Getting White-collar Job in Competitive India

Getting White-collar Job in Competitive India

Is that easy today to get a white-collar job in today’s competitive world? Today we may need to know something more than just dreaming to get a white-collar job. In antique if you passed Class I or II – you can become a teacher in Primary School. If you are a graduate – you can become a Head of the institution or get a white-collar job without much sweat and brain. In India till late 1980s, specialization in any field or subject was not the main criteria to get a white-collar job. But after 1990s, the job situation in India had gradually changed. Today, just getting a degree cannot help you to get a white-collar job. In this corrupted society – we also need some important attributes to get a white-collar job

.1. Specialization in the subject: Today in every government and private company – specialization in the subject/field became one of the most important criteria to get any job. Today without specialized in any subject or field – there is not any chances to get a white-collar job. Here specialization does not mean taking up a major subject without proper knowledge in that particular subject but to be expert in that particular subject. Today in India, there are many MBBS, MBA, Engineering students, IAS aspirants and many other students in different professional and non-professional courses. Today just passing MBA, MBBS, Engineering or getting Doctorate degree is nothing to do or difficult to get any white-collar job without specialization or expert in their own fields or subjects.

2. Good Personality: In addition to specialization in any particular subject – the personality of a person became another important criterion to get a white-collar job. In every interview for new job seekers – the knowledge of that particular subject is screened and personality of that person is examined. We may have good knowledge in our particular subject but there are also many other candidates who have same knowledge. A pleasant personality with good knowledge in that particular subject is desirable. There are too many candidates who are eligible with good knowledge and pleasant personality. Today a good personality is a must and we need to learn to have good personality for getting a white-collar job.

3. Money Power: You are a knowledgeable person with a pleasant personality. But do you have money to pay for your white-collar job. If you have got money then why do you want to work? Today, not only specialization in the subject with pleasant personality – you may also need money to pay for your works to be done on time. The rich people are becoming richer day by day because money plays an important role in every aspects of our life. If you go through unfairly by paying bribe in interview, you have better chances to get a job. If you pay something to the interviewers – the interviews will never ask you any difficult question that will disappoint you. But purchasing a job is one of the most corrupted task or criminal act. Some of the rich parents purchased job for their sons or daughter, which is one of the worst evil acts in our society. Some time jobs are purchased by rich people and those capable people willing to work are frustrated, which lead to take up undesirable job or some other criminal acts.

4. Political Influence: You are specialized in your subject with a pleasant personality. Of course you also have money if need to be paid. But where do you pay or bribe without the political influence. In this corrupted political society – you need a very influential political leader. You may no need to pay bribe but you need some one to influence the recruiter or interviewer. In today’s corrupted society – your money and political influence is equally important as you have good personality and expert in the field. We may be expert with good personality but we can be put to shame by asking very difficult questions during the interview. As not one is perfect or have thorough knowledge in any subject – the interviewers can ask difficulty question that will put you down. However, if you pay the interviewer through a corrupted political leader or influential person – you are sure to be selected if you have got good personality and knowledgeable in your particular subject.

Today, to get a white-collar job in state or central government – we need to have thorough knowledge (expert), a pleasant personality, money and political influence. There are many people who are specialized in their field with a pleasant personality. However due to lack of political influence, they were landed into disappointment. Today we may need the above four attributes that will help us to get a white-collar job in many states and central job. Even if we don’t have the above four attributes, we should have at least have first two attributes. Once I was on my way from Delhi to Pune. Inside the train, I met a student who is doing MBA from IIM. He is acting over smart because he is doing MBA from IIM. Then I told him, “I appreciated that you are doing MBA from a re-known institute. But you should be specialized (expert) in your particular course – otherwise you will become another salesman in the market” Then I also told him that there are too many MBAs who are passed out students without getting any desirable job; it is not necessary that you will get a white-collar job because you are doing MBA from IIM. After listening what I told him, his facial appearance suddenly changed. Some people may think that if we have good political influence or money power – we can get a good job. But unless we meet the minimum criteria for the job – we cannot get job practically.

Many people are frustrated because of the corrupted political influence and money power. But we have the other ways too to get white-collar job. Regardless of all the political and money influence – we need to work harder to specialize in our own field and have a good personality so that all the people who are depending on money and political influence may be put to shame. The political and money influence commenced due to mediocre sons and daughters of the politicians and rich people. But this may be possible to reduce when their sons and daughters study hard and have better personality and smart like other common people. R.B. Thohe Pou

On sovereignty and what the Naga struggle is all about

By- Kaka. D. Iralu

Having written about the Naga struggle for over nine years and having written over one thousand pages about it, some fellow Nagas (and perhaps even Indians) may already be fed up with me and my opinions. I am also quite aware that I have repeated myself on many occasions. However, allow me to once again express myself with the following article.

Yes, what is Sovereignty and the Naga struggle all about? Here I would like to emphatically restate again that our struggle is to be sovereign and Independent.

In other words, it is to be a nation among the nations of the world. This assertion on our part is based on irrefutable, historical, anthropological, political and legal facts that bind all nations on earth.

Now, on the basis of these universal facts, what is the meaning and implication of sovereignty and independence with relation to the Naga struggle?

In the present Naga context, though the ordinary Naga soldiers and villagers are quite clear as to what sovereignty is and what they are fighting for, our leaders on the other hand – both overgrounds as well as undergrounds – seem to be totally confused as to what sovereignty is all about.

For example some of our senior Nagaland (Indian) State politicians are now saying that sovereignty has changed its meaning over the years and that economic sovereignty has now overtaken the meaning of political sovereignty. They go on to say that in the peculiar North Eastern context, we have to redefine the meaning of sovereignty and adopt one that will suit our own context.

Then there are some of our national leaders who, despite the fact that India had invaded our sovereign lands in 1954, and despite the fact that ever since, a foreign Indian flag and Burmese flag have been flying over our lands; they are still continuing to insist that sovereignty of the Nagas is still with the Nagas.

These leaders are now talking about a Federal relationship with India – the invader country. Now to clear up all these confusions created by our own leaders, let us examine the meaning of the word Sovereignty in its linguistic and political context:

Here, let us begin by stating this linguistic truth that: “Words” apart from their association to material objects has no meaning in themselves.

For example, if I, an Angami Naga is talking to an African in my own dialect, and I am saying ” This is my mouth,” ( Haw ame) without pointing to my mouth , the African gentleman will not understand what I am saying. All that he will be hearing will be some phonetic sounds with no meaning whatsoever! However, if I point my fingers to my mouth and say “This is my mouth;” then though he doesn’t understand my language, he will comprehend that I am talking about my mouth.

Words therefore have no meaning in themselves apart from their association to material objects. This is true of any words and their association to material objects, whether it is in relation to the stars, the moon or the whole planet earth and all that is in it.

Conforming to this linguistic law, the word sovereignty too, has no meaning apart from its association to material geography and material human beings. Now in the context of this linguistic truth, what is the meaning of the word “Sovereignty” or its synonym – “Independence” in relation to the Naga struggle?

In the context of political science and sociology, to be sovereign is to be self governing in one’s own geographical territory. It is to be free and independent of any other nation’s political dictates or Constitutional control.

Here, like the word “My mouth,” the word “Sovereignty” also has no meaning apart from its association to a concrete material geographical land and a material self governing people inhabiting that land with their own distinct history, culture and laws.

That being the definition of sovereignty and independence, a people and nation like the Nagas whose lands have been invaded by two other sovereign powers is no longer a sovereign country. After all, when the writ and laws of India and Burma are controlling our national affairs and when their flags are flying in our national lands, how can we claim that we are still independent?

We have in fact become “Subject” nations of these two invading nations. In such a situation, the only option left for the citizens of the suppressed nation is to take up arms to defend their declared sovereignty against the occupational forces. In this context such armed, self defence activities of a suppressed nation can never be termed as “Unlawful Activities.” Far from it being “An unlawful activity,” it is in fact the most “Lawful activity” waged against the “Unlawful activities” of the aggressor nations.

In our case, these two nations are India and Burma who are, against all political and international laws accusing us of indulging in “Unlawful activities” under Regulations like the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act of 1967 etc. This is exactly why Naga citizens and its soldiers have been waging a war of self defence against the invasion forces of India and Burma for the past 60 years (1947-2007).

Now, on the basis of the above stated facts and also in exercise of my Naga traditional democratic rights, allow me to address the following questions to both our respected over-ground as well as underground leaders of our nation.

I am posing these questions to you because confusions over political terms and their meanings have brought us into a state of fratricidal killings and even the bleak prospects of a very bloody civil war among ourselves:

Questions to our over ground (Indian Nagaland State) leaders.

  1. What do you mean by saying that as long as we improve our economic and human resources, we can become sovereign within the Indian Union?
  2. While appreciating the importance of economic sovereignty of a nation, is there one single nation in the whole modern world where such a particular nation has complete economic sovereignty to the extend that, that country does not need any imports-technological or material- from any other countries for their economic survival? Also, can economic sovereignty be equated with political sovereignty?
  3. Are not political sovereignty and economic sovereignty two different issues altogether? In my understanding, political sovereignty means a country that is politically independent from any other nation’s interference in their national affairs. As for economic sovereignty of a nation, it means the economic self sufficiency of that particular nation.

    In other words, in a general sense, when we talk about political sovereignty and economic sovereignty, we are talking about “Freedom” (Political and legal in nature) and “Food” (Material and physical in nature). In this politico-economic context, as far as I am concerned, a full stomach will not automatically result in a sound sleep if, as in our case, the Indian Army under AFSPA can enter our houses and even shoot us to death on mere suspicion.

  4. Can we Nagas, spitefully redefine such an important and universal political term as “Political sovereignty” into “Economic terms” so that our compromised political stand- caused by the 16 Point Agreement- can be justified before India and the world? Some of our over ground national leaders indeed betrayed our political sovereignty in order to gain economic benefits from India, when they signed the 16 Point Agreement in 1960. Here, please do not try to justify that treacherous betrayal by mixing political terms with economic terms.

    If we, a small nation try to do that, then the rest of the world can sue us in an international court of law for trying to twist political terms that are crucial for the political survival of any nation on earth. After all many nations have gone to war with many other nations when their political sovereignties were threatened by external invasions. Here we have absolutely no right to redefine political terms with economic terms and insult the sacrifices of other nations who have also suffered like us in human history.

Questions to our Naga national leaders.

  1. As you go for final crucial talks with the Government of India for a federal relationship with her, what do you mean by a “Federal relationship with the country that has invaded our lands?”
  2. Do we not already have a Federal relationship with India because of our over ground leaders who treacherously signed the 16 Point Agreement and made Sovereign Independent Nagaland into an Indian State in 1963? Are you trying to further consolidate this betrayal and condemn all future generation of Nagas into Indian citizens and Indian subjects?
  3. When our Naga Yehzahbo in Article 1, with reference to the integrated Naga territories of Nagaland had clearly stated that “The territory of Nagaland shall comprise of all the territories inhabited by the Naga tribes…,” what integration of Naga territories under the Constitution of India are you talking about with India? Does one sovereign nation ask another nation to demarcate its national boundaries and integrate its people under the political umbrella of that other nation?
  4. What do you mean when you say “We have not given up sovereignty; sovereignty is with the Naga people?” When a foreign flag is flying in our country and foreign soldiers are empowered to even shoot us to death on mere suspicion, can sovereignty of the Naga nation be still with the Naga people? Is political sovereignty a feeling or a spirit that can still reside in the hearts and minds of a nation even when their leaders have surrendered their political freedom and political geography in a federal relationship with the invading nation?
  5. At the beginning of the present peace talks, India had clearly stated that independence of the Nagas is an issue that cannot be discussed in the talks. What then have you been talking for the past nine years? When the real issue is not being addressed, can there be a solution to the issue? “When will this nine years’ ‘diplomatic dance’ with India finally come to an end?”( The phrase; “diplomatic dance” has been borrowed from an African lady who recently spoke in the CNN over the Darfur imbroglio where the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU) and the UN have been talking and talking diplomatically without bringing out any concrete solutions for the suffering millions of the Darfur tragedy).
  6. I for one will salute you, if you walk away from this nine year ‘diplomatic dance’ with India, if the present Indian leaders will continue to refuses to address the issue of Naga independence. Thousands upon thousands of both Nagas and Indians have already died over this issue in the span of the past 60 years. If however, Indian leaders will still try to evade the issue, then what is the point of having any further dialogue with India?
  7. In a deadlock of the present peace talks, I fully realise that the only alternative will be for Nagas to unite and go back to war against India and Burma with the assistance of other nations. But won’t that be a far better option then the present trap into which India has trapped us by effectively dividing us into factions and are compelling us to fight among ourselves rather then with her?

The Naga struggle for independence will have to go on until our freedom and liberty is finally achieved. In that struggle, let us remember that India and Burma are not the only two nations on earth. We can surely over rule their arrogant attitudes and stance with the assistance of other nations that are much more powerful then they.

In conclusion, pardon me for the very blunt and uncomfortable questions that I have posed to you. But please understand that my generation – your sons and daughters – have also suffered with you for the past half a century.

Please therefore do not condemn us into a bloody civil war by compromising the sovereign independent status of Nagaland at the end of 60 years of blood and tears.

After all, all those sacrifices were freely given by our own kith and kin so that Nagaland can become a Nation among the nations.

 Source: Kaka. D. Iralu, Noted writer and outspoken social figure of Nagaland, wrote this article for The Sangai Express . This article was webcasted on August 22, 2007 .


By: Arijit Mazumdar 

The North-East continues to be racked by violence with no signs of the situation improving. The wave of deadly attacks in Assam and Nagaland in October, where over 50 people were killed and close to 150 injured, proves that insurgency is still strong in the region. The Government of India and the respective state governments of Assam and Nagaland have condemned the attacks.

Although, any decent human being will feel repulsed by these attacks on innocent civilians, we must still allow ourselves to look at the insurgency in the region from a holistic point of view, rather than through the lenses of the recent attacks. It is too simplistic, as some commentators have done, to dismiss insurgency in the region as merely a tool of certain insurgent leaders and demagogues to pursue their selfish ends.

There are certain valid reasons why the north-east in particular has been wreaked by insurgency. There are five major factors that have promoted insurgency in the region – immigration, economic underdevelopment, poorly developed transport and communications links, the negligence of the central government, and corruption among local politicians and elites.

It is widely accepted that continuing immigration from Bangladesh, encouraged by politicians eager fill their vote banks, have caused a demographic and social shift in the region. This has ultimately proved harmful to the indigenous people of the northeast who have been swamped in certain areas by these new immigrants. Already scarce jobs and resources will be further stretched as the competition for them increases. Educated, unemployed youths sometimes have no option but to take up the gun after becoming frustrated with the sad state of affairs.

The other factor that fuels the insurgency is economic underdevelopment. Even today, after half a century of Indian independence, the central government has not developed large-scale industries in the region. The tea industry and the oil refineries in Assam are the only industries worth mentioning. Even these industries have catered more to the needs of the people outside the northeast than within it. There is a consequent lack of economic and industrial development and thus prosperity and jobs are hard to come by.

Poorly developed communications and transport links are additional factors that have given rise to insurgency. Political isolation has resulted because of this. The region as a whole is “walled off” from the rest of India. People outside the region seem to have little idea as to what is going on in the northeast. Residents of the northeast believe themselves to be a distinct group who are shunned by the central government and the rest of the people of India. Political isolation gives rise to feelings of frustration and neglect. One must also not forget that some people in the northeast feel that the region was never a part and should not be a part of India.

These in turn give rise to feelings of intense ethnic nationalism, where some people desire to take the matters into their own hands. They perceive, rightly or wrongly, that they will be able to do a better job at administering themselves than the central government. The desire to be masters of their own destiny and not live on the pittance of others leads some to take up insurgency.

The central government has been historically unsympathetic to the troubles of the region. While turning a blind eye to the pressing problem of immigration, it has used the military to brutally put down even legitimate demands in the region. Its idea of solving the north east insurgency is by a piece by piece approach, i.e. initiate peace talks with each insurgent groups and sign peace agreements.

The flaw in this method is that these negotiated peace deals rarely address the larger issues involved which have given rise to insurgency in the first place. There are so many groups in the region that initiating talks with all those who have grievances will take an eternity, quite apart from the fact that the average time taken to negotiate a peace deal can span almost a decade. Unless the central government addresses the larger issues involved, insurgency will remain.

Finally, we must not discount the role of local politicians in adding fuel to the insurgency. Some of the politicians in the region have developed a vested interest in the insurgency. Sometimes they incite one group against the other and thus ensure that the violence remains endemic. There have been numerous accusations against politicians encouraging particular groups and also receiving money from them. To them insurgency has become a business out of which they maintain their livelihood.

Many of them get elected because they are able to secure support from some groups. They complement the central government when it comes to mismanaging the affairs of the region. They are far removed from the ordinary people of the region and remain cocooned in their plush air-conditioned offices while their state burns outside. Local politicians have not placed a premium on development and their use of security forces to put down protests has driven many to taking up arms.

Therefore, we need to keep all these factors in mind. Insurgency is not a single-issue phenomenon. In the north east, insurgency is not about selfish individuals and groups indulging in violence to fill their coffers. It is about people taking up arms because the government – central and state – has failed them completely. It is about getting their honor and dignity back and it is about trying to right the wrongs that have been perpetrated against them. While not discounting that some people have selfish motives, insurgency cannot be explained away only on this basis.


Arijit Mazumdar, currently pursuing PhD in Political Science at Miami University, Ohio, USA writes for the first time to
The writer can be contacted at
This article was written on 28th October 2004.