In a column named ‘bizsense’ in The Week magazine, David Brooks said, “ There are four steps to every decision. First, you perceive a situation. Then you think of possible courses of action. Then you calculate which course is in your best interest. Then you take the action. Over the past few centuries, public policy analysts have assumed that step three is the most important.”
Practically all neoliberal models of economic growth and the entire development model trusted on the assumption that people are seriously engaged in rationally calculating and maximizing their self interest. But the financial meltdown seems to show that this seriousness did not reflect in their third step of calculating which step is in their best interest and the fourth step of taking action.
We are startled to read about the Satyam fiasco. By this India is not isolated. America is in a much bigger mess. Stating from Intel, Honeywell, Ingersoll-Rand and Starwood Hotels many other big companies have failed to withstand the current crisis. On the one hand the scam of 7000crore shook the nation but on the other hand no media highlighted the state of 53,000 employees of Satyam and the thousands of companies who started laying off their employees. This is a more pertinent question than thousands of crores which seem to irk minds of many.
Thousands of corporate ventures have disappeared during the current economic meltdown that had its roots from the 2008 catastrophic meltdown. We can imagine the number of people particularly the youth who are thrown out of various such companies and organizations. Apart from these organizations, companies and the employees who are affected there are the investors who made these companies flourish. I have one very important question in mind: What have they left behind for all these investors who pumped in capital with their hard earned money for the success of these companies? There is no report saying such people were compensated.
While this is the plight of the companies that sprout today and disappear tomorrow, we think of various organisations that were meaningfully present in several countries offering free services to mulitudes of youth, chidlren and women on humanitarian grounds. Imagine especially, the workforce deployed by them to reach out to millions of youth, children and women who otherwise would have resorted to violence, stealing and crimes. You just cannot measure the amount of crime prevention works they have done through their various interventions.
At this juncture I would like to ask a pertinent question. Have these organisations been recognised as the “Social Entrepreneurs?”
Why is this partiality? Even the personal money earned is appreciated and acclaimed, while a true service for the upliftment of the people is not even recognized in this country especially by the elitistic government.
The words of Albert Schweitzer is consoling. He said, “I don’t know what your destiny will be, but one thing I do know: the only ones among you who will be really happy are those who have sought and found how to serve.” Service to various segments of the needy society as envisioned by great minds, is the only virtue that will ennoble those who served humanity without charging them.
“One Act of beneficence, one act of real usefulness, is worth all the abstract sentiments in the world,” said Ann Radcliffe. After all, all these many years are the strengthening of the foundation laid by such great souls through sacrifice and hard labour.
Don’t we realise that we neeed to build a vast movment for various segments of the society to help them firther the cause of the rest of humanity? It is not a call to build empires full of wealth and money, but, it is like building a heaven full of souls. That is the service required of us at this juncture though it calls for sacrifice. Let all other economic infrastructures be strongly built on this one unmatchable foundation of humanitarian service.
Everyone has some idea what a sense of humor is, though he would find it difficult to give a definition or an explanation. We all know what we mean when we say that a person has a good sense of humor, or that his sense of humor is poor. But to say exactly why we think this of him is a hard work.
A sense of humor is not always shown by laughter. Laughter may result from feelings of superiority or hostility, or other forms of generally unacceptable social behavior