Manifestations of Insecurity

Yesterday, I was watching a documentary - Indyeah on one of the "knowledge" channels offered by Tata Sky. The film was about what Mumbai went through on July 26, 2005 and the days following it, and how people of Mumbai combatted it. Today, after returning from office, I turned on the news channel to see MNS party workers bashing up North Indians in the metropolis. Two stories, from the same place, but so different. On that fateful day in 2005, many great "marathi manush" might have sought help from these "bhaiyas" who are getting beaten up because of their identity.

If the media coverage is to be believed, this might be a result of two insignificant (in Mumbai) political parties pitching their political battles on the streets of Mumbai. I also hope (just like the media believes) that this sporadic violence that occurred over the last two days will not spiral into something big and sinister. Now, I don't understand much of national politics, leave aside Mumbai politics. News of racial violence is also commonplace in India. My point in writing this piece is not to delve into either of these. All I want to present is my half-baked opinion that racial violence (and disputes at large) result from a very basic instinct of human beings - insecurity.

For all the great "marathi manush" talk from Raj Thackeray, he is just exploiting the insecurity the under-previleged in Mumbai. He is positioning himself perfectly for the bottom of the pyramid. Bad news for Raj is that he is not the first one to do so. Many star politicians and statesmen have trode on the same road - some attaining success, some failure.

Unfortunately or perhaps characteristically, we find simply too many examples of this exploitation within our own country's history. We accuse Britishers of divide and rule policies. The division was just a derivative of the insecurity exhibited by our forefathers. India's economic policies before 1991, and some followed still, had their roots in the insecurity of the country's government and the babus that ran/run it. When Assamese candidates were beaten up (and killed) because they enrolled for Railways exams in Bihar, we again saw insecurity (job-related) raise its ugly head. When ICFAI tries to ban the CFA (offered by CFA Institute, USA) in India, it again is insecurity (status and enrollment - related). Reservation is just another name for insecurity. So what am I doing citing all these examples?

Do I wish to condemn insecurity, or the insecure? Certainly not! Insecurity is simply a basic trait of living creatures. It is exhibited by prides of lions and packs of hyenas alike. I would stretch the argument to say that it is an absolutely essential trait. At some emotional or intellectual level, subconsciously or consciously, I too might be and am, insecure. So when does insecurity stop being ugly and starts being benign? Simply put, when it pushes the insecure to raise up the bar, so that there is nothing to fear from the intruder.

The best example that comes to my mind is that of the Indian economy. Since 1991, the way the country's business community have overcome their own sense of insecurity and that of the government, by matching their international counterparts head-to-head, is phenomenal to say the least. In 1991, the government was reacting to the economic situation. Today policy makers and politicians have the opportunity to be proactive. Instead of keeping the intruders out, they should be allowed in. The insecure should be given an opportunity to become stronger. In education and government jobs (and God forbid, in private sector too) the reserved people do not get to improve their standards because their lower standards are subsidized by policy. This applies in every case, where at present insecurity is being exploited, primarily for short-term gains.

But for his short-sightedness, Raj would be exhalting the "marathi manush" on his confidence and courage, not propping him up on stilts of straw. So would Delhi High Court allow the americans to conduct their CFA and tell ICFAI to raise its standards to a matching level. So would all the politicians hoot for removal of reservation, not an increase in the same. But then short-sightedness is too pervasive a disease for such wishful thinking.

Some disclaimers- I think of Marathi people in the same way as I think of all human beings and races - as great. My references to "Marathi Manush" are not disrespectful to the Marathi people. Rather they are a reference to the MNS politicians' stupid arguements in justifying the violence. My examples are all India related, as they are close at home and top-of-mind. In no way, I consider that insecurity is an Indian characteristic. All peoples and countries exhibit it, albeit at different levels, which I believe are commensurate with their position in a giant Maslow's pyramid. As I mentioned, this is really a half-baked opinion, so there might be a lot of example of fragmented logic in here.