“We Need Young Women” — The Epstein Files and the Burden of Power
by - Dr. Satyabrata jena
The phrase emerging from the Epstein files — “We like young women” — is not merely disturbing language. It represents a culture where power, privilege, and silence converged to enable abuse. The files surrounding Jeffrey Epstein do not just expose an individual predator; they expose how unchecked influence can distort morality and delay justice.
What makes the Epstein case globally unsettling is not only the crimes themselves, but the ecosystem that allowed them to persist. Wealth, access, and elite networks acted as insulation. The casual phrasing used to describe exploitation was a deliberate attempt to normalise what should never be normalised. Language softened crime; power protected the perpetrator.
In the aftermath, public attention has turned to names — political leaders, business magnates, and influential figures whose proximity to power inevitably draws scrutiny. This includes global leaders and industrialists, among them Narendra Modi, Mukesh Ambani, and Gautam Adani — not as accusations, but as symbols of how modern power structures operate and why transparency matters.
It is important to state clearly: association, mention, or curiosity is not guilt. Yet in democratic societies, public trust depends on openness. When powerful names circulate in conversations about global elites and accountability, silence alone cannot resolve doubt. The demand is not for suspicion, but for clarity. Trust thrives where information is open and institutions are credible.
The Epstein scandal illustrates a larger truth: systems often fail not because laws are absent, but because influence weakens enforcement. When power becomes too concentrated — political, economic, or social — it creates zones where accountability struggles to enter. This is why scrutiny of power is not hostility; it is a democratic necessity.
Another uncomfortable lesson lies in selective outrage. While Epstein became the face of the scandal, many who benefited from elite silence escaped examination. Survivors were doubted, delayed, or dismissed. The real crime extended beyond individual abuse to institutional indifference. Justice, when filtered through status, ceases to be justice.
For countries like India, where political authority and corporate power are deeply intertwined with national aspiration, the lesson is especially relevant. Strong leadership and economic success must coexist with ethical transparency. The credibility of institutions depends not on defending the powerful, but on ensuring that no one is beyond scrutiny.
This editorial is not about naming villains without evidence. It is about recognising a universal risk: when power is revered more than accountability, abuse finds shelter. The Epstein files are a warning, not a conspiracy — a reminder that morality collapses when influence replaces law.
The phrase “We like young women” should haunt public conscience not because of who said it, but because of how long it was tolerated. Democracies must learn that silence is not neutrality, and power without oversight is not strength.
In the end, the true test of leadership — political or corporate — is not proximity to influence, but distance from impunity. Societies that demand transparency from the powerful protect not only the vulnerable, but their own moral future.
