At a time when the pulse of collective action seems faint, Bangladesh emerges like a phoenix, ablaze with a fervour that has captured the world’s attention. The spectacle of millions, hand in hand, defying the odds, is more than just a ripple; it’s a tidal wave crashing against the shores of complacency. In an age where even the wind struggles to gather ten voices in protest, this spontaneous eruption is no mere accident, nor the product of shadowy conspiracies. It is the roar of a people, their hear ts heavy with centuries of grievance, their spirits aflame with righteous indignation. Yet, amid this uprising, darker forces have reared their heads ~ the desecration of temples, the plight of the minorities, the bi tter looting incidents etc.

The soil of Bangladesh has been stir red, and from it springs both ne ctar and venom. The question that now hangs in the air, like a storm cloud ready to burst: who will be the divine figure to drink the venom and dispense the nectar? In the heart of this turmoil, perhaps the answer lies with Mohammed Yunus, the Nobel laureate, a figure who might just be the harbinger of a new dawn. But the question remains, how? The recent upheaval in Bangladesh, sparked by demands to abolish the reservation policy, exposes a deeper, more pervasive malaise: the gnawing pain of unemployment amid rampant corruption.

This movement, while seemingly sudden, is a symptom of a broader global crisis ~ one rooted in the chasm of the 21st century’s dual economies. In this technology-driven, post-industrial world, unemployment and underemployment are not merely inconveniences but existential threats, exacerbated by the relentless march of globalization and neo-liberalism. This era’s double-edged sword offers glittering advances for the elite while relegating the masses to an everdeepening abyss of poverty. As artificial intelligence and machines drive productivity to new heights, human labour is cast aside, leaving a stark divide: the opulent few luxuriate in excess, while the destitute grapple with the barest essentials. Oxfam’s revelations of staggering inequality where the wealth of the top five individuals doubles even as the poorest 60 percent lose ground paints a grim portrait of a world where luxury and deprivation exist side by side, a cruel testament to the failures of our current economic paradigms.

In the labyrinth of this century, where the promise of globalization gleamed like a beacon, policymakers faltered, blind to the lessons of history. This miscalculation birthed a brutal form of turbocapitalism, dividing society into winners and forgotten souls. As the new economy soared, those lacking the requisite skills and education were relegated to the shadows, trappedin dwindling, low-wage sectors, forsaken by the very systems meant to support them. In the relent less pursuit of economic growth, policymakers sacrificed social protection on the altar of high pressure economics. The result? A fragile society, where the gains of globalization and deregulation enriched the few, while the many at the bottom bore the brunt of in equality.

As mental and physical well-being eroded, disillusionment grew, threatening to unravel the democratic fabric and hollow out the middle class, leaving a fractured and un stable order in its wake in Bangladesh. In the unforgiving landscape of turbocapitalism, the importance of stable employment has never been clearer nor more traically overlooked spe cifically in the reign of Sheikh Hasina. Here, the Covid-19 pandemic laid bare the fragility of an economy that prioritized pro fits, GDP, and market efficiency over basic human needs. Far from an inclusive system, it left many scrambling for survival in a world with sc ant safety nets and slackened savings. In fact, mainstream economists in the world, in their zeal for growth, made a grave error: treating labour as mere capital, forgetting that workers are not just cogs in the machine they are human beings with needs, anxieties, and political power. In a world where capital doesn’t vote but labour does, this neglect is perilous, as exemplified by the last ten years of Hasina’s go vernment.

As the forces of populism surge, it is clear that the social and political consequences of unemployment, non employment, and under employment are no longer theoretical ~ they are here, demanding attention. However, in a world where governments and capitalists tout the myth of a jobless market, the facade of opportunity crumbles under scrutiny. They blame the lack of employment on mismatched skills, traditional education systems and inadequate conditions, while the free market, in its vaunted glory, fails to provide security, basic needs, or a semblance of work-life balance. This dis connect breeds widespread frustration across divisions ~ from India to the USA and Bangladesh.

In a bid to quell mounting unrest, the powerful advocate for universal basic income (UBI), a mere ban d age on a gaping wound, offering money with no strings at tached while the state retreats from responsibility. This precarious gig economy, where today’s job could vanish tomorrow, renders survival reliant on this hollow promise, stripping workers of dignity and turning their struggle into a de meaning survival game.

Would Yunus support Bangladesh’s upcoming development in the same manner? On the other hand, as the clamour for universal basic income grows worldwide, a critical question remains unanswered: where will the funds come from? The prospect of raising direct taxes on the wealthy is met with fierce resistance from capitalists, leading instead to a massive privatization push. Educational campuses and hospitals are stripped of their essential staff, while everyday costs and indirect taxes rise, perpetuating a cycle where household wealth flows back to the elite. Bangladesh should remember that this scheme not only enriches the rich but also threatens democratic integrity, rendering citizens passive and fe non employment. Bangladesh now, ahead of the curve, stands on the precipice of this grim reality, particularly after this upsurge.

However, amid the upheaval in Bangladesh, a glimmer of hope emerges from an overlooked aspect of the coup: a call to rebuild from the ground up, challenging these deep-seated econpomic inequalities. The movement’s original aim ~ to com b at economic disparity now faces obfuscation by divisive issues of religious fundamentalism. While the technological boom reshapes the job landscape, the true scarcity lies not in work but in equitable access to it. The right to work is en shrined in constitutions worldwide; denying this right under the guise of a jobless future is both unconstitutional and unjust. The claim that vacancies are non-existent, and that the popu lace lacks qualifications is a dis ingenuous smokescreen.

The real task of contemporary Bangladesh is straightforward: a people-oriented government could address infinite work opportunities by expanding vacancies and launching new projects. The assertion of widespread in competence is flawed; everyone has some capacity to contribute, much like even the most disabled member of a family finding a role. If true competence is lacking, the answerlies in a robust edu cation system and vocational training. Instead of a superficial Universal Basic Income, they should advocate for Universal Basic Earning (UBE) and establish a Universal Employment Fund (UEF).

By raising direct taxes on capitalists, they could create real, sustainable job opportunities and ensure equitable livelihoods for all. Bangladesh’s garment industry has not only positioned the country on the global economic stage but also cast it into the geopolitical spotlight among the US, China, and India. The mass up rising currently unfolding in Bangladesh reverberates far beyond its borders, em bodying both hope and uncertainty. While not all coups succeed, each revolution begets fresh perspectives, driven by a youthful energy that da res to reimagine the future. For Bangladesh’s students, the pressing challenge is to channel this revolutionary spirit into delivering equitable work opportunities for all. Guided by Yunus’s anti-discrimination principles, they must wage a “Jihad” against economic exploitation.

Should they succeed, this uprising could etch its name in history; failure, however, will usher in a gruelling wait for the next wave of change. The interim government’s balancing act between potential and pro should remember makes for an optimistic yet precarious outlook right here.

(The writer is on the faculty of the Department of Statistics, Basanti Devi College’s Kolkata)