In the last three or four years, ( mind you and not in last one and half year) there has been an influx of some awkwardly meaningful but equally grounded words. Definitely, the evolution of these words started on social media platforms especially in the comment section of leading dailies.Whether it is 'Sickular', 'Pokistan', 'Chaddiwala', 'Bhakts', 'Aaptards', 'Modrons' 'Namonia' 'Pappukachamacha' or some serious ones such as Anti-national, Bharat-Mata, and Patriotism all of these resurfaced as a result of vibrant netizens.
A student of social science might see this as changing conscience because of a vibrant democracy. On the other hand, a student of History might see this as a degenerating era of Indian history. A political one might hold on an age old analogy that 'differences in opinions actually help to bring out the real problem'. But the real question is that can we draw some parallels and try to comprehend -what is really happening.
So probably, Indians though, possesses a great amount of tolerance and sympathy but surely, a majority of us lack empathy. The empathy is to feel another's feeling for yourself or rather to keep yourself in his position to understand his feelings. Contrary to it, sympathy is only to have compassion for another person and not necessarily feeling his feelings. In a swizzling mode of modern technology, supported by easy availability of social platforms, we have put ourselves in a fifth gear, only to prove 'why I am right and you are wrong'.
We have completely forgotten to understand the other side, the other half, the contrary view, the proletariat. We have become so stubborn that despite having any knowledge about the past, we mediate through our theories only to garner hatred and personal mottos. In the debate of nationalism, several views stunned the Indian subcontinent. Many scholars, academicians and politician tried everything to prove as how their definition of nationalism is correct. But the conclusive and more profound definition is probably given by an American comedian Doug Stanhope.
" Nationalism teach you nothing but to hate people you never met, and to take pride in accomplishment you had no part in"
For sure, India is surrounded by many complex and cumulative problems. But excluding the other half or blaming it for all problems is highly uncalled for. We have to understand that, In a progressive democracy, the primacy of individual rights over state's right except in severe emergencies should always be given importance. And political establishments, not the military should have a final say on all issues.
This is particularly true about the problem of Kashmir valley. The Indian military has time and again gave the excuse of security and its past sacrifices, which no doubt is a real one, to perpetuate AFSPA on Kashmiri people. I will not reiterate the security problems, the views of the military, the politics and international scenario involved, that is because tonnes of articles have already been written on the subject. But what as a citizen I think is that a democratically elected government should have a primacy in this matter and not the military. Because military will always want to be in power which is a natural thing, and it will always give the excuse of naughty neighbour and its vulnerability.
Very true, but for a larger cause, it is important to build a dialogue and slowly, in parts, step by step,remove AFSPA from the region. Many times, it seems remotely impossible to do things. And again, the question of will power resurfaces. Because of political interference, and to take a cut in vote bank politics, our politicians seems to have made easily solvable issues into gangrene.
Like I said earlier, we lack certain empathy, we have become averse to human rights, their problems, the dignity and the human value. If our neighbour has that capacity to radicalise local problem of a separate state, why can't we use the same weapon? We should rename radicalisation to curation and start mass advertisement and mobilisation programme so that the people of Kashmir valley looks towards India with confidence and rejuvenating force. A good start in this direction would be by giving diverse and abundantly available opportunities which they can't refuse.
No problem is a real problem unless we talk with the people. Even if we identify people with their religion, region, caste, creed and be afraid that this problem can't be solved, and even if we used all means and still that problem won't seem to solve, we have to believe in one thing. The thing is that we are human beings a product of great adaptation and evolution. Throughout the centuries, there were problems, problems of grave nature, unsolvable, undefeatable but still we progressed. Still we found the solutions to these problems, uniting, adapting, again uniting and again adapting. Probably, the first thing we did, might have been we looked at each other, smiled and said
" Aadhi Aadhi baantlei aaja dilki ye jamin,
Thodasa terasa hoga, Thoda mera bhi hoga, Apna yein
Aashiyan"
A student of social science might see this as changing conscience because of a vibrant democracy. On the other hand, a student of History might see this as a degenerating era of Indian history. A political one might hold on an age old analogy that 'differences in opinions actually help to bring out the real problem'. But the real question is that can we draw some parallels and try to comprehend -what is really happening.
So probably, Indians though, possesses a great amount of tolerance and sympathy but surely, a majority of us lack empathy. The empathy is to feel another's feeling for yourself or rather to keep yourself in his position to understand his feelings. Contrary to it, sympathy is only to have compassion for another person and not necessarily feeling his feelings. In a swizzling mode of modern technology, supported by easy availability of social platforms, we have put ourselves in a fifth gear, only to prove 'why I am right and you are wrong'.
We have completely forgotten to understand the other side, the other half, the contrary view, the proletariat. We have become so stubborn that despite having any knowledge about the past, we mediate through our theories only to garner hatred and personal mottos. In the debate of nationalism, several views stunned the Indian subcontinent. Many scholars, academicians and politician tried everything to prove as how their definition of nationalism is correct. But the conclusive and more profound definition is probably given by an American comedian Doug Stanhope.
" Nationalism teach you nothing but to hate people you never met, and to take pride in accomplishment you had no part in"
For sure, India is surrounded by many complex and cumulative problems. But excluding the other half or blaming it for all problems is highly uncalled for. We have to understand that, In a progressive democracy, the primacy of individual rights over state's right except in severe emergencies should always be given importance. And political establishments, not the military should have a final say on all issues.
This is particularly true about the problem of Kashmir valley. The Indian military has time and again gave the excuse of security and its past sacrifices, which no doubt is a real one, to perpetuate AFSPA on Kashmiri people. I will not reiterate the security problems, the views of the military, the politics and international scenario involved, that is because tonnes of articles have already been written on the subject. But what as a citizen I think is that a democratically elected government should have a primacy in this matter and not the military. Because military will always want to be in power which is a natural thing, and it will always give the excuse of naughty neighbour and its vulnerability.
Very true, but for a larger cause, it is important to build a dialogue and slowly, in parts, step by step,remove AFSPA from the region. Many times, it seems remotely impossible to do things. And again, the question of will power resurfaces. Because of political interference, and to take a cut in vote bank politics, our politicians seems to have made easily solvable issues into gangrene.
Like I said earlier, we lack certain empathy, we have become averse to human rights, their problems, the dignity and the human value. If our neighbour has that capacity to radicalise local problem of a separate state, why can't we use the same weapon? We should rename radicalisation to curation and start mass advertisement and mobilisation programme so that the people of Kashmir valley looks towards India with confidence and rejuvenating force. A good start in this direction would be by giving diverse and abundantly available opportunities which they can't refuse.
No problem is a real problem unless we talk with the people. Even if we identify people with their religion, region, caste, creed and be afraid that this problem can't be solved, and even if we used all means and still that problem won't seem to solve, we have to believe in one thing. The thing is that we are human beings a product of great adaptation and evolution. Throughout the centuries, there were problems, problems of grave nature, unsolvable, undefeatable but still we progressed. Still we found the solutions to these problems, uniting, adapting, again uniting and again adapting. Probably, the first thing we did, might have been we looked at each other, smiled and said
" Aadhi Aadhi baantlei aaja dilki ye jamin,
Thodasa terasa hoga, Thoda mera bhi hoga, Apna yein
Aashiyan"