Liton Nandi |
''There is one other group almost diminished from our public life, politics and culture. They are very few in numbers and are the last men standing. One was on display the day of the incident and broke his hand whilst defending morality and humanity. We should salute him, Liton Nandi.''
20th
century’s famous moral and political philosopher John Rawls’s magnum opus was
the ‘Theory of Justice’ (1971). In it he coins the term ‘public reason’-the common
reason of all citizens in a pluralist society. To take the Rawlsian definition literally,
public reason involves justifying a particular position by way of reasons that
people of different moral or political backgrounds could accept.
John Rawls (1921-2002) |
I claim
that in Bangladesh, persecuting the weak and vulnerable has reached a peak that
we can say the public collectively now have accepted that inhuman, brutal and
barbaric events can occur and their silence is natural and justified. The public
mind in Bangladesh is coward, corrupt, abusive and opportunist.
Yes, it
is a crude generalisation and the least I will argue is that the falsehood,
unfairness and injustice is dominant in Bangladesh because of the public mind
guilty of accepting or performing it. Though, it is totally contrary to the
spirit John Rawls tried to define public reason. John Rawls’s public reason was
the common agreement from between different moral and political corners of
society for public good. Yes for
public good.
Public Reason in Bangladesh
In the
light of the recent sex assault in Dhaka University during celebrations for Bangla
New Year, I see a proof in support to my claim.
Let us analyse
the event. The actors were the general mass involved, the idle witnesses, the
state authority represented by the police and the official of the public
university. What roles were played by the public from different spectrums of society
letting this inhumane act happen in broad
daylight? The answer complements my claim that the dominant public reason of
Bangladesh is relatively immoral.
There
were three main types of people involved
in this event with different levels of moral standard.
Firstly,
the group that committed the assault. Secondly, the ones who let this happen
without condemning it and thirdly, the one whose job it was to protect the
member of the public and prevent such incidents from happening.
These three
entire groups shared something in common, a common public reasoning justifying or at least accepting the sexual assault of a woman
who came out in a crowd to celebrate a national event. The moral stance of all three
groups differed very little. Their action or inaction can be defined as public
reason in Bangladesh where sexual assault is an accepted public norm and a huge
outcry about it is not expected. None of the student organisations such as the
BCL, JCD or Islami Chatro Shibir has condemned the attack. That’s just the
student’s political front. You are also unlikely to hear condemnation from the
cultural front because they do not have their preferred enemy here. If Avijit’s
murder was an attack on free speech these attacks were an attack on the freedom
of movement, women’s rights and human rights.
The first group of public are the young
criminals who possess low morality born out of our anti-value education system.
They were probably brought up in a physically, intellectually and morally abusive
society and from similar age groups. They are brought up perceiving sexuality
as the biggest taboo topic not to be discussed. For them sex is an illicit act
performed with certain guilt and ironically sex for them is at the core of
entertainment and excitement in their lives.
These
individuals are living in an immensely sexualised culture where the former porn
star from the neighbouring country is the biggest sensation. Well you may argue
so what? Western culture doesn’t seem to have similar incidents where a group
of people will sexually assault women in public. The answer is that western
culture doesn’t have the pull effect that Eastern culture have. Sexual
behaviour in a country like Bangladesh and India still confronts a huge
religious and cultural challenge in how sex is manifested in public culture and
society as a whole. I am not talking about the clubs in Gulshan or Mumbai,
please exclude them from the mainstream, my point is with general mass.
Our
society is transforming rapidly with technological and information revolutions
flooding youths with choices of entertainment that are sexualised on a commercial
level. Bangladesh is at the receiving end of this wave, typical for a developing
economy. Middle class urban society is at the centre of this wave. If you let a
short skirt woman pass by in a rural
village, the villagers would probably offer them tea, biscuits and directions.
The same woman is very likely to be raped and assaulted in urban areas.
So once
an opportunity arises for these disturbed and culturally conflicted youth, they
become dogs unleashed from chains in events where they can exercise sexual
behaviour, and enjoy flesh which up until then they could only fantasise. If you study closely,
you will find the same young criminals enjoying raunchy Hindi cinema returning
from Jummah prayers and probably beating up their sister’s boyfriend defending
honour.
This
group justified sexual assault in public, and it was a public act.. This group
of men ‘enjoyed’ the act while the second and third public group watched.
Another major reason to note on the causes of this crime isis the confidence of
the criminals that their crime will go unpunished and nothing will come of it.
They knew that the law enforcement agency and state is too busy with other work
to be able to persecute them. As Rumi Ahmed said whilst sharing Liton Nondi’s
description of the event, this is the ‘State of the republic.’
What is
unfortunate is that a sexualised cultural explosion since the late 90’s through
mass media, is rapidly replacing and diminishing the very fabric of our society
and the values we have inhabited from it
in the last hundreds of years. There were shared values or ‘public reason’ derived
from the religious values of Hinduism and Islam, the old and the young, from
men and women. Respecting women and protecting them where they are vulnerable were part of the lessons I learnt
in the society I was living in.
That
public reason is changing or has changed.Now, enjoying women and exploiting
them is the fashion for men, and for women, to make themselves pretty and
enjoyable to man is the fashion. The capitalist corporate culture with its
growing use of social media is perfectly suited to host such a culture.
The second group of
public in the incident are those hundreds
of inactive witnesses present there, enjoying it as spectators I should add.
They do not possess the moral value to recognise the sexual assaultt as wrong,
unlawful and unjust. They are the coward public who gave silent consent to the
first group to commit their crimes. They did not intervene and condemn the
crime rather their moral distance shows an almost justification of it.
They
will probably talk amongst friends of witnessing a ‘funny’ act as if it was
another drama serial being played out live at Dhaka University. The difference
between the first and second group of people is the latter group would avoid
molesting girls in public but would be just as cruel and barbaric in seclusion
or in a private space.
The Third group of people are the police
officers in duty and the university authority. You could probably just divide them
into groups one and two already
mentioned. This group, ultimately facilitate crimes such as sexual assaults
with their inaction and do not suffer from any guilt for that, though their
very purpose is to protect the citizens. Their crime is twofold, they failed as
a human being and they also failed as officer’s n duty.
Like
the university proctor responded to Liton Nondi’s plea when found playing chess
on his computer, he said he could not have done anything even had he been
there. In essence, he actually gave institutional consent to justify the sexual
assault just like the police did with their inaction.
There
is one other group almost diminished from our public life, politics and culture.
They are very few in numbers and are the last men standing. One was on display the
day of the incident and broke his hand whilst defending morality and humanity.
We should salute him, Liton Nandi.
One
should be alarmed at my claim. What I mean is that these incidents are apparent
in the way our society is transforming and many more will follow through. Our
public mind needs to be educated with universal values and teachings to be able
to live with dignity and let others have dignity. Neither our state is capable
of doing protecting our dignity nor our judiciary. Our religious foundation is
weak in its interpretation and has lost its credibility by failing to adjust
with changing contexts in 21st century. So we are out of spirit and
our culture is diminishing in front of our very eye.
No comments:
Post a Comment