Saturday, October 16, 2010
how often have we witness people of high authority or/and power promoting the mantra "give the voiceless a voice"
it definitely sounds very noble but have we thought about the implications and responsibility such a statement carries.
Who are they exactly targeting when they make such a noble promise.
Do they really have the intent of giving a voice to the voiceless, or is it a mere self-serving propaganda to win the hearts of the people.
So who exactly are these voiceless people they claim to be able to give voice to?
Is someone who once had a voice but was silenced after certain circumstances (such as countless failed attempts) fall into this category of the voiceless? (or does he/she fall in the category of the silenced)
It embodies much more than just allowing the voiceless and the silenced to speak.
They can have a voice. But is that all you are promising? Just giving them a voice?
What difference does it make, when the voiceless has spoken but it falls on death ears.
Give voice to the voiceless, but are you willing to listen?
voicing and listening is no one way communication, it requires action.
Before we fall victim to making such a promise to others in future, lets think of the implications, its definitely more than just having a voice.
