The whole of Orissa was watching the kidnapping and the hectic parleys that ensued after that. Maybe it was the whole of India/world watching. The difference would probably be the sense of involvement and emotional intensity would be inversely to the physical distance from the scene of action and the key players.
The facts of the case – Krishna venturing into the cut-off area without due security, his kidnapping, public hue and cry, hectic mediation, demands of Maoists, accepting/acceding [depending upon, how we look at them] to the demands and the release. That’s the story which all of us know.
I am not interested to elaborate the facts of the case. My questions are different. But still I am eager to note a few points in this whole drama. One, Mr Vineel Krishna was apparently a hard working and popular officer, he had started many positive initiatives. Kudos to such young bright officers – I am happy the most prestigious [if not most coveted any longer] is attracting such motivated people. Thanks to him and his efforts the huge public support he had, made things easier. Had it been someone with lesser credentials – the denouement could have possibly been very different. The broader message was – there are developmental efforts going at ground level.
Two, the ‘Maoists’ [this sounds like another caste – I am tempted to call them the abductors or better still the protesters] acted with fair amount of maturity. Considering they could have arm twisted big time. Most of their demands were along developmental lines – which were easier to accept. The treated the collector and the engineer well. So essentially they were humane. That’s the message.
At a larger level – the queries. There is certain amount of development happening. However humane [maybe logically consistent too] people fighting against lack of development [or atleast making it a plank to garner local support] and fighting against the very system which promises development. Where is the gap? Is it at an intent level? Is it at an empathy level? Is it an interest level? Is it merely at fight between consumption and contentedness? Is it just a fight between two cultural and political contexts? Is it a manifestation of the boundary condition failure of the concept of a united nation state!!!!
Those are the larger questions. I don’t have any point of view to these answers. I think people like me are far removed from the ground level [temporally, spatially and culturally] to have a point of view [forget about thinking of answers!!]. More so we would be demeaning the complex social web and the tireless efforts to solve this social dichotomy/problem – if we were to profess a simplistic solution. But these questions will nonetheless play into the mind. Hope they don’t get into oblivion with time – till we have another Vineel Krishna being abducted.
Forgetting philosophy and talking about policy. Can this bartering be a precedent a sustainable policy? Where is it leading to? Can we answer aligned questions? In the emotion charged atmosphere, these questions were coldly indecent. But they are questions we need to answer, if we have to have a sustainable and proactive action road-map.
• How will Mr. Vineel Krishna and family respond. Will he/they get defensive/withdrawn or will be more motivated. The government [read ‘civil’ society] has allowed to let a few people who were abetting crime back to initate violence and killings.
• For whom should we bend [remember Subaiya Sayeed], who should be martyred [and how would the martyrs family feel, when we bend for others] and who are to be treated as statistics [common people, dragged and ragged daily am sure by different groups – based on affiliations].
• What will the Government of India/Government of Orissa do to avoid such incidents. Will officers continue going to cut-off areas to further developmental initiatives or whether they will fall back. If they fall back, will we be increasing the dichotomy with aborigines/Maoist sympathizers.
• What will be the role of Home Ministry in tackling violence. Should they take proactive measures and book more and more people in an attempt to eradicate the problem. In such a case – if we have more kidnapping should have a barter system. Equally, the Maoists wait for bartering.
• What happens to the defence personnel, police personnel, locals who get killed; who don’t have the mercy of the Maoists. They are also doing the job of ‘civil’/mainstream society like the way Mr. Krishna was doing. What will be their morale in the whole process?
To summarise [I reiterate I don’t have a point of view], just asking questions:
• Is it proper to save a collector, when we are allowing the local to die.
• Do we have an actionable philosophically consistent road-map? Where are we heading towards?
• Is it practical to aspire for a road-map, when such dichotomies have existed since time immemorial? Can we head towards greater sanity or is the steady state only status quo or greater disorderliness?
• Assuming egalitarianism would help [am personally not sure about this though] Do the answers – lie is reduction in consumption or greater development [which is greater consumption]?
• How do we make different social groups nurture a perception / feeling of a sense of fairness/empathy by other groups to them? The crux how do we curb comparision and more the merrier syndrome. And accept what we what, but try for what we want and what we feel is consistent with self and greater good.
These are tough calls.
Bhubaneswar
February 26, 2011
The facts of the case – Krishna venturing into the cut-off area without due security, his kidnapping, public hue and cry, hectic mediation, demands of Maoists, accepting/acceding [depending upon, how we look at them] to the demands and the release. That’s the story which all of us know.
I am not interested to elaborate the facts of the case. My questions are different. But still I am eager to note a few points in this whole drama. One, Mr Vineel Krishna was apparently a hard working and popular officer, he had started many positive initiatives. Kudos to such young bright officers – I am happy the most prestigious [if not most coveted any longer] is attracting such motivated people. Thanks to him and his efforts the huge public support he had, made things easier. Had it been someone with lesser credentials – the denouement could have possibly been very different. The broader message was – there are developmental efforts going at ground level.
Two, the ‘Maoists’ [this sounds like another caste – I am tempted to call them the abductors or better still the protesters] acted with fair amount of maturity. Considering they could have arm twisted big time. Most of their demands were along developmental lines – which were easier to accept. The treated the collector and the engineer well. So essentially they were humane. That’s the message.
At a larger level – the queries. There is certain amount of development happening. However humane [maybe logically consistent too] people fighting against lack of development [or atleast making it a plank to garner local support] and fighting against the very system which promises development. Where is the gap? Is it at an intent level? Is it at an empathy level? Is it an interest level? Is it merely at fight between consumption and contentedness? Is it just a fight between two cultural and political contexts? Is it a manifestation of the boundary condition failure of the concept of a united nation state!!!!
Those are the larger questions. I don’t have any point of view to these answers. I think people like me are far removed from the ground level [temporally, spatially and culturally] to have a point of view [forget about thinking of answers!!]. More so we would be demeaning the complex social web and the tireless efforts to solve this social dichotomy/problem – if we were to profess a simplistic solution. But these questions will nonetheless play into the mind. Hope they don’t get into oblivion with time – till we have another Vineel Krishna being abducted.
Forgetting philosophy and talking about policy. Can this bartering be a precedent a sustainable policy? Where is it leading to? Can we answer aligned questions? In the emotion charged atmosphere, these questions were coldly indecent. But they are questions we need to answer, if we have to have a sustainable and proactive action road-map.
• How will Mr. Vineel Krishna and family respond. Will he/they get defensive/withdrawn or will be more motivated. The government [read ‘civil’ society] has allowed to let a few people who were abetting crime back to initate violence and killings.
• For whom should we bend [remember Subaiya Sayeed], who should be martyred [and how would the martyrs family feel, when we bend for others] and who are to be treated as statistics [common people, dragged and ragged daily am sure by different groups – based on affiliations].
• What will the Government of India/Government of Orissa do to avoid such incidents. Will officers continue going to cut-off areas to further developmental initiatives or whether they will fall back. If they fall back, will we be increasing the dichotomy with aborigines/Maoist sympathizers.
• What will be the role of Home Ministry in tackling violence. Should they take proactive measures and book more and more people in an attempt to eradicate the problem. In such a case – if we have more kidnapping should have a barter system. Equally, the Maoists wait for bartering.
• What happens to the defence personnel, police personnel, locals who get killed; who don’t have the mercy of the Maoists. They are also doing the job of ‘civil’/mainstream society like the way Mr. Krishna was doing. What will be their morale in the whole process?
To summarise [I reiterate I don’t have a point of view], just asking questions:
• Is it proper to save a collector, when we are allowing the local to die.
• Do we have an actionable philosophically consistent road-map? Where are we heading towards?
• Is it practical to aspire for a road-map, when such dichotomies have existed since time immemorial? Can we head towards greater sanity or is the steady state only status quo or greater disorderliness?
• Assuming egalitarianism would help [am personally not sure about this though] Do the answers – lie is reduction in consumption or greater development [which is greater consumption]?
• How do we make different social groups nurture a perception / feeling of a sense of fairness/empathy by other groups to them? The crux how do we curb comparision and more the merrier syndrome. And accept what we what, but try for what we want and what we feel is consistent with self and greater good.
These are tough calls.
Bhubaneswar
February 26, 2011
Comments
Post a Comment