From poets to pedestrians, politicians of different hues and social scientists of different colors, intellectuals to high government officials, representatives of civil society to the faithful if particular ideologies, and, of course, from ministers to the scared girls, their parents and the common people have shown different reactions to the single horribly sad and distressing incident. Everyone is aghast and angry that such a disgraceful incident can take place.
It was few minutes before midnight on February 15 when three drunk young goons insulted and molested a 21 year lady returning home from her work and murdered her 15 year old brother who tried to plead and protest against the goons' outrageously uncivilized behavior while the brother was riding home in his bicycle along with his elder sister from the Rail station along a road that is flanked by the policemen-guarded residences of high-ranking government administrator, police official and judge in the populous town of Barasat, about 45 kms from the City of Kolkata. The girl had sought help from the armed policemen guarding the government official residence in vain while her brother was being beaten to death. The boy was taken to hospital by some passing rickshaw van puller while the murders fled. The boy soon thereafter died in the hospital. This is not the first incident of its kind in West Bengal cities and towns in many years: such incidents are regularly reported with high frequency in the Calcutta dailies and TV channels. Even as one of the murders of February 15 was arrested by the Police, reports of further similar incidents that led only to injuries inflicted by goons but not death have been reported in the next two days.
It is an interesting study of varying perceptions and the poor quality of Bengali intellect that gets revealed from the reactions. First are the Chief Minister’s actions: he visited the bereaved family to console them the very next morning, offered them all help and two lakh rupees as assistance.He did just the right thing as he must have perceived that as the chief of the political administration in the State he needed to be beside thethe family affected by a gruesome incident. He also had perceived something more. After returning to office, he issued fresh instructions to the police that they need to be more vigilant in patrolling and should be responsive to demand for quick action while the goons are busy committing crimes, etc. This was indeed the just reaction from his perceptive perspective as the minister in charge of the police department. How wide-angled had his perception been that the Chief Minister did not see that he as the minister of the police department needed to own the moral responsibility for the incident resulting from allowing the Police to function so incompetently that they were not guarding/ patrolling roads known to be the roaming place of goons and criminals at night, causing danger to common people who needed to use the road. He was probably very nervous about his failure to discharge the responsibility of protecting citizens traveling on a major road from known, operative local goons. The danger was known to even the common residents but his policemen did not bother beyond guarding the security of the residences of the government officials. His perception might have been that this was a rare incident and the police department should wake up to its basic responsibility only now. So, he forgot to appeal to the citizens’ at large seeking their pardon for his failure to keep the police department in proper shape to serve the basic cause for which a police department is supposed to exist. He must have done right as he never perceived that he has done any wrong or mistake and that he has no accountability for the acts of the goons freely roaming along the main road to commit crimes at their will.
What did the politicians do? The same thing they do in case of murders: claim that the victim was their supporter. Each political party's perception was that the incident, though very sad, is one over which they could draw sympathy from the public towards them in the current environment of continuing political murders throughout the State of West Bengal. Each party's perception was that this would be also yet another opportunity to blame the other party for being the home of the murders. The political parties reacted as per the common political party's perceptive perspective in these days. What they did must have been appropriate.
This time however the bereaved family and the neighbors objected to political party association and did not allow any political party to capture the opportunity to carry the dead body in a procession towards the cremation site. Whole of West Bengal knows that all most all goons and criminals in the State either enjoy the patronage and support of one political party or the other (and some enjoy a close friendship of the Police), or, patronize one politician or another (some patronize one policeman or other). So, the political parties' calls for a local bandh (strike) against the incident fizzled out. The next day the residents of the town made a silent condolence and protest signature campaign and lit candles and disallowed any political party activists/ members to come near. The common people had their own perception about the incident: they did not want any one responsible for creating conditions that have given rise to these kinds of incidents any where around during the expressions of protests and grief. They wanted the politicians to leave them alone in their moments of silent grief and tearful eyes enduring suffering under the oppressively idiotic political regime in the State. They must have been right in what they did: for a while they breathed air unpolluted by politicians and their armies.
Having failed to exploit a sad incident to their advantage before the forthcoming elections, they rushed to the TV studios to participate in debates over the sad incident. All f them expressed sadness over the incident. They did what they perceived their role to be: as leaders of people, each one of them expressed their sadness and grief over the murder and the incident (the chief minister did the same along with the Governor; the intellectuals and commentators did the same). As if without their expressions of sadness the public at large would be less sad! As if the people were waiting to see them expressing their sadness on the TV screen! They must have done the right thing.
But what do the politicians and intellectuals do during the debate other than expressing sadness. The opposition parties blamed the 34-year misrule of the CPM-dominated communist/leftist coalition government: this communist government, according to them, had patronized criminals and goons, had made the police force work according to the needs of the ruling party rather than in accordance with the responsibilities of the police force in a civilized, democratic State, and had encouraged the proliferation of liquor shops in every corner of the streets / roads of the State to get the youth turn into goons of the type capable of crimes witnessed in the incident of the 15th February night. No common apolitical citizen of the State would doubt the thesis of the opposition parties. The opposition parties did what was right: they gave us a brilliant analysis of the situation that gives birth to the incidents of this type.
The ruling party also did what they considered right. According to their perception such incidents are few and far between in the State and reported much less in terms of their occurring as compared to other states in India, that it is not possible to guarantee such-incident-free conditions to the 85 million citizens of the State with a 0.5 million strong police force, that the cause of youth taking to drinking at heart's content to become potential girl-molesters and murders on public roads is the consumption-oriented (capitalism) that has gained ground in the last two decades because of the Govt. of India's economic policies. Their response must be right because the whole world witnesses such incidents, because countries with capitalistic consumerism witness such crimes and because perceptions do not require to be justified by scientific and empirically tested/testable arguments. The only strength of their analysis is that they seemed helpless in not concealing their apprehension that given the consumption-oriented societal life, such incidents have to be experienced and endured even in leftist rule. They did right in stating the Truth at least on this occasion: people must be prepared to accept incidents like the one of February 15th night as part of life so long as the society remains consumption oriented and pursues the path of capitalism, globalization and liberalization. People must think what they want to do: the Maoist extremists are calling everyone to join them to destroy the current socio-economic set up of capitalism and consumerism! Or, do they want to endure crime against women.
What did the social scientists have to say? They perceived that all these kinds of criminal behavior of youth are essentially due to their upbringing in the family: today's murders and women-molesters are born out of neglect from parent's love, training and lack of education and extreme deprivation as well as the progressive disintegration of society into dispersed units without bondage of affection and cooperation. That is again a master piece of analysis: as if not widely known by most of the TV viewers. The social scientists are right. People have to wait. There is no magic wand available. Each parent must provide adequate love, affection, time, education and training as also facilities at childhood so that the children have difficulty of growing up with goons of the February 15th fame as their role models!
What about other intellectuals? They used their intellect to blame one or more of the following: the incompetence of the police force, the criminalization of politics, the turning of police from being the servant of the State to one of the ruling party politicians, the politicization of education and educational institutions, the inadequate generation of employment activities in the state, the degradation of societal value systems, and the like. They demanded immediate apprehension of the culprits and exemplary punishment to them (as if the common citizens were waiting for their considered opinion to demand the same).
The considerate commentators were worried that the criminals were drunk, as if crime committed in drunken state constituted a lesser crime than the one committed in a non-drunk state. They must be right as they perceive drinks are the villiain of piece and known goons have the right to commit crimes in drunken state on the roads. There seems to be a law prohibiting driving cars in drunk state, but committing crime in drunk state on the road is not prohibited! Some others are sympathetic to one of the three goons apprehended so far comes from a poor family and hence must have been exposed at early childhood to regular incidents of torturing of women by men at home and in the neighborhood. These are real beauty gems of expert opinions: the child became adult and did not know what he was doing was a criminal act. God and the society forgive them who does not know what they are doing! God and society forgive them those responsible for preventing crime from allowing those ignorant of what constitutes a crime to commit crimes.
One government official however was a bit cautious: he seemed to have said something like 'nothing can be said about the incident as the investigations have just started and that the murdered boy's elder sister was probably a divorcee'. He was right in his perception: the risk of a divorce attracting attempt of molestation was higher. Maybe women will try henceforth not to get divorce, once married! A lady poet did write a column praising the bravery (as did all others praise the bravery in the face of beating and weapons with the criminals) of the 15-year old who protested at the time of the crime being committed but expressed her apprehension that in future such bravery would receive a great jolt because the brave people would be cowed down by the fear of getting murdered. Most interesting however was her perception that such incidence are the result of the age-old basic trait and instinct of Men perceiving women as a commodity of consumption. She is right: men are like that, it is immaterial that the man-dominated societies made laws to categorise certain behavior against women as punishable crimes and the 15 year old who tried to save the honor of his sister was not a man but a mere boy. Maybe she had not heard of a policeMan, Bapi Sen, who was killed by goons when he tried to stop them from committing crimes against some women a few years ago in her own city.
The different elite sections of the Bengali society have done extremely well in throwing lot of light of knowledge, wisdom and prompt response after the incident. However, one is not sure if the roads will be illuminated enough or the girls and boys enlightened enough not to become victims of infamous incidents of the 15th February disgracing the entire Bengali society!
No comments:
Post a Comment