People think I'm a cynic, and a self conceited bastard who doesn't like to play fair. People are right. Take, for example, last night's final match. I supported Sri Lanka, not India. In fact, I dislike the present Indian team, or more so, the way the present team is. And for that, I was called unpatriotic, traitor even.
Well, with a nation full of such "patriots", I think it might do rather well without one like me.
So, am I going to defend myself now? I don't know. Am I going to apologize? Hell no.
Firstly, I haven't committed a crime to ask for forgiveness, or to grovel at someone's feet, pleading for mercy. I stood by my convictions; whether they were wrong or right, fair or unfair, I don't give a damn. Secondly, I think, and I'm saying this not in a fit of rage, but through years of patience and observation- may the public be damned. They do not know what is good for them and will never do.
Some call me a Marxist for my dislike of capitalism and the consumerist way of life. Others call me a misguided and dangerous individualist, one who would sacrifice the greater good to fit the outcome in his very own twisted sense of ethics and morality. I say, I'm a little bit of both.
I am not a Marxist for the reason that I do not agree with most of what Marx had said. I do not think it to be wise or even beneficial to sacrifice the talents of one individual to abolish the injustice that arises from inequality. And I'm not a misguided individualist either. I am a perfectly guided one. I believe that man, by himself, is perhaps the most sentient being nature has created, her finest. He enters into an agreement with other men, of equal or perhaps more, talent to meet his own needs, never seeking refuge from incompetence under the guise of charity.
This is the single individual. The single man, who is endowed with this biological virtue; fine-tuned through years of evolution. True, man has always lived in groups; he was ever in need to cooperation. Not a blatant sense of conformance that shows disdain to his superior intellect just for the one reason that it seems to create inequality between him and the lesser man. Cooperation, then was turned to a forced relation of charity and philanthropy, benefiting not the needy, but the incompetent.
Tell me, is this justice? This, my friends, doesn't fit in my twisted sense of ethics and morality. And a great woman by the name of Ayn Rand showed this- that selfishness is not an undesirable trait- Selflessness, by its most direct meaning, is that itself: the loss of the self. The loss of conviction. The loss of that biological virtue.
Animals either hunt individually, or in packs. That's how nature has programmed them; wolves and lions hunt together, it's the basic philosophy of their existence, and for tigers and vipers, to hunt by themselves. But even pack animals don't give into to mass delusions; a condition to which we humans are so susceptible. We create terms like 'patriotism' and 'teams', with their own set own prescriptive standards; "if you're not this, you can't be that"; "if you're not supporting India, you're a traitor to the cause".
Public opinion is a powerful tool in a democracy. It has the power to change the fate of the nation, for the better or for the worse. The fate of the world has, on many occasions, been safeguarded by public opinion itself; sound and logical thoughts shared by the citizenry. This is where the first contradiction of the modern time arises. The public can, with proper and informed knowledge, be mobilized to do great good that the governments of the world may not even dare to achieve. But, it can also be made slave to delusions, by offering it the sweet nectar of mass conformity. A sense of identity derived from not what we believe in, but believing in what others want us to believe.
Yes, I didn't fight any war, or kill any enemies to show by allegiance to my nation. I don't think any citizen in today's world should ever have to do that. It is so easy for us to direct our nationalism against another nation, or an individual, whilst asserting our love for the motherland. When, at the very some moment, we are sending it to the gutters. Hypocrisy is one thing, a patriotic treason, quite another. I might end up making more enemies than friends through this essay. But I know you, and your tools of subjugation.
How do you defeat a man who loves none but himself? How do yo wound him, when he has no guilt whatsoever, when he risks his own standing in society, by choosing to stand by what he believes in?
The answer is: you cannot defeat him. Kill him, maybe. But not claim victory. Because, the letter 'i' isn't there in the word 'team', but it's there in 'victory'.
You've sacrificed your self worth for the sake of complacence; your identity as a responsible citizen, for the ecstasy of a victory to which you have contributed nothing. To the death of both, a sport and a nation; to create one that suits your twisted sense of ethics and morality.
With that, I sign off on this note...you may agree with me; though most would disagree, violently even. But I am just exercising a right that my nation guarantees me (or maybe it once did), the right to freedom of speech.
You have that right too. Don't forget so; because if you do, then God help our nation.
Bravo!
ReplyDeleteI would first express what I disagree with. I guess any position - whatever right one may have to hold it - if expressed, will have to be defended. And because the onus of coming into agreement with other people lies on those who initiate, they are constrained to explain their stand. Now this, I don't think, should be confused with apology or justification (though Plato very aesthetically fashions Socrates's last discourse as 'Apologia'). And really, that sheds any seemingly necessary dualism between individualism and collectivism stands disproven. We are individuals bound to live with others like us. I hope you find this link interesting. http://struggle.ws/rbr/noamrbr2.html
Now for the part I agree with: really, why all this world cup fracas? Did India win by playing well, or did it get lucky? Have we done anything to claim that victory for ourselves, or is it our need for catharsis making us claim the potion? So on. In fact, these days have got me thinking hard about nationalism, and I have got some points of my own, put up in some time, I hope.
Bravo again. It's a cemetery for somebody wanting to ask these questions here.
But why 'A "Patriotic" Treason'?
ReplyDeleteProshant, firstly I don't think you should ever explain yourself to people. It's not worth it.
ReplyDeleteThere's a reason I like you. Some things that set you apart. Okay, a lot of things.
You have your opinions. I'm glad you don't abandon them. For then, what does a man have left?
With regards to cricket, the primary reason behind this post, I like the game, and I like the current team, not all but most of them. You don't like them, that's fine. You support Sri Lanka, that's fine. People don't understand, that's fine. They never will. Patriotism has been, is and always will be a twisted concept in India.
You're set apart, my friend. But know that a few of us will always back you in whatever you do. Cheers.
P.S.: I'd like to know the reasons you don't like the current team.
@Pratik: this is precisely where the whole question of conformance and contradiction comes to the forefront of discussion. Is it possible for both to exist, but not co-exist? A paradox, it is. It's a question that I seek to answer myself, but I don't think I have reached that level of intellectual maturity as of yet. But once I do, you shall be one of the first to know!
ReplyDeleteAnd as for the title, I got the idea from the sentence in the essay itself; I thought it had a tinge of paradoxism to it.
@MrNarci: I think so too, that's why I didn't tag anyone on the link, or the note...those who were curious are welcome to see what it is and present their perspective. And, to be honest, I have no problem really with 'cricket', but the undertones it acquires as a mass event...explicit examples of mob behaviour.
And, if there's any person foolhardy enough to take my side, I guess it'd have to be you, even though we have our share of disagreements...that's what sets us apart, my friend...
and as for the reason why I dislike the present Indian team, it is actually quite simple.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the same spirit that they had three-four years back...even in the '03 WC and the India-Pak series in the same year, they played with a lot of spirit and honour...something made me respect them, and I did. But now, I don't see that earnestness and purity in their game anymore; they're good players, as is clearly evident...but they don't have that charm htey once did. And I find that very tragic.
Perhaps you are assuming that we do everything at the same time? Obviously, in a world like that, it wouldn't be possible to do anything that isn't paradox. But we are responding to different situations differently, one at a time, right? And that accounts for the possibility of wanting nobody around at times and wanting to be around many other times, right?
ReplyDeletePerhaps this thought might help:
"Man is an animal which refuses to be what he is." Albert Camus