It is a collective failure

People are not unreasonable. They have heart, compassion. Even when they are not aware of facts, they are amenable to reasons if the issues are presented dispassionately, objectively. Then why should there be so many aversions, disputes, divides, hatred? It is not justifiable.

People are fed and misled with mutilated and perverted opinions, views, misinformation covertly or overtly. They are inebriated, stupified with convoluted logic, narratives to convert their mindset, insecurities provoking their basic instincts, impulsive actions.

It is not that the majority of people succumb to such designs, machinations but their silence and passivity against deliberate aggressive agenda set by tricksters, mischief-makers fail to prevent and stop but also allow them to spread causing incalculable damage to this country.

We cannot get away by blaming others for our failure. That is escapism and we are also part of that majority even if not silent but failed to effectively counter it. But when a majority of people failed it indicates that difficulties were not properly examined, addressed.

It is not totally right to escape citing that the opponent captured the media, subjugated independent institutions; nothing is possible in such adverse circumstances; there is a leadership vacuum in the opposition ranks; people should change their attitude etc.

Who are the people? That includes us. The people and the fascist are not going to change. It is unlikely to happen. Are we going to wait till D-day? Have we examined, utilised, exhausted all possibilities that were or even presently available before us? No is the blunt answer. 

The truth is it is a total and miserable failure on the part of everyone in the opposition or groups of people who know the dangers posed by the fascist. Negativity is not going to solve the issue, save and bring back our democracy, but objectivity and application will.

What is the way out?

Most of us are conscious of our right not so much about the rights of others or the truth or justifications behind them. Our opinions, views are ‘sticky’ and do not get out of our mind even if illogical. We have a closed mind, not dispassionate while we refuse to admit them.

The opinions, views, conclusions that float around about every issue, every angle, its origin, its solutions widely vary. The versions and conclusions are innumerable in quality and content. But what is true and right do not vary except over time due to improvements, changes.

Why should there be so much variation and varieties in deviating so much away or around the truth? It is due to imperfect thought processes, failed leadership, lack of confidence in them. We are not robots to come with identical, unitary conclusions but can evolve a consensus.

How to go about building that consensus and study, understand what is true and right? One should not see everything in isolation. All factors, information, opinion about all issues should be collected, analysed to come to conclusion, consensus. A comprehensive look is needed.

We adopt this approach for any investigation or judicial process to arrive at the truth. Addressing public issues obviously has to be the job of all political leaders or groups especially when democracy is under threat. But they are pulling in different directions.

All political leaders, parties are trying to secure their political relevance, existence instead of standing together, consolidating their views and launch a political offensive to establish the truth. They are overconfident; will be irrelevant when democracy does not exist.

Role of the people

When the preamble of the constitution of India starts with “We The People Of India” we feel glorified, superhuman. When fascists elected by us are beating us to a pulp and leaving us pulseless, we feel helpless with all the negativity and passivity flooding our thoughts and mind.

We are perplexed. We are unable to correct our thought process. We presume that our views, ideas, opinion are largely right and question why others are unreasonable, illogical. We do not get all facts on hand to come to firm conclusions. We should search for ideas, information.

Everyone functions within their limitations. No one achieves anything on their own including the scientists, experts. The contributions and efforts of many others are also involved behind such achievements. But we are not so professional in our personal, political decisions.

We misjudge our strengths, limitations. There is vast scope for the exchange of views. We are to engage in negotiation, discussion, interaction to arrive at what is right and true. Rahul is repeatedly emphasising it at the macro level. Can we do it at the micro-level?

What a popular political leader can do is immense and will have a wide impact. But the role of we the people is not insignificant. We have a right to agitate for the right causes; fight for the public interest in all available forums; we can collect, coordinate, consolidate views.

We, the people have some advantages. Many politicians do not have them. The fascist regime cannot file cases against everyone. We have social media, other media, channels that we can make use of to interact, spread our views, contents. But there has to a method, not madness.

There is a way to collect all information, piece them together without losing its relevance, logic and sense. We are to connect the dots and loose ends, lateral angles of characters and contexts involved. It may be a collective coordinated effort. But patience is needed.

This is just to create awareness about the existence of this angle, our weaknesses, failures. Behind the liberal skin, many(most?) of us are self-righteous, listen less, preach more. We should discuss how to have discussions. There is much to improve if one has an open mind.

Beyond the limitations, weaknesses of people, the reality is they do not have a proper public platform for the exchange of views, opinion, engage in rational conversations, discussions, interactions allowing, accommodating all points of view even if they wish to indulge in it.

The social media for which people have easy access may be used but the format, practices adopted lack the depth needed for free exchange of diverse views to come to mature conclusions. There are avenues for creating such a platform but organised efforts and support are needed.