Preventing Spread of An Idea And Preserving Culture: A Futile Struggle

25/07/2010


When I was in London recently my daughter gave me this book “Things Fall Apart” written by Chinua Achebe, saying that it was one of the best books she has read in a long time. Last week I read it. I could not put it down till I finished it. It is certainly a great book. Written in a story telling style, it is easy to read and at the same time has got a profound intellectual depth. The book describes the life and culture of a tribal village in the backwoods of Africa and vividly portrays the cataclysmic effect of the arrival of the missionary and colonial personnel without any incrimination or lamentation. The reader feels sad at the demise of a simple but elegant culture but also sees the inevitability of the change that the modernity brings.

Though first published in 1958 the book still feels fresh. The struggle to preserve the local culture from the external influences which constantly keep trying to insinuate is still happening all over the world. The futility of this struggle is also evident but only in hindsight. In India some people want to stop the satellite television and multinational companies to prevent dilution or outright destruction of their “culture”. In Afghanistan some people are prepared to die and kill to preserve the way of life which they had since middle ages. It is not happening only in the poor and developing nations but in every nation. In China the government is struggling hard to prevent the “subversive influences of internet “and in France the government is banning the veil. In Britain the BNP the ultra nationalist party is opposing any proposal to build a temple and Switzerland does not want any more mosques. Americans are worried about Hispanic influence and Venezuelans are banning all things American.

As evident in this book by Achebe one can not prevent the changes. It is exactly the same all over the world. One can never prevent the spread of ideas from one culture to another, from one country to another. It is inevitable.

I wish we could all rise above our pettiness and not waste our precious resources in obstructing the free flow of ideas all over the world.

THINKING IN PLANETARY TERMS

4/07/2010
Global warming has become the issue of 21^st century. Most if not all our scientific, economic and cultural resources are being and will be employed towards finding a solution to this problem. Why is it so difficult to solve this problem? The answer lies in the name it self. Global warming; global is the key word. Up till now problem solving has been an individual effort, may it be an individual person or individual institute or an individual country and the reward of problem solving has also mostly gone to that individual in one way or another. Global warming is different. The effort of solving it has to be global and rewards of finding a solution will benefit every one on this planet. Failure to do so will harm everyone.
This universality of solving the problem and reaping the outcome is a total paradigm shift from what the human modus operandi has been up till now. Our way of thinking and working has evolved over millennia; individual or tribal survival being the prime moving force. Our civilization has broadened this to the extent that now we think in terms of countries or group of countries. We may pretend but still evolutionally we are way behind thinking in planetary terms. At present we do not act as though every human being is equally important and has equal rights (compare between the responses to Bhopal ie UNION CARBIDE and Mexican gulf ie BRITISH PETROLEUM disasters). 1000 people dying in a third world country makes a smaller news impact than 10 people in a G8 country. From this state of affairs to visualize that not every one on this earth but every thing on this earth is equally important seems an unfathomable leap. And that is what thinking in planetary terms means.

At present in many regions of the world the governments still make decisions which help them personally or tribally. Whether it will be of any benefit to their country is not taken into consideration. Many a times these decisions blatantly harm their country. We rightly call them corrupt and denounce them. But when governments take decisions which are beneficial to their countries but harmful to the planet as a whole (increased carbon emission, pollution of air, water and soil, increased consumerism and natural source depletion) we do not apply the same moral criterion. In planetary term they are almost equally guilty. And this applies to every country in the world!


If we are going to survive this millennium we have to start thinking in planetary terms. Before taking any decision we must check that it would not harm the planet. And this should be incorporated into our inherent moral code. Can it be achieved? I am certain that it can be. But it needs a seismic change in our psyche not just in our industries.