Why AAP brand of economics is unsustainable.

So everyone was joyous after an thumping victory for a rookie party called as AAP in the recent Delhi election. They not only grabbed thiry percent of vote they were on a close second position behind BJP in the election. Only place where BJP's Narendra Modi persona failed to take off. What was most resounding feature of this victory is that this is perhaps hte first party which truly represents the Aam aadmi, not that there has been no new parties in past; but they were mostly driven by a person driven cult or only faught on the basis of caste and creed.




Now that they are on the driving seat of Delhi after a suicidal step of Congress for lending them support, they do seems to be changing about how stuff works in India, from red becon to turning down the personal security covers.




However, this is only a part of story. What will make Delhi a more prosperous and economically viable and a better place to live? Is it this righteousness or a sound economic policies? If former is your answer than perhaps one need to visit Bengal. While Left ruled for 30 years, you don't see any massive corruption going on there, the leaders from late Joyi Basu to Buddadev Bhattacharjee were of impeccable integrity. Still there is a near unanimity that Left rule in Bengal nearly ruined one generation. Why? They dusted once vibrant Bengal industry by infecting it with the hartal culture. They did some good job by doing land reforms however they failed to take the notice of the fact that without impetus on industry and infrastructure the prospects of growth are very limited. Bengal failed to do it miserable, their shoddy and anti business policies coupled a complete ignorance of building a sustainable infrastructure made once the city of hope to what another author described "pile of garbage". While they spent on paying the school teachers they forgot to build new schools. While they gave free and cheap electricity, they refused to acknowledge that they will have to build new power plants to cater the growing need of people. Even if the intentions were right; they failed one of the most elated state of the country.




AAP has taken office on the plank of anti corruption making government to work with the people and not rule on them. They will off course there intentions are benign but they must not commit the same mistakes the communists done in Bengal. Kejriwal and company must not take populism as the sole base of economy otherwise, AAP will find itself in the same league of those, who will be judged by history as failed the nation and it's people.

All is dark, there is no one sane!

So what can be more ridiculous than the proposition of Kapil SIbbal and company that the policy of first come first serve resulted again in ZERO loss in coal allocation after 2G or of a Baba who says if you stop printing the 500 and 1000 rupees notes; it will wipe out all the corruption and "unlearning" english that is only advantage we have over China will resut in India becoming powerful country, or of a Hazare who says that FDI is against poor and we might again loose our 'independence' as "Brits came to India first to business only"  so what if there is not a single example to prove his argument at first place or of the chief opposition party BJP which even happily stalls those bills that it pressed so hard in the erstwhile Vajpai government, just to get 'momentum' going against the government, or of a agriculture minister who decided to move in to "Kop Bhavan" when country was on the brink of drought & don't even give a damn to farmers of Vidarbha of his own state or of a Maharashtra government who decided to become a silent spectator and is willing to accept the demolition of Amar jyoti Smarak in Mumbai thinking that these are the true representative of Muslims and if this ruckus is allowed, muslims will overwhelm ruling parties once again, or of the facebook trolls who paints all the muslim with same brush and spend an hour daily for bashing Islam for visibly no reason or of the Digvijay Singh who is happy with the starving secular India  than a pragmatic prosperous one by asserting that "Sone ki lanka to Ravan ki bhi thi..kya hua?" or of the power minister who was given a promotion when the half of India was in dark and from CNN to BBC, every one was mocking the 'super power' India or of those Congress workers who after seeing the teen aged children of Priyanka Gandhi started yelling "rahul bhaiya ke baad aapki hi baari hai" or of the parliament who first passes a resolution to pass the Lokpal asap and then do so many flip flops to remind us all about famous  dialogue of Sunny Deol of "Tarikh par Tarikh" or of the Neta ji Mulayam Singh Yadav who gives money for muslim families for their daughters only when they marry them and not when they study further and his heir Akhilesh Yadav says Tabs that will be given will only have urdu software's not the English ones or of a congress chief who enjoys absolute power but is accountable to none and decides of all the matters from who will be the president to PM to CMs no matter what the people aspirations are or of his son Rahul Gandhi who tells farmers that He is ashamed of India, and employment is less as Mayawati government as it is doing all the work from computers than by people and even suggests Gujarat is larger than UK!! or of the media channels who will allocate prime time slots for astrology and Bollywood programs but are blind towards the other daunting issues country faces or of Kanimozi who rather than using the 200 crores she received as a quid pro quo for 2G scam for Indian Tamils are more interested in "Eelam conference" in Chennai and finally of a Prime minister who is more mute than a congenital mute and is always expressionless even when he can visibly see how things are nose diving all across the country

Yes there is, it is our apathy towards our country, 300 million educated India is 'simply not interested' in all the issues we face in our daily lives as it is not "cool" and "every one is thief there".. It is okay after some time if Kalmandis and Rajas are acquitted and allowed to keep money they stole away and since all are crooks so why not to vote for someone who are of same caste and religion as eventually everyone has to loot. This apathy is so deep rooted in indian mindset that it has made we Indians almost soul dead, even if it does not really matters for Indians that their children will have a a gloomy future due to all the sham in our present what else can awake them? 

What is wrong with you Mr Prime Minister!

So I was to take a gas connection in Bangalore; new to the city and apart from few faces, looking at them I can smile, I am all but alone in the city so obviously intenet was my best mate to kick off the search. Two days ago I started by typing Indane gas ageny in google and it yielded some result; so after looking the area code I decided to call the number mentioned in the yellow pages and since then I'm trying daily once in morning and then in evening and no one till now has picked up my call, same was the story with HP and Bharat gas, when I shared my anguish with one of my peer here, he tried to console me by suggesting this is not only the story with me but every one suffers who dare to deal with these agencies. He suggested to buy a private connection stating that though this would cost me around 1000 rupees as compared to the some 400 that if I take the connection from the government run agencies. "But they give better service".

His advice was no doubt an avuncular one and gentle too but it also popped up the same question in my mind once again as it always does whenever I interact with these government run agencies 'why these government agencies can't give us better service?' Why they do not bother to do the work which they are hired for and given hefty hike in every ten years? I work in service sector inside IT and for us even turning down the most idiotic demand of customers is blasphemous, 'customer is always right' is something forcefully fed to us from day one, So when I am getting my salary only when I ensure that the customer satisfaction is utmost important why these people are exempted from it? not that they are from heaven and primary citizens! Why is this disparity? remember our government yells out loud that equality is for which they are fighting tooth to nail!

And this time is exactly I'd like to move towards my headline; What is wrong with our Prime Minister? You might sympathize with a person when he is in a mess and don't know how to sail across but what term but stupid you'd use for someone who knows what the problem is; it's solution and still decides to remain in that problem. Though there is no short cut of success but history has shown us that the 'Great Indian success story' has been observed in all those sectors where government has decided to hang up it's monopoly, be it communication, aviation or banking. Give these agencies to private players to manage if not privatise; I can bet everyone in common masses would "give the hell ya" in stonecold style, but perhaps this government just wants to remain in cocoon of insanity but asserting that protecting a few millions from competition; (perhaps from the like of those who are working in non governmental organizations such as myself); they are doing a great favour of "aam aadmi", no matter how many true aam aadmis are getting thrashed by this sham policy on daily basis!

Perilous Pakistan and Puerile Indian policy.

All the the p's are in capital does not represent the grammatical error here, rather I wish to be relentless in pressing the significance of all the three P's. No doubt there has been a peril in Pakistan, ever since Musharraf have given up the power; there has been a series of catastrophes , Tahreek-e-Taliban has created all sorts of ruckus and then not so clean president Zardari installed the sacked chief Justice Ifthikhar Chaudhary when all the option ran out for him; this not only showed how much Mr President is concerned about re opening of the graft cases against him, it also made a quite fearless Justice Chaudhary against civilian regime. With military now flocking behind the supreme court and "constitutional coup" is very much on the cards after SC contempt notice to PM Gillani our troublesome neighbor looks all but rattled!

So what is India doing about it? "we are observing" and "we do not intervene in internal affairs of Pakistan" are the common words coming from the north block; very much in line with that "Panchsheel" philosophy which is as much futile today as it was when India signed it with China and as a result of which tasted the dust in 1965 war with it! We by every means can not line ourselves up with the power players of Pakistan as it would only ensure validating the charges of Pakistan that India is promoting terror inside Pakistan, but this by no means is a justification to sit idle and be reactive and follow status quo of "take as it comes" because if at all Pakistan as a country fails; India, not US or European countries would be the first which would be in the line of fire transforming south Asia to much like Korea peninsula.

So what options are left for us? perhaps the best viable stand could be to stand by the weak civilian government. This has multiple benefits; India would look promoting the democracy in the region and north block potentially make friendly relations with the Pakistani politicians in person during their "tough days" the likes of Musharraf era. India for long has followed "will talk whoever comes in power" for Pakistan, talking to same Musharraf and Yahya khan; we all know how awry the plans went, history tells us all the three wars between the two countries were fought during military regimes in Pakistan, Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan and in Kargil where de facto head was Parvez Musharraf; still we invited Musharraf for the peace talks in Agra only to get the dialogues from the general that "Pakistan can attack India" "no country can breach our sovereignty" (until it was showed by Americans how to do it!) and "Kashmiri separatists are freedom fighters". What he gained was a popular sentiment back home. Politicians are more susceptible to bow down than Pakistani army men. We can safely insulate ourselves from generals by rebuking them on the basis of their military credentials. Army there want Kashmir to remain hot and alive to strength their rule, by refusing to talk; India can do a huge favor to political players of Pakistan by making them more relevant in picture

We must understand it is very difficult for civilian regimes to go in to a war; as there are so many people and agencies that needs to be taken on the board before pressing the final button, which dictators don't generally have to do. So a stable and democratic Pakistan is in best Indian interest which we can endorse by effectively snubbing the generals.

The time for middle class has arrived...

Just saw the flash mob dance here. Was static! well can these things also happen in India? young good looking handsome guys and beautiful girls dancing on CST station, the same station which is the synonymous of the "aam aadmi" congress party claims to be whose true representative. This was nice dance indeed but it gave me something to think about. Now bastion of the lower middle classes has been demolished with this young middle class India. Whoa! they made the apathetic CST crowd to stop, cheer and enjoy! let me cut it short; they shook them from their one dimensional world where the metro stations are places where being emotive is 'foolish'.

I remember once I watched a movie where the villein neta yelled on one junior neta , "educated people will not vote and illiterate I can manage".. This has been a sad story for the India a giant democracy as a whole. Educated people considered politics a whim while the poor were too feeble to rise above caste and creed. Corrupt and thieves entered in the parliament and vidhansabhas, making a mockery of the system, the height was achieved when during the fodder scam in Lalu era; Vidhan Sabha passed a "privileged motion" against the CBI regional director for showing "disrespect". He was forced to apologize for this "blasphemy".

So poor were electing those who never deserved it, they at least took their pie of the democracy of India. They; no matter how ill equipped were, made all important decisions about who is going to rule, not only on them but on whole India. Where lies the rich? Nehruvean policies ensured we were to remain and live in the box. So those who were princely before independence were perhaps only one who can enjoy the perks of rich. They actively shared the dais with the power centers, poors were electing them and Rich were funding them while "they" were unaccountable to anyone!

Perhaps the only stratum which do not have any say in the governance is the middle class. neither do they vote nor they have resources to establish the connection with the elites. Disconnected, isolated and someone who were never given a damn! (look at the Indian economic policies, government has always been out there to appease the mass rural voters even if their demands are unjustifiable while neglecting the urban India's just demands).

Sadly this has been a unfortunate tale of India until 1991, when almost a bankrupt India has to initiate the reforms under then prime minister P.V. Narsimha Rao, when India was substantially freed from the shackles of incompetent government; the fruit soon started to show up, one visible area where we can see huge turn around is our "boodhoo box" television, from a flickering BPL, Indians now switched to Sony and LG; IT boomed like anything; even in the recession days, all IT majors posted the profits in "twenties" percentage points, employing this common middle class, raising the purchasing power and connecting them to the global world. pharmaceuticals and automobiles, you name it, India had an growth story after 2000s which it is ready to tell to everyone in the world, India managed to bring up millions of Indians from the trap of poverty and transformed them to the 'middle class' even in recession and corruption hit India is marching ahead at 7% growth rate; termed as miracle economy by World bank standards.

But you can't change the whole structure without touching it's root. There now exists a middle class Indian who can not only take care of their basic needs but also can afford the luxury jeans, but they are still disconnected from their democratic government. This is the reason why Anna Hazare created such a mass appeal among this brand of Indian youth, it was not Anna Hazare; it was this India which created the ruckus inside the governmental circles. There is a strong feeling in this young India about how stuff works in India; this young India is aggravated from the fact that our politicians shamelessly describe their acts as 'opposition ki chaal' and 'an action against their particular caste' (remember Karunanidhi said A Raja is targeted for being a dalit! ) The number of this middle class is increasing with every day passed; so is their frustration with the hypersensitive 24X7 media.

Let's go back to where I've started, this young, middle class, frustrated, zealous, forward-thinkinng, avant-garde, innovative & painstaking India is unfolding it's wings, it wants accountability which whole government has lagged since independence, the questions like "are they destined to rule on us?" are very frequent in Indian democracy. Typically neglected middle class is now stacking the claim to be the India's new signature. How national geographic has also started visiting the infosys campus apaer from there as usual, "interview with the snake charmers".

The flash dance at the CST is not just another ordinary event, or a good dance; this young India has made his presence felt in the bastion of the "aam aadmi" This India is a ever rising power, this is the India which will one day snatch the titles of "real India" from the starving rural India. When this will happen, dynamics of the country would change; it has the potential to trounce a set of whole political class; someone has to rewrite "how stuff works" about India.

With putting my stakes on the line; I predict a huge iceberg is destined to hit the power centers all across India soon! watch out baba's and madams...

Why a country has to be Secular to attain the heights!

Another quite burning issure what I am going to take up this time, every time we hear the chants of "Hindu Rashtra" and Muslim "appeasement" in India, we may see some disadvantages of it but we simply turn blind of what all it offered it to us. So let's get started...

What is secularism?

The term was coined by George Jacob Holyoake, he meant it to associate with the free thoughts which the history was full of. He did not meant to specifically castigate the religion but merely wish the government and the state should be kept away from the religion. This was an adopted definition of the secularism for long, since this notion was from west the definition suggests, "separating the state and the Church". George Holyoake himself defines it in his book "English secularism" as the

"code of duty pertaining to this life for all those who find Theocracy as unreliable, unbelievable inadequate and undefined and those who believe in the three principles, 1) The improvement in this life by material means 2) That science is the providence of man 3) Good is always good."

His secualr ethics calls for the not discussing the religious principles by the state as it was irrelevant. This he broke away with the Charles Bradlaugh and suggested that freethoughs and the atheism are the two different identities.

Classification of the Secularism

The secularism can be classified on the basis of the definition or the way it is applied across the countries, the Institute of study of secularism in society and culture divides the mordern secularism in two broad categories,

1) Hard secularism:- This form of secularism rebukes the concept of the religious doctrine on epistimological grounds and terms the religion as illegitimate and irregular.

2) Soft Secularism:- This brand of secularism have a tolerant quotient in itself and suggests that since the human knowledge can not be absolute, this calls for taking an accommodating stance on the religious issues. Most countries of the world follow this brand of Secularism with a difference degrees of variance.

Attributes of the Secularism

The secularism inherently places everyone at par irrespective of the religion of the person. It promotes the equality within the religion itself, It not only talks with the inter religious issues but also talks about the intra religious disparity as well.

i) Secularism on the intra religious disparities:-

The problems which has been the identified as man made are sought to be answered by means of religion and the philosophy. Secularism adores this conception and thus is not anti religious by any means.

There however exists deep rooted problems in the religion, very few religions calls for the equality between the the two sex, In hindusim, dalits were considered as way below par than Bhramins, they were employed as labors and were persecuted. Secularism thus came into the picture and defies this disparity within the religion and asserts a equlity among religion, but does not defy the religion itself. Hence it can not be termed as atheism which discards for the complete existence of religion itself.

Secular state:-

Some define a secular state as one which is not theocratic, meaning the states which do not take the order directly from a particularly preists or religious authority, however this definition seems to be quite narrow. The Islamic republic of Pakistan have Islam has a state religion and this many times the shariyat get the validity by various courts, hence it can not be termed as a secular society. A secular state ist the one which not only theocratic but also distance itself from all the religions, without disregarding the religion itself.

The secular state ought to promote the puristic society where the people of multiple ethnic group can live peacefully and can co exists together with each being given the equal opportunity. Since everyone is given equal opportunity, the application of he secularism in longer term results in the formation of a society which sounds like a melting pot where people have a common objective thus breaking the combination of the caste and caste.

Models of Democracy:-

Western model of Democracy(American model)

Western and typically the American model of democracy is based on the principle of "Ceaser and God" of the bible which says "Give the caeser what is caeser's and God what is God's" This inherently calls for a separation of powers between the religion and the state. Most appropriate application has been seen in America where the religious institutions and the government are separated with each other and there is no way the two can intersect. The government can not undertake any responsibility which is religious not does it can interfair in any other religious activity. This model makes government passive towards religion. However there are some drawbacks associated with it as well, Since government can not interfare in the religion, it does not have a power to intervene when it is visible that religion is not promoting the equality or is being involved in castigating the other religion. The very sound example was visible when a pastor organised an even to burn a sacred book of other religion and government does not have any tools to stop that happning.

Indian Model:-

Indian models can not truly be said a copy book case of application of secularism but it indeed contain all the basic definitions and prerequisites of the Secular society. The India does not have any state religion nor does it have any affiliation with other religious institutes, it puts it's civilians at par with one another without discriminationg on the basis of caste and religion. The preamble of the constitution of India terms itself a Secular republic in 42nd amendment.

However India does not apply the theory of "Caeser and God". The state see it's role in promoting the harmony in interreligious issues and equality among the intra religious issues. The Personal law boards are put in place for different religions which are delegated the responsibility to formulate the policies for the government on the religious issues. Constitution terms the caste system illegal and tries to bring the oppressed castes at par with others by means of giving them reservations in the governmental jobs.

Social Justice is an integral part of a civilized society.

Before analyzing the term social justice, the term justice needs to be ascertained first, the Justice is the ability of a person or society to be just or to posses righteousness. From ancient times; what a just society or a person should be have been a great question. In Indian culture, all the school of thoughts which are considered as "aastik" have banked upon the vedas and have suggested that following the vedas is indeed the justice a person or a society can do to themselves. In ancient China the great philosopher Confucius have advocated the penalty to those who violate the law while rewarding the virtuoso.

Whether one should remain just at all has been a question for so long. History consists of examples where the people who were not just, still enjoyed the fruit of success in their lives, the reason cited again is the famous proverb, "Until you are caught, you are innocent so rather than abstaining from bad, try not to get caught" This concept has however got a severe castigation by Socrates, who have ascertained that though some people can get away with the enjoying the perks in life with out being just; if whole society would become unjust, there would be a complete chaos since if every person of society tries to live and fulfill his own ambitions, there is very little left for the community living. Hence he concludes in his book "The republic" that in the longer run development of the just society is in the best interest for everyone.

Another question a modern pragmatist will ask "why at all it is necessary to devote ourselves to this question of making a just society", the answer is perhaps answered by the the Martin Luther King when he asserted,

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Similar words were echoed by the Winston Churchill when he suggested

All great things are quite simple and many of them can be described in a single word, Hope, equality, freedom and Justice;

In modern times, though the context have changed but the question have remained more or less the same. Before starting the discussion on what is justice and thus social justice, lets us consider some thumb rules which all modern philosophers agree and democracies have adopted.

1. Equal Justice for equals

This term of justice is very much co related to the concept of quality, the equality does not necessarily means the equality in the position a person finally attains in his social or public life but the means of equality of opportunity. Kant have once said, every person posses dignity, once this is awarded the next thing that one would require is the equality of opportunity to fulfill their dreams. This also includes the justice in giving the equal treatment to all the people which is independent on the sex, caste and religion.

2. Proportionate Justice

The equal opportunity does not mean all the members of the society would utilize it fully. Some members of the society would en cash the opportunity awarded to them while some other would just not, hence this is very obvious for a society to do the justice with the person in accordance with the skill one posses. The highly skilled person generally is given more recognition than the one who is somewhat below par. A doctor is off course has been more venerated than a manual labor. This concept of proportional justice does not mean applies on the two people have similar skills, thus recognizing the male doctor over a female in spite of the face that both posses the same degree would not be counted as a proportionate justice.

Thus for the just society, the equal treatment has to be carefully balanced with the proportionate justice without getting lopsided towards either.

3. Recognizing the special needs of the needy

The term indicates that the society has to consider the needs for those who are lying in lowest stratum while distributing the rewards and the responsibility. This conception has been coined as even the proportional justice can not guarantee that the affirmative action. Hence there has to exist some safeguard for those who do not have the leisure of the basic amenities like some others. Recognizing the special needs does not necessarily means the violation of the equality among equals, since the special needs are only recognized for those who are considered as unequal( below par) with the others.

Once agreeing on the fact the the just society have to recognize the needs for the marginalized in it, the question arises what is the parameter to judge who is at need. It could be based on the financial status, physically disability or the any other reason which may vary society to society.

In Indian context, the constitution framers decided to remove the malice of the "untouchability" from the society and wished to make those at par with the the others who have been oppressed on the name of caste and creed. For this reason the constitution have reserved some of the seats in educational institutions and in governmental jobs to promote the equitable growth. What is makes the selection of the criteria of "caste" as a parameter is also echoed by the Jai Prakash Narayan, He once said,

Those who are at the lowest stratum in the caste system of India are also more close to face financial bankruptcy .

The basic objective thus of the government is the to ensure the level playing field for all of it's members so as each person can persue his or her objective in life with full freedom.

There have however been a lot's of question on what should be the parameter of selecting the needy and who should be authorized to take the decision on it. A person if is allowed to take the decision on what is the parameter for choosing the needs of the needy may get biased and favor those which personally benefit himself. This has been seen in some states of India where the reservation meant for poors have been twisted to accommodate even those who do not fall in the categories of needy for the sake of getting the political advantages. This question has been answered by John Rawl's theory of Justice.

John Rawl's theory of Justice

When the person are allowed to take the decision on the framework of the society, not all of them can be expected to take the equitable position and some of them would design the architecture which would offer them the most privileged position in it. So how should such architecture be choosed?

John Rawl tries to answer this by suggesting that the thinking should be done under the "veil of ignorance" in which a person should decide the architecture of the society without knowing his own position in it. When one has to design the aspects of the society on this basis, one has to consider the possibility of him getting the worst and thus would try to make the socity most equitable one.

John Rawl thought was that it is not the morality but the rationality which has to be the basic aspect of the determining the form of the equiable society. He thus suggested that working under the "veil of ignorance" is the best way out for a equitable society.

Formulating the equitable policy thus becomes a important question for a just society. Some difference in the members of the society is justifiable but there must not be any difference in terms of the the opportunities. So those who are poor and are lying in the lowest stratum of the society should be given a certain minimum assistance which would ensure the level playing field. what could be the "minimum level of assistance" have been investigated by the various governmental and other institutions the likes of WHO and the various NGO, the reports generally infers to include the basic healthcare facilities, elementary education and the food securities. These basic minimum assistance has been considered as the important responsibility of the welfare government as it encircles the most vulnerable.

Once the formulation of the basic minimum assistance has been agreed, the next problem arises is the method of implementation of this policy. There has been a controversy as who should be given the role of the implementer? This invokes the question of State vs the Market.

State vs the Market.

What is the role of the government in ensuring the equitable growth and promoting the social justice? The state has to be on the board but what would be the roles it should be equipped with? The socialist regimes would like to take all the work themselves. This school of thought believes that state can only be the unbiased and natural choice for promoting the equal growth among the citizens. They cite the example that market will not cater anyone who is not willing to pay or can not pay at all. This has been seen in 2008 Financial crises that if market is left unchecked, the results could be catastrophic.

This model was relentlessly pressed hard in India after independence. The state was considered as the engine for promoting the growth where the private players were dubbed as "inefficient and incapable of bringing anything in to the table". This plan however has failed a big way when the growth rate were dismal in the years after independence.

A consolation has been thus arranged which has been very much in the line with the keynesian economics which calls for the government withdrawing it's role as the sole engine of development by means of the public sector allowing the private players to fill the void, however it is to remain the control on the business and also to regulate it by means of the monetary and financial policies.

The collapse of the socialist governments and the 2008 financial crises points to phenomenon that the market and state needs to co exists together, if anyone is left unchecked; the results could be catastrophic.

No matter how long this discussion goes on; what would be the methods to adopt the social justice, there has been almost a unanimity that we need to have some affirmative actions in place to prepare a just society who according to the Bharat Ratna and the founding father of Indian constitution B.R. Ambedkar,

A society where the ascending sense of reverence and the descending sense of contempt is dissolved into a compassionate society.

This is where I'd like to conclude, Thank you for reading.