There’s a common saying, absence of evidence doesn’t mean evidence of absence. Indeed, an ill-intent sowed perspective cannot be proven complicit due to presence of free will (which again is the foundation stone of this fabric). But its repercussions could be observed & analyzed via direct & indirect impressions, with time. For example, let’s say a complicit theory or doctrine is being floated. Now under free will, cogent evidence against direct ill-will/ill-intent would always remain absent, except, what could remain would be observations w.r.t. indirect deterioration of anything made to encircle it via expansive impressions, spread through mainstream or not. As such perspectives cannot be made complicit too, the only way, not to reach till that stage is, by keeping scent intact. Of what?
Like, once a fruit starts decaying, it becomes inconsumable. Similar thing happened with Liberalism & contemporary Liberals, who eventually decayed, & ‘even if’ they try to correct or rectify, that could be mere an illusion, an impossible event, under irreversible distinct evolutionary traits. So, once it becomes perceptible of decaying of anything, cognizance be taken against it which should neither be too late nor too early, but at the exact time! And for that, one needs to keep discovering, evaluating. But that ain’t easy at all either. It’s always a challenge to counter free will intent to extract the ill-intent out of it, bypassing all counter counter reprieves. The more you’ve anything, the more you’ll be insecure; the insecurity which would be analogous to that of an indigent.In
which direction time is moving is unfathomable. With genuine discontent, incompatibility,
exponentially growing with every generation; if we want to sugar coat, fine,
but that’s not the escape key, nor way out.
Empires
fell not because the king was complicit (as in
any case, the King would sometimes needs to be complicit to fulfill dharma of
King), but because ‘a few good men’ fell, & so eventually all, as well!
© Pranav Chaturvedi 2020