Unbelieving

We all have some beliefs or values. No matter how refined or rational we believe we are, we harbor some core beliefs. These beliefs are the results of our upbringing. Our family values, the religion that we are forced to accept without our informed consent, and our social and economic environment (our upbringing) all add various beliefs that shape our personality and thinking. The problem with these beliefs is that we adopt them first and then try to find every possible way to justify and defend them. That is, these beliefs or values are not well vetted, they are not evaluated before ingraining them into our system. Most of us, get them as a legacy from our environment and stick with them for the rest of our lives. If you don't believe me, just look around. How many people do you know changed the religion in which they were born? How many do you see who question the party or a leader they voted for? How many people do you see condemn the questionable behavior of their loved ones, especially their parents? How many people you see accept that they were wrong and are ready to correct (especially in politics)? Very few or none, right? It is interesting to note that people do this not because they are bad or weak, but because it is extremely difficult to unbelieve something you believe. 

Unbelieving is not easy and not many even think about it, it is that hard and uncommon. Also, note that unbelieving is not the same as unlearning. Unbelieving is scary, whereas unlearning is not. We unlearn something when we want to change our habits. Some of our beliefs could contribute to some of our habits, but it is not necessary, we harbor many beliefs that control our opinions and views without affecting our habits. To leave something we believed for long or accept that it was wrong sounds scary as many people think that changing their beliefs and values demolishes their core identity. No doubt, our beliefs and values constitute a core part of our identities, but this is why it is important to review and update them from time to time. I understand this because I have to go through a lot of unbelieving. I grew up in a very casteist, patriarchal, misogynist, and communal society. There were so many values associated with these ancient cultural aspects that were ingrained in my mind. I used to think in a particular way, used to look at people from different castes and religions in a particular way and had a very backward view about different genders. All this was challenged and tested when I read more, met with people from different regions and cultures, and finally when I immigrated to the US. It was not very comfortable to learn that I was wrong about so many things. I could have stuck with those dated values considering them as a part of my culture and tradition, many people offer this justification, so, this was an option available for me. However, when I saw that these things were wrong, no matter how old or from where I learned, I couldn't continue with them, I needed to unbeliever them and replace them with a secular and gender-unbiased set of values. These values are not also permanent, I need to test and evaluate them from time to time to confirm that they meet the high standards of humanity set by me. This is an ongoing and continuous process, that's what I call a personal evolution, it is a slow but continuous process. The first step in this process is to unbelieve everything that is outdated and biased, unbelieve everything that teaches us hate and discrimination. The Sooner we start this process, the better for us, as I said this is not easy, it is going to take time, so start as soon as you can if you have not already done so, and repeat this process regularly. We update our furniture and wardrobe regularly, so why not do the same with our values and beliefs.    

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com

Social media and freedom of speech

Freedom of speech or expression is one of the coveted fundamental rights available in most developed countries, and even most developing countries claim to offer this right to their residents. Since the advent of social media, this right has been a subject of discussion, mainly due to the use of social media to spread misinformation and propaganda related to hate and social disharmony. The main issue is whether governments should regulate social media to control its contents or whether social media should be treated like we treat the individual right to freedom of speech where anonymous speech is also protected? As we all know, currently, social media is used by various groups and countries to spread propaganda by using anonymous accounts, especially during election times to influence the outcome of that election. No doubt, this is a serious issue. However, is it serious enough to curb one of the most valued personal rights in developed countries, the right of freedom of expression? Of course, governments will argue that it is important to control social media, but as people, do we want our governments to control what we can and cannot say on social media? These are some of the questions this issue raises. Also, note that there is no absolute right to freedom of expression anywhere, there are minimum reasonable restrictions, but it seems on social media these restrictions are not enough to curb the harmful effects of free speech.

Whether government or we like it or not, the reality is that social media is the new platform where most interpersonal communication happens. Nowadays, most people communicate through their devices, mainly through their phones. Even during face-to-face meetings, people are busy either posting on social media or browsing the contents of social media. People derive most of their news and other information from the internet, and mostly from social media posts. So, social media dominates our medium of expression, and this is the reason governments are interested in controlling it. Also, I agree that social media is used to spread propaganda and misinformation. People are so siloed in their information chambers either by their own choice or by algorithm manipulation that feeds them only with content that validates their ideas and opinions, it is easy to condition their minds. This is one of the main reasons why social polarization is on the rise. People treat their ideological opponents as enemies, they don't just disagree, but they also hate with whom they disagree. Why? Because they are more convinced than ever that the other side is not only wrong but their presence is also bad for their society. This is the extent of polarization. There is also a rise in cult-like worshipping of political leaders and celebrities, there are not just followers, these followers think and behave like devotees. They do not want to hear anything critical about their demagogue. If anyone says anything critical, these devotees attack viciously. Also, countering bad speech by putting in a lot of good speech is not working that well. People with access to resources dominate any conversation by using paid or fake accounts where people post the same or similar content propagating certain views to dominate the discourse. This is where we are currently, and it is predicted to get worse from here. However, even after all the risks and drawbacks associated with social media, I don't think the government should control free speech on social media and put more restrictions than what we already have. Why? Just because once the right to free speech is compromised, it is rarely returned back in its original form. Imagine, how much power any government will have if they can control the biggest communication platform used by the current generation. The risks of giving control to the government outweigh the benefits. If at all they want to propose some additional reasonable restrictions, let them propose them first so that people to review and evaluate them. This is not a partisan issue, everyone's right to freedom of speech, irrespective of their party affiliation, is on the line, hence we all need to think carefully. The idea of having some order and reliability is appealing, but not at the cost of our fundamental right of freedom of speech. Let's protect our fundamental rights first, social media can take care of itself as its users mature and become aware of its strengths and weaknesses, let's give this platform some more time, it is still too early to call for any government help.

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com