Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Unity (*)

An article to strengthen my ability of controversial writing ,as a result of frustration of events in my day to day life .

My rating : 5/10


First of all ,the word itself is ambiguous. Unity ,what does it mean ?One .And when applied to human race ,what it implies is more than one people -being one ,not physically however ,but mentally, that is lacking the individualism .According to true English ,individualism and unity should be two disjoint sets ,but then either of them wouldn't exist in this world .And no doubt, given the choice between the two,the obvious answer has to be unity .
It is just a pretension ,to feel for the other ,but hardly does anyone sacrifice self interest in blindly helping another ,and if one does ,the other defies the honor code of unity ,in using it to the fullest.

'Unity in diversity' ,has been a well used term , but the use of the term 'diversity' has been far more diverse than the term unity.The feeling of diversity never submerges while any act.
The teams that claim of unity, soon disintegrate when the obvious bait of money lies ahead ,like in football clubs regarding player transfers. But the scenario throughout the world has been same,not only in football . Money has been able to break the best of trusts ,bonds and what not .

Unity is just a fake word nowadays; to win hearts, to preserve them to be broken later ,when required . Yea, the words 'me' and 'you' in unity, are completely ambiguous. Uniting means forgetting the differences ,that were,and becoming the same ,helping without bothering for self interest ,actually bothering for interest of all that constitute the new individual formed by the process of uniting .

And it is not being spoken of love ,probably that's the only exception ,as it makes us blind enough to see anything ,abnormal enough to lose senses ,therefore in this we do end up uniting .Other relations ,primarily friendship have a scope for fraud and treachery ,and there's where the word unity takes the wrong sought meaning . No group is united enough .

100 years on ,another rebirth of Lord Curzon hardly requires a substantial effort, 'divide and rule' remains one of the easiest policies even today . But unity implies the relation to be strong enough, to be moved by just an earthquakes and not some another human or someone within.

So think before using the term united again ,as it may not only may imply nothing but worse devastation.


pgm said...

Such an abstract article!! All I could do is point out some grammatical errors :P

what it implies is more than one people -being one
one PEOPLE??

may as it may ??
MAY as it MAY???

lol, that last one was like one of em tongue twisters: A canner can can as many cans as a canner can can cans (without the if) :P

Siddharth Bhattacharya said...

ya sure ,agreed the article was more than abstract. It was a result of some lack of unity shown by wing members on my exclusion to Select City . But ya somewhat the point is clear -the conception of unity is false

Blog Archive