INSIDE THE MIND OF A REBEL
A rebel's mind is a fascinating area of study. We see here nature's bounty of moral courage at its highest. A rebel is another name for the audacity of human spirit to disregard all considerations of the self in pursuing the call of conscience. Why then did Aristotle say that those who excel in virtue have the best right of all to rebel, but then they are of all men the least inclined to do so?
There is an inherent conflict in the concept of virtue and the spirit of rebellion. The former celebrates conformity, the latter detests it. Virtue may be simply defined as conduct in thought and action in accordance with prevalent social norms and respect for law. Without it a stable social order can not exist. Unstable societies can neither provide harmony and peace nor individual liberty and safety.
Imperfection is a word writ large on every facet of society. Stability breeds stagnation and human institutions requires periodic course correction to regain lost focus. A rebel's mind reacts with indignation to a perceived or real wrong and the urge for drastic action is irresistable.
A traumatic social upheaval is seldom the right instrument of change. Firstly, it produces avoidable disruption, destruction and pain. Secondly, phenomena instantaneous in nature do not proceed in accordance with well planned blue prints and produce unexpected, and not infrequently, unsavory results. A very bloody revolution recorded in history bears testimony to this fact. The Guillotine separated heads from bodies but did not rid France of acrimony or injustice. It simply replaced the agencies and their philosophies. Nine decades after the Bolshevik Revolution Russia remains wasteland of human aspirations and hopes.
It is suggested that the seeds of the French Revolution were sown by Voltaire's writings. Can it not be argued that the stirrings of our own Freedom Movement can be traced back to the influence of liberal British education on our early thinkers and leaders. A rebel needs to appreciate that a lasting change has to first take place in the minds and hearts of men. Taking that as a blank canvas the imagined grand panorama of change must first be painted there.
The word constraint is to a rebel what a red rag is to bull in a ring. Is every restriction a meaningless denial of freedom or serves some useful purpose. How would a rebel react to see a toddler reaching with his tiny fingers burning embers of fire? Does such a situation not demand intervention to keep the child away from harm? Such intervention becomes a constraint or restriction when imposed by society to keep people away from the dangers of unthoughtful behavior.
A benign regulatory mechanism is different from tyrannical controls of despots. Here it is not perceived unjustness of curtailment of liberty but downright injustice, which must turn every self-respecting citizen into a rebel.
Close
Hullo DW
" Jinnah would be considered ambitious but not a rebel. While as someone like Gandhi would be a rebel in the true sense."
You are right there. But therein lies the rub a rebel with Mahatma's humility and healing touch. Why, why can not each one be a rebel of that kind? We lack his faith in God and the capacity to suffer in our cause.
Thanks for being here.
Sceptic
Reply | | Report Abuse
Reply | | Report Abuse
I believe that the right to rebel is the birthright of all who wish to practice their free will. It is when unbridled ambition takes on the mask of rebellion that one sees the most amount of injustice unleashed on the world.
While ambition to make one's mark on the world and rebellious rituals can sometimes be confused as one - it isn't. Innately they are different. The former is for selfish reasons, and the latter is for altruistic reasons. To draw an example - someone like Jinnah would be considered ambitious but not a rebel. While as someone like Gandhi would be a rebel in the true sense.
p.s. I read your response to my comment on Anjana's blog - but did not feel it was an appropriate place for a debate of that nature :)
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hullo Supriya
A predictable reaction from one a rebel at heart and in practice too.
Is the the personal freedom you speak of not a reality in the animal world? No senile patriarchs hold sway there. The young and the old, the male and the female, are free to do there own thing, at their own risk and peril. Now, it appears that humans, at some atage, thought of freeing society from this 'risk and peril' menace and ended up designing constraints.
A great leader has the option of leading humans back to the cave age ethos. Are you accepting the challenge of taking man back to unbridled freedom, even if that leads to licentiousness of the worst kind?
Good morning. Did you ignore this constraint wittingly?
Sceptic
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hello Sceptic,
Very nice to see you share your thoughts on rebels.
'Rebellion' is a feeling I recognize far too well, for reasons well known to people who know me.
Such intervention becomes a constraint or restriction when imposed by society to keep people away from the dangers of unthoughtful behavior.
Well, my question: who is the society made up of? Who makes the rules on behalf of the society? Truth is - the society, whole human society at large is ruled, controlled and maipulated by male partiarchs - who have at various points in history deemed whatever suited them to best advantage - as rules. Who say? Who has the right to make a judgement call on another? The only deciding factor is human conscience - one's own. Right and wrong are highly relative. The ethical quotient of one's own decides whats wrong and what is virtuous. How I hate the word virtue for its used, overused by the lordly patriarchs to subdue the free spirited ones!
Rebels will outlive such faux rules. One day - personal feedom will be supreme for that is how it was cracked up to be.
Reply | | Report Abuse