In the stillness of the sultry night, while negotiating the cluttered and noisy lanes of the digital communication , I stumbled upon a bizarre notification flashing on my phone announcing the removal of an esteemed gentlemen from a digital social group for his refusal to kowtow before the edifice of a scared ordinance promulgated by a tribe of democratically elected representatives.
Is there anything bizarre and unusual about the act of removal of individual from a any digital association, many mortals may ask this question, challenging the premise of the argument mentioned above
The answer to the above mentioned hypothetical concern may vary depending upon the code of conduct one believes in, but for me it is resounding “Yes” - it is indeed unusual. We all understand that every democratic group, federation or association is blessed with the right to add and remove the members based on the defined, documented and agreed policies and procedures. However, any unfair assertion and action by the select group on the basis of “predilection for” or “prejudice against” the individual is at best unethical and unjust. This specific case stands out as a brazen act of injustice by the authorities at the helm of affairs to send an unambiguous warning message to the large populace to comply and concur with the edicts cast in stone silently.
Unfortunately, there is nothing new about this undesirable overreaction by the emperor of the day, the annal of history is filled with the similar stories of “arrogance of power” from the time immemorial . In the recent past with the emergence of powerful democratic leaders across the geographical boundaries, the space for liberty and freedom is continuously shrinking and is under unprecedented threat. The malaise is not limited to the large political enterprises but has spread to the lowest level of political and social institutions like an incurable disease of cancer . How can behaviour of RWAs be different – the same arrogance of power has corroded the “structure of the ability” of many representatives to patiently manage the dissenting voices. Taking inspiration from the political leadership, they are trying assiduously to master the art of bullying the residents into submission.
Going back to the issue of expulsion, it is not the act but the meek acceptance of the act by the populace that has worried me most. It reminds me of a famous statement by Martin Luther King Jr - “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
It is true that the sprinkling of the fellow residents, raised their concerns and demanded reinstatement of the membership but it is also a sad reality that the larger cluster chose the comfortable silence over inconvenient truth. In my limited view, the act of silence have always emboldened the authorities to impose their will without the formal due diligence process.
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.” — Archbishop Desmond Tutu
At times, there can be valid justification for the decisions taken by RWA, but the same has to be ratified as per the provisions of the law. Occasionally, there can also be unreasonable resistance to the specific clauses of the provisions promulgated by the esteemed RWA with a good and positive intent. Let us not forget that the democratic governance framework is chaotic and stifling the voice is not the best of approach to address the concern raised by one, a few or many.
The history of the world is filled with the instances of disgraceful silence, when the world demanded the sane voices to standup. The most recent example before our eyes is the carefully calculated silence of the Arab world when the naked dance of death is going on in the ruins of Ghaza. In the words of Iqbal -
Yeh Misra Likh Diya Kis Shokh Ne Mehraab-e-Masjid Par
Naadan Gir Gaye Sajde mein Jab Vaqt-e-Qayaam Aaya
The act of raising voice against injustice is important – the voice may be feeble , the incidence of injustice may be small in scale and scope.
No comments:
Post a Comment