We are supposedly proud of our Independence yet the celebrations are ridiculously formal, typically limited to the hoisting of our tricolor and distribution of sweets from the neighborhood halwai. Today's HT editorial says we should express ourselves more freely. Totally agree with that coz in the US, most people look at 4th of July as an occasion to meet family or go to Vegas rather than stick US flags on their shirts. Of course, its been more than 200 years for them now but only 60 for us, so maybe at a subconscious level we are a little afraid to celebrate. If we relaxed too much and let our guard down, maybe...you get the point.
Next is the question of patriotism. In the movie, "The Rock", Sean Connery surrenders after Ed Harris threatens to kill a tourist held as hostage. In the ensuing conversation, Connery says he thinks Harris is a friggin idiot. Harris quotes Thomas Jefferson about nurturing the roots of liberty from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Connery retorts with Oscar Wilde's "Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious". Harris strikes Connery behind the neck, who falls to his knees and follows up with "Thank you for making my point!" If it was a Bollywood movie, the hall would be drowned in whistles.
Is patriotism losing its relevance today? For that matter even independence. No country can claim to be totally independent of the rest of the world. Except Iran and North Korea maybe, but even they have some outside help. The great United States that proclaims itself to be land of the free and home of the brave is probably the least independent nation today. Why, even our economy is intimately linked to the fortunes of the US as the recent crisis has shown. So in days of globalization where interdependency and interconnectedness rule, independence is an illusion. Even governments get influenced when making policy choices.
Things are even murkier with patriotism, which was never clearly defined to begin with. Its not right to love and protect one's own faith, gender, community or even state against another, but it is miraculously right to defend one's nation against another. The definition and boundaries of patriotism have been conveniently morphed over time. Some freedom fighters and most kings are revered as valiant patriots although their actions amounted to nothing more than protecting their own little territory. If patriotism is the feeling that one's nation is the best among all, how different is it from terrorism? I am not denying the need to defend one's nation against terrorists and wars, but let us clearly identify it as a necessary evil than an inherent virtue.
Finally on SRK's detention at Newark. Applying my learnings from Taleb's FBR, someone being a celebrity doesnt rule out their possibility of being a terrorist. That he is popular doesnt mean he cannot be a criminal. Plus the fact that someone has not killed until today doesnt mean he wont ever. That's a black swan for you. Although in SRK's case, I have this funny feeling that the immigration officer's wife is a big fan of SRK and must have dragged him along to watch one of his inane movies. Wont blame him for the reaction! But our politicians are taking this incident more seriously than Kalam's frisking!!
No comments:
Post a Comment