On Freedom and Society
“Man
is a social animal and we live in a society. Each one of us is dependent on the
other directly or indirectly. For example, the milk man brings the milk to our
door step every day, the news paper boy throws the paper in our balcony every
morning, the washer man washes our cloths, our cloths are manufactured in
factories by the factory employees so on and so forth.” This was what my class
second teacher told our class while teaching something about profession of
people. I distinctly remember of having felt a deep pain and anger over the
idea of my being dependent on so many other people and not being free. It was
in that moment that I decided I will study Mathematics for the rest of my life
as that was the only subject in which ideas and concepts are built in air and
one has to not think of society and various un-freedoms. A man can be truly
free only in the realm of Mathematics. Mathematics gives the freedom I valued.
My love continues to this date. But I have realised no one can live in vacuum
and existence as a man implies there will be certain givens like – inter
depended-ness, relatedness, emotional bondages etc. By being ascetic one can
practice sacrifice and meditation. One can try to connect to God and be content
with the self but that is a though way of living and not all men turn to
monkhood. Is freedom, in its true sense, meant for monks only?
Living
in a society why should a man value the value system of the society even if he
disagrees with many? For example why should a man not go out naked on street?
Why should a woman behave in a certain dignified way only? Why should there be
conformity and not chaos? One answer can be chaos leads to destruction and man
wants to avoid destruction and look forward for peaceful re-creation or
creation of a new world around him. Man feels happy to be alive and develops a
love for nature. He learns from the conformity in nature. He sees how plants,
flowers, honey bees, butterflies, birds, trees, rivers, clouds etc are
dependent on each other and value each others’ existence. They nourish each
other and do not burn the earth for petty issues. I believe my decision to conform is not so much rooted in the fear of persecution by some hard-headed members of the society but is rather in the respect for natural order that I see around me.
For, I know that if I find something deeply moving and outrageous in the social
fabric, I rise in revolt and opposition. History is full of personalities who
rose against oppression, racial discrimination, gender issues, human rights
violations etc. against very strong powers. I would like to add another aspect
to this by presenting Jermey Betham’s
on the reason behind such co-operation between men: He believed that the human
beings by nature were hedonists. Each of their actions was motivated by a
desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Every human action has a cause and a
motive. “Take away all pleasure and all pain and you have no desire and without
desire there is no action.” Which probably is in contradiction with the
teachings from Bhagwad Geeta that directs men to act without the thought of the
fruit.
We have judicial system which is loaded with
work. People have a sense of being wronged or not being wronged and therefore
they seek justice. Because they think there is something like justice. Some way of living which is just. “In this little world, in which
children have their existence, nothing is so finely felt and perceived as
injustice”, says Pip in “The Great Expectation” by Charles Dickens. Man has a
sense of justice and injustice and around such (and similar such) senses social
fabric is woven.
It
is widely expected today, that men should be able to enjoy the freedoms they
value and they have reason to value (as
I might want to have the Taj Mahal
but I don’t have a reason to value such a freedom in a country of 1.2 billion
people. I can ofcourse have a piece of land and build a house but ownership of the Taj may not be the freedom which I
can value). I might want to hoard all the food grain stocks available in the
market for export so that I can build a Taj
Mahal for myself, but again that would mean everyone will go hungry and
therefore here again I have no reason to value such a want or whim. But I
certainly can want a freedom of speech, of choosing profession, religion,
faith, travelling, political freedoms etc. The United Nations Declaration of
Human Rights 1948 identified certain Rights which a Human Being should be able
to enjoy. Jeremy Bentham found the idea of human rights as non sense. He felt
that rights were children of law. Some scholars believe rights are parents of
law and laws are made under the light of the rights men should enjoy. I think
there is a duality here. In some cases rights can be parents of law for example
Right To Information or Right To Education are essentially rights that have now
translated into law and find their place in statue books. Also, some countries
have laws against abortion. Such laws override the Right To Life. Which shows
right can be child of law.
What
is the role of State? What is the aim of political setup?
Kant
believed that the aim of Politics not making the subjects happy, but is to
provide them with enough freedoms so that they can work forward for their own
happiness. It’s to provide an enabling environment where peaceful pursuit of
happiness is possible. He was opposed to benevolent despotism. Jeremy Bentham advocated
utilitarian ideas. He believed the purpose of a State should be to ensure
greatest good for greatest numbers. Amartya Sen critics such a view and says
that focus should be on means as well as ends. Greatest good can be achieved through
several means. But while achieving such ends the State should ensure that
people have freedoms to chose from. “Development”, to Sen, “is fundamentally a
aimed at empowerment.” There is a complementarity between freedom and
development. If freedom is enhanced the State would develop, if development is
done then freedoms (that men can enjoy) will get enhanced. The purpose of State
should be in only making the people empowered and let them work for their own
set goals. Public debates and reasoning should be given great importance to
weed out conflicts and seek solutions in conflicting situations. The society
might not be made totally just (no body knows what that is) but it certainly
can be made less unjust. And it is the State to take care of such
transformation from unjust to less unjust.
(...conclusion to be written
later)
No comments:
Post a Comment