Manipur News

There are two ways of looking at the way things are developing in Manipur. One is that everybody is taking the law into their own hands. But this leads to the second conclusion, that the establishment in which hands the law should solely rest has lost its moral legitimacy and with it the authority to make the citizen trust it is there to do them good. And so here is Manipur again under a prolonged siege. Even the thought of the creation of a new district is threatening to turn the state upside down, with one group wanting it at any cost and another threatening to oppose it to any extent. Even as the siege is nearing a month, the government remains clueless as to how to proceed. The only thing it has said is that it would not be coerced into doing anything against its will and that it would execute this will on its own once a study by a high powered committee it has instituted to find out how feasible or desirable this proposed new district would be from the consideration of administrative convenience alone, is completed. But at this moment, neither those demanding nor those opposing are willing to step back an inch from where they were despite the government’s show of intent that it would proceed on the issue solely on its own will and not be dictated by any of the agitations.

What about the common man in the meantime? Does the government think that merely instituting a probe committee and arbitrating the deadlocked issue is enough remedy? For while it is doing this, there are people on the streets put to immense hardships. The poorer sections are the worst hit by the blockade consequent price rise, and if things get any worse, there is no saying they would remain calm as they have been. What then would the government do? Would it hold itself accountable for such an outcome? What it should be doing now is to firmly come clear and make the agitators on both sides understand that they cannot hold the entire state to ransom. This must be precisely by demonstrating the state can bring in provision for everybody and any form of prolonged blockades or strikes that indiscriminately make people, men and women, old and young alike suffer for no fault of theirs, would be broken up. In other words, ensure the highways are open although after convincing the agitators on both sides that justice as defined by the constitutional law of the country would be done. To give the devil its due however, we must also add that we give the benefit of the doubt to the committee looking into the matter that it would do what is just, but it must expedite its mission so that the agony of the state is not prolonged. In the meantime, let the government assure essential commodities do not run out from the markets.

If the government is unable to act on the matter then the available alternative of Presidents Rule must be resorted to. This is not altogether an indictment of the government for failing to act proactively on the matter. Nobody has any doubt in a state so badly fractured by ethnic divisions a decision on the SADAR hills will not be easy. Whichever way the decision goes, it will be cause for much bad blood and further challenges to the state’s authority. In other words the blockade is more than likely to stay inordinately. But this is just one dimension of the problem. The complex nature of the ethnic division in the state being such, darker ethnic motives, imaginary or otherwise, of the trouble being the caused by manipulation by the Valley dwellers would be attributed to whatever decision the government takes. Indications of this are already heard on many cacophonous discussion forums on the internet as well as delirious comments to web editions of newspapers from the state aimed at provoking anger, but more often than not inspire only laughter of ridicule. The limitation of the local government being such, it is not an altogether unreasonable conclusion that if at all it is unable bring an early end to the humanitarian crisis developing in the state, Central rule should fill in. Legitimate force used by the Central rule to ensure goods and passenger movements along the highway would not be interpreted as communally biased as so many would be waiting to jump to the conclusion if the state government did so. Likewise, a Central rule’s decision on whether the SADAR Hills district should be created and on what terms, would not be as prone to be smeared with communal colours by those for who have little other constructive things to do than read between the lines to discover non-existent, imaginary, sinister designs behind every political and economic development in the state. Our appeal is, let the government act immediately to ensure flow of goods into the state and in the longer term to settle the SADAR hills issue conclusively and in a manner satisfactory to all parties concerned.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2011/09/devise-a-way-out-fast/

A question often is asked, sometimes with an air of mischievous rhetoric, whether Sharmila is being pushed into what she is doing by vested interests, and if not this, then by public expectations. The implication is, she is unable to exercise her free will to decide on how or whether her seemingly futile protest should proceed any further. Further, another implied allegation is also Sharmila has ceased to be of any great concern for the people of Manipur by and large, which is why her protest is all the more doomed to be in a limbo that it seems to be in at the moment. These are serious thoughts or charges if you like. The question is, what is the volitional element in Sharmila’s continued fast? Is she responding to public expectations only or is she driven by a faith in her own action? While there should be no doubt the latter is there predominantly, it is necessary to dispel some of the doubts raised. The answer could come in the form of a question. Is there anybody whose action is not in some ways or other a response to public expectations?

Students of psychology would tell us there is nobody. These expectations are not always overt. They have been ingrained into the social consciousness so deeply that much of them come naturally to all of us without the need for making conscious choices. A few very basic questions should be illuminating. Why do we fear not doing well in studies? Why do we not walk around naked in public? The answer is, because such behaviours would not be approved by the society. Much of our social behaviours are thus moderated by this ever present “Superego” in Freudian terms. In a crux, Freud’s personality dynamics becomes an interplay of three powerful forces within the human psyche: the infantile “Id”, the parental “superego” and the rational “ego”. “Id” is thus about inborn, primitive, animal desires, appetites and instincts. The “Superego” controls and moderates (or civilises) the “Id”, sometimes excessively and to the detriment of the health of the individual. It is thus the rational “Ego” which must negotiate between these two. This personality dynamic would be the fuel behind Sharmila’s decisions, conscious or subconscious, as it is for everybody else. The only difference is, Sharmila has stepped out of private life boldly and is in the public domain in a radical way, and hence, we would argue here is a case of an enviable success of the “Ego” to rein in the “Id” and the “Superego”. The “Superego” which normally should have determined her public behaviour and decisions, have been rationalise successfully by her powerful “Ego” to convert it into a magnanimous sense of public duty. This being the case, it is only natural the pressure of expectations, not just public expectations but her own as well, would be much more on her. It is a truism that people do expect much more from public figures than from the ordinary man or woman on the street, and in our opinion, nobody in the state is as much a selfless public figure as Sharmila has come to be.

The next question is, why do people expect another to accomplish what is also essentially their aspiration? Why hasn’t there been many more stepping forward to join Sharmila’s style of protest? These questions deserve another rhetorical answer as well. If everybody were to take care of their own problems, or were to be capable of taking care of all their own problems, and this ability in collective were to be the solution to social problems, why would there have been any need for leaders at all? Eric Fromm’s book “Escape from Freedom” is dedicated to answering this question. Freedom can get terrifying for many if not most, and so taking important decisions on which crucially hangs the fate of individuals and society, independently, is not easy. This is where the role of inspirational leadership comes in. These strong men and women would become the centres where the ordinary men and women surrender their freedoms to make important decisions. And who can deny Sharmila is an inspirational leader who has made sacrifices nobody can or has ever made. But Fromm’s caution is, although this has nothing remotely to do with Sharmila’s case, when the ordinary men and women get too insecure, they begin to surrender more and more of their freedom to tough leaders who they entrust to deliver them from the source of their insecurities. Such a condition he says is the ground on which the most brutal dictatorships have spawned. Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, Mussolini’s Italy, all shared this social dynamics. Sharmila’s case is a radical departure from this but there is an interesting parallel. While there can be no argument she is an inspirational leader let those who love her not leave her to bear all the burdens alone. Nobody can emulate what she is doing, but let it not be forgotten everybody who would benefit from her cause has a duty to also contribute to take forward what she is fighting for.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2011/08/sharmilas-road-ahead/