destiny

When Some failures can not be undone.. with a smile, one comes to terms with destiny’s will..

    destiny

 

Will always miss the lost chance

Inadequate without my lost dream

Reality strikes leaving an uneasy stance.

This nonchalance is self taught

A trained acceptance one concedes to

Like a defeated soldier just home brought.

The trophy of victory why ought I not

Spent considerable thought plenty a tears

Yet with invincible conviction the fighter’s fought.

Mind like a recuperated bird flies higher in unabashed grit

Life anew when experiences the spirit

Befriending destiny’s will- a door shut forever

Fails to fade the enthusiasm in the soldier.

what to write.. creative flight

Creative flight

pick up my laptop start afresh

open a new document write anew

the mind videography as real as blood n flesh

thoughts galore which one do I pen?

The mind sojourn- whatever direction..

Might bend- Taj or garden of Eden.

Some make thy frustrated some make thy anguished

Some inspirational ; some deject

All inhabiting within.. who knows when shall appear

.. amidst the  brainstorm,must i recall those i routinely forget..?

Theory behind Economic Crises

Economic Crises –(as understood by Sweezy and Anwar Sheikh)

Crises are extraordinarily complicated phenomena- shaped to a greater or lesser extent by a wide variety of economic forces. As per Marx crises could be explained only by production, competition and credit. however his work on the subject remained unfinished. Therefore much time and energy has been devoted to decode the theory behind crises.

Simple commodity production and crises.

Barter system was C-C i.e commodity for commodity.(as against C-M-C circuit for a developed commodity production system) purpose of money is to split the act of exchange into 2 parts- in time and in space. By allowing such flexibility to parties- producer and buyer we can say that use of money makes productivity possible.  Organization of production in this way carries the risk of a crisis. As a result of the crisis , coexistence of stocks of unsaleable commodities and unsatisfied wants emerges. Every producer has produced more than he can sell.vis a vis economic scarcity here for the first time we see a crisis of overproduction. Overproduction is a result of crisis and not the cause for the same. The idea is to explore why the produce was not bought. Possibility of external factors like wars, natural disasters etc. is ruled out since these occurrences lead to crisis of acute shortage rather than one of unsaleable surpluses.

Hoarding is a possible explanation- however this is a gradual process which can be offset by an adequate increase in the supply of money commodity otherwise can even lead the economy into a depression via effect on circulation and hence production.

We can conclude that under simple commodity production, barring external factors- wars and crop failures, crises are possible but rather unlikely. (since it is based on C-M-C i.e production is undertaken basically for consumption and because consumption is a continuous process there is little chance of the there being a crisis.)

Say’s Law which states that a sale is invariably followed by a purchase of equal amount – there can be no interruption of the circulation C-M-C , hence no crisis and no overproduction. Say’s law further establishes it into an impossibility- of crisis in a simple commodity mode of production. This law hoever barred the way to a theory of crises and led to fragmentary, unrelated contributions to the subject by economists. Marx for this reason devoted much attention to a detailed criticism of the law. He wanted to clear the way for a later analysis for the cause of crises in commodity mode of production by removing all doubts about the existence of crises and overproduction. He ridiculed Ricardo’s theory of impossibility of overproduction as “childish”.

Actually one does not have to buy just because one has sold. Sale and purchase are separated by time and space.  

The circulation form C-M-C which is characteristic of simple commodity production, turns into M-C-M’ under capitalism. This is the fundamental difference between the two. For the former, the purpose is the acquisition of use value and not the enhancement of exchange value. (that is why simple commodity production is production for consumption and it explains the unlikelihood of crisis and overproduction).

Under capitalism with M-C-M’ being the dominant form of circulation we see that the capitalist is money oriented with M and M’ both representing exchange value (no use value). Purpose of the entire procedure is to have a quantitative difference between the two i.e a positive (M’-M). therefore expansion of value becomes the subjective aim. Capitalism is production for profit and that is why capitalism is peculiarly susceptible to crises and overproduction. It can be said that C-M-C does not disappear with the coming of capitalism. Indeed for laborers etc. circulation continues to take this form (since his objective is to increase use value unlike the capitalists’ desire for appropriating more and more wealth). Therefore accumulation of the workers- savings banks, insurance etc. springs from the necessity to insure a smooth flow of use values to himself. This establishes that it is a falsity that in capitalism ever one is driven on by a desire to make profits. Also it is erroneous to suppose that everyone is interested in use values.

Relation b/w M-C-M’ and the crisis problem

The attention of the capitalist is focused on maximizing (M’-M)- not it’s absolute value but the value relative to magnitude of the original capital i.e (M’-M)/M. this fraction denotes the rate of profit. Therefore we say that the capitalist wants to maximize his rate of profit.

As far as the possibility of a crisis is concerned- the condition is same as that for simple commodity mode of production. Any interruption in the circulation process, any withholding of buying power from the mkt., can initiate a contraction in the circulation process which will give rise to overproduction and will soon be reflected in a curtailment of production itself.  The basic point of difference with the simple commodity mode of production is (M’-M)- which is responsible for contraction in capitalism.

Two cases for consideration-

1)      (M’-M) disappears or becomes negative.- here the incentive for capitalist production is removed. Capitalists will withdraw their capital, circulation will contract and a crisis followed by overproduction will set in.

2)      (M’-M) falls- i.e there is a fall in the rate of profit. once it goes below the usual range, a curtailment of operations on the part of capitalists will set in. the reasons being-

1. Since capitalists are required to continually keep reinvesting,  the capitalists shift their capital out of an industry performing poorly into another one. However if the general scenario for all industries is bad then investment by capitalists will be postponed which will interrupt the circulation process. Result would be crisis and overproduction. Crisis is in fact part of the mechanism by which the rate of profit is restored either completely or partially to it’s previous level.
2. Capitalists when faced with abnormally low rate of profits, instead of holding on to their money capital would rather increase their personal consumption. The argument in this regard that the total dd for commodities would be unaffected and there would be no interruption of the circulation process is flawed however as pointed out by Marx. Since this reasoning does away with the most basic assumption of capitalism- capitalists’ never-ceasing urge to accumulate capital. 

 

Crisis is an interruption of the circulation process induced by a decline in the rate of profit below its usual level.  Modern Business-Cycle theory concludes that capitalist class comprises two sections-

a)      Entrepreneurs- org and direct the process of production.

b)      Money capitalists- ss the funds in the form of interest bearing loans, required by the former for their operations.

The entrepreneur finds it worthwhile to invest capital so long as the rate of profit which he receives is greater than the rate of interest which he is obliged to pay. As soon as the rate of profit falls below the rate of interest, the entrepreneur has no more motives to invest; circulation is interrupted, and a crisis ensues. The problem might seem to be high rates of interests but it must be acknowledged that capitalists prefer high rates (for loans to entrepreneurs) only because they have a higher preference for holding capital in money form. Moreover the capitalists are of the belief that lower rates of interest would be unlikely to last. They postpone lending activities until demand has picked up or till interest rates rise up again. If that doesn’t happen then the new lower rate of interest becomes the norm and capitalists resume their lending operations.

The refusal of money capitalists to lend to entrepreneurs at interest rates below what is regarded as normal is essentially the same as the refusal of capitalist entrepreneurs to invest when the rate of profit falls below the usual range. The capitalist class contracts its investment activities when the rate of return on capital sinks below a certain level. As per Marx this behavior springs from the most fundamental characteristics of capitalist production and not from the form in which the supply and use of capital funds is organized. i.e the modern business cycle theory suggests that even in the absence of institutional arrangements that give rise to a money mkt. and a rate of interest, capitalist production would still be subject to crises brought on by fluctuations in the rate of profit.

No amount of tampering with the monetary system can be expected to do away with capitalist crises. The main reason is the falling rates of profit and the reasons responsible for the same are-

1)      Crisis associated with the falling tendency of rate of profit- process of capital accumulation.

2)      Realization crises

The law of falling rate of profit expresses the results of Marx’s analysis of capitalist accumulation: periods of accelerated growth are necessarily followed by periods of decelerating growth.

Eg. The great depression of 1930s and acc to some Marxists the capitalist world once again hovers on the brink.

There is a difference b/w a generalized economic crises and shorter term cyclical fluctuations such a s business cycles or partial crises caused by crop failures, monetary disturbances etc. business cycles and partial crises are explained by more concrete factors.

The main driving force behind capitalist activity- the desire for profits, makes the individual capitalist battle on two fronts:

1)      In the labor process- against labor over the production of surplus value. Here Mechanization emerges as the dominant form to increase the production of surplus value.

2)      Circulation process- against other capitalists in the realization of surplus value in the form of profits. Here Reduction of unit production costs/ cost prices emerges as the principal weapon of competition. And this can be achieved by more advanced methods of production – larger, more capital intensive plants that lower unit production costs.

Now, for more advanced methods :

a)      the higher capitalization (capital advanced per unit o/p) implies higher unit non labor costs- ‘c’ (unit constant capital)

b)      higher productivity implies lower unit labor costs ‘v’ (unit variable capital)

on balance, the unit production cost must decline ( c+v) so that the latter effect must more than offset the former- fall in ‘v’> rise in ‘c’ . diminishing returns set in when limits of existing knowledge and technology are reached  and subsequent increases in investment per unit o/p will call forth ever smaller reductions in unit production costs.  This implies lower rate of profit hence a falling general rate of profit.

Various counteracting influences act to slow down and even temporarily reverse the falling rate of profit-

a)      higher intensity of exploitation

b)      lower wages

c)       cheaper constant capital

d)      growth of relatively low organic composition industries

e)      import of cheap wage goods or means of production

f)       Migration of capital to areas of cheap labor and natural resources.

A falling rate of profit leads to a generalized crisis through its effect on the mass of profit. In an economy with invested capital, any fall in the rate of profit reduces the mass of profit, accumulation on the other hand adds to the stock of capital so long as the new capital’s rate of profit is positive. The strength of the 2 effects determines the movement of the total mass of profit.

Necessity theories-

Marx’s theory of falling rate of profit is the principal necessity theory. He explains the occurrences of crises through internal factors based on the movement of potential rate of profit.

(it talks about the fall in rate of profit).

Capitalism comprises of two objectives-

1)      Profit increasing motive- can be achieved by increasing productivity of labor with wage cuts etc.

2)      Surplus value increase motive- can be achieved by reducing production cost.

The two can be achieved with fixed capital. But the use of the same lowers the rate of profit (as increased investment helps one- i.e. the large firm to reduce costs but for the system as a whole- average rate of profit falls- emerges as the dominant tendency).

Effect on investment- due to decline in rate of profit, ‘long wave’ in the mass of total potential profit- first accelerates then decelerates and stagnates. Investment fall implies productivity growth falls (real wages increase relative to productivity). Effects of crisis of profitability:- under consumption and wage squeeze.

System’s natural recovery- each general crisis precipitates wholesale destruction of weaker capitals and intensified attacks on labor (wage cuts etc.), which help restore accumulation by increasing centralization and concentration by increasing overall profitability.

 But in capitalist world, problems of stagnation and worldwide unemployment worsen over time. (due to the cycle- profit followed by lower long term rate of profit and growth). These problems arise from capitalist accumulation itself (not from insufficient competition/ excessive wages) and therefore cannot be ‘managed away by state intervention’.

Politics cannot and will not command the system unless it is willing to recognize that the capitalist solution to a crisis requires an attack on the working class and that the socialist in turn requires an attack on the system itself.

Possibility theory

Can be split into:-

1)      Under consumption theory

2)      Wage squeeze theory

Under consumption theory: (money value of product= wages+ profit) .since wages are less then value of the product, consumption for workers is never sufficient to buy back the product-leading to a demand gap. And greater the share of profits, greater the demand gap (since lower the wages). Gap is filled somewhat by capitalists’ consumption but bulk of their income is saved not consumed- i.e. ‘leakage’. If this saved income (leakage) is not used to fill the demand gap part of the product wouldn’t be sold, such that whole system contracts till profits fall so low that capitalists are forced to consume all their income. This implies no Investment and no growth. Therefore economy is predisposed toward stagnation.

how about filling the demand gap not by consumption but by investment? Yes that could happen with demand for plant and equipment and the greater this demand greater the production level and employment.

We see two contrary forces- Savings and Investment. The former leads to stagnation and the latter leads to expansion.

Possibilities for investment depend on-

1)      Foundation- for large scale commerce and trade. i.e. when hegemony of capitalist nation allows it political and economic  stability.

2)      Fuel for large scale Investment- i.e. when new products, new markets, new technologies- all coincide.

Both 1) and 2) determine growth.

Impact of monopoly power?

It restricts output, increases prices and redistributes income in their (monopolists’) favor at the expense of workers and small capitalists.

Therefore these large capitalists- get more and save more and restrict investment in their own industry to keep prices high. And profits imply demand gap increases (Investment opportunities fall) and stagnation is unavoidable.

Sweezy says- monopoly capitalism- post war witnessed secular boom and absence of stagnation is explained by (countervailing factores)-

a)      Post war US hegemony

b)      New products and technology

c)       Military expenditures

To overcome stagnation-

Keynesian Economics- the State (through its own spending or through its stimulation of pvt. Spending) can achieve socially desired o/p and employment level. Therefore the state shall determine, finally, laws of motion of capitalist economy.

Under Consumptionists- agree on the view given above. But they say it isn’t currently practical since the world is characterized by Monopoly not Competition. And monopoly increases capitalism’s tendency toward stagnation and the state counters it by stimulating Aggregate Demand. (but monopolists respond by increasing prices and not by increasing o/p or employment). Result is- stagflation (of stalemate b/w state power and monopoly power) and if state retreats- it results in recession/ depression.

Therefore, Crisis is essentially a political event, due to unwillingness of the state to tackle monopolies.

Keynesian theory claims that the state has the economic capability to manage the capitalist sytem and both- crisis and the recovery from it. These are political questions towards which this capability is applied.

Therefore monopolies can be controlled via-

1)      Price controls

2)      Regulation

3)       Forceful economic planning

These will break the back of inflation. Along with these measures- increased social welfare expenditure and increased wages. These benefit the working class and the capitalist system as a whole.

Wage Squeeze Theory

Link general crisis to a sustained fall in the rate of profit- i.e. when wages increase, working hours fall – there is a decline in the rate of surplus value. Marx says that this leads to decline in rate of profit. Technological change increases rate of profit (in absence of changes in real wages). Increase in rate of profit leads to Investment boom. Profit to wage ratio increases and monopoly power increase exacerbate the demand gap. This displays tendency of stagnation. He state can offset this.

Wage squeeze theory looks for increasing real wages more than increasing the productivity as evidence that it is labor- behind crisis. Proponents of this theory are- Roemer, Bowles, Armstrong and Glyn.

Kalecki gives the argument – state intervention turns an under consumption theory into a wage squeeze.

The state can engineer a recovery from (workers’ excessive wage increase induced crisis) if both workers and capitalists make sufficient concessions and display moderation. Here also the State is endowed with the power (which is characteristic of possibility theory).

The bottom line of the two theories is that- Politics can command capitalism.

 

 

 

Armed Forces Aspirant

how i find myself amidst this rainy city!

my being here; perhaps an inspiration..

headed toward the destination of my destiny..

a calling from within- the magnetism of inclination.

 

My pursuit of a life that is so lived- down the ages

a child raised proud among the family hierarchy..

fragments of memoirs somewhere in pieces of pages

subtly determine me to ‘touch the sky with glory’ .

 

)

 

life loyalist..

“life is a petty thing …unless moved by the indomitable urge to extend its boundaries”.

 

life is a globe trotter’s breath- that breathes into her being ,her very raison d’etre of existence. life is a gateway of options that allow one the luxury to choose how she would want to sign out from the world road.

it gives her purpose- it shines on her like her guiding light and strengthens her enough to believe in her calling. if she wants she can rise up and fly!

life entrusts her with the option of choosing to live it a certain way.

and she wants the best! she’s hungry for life- she desires all  of life-all that life can offer her in the lifetime. more life- more living.

life is music. her emotions swing to the beats in the melody. to the lyrics, her heart beats. it soothes her aching muscles- the music of life.

she wants to be alive and feel life in her moments of pain and joy; in failure and victory. she wishes to breathe life into her struggle to live  what beholds her prized future.

i’m a life loyalist and i shall never let go of any opportunity to live a little more than the ticks of the clock allow. in the given time that I tread the world, in the en devours I pursue, in the dreams I dream- my life will be mirrored.

after all, the destination of this backpacker is the treasured testimony of a life lived to the fullest!

Sunrise I Dream (women emancipation)

SUNRISE I DREAM

I’m an individual

Who refuses to be identified as ‘woman’

Stereotyping me is foolish not cruel.

With resilience that I epitomize

Defining life- pearls of mankind

That I not only wear but also bear.

Associated with pious love -affection unfathomable

Like stars reflected in ocean waters in innumerable nights

My concern and love- formidable.

Damsel, dame- damn names you call me

Idolizing my sexuality and pitching us sisters against each other

Each rated like some commodity.

Aspirations to conquer the world

Thrive as much in me

As the devotion of the shore to meet the sea.

What does that have to do with me being a ‘woman’?

But for the organs I’m born with

The unfortunate human is appetite for demon.

Remember- appreciate the orchid of humanity

Separating mother from child is no sin… it’s treachery!

The flower abandoned by its fragrance would be nature’s penury.

film review- Bhaag Milka Bhaag

what an inspirational piece of art! it’s the masterpieces like these that earn the industry of ‘entertainment’ a good name.raising the standards manifold.

the film is a biopic on the life of Indian Sports legend- Milkha Singh. it traces his journey from an ordinary man with expectations of earning a decent living as an Army man to one that gets him the coveted title of the ‘flying Sikh’.

his life path (of joining the Army) is not only a materialization of his childhood aspirations but is actually a step in direction of his destiny as a world class athlete. all of it which seemingly begins as a gateway to enjoy the few perks an Army recruit can afford- a glass full of milk being reason enough for Milkha.

only later to be revealed in the depth of his roots- there’s a traumatic loss of his homeland and his family to the brutalities of the ’47 partition. the one he narrowly survives as a kid but is suppressed enough for long to cost him the Olympic Gold (’60) . this agony that he carries for many years in his life – the anguish and the scar from childhood resurfaces everytime he hears the fateful words- ‘bhaag Milkha bhaag’.

these words are his weakness; symbolic of the internal conflict he battles within a happy go lucky persona. the story is about this mental ordeal of our protagonist that ends when Milkha finds himself on the other side of the border- knelt down and wept his heart out on the very land that was once his home. ‘circumstances are bad, not people’ , pacifies his long lost friend from the good old times, times burdened under the devastating setback. (but it’s almost like time stood still all this while- the reunion of the friends separated by borders is heartwarming. this friend has framed Milkha on his wall).

the fabric portraying the rise of the man- destined to be iconic, is the multifarious canvas of -Sport. milkha’s sport- Running.

the depiction of the narrative through the devotion, unwavering focus and the aweinspiring preparation to beat the world record is a class act! one that leaves you speechless. the screen seems small to capture the devout motivation towards the accomplishment of the goal. it moved a part of me.

yes. the man tastes the fruit of the rigorous training- creating history and making a record of his own. and true to a biopic, the protagonist isn’t made into a ‘hero’. after you win some you loose some. every race can not be won. in everyday life we battle with our internal conflicts. some latent ,some destructive. what matters is where you face them and when you defeat THEM. and no body else but the self can conquer these demons. like Milkha exemplified.

if life is a race, Milkha is a winner.

PS- Farhan Akhtar is the ultimate Milkha on screen. THA BEST!

Poverty- the social evil

“Poverty is the greatest of evils and worst of crimes.”

George Bernard Shaw

Poverty means the absence of resources for an individual that are otherwise enjoyed by others, it is the inability to realize ones full potential in society and the inability to confirm to standards of the society one inhabits. Also, by the pioneering work of Amartya Sen- povery is the concept of an absence of ‘capabilities’. Where poverty is to be seen as more than the mere inequality of incomes.

Poverty can be classified as income poverty, health poverty and relative poverty. a distinction between the variants is of importance in the formulation of policy measures to cope with the same problem.

Income poverty is the problem of inadequate income to provide for ones basic necessities- like food, clothing and housing.

Health poverty arises due to an unhealthy state of  the body on account of having not sufficient access to health care that renders one vulnerable to diseases.

Measures to tackle the same have lead to the eradication of certain epidemics like small pox from the world and to a great extent- polio rates have been brought down in India.

Relative poverty is a rather revolutionary concept that people miss out on in discussions about the plague of poverty. we define the same as the inability of an individual to live up to the norms of his society in any form – be it denied access to education or political participation. It could also be a denial of one’s full role in his society. When a person is unable to confirm to his societal norms and customs- such a person is ‘poor’. The above explanation can be understood in this context- take the case of a relatively rich country like the Unites States-  a country where most of the populace can cater for the basic necessities in life. However, a US citizen not owning a four wheeler must appear to be ‘poor’ in his society.

Policies must take cognizance of this differentiation and must thereby be carefully formulated so that tackling one issue does not aggravate the other. Eg- an effective policy measure to tackle a health hazard might incur a tax on the citizens. Though the policy would check health poverty however it would do so at the expense of aggravating income poverty.

Poverty is a pressing issue not only within countries but for the world as well. Therefore it comes as no surprise that the 1^st MDG (Millennium Development Goal) of the United Nations is eradication of poverty and hunger “to reduce by half the proportion of people whose income is less than 1 $ a day”.

The reason we concern ourselves with this issue and the means and ways to measure and tackle it is on grounds of the most basic of human rights- ‘the right to live’ – with dignity, respect and have hopes and aspirations which poverty destroys. However counteracting this plague begins with an appropriate definition of poverty and a precise measure that goes beyond the traditional ‘poverty lines’ and views it rather as a multidimensional concept encompassing the health and relative poverty concepts.

A case in point is the Planning Commission’s announced poverty line benchmark at 34 Rs/day has been widely criticized as being too unreasonably low. However a multidimensional perspective calls for action beyond a mere benchmark numerical figure. Such policies provide the Government ‘bang for the buck’ as they merely represent a head count of the poor – the lower the value each year the higher the claims of the Government of having reduced poverty. However such measures of head count ignore the ‘intensity’ of poverty and therefore can be said to be fundamentally flawed. Measures like the head count (HC) and the head count ratio (HCR) are archaic. These need to be replaced by other sophisticated measures like the income gap ratio IGR, poverty gap ratio (PGR) etc. which check this political issue of ‘bang for the buck’ policies. Another argument against the  HC and HCR etc. is the ‘Micawber Problem’ – where “income twenty shillings, expanses 19 shillings and 6 pence result happiness. Income- 20 shillings, expenses 2 shillings and 6 pence, result- misery”. A tiny difference making such a huge difference is irrational and most Government policies who wish to be seen as reducing poverty incur measures to lift the just-near-poverty-line individuals at the expense of those far below the poverty line thereby rendering them worse off.

Therefore we say that poverty lines are as much political as scientific constructs. And the measure of poverty is a multidimensional concept analogous to the multidimensionality of ‘growth’ which is seen not only in GDP terms but also in HDI terms.

 

 

 

Tanesha Chaudhary

 

References-

Angus Deaton, “Measuring Poverty”

Amartya Sen, “Poverty as Capability Deprivation”

Debraj Ray, ‘ Poverty Measures and correlates’.

to live a complete sunday !

That day of the week we love to wait for. the count down for which begins just after it’s barely over. the Savior that gives one the strength to sail through the week. the day synonymous with the holiday we most eagerly await…is none other than Sunday!!

ironical, that once we awaken ourselves to the sunday morning, the pleasure of spending a leisurely day is marred in thought of the impending week that commences with the inglorious ‘blues’.

isn’t this little chunk of our daily lives a reflection of the mindset we carry throughout our lifetime! thought provoking indeed. depends on oneself whether she allows the happiness in her prime be a subordinate to the anxiety of an obscure tomorrow. for all you might know it’s a paradise in waiting! even otherwise, say- ‘bring it on’!

well, for the monday morning blues- those i shall procrastinate till the last snooze 😉

dilemma#2. awakening

a new chapter of life had begun.. i found myself living the dream i had envisioned myself in. college! delhi university. i was going bonkers trying to make the transition from a schoolkid to a happening college goer! and what follows with it- makeovers- of both- self and wardrobe. handbags and shoes preoccupied my time and my mum my companion for the same. dreamy isn’t it. yes, because i failed to take cognizance of the raison d e’tre  of my presence there.

while i effortlessly managed to get the ‘miss in vogue’ attention but try as much as i did i had not made a successful transition in my attitude towards life. the realization of this purposelessness came as a rude shock after a poor academic score at the end of my college first year. perhaps i got to eat the sweet fruit without having to work towards it and hence didn’t realize the importance of the coveted seat i occupied. life had come full circle and my college happiness so far seemed an ephemeral mirage. more than my parents, more than my dear uncle and aunt’s dis approvals, more than any college mentor’s remarks – my inner self was wounded afresh with the plunged self confidence. i was crying again. as serves right to one escapist. i had lost faith in my ability to carry on any further in this new subject that i had ‘blundered’ to pursue. to the extent that i seriously considered switching to another ‘easier’ subject to get rid of economics once and for all.

reminiscing my escapism i exclaim at my irresoluteness. i wonder where i’d be today had my mum not shown me the mirror at face value! the reflection i saw couldn’t cut any bit over a sorry figure. that moment was momentous. thereon i knew it was time for me to anchor my adrift life boat. at this time i took up running- as a resort to take out my agony on the road. soon i became an avid runner and found peace in it.

persistence found me or i discovered it. i was cautious and deep inside worried if my efforts would bare fruit. indeed they did! i scored a massive improvement at the end of my second year of college- i had gone from a 53% to 67% and i was elated with the feeling.

in the final year of college my parents had shifted out of town- away from home away from my pillars of support i found myself in a hostel. this was the place i rediscovered myself again. my perspective towards many a things changed. i really missed my parents. this was the time i realized the worth of the values they’d raised me with. i became a better person. nevertheless i doubted my academic credentials still. this was my final year at college- the last chance to prove myself.

awesome times were spent at the place- each moment most memorable. gem of friends and hostel fun and parties. all only worked in favor of my resolve to deliver an encore of my last year’s performance. i tried being confident of my ability, but deep inside uncertainty troubled me. i wrote each exam with devout sincerity. later i would engage myself in calculating the odds of a good score to pacify myself. all of this attained gigantic heights before result time.

the judgement time approached us and my parents were back in town. what i saw in my score card brought tears of joy in my parents’ eyes. i had scored a whopping 70% !!

with a performance so impressive i had undone the blot of the 1st year but the lesson that the year tought me- due to which i saved myself- is precious. it stands testimony to the adage- everything happens for the best. i have regained my lost self confidence. i am convinced that ‘I can’ as long as i never give up!