Witoubou Newmai
“On this day, 45 years ago one family’s greed for power led to the imposition of the Emergency. Overnight the nation was turned into a prison. The press, courts, free speech...all were trampled over. Atrocities were committed on the poor and downtrodden,” Union Home minister Amit Shah said on Thursday, June 25.
The Emergency was declared “just a few minutes before the clock struck midnight” 45 years ago on June 25, 1975. The order of the Emergency, Wikipedia entry informed, “bestowed upon the Prime Minister the authority to rule by decree.”
While reflecting on the Emergency, it will be a matter of courage for today’s society to know who was trampling democracy, and who is trampling democracy. Or, are the people today becoming quite blasé about the dangers that they are struggling to come out of their stupor?
This writer was prompted to ask this question after Union Home Minister Amit Shah had suggested on Thursday that the people have the power to defeat any authority. “The Emergency was lifted after the efforts of lakhs of people,” he said.
But the sorry state of affairs today is the missing ground to gain leverage for the people to act in any eventuality. The argument altogether is this: In a time such as this when the society finds it hard to withstand the shoves of circumstances any day, no one is attracted to doing things one should be doing. The greater problem is also about anyone succumbing to the pressure and the society blithely dismisses as ‘unavoidable consequences’. This culture, indeed, has compounded the errors further so that we continue to witness a pliant society.
Are we really choosing to be what we allow ourselves to be the way we are because we have other ideas? The society seems to feel smug in the belief that it is treading on pragmatism, while, without resorting to various subtleties.
It may not be that off-tracked to argue that, what we think of the ‘authority’ and the corresponding society, or the other way round, will determine on how we live and who we are. In other words, as long as we do not have the correct opinion of the ‘authority’ or as long as our opinion on the ‘authority’ is wrong or as long as we view the ‘authority’ from the wrong lens; we will continue to live wrongly.
To view from the right lens should also mean that, among various explanations, a society should think beyond its immediate circumstances to find out what the ‘authority’ is up to.
In other words, we must draw back the attitude that veils our future. However, we cannot expect one bit of hope if the society continues to get riled by a clichéd and monotonous opinion such as this.
