[C'EST MOI]
living paradox. individualist with anarchistic tendencies.
eludes eminence but appreciates subtle recognition.
capricious yet dependable. clandestine and unfathomable.
cynical realist who succumbs to the occasional idealism.
[J'AIME]
music. films. feasting & drinking. team sports.
good company; family, friends and those who share similar interests.
apathetic Main Entry: ap·a·thet·ic Pronunciation: "a-p&-'the-tik Function: adjective 1 : having or showing little or no feeling or emotion : SPIRITLESS 2 : having little or no interest or concern : INDIFFERENT synonym see IMPASSIVE
It has happened more than once, that the youths of today are accused of being plain apathetic and disinterested in important matters of our modern society. Put simply, the younger generation doesn't give two hoots about politics. I don't pretend that I'm an exception and am able to ride along effortlessly on political waves - in fact, it is probably fair to say that I don't even know enough for my own good... but one there's thing I know: if politics is about what we've seen, read or heard these past 2 weeks, I'd rather be labeled indifferent than be caught following a messy ball of yarn that threatens to reduce the most respectable of men to mere kittens who scratch and hiss for that extra length of fibre.
Of course I don't deny that there are the few good souls who deserve support and due regard, and these are those who demonstrate passion and sincerity to serve the people, EVEN IF they fail to garner the complete support of the people. But on the other end of the spectrum, it is beyond doubt, that despite the almost naturalistic facade, some are just out for power and total control.
We all know that it's arguable and we will probably never know the real agenda behind each individual because 1. they are really know how to conceal their thoughts behind those Darlie-white commercial smiles and 2. even after years of rallying for the freedom of expression and press, we still see a distinct bias in the media reports;
And then there are the sore losers.
After failing to sway the people by dangling millions worth of incentives in front of them, a resolute statement was made in the papers that since 'the people have made their choice' (to support the opposition parties), they will be left at the back of the queue for the upgrading of their quarters. The statement is continued with an argument that resources are scarce and to maintain the credibility of the party, the portion of the tiny pie will be and should be bestowed upon those who have stood behind them.
Talk about equality and social fairness?
Firstly, when the majority (in the 2 constituencies) 'made their choice' and voted for the opposition, I doubt that they were implying, "We don't want the upgrading." Isn't this general election not just about upgrading and what have you?
Isn't it about rallying support to ensure that capable leaders have a seat in the parliament so that they can debate over consequential issues like mature adults and make informed decisions as a team so as to secure the rosy future for our nation? Why then, do they take it so personally that if they don't get the certain number of votes, the people are not supportive of them? I think it's called looking at the bigger picture. In fact, we should all feel proud that the people of our nation are thinkers who are not easily moved by the lure of a more comfortable abode.
Credibililty.
Giving the incentive to those who showed support. Favouring those who favour you. That is credibility? Is that the credibility we so yearn to see in our leaders? Is it not easy even for a layman to love those who loves him? It is disappointing to know that even with the constant 'preaching' that our nation stands by equality and fairness, the unequal distribution of the pie is blatant.
Don't those who voted for the opposition not pay their taxes and abide by the law like every good citizen? Why then, are they treated differently? Just because they have an alternative perspective? Even if it is so, that our resources are so limited, shouldn't it go to those who need it more first? Rather than those who deserves it more? And who is to judge who deserves it more in the first place? Everyone contributes to that resource.
It's an unfair deal, if you ask me. But who am I to complain? I am but an apathetic person who don't know what I'm saying. Right?
[Time of Confession] 1:55 PM 0 Wisecracks for Me
_______________________________________________________________________________________
]>
_______________________________________________________________________________________
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home