How Effective Has ONline Learning Been ?

                The covid-19 pandemic has been challenging for everyone , especially the education sector . Schools and colleges have been shut for almost two years , education is taking place exclusively online , this exclusivity has lead to people asking is such education effective .

Even though online courses have been out there even before COVID they have come into the public's eyes much more during the pandemic , and they are asking that is it the same as teaching where the teacher is present infront of the student , to put it bluntly no 

A major aspect of teaching is the interaction not just between the student and the teacher but between the students themselves which unfortunately has been missing due to the pandemic .

But saying that online education is worthless would not only just be wrong but also is highly ignorant .

 For students who were preparing for entrance exams the pandemic has been a blessing in disguise , the pandemic for them restricted them from wasting their times leading to better marks . This can be clearly seen in the improved results of students in the joint entrance exam (JEE) and especially the national eligibility cum entrance test (NEET)in which students for the first time scored a perfect 720 during COVID 

In the end COVID led to a alot of hurdles , education being one of them but saying that it was totally ruined would be wrong , but yes it was aversely affected

Is politics responsible for unemployment?

Politicians nowadays are bending over backwards to please the minorities by giving them reservations in jobs , education and other so called ‘supplements’ but all this achieves is social imbalance and instabilities such as unemployment  . this is because less hard working people are  preferred over those who need the job more or are more suitable for it.
This is not the only way  in which politics has left people jobless , politics for the most part follows dynastic succession which more often than not leads to only a few friendly businessmen and businesses benefiting and have a monopoly over the market and others competitors being ruined  this not only leads to the business Being  in shambles but also but his employs or anyone who depended on his or her business for income unemployed . This leads to an even bigger problem an in creased crime rate . Just to fill their families stomachs un jobless people resort to less than legitimate ways for  money sometimes even involving their families  which leads to even more chaos along with social and political unitability  .
Unemployment also leads to personal issues such as a feeling of worthlessness or being a burden on others such a feeling develops into depression which if not treated leads to over burdening of our already inadequate healthcare system    which could have been avoided if not for our narcissistic and selfish representatives .  But still this phenomena seems to be on the rise as no one in politics wants to become the bad person in this bonanza we call "democracy"and lose out on votes

Gandhivad : irrelevant?

No longer are the principles of Gandhi or Gandhivad suitable for today’s era , where a country’s stand in the world is decided by their nuclear arsenal rather than it’s people or how developed it is . Gone are the days when criminals could be persuaded by love but they can still be disciplined by action . And the data backs it up , showing that more than 60% of all acquitted criminals who are thought to have been changed by counseling alone and up back  behind bars .
Today companies are running countries , controlling their economies . Cooperates that can not be convinced by dialogs but can still be forced to play by the rules . This was seen in the recent Facebook scandal where the platform was warned time and again against its malicious use of the user’s data but the social juggernaut only stopped once the matter was brought to court and the company was scared of losing its market value . Showing that in today’s time dialog alone isn’t enough to solve all our problems .
Gandhi’s ideals are also filled with chauvinistic ideology . Gandhi proclaimed that women could never be equal to men , which is not only unacceptable now but was immoral even back when Gandhi was alive . This just goes to show that the ideals whose relevancy is being contested were formed by a sexist hypocrite who did not follow his own preachings of equality for all
 Gandhi’s ideals may be principles to live by but they are not the solution to our problems

Children should not sue their parents for religious indoctrination

A major reason why parents indoctrinate their children into the same religion as them is so that their children will have the same outlook , values and mind set as themselves. Which according to them is necessary in a  society in order to attain some sort of social stability and thus balancing their needs to be  groups of  people with the same ideas, believes and agendas. Therefore in today's time where everyone is just looking out for themselves that agenda has taken the form of religion, where people with same beliefs and somewhat a common ground form a religion to bring people with the same ideas and thoughts together. Furthermore it has been seen all around the world that countries with a single dominant religion have a more stable society than  those with religious diversity. Take for instance western Europe which is predominantly Christian and is far ahead of a secular country like India in almost every conceivable way . If this common ground amongst the groups is lost than it is almost certain that the construction of our society will start falling apart. Another argument that can be made here is that it is the job of a parent to educate his or her child/children with morals and other essential values which in most cases is done through the means of religious indoctrination. So even if one argues that religious indoctrination is immoral and a social evil then the point can be raised that it is an evil necessary for us to construct a society

Moreover it is the duty of a parent to guide their child when they are not mature enough to understand the world around them and also when they can easily be influenced by anything or anyone. So in order to protect them these measures are taken by the parents even if it means becoming the bad person in the eyes of their offspring, that doesn't mean that children should sue their parents which only leads to strain in the parent child dynamic

Media does not influence trials

It is the job of the judiciary to interpret the laws set in place by the legislature, to carry out justice. The judiciary can do this only if it acts as an independent body away from the influence of all the other functionaries of the government and external bodies. The judiciary has proven time and again that it is capable of working in such a manner take for instance the judgement of our supreme Court delivered in 1978 in menka Gandhi's case. In this judgement the interpretation of article 21 in respect of life and personal liberty of a person , not only contrary to the intention of our constituent assembly went on to broaden its scope to include even right to education and right livelihood. This law was appreciated not only in our country but all over the globe. In this scenario one can not say that our judiciary is not independent and works under the influence of any other authority like media.
in democratic society it is the role of the media to present everything that it has attained through it's own methods which may or may not be ethical to the judiciary but the motive of the media is to boost its trp in the easiest way possible whereas the role of the judiciary is to listen to everything presented in front of it and its motive is to interpret the information in such a way that it can provide an unbiased and unquestionable verdict.
Moreover one could argue that media is influenced by the judiciary as some high ranking individuals of the judicial system control or have ties with media outlets and influence their broadcasting to such a manner that it justifies the stance of the judiciary and the judge which sometimes to an outside observer may look as if the media influenced the verdict of the judiciary. This was seen in the farkhunda mob murder where the media presented the situation in such a manner that the viewer felt as if the media were the ones to discover this hanous crime but the actual scenario was that the court was already prosecuting the mob leaders and to make the Afghani judiciary look good in the eyes of the public the already low profile, on going case was making headlines almost 2 months later . In this case the viewer might have felt that the media had influenced the judiciary in prosecuting the mob leader rather the contrary was correct that the judiciary to put itself in a good light had influenced the media into broadcasting the incident