Teachers and guns: a nauseating combo

Recently Donald Trump, the US president strongly advocated arming the teachers to combat shootouts in schools!  At first I thought it was a joke!  But he was serious and sure about it producing better results: preventing any further shoot outs. His logic: any intruder will not dare step into a place where he knows he is going to be shot at.  However I realised I needed to put down my thoughts as to why this idea is not only bizarre, absurd but nauseating.  Apart from the evident political gain of upsetting the pro-gun lobby, why is this proposal wrong...

Education is meant to equip students with a sense of meaning and purpose for their life.  It is meant to help them form not just their heads but their hearts and hands as well.  If one overseeing such an endeavour is carrying a firearm what message does it carry for the students?? 

• That violence is normal.  Rather than advocate and work towards peace, the teacher becomes a living symbol of violence and fear.  In an era when physical punishment is seen as detrimental to the growth of the child, how can carrying a gun be seen as helpful?  
• Imagine the trauma of a child watch a teacher kill a student, a fellow classmate - however wrong the latter may be!  
• A teacher is not a soldier.  He or she is not moulded to take lives but build lives. Those teachers who laid down their lives saving their students from bullets are hailed as heroes.  That's what teachers do - save and help grow.  Not shoot and kill! 
• What if a disgruntled teacher decides to open fire in his or her classroom?  
• How does having more guns prevent shootouts?  The only thing it would lead to is an increase in the possibility of a shootout.  
• Rather than see how troubled children and youngsters can be helped to grow up healthy, the proposal suggests to eliminate them! 
  

While I sympathize with the parents, relatives and friends of those children and staff killed in the recent Florida school shootout, my heart also goes out to the youngster who carried out the brutal attack and his family.  The larger question that needs to be addressed is how does one ensure that young people do not end up so depressed that they have no other means than the gun to resort to? 

Alternatives to violence

On a lighter note...

Identity and conflict

Why and when do we enter into conflict with another?  In a broader sense, why war? Among the many reasons, one prominent one is the narrowing of identity.  When we human beings reduce or narrow down our identity to something specific and identify our whole selves to just that aspect, and if that aspect is questioned or perceived as under threat, then we are bound to enter into violence or conflict.  The problem is not with trying to get a clear and specific aspect of our identity.  The narrowing down of our identity to something definite or small is not the real issue.  It is the exclusion or failure to recognise and acknowledge the possibility of other aspects that make up our complex identity that really is the problem.  As human beings we carve our identity at various levels, in different ways and through diverse situations.  We belong to a family, have a certain social or economic standing, have a set of beliefs, affiliate ourselves to different groups (age, interests, work...), hold some convictions.... To convince ourselves that among all of these one of it or some of it exclusively creates our identity is the pitfall.  While one of these or some of these could influence us more than others, there is no exclusivity.  Identity formed through association is far more healthy and helpful than when done through isolation!

Dehumanisation and violence

What drives people to torture and kill scores of people as in genocides or ethnic cleansing?  The easiest answer to that is that those perpetuating these crimes have lost their humanity.  They do not recognise the other as a human being.  But if one does not regard the other as a person, worth respecting and whose life ought to be safeguarded, then it only leads one to indifference.  Not desire or thrill in killing, at least not consistently and in such great numbers.  Just like we see mosquitoes.  We don't go about smashing every mosquito in the house.  We protect ourselves against them.  We carry on our work and only when they disturb us do we chase or kill them.  The same with lizards and even pests.  No sane person kills them en masse just for the heck of it, for no particular reason.  Most often these are outside our observation radar. They just don't exist!

One opinion is that the roots of mass violence is to be found not in dehumanisation but in human morality.

We find that moral violence emerges only when perpetrators see victims as capable of thinking, experiencing sensations and having moral emotions. In other words, when perpetrators perceive their victims as human.

.... dehumanising victims predicts support for instrumental violence, but not for moral violence. (Source: click here)

Does that mean dehumanisation has no role in killings of any sort?  Not necessarily.  Most often it is a deficit in humanity that lets one not do anything positively to prevent violence or murder. 

Murder, most brutal

Everytime I dig out a grown up plant in the garden, I feel a bit bad.  Not because the plant is a rare variety or that it is a 'good' plant for the garden but because it has taken more than a year to grow to the stature it is.  And my act of 15 minutes is going to undo all of that year's slow painstaking effort of the plant to keep growing.

The same logic is applicable to people as well.  Whenever someone is killed, however or for whatever reason, that single act of an instant negates years of growth.  Not only of that person but of all those involved in the life of that person, right since infancy.  Surviving all those years of childhood's vulnerabilities mostly riding on the gracious and generous sacrifice of parents, the risks and dangers of youth, dodging those viruses and fatal bacteria, carving out a life, building up relationships and a worldview... all of it, everything is destroyed by one senseless act of someone.  And most often why does one murder?  Merely because something the person said or wrote is not to my liking, or because the other person's belief structure is different from that of mine... If only one would weigh all what goes into making a life against that one particular differing aspect, just for one silent minute, may be several lives would be spared.  

Prophet vs terrorist

Yesterday's readings wherein Jeremiah begins lamenting his role as a prophet and then concludes stating that he cannot but continue, of his own accord to be so, offers some insights into the role of suffering and pain.  If given a choice to opt out, he would have taken the chance to quit.  But now he says, he is 'addicted' to this challenging role which invariably includes suffering and pain.  However, the notable point is that his main reason to continue being a prophet is that in the long run he is doing good to people and carrying out the will of God.  There is really no personal thrill involved - hardly any!

May appear very brave and sacred.  But that is the same motivation for the terrorists who spread fear and violence, most often in the name of religion.  What then distinguishes Jeremiah from this group of people?  The one striking difference that I can think of is one related to life and death.  Jeremiah sought to carry out God's will by improving the quality of life.  If at all anyone has to suffer, Jeremiah is willing to take on that role, rather than pass it on to others.  God and people were both important and alive at the end of it all.  In the case of extremists, God's command is all that matters.  Human life has absolutely no relevance; not mine not others.  

True Ruler

(My last blog post while at Punganur...)

I was reading history this morning... just because it was so enticing. The text was about the situation in Europe just prior and during the two World Wars. Of course, was aware that history is never as plain and direct as it appears on paper. There are many dimensions to it and not all get recorded. Much depends on the one who is writing it. But all the same, history is always fascinating.

Reading the text in hand made me realize that we keep making the same mistakes over and over again. We learn basically nothing from the past. Just one point about wars. The same today, as it was then. The decision for going to war (either within the country or with the neighbour) which subsequently led to the World Wars, was of the leaders. And who paid the price for it? The common citizen! And he/she paid it dearly. And what was the reason for going to war with some other group or nation? Mere trifles! While people of the country suffered for want of food, medicine and peace, the rulers (one after another) sustained the war. Perhaps if the political leaders were a bit more educated and humane, they would have realised the difference between merely being good and being great.

A good man would act boldly and courageously, bring victory and spare lives. A great man would have stopped the attack from happening at all... a great man would have stopped what he knew to be wrong, no matter who was ordering it. (from the movie, Prince of Persia, The Sands of Time)

What has religion to offer?

The recent outbursts against Islam - camouflaged under the term 'terrorism' - is not a very healthy sign of things to come.  Every action, yielding a reaction which again becomes the source for a reaction.  Sooner than later, there would be violence and hatred and suspicion and most dangerously anarchy everywhere.  No one would trust anyone.

This brings me back to the question that I've been battling with myself: The relevance of Religion? Responding the reactions to the murder of the cartoonists in France, a person has this to say:

When we get stuck in a religious debate we are never going to win, we miss the point, which is that extremists are offering young people a sense of belonging, an outlet for adventure, and some kind of enhanced status. To combat this, we have to appeal to them as young people more than we have to appeal to them as Muslims. (Here's the source). Emphasis added.

So what does religion offer? Merely a sense of belonging, an adventure, an enhanced status? Then anything that offers these is a 'religion'...?

A proper attitude towards women

Though not very keenly but I did follow the news about Nirbhaya, India's new-found braveheart, who breathed her last after being raped and brutalized last month.  It was sad to hear her pass away... sadder still is the news that keeps trickling in.  The initial fervour of stronger action and tougher laws as protection and equal dignity to women is now being diverted to fights and blame-games between media, police, laws, ministers and the medical fraternity. While I hope something worthwhile and truly noble emerges out of this whole tragic incident... that Nirbhaya's struggle for life will have brought about something substantial for those still undergoing the trauma, is my hope.

Initially I was skeptical of all the protests and candle-lit vigils held in Delhi. But when I saw that the protests continued also on the midnight of December 31, I was all praise for those young and old braving the cold and the temptation to forget it all and just celebrate the new year!

As for me, I strongly believe that more than law and patrolling, it is a proper attitude towards women in our families that will help our society.  In a culture where boys are preferred (in every sense of the word and for all matters, except that of doing household chores!) girls too need to be treated with equal dignity and respect.  Only when children, and subsequently young men and adults begin to see women as another human being, as a person with feelings, sentiments, hopes, desires and dignity, will this sort of upmanship and violence end.

And as someone rightly pointed out, violence against women is caused not by anger against them, but is in fact, a response (of men) to our incapacity to be able to respond to situations better than women. Hence instead of accepting the fact that women do compliment us and are in certain fields better than men, use the muscle power and 'subdue' them. 

When humanity is endangered...

The inhuman treatment of the Jews through eviction from their homes, separation of families, torture, labour camps, death ... makes one wonder how a human being can stoop to such a bestial behaviour. The worst is that it was not of one person (Hitler alone), but so many who perpetuated it (the Nazis). There may be several reasons why each individual choose to be so and not stand up against a system of dehumanisation. Yet, the fact remains, a whole nation, a whole race was targetted and almost annihilated. And their only crime? Being born a Jew!

The same story continues, more or less, when security forces storm and destroy three villages on Dantewada, Orissa. Their crime? Being labelled Maoists. If this is how each one tries to settle and eliminate every threat, there would be no one left. Each action of one would eliminate some but give rise to more. Everytime a jawan is killed, there are several who are inspired by his bravery and hence willing to join the armed forces. So too, everytime an innocent tribal is tortured and dehumanised, there will be several who would join the Maoists, not for its ideals but as against the armed forces!

Debasing ourselves!

The vandalisation of the statues on Tank Band, Hyderabad on the day of the 'million march' was perhaps the most foolish act that those involved could do. A clear proof that those involved in this desecration were hooligans who have no regard for anything good and noble. Those statues which they attacked were of great poets and writers, men and women who helped Telugu reach its prestigious place in literature.

Such acts do nothing more than debase ourselves and show how low we can stoop.

At Muniguda, Orissa

Walking through the ransacked convent and Church at Muniguda, Orissa I was trying to picture to myself the actual day. As Aquinas showed me the video and led Fr Wilson and myself through the destroyed Church and convent, I found myself rather calm and resigned. It was easy to get agitated and angry but somehow I could not. The hatred that led to that riots in December 2007 is still difficult to comprehend. To review them years later in a peaceful atmosphere was another experience: one of retrospective evaluation, of trying to find out the real 'why'?

The Church debris has been cleared (the photo is of last year) and plans are underway to renovate the Parish Church which has now been handed over to the Salesians. However the convent has been untouched since that day in December 2007. The burnt records, jeep, cots, chapel, kitchen, rooms and the corridors still bear a silent witness to what happened that day in broad daylight. However one may walk through those corridors or watch videos, the agony of those who lived that day there and had to flee for their dear lives can never really be fathomed or understood.

Hudson, Vivekananda, Gandhi, WTC and 9/11

There was an interesting discovery I made this evening as I glanced through The Hindu of September 19, 2010. It was an article titled Vivekanada, Gandhi and 9/11. The author, Rajni Bakshi weaves together three other significant 9/11s which indeed prove as crucial crossroads in the history of humanity. The first 9/11 is that of 1609: the day Henry Hudson, the first European landed on an island called 'Menatay' - today it is Manhattan.

Within half a century of Hudson's landing, much of the native population had been wiped out by European guns and germs, those who survived retreated inland.

The next significant 9/11 is of 1893: the day Swami Vivekananda gave his famous "Sisters and Brothers of America" speech at the World Parliament of Religions at Chicago. A day for celebrating peace and brotherhood through reason.

Vivekananda realised that all spiritual striving is beyond reason, but reason is the only way to get there. For, reason is the greatest gift of the human existence.

The other great 9/11 is of 1906: a day when Gandhiji first spoke of Satyagraha at the packed Imperial Theatre in Johannesburg.

In an atmosphere charged with anger and the will to fight, Gandhi dropped an idea that acted like a depth charge. Let us fight disciriminatory laws by refusing to comply - by offering unflinching non-violent resistance. His logic was impeccable. Truth is God and God is love. It follows that a struggle for justice cannot involve hurting one's opponent. Instead, the 'other' in a conflict must be weaned from error by patience and sympathy. In turn, this means cultivating the willingness to examine 'truth' in all its many dimensions. This can only be done by being strong - not physical strength but the strength of truth-force or love-force.

What I liked best was the author's intention of drawing our attention to not the incident itself but the attitude with which we recall those incidents. That these ground-breaking events took place, is a fact, but with what outlook and attitude we face today and especially live the events related to these 9/11s is what really matters.

Of jawans, 'maoists' and media

The 'shocking' news of another ambush and the subsequent death of a number of CRPF jawans by the maoists is not really good news. First of all there is the loss of life, secondly there is the whole misinterpretation of facts given the context. While my sympathies are with those who died - I really appreciate these CRPF men who are sent out of marching orders to any part of the country irrespective of where they come from and where their families are located. Brave indeed!!

However I also see the other side: the death of CRPF men makes front page news while the death of a poor tribal or "maoists" makes no news at all! That's surprising. Given the fact that in the final analysis it is life of a human being. Furthermore, when such 'ambush' is broadcast - even literally - the 'maoists' are portrayed as hardcore criminals and terrorists. But in the real analysis they are poor tribals and villagers pushed to the corner and out of sheer desperation they retaliate - I do not say that all 'maoists' are that, but most are! Just recollect who are all those who were caught or killed over the last three months: all shirtless, ragged, skinny people who barely are able to smile. What drives them to loot and kill is nothing but sheer will to survive with a little, just atleast a little, bit of dignity.

Here is where I feel the media needs to be a bit more sensitive. Rather than paint these poor and desperate people as murderers straightaway, a little bit of openness would go a long way in helping these people not just live with dignity but make them contributors towards the progress of the country. We really can learn much from these people.

Politics, hatred and children

I was moved by a photo The Hindu published on its front page today (June 16, 2010)...

The caption reads thus: Violence erupted over the weekend in south Kyrgyztan targeting the minority Uzbeks. Reports said on Tuesday 170 people were killed. This woman from Osh city, which saw the worst of ethnic bloodshed, is among over 2.7 lakh who are fleeing their homes. Unable to cope with the refugee influx, Uzbekistan is said to have closed its border.

It is very disturbing to see innocent victims caught in the crossfire of hatred and politics. Just imagine what that small baby would grow up to? Displaced and running around for dear life ever since it has opened its eyes to the world, what foundation and roots will the baby be able to establish for its growth and future?

Forcing sense into politics

I was thrilled when I heard the directive of the court issuing a decree that henceforth any political party calling for a bandh has to pay for the losses incurred that day! Now that's one of the most creative and forceful way of driving sense into political factions which disrupt normal life for their selfish ends. This indeed is a great move and I salute the one who got this idea. Furthermore, today's newspaper has, on its frontpage, the news that a court issued an order stating that a youngster booked under the case of violence during the Telangana bandh pay up Rs 1 lakh as compensation to seek bail! Let's see if those political groups backing this come to his aid... I doubt anyone will. Some lessons are better taught the hard way!

Who defines a terrorist?

The editorial page of The Hindu contains an interesting article (of course, against congress party men) and rightly so exposing those who now being glorified after having done heinous crimes in the past! Titled 'Immunity for mobs in the war on terror', the article by Siddharth Varadarajan, makes a point when he states: Bearing silent witness to injustice, as Bhishma and Dronacharya did, makes one morally culpable. Modern jurisprudence tells us that allowing the commission of a heinous crime that one was in a position to prevent makes one as guilty of the offense as actual perpetrator. Throwing a stone at a gurudwara or emptying a Jerry can of petrol on a helpless man or inciting others to do these terrible things are not the only way of committing a crime. Walking away when all of this is happening or about to happen makes a leader or police officer just as guilty.

He goes on to rightly say that we are in a way lob sided in our view of terror and violence. Terrorists blowing up people with bombs and splashing bullets are indeed great criminals (some one for whom no lawyer is even permitted to defend). But individuals guilty of inciting and orchestrating mass murders in the shadow of religion and caste, enjoy effective impunity.

Kandhamal and Calvary

Reflecting today while reciting the rosary on the fourth sorrowful mystery, I thought there was not much of a difference between Jesus on the way to Calvary and the poor helpless Christians in Kandhamal and other parts of Orissa. Perhaps Jesus was a bit lucky in the sense, he knew for sure that he'd be killed by the time he reaches the end of the road. Those poor people in Orissa may be running helter-skelter without knowing at all if they'd make through it alive!! God be with them!

Angst..

The situation in Orissa is a perfect example of 'angst' - desperate anger towards and for nothing! Those innocent victims are being tortured for no fault of theirs, they know not who and when will they be hunted, for what reason and by whom! The worst I can sense is the desperation they must be feeling when they cannot even get angry - because then they will be going against the very tenet for which they are being persecuted. Neither can they appeal to anyone, for even those who are supposed to protect them are the ones perpetuating the violence. This is real 'angst' according to me!
And here I am, in the comfort of my office, sitting and philosophizing on their plight!