The recent case of brutal rape of a 23 year old girl in Delhi has led to reactions pouring in from all parts of the country and from people in all walks of life. This post is not about the disgraceful behaviour on the part of the legislature, executive and judiciary in the past or even today, though A LOT can be said about that.
As a person who observed the turmoil both on ground during the protests and on the television screen watching debate after debate, listening to various view points being presented, I made an observation.
I believe that all the people who talk about/act upon such issues or any issue for that matter can be demarcated into 3 categories. And these categories bear an uncanny resemblance to the people who lived in our country during the fight for independence. Listening to various personalities on panel discussions took me back to my class VIII history lessons on modern Indian history. You'll soon understand why. Now for the categories:
The Protestors: They seem to be the 21st century's version of Indian National Congress extremists. They are the ones who have had enough and have waited for long in vain for those in power to take steps for their welfare. Finally when they see no other alternative they take the situation in their own hands. Upon provocation they'll retort through violence ( Dec 23rd incident at India Gate) but they are also mature enough to protest without any weapon in their hands except for candles to show sympathy towards the victim (Dec 29th-Jantar Mantar). They will also throw out the people they don't want without a sparing a second thought towards them( Delhi CM being sent back from Jantar Mantar).
The Political Class: An exact replica of the regresssive British authorities of the 1911-1948 period to the very molecular level, except that in those days their was no option of playing blame games and passing the buck across party lines. Then the loyalties lay with the king, today they lie with the respective party leaders. Addressing only vote banks, criticising members of other political parties, suspending public services at their own whims and fancies and most of all insensitivity towards the comman man and a lackadaisical approach towards reformation is what definies the core ideologies of our political class. When the citizens want to be heard they are out of sight, when people don't want to see them they appear and then only to gain political mileage.
And now for the most interesting and agonising lot of them all :
The Gutless : This group is made up of people who want to please both the sides, the ones who are either too afraid to take sides or the ones who probably got stuck in a time portal when the acceptable turned into the unaccepted and the prevalent metamorphed into the orthodox old-world order. They feel that women are justified in demanding a life of dignity but also support the politicians who have the audacity to say that women should be married off early so as to prevent rapes. It cannot possibly appeal to any person's logic that these two schools of thought are supported at the same time. This lot resembles the Indian National Congress moderates who tried to maintain peace because they were either easily satiated or too scared to raise their voices, the former being more likely.
It is not just in this instance. Whenever a mass movement takes place these divisions exist in the society. People continue to have different perspectives. That is not the problem. The problem is that in the fight to prove who has a more logical ideology, the main issue gets diluted and lost somewhere.
As a person who observed the turmoil both on ground during the protests and on the television screen watching debate after debate, listening to various view points being presented, I made an observation.
I believe that all the people who talk about/act upon such issues or any issue for that matter can be demarcated into 3 categories. And these categories bear an uncanny resemblance to the people who lived in our country during the fight for independence. Listening to various personalities on panel discussions took me back to my class VIII history lessons on modern Indian history. You'll soon understand why. Now for the categories:
The Protestors: They seem to be the 21st century's version of Indian National Congress extremists. They are the ones who have had enough and have waited for long in vain for those in power to take steps for their welfare. Finally when they see no other alternative they take the situation in their own hands. Upon provocation they'll retort through violence ( Dec 23rd incident at India Gate) but they are also mature enough to protest without any weapon in their hands except for candles to show sympathy towards the victim (Dec 29th-Jantar Mantar). They will also throw out the people they don't want without a sparing a second thought towards them( Delhi CM being sent back from Jantar Mantar).
The Political Class: An exact replica of the regresssive British authorities of the 1911-1948 period to the very molecular level, except that in those days their was no option of playing blame games and passing the buck across party lines. Then the loyalties lay with the king, today they lie with the respective party leaders. Addressing only vote banks, criticising members of other political parties, suspending public services at their own whims and fancies and most of all insensitivity towards the comman man and a lackadaisical approach towards reformation is what definies the core ideologies of our political class. When the citizens want to be heard they are out of sight, when people don't want to see them they appear and then only to gain political mileage.
And now for the most interesting and agonising lot of them all :
The Gutless : This group is made up of people who want to please both the sides, the ones who are either too afraid to take sides or the ones who probably got stuck in a time portal when the acceptable turned into the unaccepted and the prevalent metamorphed into the orthodox old-world order. They feel that women are justified in demanding a life of dignity but also support the politicians who have the audacity to say that women should be married off early so as to prevent rapes. It cannot possibly appeal to any person's logic that these two schools of thought are supported at the same time. This lot resembles the Indian National Congress moderates who tried to maintain peace because they were either easily satiated or too scared to raise their voices, the former being more likely.
It is not just in this instance. Whenever a mass movement takes place these divisions exist in the society. People continue to have different perspectives. That is not the problem. The problem is that in the fight to prove who has a more logical ideology, the main issue gets diluted and lost somewhere.
