Discussing the ideology, logically criticizing the unstructured way in implementation of anything or determining the credibility or ethics (not solely confined to meritocracy which Beings generally take in Verbatim),
is in no way transmute the liberty under the ambit of ‘undermining the essence’
of the privileges any democracy has imparted to anyone, when the republic or individuals
are the direct recipients of the same and the subjective opinions made, make substantial
sense & conclusions in their objections. That is at the public level. But personally, those entities, be a
practitioner of any ideology, it's not right to snoop around into
anyone’s personal affairs or matters and ending up unfolding distinct subjective
outlook, and honestly, no one is even interested also in going through such contents.
But
again, condemning or objecting the actual practice of that entity at any particular given instance where it
could be clearly perceived that somewhere that Being has unfolded & utilized the ‘Influential’ factor and thus could be surmised with a reasoning that wherever any victim
is involved, associated to that entity, professionally or personally, might be denied
justice or the justice could never reach to that recipient, neither on this
sphere nor beyond it due to that factor, is thence neither snooping nor infringing the private
life of any entity. Because if the sanctity of the Democracy has to be
maintained, the ‘Influential’ terminology shouldn't conceive only at the first
place. As wherever the concept of ‘Buy
Anyone’ & ‘Borrow Platforms for
Projections’ exists, to question it would in no way undermine the sanctity
of any rights conferred to anyone. So many victims, well I don’t have stats and
figures where the projections in the chart are lowered or raised, as per the
convenience, would have been succumbed to this obnoxious terminology 'Influence' is unexplainable, as we know how the structure works.
Thence, whenever any issue is
surfaced where it is not even necessary to lift the veil to unravel that the ‘Influential’
part within that structure might have played the role to deny the justice to any
victim associated with the same entity, it is the duty by and large to take the cognizance of the same. Also, the Projectors play an important role in it. Yeah, to listen
and project the contentions or averments made by that entity is Absolutely Justified,
but the projections made with an intention to project that entity as being the victim
of infringement of privacy: certainly not right!
Copyright © Pranav Chaturvedi 2015