Category: Social Issues

Is technology the solution to the problem of global poverty?

Technology is often viewed as a solution to all of humanity’s problems. Afterall technology has opened up many avenues for mankind. From medicines that can cure diseases to software that can crunch and compute vital information, technology has provided endless solutions. It is no surprise then that many people believe that technology can provide solutions to the global problem of poverty. Technology has successfully alleviated poverty in multiple ways in the form of food production, microfinancing and education. However, global poverty is a complex issue and requires a multifaceted approach, that is why technology is only part of the solution to the problem of global poverty.

Technology can help and remove people from the cycle of poverty through access to genetically modified crops. According to the United Nations, around 1.4 billion people rely on agriculture for their daily subsistence. Technology can help these communities by introducing better farming techniques and growing higher yield crops. Most of the times extreme weather conditions destroy the crops for the poor, in such condition technology can prove as a helpful tool. For example, farmers throughout the Global South are turning to SMS-based services for technical support that allows them more easily to adopt new crops and growing techniques. Technology thus provides people with benefits for both natural resources and household income and nutrition. Technology is responsible for the development of ‘high-yielding’ crops like wheat and corn through advances in molecular genetics. ­­However, technology also has a flip side, these technologies meant to help poor farmers often are expensive and end up helping richer businesses, which in turn drives farmers towards poverty. Moreover, even if the poor farmers have access to these technologies, they might lack the technological know-how, which might make such technologies of little use. Thus, while technology has the potential to aid the poor by increasing access to basic necessities, it is unfortunately hampered by several other factors, preventing its effects to be maximised.

Technology, in the form of new media, has contributed significantly to combating poverty. Social media is a prominent tool for spreading knowledge and awareness. It also has the power to influence people to take actions and measures to tackle the issue of poverty. social media, to educate and transform how people engage with reducing poverty. Social media can help in solving the issue of poverty by sharing information to raise public awareness and involvement. An example of this was seen recently, where The Junior League of Savannah participated in the Little Black Dress Initiative where women wore the same black dress for five days. Through the initiative, they tried to illustrate how poverty affects women. Through the initiative, they invited to dialogue about poverty. The influence of social media also encourages people to volunteer and donate to causes that can reduce poverty. An example of this is the Red Nose campaign which has successfully raised $200 million and positively impacted the lives of nearly 25 million children. Many Non-Governmental Organisations around the world employ social media for fundraising and awareness. Thus, technology in the form of social media helps in improving the conditions of the poor and also garner attention towards the issue of poverty.

However, technology cannot help in situations where governments are corrupt and lack governance skills. It is often seen that countries with poor leadership face a greater degree of poverty. Many times, governments fail to manage funds and the mismanagement aggravates the situations. Brazil, Venezuela, and even countries like India are often unable to use technology to better the lives of people, simply due to poor leadership and corruption. Therefore, technology cannot solve the problem of inefficient and corrupt governments.

In conclusion, technology has been an instrumental tool in tackling the issue of poverty to some extent. However, poverty is a complex issue which requires better approaches than just technology. Technology needs to be used in efficient ways with a combination of government efforts and international organisations. Therefore, a better approach is required to tackle the issue of global poverty.

Is it possible for your society to be fair and inclusive?

Singapore is known as a multi-cultural society. It is believed society is fair when people are judged on their abilities and efforts rather than factors like race and religion. Inclusiveness in a society means that all members of society benefit from progress and development. It also means that all people have opportunities to do well and raise their status. Diversity is celebrated and respected in an inclusive society. In these terms then, Singapore is a pretty fair and inclusive society.

The Singapore government adopts policies that benefit all. The government understands that all people regardless of race, religion, gender and age have something to contribute to the nation. The annual budget plan of the Singapore government generally focuses on creating neighbourhoods and transport systems which are elder-friendly. Apart from that, the government also has adopted GST vouchers that help in uplifting people from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Similarly, healthcare has integrated and streamlined to make it more affordable. Singaporeans also come together to celebrate various festivities. The Chinese host open houses during Chinese New Year, as do Indians for Deepavali. On the political front, chief-of-army, ministerial positions as well as heads of state have been graced by minorities. Thus, Singapore tries to be fair and inclusive by introducing policies that benefit all and appoint leaders based on meritocracy.

Singapore also ensures inclusivity and fairness in its educational system. The government has ensured that the education system is affordable for all. Educational policies ensure that everyone in society progresses and tries its best to prevent social exclusion. The education system also ensures that it better integrates the learning needs of the students. The government tries its best to ensure that no child is excluded from basic education that provides them with literacy and numeracy skills. Even prisoners have access to education and can complete Cambridge exams while serving time. Increasingly, disabled children are also integrated with peers from regular school systems. Thus, there is inclusiveness and fairness in education systems in Singaporean society.

However, despite the educational policies of the government, educational systems continue to create a divide within society. Educational systems tend to be unfair when rich parents are able to afford tuition and extra classes for their children. This educational disparity creates a rift between the rich and the poor. Nevertheless, self-help groups do exist to provide extra classes outside of school hours to those that need it.  It is also easily observable that only a small proportion of people with disabilities are employed and many face discrimination in the workplace. Those above 45 also have trouble finding jobs in Singapore as foreign workers are often favoured over locals. No society is perfect, but Singapore tries its best to ensure no one is left behind.

The Singapore pledge reminds people about the idea of equality. Thus, it can be said that Singapore in many ways is a society which welcomes and accepts people from all walks of life regardless of their differences. Thus, it possible to have a fair and inclusive society in Singapore when people actively practice it in their daily lives. It is surely possible to have a fair and inclusive society in Singapore, by the implementation of government policies, education, and awareness on an individual level.

Consider the view that cities of the future will need to be designed very differently from the ones we know today.

Cities of today are constructed in a way that makes people wonder how much progress we have made as a society. In fact, it is expected that people living in cities will multiply ten-fold in the next 4o years. The cities of the future will need to build using a holistic and sustainable approach. The cities of the future will need to be designed ensuring that it can accommodate a larger number of people and the quality of life is not compromised.


Many environmentalists predict that cities of the future will have to incorporate urban farming technologies. The urban farming technologies like vertical farming and hydroponics will be the future of the cities in the next few years. This will not only enable people to solve issues of food but also nourish the local economies. Another advantage of these vertical farms would be that they will add greenery to the concrete jungles of the future. It will also help people in eating food which is homegrown and will lead to healthier lifestyles. Initiatives in Shanghai, China and in Gotham, New York have sprung up to grow fruits and vegetables on roop tops and cleverly planned vertical farms. Thus, cities of the future need to be designed differently keeping in mind the agricultural practices and issues like water shortages.


The cities will have to be better designed in terms of transportation as well. Some of these technologies have already emerged in the present times. These include transportation in the form of electric cars and autonomous vehicles. The cities of the future will need to implement radical changes to other aspects of transportation like electric roads akin to the ones already seen in Frankfurt and Mannheim. The cities of the future may also need to change the mass transit system, to be faster and efficient. Elon Musk’s hyperloop concept, for example, could very much turn into a reality in the future. This is especially true in the case of India and Estonia where Virgin Hyperloop One is already planning routes for the transport. It could also be common to see drones delivering pizzas and robots cleaning homes in the future. Thus, current innovative ideas will have to be incorporated in the future cities to make them more fast, comfortable and efficient.
Future cities would also need to be more inclusive of the ageing population.

The buildings of the future would need to incorporate minor changes like ramps and lifts to allow wheelchair-bound elderly to move around the house. Cities of the future may also need to keep in mind the needs of the disabled. This can be done by creating doors that are slightly translucent for the deaf or street signs that are in braille. It might also need to include advancements in current designs like lift doors that remain open for longer, handrails for people, wider gates and barrier-free roads. There can be the incorporation of elderly care with childcare which can prove beneficial in improving the mental health of the senior citizens. Thus, city developers of the future must keep in mind the needs of the elderly by creating diverse designs.

While these concepts could be easily implemented in developed countries, developing countries could have a problem in designing for the future. Expertise, finance and most importantly having an infrastructure that suits the economic climate could be a crucial factor determining the progress of Nairobi, Johannesburg or Lagos. The future does not need to be technologically advanced. It can be adaptive to nature and sustainable. The changes can be drastic in some areas but in other areas, there are only minor adjustments to be made to the existent designs. The cities of the future need to be different in terms of environment, transportation systems and will require to be more inclusive. In the future, the cities will not just be cities but smart cities.

Women will never enjoy the same rights as men. Do you agree?

The issue of gender equality has been discussed and debated for centuries. While optimists believe that gender equality is attainable. There are others who have offered cynical views on the issue stating that it is a difficult and unachievable goal. It can be said that women’s rights can be improved in the future but women will never enjoy the same rights as men due to social, political and religious beliefs.

Women and men enjoy equal rights only in progressive societies. Women in countries like the US, UK and Canada have proved that women can contribute to the economy significantly. Women of today are empowered; this is evident from protests and parades where they fight for their rights. Women today even are given the same suffrage rights and the authority to make decisions about their lives. Thus, women do have a chance at attaining equal rights as men, but for now, the most impact is in progressive societies. While feminist movements have empowered women, these movements have not been enough in bringing equal rights for women than men already enjoy. It is evident from the fact that women still do not get paid equal wages and are still under-represented in political fields. In Middle Eastern countries women are still oppressed and do not even enjoy basic rights such as education. This clearly shows that demonstrations and protests are not enough to bring equal rights to women if the governments and businesses are not ready to listen. Therefore, women will never enjoy the same rights due to various factors like society and politics being at play. 

In countries with religious influence women still remain as second-class citizens. Religion continues to be a driving force in many people’s lives. Religious texts have often portrayed women in submissive roles. In Christianity, the bible not only prescribes women to be submissive to husbands but even to the church and the community. Similarly, in the Jewish religious texts, hierarchies of gender are deeply entrenched. This is evident in several verses like Exodus 21:10 where god ordains men taking several wives. Though many liberals may find it in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which emphasise on equality, life and personal security. However, in many countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt, women’s rights are negligible and women do not enjoy equal rights in the name of traditions. Therefore, religious ideas deeply influence mindsets which can be a hindrance to the dream of attaining equal rights for men and women. 

Women do not enjoy equal rights in terms of wages. Despite various campaigns and efforts to close the gap between wages, the gap still exists. The issue of equal pay is even prevalent in developed countries. While Nordic countries have attained equal rights for women and men, the other countries are still lagging. In fact, a report published by The World Economic Forum states that for equal pay to come into picture women will have to wait until the year 2277. In developed countries like Singapore, women still earn less than women. A study by the Ministry of Manpower in Singapore found that women earned 6 per cent less than their male peers in 2018. Though the gender gap exists today, in the future women might receive close to equal if not equal pay. Therefore, equal rights between men and women would be difficult to achieve. 

Though inequality is not beneficial to society in any way, equal rights for women is a difficult goal to achieve due to various religious and social factors. In sectors like education and work women still have a long way to go. If one needs to attain equal rights for men and women there is a need to tackle inequality in all forms. Political, religious and cultural leaders have to make a concerted push to ensure equal rights. Without a large impetus, equal rights for women will remain a dream.

Selflessness is a desirable quality. Do you agree?

Selflessness is the concern for needs and wishes of others than with one’s own. People generally believe that being selfless is a quality that is desirable. Altruistic qualities are often associated with being selfless, while negative qualities are often associated with selfishness. Many people distinguish selfish people as those who take and selfless people as those who give. However, it is a generalisation and there is a need to view selflessness from multiple perspectives. It cannot be denied that selflessness is a desirable quality to a large extent.

Selflessness is often promoted as a positive quality in religious texts. Many religions are linked to people becoming more altruistic. Globally all religions promote altruism, by helping others, individuals feel good about themselves. In religions like Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam people are encouraged to be selfless and keep the needs and wants of others at the forefront. In Hinduism for instance, Bhagavad Gita describes selflessness as the essence of karma yoga and the basis of all existence. Similarly, in Christianity, people are encouraged to be selfless. This is evident from the two commandments “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God” is first, and “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”. Selflessness in a religious sense is a desirable quality because it encourages people to help others. Therefore, selflessness is a desirable quality as it encourages a humanistic nature in people.

Selflessness is not considered a desirable trait because people falsely believe that their needs are not valid. Opponents of selflessness believe that selflessness is a way of morally bullying an individual. They often argue that even religion promotes selfishness and not selflessness. For example, in Christianity, it is believed that if people help others and keep others needs at fore, they will get a place in heaven. They, therefore, believe that even acts of selflessness require selfishness. Therefore, selflessness is not a desirable quality.

Despite this, it cannot be denied that selflessness is desirable because it makes life better for an individual and also others. Selfless actions are helpful to people who live around us and fosters a sense of self-identity.  Mother Teresa and Mahatma Gandhi are notable examples of people who have truly been selfless and helped society in a myriad of ways. Gandhi’s selflessness awakened the national consciousness of people. Similarly, Mother Teresa accepted the rejects of the society and transformed them trough her selfless acts. She always believed that “the most horrible disease is not leprosy or tuberculosis. It is the feeling to be undesirable, rejected, abandoned by all.” Selflessness is morally desirable as it helps people to make the lives of people around them better.

Selflessness within societies as it encourages people to progress and prosper together. In every society, it is desired that individuals cultivate selflessness because it helps people. Many societies go to the extent of fostering selflessness through various activities and programmes.  For example, in Singapore, there is a Kindness Movement, that provides people with volunteering opportunities to help those in need. Selflessness allows people to open their hearts and understand the problem of others. Some might argue that Singapore as a competitive country is selfish especially in terms of education and economics. However, it can not be overlooked that movements like these encourage people to grow and prosper together and show that selflessness is valued and desired in many societies. Thus, selflessness is a desirable quality.  

Though selflessness is the desired quality, people often fail to work selflessly in certain circumstances. Many times people do not act selflessly, for example, many rehabilitated criminals are not accepted back into society. Recent pandemic has also shown that though selflessness is desired not many people practice it. For example, there have been instances across the world where sellers are hoarding hand sanitizers and masks and selling them at a higher price. These examples clearly show that ideally, people would like to work selflessly, in reality, it is not possible. Thus, even though selflessness is a desired quality many do not act selflessly.

Selflessness is a moral principle that is highly desirable. Selflessness allows people to widen their perspective and understand people better. Religion and society also prove that selflessness is the desired quality because they promote acts of helping and volunteering for the benefit of others. Even today many people act in a selfless manner. This is evident from the fact that many doctors, policemen, cleaners are working tirelessly during the recent pandemic and helping people. Selflessness has the power to change the world and is, therefore, a desirable quality.

In conclusion, selflessness is to a large extent a desirable quality as it helps people and society. Though being selfless is desired, people need to realise that it cannot always be practised. In our materialistic world where people thrive in selfishness acts of selflessness are truly desired because they keep us in touch with our humanity.

‘Rules are meant to be broken.’ Is such a perspective justifiable?

People feel the presence of rules everywhere. Oppressive presence of rules, both written and unwritten are a norm in some societies. Rules are prescribed to dictate people’s every move and keep their behaviour in check. Many believe that rules are an affront to their freedom, and argue that they are there to be broken. However, rules are necessary for any society so that it can run smoothly and progress in a stable manner. Increasingly, many hold the view that rules are usually meant to be followed but, in some cases, when rules hinder progress and are unjust, then the rules can be broken.

Rules are the building blocks of a harmonious society. Rules in society are meant for the well-being of the individual and society as a whole. As such rules in society must be followed so that everyone can stay peacefully. In society, rules are in the form of laws that help society to progress. For example, many developed nations have rules and laws in place that make education compulsory for children. As good education is the sign of a progressive society, with responsible citizens. Similarly, there are laws or rules against crimes like murder, robbery, bribery and other so that people can be protected from practices that oppress them in any way. Even following the simplest rules in a society leads to harmony and smooth functioning of that society. For example, not smoking near schools, following the traffic signs, queueing in an orderly manner, not littering are all rules that are meant to prevent society from falling into anarchy. Therefore, rules must not be broken in society as they are there for protecting the well-being of the individuals and communities that stay within that society.

However, sometimes people need to break rules to achieve success and revolutionise people’s lives. Most influential people all had to break rules to initiate change and bring on multitudes of new ways to people’s lives. If people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had stuck to following the rules, then we may not have the technological advances like we do and thrive on today. Similarly, if Galileo did not propose Heliocentricity, people would have never established that Earth is not the centre of the universe. There is a need to strive for more especially when people are innovating. Rule-breaking in innovation helps to make a positive impact not only for an individual but also the lives of others in society. Therefore, to create something path-breaking rules need to be broken.

Societal and cultural norms need to be broken when they prove detrimental to the well-being of society. Unspoken rules are responsible for many of the atrocities that happen in society. Honour killing in countries like Pakistan and India is due to the rule in which the perpetrator believes that the victim has violated the principles of a community or a religion. Similarly, in China, the foot-binding practice was considered a status symbol as well as a mark of beauty. However, the cultural practice was painful and limited the mobility of women, resulting in lifelong disabilities for most of its victims. With many campaigns in China, the practice finally came to an end in the early 20th century. In many parts of the world, discriminatory practices are entrenched into the cultures.  Thus, breaking rules is necessary when it comes to discriminatory practices rooted in cultural and traditional norms.

Rules in most cases should be followed, however when it comes to discriminatory practices or creating something new rules need to be broken. Individuals and societies, face a continual battle over rules, however, what needs to be understood is that rules are meant for the benefit of the society. Only rules that hinder innovation and lead to discrimination should be condemned.

How far do you agree that having children is just another lifestyle choice?

The world today is facing an appreciable drop in global population due to declining birth rates. This growing phenomenon is here to stay as long as mankind continues to exist and remain indifferent towards having children. Increasingly, not having children has become a lifestyle choice for those in the first world.

Decades ago, traditional couples believed that having children is necessary so as to continue the family line. Others also saw the need to have children as they believed that they would be well taken care of in their old age. This mentality has led many families, especially those in rural areas or developing countries, to ensure that they have many children. The situation is different now. With financial independence, many couples believe that they can achieve their bucket-list faster if they remained a pair and avoided a 20-year commitment to raise children, or the prospect of doctor visits or paying for an education loan.  Many see being childless as a worry-free life.

Women who do not have kids, tend to understand motherhood as all-encompassing and overwhelming responsibility—one that might interfere with their next promotion. The choice to be childfree gave women the freedom to work and men freedom from work. Research has shown that childless women end up just as satisfied with their lives in the end. The challenges of today’s world is far different from the past. As such, many prospective parents feel that they may not have the skills and ability to raise children. There is a general fear of not being mentally or emotionally equipped for parenthood.

People who have grown up in a confused or very liberal environment are also choosing not to have children. These groups opine that the best thing about being childfree is not having to think about anyone else in terms of choices that are made. Ultimately, the freedom to choose, one way or the other, is something we should celebrate. But just how free that choice actually is, when much of society still expects women to choose to be mothers, is something worth considering.

A growing contingent of young people are refusing to have kids — or are considering having fewer kids — because of climate change.  The growing antinatalist movement is another factor that correlates with lifestyle choice. This philosophical movement based around the tenet that it is cruel to bring sentient lives, doomed to suffer into the world that is already suffering. They feel that people who have children by celebrating childbearing without acknowledging the consequences for themselves and the planet are doing injustice towards their progeny.

In conclusion, while some couples embrace having children, others view it as part of enhancing their lives or the lives of their loved ones. Reasons for having children have undoubtedly changed over the years, as people now do not only have children for the sake of completing their family portrait.

That loneliness is a major problem in city life? How far do you agree?

The city – full of zest, glitz and glamour and all that jazz.  It is said to be the pulse of a country and where economic progress is centred at. Amidst all that are its people who create the city as it is, living in six degrees of separation.  As life becomes profoundly more mercurial and intricately complex with tectonic shifts, the labyrinth we live in today has robbed most of us, to say the least, of something we yearn for, desire, need, want – creating an empty space that is loneliness.  Though loneliness is a major problem in city, it is not necessarily the only problem given the myriad of troubles that plague the world today.

The advent of the internet has enhanced the connectivity between two people regardless of geographical boundaries.  It has created various matchmaking and online chatting services that allow people to fall in love without meeting each other prior. A burgeoning number of couples who are dating first got to know each other via online dating services.  For instance, Taiwanese author Gladden met his girlfriend of four years via her blog. Matchmaking companies use the internet to find a potential bride for someone. Family members have been able to stay in touch via skype. Thanks to technology, communication has been enhanced that diminish prospect for loneliness to be dominant in one’s life and create a major problem, especially in city life.

As people today adopt a more active lifestyle and are interested to acquire new skills, more are dining out, joining classes and spend a relaxed day somewhere out.  This has widened the breadth of interactions between people.  Through social interactions, we are able to make new friends that do away with loneliness. Social support systems available such as religious institutions too provide the opportunity for city dwellers to interact with each other.  In Singapore, more locals are actively joining marathon (Nike Race – within six days all spots were taken) and taking up speed dating services. One reason for lower loneliness too is that companies these days emphasize corporate social responsibility  (CSR) that create a compulsory requirement for employees to do community service.  It is refreshing for a city dweller to temporarily take leave from the fast pace, hectic working life that causes one to be caught up with it and lose social interaction that is vital for anyone being.

If one stays connected to world issues, the comprehensive problems that engulf us today, makes loneliness take a back seat.  The passionate debate about environmental issues, child trafficking and slow economic growth have wider and grave consequences. Solutions to these problems have not been absolute and abided to as promised which poses a more serious problem than loneliness which has available avenues for one to channel and suppress.  In fact, it is these problems that actually proliferated one’s communications with each other.  Demonstrators from all over the globe usually come together to protests against something they agree such as protests against the IMF and the negative impact of the capitalist economy.  As these people come together for a common course, the similar interest they share, allow one to forget loneliness and feel content to fight for something they believe in with like-minded people.  City dwellers, they no longer are, but unrecognized soldiers.

However, though on a majority scale, loneliness may not be a problem, for some it is a significant problem that would pose a major problem to their loved ones.  In a city, besides workers, students who live in one have access to various electronic goods that can strip away communication from the world.  Point in case – video games.  Consumers can become so absorbed in it that at times they forget they are actually living, forgetting their daily routines as they become preoccupied with the games.  In Japan, video gamers are known to have died from being obsessed with playing that they forget to blink.  It could be because they could be lonely and play such games to negate loneliness, self-immersed in it and worry parents.

Globalisation has sewn the world closer and has seen a greater influx of migrants to cities in hope of a better life by earning higher wages that are used to support their families.  The “city-dwellers” would feel loneliness as they are separated from loved ones and do not really know anyone in the place they have migrated to.  Moreover, they also do not have the financial means usually to afford electronic goods that allow them to remain in touch with the loved ones.  For instance, many Bangladesh, Thai and Chinese workers stay in Singapore in dormitories – evident of their low income to have a comfortable place of their own.  While their roommates may transiently erase loneliness, these migrants who live in the city are lonely but do not pose a major problem for a  government to interfere.

Loneliness – the feeling of being cut off, alienated and disconnected from the others in an urban environment that thrives on a high standard of living seems to have or inverse relationship between city and loneliness.  In view of the majority, it does not pose a major problem in city life but for the minor few whose character may not be appreciated by others or for those who do not speak the same language, do experience loneliness in large volumes, but it is more on a personal level than a national one to be seen as a major problem.

Can patriotism be taught?

Many believe that young people today are less patriotic today. They argue that young people view their country more negatively than older generations. They believe that the reason behind this is the younger generation is not taught to respect their country and be patriotic. However, patriotism is an enlarged and extended form of love for one’s country which cannot be forced upon people. One should be patriotic not because they were taught to do so but because an individual considers themselves to be part of the country. Therefore, it can be contended that patriotism cannot be taught to a large extent because only through the citizen’s personal development and experiences will they be willing to sacrifice and contribute to the wellbeing of their country.

In many countries across the world, governments try to integrate patriotism in the educational curriculum. Patriotism is taught in schools by singing the national anthem, repeating the national pledge and even by teaching historical events that happened in the country. However, this association of education with patriotism is not correct as it makes people rigid in their views and opinions. The concept of patriotism is unique to every person and the idea of loving one’s country can differ from one person to another. For some being proud of the military is patriotism and for the others supporting the athletes who are representing the country at international level is patriotism. The aim of drilling patriotism in young people’s mind is ineffective because in using education when we try to integrate patriotism it can also lead to distortion of facts. For example, in countries like Pakistan history text books present a very skewed view of the India-Pakistan partition and war. Therefore, patriotism should not be taught instead young people should be given an opportunity to love and respect their country through personal experiences.

Patriotism through rigid and repetitive exercise can acquaint one with patriotism, but may not fully convince them.

Teaching patriotism does not work because when it is taught the efforts are taken for granted. When patriotism is taught through acts like singing national anthem and holding flags, then patriotism is taken for granted. This is because the true meaning behind patriotism is lost and people do not really understand the sacrifice of the freedom fighters. Patriotism when taught leads people to respect a country only for a moment. This is evident from the fact that in many countries people only celebrate national day or Independence Day like a holiday without understanding the true meaning behind it. The meaning behind patriotism cannot be taught and therefore the efforts of instilling patriotism are futile. Moreover, when people are taught patriotism, they might just follow the trend instead of really respecting or loving the country. Therefore, patriotism should not be taught because it does not truly make a person patriotic.

Patriotism can only be learned through personal experiences and struggles. Patriotism that consists of the experiences people have living in their country can be a life-long learning experience. Only through their experiences, people feel more inclined to love and respect their country. For example, during the Covid19 pandemic, many governments encouraged citizens to buy local products. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave the call for “vocal for local”. Similarly, French citizens were asked to fulfil their patriotic duty and eat more cheese to help the dairy industry amid the coronavirus. Furthermore, citizens of many countries maintained social distancing and staying at home so that their country can emerge victorious in the battle with coronavirus. Hence, it is not essential for education to teach patriotism. Rather, patriotism is an ideal which has to grow within individuals through experience.

From a practical perspective, young people can be taught about historical events that can build a sense of patriotism and national identity among the youth. The events can also serve as lessons that help in guiding the young into the future. The knowledge of a country’s history can serve as a source of inspiration for people. The organic nature of patriotism can be seen at sports meets and even in cuisine. The Iranians show excessive pride for their wrestling athletes as do the Russians for their gymnasts. Brazilians believe that their soccer team is endowed with supernatural abilities by the soccer Gods, while the New Zealand rugby team proudly perform their Hakka to show strength and pride.

Singaporeans and Malaysians constantly argue over who makes better chicken rice and other hawker food staples like satay and crab curry. In 2014, the Israelis set the record for the largest plate of hummus, cooking some 4,000 kilos of the stuff. A few months later, Lebanon responded with a humongous 10,000-kilo dish. Countries have argued over the origins of the pavlova, kimchi and even cheese. These aspects cannot be taught but are felt in every living fibre of the patriot.

Thus, patriotism cannot be taught through education or by singing the national anthem. It has to develop in individuals voluntarily in order for ideals of patriotism to be deeply rooted. As the world becomes flatter, it is difficult to wave the flag of patriotism as people become more connected through movies, music and even muses. While teaching patriotism can be considered a starting point to imbibe in each citizen the fervour to love their country, the overall nature of patriotism is that it has to be felt, consumed and defended particularly when pride is at stake.

Public figures have to behave well at all times. Do you agree?

The 24×7 media today has placed public figures and celebrities constantly in the public eye. Their every move and action is scrutinized and analysed. This constant analysis of their life has a huge impact on the people who follow and sometimes worship them. Thus, it is fair to say that public figures should behave well most of the time as their actions have the power to influence people particularly when sections of the public look up to them as role models.

Public figures have to behave responsibly because they are accountable for the reputation of the body they represent. In political scenarios, this is extremely true because any misconduct can lead to public distrusting the political party. For example, in the United States, Senator Al Franken had to resign when several women accused him of behaving inappropriately with them. After the allegations surfaced, more than two dozen Democratic senators called on Franken to resign. Similarly, United States politician, Tim Murphy, an outspoken opponent of abortion was revealed to have strongly encouraged his mistress to get an abortion when she became pregnant. This accusation led him to resign from the party he was representing. These examples illustrate how inappropriate behaviour even in private lives can wreak havoc on their credibility and integrity. Public figures should not forget that their actions can have severe consequences as even a small detail can become big news. Thus, it is true that public figures should behave well all the time as their mistakes can damage the reputation of a political party and raise questions about their credibility. 

Public figures also need to behave well all the time as they need to develop mutual trust. Successful public figures in the public eye need to build an image that shows they support family values. For example, the duke and duchess of Cambridge are always seen together with their kids. Many believe that the family is the picture of perfection, always upholding royal standards where even their kids have likely never been photographed crying. Despite being royals, their down to earth nature has made them famous among the commoners. On the same note, Leonardo DiCaprio has gained a huge fan following because of his image as a celebrity who takes care of the environment and animals. Even at the Oscars, DiCaprio chose to talk about environmental issues and won the hearts of millions. These examples illustrate how society expects public figures to be worthy and standing for all the right issues. Thus, public figures need to behave well all the time because they need to gain the trust of millions.

Public figures are looked up to by followers as role models and they need to behave well to set a good example. Public figures have a huge influence on people’s behaviour. Many look up to sportspersons, singers and actors as role models and emulate their behaviour. In such a case it is a moral duty of public figures to behave in an appropriate manner all the time so that they can have a positive impact on society. Singer Lorde, for instance, called out a Photoshopped image of herself on Twitter. With the image, she tweeted that it is important to remember that flaws are okay. Through this tweet, she influenced the body-image discussion for the better and promoted body positivity. On the other hand, celebrities like Kim Kardashian have faced severe backlash for selling and promoting products like, Appetite Suppressant Lollipops and have been accused of being a ‘toxic influence’ on youngsters who are impressionable and face the constant pressure of looking a certain way. Public figures need to realise that they have a responsibility towards society, as their followers would want to dress, act, be like them. Therefore, it is necessary for public figures to behave well all the time because they can influence the behaviour and actions of people in society.

In conclusion, it can be said that celebrities should behave well most of the time because their behaviour can have positive and negative impacts. Public figures who seek the benefits of fame must be able to take the downside of public interrogation. Public figures hold huge power and thus are accountable for their behaviour which can negatively influence people around them and society at large. To say a celebrity is not responsible for his or her actions is saying that as human beings, our lives aren’t all somehow connected.