Conservatism & Escapism
लेखक: आनंद मेश्राम
(दिसंबर २०१२)
A married woman decides to step out of her abusive in-laws’ house. Is she an escapist?
She can’t deal with the problems she’s facing there right now, and finally decides to do just anything else but stay. She’s ready to take on a whole new set of problems, to avoid old, sickening problems, isn’t she? According to most advises, she shouldn’t even try anymore and waste energy convincing her husband and in-laws after what happened, because there’s high probability that they’re not going to get better, or she can’t wait that long even if they do. They are stubborn old conservative people, aren’t they? They don’t know any better, do they?
So technically, isn’t she an escapist? Because, for obvious reasons, she can’t tolerate anymore and desperately finding a way out.
Are her in-laws absolutely wrong when they say, “घर जिम्मेदारी छोड़के भाग गयी! An escapist!”
But is she really? Now if she shrugs off the entire episode of abuses, and decides NOT to step out, will that make her conservative?
Has a moment of reckoning come into her life when upon deciding just anything would she belong to one group or another, conservative or escapist? But isn’t she only replacing one set of problems and possibilities with another set? Why should she either be labelled an orthodox/conservative or modern/escapist?
Similarly, a village suffering a prolonged draught faces distress migration. Some people stay back and fight through innovative means. Those who’re staying back will label migrating people as escapist, while those who see nothing but gloom in the village will move on, labelling others as conservative.
Exactly who’s coward in this case? Those brave conservatives who’re staying back in the village and trying innovative means to subsist? Or those brave escapists who’re stepping out of their comfort zone, readying themselves for any situation, come what may? Both sides call each other cowards, because of other’s conservatism or escapism.
Isn’t it similar to the case of youth migrating to other cities or countries in search of better job and prospects?
Similarly, some people are quarrelsome, because of high intolerance level, while some are enough tolerant to stay quiet. Supposing both are friends and a fight breaks out with some other group; intolerant person fights with others, while peaceful person either tries to stop the fight or doesn’t involve. Intolerant quarrelsome person would later on call that tolerant peaceful person as a coward, an escapist. But tolerant, peaceful person would say, “You’re intolerant and you don’t know any better!”
Let’s get even acute. Whenever some people feel environmental heat/cold, they turn on the fan/ac/fireplace. Now those who can stay put would say, “You’re an escapist! You can’t tolerate what nature offers. Even a little!” While those escapists reply, “You don’t know any better. Why be conservative when we have the technology?”
Likewise for any unpleasant noise, sight, odour, taste and sensations, some people try to cover their sense faculties. Are they all escapists? Because many around us can easily tolerate the situation. They see you flinching, reacting in myriads of ways, and they smile.
So, does only tolerance determine who’s an escapist and who’s a conservative? Because then, everybody is an escapist and everybody a conservative at the same time.
Think about it; every tolerant person calls an intolerant one an escapist, while every intolerant person labels the tolerant one “a conservative, who doesn’t know any better.”
Nobody’s right and nobody’s wrong. It’s just what every individual wants from life, which differs from person to person, geographically and historically.
So according to this, every so called “modern progressive society” is essentially an escapist society. They don’t tolerate one another much, the old customs, ways and problems, even nature as it is, and hence continually innovate and escape to a newer world of problems and possibilities.
On the other hand, any old conservative society simply tolerate one another, the old customs, ways and problems, and nature as it is, not innovating and escaping.
So, are escapists better than Conservatives? Or is opposite true? Or both? Or nobody? Well, it only depends on what individuals/societies want from life.
Right now, be a conservative or an escapist, problems and sufferings will keep haunting you forever, testing your tolerance, and pushing you from one camp to another, round and round.
One way or another, every human being becomes an escapist when he/she can’t tolerate. And becomes conservative when he/she can. Whenever anyone sees present suffering as hopeless and meaningless, and thinks there might be a way out, he/she escapes in hope, to a newer set of sufferings.
Science and technology is an act of escapism. Because if you’re tolerant and happy today with what is, why would you care to invent, innovate and discover anything new? So all technology is mere a fruit of intolerance. In fact intolerance is the only reason anybody ever learns anything new.
At any given time in any society, there’s no progressive or regressive about anything. It’s just it’s tolerance level! Tolerating the fruits of intolerance is how a society progresses.
And dare I say, every action anybody ever takes is an act of escapism. I mean, why would you even move if you can tolerate the present moment, as it is, perpetually?
This dichotomy keeps blurring disastrously and eventually falls flat on it’s face as you go on applying it to all actions people take.
Now think about extremes;
A situation arises when somebody wants to escape “all” sufferings. One renunciates material life and leads a very painful life of abstinence. Funny thing is, in order to become an ultra-escapist, one needs to become an ultra-conservative! Ultra-conservative in terms of strictly observing hundreds of precepts along the painful journey, which old gurus proclaimed thousands of years ago.
Now are this kind of people conservatives, or escapists? Tolerant or intolerant? Tolerant to the extent of not moving body even an inch for hours, days and even months, suffering societal, mental, and bodily torture, begging food, and with heat, cold, rain, mosquitoes and animals into the wild. Even if they die, nobody would know. Intolerant to the extent that they drop everything associated with their past life which represents a form of suffering. They don’t take no for an answer, and won’t settle until all sufferings vaporize one by one.
Now how do you categorize these people? What camp do they really belong to? What term should they be labelled with? I’ll leave it to your imagination. But my real question is; Is it wise to categorize or label?