SO MUCH SO FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH

The Indian IT act

66A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.,Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device:
  (a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character;

To my Friends:

I being a law abiding citizen hereby declare that anything offensive directly or indirectly implied against me, will end in a case being registered against you. Commenting on my photo other than praising me will be considered offensive. I will take offence to even appreciating me sarcastically. Commenting on my posts without liking it is offending me.

Sharing my posts knowingly and unknowingly to people I don’t not like and appreciate, will be grossly offensive to me and is menacing my character causing my enemies to appreciate my genius. As I want them to think of my character as an idiot or not.  Not appreciating my genius is anyways offensive to me.

Any status updates or photos you put on the internet, where you are partying and I was not invited is in all the way grossly offensive to me. Your posts of your fancy gismos and new expensive stuff will be considered menacing my character – it portrays me as a lesser species. Your portrayal in bad taste to anything (absolutely anything) in your status updates is offensive to me, as it just happens to be my favorite.  Similarly if you appreciate anything in your communique is still offensive to me as I happen to hate it.

Finally emailing or messaging me to attend your or your sisters weeding is very offensive- I might have a heart for her and you are just not breaking but stomping on it. I will for surely register a complaint.

To My Managers:

Any email communication or messages of any kind asking me to work late or on weekends is very grossly offensive to me. It menaces my character in its entirety by hinting to me that I am a slave at your command. Emailing me about work is also offensive as it suggests that I am not aware of my duties. This also menaces the character of all my colleagues who are on bench portraying me as better than them in dosing this particular task. It goes similarly for not emailing me work items and sending it to my colleagues; offending me by implying that I am not good at doing the task.

Thank you for the law, government.

SO MUCH SO FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Cheers,

Ninad Dighe.

‘Where they burn books, there they won’t shy from burning people’.

Everyone dreads change, and people will go too great extends to avoid it. However they try they have to change, that the irony, the things they do to avoid change is change in itself. Especially we see that cultures and religions do not want to adapt.  Mostly cultures in homo-sapiens are passed from one generation to another. A new generation comes with change in thought; and technology brings in new ideas. With this new ideas and thoughts there is always a clash with the older generation. The new generation will win eventually when the older dies. However they are then confronted with the next generation of thoughts. It is a never ending cycle.

The problem as I see is that we are trained culturally to follow rather than think. Even so, in most cultures whatever knowledge that is there is not freely available for following. You need to be in a certain sect or cast to have access to this knowledge. Common examples are bhramins in India or priest in the western country. There is this fundamental problem in following, that cultures where formed so that knowledge could be passed from one generation to another. But not all could access it.

In the last 50 years we have seen the world getting more connected. Information passes from one end of the world to the other in matter of seconds. New discoveries adopted and assimilated very quickly today.  Since world war 2 the world has become a more free thinking world. But some cultures still do not want to change. They oppress men, women and eventually progress in their region. In the name of culture or religion, free thought is not allowed, your opinions do not matter and violence is preferred over fair debate. In most cases it is one person whose philosophy is followed by a bunch of followers since most do not want or lack the knowledge to form their own opinion. Then again we have been brought up to follow the system and not question it. Most parents teach their children to follow their culture and not question it, if questioned the all you hear in counter is that it has been this way for generations. Hence most of us seek leaders and gurus whom we can follow, we don’t want to come to conclusions ourselves.

I have seen this happen in most political scenarios, if you question the logic of a leader. They will start with a debate on it. If they have the slightest feeling that you might be right, they won’t change their opinion. But call you name and try to prove how you are not a credible person or how your character or personality is immoral. If their agenda still threatened by your ideology, they will resort to violence.  In most cases such leaders gain mass following not because they want to bring in change but are opposed to change that is happening and want to prevent it. Hence political parties can gain mileage by making religion, language or culture as their agenda.

Most political party agendas are based on vote politics and not progress. However it works that in every personal hidden agenda every voter wants and needs some visible progress. But political party formed on philosophies of saving culture and religion rarely do good to the country and humanity at large. Mainly because any opinion; other than the main leaders opinion is met with violence. I would like to restate Heinrich Heine [ Almansor: A Tragedy (1823)],’where they burn books, there they won’t shy from burning people’.

Cheers,

Ninad Dighe.

Why be Spiritual?

Will our actions be clear when our mind in clean? 
Or our mind clear when our action is moderated?
Are we spiritual to clear our sins or to avoid them?
Then why being spiritual we still sin, lie? 
So why be spiritual at all? 

Always have something to hide, that others need not know.
But then why hide from others if we are not doing anything wrong?
Then why be spiritual at all if we do wrong?
Is it so that we can sin and know we will be forgiven, so that we can sin a little bit more?

Then why be spiritual at all if you know you will not follow.