AT CROSSROADS WE STAND

This post should be read in continuaton with the previous post.

 

 

 

I do not think that the task of bringing about a change in Consciousness is impossible. It will be very very difficult, a truely telling process on our patience,receptivity and deeper understanding of things,and perhaps a lot of personal and social sacrifices on our part.But if the intent is there, the destination shall be reached at some stage.

Perhaps the common man thinks that as an individual he is powerless to do anything which tends to change the existing scheme of things.And we all wait for a leader like M.K.Gandhi or Nelson Mandela to arise and show us the way(in fact we publicly express ourselves to rue the fact there is no True Leader anymore as it used to be).This actually reflects the subconscious guilt of the common man that he fails to participate actively in actions or movements,individual or social,that he actually believes to be necessary for the betterment of situations. When I publicly declare,"I wish we had a leader..",I am actually washing my conscience of a necessary,broader responsibility that my membership of human society has automatically bestowed upon me. It is not an act of superhuman physical strength or superlative quotients of intelligence that is required. What is required is Honest Desire,Commitment and Patience,and an unflinching passion to keep on
Dreaming a better time in future,in the face of the worst of adversities. An average human being has all these attributes,and he uses them on a daily basis in varying degrees to survive and sustain a good-quality life.And it is a degradation and corruption of his moral commitments,that prevents him from using his natural attributes to act for a Better Cause,a Better Tomorrow and a Better Planet,for his own child.

The present stage of evolution of consciousness enwraps man in a selfish blanket of insecurity that man does not want to 'put anything at stake',which an idealogue would define as Sacrifice.It is too heavy a term,too complicated in philosophical ramifications for the average man to dabble with. We forget that all of us are making sacrifices of varying degrees in our daily lives for our own selves and our families.The difference is the degree of accountability,answerability and the responsibility to face and own up the consequences of our actions. It is Responsibility on a bigger scale and Accountability which man tries to run away from. We all display moral cowardice,and we keep on denying it because we do it collectively.

Change in consciousness has to start from here-the basic roots of morality of the individual man. We do not need mass leaders to bring about mass changes.But that's what we keep on doing oh so erroneously. If we look around us to observe the existence of radically different ideologies and the constant clash that goes on, we see A Big Mistake being committee all the time. All communities are thinking about bringing on changes through mass movements under ideologies which leaders must keep alive at any cost and drill them in from time to time.

The process to reform, must start at the individual level.Every man has to take a pause,look unto his own self and realise the fatality of his daily existence. The leader to lead the individual consciousness into an advanced 'orientation' is the individual himself. Man himself has got the power and the ability,but he must believe in his own self first.

Civilisation has reached an important landmark now.And sociologically we can no more afford to create community systems by Trial and Error(That's what we have done through History..).We should have,by now,learnt the sustainibilities and fallibilities of different models of individual morality and its execution in community guidelines. If we haven't learnt,I do not think we have become more 'civilised',in spite of having become more developed.

The facts are striking and outrageous to gulp down,but they are true. And they are lying out there,unattended. If man has gulped down the Jew Holocaust, and abominable genocides in Nagasaki and Hiroshima amongst other things, then I do not see any reason why he cannot gulp down the reality of his sociological blunders,Apologize and move ahead.

I take the first step.I do not wait for others to show me the way. It is just a matter of time that every one shall join me in The Journey-the Journey that I dream about and mentioned about in my very first post here.I know I can do it because I am Man,the Son of Nature,and my Strength is Immense.

So is Yours.

KASAB - THE FACE OF TERROR

I strongly believe that NOBODY has got the moral right to take human lives-a life which has been given to Live and flourish.It is against the 'Nature's Law'.

Kasab IS a victim of circumstances.He was not born a monster.In fact no body is.(It's a different issue that degrees of inherent violent instinct varies from man to man).Kasab has been thoroughly brainwashed by a fanatic ideology which thrives on violence,on the pervert faith that man can be killed for a cause.If I try to picturise Kasab as a child growing up with his family in the rough terrains of west Pakistan 20 years back,I find it impossible to find any interplay of sordid games of ruthlessness inside the innocent consciousness of a child who would one day grow up to kill 40 people WITHOUT any remorse.

What made that innocent child into the mass murderer he grew up to be? A consciousness which tended to co-exist,to lead a normal life of love and harmony was so deeply affected by a strong idealogue that the very roots of the consciousness changed radically.Kasab didnt take a human life at the spur of the moment,driven by a moment of distorted frenzy.For 3 long months if not more, he knew that he would kill a fellow human being,his conscience was prepared for it and throughout this period not for once did Kasab's original consciousness return to ask him questions.

We have to take that fanatic ideology on face.Why has this ideology grown?Why people of character,intelligence and leadership believe in and preach this ideology?These people do not have any guilt.They do not think that their ideologies end up provoking acts of crime. They believe in it,and seek solace from its distorted principles in times of crisis.This is what is frightening.A whole generation (or generations) exists in today's society with a set of moralities and ideals which are drastically different from ours,in the rest of the world. It's members are not criminals. They do not consciously cause thefts,robberies,murders and rapes of passion driven by an antisocial instinct. The militant revolutionaries of pre-independant India were not habitual bandits or killers.They too believe in a cause.India also believed in that cause in its days of pre-independence extremist movements. And we still do believe that they(they killed innocent British
women and children too) were heroes   and patriots who sacrificed their lives for a cause.

The first batch of men in whom the seeds of this ideology were planted, were looked upon in the same way by their own lot.That is why the ideology could thrive. The common man believed it to be morally correct and just. The ideology took its nourishment from the beliefs of the common man in it.

It's the ultimate failure of modern humanism (specially over the last 2 centuries) to create a world of Peace and Equality which pushed a segment of the normal population out of its umbrella and forced them to find a meaning in Life through a radically opposite set of moral values.If I deny this, I would be guilty of telling the greatest Lie in the history of man. Man could have given a different format to society over his existence over the last 2 centuries. Man chose inequality and marginalisation.Certain communities went on to thrive as 'developed' which sadly was synonymous with power and affluence. And THIS segment decided that it shall decide the fate of humanity-This is the most criminal blunder modern man has ever committed.Man had a chance.Because it had human history to ponder over.In history over the last 7 thousand years,we see the frailties and brittleness of community systems when man wanted to dominate man,to exist and evolve
socially,formalising social doctrines to serve as tools to create and maintain inequality.They all failed,some after decades and some after centuries. In history's pages,one can see the evolution of humankind with a corresponding tilt of social philosophy towards Equality and Democracy.And man has reached the present day where countries,societies and communities are not Ruled but Governed.The common man does not think Ruling is morally correct.

At this stage of social evolution,man made The Mistake(most probably unintentionally).It distributed ethnic pockets into a new social pattern which accommodated polarisation of power and discrimination of rights,the pattern being theorised by laws which seemingly originated from a philosophy oriented towards democracy. But it resulted in Marginalisation.

We cannot say that we did not foresee the result.The two World Wars within a single century grossly point out the fallibility of the social order humankind has adopted to proceed. Nothing changed. Man vainly wanted to hold on to same principle and the result was more warnings-the Korean War,the Cold War,the Vietnam War,the wars in Argentina,Bolivia,Nicaragua,the Seven Year War and its offshoots in the entire Middle East,the bloody strides in Cambodia,Zambia, Congo ,Somalia and the more recent Afghan and Sri Lankan wars have happened within the last 59 years,and newer and newer ones are being born,not to mention the Gulf War and the Iraq war.
The astonishing fact that 34 or more major wars have errupted all over the world in that phase of human history which symbolises the zenith of its development and advancement, reeks of an obnoxious truth we are still trying cover up in the name of 'modernization' and 'civilisation'.

Human consciousness has to change.From the basics.To start with,we must accept and apologise.Diplomatic and foreign policies have to re-written entirely.National constitutions have to be re-shaped.I think the entire concept of Sociology has to be re-defined.

It is a long and tedious job requiring Patience, Tolerance, and Sacrifice. Are we willing to do it?

WERE WE REALLY AFFECTED?

Being a resident of Mumbai,I can perceive its citizens' reactions
closely to the on-going trial of Ajmal Aamir Kasab,the lone terrorist
to be captured alive out of the ten who had precipitated the abhorrant
26/11 bloodbash in the city last year.

It's been quite a tedious process-the filing of a chargessheet against
Kasab to bring him to court for trial.At first,there was this
tug-of-war between India and Pakistan who vehemently denied any
involvement in the terror attack,despite India forwarding hard-core
proof from Kasab's in-custody confessions and the massive body of
corroborative evidence India gathered,taking the FBI's help where
concerned.

The entire world watched a three month old facade when Pakistan
officially continued to DENY all the evidence,despite voices of
eminent social and political activists,and journalists within
Pakistan,publicly agreeing that its soil had been used to breed
terrorism.There were innumerable ludicrous faux passes when Pakistani
govt.officials coming out with ill-coordinated statements on the issue
only to retract them days later.

All this is old news now.Now Pakistan officially having admitted that
the plot was hatched in Pakistan,and the executioners were trained on
its soil by organisations(blatantly terrorist,but they continue to
exist as socio-religious voluntary welfare organisations).Yet Pakistan
hasn't taken one concrete step to bring the co-conspirators to
justice.It continues to 'fight' terrorism on the Pak-Afghan border and
its own tribal dominated north-western areas,trying to show(and
failing to do so)that the state of Pakistan is not involved in any
terrorist activity.
The iron continues to get colder,as the strike continues to get
delayed consistently because of diplomatic restrictions,divided
opinions of countries on the table of the United Nations,and the
Confusion that continues to persist within India herself.

At one point of time,a decision to carry out surgical strikes in
Pakistan to smoke out the terror king-pins,was almost formalised in
response to which Pakistan created a pitch in the international forum
that India was going to war.It was baffling,comical but was successful
in warding off the possibility.Surgical strikes can never be likened
to War.Principles of Military Science convey that the motives of war
and surgical strikes are absolutely different,in
cause,strategum,principle and execution.
Let's imagine the following situation: There are two neighbouring
houses with families-'I' and 'P'. An enfante terrible of family P
continues to enter the house of I,wreaking havoc and comes back to its
own house.Family I protests against this and tells P to control and
discipline its enfante terrible. Family P says that it is incapable of
doing so. What should I do now,to prevent future intrusions by the
brats of family P?There are two options(both of which have been tried
out by states,kingdoms and republics all along history).
Option #1:To take revenge,its members can enter the house of P and
wreak havoc,more in the line of a tit for tat.This would be going into
war with P(Pakistan).For most Indians,this option is a bad one(it
is).India has never believed in this option,as it sees no sense in
destroying Pakistan's innocent citizens in its bid to destroy its
terrorist infrastructure.Whenever it has,it has been forced to do
so,being pushed into it as the backgrounds of the 1965 and 1971 wars
show.
Option 2# :It goes to P's house,tells it that " if you are not able to
control your brats,well we will ". It enters the house of P,catches
the brats,gives them a good hiding and a good smack in the rear,and
comes back.It has not destroyed the whole of Pakistan,it has only
acted against the terrorists Pakistan has harboured.This is a Surgical
Strike.If the cause of such a manuoever is well justified in front of
the international community,its execution is justified too.
This had almost happened.But Pakistan hysterically cried foul of war
pushing the Indian government,military and bureaucracy into the
backfoot.A similar thing had happened during the Kargil impasse when
Pakistan had exploited India's confused indecisiveness,and its failure
to get all the political voices rooting for a same agenda.

The in-house bickering of Indian politics continues shamelessly to the
day.And the result is we have not been able to push Pakistan back a
single inch.The iron has cooled down,and the capacity to strike has
disappeared for good.Indian political parties fight tooth and nail
with each other,seeing a potential threat eradication in the opponent
party's eyes.But we cannot simply rise above it and see a true threat
to our sovereignty as a whole,in the shameful Pakistani antics.

The trial of Kasab is turning out to be a facade too.Already with the
Western media branding Kasab as the 'gunman' and not the
'terrorist',and referring to him as 'Mr.Kasab',the Indian media has
started to present Kasab in a sympathetic overtone.The front-pages
describe Kasab's every glance,smile and expression with a hero's
attention,the resultant portrayal being of a man primarily misguided
and now in utmost repentance.The monster is slowly turning into a
helpless man needing the world's sympathy.
Do we really have to do this?Does Kasab deserve this?The entire world
had seen and had become enraged by the cruel psychosis with which
Kasab the Monster had randomly fired from his AK-47 spraying bullets
and hurling grenades at innocent Indian lives,killing scores of
them.Mumbai seems to have forgotten all these.So does India.
It raises an embarrassing question:shameful but true.Were we,outside
the near and dear ones of the 179 people killed in the 26/11 carnage
really affected?Or was it just another 'show' for us?

WHERE DO WE STAND

 

 

It was disgusting,to say the least,to see the way the electronic media portrayed/presented the recent sensational news of a young woman who was molested and stripped to nudity by a mob in the presence of a police contingent.

I dont want to go into the graphical details of what was shown in the popular news channels. I do not wish to,and that would contradict the very point which I am trying to drive home here. I can only say that certain parts of the incident where the hapless victim's modesty was outraged to the extreme were shown again and again and again, each time with Suggestive  specific commentaries on HOW the act was being done.

From here,one can proceed to elaborate on many aspects: gullibility and escapisn of the human mind(which we have discussed before),commercialisation of the electronic media(keeping in mind the negative consequences)etc.

Should an official gag be put upon the media in certain aspects?Whenever this topic has come up before,the media and the intelligentsia have always come up with CRY FREEDOM. Freedom to express,Right to know etc. are referred to specific paragraphs of the constitution,and a frenzied rhetoric is whipped upto such an embarrassing pitch that the poor voice which had pronounced the word Gag cowers down to a long and secret hibernation.
Even I am,personally,against anything which tends to curb conscious,spontaneous and healthy expression and sharing of thoughts/informations/knowledge on any platform.But if someone would propose that the above-mentioned presentation of the news qualifies to be healthy sharing of information with people who have got a right to know,I would strongly beg to disagree.

What is the effect of a gag and what purpose is served by a gag order?A literate person of average intelligence like me would say that the effect of a gag is restriction and its purpose is to restrict potential elements from influencing the society in a negative way.A good example of a gag is censoring of movies by boards which assume the role of watch-dogs.Censoring of movies is carried out mainly to minimise graphic representations of irrelevant violence including sexual violence,to exclude irrelevant dialogues and songs which are obscene,and to avoid aspects which can potentially hamper ethno-religious coexistence of the human community.Out of these,the first 2 are more specific as they target impressionable minds of children,adolescents and the volatility of the young mind rising out of despair and frustration due to social unequality.
I agree with censorship in movies in specific cases when I see that the actual purpose is being served. And I also point out that presentation of news by the electronic media in the expression and format similar to that of the Bihar incident,can affect the minds of children, adolescents (or frustrated youths) when they watch it over the electronic screen in their own homes and in presence of their own parents.(Being at home with parents adds another dimension featuring sensitive mind-games of a thinking child,as the child accepts that what is taking place on the television screen,is taking place in agreement with the parents and the security of home ).
I can imagine myself as the eight year old boy that I was,watching this news item on television, lapping up the graphic details, listenin the suggestive commentary again and again. I dont think I am feeling good.
Freedom of Press has to exist.For that the Press has to ensure officially and practically that whatever it is expressing,serves the actual purpose-Right to know and Freedom of knowledge.If it is not, then it is outside the domain of Freedom of Press, the Press should dissociate itself from such subverses.And then censorship by appropriate watch-dogs should come down heavily upon them to nullify their existence once and for all.

Of course, the feasibility of appropriate watch-dogs is another matter.

 

SCIENCE-SPIRITUALISM INTERFACE

A few days back, one of my dear friends had posted a comment on a social
internetwork site that drew a lot of healthy speculation and revealing
comments.

The subject in discussion was Randomness. My dear friend,though a
medico,has vast interest in a lot of other subjects of science,and he
had seemed to hit upon Randomness in an article from the domain of
mathematics.

The discussions were huge and varied.People from the fields of
mathematics and physics came forward with insights citing well-known
theories and mind-boggling equations.Mind-boggling for me,at least,as
I am a physician and have got pathetic knowledge in Mathematics or
Physics.

The debate spanned everything from Randomness, Chaos(as defined in
Physics) and states of Equilibrium.I proceeded to add my own thoughts
on what I think about Randomness and Equilibrium(which is dealt
extensively in the subject of Physiology,when we study Homeostasis).

Randomness is spread throughout the Universe.And it has been defined
by mathematics,theoretical physics to the best of man's ability.Man
looks at his surroundings,Nature and has got an inherent urge to
understand and explain previously unexplained occupances and
events.This urge has resulted in the evolution of scientific
knowledge,thus in the evolution of mankind itself.

It is a very debatable topic that how we look at things and explain
them is the Actual Truth or not.We have to make strong,drastic
assumptions right here in the beginning.Before man proceeds ahead to
delve into scientific subjects,he must assume one thing and follow it
wholeheartedly - that what man explains and understands through
theories and equations Is what happens actually.
We look at nature,the universe with perceptions that have developed
over thousands of years as man has advanced in his knowledge.These
perceptions have now become deep-rooted in our minds to the extent of
almost being Original Truths in our subconscious.We go ahead in
science and technology,naturally assuming to be Absolutely
True,certain aspects which our forefathers have invented or theorised.

If a modern day physicist wants to proceed,for example,in the subject
of Gravitation,he already takes into account the laws of gravitation
as theorised by Newton a few hundred ears back.The physicist does not
theorise on his own,the concepts of statics and dynamics,speed and
acceleration,actions and reactions.He proceeds assuming the facts
explained by Newton's laws to be true.
That is how man has developed scientific branches further. Equation A
has been formalised in the 18th.century,Equation B in the
19th.century,Equation C in the 20th.century.A 21st.century student of
science tries to understand a particular event through his knowledge
which comprises of all the Equations,A, B and C.He hits upon something
new which he theorises by Equation D.
At this point,Equations A,B and C are 'discarded' to make way for
Equation D.Scientific principle does not prove,however,that these
Equations were wrong. On the contrary,it acknowledges all three are
correct and that Equation D is an amalgamation of A,B and C. The new
equation D can explain a particular event much better than the
previous equations,so it is incorporated in the pages of advanced
knowledge,which no more contain the previous equations as they have
served their purpose and have become redundant now.The new student
goes ahead with Equation D as a base.He doesnt need to know A,B,C now
as it is assumed that if he has accepted Equation D,he has
automatically agreed with Equations A,B and C.This is how branches of
science become advanced and refined.

One aspect has been constant in this discussion all along.That what
Man sees and how he sees it and understand it in Nature is what
happens Actually.This means that this view-point is true regardless of
human existence.An event will always follow a specific path,whether
humankind is present to understand it or not.
An event takes place.Man studies it,analyses it and understands the
mechanism,putting forward a theory which tells us the event has taken
place in This mechanism or That. Does it have to be true?
Red is red.98% people see it as red.So Man assumes that the colour is
Really red. 2% people who are colour-blind do not see red as red.This
is because their chromo-receptors are defective in a Specific way.
What if the chromo-receptors of those 98% people with 'normal vision'
were aligned in that Specific way(which is the case in colour-blind
people)and the 2%colour-blind people had their chromo-receptors in the
alignment which is 'normal' as we actually look upon it?Then man
wouldn't seen perceived Red as red Actually is.It would have been some
other colour which the colour-blind people would only see as Red.
Nobody knows what Red actually is.We see it red because of a
specificity of our own structural anatomy.Do Nature and
Universe,existing from the beginning of Time long before man came to
exist Have to conform to specificities of man who actually occupies a
mere .00000000000001 % of schemes of things?Logic,evolved by man
himself,will say a loud NO to this question.Natural and Universal
events continue to happen completely independant of man's existence.

The basic concepts of SCIENCE are Relative,not Absolute.

Science is the way how We understand the scheme of things out there.It
is a necessity for us,not for the scheme of things.

Science itself pointed this out to Man when he entered the world of
quantum physics.In every step,man would face a contradiction which
classical physics would not conform to.The contradiction would cease
to exist in the quantum world which also follows its own
specifics.Millions of things happen predictably in the quantum
world,which classical physics cannot explain at all.Man has been
forced to accommodate both classical laws and quantum laws in applied
physics.The particle fits in as smugly in scientific knowledge as does
a wave.We have been forced to accept this Dualism of Nature.
Modern theoretical astrophysics has evolved on the basis of
dualism.And it has taken man to understand the grey zones of his
surroundings.But it wouldnt stand a chance if man stuck to the
principles of classical physics.

Man's acceptance of Dualism in the scheme of things has taken him into
the world of 'Possibilities' .If we can accept two contrasting
principles and possibilities as in dualism,we can accept an infinite
number of possibilities.There are infinite possibilities everywhere
and we proceed to choose one out of the infinite which can make us
understand and predict a specific event.We dont deny the other
possibilities.We just choose one of them to understand and comprehend.

The incorporation of Dualism and the Infinite in Science have taken
place recently,over the last century.But it has been always
there,since times infinite,in Spiritual Philosophy.Thousands of years
back,men of wisdom has dealt with and circumspected Dualism.The Vedas
and Upanishads of ancient India are prominent examples discussing the
co-existence of the Dwaita and the Adwaita,the Khanda and the
Akhanda,the Nitya and the Anitya,in man's attempt to understand the
Mind of Brahma,the Superconscious.
If one attempts to understand the principles of Life with the
knowledge of the ancient Vedas and the modern Quantum theories
together,there are startling revelations which tend to explain the
Absolute Truth rather than the Relative truths which
classical,pre-quantum science adhere to.That however will be the
subject of our next discussion.

Heading For Disaster

It is alarming to open the morning newspaper and find out another new
prediction which brings the approximate date of the Arctic Sea warming
up,the polar caps melting and inundation of the continents,closer and
closer.
Till a few years back,one could sit back and selfishly feel secure
that the potential doomsday is centuries away.
Perhaps this self-centred feeling of security has decelerated the
progress of awareness regarding eco-preservation and the potential
threat of global warming and its disastrous consequences.Man needed to
think deeper and act more strongly to stop and reverse the dynamic
ecological imbalance.
Trillions of globally dominant currency have been spent,newer
environment preservation groups have surfaced,to do something about
ozone holes,greenhouse effects and take drastic steps to stop and
reverse man-made pollution.
It has not been enough.Ecologic forecasts have set doomsday dates
centuries ahead,even millenia away.Now these dates have come so
close,with predictions of disastrous calamites in 2020 or so.This
alarms me.

It is more alarming to see the lack of desired responses.It seems we
are not taking these eco-researches and predictions.Are we in a mode
of self denial.Political oscillations,terrorism,economic
meltdowns,corporate mergers,billion currency deals,the ever-fresh dumb
charade of nuclear (non/) proliferation-it's a long list with improper
placements of priorities-dominate the thoughts of men behind
politico-economic power,of the electronic media,and (as a result)the
priorites of the average citizen.
Even the protesting voices of environmental groups have become
familiar now to the extent of being totally overlooked.
Man has developed a gross apathy.It seems to be a socio-psychological
community response.It's an apathy towards the potential threats of
destroying the planet and along with that,man's very existence.
It has been a deliberate subconscious process,resulting in a mind-set
behind which man hides and use it a tool to survive the trauma and
stress of modern life which is becoming fuller with newer complexities
and seem to be auto-generated.This seemingly auto-generation of newer
complexities encourages man to 'escape' to absolve himself of his
basic responsibiliter.Actually it represents the vicious cycle in
which man's life has been caught,spiralling towards destruction.
Man's perception has to change,and that too,very soon.If we think we
have got no control over life's ever-increasing complications and that
it is a social event which shall shall happen,then we are wrong.
If we admit for once that it is a man-made vicious cycle which has to
be cut at one place and can be rectified by man himself,half the job
is done.But one of us has to take the most important step,the very
first one.

Is anybody listenin?

FAKE PHOTOS:THE INSTINCT

After the recent tragic crash of an Air France plane,newspapers and
television channels kept on presenting newer facts each day through
desperate assumptions,and speculating wildly on the possible causes
and exact location of the plane crash.And this kept the world stuck to
the newspaper headlines and television screens when news channels went
live.It went on for weeks,long after the crash had taken place(and
possibly by then,bereaved family members and friends of the passengers
had accepted and reconciled to the reality of the disaster).
There was sensational excitement all over the world,when all of a
sudden,photos of the passengers in their last few moments were
released into the internet.Nobody could trace the source though,but
the photos were assumedly snapped by one of the passengers himself
just before the aircraft went down.Mails were frenziedly forwarded all
over the web sharing the morbid photos and people kept on gushing and
commenting on the Pictures Of Death.People wanted to see and feel
first hand,the ruthless(and ironical)reality of the last moments of
the passengers before they were lost forever.
Then came a bigger shock.It was revealed that the photos were
fake,taken from the television series LOST.People reacted angrily to
the perverseness of the idea of circulation of fake photos surrounding
a real-life disaster and there was rapid despatching of emails
conveying the shock and anger of those who had actually believed in
the photos.And this infuriated reaction seemed palpably overdone.
People had 'fed' upon the gross brutality of death and the morbid
helplessness of the people just before they died.
Man had been caught on the wrong foot.Suddenly a sadistic aspect of
human psychology was exposed to the world and,more importantly,in
front of its own self.
The frenzied anger behind the world-wide condemnation of and protest
against this perverted joke,actually reflects upon the human psyche's
embarrassment and the immediate reaction to escape,distancing itself
from this embarrassment.People suddenly perceived the naked perverted
gratification they had subconsciously derived each day,from
following,and speculating about,the helplessness of men who would die
in a few moments.Man had somehow 'enjoyed' the brutal and cruel way
death had captured the ill-fated passengers with.The same animal
instinct had once gratified citizens of Rome as they watched
gladiators drawing enslaved blood in the amphitheatre.And the same
instinct still comes to surface when men spend exorbitantly for
tickets to watch Matadors killing a helpless,entrapped bull,slowly and
gradually.They enjoy watching the bull die step by step,each lance
piercing it with cruel pain.
Man can deny it but cannot escape from this Reality-that a
violent,sadistic element still remains.Perhaps it was an instinctive
necessity of prehistoric men to survive in a dangerous,hostile
environment 15,000 years back when they Had to kill to live
themselves.
Is this morbid instinct relevant at all for human
existence?Evolutionally it should have been extinct by now.But it is
still there inside.Man has consistently and deliberately made his
environment hostile by 'creating' wars and polluting the ecosystem in
which he lives.Perhaps it is a subconscious need of man to justify his
innate animalistic sub-self,and to create windows by which he can vent
out animal self.
Man has a long way to go to reach a superior evolved level.And for
that,he has a Big Responsibility.He cannot escape.