It's time to clean our burdensome culture

Whenever I used to question some rituals or some rules that were imposed on us, for being a boy, or on my sisters for being a girl, I used to get a very common response, just do it, this is our culture. No one bothered to answer why. Things have not changed much in the last 30-40 years, rather I see that people have become more aggressive and sensitive about these age-old discriminatory rituals and practices. Still, certain things are questioned or imposed as they may hurt the religious sentiments of the majority or minority. Any woman not subscribing to these oppressive traditions is labeled as Western, uncultured, or worse, an anti-something (put Hindu or Muslim or any other group in the place of "something"). I wonder what fun people get in carrying the weight of this burdensome culture, why people insist on continuing with openly discriminatory practices, and why it is so difficult to understand that just because something has been practiced for centuries it does not make it right. 

Females are worst affected by these discriminatory cultural practices. In many cultures across the world, females are expected to carry the burden of cultural traditions, they are at the receiving end of any rituals that require obedience or submissiveness. They are expected to fast, expected to serve, expected to cover their body, expected to take the blame for blatant sexual assaults directed towards them, expected to bear the burden of parenthood, expected to protect their and their family's honor, the list is long and includes different things based on which part of the world we consider. The time has come for all of us to let go of this burdensome culture, no matter how old it is. Just because it is old, or going on for ages, it doesn't become worthy of protection, it does not become right, and definitely, it does not become acceptable to discriminate. Discrimination is very subtle in many of these rituals, after all, the people who designed them were not stupid, they wanted to create a patriarchal system that could go on forever, conditioned, both, men and women so that both can carry these traditions with equal faith and conviction. This is why it is not easy to fight against these discriminatory traditions because many who suffer and get discriminated against by these traditions support them thinking that these are sacred and need to be protected. My personal experience is that fighting against these discriminatory and burdensome traditions is one of the most difficult challenges one can take, mainly because many times, you have to fight against your own. One needs to stand up against their own parents or other family members, it is complete hypocrisy to speak against these things on social media or other places and keep mum when it happens within our own family. I have seen many who claim to be progressive and against any type of discrimination keeping mum when their own parents or other so-called respected relatives practice some of these discriminatory traditions. This type of double face is very common nowadays in the era of social media where people have different personalities in the virtual world and different in the real world.

The time has come to get rid of this discriminatory and burdensome culture, we need to create our own traditions and culture that suit our time and place. Old is not always gold, we need to evaluate old traditions with our current set of standards and get rid of the junk or modify it to suit the needs and demands of our time. Let's start cleaning our culture, during the festival season it is not only important to clean our bodies and house, but let's clean our culture also.

Thanks for reading and please share your opinion about this topic.  

Please don't play a victim's card during fight against racism, it won't help

I read a few news items about protests by some students against alleged racism-related incidents on campuses of reputed American universities like Yale University and the University of Missouri. No matter how much we criticize racism, casteism, or any discriminatory traditions the truth is that they still exist in some form or other. Another ugly truth is that many people still believe in some of these discriminatory practices, so we need to argue with them, discuss with them, debate with them, and try to change their opinions through dialogue and discussions. This is the only way, we already have enough laws and regulations to check these things and even after all this if this doesn't stop, then we need to continue dialogue and discussions along with other efforts. People living in societies or countries where freedom of expression exists understand that every one of us no matter how stupid or outrageous we are, we all have the same right to express our opinion. The only exception is that no one should be allowed to preach violence, but apart from that in most of these societies anyone is free to express their opinion. The United States is one such country, I don't think there is as much freedom of expression practiced anywhere in the world as it is in the USA, at least based on the population size. So, I was really surprised when this group of students at Yale demanded to ban some Halloween costume parties and demanded the resignation of some administrators for defending the right of some students to express themselves. One can disagree with someone's opinions or views, and one can even feel offended by someone's costume or statement, but in a free and democratic society how can one object to that person's right to say or wear those things? As those students who say or wear something with offensive messages are free to express their opinions, other students are also free to raise their objections and protest if they are feeling hurt. Both are using their freedom of expression right so how one group can object to the rights of another group? Another question is, is it right to use the argument of hurt feelings to justify banning something? Is this the right approach to solve this issue? Can this help us to curb discrimination without taking away the fundamental right of freedom of expression? What if some other group tomorrow gets hurt by these protests and demands a ban on students who are currently demanding the ban, are these students going to support them? There are many issues and questions like these, the battle against racism or any type of discrimination has been going on for decades, it is a long ongoing battle but losing patience and playing the victim's card is not going to serve any purpose.

We can definitely raise our voices against any form of offensive messages, but asking to ban them just because they are offensive or hurt someone's emotions is wrong. It can open another Pandora's box where any group can come up with their demand to ban something because it hurts their sentiments. Suppose tomorrow Hindus ask to ban the sale and consumption of beef because it hurts their deep religious sentiments and also claim that cow slaughter is very offensive to them, are these students going to support any such demand for a beef ban? This is just one simple example to demonstrate that mere claims of hurt sentiments can not be a valid reason to curtain someone's fundamental right like freedom of expression. Racism is a result of ignorance, wrong teachings, and lack of social awareness. Bigots behave in a racist way. Most discriminatory practices are deeply rooted in some cultural or historical traditions that are passed from one generation to another. These traditions are outdated and even illegal, but somehow that mindset still exists among some people. Some people still believe in the superiority or inferiority of races and castes. This feeling of inherent superiority based on their birth can manifest in their behavior in so many ways. But in any free society, these people also have the right to express their opinions. We need to challenge this behavior and question them, we need to expose their ignorance and bigotry, to allow our anger to take over our logical sense is not good. Intolerance doesn't solve any problems rather it can create a few more problems that can be more serious than the original one. Freedom of speech/expression is a very important right we all have and we should not try to take it away from anyone, not even from our fierce opponents. Freedom of speech should come with the freedom to offend. The only option we have is to increase our tolerance and question things, but please don't try to silence people just because it hurts your sentiments. I hope students who want to fight against discrimination don't become a reason for some type of discrimination where some people are targeted or punished just for expressing their opinion (whatever that opinion is doesn't matter as long as it is not inciting violence). I wish all the strength, patience, and courage to these students who are fighting against discrimination because they will need these things. Playing a victim's card is of no use, it can only generate some media attention and temporary sympathy but won't help the cause in the long run. This disease of racism or casteism or any other discrimination is very old and serious, generations are affected by this problem, and fighting against these things is not that easy. Sentiments will be hurt, and offensive language or images will be used by opponents to hurt feelings, but this is part of this struggle, and anyone who wants to fight for any cause should learn to deal with these things, as these tactics are used to derail such movements and label them intolerant and anarchist. I hope these students focus on their real cause and struggle rather than getting involved in trivial things such as the demand to ban something which is a direct assault on freedom of expression.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:
1. At University of Missouri, Black Students See a Campus Riven by Race
2. Massive Yale student rally makes call for inclusiveness on New Haven campus

Who owns Jawaharlal Nehru?

The ugly spat between Congress and BJP, the two largest national parties of India over the legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru during the celebration of his 125th birth anniversary has generated a lot of political drama. The issue was really a trivia. The Congress party organized an international symposium to celebrate the 125th birth anniversary of India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. They invited leaders from various political parties (like Mamta Banerjee from Trinamool) to take part in the symposium but not the current prime minister of India Mr. Narendra Modi. This has created a political storm and wrestling match between the BJP and Congress over who owns the legacy of Nehru. Who can appropriate Nehru and who can't. This controversy is totally unnecessary and displays the primitive and shallow nature of politics which both national parties are trying to play just to score some brownie points. One can agree or disagree with Nehru's policies, one can analyze or criticize his tenure as first prime minister of India, but one can not deny his contribution to India's freedom struggle and his role in establishing a democratic system in India. One also can not ignore his role in recognizing the importance of science and scientific aptitude for a young country like India. He took an active interest and all the necessary steps to establish some of the major scientific institutes which we cherish even today. No leader is perfect, they all have their own strengths and weaknesses, and that is why we debate and discuss them, and Nohru or Gandhi were no different. But it is really unfortunate to see such a pathetic tug-of-war between two major political parties over the legacy of a national icon.

The question people are asking is, who owns Nehru? Is he Congress party's personal property as he belonged and represented Congress for his entire political career? Is he the personal property of the Nehru-Gandhi family which is still a major player in Indian politics? Do India and its people own him as he was their first prime minister? According to me, no single political party or family owns the legacy of a leader like Nehru. Of course, the family in which such individuals are born and parties or people with whom they were directly or indirectly associated might feel more strongly for them, but any public figure is open to praise or criticism by anyone. Saying that only Congress can appropriate Nehru and no one else should dare to honor him or celebrate his birth anniversary is a sign of extreme narrow-mindedness. National icons belong to the entire country irrespective of any party or group. It is not easy to become a national icon, winning an election is fine, becoming prime minister or chief minister is also okay but not every PM or CM becomes a national icon and Jawaharlal Nehru has the status of an international icon. He belongs to everyone. Any praise and criticism about his policies or actions should not be considered a direct attack on his legacy or personality. People who don't believe in Nehru's ideology or his policies are free to disagree with him or criticize him. Of course, people will feel odd if the group or party that continuously insults and discredits Nehru or Gandhi suddenly tries to claim their legacy. At the same time, one also should understand that people may change their opinion and if now suddenly they feel that Gandhi or Nehru's policies or ideas were right, and they should respect them, then this opportunity should be given to them. Only time will tell us what the real purpose behind the sudden change of hearts of these groups is. One should not doubt anyone's intentions without any evidence, a chance must be given to prove that their feelings and intentions are honest.

I feel this drama was totally avoidable and unnecessary. Unfortunately, political parties are making personalities like Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, or Sardar Patel tools of political tug-of-war between them (especially Congress and BJP). Both parties are actually insulting these people by engaging in such public spats. The whole of India is proud of these people and everyone who is influenced by their work should celebrate their legacy, at the same time, any constructive criticism should also be welcomed. No particular party should claim ownership of these national icons. I hope this controversy settles down soon and we get to celebrate the real legacy of these people. Let's hope that people remember them for the work they have done for India not just because of the party they represented.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Was Manjunath stupid to sacrifice his life?

I recently watched the movie "Manjunath" which is based on events in the life of Shanmughan Manjunath, who was a marketing manager of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC). He was murdered in November 2005 for sealing one petrol station in UP which was selling adulterated fuel. The movie specifically deals with this particular incident in Manjunath's life. Two years before (in November 2003) this incident there was another shocking murder of Satyendra Dubey which shocked the nation. Both these young professionals were murdered for opposing the corrupt practices which are very rampant all over India (especially in the public sector). They paid with their life for their desire to do their job with honesty and sincerity. The movie is very well made, it is not like other regular entertaining movies as it is not supposed to entertain you. The movie is supposed to disturb, shock, and force its audience to think and I think movie makers are reasonably successful in this. I especially liked the conversations between the dead Manjunath and his killer Monu Mittal. The dialogue between both of them when Monu is locked in jail is the highlight of the movie according to me. During these conversations, Monu tries to make fun of Manjunath's values and his courage to stand for them by teasing him for his stupidity to risking his life for his principles. He also tells him that everyone wants to have someone to change this rotten system, but they do not want this person from their own home, they want in their neighbor's house. People want the change but not at the cost of their own comfort. Many of us don't want to sacrifice our own lives or risk our own jobs to eradicate corruption from the system. We want the system to be fixed but don't want to make our own hands dirty. Because of this attitude, the corrupt system has become so strong and robust that it ruthlessly crushes anyone who even by mistake tries to challenge it. People who dare to challenge this are so few in number compared to people who meekly surrender to it that it is easy to crush these challengers without even getting into much trouble. It is not easy to be a parent of a rebel or a martyr, it takes a lot of emotional toll on the family. Manjunath's family must have faced a lot of pain and trauma after his death. They must have felt the disgusting feeling that the killers of their son might get away with their crime because of the corrupt system in India. They must be wondering why their son risked his life to stand for the principles he believed in? Fortunately, some better sense prevailed in this case, maybe because of tremendous pressure created by people, justice was delivered and perpetrators got punished. But not every case is resolved in this manure, at the end of the movie watch the names of people who were murdered or tortured just for trying to do their job honestly.

Actually, many of us see wrong things happening around us, but most of us choose to ignore them or tolerate these things. Forget about risking our lives to stop them we don't even register a protest. Social evils like discrimination, sexual harassment, and bullying keep on happening right in front of people's eyes and many choose to ignore them rather than at least register a protest. Slowly these things become systematic and very few dare to oppose them. Manjunath exactly faced the same dilemma, whatever he learned in class and whatever values he believed in were different than the ground reality he saw after starting his job. He was shocked to see such a blatant and shameless act of corruption, he was shocked that even after several warnings there was no effect. Many people surrender after witnessing systematic corruption, they accept current norms and think that one person cannot change things but Manjunath didn't and that's why we are talking about him. During one of their conversations, Monu calls him 'stupid' for risking his life for such a small thing. Was Manjunath stupid? Or was he the only sane person in the insane environment around him? Are we as a society taking any steps towards creating an environment where Manjunaths don't feel suffocated and murdered? What do murders of people like Dr. Dabholkar tell us? The movie raises many questions like this. Recent support to movements like India Against Corruption (IAC) or Aam Adami Party (AAP) showed us how serious is the problem of corruption in India. But the progress in the direction of eradicating this social menace or even controlling it is very slow, there is a lack of political will from all political parties and it seems for voters corruption is not an election issue. So it seems our society is only interested in candle marches or protests after each incident like this but they are not yet ready to force political parties to reform the entire system. I really don't know how many Manjunaths or Satyendras have to sacrifice their lives to open our eyes to see the monster of corruption. Political parties are not going to do anything on their own until people force them to do it. I hope this movie and the story of people like Manjunath inspire many young people who can at least dare to ask some tough questions to the current establishment. Initiating some change toward controlling widespread corruption will be the biggest tribute to these people who sacrificed their lives to clean this system.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]