Saturday, August 20, 2016

Words and inaction

It's all in the words. The way we use it. And the way we choose not to. For instance, some newspapers today consciously made an effort to lionize PV Sindhu's inspirational final last night while others didn't. The latter used effete words like "settles for a silver", not necessarily to demean her efforts but because they didn't put in too much thought into the headline. However, we are fast moving into an era where the intentions don't matter anymore. The vocabulary does. If you call a Balochi freedom fighter a rebel but an Azadi seeker from Kashmir a hero, you are in trouble. If you mention "the men behind PV Sindhu's success" in your tweet, you'll be called a sexist although you were anything but that. This verbal microscopism has reached a point that it's high time we abolished men and women, male and female, from our dictionaries. Apparently, we are all single entity irrespective of our biological diversity. In a similar vein, the word 'justice' gets thrown around by the ones who can't help but brandish their flag of self-righteousness. Again, the intentions are not bad but the moment you get into the corridor of legalities, you've got to accept the overbearing fact that humans aren't capable of justice. It's also when we realize that we are just a few breaths short of using another circumstantial word called 'revenge'. Fast-backward to Hammurabi code before we know it? Yes, people are evil and wrongs are committed every single day without fail. But what's the solution? Will vindication of your own morality restore the faith in anything else except you? I highly doubt it. Whatever you do in the name of justice is mostly for yourself; to feel better about yourself; to be able to sleep at night hoping strongly that the perpetrator doesn't. The battle for justice turns into a circus of sorts, mainly because we are supposed to refer the law. Laws written by mortals like you and me. Laws that change every year. What was deemed lawful 30 years ago is a criminal offence today. What's unpardonable today might be granted a medical twist two decades hence. In such a miserable scenario, one can only hope for answers. Putting someone behind bars because you want to make sure they don't repeat the crime has less to do with that and more to do with your vengeance. For some reason, you're not willing to give somebody the benefit of doubt you'd happily present yourself. The benefit that he might not repeat his crime just like you firmly believe that you won't open your criminal account by committing that same crime someday in the future. I'm not saying we should ignore our great books of wisdom but i can't help but notice the helpless state we are in. Just like i am in when i wrote "repeat his crime" knowing clearly that i'm being sexist there. 


Harry said...

brilliant post

jack said...

If u want get more information pls click rsgoldfast