Apathy, Activism and the Line in Between

The Christian community has typically been used to living a fairly sheltered and secluded life. The community has been largely till recently been spared the social ostracism that even elite and urbane Muslims have faced in times of communal violence and the poorer sections of the community have till recently been spared the violence that has so regularly lashed the Muslims. The result is a very obvious one: the Christian community has often lacked the institutional mechanism to deal with targeted attacks on the community it is still fumbling to press the right buttons, and apart from the response of human rights activists and bodies of clergy, the lay person’s response has been lukewarm. Indeed the Christian community is perhaps full of people guided by apathy.

Traditionally the Muslim response has been clergy driven and the over riding slogan has been that of “Islam in danger.” Whether Islam was in danger or not at these times, the power of the clergy probably was and that red flag provided certain shrillness to the protests that were driven by a sense of urgency. In contrast, the appropriate Christian response might have been that “Christianity is in danger” but mercifully, the resistance has not taken that route and it is good that it has been this way. The worst possible way to counter fundamentalism of one kind is to replace it with fundamentalism of another kind.

The Christian response to this kind of violence has thus far to be commended for not losing the moral high ground by also resorting to violence. This is especially so because in spite of the largely measured responses from the Christian clergy, in a volatile environment, there is always the danger of some lunatic fringe element shooting off some loose canon.

On the other hand, a better and more effective answer to rising tides of fundamentalism of any shade would be to try and enlarge the space of secular and liberal ideologies and by speaking up against all forms of communalism and sectarian and ethnic or region based violence – whether it affects one’s particular community or language group or not this time round. If it has, this time around… never mind this - there is always another time.

If one disagrees with this thesis, one need not look very far away for evidence. One will remember in that in the not too distant past, the Shiv Sena had as its target the Udipi restaurants dotting the Mumbai landscape. In fact, the Shiv Sena really came of age as a lumpen organization, out to vanquish the South Indians from the city’s landscape. Of course, once the Sena had carved out its identity, it promptly forgot the South Indians and more than a generation later, the Generation X Sena – has begun inventing itself by venting itself on the North Indians - the Biharis and the UP wallahs.

Martin Niemöller, the Nazi era, Christian theologian had it right, when he explained the dangers of looking out only for one’s own. His quote of war time Germany explaining the apathy of many in his generation concerned just with getting on with their lives… “First they came for the Jews…..” has become a lodestar for engagement with wider, liberal elements of civil society whose boundaries are wider than one’s own. Niemoller’s words were later elaborated ….

“When Hitler attacked the Jews I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church — and there was nobody left to be concerned.”

In a multi-cultural, multi-lingual and multi-lingual country like India, this prophecy could be fulfilled faster than one thinks. Those who sit back today, unaffected by the plight of any one else’s but their own, comforted in their ghettos could find their security shattered very soon. At the end of the day, when all our identities are stripped down to the bone; there is only one question that remains to be asked ; one that remains to be answered… are you an inclusive person—embracing every one and their culture and belief or are you an exclusive person, with your world shrinking by the day.. as you leave out more and more and more people out of the fold because they are different …. Or are you just plain apathetic … that worst sin of all? For even an excluvist person can perhaps be won over by reasoning or argument …. but an apathetic person can pass through life unmoved by all things and every thing… till his own life is shattered by a glass pane.

The Shadows Series IV : A Counter Culture of Courage

When Madhavi Kapoor wanted to sell her flat in Pune and found that her efforts were being thwarted because her buyer was a Muslim, she did some thing unusual. Instead of humming and hawing to her buyer and fobbing him off with vague answers and then identifying another buyer, she took on the housing society head on. Her reasoning is impeccable: She had given her word to the Muslim family in question and so would not back out and further more, after coming to know of the reasons of the housing society’s objections, she became more adamant.

As she puts it, it became a matter of principle. So much so that the lady has promised to keep an eye on the situation and is prepared t move the National Human Rights Commission if she finds her buyers being harassed on account of their religion.Madhavi Kapoor is no human rights activist which is why her act deserves to be highlighted more. Most people, especially from the majority community would choose to duck and dodge rather than get involved. The flat is in a good location, other buyers can be found, so why alienate members of one’s own community – in this case, not just the religious community but even the Sindhi community. The unnamed Muslim family can be called lucky because Mrs. Kapoor did not hang Martin Neimoller’s well known quote as a tapestry on a wall.

“… They first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew….”

When faced with uncomfortable situations which do not directly affect one’ own life and comforts very few can expect to find some one like Mrs. Kapoor who stood up and made a stink. Most of us will react in one of three ways, and not one of them is of any meaningful help.

Apathy is the most common reaction. There is so much going on, life is so crowded that there seems little point in burdening yourself more by taking on more and choosing to get involved. The conscience can be coaxed into somnolence by the simple logic that this is the business of some one else – the politicians, the law enforcement people, the activists, some body, any body but not ours. From traffic accidents to genocides, this is the commonest response of them all.

The next and the most visible response is aggression. This is what Mrs. Madhavi Kapoor as well as the housing society management displayed through her active involvement and advocacy on behalf of the Bohra Muslim buyers of her property did; thought the word aggression typically has negative connotations of violence for us. But aggression and advocacy when carried out in the ambit of the law is great and what makes Mrs. Kapoor’s response nobler is that while most of us will stir ourselves out of our apathy.

But the most chilling response that we can construct is that of acquiescence. Though on the face, apathy and acquiescence might both look alike, acquiescence is far more sinister. Apathy makes you look the other way when you could do better but acquiescence makes you an active participant in a perverse act, be it in so flaccid a gesture as a participant in a rabble or the one who says “Aye” as a degenerate and retrograde resolution is carried by the show of hands as probably happened in the Pune housing society.

With the culture of apathy being the prevailing theme, displaying daring and courage is really living by a lonely counter culture that merits accolades and appreciation at every turn. May be the Godfrey Philips Bravery awards which have a grouping for recognizing and honoring those who have involved themselves in acts of social courage will take note of Madhavi Kapoor’s act. We will always need many more of them to display a different kind of aggression – one that declines to acquiesce and accept what is unjust and wrong.