A Response to an Excellent Entry

This blog entry is in response to this excellent entry written by Divya here (http://maddendum.blogspot.com/2008/08/nothing-is-obvious-from-history.html). The italicised text is from her entry and the normal text is my response to it.

"People in their everyday lives (especially the ones with as much common sense as you and me) are seldom spurred to "change"...........................
............................... someone with a 'not so practical outlook' of life."

People know me as someone with, as you put it, “a not so practical outlook of life”. I know for myself that I have a utopian view of the world and I dream of the what ifs and the what could be. It is a sad truth in today’s world that the majority of people have accepted the world for all its negative aspects and they are too afraid of disappointment to bring themselves to think idealistically.

I feel principles are losing their meaning in this world as they are now adopted more for convenience and are no longer an integral part of life. Politicians state principles to garner votes, and everyone knows how wonderfully principled their lives are. The average citizen adopts principles to say that he/she believes in the elected government to bring about change when in essence he’s using this to hide behind and basically say that there is a scapegoat to blame for the problems in this country and that he/she can’t be bothered. I personally feel at times that I’m on a deserted island for I am strongly idealistic and if I believe in something I keep fighting for it and I live life by the principles I have set myself. But this is my opinion of myself and I’m sure there are others who think differently.

"Looking back at history, ................
............... condemn British rule as imperialistic."

When you’re living a life where you know its your land, and your world and rightfully it should belong to you but instead someone else is reaping the benefits, you can’t help but resent the situation. There were people of varying opinions in the country, some who felt that their society was oppressed and some who felt that they were being treated as slaves. People were slowly starting to wake up to the realization that, they are not independent to decide what they wish to do, not independent to even voice their opinion and all this while feeling like they were being treated as outcasts in their own home.

The one unifying factor for all these people was that they felt that their problems were due to the white man in the funny clothes speaking the funny language. The only thing that was lacking was a spark to actually make them unite. Gandhi proved to be that spark, he took up the responsibility of being one with the people and fighting for their cause. The ideas of being independent and free from the Raj were festering in people’s minds, but it was never out in the open (except for the failed Mutiny in 1857). When Gandhi and the congress at the time spoke about having a free and independent India, all these individual thoughts of the people now had a collective (and public) voice that was saying things that completely appealed to what the majority of the people were feeling. This empowered them and enabled them to fight for their cause; and since it was a cause that appealed to the masses, it brought them together. Indian people at the time can be defined, not as people speaking a language or belonging to a specific community, but as people of this region fighting for a common cause “Freedom from the Raj”

Yes, there were doubts and there were fears. My grandfather is 94 years old and he’s seen all that happened during the latter part of the struggle. He is one of the few people who felt that the British Rule was good for India because it kept our country united and would ensure better development than what we would have managed by ourselves at the time. But, as you rightly said, there was the confusion, in my grandfather’s case it was one of trust. He said the reason why he wasn’t whole heartedly for the British staying was the doubts he had as to whether or not we’d just be a sort of feeder country to the empire. And going down that path, he knew, would be a disaster of unfathomable proportions. He also felt that actually going out and fighting for freedom was something people did out of a misplaced sense of heroism (plus his family was against it).

"And for the older generation of Indians, the congress and the nationalist movement, in many ways, despoiled local culture just like the British did. When done by the British, it was seen as defiling everything Indian and traditional. But by the congress, the same thing was viewed as nationalism. "

This I’m curious about. I really haven’t read much about the nationalist movement despoiling local culture in any way. So don’t take me wrong, I’m not questioning the validity of your statement, I’m just asking for more information about it.

"So each man's convictions .............
...................Hindustan Values?. "

This is more of a question of mob mentality. When you have a horde of people who are fighting for a cause that they feel is worth fighting for, the borders of reason are stretched and sometimes even lost. A good example is if you take a look at the current Amarnath Land Row Issue in Kashmir. Indians are coming out across the country (and even the world) and voicing their opinions in various ways, be it online or in the media. But what shows a clear sense of mob mentality is the opinions that read something like – “These Pakistanis don’t want us Hindu’s to own any land in our own Hindustan”. It is a complete exaggeration of the current situation but mob mentality works in a way that there are people who agree with this and even consider further exaggeration. The same way, the Sanskrit speaker who could play tennis was seen as a pervert because of the growing (and united) resentment towards the British rule and this out of sheer mob mentality extended to British Culture as well.

"Right now,..........
............. what it means."

This IS one side of the picture, and it is to some extent quite honest because a lot of mention of sacrifice and heroism is backed up by both eyewitness accounts and the records of the British as well. In terms of the other side of the coin, the obvious reason for us to go under the British yoke was our sheer abundance in resources that were in extreme demand in the west. Spices, silks and even natural resources was all there for the taking in the divided state that our nation was when the East India Company walked into Bengal. What is harder to find is the British side of things in terms of their plans. What were their intentions for us had we not fought for independence? Would we have still been under their rule even if we didn’t fight and they were extremely weakened after the two world wars? I’m sure there are some British Scholars somewhere who know about this but in India we couldn’t be less bothered with any more details about it because it is all a part of the what ifs that didn’t happen.

"And I am not ..........
...................it quite exciting."

Again, going by eyewitness accounts, the influence of western culture was more prevalent in the affluent parts of society and much less so to the middle and lower income class of people at the time. The rich found it to their convenience to adopt English ways and imbibe western culture into their lives to appease the current masters of the time; this was something that both the middle and lower class couldn’t afford. The lower income class was totally unaffected by this and the only aspect of western culture that they felt was the whip and the burden of taxes. The middle class then was the same as it is now, unconcerned for the most part. They went on with their lives and carried their responsibilities like they do so today. It was only when the whole country was in an uproar that they decided to wake up and side with Indians. So yes, it might have been exciting to experience western ways but unless you were well off, there is a very minute chance that you would have had the opportunity.

"For all we know, ............
.................. brilliant struggle."

Spoken like the dreamer that I am. For long, I have been optimistic of our country and its people changing and as time goes by, I can’t help but feel that the only way things can change for the better is drastic change. A civil-war is pushing it a bit far but it could happen. I’m thinking more in terms of a mass revolt, a new fight for independence (from the currently flawed political system) but hey, I’m just a dreamer.

“But knowing our government …………………………
………………………..Have we always been? "

I agree with you on this but I think traitor is a strong word to use to describe someone, and for the middle class if prefer to call them the hypocritical class that can’t be less bothered. They are above the clutches of being affected by basic inflation (of say foodstuffs) but at the same time (they think) they have more than enough to do in their lives to be concerned about actually taking a stance for issues like the Nuclear Deal. I call them hypocritical because the only time they get out of their comfort zones and voice their protest is when something concerns them directly, like a hike in fuel prices. Only in times like this will you find the middle class out in force saying that the government needs to care about its people.

I don’t know if I was born an optimist but I know that for as long as I’ve been aware, I have been one, and that is not about change any time soon. I feel that our country has a great capacity to achieve anything it wants and that every problem that affects our country can be resolved with ease. The only thing that stops us is the fact that we’ve accepted all these problems and gotten accustomed to living with them around us while just mildly voicing our complaints every now and then.

I feel that selfishness to our own cause and completely apathetic views to the problems that afflict our country have led the country to the position it is in today. People are far too narrow minded and affected by tunnel vision to see the big picture. The amount of energy and resources spent in fighting battles like Hindu vs Muslim, Congress vs BJP, or who gets water from the Kaveri River, is quite frankly ridiculous. If this energy and passion and resources were used to instead just realize, not even do anything, but just realize that before we’re Hindus or Muslims or anything else, we are Indians, it would already be a time of "India Shining"

Why I hate News Media -- Round 2

I feel that the responsibility of the press is to keep the people informed, keep them up to date on what is TRULY happening around the world. I stress on the word truly here because it is the one aspect that the media tends to bend to the very extremes, the truth. I've talked before about how the media jumps on the bandwagon for anything and everything. Well, now I'm talking about how the media sensationalizes even the most mundane by bending the truth and making it seem like a disaster of gargantuan proportions.

Take for example, the long saga of the Arushi murder case in Noida, India. The day it happened it was headline news that a father killed his daughter as an honor killing. I agree that the cops are partly to blame for cooking up this story and trying to conclude the case without any kind of even superficial investigation, but that does not give the media the right to continue to develop on the story (beyond known fact) and completely tarnish someone's reputation (dead or alive). After the first day of this news breaking out, the press went all out to find evidence to back up the police's claim and they even stooped to the level of hacking emails and facebook accounts to come up with messages that might show that the girl was of poor character, and that her relationship with her dad was strained, hence warranting the honor killing (I really do not wish to elaborate on this).

Move forward in time a few weeks and surprise surprise, after extensive investigation, it was proven that the father was completely innocent and that the girl did nothing wrong. And what do you get from the media, nothing. It is thanks to this media and the fabricated story of the cops that a father had to endure incredible trauma when in reality he would have been in mourning about his daughter's death. But, there is not even an inkling of an apology or a mention that they might have made a mistake. Absolutely nothing. And this infuriates me. A parent's connection to a child is something that only the parent can fully know the magnitude of and this is even stronger in the case of a father and his daughter, and the news media of India went all out to vilify this relationship.

I've actually been wanting to write this for a while now and I've just been letting the thoughts take shape in my head. What triggered my actually writing was this article

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3312296.cms

Please note that I'm not commenting on what the news is about but more on the media. I don't know (and neither does anyone else) know for sure if this was a dowry killing or not and if it is that is a subject for another discussion. But, as it is clear to see, before there is any proof of the circumstances and what actually happened, the news media has come to its own conclusion with absolutely no idea of the facts. No post-mortem report, no interrogations, but they already have a case of dowry killing according to them.

I feel that this literally amounts to character assassination and I'm sure that in any other country the news media would likely be sued (when proven wrong like the Arushi murder case).

Now if this were a single person's opinion I wouldn't really react this much since everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But this is the news, the media, the people who have the power to influence the decisions and the thought process of millions in just a few words (If you doubt this, just read the comments on the link above). Using the cliched statement from Spiderman "with great power comes great responsibility". And quite frankly, the news media does not seem to be even remotely responsible to possess such power and furthermore they are not in the least bit accountible. The trend of the news media in India these days is clear to see, sensationalist headlines and a whole lot of nonsensical fluff (Paris Hilton's dog anyone?). With a headline that is sure to make people read the article, the media makes its intentions extremely clear.

They're here to sell newspapers and increase TRP ratings, not report what really happens.