limits.
with every freedom, comes a responsibility - just as when we are given a freedom to express ourselves in public, comes a responsibility not to cross the limits of decency....but this "limit" is a subjective matter, and hence it differs from person to person.
unfortunately, in india, the population is not "trusted" enough to self-enforce those limits, hence the "authorities" have stepped in, often erring on the side of caution - imposing stricter rules than what is norrmally accepted in the west. this has led to an atmosphere that stifles individual expression of freedom, and may be even leads to frustration amongst the youth of today - manifested in the number of crimes that have been observed across the major metros, and the numerous ones that go unreported in rural areas. moreover this has lead to a semi-talibanisation of our soceity, where a handful of people may decide what the majority are allowed to see, hear, wear and do. not only will this (and it has) lead to corruption, a direct result of powers being concentrated in the hands of a few who are allowed to take arbitary decisions, on what benefits the general populace, but it will also cause a stifling of creativity, where art (in its various forms) could be repressed, because the views of the artist do not match those of the higher powers.
the flip side has been seen in the west, most notably countries in europe, and to a lesser extent, the US. a high premium placed on personal freedom has led to its abuse. while certain values, that were held dear to, by the orthodoxy, have been abandoned, the youth at times, have "crossed" the "acceptable" limits and show no signs of retribution - or even regret at their actions. moreover a free and fair(?) media further encourages them to go one step further. the government, as well as the church, at times, are rendered ineffective at curbing this trend. crime has also become on the rise, not of the kind back home, but of a different nature, drugs and alcohol related for example. other disturbing signs have been observed which may only be a precursor to something much worse. while a high emphasis has been placed on personal freedom, it can only be concluded that too much of a good thing is not so - and a delicate balance between the two extremes is what is best for soceity in the long term.
unfortunately, in india, the population is not "trusted" enough to self-enforce those limits, hence the "authorities" have stepped in, often erring on the side of caution - imposing stricter rules than what is norrmally accepted in the west. this has led to an atmosphere that stifles individual expression of freedom, and may be even leads to frustration amongst the youth of today - manifested in the number of crimes that have been observed across the major metros, and the numerous ones that go unreported in rural areas. moreover this has lead to a semi-talibanisation of our soceity, where a handful of people may decide what the majority are allowed to see, hear, wear and do. not only will this (and it has) lead to corruption, a direct result of powers being concentrated in the hands of a few who are allowed to take arbitary decisions, on what benefits the general populace, but it will also cause a stifling of creativity, where art (in its various forms) could be repressed, because the views of the artist do not match those of the higher powers.
the flip side has been seen in the west, most notably countries in europe, and to a lesser extent, the US. a high premium placed on personal freedom has led to its abuse. while certain values, that were held dear to, by the orthodoxy, have been abandoned, the youth at times, have "crossed" the "acceptable" limits and show no signs of retribution - or even regret at their actions. moreover a free and fair(?) media further encourages them to go one step further. the government, as well as the church, at times, are rendered ineffective at curbing this trend. crime has also become on the rise, not of the kind back home, but of a different nature, drugs and alcohol related for example. other disturbing signs have been observed which may only be a precursor to something much worse. while a high emphasis has been placed on personal freedom, it can only be concluded that too much of a good thing is not so - and a delicate balance between the two extremes is what is best for soceity in the long term.
posted by Praveer @ 7:11 PM
4 Comments:
Yes everything in Limits is good.
And as you said, "to strike a balance" is always recommended.
So they say is democracy...and ppl try to exploit it.
its the rule of the ppl, by the ppl and for the ppl...
if no constraints are putup by the authorities, then the rule will def. be exploited. its in human nature to find out loopholes in the system...and they will.
thus, we need rules. but then the rules become a subjective matter. who defines this rule? is the public asked before making a specific rule. KISSING IN PUBLIC NOT ALLOWED. why not?? well..its a decision by the government and those 400-500 ppl in the government who themselves are well past their enjoyment age...are stopping us...frm enjoying. [:)]
anyways...as u said...we need to strike a balance...and if the lines are drawn...the least we can do is be obedient...and stay behind the line...rather thn crossing the line and being called a rebel.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
There are pros and cons to both the extremes: freedom and restrictions picturised here.
We cannot blame the authorities for not allowing someone to kiss in public. Times were different earlier and that trend has been so far followed in India, may be because there a quite a few offsprings who want to do certain things, but refrain from doing them just because they "feel" what would the society say? We forget that in today's world, we should not bother about thy neighbor and just move on. On the contrary, this botheration is not prevalent in the United States, wherein you are given the freedom to do what you please, be it within or outside limits. But, the reason things which would be tabooed back home, go untouched here, is because masses do not try to intrude into someone's else's privacy, let alone that someone be your parents or siblings.
So, you indeed need a balance between the two. When you talk of balance, you may question, what is the definition of this "balance". Irrespective of your true balance, the society back home is going to outcast you. And this will continue for another 30 years or so, until our next generation is given the definition of "balance" by us. We should remember that it begins at home and we as an individual can indeed make some difference.
Post a Comment
<< Home