Don’t let virtual lives dictate the real

The number of social networking sites are increasing by the day and most technology literate people, especially the youngsters, are hooked on to one platform or the other. These websites came as a boon to people who are away from their family and friends due to work, studies and other unavoidable commitments.

They provide free means of communication, entertainment and networking facilities for professional and personal purposes. One can keep track of developments in the lives of people connected to them with the least of efforts.

However, in course of time, the tools that were aids became a necessity and eventually an addiction. Mere websites became benchmarks for determining friends and foes, for gauging one’s own acceptability, to judge loyalties, and of course, social standing.

The obsession with impressing others, already fuelled by a culture driven by consumerism, takes uncontrollable proportions. People are devoting time, energy and money into ‘perfecting’ their virtual lives and in the end, lose out in real life.

Though a direct comparison will be an exaggeration, the film Matrix kind of portrays the situation of those who are totally dependent on social networking sites. In the movie, all are plugged into a virtual reality that caters to all needs. People go about their lives full of happiness and all seem perfect. However, the reality is that all are nothing but masses of flesh and bone cocooned in containers, with no connection to real life. For example, a bodybuilding champion in the matrix is in reality as weak as a newborn.

There have been reports of relationships breaking off due to disagreements over what should be its influence on the partners’ online profiles. Wives and husbands dumping partners because they are ‘single’ online!!!

Many confess to using photo editing tools to make themselves look better in their display pictures and admit that one of their biggest worries is about friends tagging them in photographs that would provide a reality contrast to the carefully managed online profiles.

It was barely a year ago when an East Asian couple, obsessed with an online virtual farming game on a top social networking site, kept forgetting to feed their child. Though the farms plants and animals thrived due to constant monitoring, the real child succumbed to a malnutrition-induced ailment. These networking platforms have also emerged as hot spots of e-bullying where people gang up to insult, blackmail and defame others. The number of suicides and violent crimes that is in some way or the other connected to social networking sites are rising at an alarming rate.

However, blaming social networking sites would be akin to blaming liquor for alcoholism. It is our uncontrolled pursuit of limelight that is enabling these platforms to act as force-multipliers for vices and abuse.

Virtual world bonding stops at virtual levels and cannot help with real life issues. If we spend a fraction of our online time in making real friends and socialising, we will be much better off. And you won’t have some friend’s friend’s friend making comments on your looks.

Come on, these are just websites and nothing more. Let us not give them the importance they don’t deserve and allow them to dictate our social life.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on September 26, 2012)

Rushdie’s right: Blasphemy is good

If Salman Rushdie was worried if his brand of defiance was passé, the recent upgrading of the bounty on his head (by $500,000) would come as a great relief. And in a subsequent interview, the author reiterated his belief that blasphemy is necessary to promote modern thinking.

Whether he intended it or not, the Booker-winning author has brought into focus one usually-ignored truth — that blasphemy has brought about progress and development as we see it.

The development of science has always been in the blasphemous path and many men who followed reason gave their lives for it. If they hadn’t challenged the faith-driven interpretations of nature, we would have been still with medieval mindsets.

*Imagine the whole world believing than someone created the first man from dirt and a few days later the dude wakes up with a missing rib and a naked woman at his side. And since this is the original man-woman pair, the entire humanity is a mass of inbreds.

And we would be living on a flat earth and not sailing too far from land for fear of falling off the edge. Not to forget that the universe would be orbiting the Earth.

People with mental illness would be seen as possessed with evil spirits and subjected to brutal treatment (not that this has really changed even now).

It was not long ago when my mother’s colleague died of high blood sugar because his prayer group believed it is against god’s will to take medicine. After prayers failed to keep his soul attached to his body, he left behind an unemployed wife and five little children (yes, the sect also believes that family planning offends god).

If people were to not to allow the ‘mysterious ways’ to decide their behaviour, the world would definitely be a better place. Caste divisions, communal riots, ethnic cleansing, genocides, female genital mutilation and a million other inhuman practices would have no takers.

Think of the absurdness of some random guy in India going around burning government buses in which he travels daily because of some offensive short film made in the United States. How does your thunder and tirade help, buddy?

We wouldn’t have had the misfortune of our greatest contemporary artist, MF Husain, dying in exile if his artistic freedom hadn’t ‘offended religious sensitivities’ and made him a target of legal harassment and vandalism of his works.

Imagine the amount of money you would be saving, or spending on matters of your tastes and choice it wasn’t diverted to people who claim to have a hotline with god or can broker your way to salvation (for a price).

Couples would have been living happily if they weren’t forced apart because a couple planets or stars aren’t favouring their union.

And when you want to do something you can do it at a time of your own choosing and not wait for some board-reader to tell you the ‘auspicious’ time for it.

Colour of the flag or name of the sect doesn’t manner, religious bigots have been there all throughout human history. They thrive on ignorance, blind faith, complacence, nepotism and the desire for status quo by the privileged. The lines are redrawn and rules are bent to suit their material gains and controlling power.

Life is short, let us use our brains (unless already muddled by religions) to be better human beings to our brothers than be dictated by criteria to avoid the purgatory.

*Removed from the printed version

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on September 19, 2012)

Mumbai isn’t a tale of three Thackerays

Not long after Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray termed migrants ‘infiltrators’, his estranged cousin and Shiv Sena heir apparent Uddhav Thackeray, not wanting to be outdone in vitriolic diatribe, has said that migration from Bihar must be kept under check through permit system.

It was barely 80 years ago that a short young politician popularised the concept of lebensraum (roughly translates as ‘living space’) to ascend to power in Germany. Yes, your guess is right, we are talking about Adolf Hitler, who considered anyone non-German sub-human. People of Slavic origin, Gypsies and Jews were persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, deported — and in the case of Jews, massacred to the best of his ability.

The more the Thackerays (including Shiv Sena satrap, the ageing but definitely not mellowing, Bal Thackeray) unleash their polarising venom, the more it sounds like a desi version of Mein Kampf. And if one were to analyse their organisations’ agenda, it is only the lack of unchecked power that is preventing them from carrying out similar pogroms.

To understand Raj’s tirades and Uddhav’s attempt to whip up ‘sons of soil’ passions, we should go back to Bombay (wasn’t Mumbai then) of the 1970s. Bal Thackeray’s Shiv Sena was carrying out a vitriolic (and violent) campaign against South Indians, who, according to him, were taking away the jobs and opportunities of Marathi manoos.

It was under the wing of Bal Thackeray that nephew Raj and son Uddhav cut their teeth in the toxic politics of regionalism. Raj, a firebrand orator, always had more visibility in Shiv Sena and many thought he would take over from Bal Thackeray. However, it was not to be.

As the worried uncle started relegating him to the margins to give more space and visibility for Uddhav, the cousins drifted apart and two factions emerged. And finally in 2006, with no more maneuvering space left within the fold of the same party, Raj walked out and formed the MNS.

Ever since, Raj and his followers embarked on a Marathi chauvinism campaign; shriller, more poisonous, more violent and better organised — designed to outdo his uncle’s outfit in the same department, on his home turf. And it is working.

The audacity with which the MNS is able to continue with its politics of thuggery is an insult to our democracy and the rights guaranteed to all citizens under the Constitution.

Despite its violent campaigns targeting migrant workers, especially autorickshaw and taxi drivers, the MNS boss is a free man and continues his trade with impunity.

While several cases have been registered against the MNS chief and his outfit, thanks to our legal system, the bigot has never had a reason to worry or curtail his activities.

Mumbai is what it is today because it has attracted and made maximum out of the best talents from across the country. It is the migrants who form the fabric of cheap essential services that keep the city running. If people from other states were to be taken out of India’s financial capital, it would be reduced to an empty shell.

South Indian, North Indian, Bihari or Bengali... anyone who is a citizen of this country has the right to travel, live and ply his trade and maintain his identity anywhere in the country.

Organisations like Shiv Sena and MNS are a blot on our culture and have little difference from the Third Reich. They must be crushed before these cancer cells inspire more of their kind elsewhere and become malignant to our civilisation.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on September 5, 2012)