“it is not in the interests of the rich to cooperate with the poor; it is in the interests of the poor to non cooperate with the rich,” gandhi had told the mill workers a hundred years ago.

hello alexandria ocasio-cortez,

since your election to the congress a wide range of opportunities have opened up for you to help cause changes in the fields of your interests, the education, health and ecology. seeing your enthusiasm, people, and not just young and innocent, but even your grandparents’ age have begun to take active interest in participating in the changing the american mindset.

i was your age when i, too, refused to acquire the american dream with which the commerce controlled u.s. politicians were enticing the young of the 3rd world. and i did find the american dream to be a distraction from facing the now. that was some seventy years ago when india was a jewel in the british crown. at 29, in an american fellowship grant interview i was asked:

‘why do you want to go to america?”

“because the indians are imitating the americans, they do not listen to me. so i want to talk to the americans”

“what do you want to tell them?”

“that it is the profit motive, that is the problem...”

i was interrupted with “if mr ford and others did not make profit, there would be no fellowship grants for you to apply.”

“true, but if nobody made profit and everybody had one’s fair share, i would not need go to america to tell people what they already practiced.”

i did not get that fellowship grant, but came to the u.s. a few years later, only to observe that the americans were not eager to listen to anything that requires of them to change inwardly and outwardly.

i saw, and still see the u.s. to be an english colony, socially, politically and even in dress codes. i was criticized by the presidents of the schools in india and thailand for not dressing like a “professor” who sweated in the suit instead of wearing the native dress that had evolved with the climate of the land.

what the commerce sector has promoted as the fashion industry is the biggest cause of the climate change. and women are the biggest consumers of these ecologically damaging goods. what used to be purely functional physical necessity is now a part of the formal and informally formal attire. wearing the purposefully torn and stone washed new pants is nothing but the mockery of the poor people.

in in early 1990s we - www.span-foundation.org - had written to the levi strauss company an alternative to this wasteful way of making new clothes old and worn out: send the new pants to us, which we will distribute among the real poor, and when these clothes are really worn out and tattered, we will collect them back and send them back to you for your acting poor customers. and you may advertise the sale with a caption: “when you wear these clothes you have already clothed a poor person.” we had received no response from them.

which brings this letter to you. the matter relates to all three of your areas of interests that affect the american way of life, and therefore, your work as a member of congress. in ecological terms, life does not express itself in isolated compartmental ways, as the commerce sector has promoted it to be doing. all avenues of motions of life are now commodified, including the designer child and death by artificial means.

as your interest in education is guided by your innocent desire to see every person acquire the safety of the socioeconomic security that now you are given. and you credit it with the hard work your mother did to receive it. but even though you are currently enamored with peoples’ ever increasing demand of your new role, being compassionate you seem to have observed the ills of the socioeconomic apartheid haunting most people. so sooner or later you will be required to question whether you can factually effect the change in the socioeconomic setup of the capitalist mode while trying to change the very mode that has put you up in that way of life that you are trying to change, the system that has uplifted you from the poverty.

as long as you are promoting all the means of achieving to acquire a place in the american dream all your constituents will fully support you. the health, education, justice, decent wages are all things the dreams are made of, the american dream is made of. it is what capitalism is formed of.

what is ignored in it is the terrible sense of insecurity. the very core of the capitalist thinking is formed of the fear of being left out, and hence the rush to the ‘me first’. thus the competitive mode of education, which ultimately sets all classmates against each other. by giving a pat on the back on one child and not every child, teacher sows seeds of hurt of being ignored and jealousy at an early age, which progresses into keen competition in acquiring good grades, admissions in “good” schools (which also results in bribing the schools to compensate grade with daddy’s money), scholarships, jobs and even spouses.

i am sure, you do not have in mind an education that was originally formed in the colonial minds to selectively train the natives to manage colonies. it therefore required to pick the top of the class, and rewarding the thus chosen one with goodies that distinguishes one from the rest.

such commerce created education has no need for knowing what is what and how and why, as once on job, none of the academic expertise is called for in the paper pushing white collar jobs and lever pushing mechanical jobs. they are required to fill in the blanks on form sheets and keep the conveyor belts moving. society creates school syllabus for the young to perpetuate itself. and teachers, from preschool to the postdoctoral courses serve the dual task of disseminating the pertinent information to the students, and then choosing the best students for the various functions of the prevailing way of life.

in such a preformed goal, which like the easter egg-hunt may involve searching, but for the organizers it is boringly repetitive work. in fact, not just the teachers, but in every aspect of the modern living, the workers have no interest nor any desire to have any insightful improvement in it. for persons trained in such compartmentalized outlook of life, it is rare to find an expert of ecology practicing living in all one’s thought, speech and action, as a human primate in harmony with nature as do all other creatures.

it all comes down to the lack of the experiential understanding of the very language of the native speakers that is their medium of communication. in the democratic context, even in the mathematically logical terms, the people as a plural of one person carries the sameness of one even in multiplication. so in a democracy, one cannot “lead” other ones who are like one oneself, or “represent” ones to others who are not like one. this separation of one and one’s group from others is itself the creation of the royalty > rex > reich > rich. what distinguishes the rich from the others is that, except for the very basic physical motions like eating and shitting, they employ others to do their work.

the u.s. and other former colonies now do not have the physical presence of the monarchy in the land, but in every other way the u.s. government functions in the manner the viceroy of india did. the u.s. president is both an english viceroy and semi-autonomous monarch, who is answerable to only his existence as the head of the state. so he has no reason to oppose to the unseen ruler he works for. as trustees in prisons themselves are prisoners, who have made their living a little more comfortable by cooperating with the prison officials, the bureaucrats of the colonies have created an upper middle class for themselves by working in the interests their employers. and therefore, in every dispute between the workers and the owners of the workplaces, these middlemen have always sided with the owners. “it is not in the interests of the rich to cooperate with the poor; it is in the interests of the poor to un-cooperate with the rich,” gandhi had told the mill workers a hundred years ago.

it is not in nature of the employed person to work for another person to sustain one’s living. in this sense, all other creatures are truly democratic. even the chest thumping big gorilla picks berries for himself. there is the natural allocation of function of an individual creature within a group. the strength of lion enables him to protect the pride, but his very bulk of body renders him unable to feed the pride by hunting. it is the slick lionesses who are feeding the pride. the big tusker defends the elephant herd, but it is the wisdom of matriarch that guides the herd in foraging for food.

thus, in the human herd called the group, the populace in a non royal ecological form, the distribution of the communal work would be naturally determined by nature, and not by the competitive mode of education, by pitting one against another. it may be called nature’s calling, and even though a work performed by and guidance of such person feels to be easy and swift, there is no need for the name recognition or reward asked for or given.

only in a capitalist created socioeconmic formation that individual persons are rewarded more or less for the work performed for another person who is evaluating the worth of the work done for that person. and that, too, when such works are repetitive enough to be compared. the rich can be rich only when one spends less of one’s energy in return for more. and it is the thus accumulated unspent amount that is the net worth of the rich person. since ecocentric nature of existence is beyond the royal command, the rich still has to move one’s limbs and organs. so the rich engage in games and sports for the body movements and in literature and arts in the mental stimulation.

the acquisition of foreign lands and people of different languages required of the owners to find and train people who acted as middlemen from the captured people. these are the slave drivers and managers who mind the workers, and convey the almost entirely one way message from the owners to the enslaved people. the two houses of congress itself is indicative of the distancing of people arising from the intellectually perceived idea of the mind over the matter; mental work superior to the menial work. the house of lords and of commons; and its u.s. replica, the house of representatives of the common folks, and the senate representing the rich controlled state. the servitude infected media of india commonly refers to the two houses of parliament as the upper and lower house, what may be considered normal in in the minds of a people reared to be inferior is not normal in the perception of a free people. and their kretos

<kar sk. hand:- strength, action:- rule.

the ruler and the ruled by nature cannot act alike. gandhi had observed over a hundred years ago, when he told the mill workers, that “it is not in the interests of the rich to cooperate with the poor; it is not in the interests of the poor to not cooperate with the rich”. all distinctions are image oriented. in nature, all images are mutually interdependent, though they may seem separated by contours.

over a couple generations of the interbreeding of the slaves made it easy for the owners to train the children of the slaves who are already conditioned to see their parents working as slaves, much like a foal running along it mother being trained in the corral. this was more of a practical additional incentive in stoppage the slave raids, like the hard work of capturing the wild horses and bronco busting. in the people of the colonial lands, almost without exception, the children of the people earning a living by working for others in factories and homes of the rich readily compete with each other to outdo their parents in performance skills much in demand by the employers.

it becomes inevitably necessary, that therefore those who teach the new generation must not view teaching as a means to sustain their living in a way that numbs the perceptive senses of the young and trains them to be work horses to repeat the task in the field or in the circus.

do you think? what do you think?