The Bigger Morality
Published by sauvik February 17th, 2006 in Culture and SocietyThis article of mine appeared, in a slightly abridged form, in The Times of India recently. I cannot find the link:
Sexual morality is very big in India. The entire establishment is sexually straitlaced. A couple kissing on the dance floor led to the police closing down a Chennai hotel. Mumbai’s dance bars were shut down by legislative fiat. But hold it there! Is sexual morality that important? After all, these are postmodern times. The prudery of Victorian England is of the long-gone past. These are the days of speed dating, gay and lesbian rights, nudity and permissiveness. In such times, young people must be encouraged to explore the sexual experience and find love on their own terms. Today, the arranged marriage and the joint family (â la Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi) must be seen as detrimental to the prospects of happiness before our youth. But does sexual freedom mean that society will break down? I don’t think so. There is a far bigger morality that is required to hold society together. And the sorry fact is that the sexually ‘correct’ Indian establishment is sorely lacking in this far more important morality. I am speaking, of course, of economic morality, which means earning one’s keep honestly. While sexual morality differs between ages and cultures, economic morality universally is a straight and narrow path, without any permissible deviations. You can either live by producing, or you can live off plunder and theft, extortion and bribery. In the area of economic morality, our politico-administrative establishment possesses no ethics whatsoever. They are all faithful to their spouses, yes, but they are not faithful to their constituents: the people of India. They demand we pay our taxes honestly, but they themselves are not honest when it comes to spending our money on our collective needs. It does not need an inquiry commission to prove that much of the money spent on roads (or armaments) is stolen. It does not require much analysis to gauge that theirs is an ugly spoils system. In a society where most politicians have criminal records, it does not require deep investigation to conclude that every ‘political party’ is a quasi-criminal gang. In such a society, very little harm occurs if we kiss on the dance floor; or, after that first kiss, we progress ‘all the way’ – to Chicago! On the contrary, it is the economic immorality of our ruling classes that is responsible for all the ills our society suffers from. So let us give the youth their sexual freedom, and let us demand of the aged strict economic honesty. That is the bigger morality.
This point was made by me earlier on AnarCapLib, with reference to the MMS scandal.
14 Responses to “The Bigger Morality”
- 1 Trackback on Feb 20th, 2006 at 6:13 pm
- 2 Pingback on Apr 2nd, 2007 at 9:18 am
- 3 Trackback on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Instead of trying to focus on ’sexual morality’, these guys should focus on the bigger picture - ‘morality’
I partially disagree. Both sexual and economic moralities are equally important. Someone who is immoral on one front, cannot be trusted to be moral on the other. Morality is a characteristic of a person. There is not bigger or smaller morality. And sexual freedom can indeed result into the breakdown of the society. Why do you think families in USA are less nuclear than in India? Why does US have a much higher divorce rate? Well… but that’s just my opinion.
Chaitanya, the issue here is who defines what morality is. For X, it is immoral to have sex before marriage, while for me, it is perfectly alright. Now X has the right to pursue his/her definition and propagate its morality among people. But X has no right to stop me from doing what I want as long as I do not harm anyone. Same thing applies to any issue of culture or sexual morality.
On the other hand, economic immorality as portrayed in the article is truly immoral, because it impedes individual rights of some people. So if governments take upon themselves to preserve morality, it must be economic morality and not cultural/sexual morality. Preserving that must be left to individuals/groups of individuals according to their own versions, as long as their methods are non-violent.
I believe there are far more greater issues plaguing this nation rather than couples kissing on the dance floor or running around trees in Meerut. Could the cops or the establishment be looking for the much needed limelight by going into acts like Operation Majnu? Could it be like, “look we can’t cleanse the country of criminals, so here we are..doing our best to atleast cleanse it from acts which are not in Indian culture?” Ha!
In the land of Kama Sutra, Konark and Khajuraho, this is a scathing vindictment of our own culture. Sexuality is and has always been a part of us.
Cheers!
PS: I read that your blog was featured as one of the top 10 blogs in the nation today. (Courtesy: Pitch). That’s how I came to know about this. Congratulations, anyways! :-)
Chaitanya in concluding that societies in the US are breaking down, you cite a higher incidence of divorces in that country to back your statement. Pray how does the fact that the US has more people getting divorced automatically lead to your assumption that its society is breaking down? Couldn’t a breakdown of law and order of such as in India more closely be approximated to be a societal breakdown than husband and wives deciding they don’t want to live with each other any more? In fact, in case of an unhappy marriage, wouldn’t it be better if the couple divorced rather than spend their lives being miserable with each other out of a false sense of morality? A view such as yours in itself is what Mr Yazad Jal is speaking out against. I think.
That should have been Mr Sauvik, not Mr Yazad Jal.
very insightful piece, I think I’ll link to it.
Brilliant post! It is high-time we started to hold our leaders accountable.
Democracy does not mean elected leaders get to do whatever they want; rape, loot, pillage (it is clearly absurd, right? )
It is time India introspects about the periodic ritual of democratic elections. Elections are meaningless unless the duties of the elected leader (whether it be municipal cleaning, or maintenance of roads) are clearly specified, and are so specified are the limits to his power.
The people should be able to restrict, and specify, the power of their “leaders”. A leader should not have a moral carte-blanche in his actions, just because he won some democratic election. We can do more than shrug; we can, and we should.
We should demand to specify the limits of his power. And by “we” - I mean the middle-class. We have the most to lose. The rich hobknob with politicians, and the poor have no clue.
We should STRIKE - take our cars and park them in the streets; park them in front of the politician’s houses; we should ORGANISE, we should PROTEST- We should get PRESS attention. We should get our hands dirty; we should do more than just discuss…
The concept of Democracy should not legitimise the nefarious morals, and immoral actions, of any elected official.
MIDDLE CLASS FOR ACCOUNTABILITY. Vande Mataram.
Bigger divorce rate in the US is due to higher stress. But, the issue is a bit less about morality and more so about disliking seeing people kiss in public–I think it has to do with etiquette and manners and not morality, as you mention.
by mentality i am a hippie: ‘extreme’ liberalism in socio-political issues and issues of life are my opinion and principle. therefore, i really appreciate your article and hope to hear from you about a pragmatic solution to the problems caused by moral police(goons).
honestly, it is the work of perverts to suppress sexual freedom in a society which has begun to gain education.
every one has its own right to leave a life.The article has many such points in it which we must follow. Must read.
http://www.bpojobsathome.com