What is America?

What is America? 

Is it just a country with geographical boundaries like any other country? Is it a superpower, the most powerful country in the world? Is it the most important economy? Is it the most attractive market in the world? Is it the most preferred country for immigrants all over the world? Is it all of the above or is it something else? America is much more than its borders or its economic and military power, it is an idea that has been manifested to include all of the above characteristics. It is an experiment in diversity, democracy, and freedom—an idea that has inspired many and attracted people worldwide, it is an idea that no other country dared to implement on such a scale. It was built on the bold idea that individuals should have the liberty to make their own choices about religion, occupation, relationships, and expression. However, believe it or not, this idea of America is under attack by none other than Americans themselves.  

Even though one can argue that the US is the best country to live in compared to any country of this size and diversity, it has always been a work in progress, continuously tested and refined as the nation evolved, and it has its own problems. Racism, misogyny, and bigotry still exist in the US, comparatively less, but to an extent where one can see and feel it. The basic idea of America was the freedom to choose. The freedom to choose your religion or not to choose any religion, freedom to choose your occupation, freedom to choose a place to live, freedom to marry a person you love, freedom to express, and freedom from unreasonable interference from the government. I agree that the US Constitution was far from perfect when it was written as all these freedoms were not granted to everyone when it was written. However, in the following decades through 27 amendments, some of them resulting from civil rights and feminist movements, at least some of those mistakes were corrected. For example, the Reconstruction Amendments, the 13th (ratified in 1865), 14th (1868), and 15th (1870) Amendments, abolished slavery and granted men the right to vote irrespective of race; and the 19th Amendment (Women's Right to Vote) was ratified in 1920, granting women the constitutional right to vote (50 years after all men got that right). Note that the Child Labor Amendment to empower the federal government to limit, regulate, and prohibit child labor, and the Equal Rights Amendment which was supposed to grant equal rights irrespective of sex, failed to be ratified by more than 3/4ths of states. Apart from these amendments, some laws like The Civil Rights Act of 1964, and US Supreme Court Decisions like Brown v. Board of Education (1954), and Loving v. Virginia (1967), helped to control if not completely remove racial discrimination. Most of these problems still persist and the struggle is still on especially for women's reproductive rights and systematic racial and gender discrimination, I would say that the US is the best place to live compared to all other places. This is not because it is perfect or has no problems, but because it has fewer problems compared to most other places.

So, why are the ideals that America purports to represent under attack by many of its own residents? One of the reasons is that America is much more diverse due to immigration all over the world and some Americans see this as a threat to their supremacy. This fear is understandable but their actions are not. America's diversity is indeed one of its most powerful assets. It fosters innovation, resilience, and a dynamic society where different perspectives blend to create something unique. Diversity of race, national origin, age, culture, gender, or sexual orientation is not a threat to any nation, religion, or culture, rather it is an opportunity to learn more and build a more diverse and equitable society. America has benefitted immensely because of immigration and immigrants; its success story cannot be written without highlighting the contributions and sacrifices of immigrants. Yes, illegal immigration is an important issue and should be handled urgently with utmost care and sensitivity, but economic disparity and women's reproductive rights are equally important if not bigger issues that need to be addressed. 

The core spirit of America, the freedom to choose is getting attacked, ironically from within. It reflects a desire by some to return to a homogeneous society. They want a homogeneous society that thinks alike and behaves alike, where one religion is superior to others, and where women's rights can be decided based on the religious faith of the majority. But this version of America—a singular, monolithic culture—goes against the nation’s progressive vision, that had made it what it is today. The real challenge America faces is internal: whether it will embrace its identity as a pluralistic nation or regress toward a restrictive vision of conformity. If we want to move forward and make America better, we can't go back, we need to move forward and realize that America's greatest strength lies in embracing differences, finding unity in diversity, and understanding that pluralism, not uniformity, is America's greatest legacy. Balancing individual freedoms with a cohesive national identity is a continuous challenge, yet achieving it is essential if America is to fulfill its promise to itself and to the world, the sooner we realize this better it is for us and for America.     

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

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved, Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com

The real meaning of gender equality

"How dare you talk like this with a woman?"
"This is not the way you should behave with women"
"How can police be so brutal towards women?"

I read many complaints like these. No doubt that they all are very well intended and express feelings of empathy towards women. There is absolutely nothing wrong in objecting to rude behavior or unwarranted aggression by the police or anyone else. But all these complaints are very gender specific. Surprisingly, even people who claim to be feminists and vow to gender equality also voice such complaints which demand some sort of soft attitude towards women. It is puzzling to me on what basis while supporting the cause of gender equality some people feel that women should be treated differently under certain situations, especially when it comes to harsh criticism or some actions to maintain law and order. Doesn't the above complaints indirectly mean that 'if someone does those things against men then it's okay or less offensive but those things are not acceptable if women are victims?' Or do they mean that men can handle those things but women can't, so please spare them from any such behavior? Aren't such arguments defeat the whole purpose of the fight for gender equality? Any misbehavior or brutality should be objected to, no matter whether it is against women, men, or someone else. According to me "equality" means not just equal rights, but also equal responsibility at all levels. Equality doesn't come only with equal rights, but also with equal responsibility, suffering, humiliation, and pressure. It means you will get equal everything. One cannot demand equality and then ask for some preferential treatment. If it is so, then it is not true equality, but again some form of discrimination, and aren't all these movements like feminism or civil rights originated to fight against any such discrimination? Also, note that the discussion is not about equity, that is an altogether different and separate topic of discussion.

There are some minimum standards for public behavior. If it is wrong to speak with a woman in a certain way, then it should be wrong to speak like that with any man. If it is wrong to push or attack women while they are part of any protest or street march then it should be wrong to do these things with men as well. Both men and women are human beings and feel humiliation or pain in the same way. They both can be very sensitive so why single out women? If these complainants in any way mean that women are more sensitive to certain types of language or are in any way weak compared to men then knowingly or unknowingly they are confirming the widely prevalent stereotype of women being the 'weaker sex.'  This prejudice of 'women being weaker than men' is very old and deep-rooted. The fight to remove this prejudice has been going on for several decades and such objections don't help this cause. If women really want equality, then they should object to any such preferential or differential treatment. This is very typical of a patriarchal mindset where women are branded as very sensitive or weak and then offered some special protection and concessions at the cost of their freedom or right to choose. The practice of this type of mindset and preferential treatment is the root cause of such widespread gender discrimination all over the world.

I guess gender equality is a very complicated and confusing subject for many men and women. I think most who demand ' gender equality' know what they are asking for but they don't know what comes with it. It might be the case that many think that equality means getting all positive things like equal rights, equal pay, the right to choose, etc. But not all negative things like high levels of expectations to perform, work pressure, personal assessments, or many other things that men face in their day-to-day lives. I don't think that it can work like this, women need to be open to all criticisms and scrutiny that men go through every day. It is not that men live a very worry-free and trouble-free life. Men and women both are stereotyped in a certain way and we need to break these stereotypes for both of them. We all know that all genders (including transgenders) are discriminated against in various ways and we need to remove all that discrimination. Gender equality specifically means not asking or expecting any different treatment anywhere just because of our gender. This is what equality means and this is what equality is. It really means not to expect anything more or anything less, but to be equal at all levels. I hope that everyone who is against any type of discrimination tries to understand the real meaning of equality and act accordingly. It is not an easy task, we all need to fight against many prejudices, stereotypes, traditions, and cultures to achieve this task, many of which are very deeply rooted in our own psyche. If we flounder like this then we are going to make our task more difficult and complicated.

Let's make it very clear that if we shouldn't talk or behave in certain ways with women then we should not be doing those things with men. It is wrong to abuse a woman as well as a man. To understand what I mean by this, please check some of the videos where people react differently to physical abuse incidents in public places while males abusing females versus females abusing males. I know that these things cannot be generalized based on one study or one video, but we can sense that there is still a strong prejudice about both genders that exists in our minds. We need to stop such gender-based reactions, we need to be sensitive equally towards all genders. If not, then I am afraid that the notion of 'equality' will only remain on paper and in our blogs with no chance of becoming a reality on the ground. Let's work towards gender equality and not against it.

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

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

I am a minority, so I understand their insecurity

Some time back, I wrote a post about why the rights of minorities matter in any civilized and progressive society. The reason why I am so aware and sensitive towards the rights of minorities is because I find myself representing a minority opinion wherever I go. I am not affiliated with any particular religion, group, philosophy, or political party, I prefer to be an independent voice. I see that people are very polarized about their views; people are either pro-gay rights, anti-war, pro-poor, pro-choice, or anti-gay rights, pro-war, anti-abortion (pro-life); people love to compartmentalize everyone, and there are stereotypical definitions of conservative and liberal. People conveniently divide themselves based on whatever argument suits them, you are either with them or against them there is no possibility of a middle ground. You are either liberal or conservative, either communal or secular, it is about which side you want to choose and not about which ideas or principles you support. People treat others who don't support their own views or ideas like enemies, they often tend to fight based on party lines not based on principles. The word "bipartisan" only exists on paper.

I personally find some good ideas with every political party or ideology, but often, they are not willing to work together to implement these ideas for the betterment of society. This makes me a unique minority, when I am arguing or discussing with liberals, they think I am a conservative person, and if I am discussing something with conservatives, they think I am a liberal. Because of this, I call myself a unique minority and very well understand why it matters to protect their voice. No matter whether we agree with their opinions or not, no matter if we are comfortable with what someone saying or not, any civilized society needs to protect the voice of dissent. They need to create and maintain an atmosphere where everyone is comfortable in sharing their views and concerns. One should not confuse this with minority appeasement, that is an altogether separate issue. The minority doesn't need any extra favors they should be given equal rights and space, that's all, no more no less.

For any majority it is easy to crush any voice of dissent, it is easy for them to intimidate the minority just based on their strength in numbers. This is why it becomes the responsibility of the majority to create a conducive and healthy atmosphere where everyone from the minority feels comfortable as only the majority has the power to do this. It is quite natural for minorities to feel insecure if the majority or even part of the majority shows any hostile attitude towards them. Fortunately, so far, I happen to live in societies where dissent was never suppressed, of course, there was criticism, resistance, and ridicule which is expected, but so far, there is no physical threat to me for expressing my views and objections. But when I see people threatening others just for expressing different lines of thought even on places like social media, this makes me wonder why there is so much hatred for dissent? Why can't people discuss and debate rather than threaten each other? I hope the importance of having voices who object or criticize is not forgotten by people who are in power, I remember how people like Jawaharlal Nehru gave so much importance to listening to the other side that didn't agree with them. I hope this culture and attitude of encouraging dissent stays or rather steps up to the next level rather than moving towards majoritarianism. This is why I speak in favor of minority's rights to raise their voice, I speak in favor of discussion and debates rather than forced obedience. Let's hope that the world still believes in moving together rather than moving in the direction of majoritarianism. 

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

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

Link:
1. http://selfrealization-vinay.blogspot.com/2014/09/why-rights-of-minorities-matter-in-any.html

Why rights of minorities matter in any civilized society?

The rights of minorities in any society are very often a controversial or sensitive issue. This minority can be a particular gender, religious group, people of a particular sexual orientation, people with different abilities, or any group that belongs to the majority. Historically, most rules and traditions are designed to suit the needs of the majority. If we look at various cultures around the world we can easily notice that the majority rules, their needs, and concerns always prevail. A few examples to cite in this regard are; most musical instruments or electronics are designed keeping in mind right-handed users, in some sports (like boxing, football) the commercially available kit is designed mostly suitable for males, the laws related to food and marriage are mostly reflect majority's preferences, one can look around and can find many examples like this. The main point here is that the majority always gets their way just because of their statistical dominance, one can not ignore them just because of their number. But then what happens with the minority? Who will care for them and why? Don't they also have their own needs and requirements like the majority? Of course, they do, and these are as relevant as the needs or requirements of the majority. At least a civilized society thinks in this way, and that is why it is the job of the majority to be sensitive towards the minority's needs and requirements. But this doesn't mean there should be a policy of minority appeasement. Appeasement of any section of society is wrong, doesn't matter if it's for the majority or minority. Being sensitive towards the rights and needs of some sections of society is different than appeasement.

As I said, most of the time majority's rights are protected just because of their statistical dominance but the minority doesn't have this number advantage, so they are always dependent on the goodwill of the majority. Even in any democracy majority always rules, they have the strength of numbers on their side. In a scenario where there is a substantial majority and a weak minority (as far as numbers are concerned), it is easy for the majority to ignore the rights of the minority. But fortunately, this is not what happens in most of civilized and developed countries. We can see that in most cases enough care and attention is given to protect the minority's rights and address their grievances. Actually, the treatment offered to minority groups is often an indicator to see how developed, civilized, and sensitive that culture is. Another issue related to this is that minority communities tend to live in more cohesive manure to protect their identity or for the sake of their security. Knowingly or unknowingly they form a minority vote bank which becomes a politically attractive option for political parties. Every party tries to lure such vote banks as they know their votes come in a bunch. This may start minority appeasement and vote bank politics. There is nothing wrong with sticking together to protect your interests but when this turns into vote bank politics then things become complicated and may turn ugly. Often this vote bank politics creates polarization in society where every party tries to cater demands of their own vote bank. No matter how rational or irrational those demands are they become part of local or national politics and then the whole political battle is turned into pity vote bank politics. Many irrational demands are accepted just to keep their vote bank happy and this becomes a vicious cycle from which neither political parties nor voters come out. As much as I support minority groups for their demand to have equal rights in any society I oppose this vote bank politics, no matter which party is engaged in it. Also in the name of protecting your own identity any group or religion should not pressure the government to allow some age-old, outdated, and discriminatory traditions. Any type of discriminatory practices and animal cruelty should not be allowed under the name of religion, traditions, or culture. 

The rights of minorities are a very important issue in any country. It represents tolerance and inclusiveness. All minority groups should get proper representation so that their voices are also heard while making any important decisions. A clear distinction also should be made between protecting minority's rights and minority appeasement, both are not the same. I hope that our political fraternity and common people both understand the importance of this issue and act accordingly. Our society will be more vibrant, progressive, and tolerant if we learn to listen and respect each other's values and ideas. The sooner it happens better for us.

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

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