Conflicts, between individuals or their hordes, arise due to either an allegiance to different creeds or an ill-formed proclamation to this effect. Tolerance and acceptance of beliefs other than one's own might require the revelations of education, in which the scholars claim to revel, to be distributed among the populace. However, the ability to read, write and speak a common tongue whilst fully realising the impact of the words in question should suffice to smother the mayhem born of misinterpretation, shouldn't it? This ability called literacy does, of course, often masquerade as education and thereby disparages it. But, more importantly, even resisting, leave alone reigning in, the storm seems to be beyond literacy.
Literacy, the numbers say, has seen a great degree of diffusion in the Indian society since independence and the process seems to be cumulatively commuting towards culmination(A sizeable mass of the population has traded thumb impressions for suave signatures and exposed itself to impersonation). The situation is further sanguine in the 'developed' quarters of the planet. Concomitantly, it should be expected that people would respond to any bunkum by seeking and consequently, at the least, flipping through the information pertaining to the issue. Even snap judgements do amount to an opinion and the masses would be required to pronounce the same. This deliberation would have to delay, and perhaps denounce, the reprisals, wouldn't it? This would surely be detrimental to the demagogues, right? The actual scheme of things points to the contrary.
Primarily, words should serve to convey one's thoughts in the form of speech or writing; and when read, should provoke thinking and keep the cycle alive. Recent incidents, though, clearly indicate a maimed literacy, dubiously called education, in action. Words still are heard, or, read and kindle opinions, but the action to be adopted in reaction is dictated by words appended by the speaker, or, the author than by those of the recipient. The contextual nature annexed to the usage of words and the recipient's extensive knowledge of synonyms, but not of the context,seem to allow the circumlocution and pontification. The need to drum the masses into the town square and trumpet one's prejudices has been rendered redundant due to the penetration enjoyed by the printed word and the unbridled air waves. Articles in the newspapers, or the broadcast bulletins, instead of illuminating the masses, incite protests and pander to the pandemoniums that reinforce the power commanded by the populist; the populists' ownership of these agencies aiding their cause. The paltrier polemicists have the much more economical option of pamphlets guaranteeing measurable impact.
In essence, one's political weight is determined by the gravity afforded by his words, which works to bring a larger mass under his fold. Thus, what was to avenge the hegemony has itself become the challenge.The only hope, arguably, would be to heed Yoda's advice - "You must unlearn what you have learned." , for silence, comparatively, should have fewer synonyms and plausible interpretations.
Literacy, the numbers say, has seen a great degree of diffusion in the Indian society since independence and the process seems to be cumulatively commuting towards culmination(A sizeable mass of the population has traded thumb impressions for suave signatures and exposed itself to impersonation). The situation is further sanguine in the 'developed' quarters of the planet. Concomitantly, it should be expected that people would respond to any bunkum by seeking and consequently, at the least, flipping through the information pertaining to the issue. Even snap judgements do amount to an opinion and the masses would be required to pronounce the same. This deliberation would have to delay, and perhaps denounce, the reprisals, wouldn't it? This would surely be detrimental to the demagogues, right? The actual scheme of things points to the contrary.
Primarily, words should serve to convey one's thoughts in the form of speech or writing; and when read, should provoke thinking and keep the cycle alive. Recent incidents, though, clearly indicate a maimed literacy, dubiously called education, in action. Words still are heard, or, read and kindle opinions, but the action to be adopted in reaction is dictated by words appended by the speaker, or, the author than by those of the recipient. The contextual nature annexed to the usage of words and the recipient's extensive knowledge of synonyms, but not of the context,seem to allow the circumlocution and pontification. The need to drum the masses into the town square and trumpet one's prejudices has been rendered redundant due to the penetration enjoyed by the printed word and the unbridled air waves. Articles in the newspapers, or the broadcast bulletins, instead of illuminating the masses, incite protests and pander to the pandemoniums that reinforce the power commanded by the populist; the populists' ownership of these agencies aiding their cause. The paltrier polemicists have the much more economical option of pamphlets guaranteeing measurable impact.
In essence, one's political weight is determined by the gravity afforded by his words, which works to bring a larger mass under his fold. Thus, what was to avenge the hegemony has itself become the challenge.The only hope, arguably, would be to heed Yoda's advice - "You must unlearn what you have learned." , for silence, comparatively, should have fewer synonyms and plausible interpretations.
Comments