Saturday, January 31, 2015

Living in unauthorized colonies- my own experience.

While watching this report on prime time by Ravish on NDTV I went back in my memory lane when we used to live in similar colony. Our colony was also unauthorized, means it was constructed without proper permission and paperwork from municipal authority which is necessary to have a authorized construction on which you pay a property tax. Authorized construction is also registered under owner's name in government records and one can sell it legally and government can't demolish it just like that. As it was unauthorized colony government didn't provide necessary infrastructure like water, sewage, proper roads, etc. Our only hope was our corporator Mr. Shashikant Sutar who used to help us to get some of these things from the municipal corporation and he also used to take care of all the legal notices of demolition sent to all of us by municipal corporation. During initial days water was supplied by water tankers and literally it used to be a war like situation to get a bucket of water. People used to fight really hard to reach to the tanker tap first to make sure that they get enough water for them until the next visit of the tanker. Normally women and kids of the family used to do this water fetching business as men used to be at work. My mom really hated this ordeal because first of all she was a recent immigrant from other state so she could not speak the local language (Marathi) very well and by nature she doesn't like to argue or to confront anyone so she used to hate this but there was no other way if you want to get water. All homes in such colonies share common walls on both the sides, only homes at the end of lane have luxury of having windows on side walls otherwise only option to have windows was on front wall or on back wall (if it is free). Normally these colonies don't look homogeneous or uniform as people construct their own houses depending on their financial capacity so some homes can be two storied and some can be just one storey and they both stand side by side. Local politician play very key role in keeping things in order as everyone goes to them to solve their disputes and for any legal trouble from municipal corporation.

Life in these places is not that easy but it is not like that people living there don't enjoy or have fun, at least I had pretty good time during my childhood. I agree that our parents were under constant pressure of loosing their home constructed with hard earned money but we also had very supportive politician to help us and in turn we elected him as our corporator and MLA until his retirement from active politics. But I agree that governments can deal with these type of colonies in much better way rather than just making it an election issue and forgetting altogether about it after elections as they are doing it in Delhi. Our colony stands on private land, every family bought piece of land from some private owned and constructed their home. It was not on some government land encroachment and still it took more than two decaded to get it authorized, so whatever promises these political parties are making sound so unreal and like a election stunt. Now our colony is authorized with all the required paperwork and we all pay property tax on it but it took almost 20-30 years to get it done and still it is very unsafe with narrow lanes and no space for parking. So making them authorized does solve few problems, you get water and electricity, but the structure remains as it is, all structures are too close to each other, ambulance can't reach to many places. The issue to make these colonies a part of any smart city is very complicated. No doubt this is a very interesting topic to play vote bank politics and all voters depend heavily on political leaders for protesting their homes from clutches of law. Surprisingly everyone living in these unauthorized colonies get voter's ID, ration card or any other government facility but their homes are not legal. The issue is very complicated and deeply political, many political parties want such issues to last forever so that they can reap benefit from them in every election. I guess time has come for people living in such colonies to unite and then negotiate with government some proper plan which can improve living conditions in such places. They definitely deserve better treatment from government and in turn they should follow the rules and regulations. Both parties involved in this issue need to show some maturity and commitment then only this problem can be resolved.

I have very fond memories from time which I spent living in unauthorized colony, but I know that life can be better for those people. I really hope that this issue can be resolved and our political parties are serious about this issue.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

1. प्राइम टाइम : अनियमित कॉलोनियों का ये है हाल

Friday, January 23, 2015

Parental leave- right or a privilege?

Topic of parental leave is very sensitive, it is debated in many political and professional forums, even President Obama mentioned it during his state of union address on January 20th. People always debate whether it is a right or a privilege? People argue very passionately either in favor or against both of these things, there is also a disagreement about how much parental leave is enough or what is optimum time; 2 weeks, 2 months, 6 months or one year? One might find some of these numbers totally irrational or ridiculous but if we accept that parenting is a full time job then it is often difficult to decide how much time is required for parents to leave their kid with someone else and come back to work. I personally believe that parenting is a personal responsibility of respective parents, after all they decide to become parents based on their own priorities. Here I am making an assumption that that at least most of parents plan before taking on to this huge responsibility. So once they decide to become a parent it is their job to figure out how to take care of their child. There is no doubt that any help from their employer or government can definitely help them to go through initial heavily demanding days of parenting and that is where this issue runs into rough waters. How much help is enough? Is this a one of the reason many small businesses (or even big ones) hesitate to hire women? Can this little gap be harmful for progress of any women's professional career? Can this policy of mandatory parental leave affect the productivity of small business? There are many questions related with this issue which people raise and debate. I think policy makers need to take into consideration these questions before making any rule or law regarding this issue otherwise there will be always some unwritten law which organizations will follow if their concerns are not taken into account.

Every parent needs some assistance during initial days after child birth as the work is both physically and mentally challenging. Women also need time to recover physically so there is no doubt that they need maternity leave before they come back to work. Parenting is a responsibility of both parents so father also need to have an option of paternity leave so that he can take care of his responsibility as a parent during those initial days. I am sure policy makers must have done research before deciding 2 month and 2 weeks of time for parental leaves. There is also professional child care options available for parents who don't want to take any leave. It should be entirely their choice. If parents, specially mother chose not to take her entire maternity leave and join the work much before then she should not be looked upon as insensitive parent (recent controversy related with Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer is an example of this). Everyone should be free to use or not to use the option of parental leave based on their own needs and priorities. There is no some gold standard which every one should follow, we should respect every parents style of parenting without being judgmental. It is OK to offer advise and suggestions but it is up to respective parents to accept or reject those suggestions. Every parent have a right to develop their own style of parenting. I have seen personally some parents inventing new ways to deal with some of the problems they faced during parenting and it definitely helped them to handle their child in better way.

I personally believe that parental leave should be a part of every professional package so that prospective parents (specially mothers) don't have to choose between either parenthood or career.  I should be considered as a right but even if for some reason it is not then it can be offered as a special privilege specially by organizations who don't have any policy about this. Doesn't matter how it is offered; a right or as a special privilege to parents it will help organizations to keep talented people in their work force. It will help women to plan their careers without worrying about effect of their pregnancy on their professional life. Parents also need to use this option responsibly. They need to plan in such a way that it doesn't hurt their company's productivity. If both parties involved behave responsibly then I think parental leave can benefit both, organizations as well as parents equally.  

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Can there ever be absolute freedom of expression?

Recent attack on people associated with satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris has initiated discussion on various levels about whether there can be a absolute freedom of expression? Terrorists killed people associated with this magazine to take revenge for publishing cartoon on Prophet Mohammad. Many Muslim people found these cartoons really offensive and insulting to their faith. This was not the first time any publication, book, picture or article came under attack for insulting any religion or politician. India is very well known to ban books, attack authors or make their life difficult so that they leave the country just for publishing something which hurts people's religious sentiments. There are various laws in India which limit freedom of expression as far as religious sentiments are concerned but still people take law in their own hands are try to intimidate artists or publishers who dare to publish something which is different than what people want to see or hear. So the question is can there be absolute right of freedom of expression? If not, then who decides where to draw the line and on what basis? Can there be general consensus on what should be allowed and what shouldn't?

Every democracy or progressive society claims to give right of freedom of expression to their citizens, but if we check carefully there are some ifs and buts attached with this right. These ifs and buts differ from country to country. I can understand that anyone is not allowed anyone to preach violence or child pornography or obscenity under the name of freedom of expression. One can very well understand this type of restriction but apart from that why to put so many restrictions. Many people agree that there should be freedom of expression but they also say that in case of religious sentiments there should be some limit which should not be crossed. But the problem with this argument is who will decide that limit not to cross? Everybody's religious sensitivities are different, whatever is considered as blasphemous in one religion is perfectly fine in another, so in any diverse society how can one draw a line and how many lines one needs to draw to cover each and every religion or sects so that nobody's religious feelings are hurt? People's sentiments are going to get hurt by some thing or other, artists or writers present their work in different form and styles. Art in some forms such as satire, paintings or cartoons can be sometimes really crude and offensive, not everyone can digest them but that doesn't mean that form should be banned or if someone uses these things to express something  they deserve to be punished. We just can not depend of people's level of sensitivities to design any law as sensitivities keep on changing. It will be good to have complete freedom of expression or as much as people have in countries like USA, it should be very clear what is allowed and what is not.

In today's developing world with so much connectivity and resources to verify any information we should be becoming more broad minded and tolerant. But it seems our civilization is going in reverse direction as far as tolerance and liberty in concerned, people are becoming more conservative and less tolerant. They get offended by small small things like some book or some cartoon and react in very violent way. To protest or express disagreement with anything is right of every group or person but it should be done in lawful and peaceful manure. Whenever people try to question freedom of expression by putting any ifs or buts after such violent attack on some publication for publishing something objectionable then actually they indirectly justify the violent act which some people commit under the name of protest or disagreement. Absolute freedom of expression is not a easy thing to handle, everyone gets equal right to express their feelings. People who feel offended also have right to express their feelings, people who dislike anything can openly say that, they can insult or say offensive things but under any case no form of violence can be a part of freedom of expression. As Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Said, "Your liberty to swing your fist ends just where my nose begins". To threaten someone with physical intimidation or injury is not freedom of expression but a act of violence and it is illegal. We are far away from achieving absolute right of freedom of expression, India has very poor record in this area (still it is better than most of its neighbors) and they need to improve a lot. USA has much better record in this area and I think it is one of the best countries as far as right of freedom of expression is concerned, if possible other countries should try to follow their example. 

I support absolute right of freedom of expression except freedom to propagate of violence. This will allow societies to become more tolerant and exchange their ideas more freely. Banning something only increases people's curiosity in those things and make them more popular. Lets not ban any book, movie, article or magazine just because some people find it offensive. This is a difficult task to achieve but at least let's try to work towards it, may be one day we will have a society where there is absolute right of freedom of expression and everyone is using it with great care and responsibility. 

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

1. Faith vs Freedom: Is Right to Free Speech Absolute?

Monday, January 12, 2015

Baba Amte- My real life superhero.

In post about my visit to Snehalaya and other similar institutions during my last India trip I briefly mentioned about this great human being Mr. Baba Amte. These institutions are doing some great humanitarian work in various areas. Late Mr. Baba Amte is one person who always impressed me and inspired me since my college days. Unfortunately his name is not very popular outside Maharashtra and I don't know why, I am still trying to figure it out how such a great personality like him can not be known to whole India, his work is so inspiring that each and every Indian (or for that matter world citizen) can take immense pride and inspiration from it. I have read about many people who were inspired to do some social work for religious or political purpose but this was the man who dedicated all his life just for humanitarian purpose, not to get any salvation or place in heaven or any sainthood or any government award or any election victory; he served people because he really felt their pain and really loved them as just humans irrespective of their age, caste, religion or nationality. His project Anandwan (means garden of happiness) is an ideal example of his vision and dedication towards humanitarian work. Amazingly not only he and his wife dedicated their lives for this work, he was lucky enough to have kids who carried forward his work with equal sincerity and dedication. Dr. Prakash Amte's work at Hemalkasa (Lok Biradari Prakalp) is legendary. Dr. Vikas Amte takes care of Anandwan, Baba Amte's daughter-in-laws and daughters are also involved with these projects with equal dedication and commitment. It is really amazing to see how this whole family is involved with complete dedication to help people in need and distress.

I am not going to go into details of the work done by these people, I request readers to read more about them on internet or from books published about them and please try to get to know more about Anandwan and other projects to decide the quality and impact of their work. The best way to know about their work is to visit these places and interact with the people who are living there and working there. I also understand that it may not be possible for everyone to find time and resources to visit many of these places that is why internet is a great place to know as much as possible and then if possible grab any opportunity which allows to visit these places. I feel extremely lucky and privileged to know few people who are very closely involved in helping these projects, they keep me aware about what is going on and I am really thankful for them for all their efforts to educate me about the work done by such amazing people. 

But for some reason work of Baba Amte and his son's didn't get much recognition in India, people know about their work but they don't know like they know about the work of Mother Teresa or work of some political organizations like RSS or  work of some cult movements like ISKON or Art of living are doing. May be because Baba Amte never sided with any particular religion or political ideology/party, rather at times he stood against the state government like in the case of Narmada Bachao Andolan. So I think all this might have made him a not so attractive or useful option for any political party as they can not use his name or his work to attract any vote bank. He did not even get Bharat Ratna, actually Baba Amte doesn't need that award but I think that award needs people like him so that its dignity and honor is maintained. But I am glad that he is not in that list of Bharat Ratna awardees, even Mahatma Gandhi is not in that list so I think its fair that even they didn't consider Baba for this award.

He didn't even claim to be a superhuman or incarnation of some god or messenger of some god who landed on this earth or was sent by The God to serve his people. Many so called babas or gurus use these tactics to get money and power. He stayed away from all these gimmicks which many political and religious groups to popularize themselves, he just did his work silently with total dedication and selflessness. I really love and respect him for this, his approach means a lot for person like me. He showed me the path that you don't need any religious, political or any other affiliation or support to do any good work. I may not believe in any god, religion, I many not also subscribe to any political ideology, cult or belief system but still can help my fellow humans as I really don't need to subscribe to any of these things to feel compassion and love for my fellow citizens. I can feel their pain and help them just because I love them and respect them as humans. We all know this theory but very few dare to follow it and try to set an example for others as it is not easy thing to do but Baba Amte was one such person who proved it with example of his own work. There are many reel life superheros but for me Baba Amte is my real life superhero he did something which was considered as impossible for normal humans, thank you sir for showing us the path. Sadly he is no more but his work and legacy will live forever and keep on inspiring many people to carry of selfless service to humans in distress.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Paris terrorist attack- it is a attack on human liberty.

Attack on Charlie Hebdo's office in Paris by some fanatic Islamic militants is barbaric and cowardice act of violence. This is not only an attack on free press or expression of freedom but it is a attack on our liberty. It is an attack on basic framework of our modern society where disagreement or difference of opinion is not only tolerated but encouraged and respected. Just words are not enough to condemn this barbaric attack, this is an act of cowardice. It is not at all a brave thing to attack unarmed, harmless, peace loving people with an assault weapon, this is display of ultimate cowardliness and bigotry.  Charlie Hebdo is a well known satirical magazine which is known to attack religion and politicians. It can be called as anti-establishment, so it not that it only mocked Mohammad or Islam and spared other religions. One can debate whether the cartoons published it almost a year ago were in good taste or bad taste, actually this discussion is in relative terms because whatever is in good taste for me might be a bad taste for someone so none of us have any right to decide what is in good taste or bad taste. We all have right to have our own opinion, people can feel angry or offended and can protest in peaceful manure if they feel certain things are offending them. Every democracy and free country (or society) gives them this right to protest, but no one has right to use violence to settle a disagreement. As I wrote previously in my blog, I believe that freedom of speech or expression comes with freedom to offend. If you have right to practice your religion, to say your prayers then I also have right to say whatever I believe. We may or may not agree with each other but we both have equal rights and we both need to respect that, this is very simple and basic thing to understand in any civilized society but it seems we are yet far from becoming a civilized society and these type of act prove this point.

I don't know who said it but I read some where a sentence 'The country/society which can't laugh on itself can't survive for long'. Satire is very special form of humor, not every one can handle it as it can be very brutal sometimes. But this brutality is its specialty and it is a very brilliant way of commenting on any issue and not a easy art to learn. I think some religions particularly Islam has got itself in highly intolerant zone where even a disagreement or a satire is not tolerated. These things are considered as so offensive by some groups or countries that they murder whoever don't agree with their philosophy. This is not only religious fanaticism but this is a attack on human liberty, attack on basic principles of civilized society and it should not be encouraged at any cost. Use of religion to spread terror or hatred should be challenged at every level. Everyone including all Muslims who believe in humanity and tolerance should speak up in one loud voice so that all these terrorists get the message very loud and clear. It is of no use to say that these terrorists don't belong to any religion or they are not humans, the truth is that they do belong to some religion and they make it very clear. Unfortunately in today's world lot of terror activities are directly or indirectly associated with some religion. Islam is being used as a terror tool by many countries and terrorist groups so it is a time for all moderates and liberals from Islam to stand up and speak against this bigotry. Every religion has gone through phases of intolerance but that doesn't mean such behavior should be allowed to continue. In the past followers of other religions might have committed some grave mistakes but that doesn't mean it gives anyone right to follow the same path today, we need to confront whatever is wrong no matter who is doing it.

Violent attacks on innocent people is barbaric and disgusting crime no matter who does it and why they do it. No religion, country, group, sect or holy book can justify any such attack. If any group feels that something is offensive, derogatory or insulting is said against them then they have right to protest in peaceful manure or they can put their own side in front of the people to counter the arguments but they absolutely have no right to use violence to silence any such voice no matter which religion, god or prophet tells them to do so. Any book or prophet is not above the rule of law, killing innocents can not be justified by using any verse from any book no matter who wrote that book. If someone is doing that then no matter to which religion they belong, which god, book or prophet they follow they are not worthy of being called as humans. Any such acts or statements which justify such violent killing even remotely should be challenged and condemned in strongest possible words, it doesn't matter they come from which holy book. If we ignore them then we will be facing many such scenarios where such bigots from some religion kill innocents for some trivial reason. Terrorism is for real and religion is aggressively used to propagate fear among its non believers. We can not live in denial mode any more by saying that there is no relationship between religion and terror, it clearly seems that there is a strong relationship between the two. I agree that it is unfair to target any single religion for this but at the same time we should not close our eyes to reality. If we see some people clearly misusing Islam for terrorism we all and specially Muslim community need to confront this misuse and stand strongly against it. Hindus or Christians or Jews also need to condemn very strongly any acts where these religions are also used to spread fear or propagate violence in any form. Unless we all speak together against these things our message is not going to have any effect. As long as people base their reactions to such incidents based on who did it or where did it happen or who killed who, such barbaric acts will continue as there will be some so called moderate or conservative or liberal who is trying to justify it. So let's stand together, let's pay our respects to these brave cartoonist who sacrificed their lives to protect our liberty. These people died to protect our freedom, they chose to die rather than compromise with tier right to express themselves freely. They command our respect and our commitment to continue their mission. If we hesitate then we will be equally responsible for their deaths as those terrorists are, I choose to stand with my friends who lost their lived to protect my right of freedom of speech. 

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]


Sunday, January 4, 2015

Is pk anti-Hindu, anti-religion or anti-religious stupidity?

Some how controversy related with movie 'pk' refuses to die, discussions are still going on in various social media forums or news channels where people talk in favor or against this movie. One interesting point which I found many people are repeatedly mentioning is that they don't have any problems with pk talking about bad aspects of religion but they have problem with the movie targeting Hinduism unfairly. They cite various scenes from movie to prove their point but at the same time they conveniently fail to mention scenes where it also comments about other religions like Christianity or Islam. But they do have a point that the central theme of movie is to comment about hypocrisy associated with religious practices in India, mainly about scams and cult movements all these babas and gurus are running in the name of spirituality and god. So in this post I try to look at these allegations of being pk a anti-Hindu movie in very sympathetic manner and see if there is any truth in it, may be there is but let's analyze it first before jumping to any final conclusion.

The movie is targeted towards Indian audience, I don't' think there is any doubt in anyone's mind about this and if there is then please first clear this misconception. This is not a Hollywood movie which is targeted for world audience but it is a commercial Hindi movie whose audience is mostly people belonging to India (Hindu majority country by statistics). So I think one should understand the reason that why it talks about religion by taking Hinduism as a prime example, it connects to more customers and helps to generate more revenue; a very simple and logical reason. After all movies are commercial products, designed and produced with an intention to make money. If one is going to invest so much money to make any product for any market then it makes perfect sense to make a product which appeals to most customers living in that region. Another main reason is, cinema as a medium itself has its own limitations. Apart from it being a commercial product a movie also has a time constraint, it can be of two or three hours long. People are not going to sit in a theater for five or six long hours to watch a movie no matter how entertaining or educating it is. I don't think it is possible for any movie maker to comment or criticize equally about wrong religious practices from each and every major religion in 2.5 hrs of time. So the matter of fact is that they have to choose their pick and Raju Hirani chose his. If someone is not happy with this movie and want to make similar movie using Christianity or Islam or Judaism or some other religion as central theme then they are most welcome to do it. It is every artist's choice what they want to make it or every writer's choice about what they want to write. One can criticize their work, debate about it, discuss or even protest about it. But one can not question why they chose to talk about A and not about X or Y. Everyone is not expert in every field, I may know more about Hinduism because I was born in Hindu family and lived my most of life in Hindu dominated surroundings. So it is my choice to write about it, if someone want to write about Islam or Christianity because they know more about it it is their choice, I think it is very simple to understand. You make your own choice and let other make their own.

Another point which I see that various people quote many times is that  it seems some foreigners feel that "India is the only country they knew where people living in majority are mocked by minorities in any name. In any other country if you ock majority you will never able to make a movie again" I don't know who is the person who said this and from which country he/she belongs. I don't even know if someone actually said this but let's assume that someone did then I don't understand from where they got an impression that in India minority mocks majority? If we look at makers of pk itself, its producers, director, script writers all seem to belong to Hindu religion. So the first part of this argument that in India minorities mock majority is not correct. Mocking is there but as everywhere else here also it is a two way process, both mock each other and there are multiple social and political reasons for this. Based on my personal experience I can say that in USA (or one can say in west) I see lot of criticism directed towards Christianity which is  major religion in most of developed countries. People make many documentaries which attack these religious beliefs and make fun of them but they don't get attacked or stop making these type of movies. There are quite a few Hollywood movies which orthodox, conservative or right wing Christians find offensive but they are not banned in US or any other western countries or these filmmakers were not attacked or boycotted to an extent that they stopped making such movies. So it is utterly worn or false to say that India is the only place where minority or majority are mocked, it happens everywhere.

So the pont here is that if we analyze carefully each of these allegation seems to be out of some anger or emotional outburst but without any rational reason or logic. People have right to feel angry or protest about things which they don't like but they don't have right to force their own beliefs on others. Freedom of expression is available equally to everyone. If people have right to protest then people also have right to express themselves freely. I don't find pk anti-Hindu or anti-religion, rather it hesitated from attacking on concept of God. It supports existence of God, it only attacks on hypocrisy propagated by these so called agents of religion or God. If these people who are attacking this movie think that these agents and their so called theatrics is real Hinduism then they are right in saying that pk is anti-Hindu because the movie specifically attacks these things. But, if they feel that Hinduism is something beyond these babas, gurus and their theatrics then they don't have to worry about this movie as it doesn't say anything about other aspects of religion. It only attacks except hypocrisy and stupidity. It is not anti-Hindu or anti-religion but it is anti-stupidity.    

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Friday, January 2, 2015

Happy New Year...

2014 is over and now we are already in 2015. One more year passed by, actually it is not a big deal as time keeps on moving whether we like it or not. So far no one has managed to freeze time, reduce its speed or reverse the flow of it, so this process is going on since we don't even know when. But it is also true that most of us need occasions to celebrate or get together. We like to party, we like to have fun so to cater these needs markets have created new year as another occasion or festival to celebrate and enjoy. Good part of this festival is that it is not a religious one, it is not associated with any particular faith or belief so every one can participate in it with equal enthusiasm. This is the reason new year is celebrated all over the world, across all communities and by people of all ages.

People who celebrate life every day or don't wait for any particular day or occasion to have fun or to wish someone don't need any special day to celebrate anything, there whole life is a big celebration and every day is like a big festival for them. But most of us can't live like that because of so many reasons, many also think that living like this is practically not possible, I beg to differ with this but this is what common perception is. New Year day, birthdays or anniversaries are just like any other day in life but we try to make it special, people celebrate them because they want to remind them that life is worth living. They need something to look forward to and these occasions or many other festivals give this opportunity. Actually when the year changes mostly nothing changes except the calender on the desk or wall. Even the weather doesn't change (in most parts of the world it is winter), but this is an opportunity to pause in busy life and look back what we did for past 365 days and what we should plan so that next 365 days can be even better. That is why people try to make some new year resolutions, they may or may not try to complete them but they at least make them.

I personally don't celebrate these occasions if I am alone, I am not a party person or festival loving guy. I prefer solitude over chaos (crowded gatherings), I really feel out of place in big functions or parties. But if I have to attend them then I prefer to spend time with friends and family. I prefer small gatherings where we can chitchat and eat tasty food. I feel happy to see cheerful people who are in celebration mood, who are looking forward to coming days with positive enthusiasm but I prefer to stay away from all chaos which these functions create. I also think that many times lot of money and resources are wasted to arrange these functions which can be used for more useful work. But for many these occasions are also about taking a break from our regular routine and rejoice. It is very important for most of us to have some break from regular routine so that we can recharge our batteries. I also see some people who enjoy their work so much that for them every day is full of lot of fun and excitement, for this type of people no festival or new year day is necessary to enjoy because they are having fun every day. I wish to achieve this target in my life, I am close but not there yet so I keep on trying.

Celebrate these occasions if you like, have fun, party hard and then work hard also. At the same time please also be considerate about people who don't like to be part of these type of functions. Don't live boring life (boring means which you yourself don't like), do what you love or learn to love what you do, both way life becomes a big party with lots of fun. Surround yourself with people you are comfortable with, interact more with talented people it improves our own qualities. Let us make resolution to make this coming year more peaceful than last year, let's try to be more tolerant and compassionate towards our fellow inhabitants of this wonderful planet. Let's celebrate the life, let's pay tribute to all who left and remember their sacrifice and contributions. I wish everyone a very prosperous, healthy and happy new year.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright : Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]