Freedom is relative

+04302008-10-20T07:03:48+04:30312008b+04:30Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:03:48 +0430 2, 2008 at 7.27 +04:3010 (society)
Tags: Fredom, human security

Freedoms are different types. Generally the world is loud about territorial freedom and sovereignty of nations. Rarely one talks about personal freedom, institutional freedom and other varieties of freedom. From an observation of day to day events around oneself, it is clear that freedom of a nation does not mean freedom of its citizens. Hunger, illiteracy, safety, security, traffic, crime, political vendetta, diseases and many other ills are ailing the society. Freedom from all these miseries is the complete freedom for both individuals and nations. Is it possible for such a freedom? None can vouchsafe for total freedom and that is not realistic. Unhappiness will persists and freedom will always be troubled and questioned. Nobody can be totally free as long the world system breeds self-centeredness. To breath better air of freedom one has to sacrifice and self-disciplined. To make this another world possible action should start from every individual.

 

From national to personal freedoms there is a change. The difference is those who control the people. Even today some of the senior citizens in India would like to have the British Raj. They regret sending the colonial rulers out. The common complaint is that the Indian sub-continent has relieved from British rule which was highly judicious. Is justice is more than freedom? Which one is a priority? It depends on the situation. Indians may desire for justice and good governance. Chinese are eager for freedom. The age-old story of the pasture looks greener from this side is the apt description for the current situation.

 

The fact of the matter is that every individual wants personal rule in the world. Common living needs rules, regulations, control and punishments. If human beings are self-governing and self-disciplined there is no need for laws. Practically that was not possible. Hence the social systems have evolved certain mechanisms which can direct its people for better living. Emile Durkheim the French sociologist studied the ways in which traditional and modern industrial societies differed in treating people for violating rules. Through mechanical and organic solidarities, Durkheim demonstrated that the community in the past acted swiftly and punished the culprits. In the industrial society, elaborate legal procedures were evolved to tackle crime. But that centralized the legal deliveries and prolonged the justice period. In between people lost faith and also lives.

 

While trying to deliver justice through proper channel, modern industrial societies have installed highly bureaucratic processes. In a hundred year experience this process is found less effective. Across the world cities crime rates are increasing. Policing seems to be futile in controlling crime. The truth is that few khaki clad police forces are not sufficient. A nation cannot afford to deploy police every nook and corner. Community policing is the feasible alternative. Once upon time community policing was the common system. It was replaced by the bureaucratic method. Are we erroneous in the replacement? 

 

The increasing choice for community policing shows that there no one size fits all solution to the nations. General. Pervez Mushraff has written that dictatorship is the best democratic method in Pakistan. It may be true. What the world considers dictatorship is democracy for Pakistan. Whatever suits the local interests should be followed in practice. Any replication of foreign methods will prove detrimental for people. This age-old truth is still not accepted. The governing people lose focus without following the traditional roots.

 

Some nations are wise enough to avoid ‘dance floor mentality’ and continue to follow their own steps. Bhutan is a fine example for maintaining the traditional systems with adequate dosage of modern methods. Its growth is slow, steady and happy. No wonder this small Himalayan Kingdom which got transformed into a democratic nation few months back is on the top of the World Happiness Index (WHI). Here too individual freedom is controlled to a large extent but people are extremely happy. The minute Bhutan opens its floodgates of global influences it will lose its distinct flavour of happiness and become one among the other unhappy nations.

 

To be free one needs to sacrifice and lead from the front. Accepting defeat and not accusing others are the crucial lessons to be learnt before embarking on the freedom flight. It is duties not rights, it is respect not fear, it is discipline not compulsion which can keep the world going without much troubles. Any amount of research and talk will be less helpful if we don’t allow others freedom and promote our freedom.