remember that in addition to the PDS, all of us rely on some sort of price control over food. That’s why we are all conditioned to protest to the government about rising onion prices.)
But how exactly does the government manage the PDS and control prices?
+
First, procurement and MSP. Originally, this covered only rice and wheat - this now covers a series of other food crops, including pulses and oils. The state procures specified produce at a “minimum support price” announced at the beginning of each season.
Poverty, illness, marriage related issues (I'm assuming this includes dowry harassment), family problems, farming issues including crop failure, indebtedness, fall in social reputation, alcohol abuse and other causes.
Economic distress manifests in different ways. The last straw for different farmers killing themselves might be different - illness without the option to stop working, family harassment, alcohol addiction, fall in social reputation, indebtedness, crop failure etc