Shankar Venkataraman - Who Owns the World?. Smokers or Non-smokers

SMOKERS OR NONSMOKERS?

ISBN : 978-981-08-5765-3

P RODUCE OF I N10CITY

July-2010

Good Heavening Listeners! Welcome to 33.3 IM Readio, the one and only radio on print! As the free spirited RJs get high on ideas, we have now brought out the cigarette pack and tossed it around for the smokers to have a huff and a puff, and take a break. However, the confusion came about as there was no specific smoking area, and the nonsmokers objected to the smokers smoking in their midst!

WHO OWNS THE WORLD?
SMOKERS OR NONSMOKERS?

Come join us as we indulge in our own individual rights to smoke or not to smoke, and whether it is fair to be dictated by the authorities to confine us in areas of smoking or nonsmoking zones, when it was the authorities who authorized the manufacture of the very product that they now discriminate its users? Is it fair to frown upon the smokers and impose penalties due to their habit?

While smokers claim that it has a calming effect and its actually enjoyable, the nonsmokers debate the fact that the true face of smoking is disease, death and horror and not so much the glamour and sophistication the pushers in the tobacco industry try to portray.

So do we really need politics here to decide what is good and exciting in ones life? Or is it just propaganda that we are all being brainwashed into thinking that it is indeed bad? And if it is that bad, why isnt it banned? Or are we criminalizing the herb? Can it actually be beneficial? Anything in moderation is good, when used wiselyso have we actually missed out on connecting the fine dots here?

Who exactly owns the world then? Smokers or nonsmokers? Can you find a good enough reason to justify the actions of both the smokers as well as the nonsmokers? Or are we just rebellious, selfish beings on earth that will do what we do, in spite of knowing full well that what we do may actually be harmful to us and others! Where do we as individuals stand.....? Which side of the coin do you belong to? Listen on to find out....

DO YOU MIND THE SMOKE OR DO YOU NOT MIND THE SMOKE?

I believe that we, as human beings, are blessed with the ability to weigh the pros and cons of ingesting any kind of substance into our system. Therefore, we should be given the right to decide if we wish to poison our bodies with harmful substances like cigarettes. In my opinion, government-imposed penalties such as taxes and so on stem from capitalist greed and NOT the sincere desire to save our lives or create a healthier society as the facade has depicted.

Smokers are being oppressed in a way because they have to pay extra to enjoy their addiction, and the government benefits from imposing this punishment. The benefits of these extra monetary impositions are that they might actually prove effective in reducing or eliminating smoking habits in spite of the intentions. It is just like celebrity-fronted charity where superstars donate to the poor to enhance their public image, but the benefactors receive the help they need anyway.

We should not treat smokers like outcasts, but I definitely believe that if they wish to reduce their health, they should do it in a segregated area for smokers so they dont pollute the environment or cause damage to the health of nonsmokers. The government is definitely doing the right thing by designating certain areas as nonsmoking zones because the rest of us should not have to be burdened by the consequences of those who wish to ingest poison into their system. Yes, this definitely means that smokers will be treated like social outcasts, but it is a necessary evil because secondary smoke is physically dangerous to nonsmokers as well as the smokers themselves. The smokers, however, choose to consume the cigarette. The nonsmoking members of the public do not.

I believe in choice but unfortunately this means that people will have the choice to pick their poison and destroy themselves. If the government was sincere about stopping smoking it would not collect taxes on cigarettes for its own capitalist gains but then again a government that cares is merely a fantasy. The future in my opinion will consist of the same fence sitting, money grabbing government and the same cigarette glamorizing media.

We all pay taxes, and the reality of it is that we have to pay them in order to enjoy anything material these days. The government should not impose taxes on anything in my opinion because it is your right to smoke yourself to death if you want to, but that does not mean you are oppressed. You will not die without a cigarette, and the reality is that you will be healthier. But because you choose to smoke, therefore engaging in a nonnecessity, you have to pay the fine whether you like it or not. This is the same with people dining at restaurants with service tax payable and so on. No, I dont believe in going up to a smoker and deliberately being hostile to him or her because he smokes because it is his or her life, and I simply do not care. But I will not want to be around smokers, and I will express disgust if they were smoking in a nonsmoking area because they are simply being selfish. My point regarding smokers is that if you wish to kill yourself, thats your choice, but please refrain from killing others.

We cannot stop the media from glamorizing cigarettes because the media is a corporation-run capitalist propaganda machine, and we cannot ask the government to ban smoking completely because people should be free to choose as long as they are not physically endangering others. The only way we can save the future generation from ashes is to educate them on the workings of the facade that is our media as well as the harmful effects of smoking. They will then be able to make the choice that they choose by weighing the information they have been given against their desire to de-stress via poison or assimilating with the cool crowd.

Wow, this is a great topic. In fact, I was beginning to miss posting on new topics, so thank you, RJ Fox, for opening this new topic for discussion.

Yes, I absolutely agree with RJ Melancholetta that it is up to the individual to choose whether he wants to smoke or not. The government allocating certain areas as nonsmoking is good as well.

However, what I do not understand is that the government makes a big fuss about all this and even bans tobacco sales up to a radius or circumference of a certain distance from school and college premises and so on. But how is it that the tobacco companies are not being shut down?

In India, there is a new rule where if you are found smoking in public areas, you are fined Rs. 500, and all bars and pubs are nonsmoking areas. What the people do is stand outside and smoke. I suppose only the bar, the restaurant or the room is considered a public area and not the open ground or road

I feel that people are biased towards Smokers. The people who dont smoke generally tend to give a very nasty look to those who smoke especially if the smoker is a girl.