So as I was traveling in a monstrous SUV one day, sitting in the rear, with a friend of mine sitting next to the driver - a close friend of his (a hail-fellow-well-met sort of guy) - the car had to brake to a halt, to allow an infirm old man tottering across the road. So my friend asked the driver "Were you a Marxist?" (Marxism had failed by then). Here we have to remember that basic feelings of consideration and compassion is there in everyone (except perhaps very rare individuals), and one doesn't have to be a Marxist to show such consideration. The dangers of such identification are that you tend to deny the existence of such feelings in persons who do not fit these labels. For example, Marxists may deny such feelings in capitalists; Maoists may deny them in money-lenders; South Indians may deny them in North Indians; Scheduled castes may deny them in Brahmins; Hindus may deny it in Muslims and so on.
Liberals are the ones who generally come up with politically-correct values. The problem is where they source them from. Quite often, a politically-correct statement that a person makes, may strongly conflict with his feelings and you may be able to distinctly discern a disconnect (a feeling that what the other is saying is not really true - not in the absolute sense - but in the sense that the person is saying a thing that he does not really feel!). A thing that he does not really believe! Often, you may find that a hilarious joke made on women just in good humor, evokes a strong reaction quite disproportionate to the sally. I can vouchsafe that I've often detected a disconnect in a person expressing anger in such cases, as though you could sense that he liked it, but restrained himself just in the nick of time, and thankfully (to himself), became angry.
I would like to see a time when people express their heart-felt feelings, express the truth, and then maybe, intensely pray that such feelings change if they intellectually realize that such feelings are wrong. (My friend Mathew may humourously remark - Who would care for what you would like!) Human interactions would then be more meaningful, warm, honest and consequently more trusting.
xxx
A very interesting TED Talk on the primacy of feelings and its relation to human evolution and further how it impacts on leadership qualities and even its impact on market dynamics is powerfully presented in the TED Talk for which the link is given below: (GIVE SOME TIME AFTER CLICKING ON THE LINK AS IT TAKES ABOUT A MINUTE TO LOAD)
Deepak
2 comments:
I heard a great definition concerning the difference between the liberal and conservative view being: a liberal believes that in changing the system we can make it better in order to help people while the conservative believes that people have to change in order to do a better job of living within the system. My point here being that perhaps it is that liberal intention for "the good of the whole," that sets them on a path towards more equitable systems, more open minded appreciation for diversity, and a more willing attitude to change within in order to help the world evolve towards a more human place. It seems a very healthy road to take.
Perhaps what is needed is a combination of both. There are definitely some systemic changes that are necessary. In India in the past 200 years some reformers like Raja Ram Mohun Roy put in great effort to abolish Sati - a cruel practice where widows were burnt just after their husband's death. Presently many in India are taking active steps to do away with dowry - a practice that encourages terribly dangerous measures like female foeticide. However, it is also true that sometimes a man has to put in quite a lot of effort to adapt himself to the requirements of the society. This is a tougher challenge, because making fundamental changes to one's way of life demands great will power!
Post a Comment