Why Taking a Stand is The Only ‘Real Choice’

Is neutrality truly a virtue, or is it a silent weapon in the hands of oppressors? When faced with injustice, should one remain indifferent, hiding behind the guise of objectivity, or should one choose a side with conviction? Can any great battle — be it in history, business, or politics — ever be won without unwavering allegiance to a cause?

Throughout history, those who remained neutral have often found themselves irrelevant, their inaction serving only to embolden the oppressor. The Mahabharata, the Ramayana, and Indian Puranas teach us that choosing a side is not just a necessity but a moral obligation. Neutrality, in reality, is a betrayal of justice. The tale of Barbarik, the grandson of Bhima, epitomizes this principle, offering a profound lesson on why standing on the sidelines is never an option.

Barbarik: The Warrior Who Could Have Destroyed Both Sides

Barbarik was no ordinary warrior. Gifted with three divine arrows from Lord Shiva, he had the power to end the entire Kurukshetra war within minutes. When Lord Krishna, disguised as a Brahmin, encountered him before the war, he asked a simple yet crucial question: "Whom will you fight for?"

Barbarik, upholding his mother’s teaching, replied that he would always support the weaker side. Krishna immediately saw the flaw in his thinking. If Barbarik fought for the Pandavas, they would gain strength, making the Kauravas the weaker side. True to his vow, he would then switch sides and fight for the Kauravas, and this cycle would continue until both sides were annihilated, leaving only Barbarik standing.

Understanding the devastation this neutrality would cause, Krishna devised a test. He asked Barbarik to offer the head of the most dangerous person. Without hesitation, Barbarik asked Krishna to name the person, and Krishna simply held up a mirror. Realizing the depth of Krishna’s wisdom, Barbarik severed his own head, proving his devotion to dharma.

Barbarik’s story is a timeless reminder that neutrality is dangerous, and indecision is a weapon that destroys everything. In real life, when we hesitate to choose between right and wrong, we pave the way for destruction — whether in governance, business, or personal life.

Other Lessons From Indian Itihaas: Why Neutrality Is A Betrayal

The principle of choosing sides is reinforced across Indian epics:

1.    Bhishma Pitamah: The Price of Loyalty Without Righteousness

Bhishma, the grand patriarch of the Kuru dynasty, was bound by his vow to serve the throne. When Draupadi was humiliated in the Kaurava court, Bhishma, despite being a warrior of unparalleled might, remained silent. His neutrality enabled the oppressors, and he ultimately paid the price by lying on a bed of arrows in his final moments. A man who chooses to be neutral when injustice prevails is, in reality, siding with the oppressors.

2.    Vibhishana: The Brother Who Took a Stand

In the Ramayana, while Ravana's court remained silent and complicit in his abduction of Sita, Vibhishana, Ravana’s own brother, took a stand for righteousness. Branded a traitor, he defected to Lord Rama's side, proving that truth and justice are above familial loyalty. His decision to abandon neutrality was what ultimately led to Ravana’s defeat and the triumph of dharma.

These stories reinforce a single truth — those who take a stand shape the course of history, while those who remain neutral perish in irrelevance.

The Cost of Neutrality in the Modern World

Neutrality is not just a relic of mythology; it is a defining factor in modern business and politics. The world has seen countless examples of leaders, corporations, and nations choosing to remain silent when they should have spoken up.

1.    Elon Musk & OpenAI: The Power of Taking a Stand

When Elon Musk felt that OpenAI was moving away from its original mission of ensuring AI benefits humanity, he took a stand — publicly criticizing the company and advocating for responsible AI development. His actions spurred debates on AI ethics, making transparency and accountability central discussions in the tech world.

2.    Ukraine War: The Nations That Took a Stand vs. Those That Didn’t

When Russia invaded Ukraine, many nations hesitated. Some, like India and China, maintained neutrality, while others, like the United States and European nations, took a firm stand. The war revealed that those who remain neutral in the face of aggression eventually become irrelevant or complicit.

3.    Steve Jobs: The Decision That Shaped Apple

Steve Jobs was once ousted from Apple, but when the company was on the brink of collapse, he didn’t sit on the fence. He took bold, uncompromising decisions, including slashing unnecessary products and refocusing on innovation. Had Jobs been neutral, Apple wouldn’t exist today.

Why Neutrality is A Myth: You Are Always Choosing a Side

Even when you think you are neutral, you are actually taking a side — the side of inaction. Whether it is injustice in society, corporate decisions, or global conflicts, every choice matters.

Should businesses remain neutral in the face of unethical labor practices? Should governments stay silent while authoritarian regimes crush freedom? Should employees tolerate toxic workplaces because "it's not their fight"?

The answer is clear: Neutrality is complicity.

Final Thoughts: The Responsibility to Choose

Will you watch injustice unfold, telling yourself it’s not your fight? Will you let the tides of history decide your fate, or will you be the force that changes history?

From Barbarik’s dilemma to corporate boardrooms and political battlefields, one truth remains unchanged — neutrality is the refuge of the weak, while taking a stand is the mark of true leadership.

History remembers those who made choices. The question is, when the moment comes, will you choose courage, or will you choose irrelevance?