Friday, May 12, 2017

Disease of the heart, and mind

In 1519 Herman Cortes and his conquistadors invaded Mexico, hitherto an isolated human world. The Aztecs, as the people who lived there called themselves, quickly noticed that the aliens showed an extraordinary interest in a certain yellow metal. In fact, they never seemed to stop talking about it. The natives were not unfamiliar with gold –it was pretty and easy to work, so they used it to make jewellery and statues, and they occasionally used gold dust as a medium of exchange. But when an Aztec wanted to buy something, he generally paid in cocoa beans or bolts of cloth. The Spanish obsession with gold thus seemed inexplicable. What was so important about metal that could not be eaten, drunk or woven, and was too soft to use for tools or weapons? When the natives questioned Cortes as to why the Spaniards had such passion for gold, the conquistador answered, ‘Because I and my companion suffer from a disease of the heart which can be cured only with gold.’

These are some interesting lines that I came across the other day while reading Sapiens –A Brief History of Humankind (by Yuval Noah Hariri). These lines help to get insight into the systems that thrive in societies and how its captures common people in its tentacles, severely degrading their world. The obsession with useless yellow metal is a construct of greed that is based on hallucination of its value by influential few this then spread across the zombie populace over time. The astronomically spiked value of useless metal gold and the obsession around it is another instance of how much degraded human societies have become. If a mutually agreed subjective context has any value and is a source of some positives then it is acceptable, even then it must be kept on probation forever and evaluated with changing realities and understandings. Religion is such a construct that has been exaggerated as an insight into some kind of objective reality, some even venture it as unquestionable ultimate truth. Critical scrutiny over the ages has called the bluff even then the frailties of people and vested interests holding power has spread it as sacred that cannot be questioned. Books with amazing level of nonsense are elevated as holy and posited as lynchpin of faith hence religion, and we are told to be sensitive while the followers play havoc through regressive ways and attitudes. Some even take this context of buffoonery by killing people who have purported to have hurt their sentiments. Blasphemy has become a serious human right threat. Indeed killing and immense atrocities in the name of religion has a fertile tradition, that it finds traction in modern world is amazing and must be dealt stringently. Inanimate objects like books and constructions like holy sites, as also animate (like cows and pigs), verses etc. get precedence over human life under this extrapolated sensitivity. Sites become sacred while lives become negotiable. The pernicious form of religion, with increasingly rare strands of enlightened thoughts or introspective consideration, is hitchhiking ego driven inconsiderate section into many part of the world. While the fluffs sequestered in luxury, untouched by much of realities of life, and with axe to grind on the mainstream (which maybe good or bad depending on the context) take these religious nonsenses as definitive references for human rights and go for crusade without as much an understanding on what is in store. It is proposed that religion is sacrosanct hence religious people’s stake on sensitivities are much higher as compared to normal people.  And we are to tolerate since they can go rabid, and with increased numbers the threat is much real, nothing really explain Saudis in human right commission. As ethics, indeed basic human values, gets threatened and redefined in the assault of intrusive religion the loss is of humanity and enlightened ways gained through immense struggle and sacrifices over the centuries. This will be resisted. Tolerance to increasingly intolerant context is not the way diversity is understood. Human rights therefore get bludgeoned into narrowed frame squeezing out the humanity. Misanthropist (effortlessly misogynist) and regressive ways are being resuscitated as faith.

We are told that “faith is impossible for an outsider to enter into” really? And what is not being into any structure or miracle driven nonsenses (read religion) has anything to do with not being into faith? It seems semantics have been usurped in favour to maintain religion as sacred. Everyone has faith, and everyone also has beliefs. It is basic human nature. What one seeks to belief and put faith in differs from people to people and changes with contexts. If it is individualised then it is alright as it part of personal growth or understanding that has consequences that individual will face and is responsible for. The problem is when these contexts of faith is communitarian, reduces humans into followers and further down as numbers, this then starts to have impact on society hence severely degrading democratic institutions.  This therefore need to be scrutinised, and surely cannot be taken on face value. Religions have rarely been benign, history is testimony to it. Its anachronistic presence will have to be severely checked. That it is sacred traditions or that is part and parcel of holy books directly presented from above (or below!!) means nothing. Clearly, in the last two decades with immense level of technological developments and insights through globalization world is very much local and local has become global. Primitiveness and unenlightened ways emerging from different corners of the world cannot be benchmark for further progress, as it seems that we are hitting the wall every time in the garb of faith driven sensitivities, that vehemently and viscously seek to restrict the world. We cannot be trapped by faith and believes that is stuck in the sacredness of words frozen in time. This will not do, and any attempt to resuscitate these in the name of religion will be resisted. Religion is not, and cannot, be seen as human identity. It is a construct that doesn’t even pass basic critical scrutiny. Indeed it is a juvenile premise that is laughable if not the immense damage it is doing.

Few years back I held the view that religion based symbols need be kept in its sacred context while ideas or traditions should be severely questioned. Now though I understand these are quite intertwined and creating space for intolerance as also ferociously trapping young into its primitive fold. The breaking point came when few cartoonists were brutally killed in Paris, and significantly some section, that vouch for liberty and freedom, were seen justifying the killers. Patronising is something that comes quite easy for West, particularly when one is cushioned in colonial angst filled luxuries, now though they are crossing the lines and entering into horrendous. It is having serious ramification as common people are shedding egalitarian ways, acquired through centuries of history and struggle, as they perceive significant threat hence reverting to atavistic references. The centre is significantly shifting to right. As beautiful an endeavour as EU is losing out. If crude unaesthetic insensitive presences are about faith and therefore common people are to tolerate these then careers of this primitiveness will also have to show some tolerance (decency is a big thing in arrogant driven faiths that always evaluated itself as superior hence the followers as entitled). Since religion is brought into public space and is having significant impact on mainstream narrations there must be therefore be complete freedom to tarnish religion and sacred symbols in public space. Because that what shrinks our world we have all the right to retaliate to that world.  There can be nothing blasphemous. If tolerance and decency has to find a place then blasphemy must be done in every nook and corner. Indeed blasphemy is sane response to increase intensity of pernicious religions in public space.  And religion, as also followers, will have to learn to tolerate. More pernicious the religion, that has no respect for rational and reasoning, the bitter must be the most response. When the reasoning is negated with unverified claims of higher truth that is severely degrading human being then the response has to be urgent and harsh. Future of humanity is very much dependent on defending these spaces that has evolved with immense struggles, it really cannot be, and will not be allowed, to be diluted for ludicrous fictions. Tolerance is not one way street. What you find as religion I find nonsensical and increasingly despicable idea, indeed all scrutiny proves it beyond doubts to be too infantile that is living well past its expiry date. It’s become a burden to human society. All the nutcases from white supremacist to terrorists to casteist scoundrels find inspiration and justification. Not only that, people are increasingly loosing the critical ability to judge and reason what is true and what is not, what is reliable, what is not reliable. Ramifications are dire.