I have been pondering over this heading for a couple of days. That - in spite of people being so civilized (at least as we claim to be), in spite of people being completely aware of the aftermath of any violent attacks or war (loss of lives & death of innocent people), & in spite of knowing for sure the futility of violence (debatable) – why does anyone take the path of violence? Does it really work?
Someone messaged me to ask when will the unrest between Israel and Lebanon come to an end. And I said within 3 months from its start. He said, “there won’t be any people left in Lebanon.” I said, that is not my area of concern, but the unrest will come to an end within 3 months of it start. When we know that any war will come to end, in a particular time frame, then why wage a war on the first place?
Indian epics are best examples of violence. Both Ramayana and Mahabharatha start with a cause and end with violence. And any movie, even today, has fight sequence or violence at the end or in between, to solve many issues. Does that mean problems cannot be resolved without wars or violence? Or it becomes a must to take up weapon to solve many a problems of life.
Before understanding this basic emotion (violence) of human beings, it becomes a must to understand what makes a person violent on the first place. To rule, or to command, or to govern on weaker people has always been the way any society has functioned. Previously Kings used to rule over the people, and now it is the politicians and the government that rules. What happens to people who aren’t happy with the rules set up by the government? Or what happens to minority who are suppressed by the majority all the time? It automatically gives way to rebellion, which sprouts into a seed of violence!
I am basically pro-LTTE. Not only me, most Tamils are. DMK, AIADMK, MGR all were pro-LTTE – but stepped back after the assassination of Rajeev Gandhi (it had a reason too). I am not for their violent outlook of course, but I support their cause. It is a debatable topic about who reached Sri Lanka first. Was it the Hindu Tamils or the Buddhist Sinhalese. But then Tamils have had contributed to their developments in most areas. But when the Sinhala Government refused to make Tamil as an official language, and also when they refused to give government jobs to Tamils, and also when they gave nil seats for Tamils in their government – the rebellion started. It started in 1983, and is still going on…great guns (literally) - and suppression of minorities was the main cause here….
To be continued…..