“Narrative is linear but action has
breadth and depth as well as height and is solid.” Thomas
Carlyle.
Geopolitics is
complicated but humanity is very simple. This is about the only generality that
applies across the board in political impasses, conflicts and transitions in
the 21st century. Unfortunately, in an age where we think of
ourselves as being civilized, we are still dogged by conflicts and political
instability all over the world. And the popular narrative is that we’ve never
had it so good.
People love narratives
in their history. It helps us make sense of what happened when we can put a
beginning, middle and end to a series of events. Most wars are explained away
by economic factors creating some form of unrest at a political or social level
and a subsequent legislation, leader, or movement coming to the fore. Before
you know it, the country found itself in a war, which looking back on it now,
was all so predictable.
“On
Gandhi: Don’t ever forget, that we were not lead by a saint with his head in
clouds, but by a master tactician with his feet on the ground.” Shashi
Tharoor
Few periods of history
escape this narrative-building. Mahatma Gandhi’s rise to prominence is a good example. The oft-cited peaceful model of Gandhi is given the credit for
bringing independence to India in 1947.
The truth is that Mahatma Gandhi was an extremely intelligent man and
could see the writing on the wall for Britain in India. His peaceful protests
set a fine example but Indian independence was on its way, regardless of his actions.
Unfortunately, his peaceful
model would achieve little if anything at all in most modern conflicts. In the
West Bank, to take one example, human rights violations occur on a daily basis.
Does anybody believe that Israel will desist in settling disputed territories
if Palestinians walk the 150km or so to the River Jordan to protest, in the
same way that Gandhi and his followers did for British salt tax when walking to
the Indian Ocean[i]?
It’s unlikely at best.
Our fetish for leaders
and narratives leads us to conclusions which are lazy and inaccurate. Countries
involved in conflicts and impasses are defined as good and bad. This is easier
to digest than the truth, which is that some things happen and it’s very
difficult to explain why. Is the Israel Palestine situation about security,
religion or territory? Or is it now purely based on bitterness? Is the
Russian-Ukrainian conflict about economics, identity or energy?
In each of the modern
conflicts listed above, only three reasons were cited. There could possibly be
tens of reasons in each case: lobbying, corporate interests, demographics or
faulty political systems could just as easily be cited. The point is that to
look at geopolitical impasses as simplistic as being one-fit-all models will
not solve them. We need to be more creative in our problem-solving than that.
“Nothing
in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious
stupidity.” Martin Luther King
Even when special
leaders like Mahatma Gandhi are involved, it doesn’t always happen. Martin Luther King – a disciple of Gandhi’s
methods – was a truly exceptional leader. In fact, it’s hard to think of a
better one in modern times. But most Americans would accept that there’s still
a long way to go in prejudice that exists in people’s minds and elsewhere in
the United States, even if huge strides have been made.
Another problem with
looking at an issue in terms of outstanding leaders arriving on the scene is
that people don’t strive for meaningful change when there aren’t any. Tunisia
has just elected the country’s main secular party in its second free democratic
election since ousting the autocrat Zein-al-Abidine in 2011[ii]. Where would Tunisians be now if they had
waited for the arrival of a charismatic leader like Gandhi or King? Or thought
that a peaceful protest on its own would solve their ills?
Conclusions
Complexity doesn’t make
a situation unsolvable. Quite the opposite; seeing all the sides in their
complexity gives us a more refined understanding ; we then gain an appreciation
of the complexities involved in finding a solution. Creativity begins to emerge
to solve something that before seemed unsolvable. Obstacles become challenges
and black-and-white attitudes begin begin to meet in the middle ground.
Mahatma Gandhi’s
peaceful resistance might have elements which can be used elsewhere, but it’s certainly
not an all-or-nothing scenario. Perhaps his biggest contribution was bringing
intelligence to the situation. We lack that in too many political contexts in
the 21st century. By turning everything into an easy-to-digest
narrative, we are moving further away from intelligence to something which
resembles a tabloid view of the world.
“If
our brains were simple enough for us to understand them, we’d be so simple that
we couldn’t.”
Ian
Stewart
No comments:
Post a Comment