Monday, January 18, 2010
WEAPONS THAT MAKE US WEAK
The article, “Weapons of the Weak” by James C. Scott, raised a few apprehensions in my mind. Most prevalent among them is the degradation of ethics and moral as a sequel to the practice of these. Adopting methods of passive resistance, foot dragging, flight may help to evade the exploitation in short run. But in the long run, when these methods get established as a part of our attitude, it results in the disintegration of the work culture. Perhaps this is the prevalent cause behind the degeneration of the government work culture today. So, how justified are these methods?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I feel that the peasents who adopted these methods did so because of lack of any other alternative option. They were oppressed to such an extent that they needed an outlet to vent out their anger. as for work culture, having slaves to work for us in itself is assault on human rights so what kind of work culture are we expecting from them?these people had no options, no freedom and under such constraints they chose to rbel in the way which they felt was safe as well as sound.
well that is exactly why these are referred to as the weapons of the weak. It entirely depends on the person as to how he/she perceives himself or herself to be- strong or weak and then they resort to such weapons.
well I may be wrong here but non-violence was adopted to be the way of protest against the British not for the reason that we were weak but because we were strong to openly defy the British dictum and still be peaceful.
If the so called 'work culture' serves the interest of people in the position of power without taking in to account the interest of people who WORK then it is better that such work culture deteriorates,degenerates and ultimately dies.
Is the exploitation of workers ethical? Is something called exploitation in short run or exploitation in long run? If the exploitation continues then the subtle methods of protest will continue.
We need to first establish the causes that result in foot dragging, flight, shirking and conniving. Going by the reasons given in the text, this behavior is resorted to by the “weak” when there remains no other conceived way of resistance.
If that, as you allege, tantamounts to unethical behavior, its better that they remain unethical and release their grievances in small quantums.(i admit perversion here)
Bud that vent, and one will most probably see, to the discomfort of many, a violent expression of those frustrations.
Also, we need to think of the merits and demerits of these established “ethics”.
@Navneet
I completely agree.
Ethics prescribes that an action should be judged on the basis of its consequences.
Classical (or hedonistic) utilitarianism asserts that an action is right or wrong according to whether it maximizes the net balance of pleasure over pain in the universe.
We just cant resort to ‘ethics’ only when they serve our narrow purpose.
“Means Justify The Ends”
Especially when there is only one at our disposal.
@Vineet
The instruments of protest chosen by Mahatma Gandhi were not done in isolation. I believe the social, political, economic and cultural dialectics of the early 20th century India and even that of South Africa had a huge role to play.
That it was just an ethical stand of non-violence against all odds, in all circumstances, even if we could successfully defeat the British Imperial forces by violent measures is something I don’t think is true.
Heroic tales of sacrifices can be spun overnight, peaceful defiance of the British seems more a term we chose to describe that movement.
taking the long list of "ayes" forward..
1)If u say this method is unethical then how do u define ethics ?
2)If not these methods, then what would u have them do ? resort to violence ?
3)THE PUBLIC SERVANTS ARE NOT WEAK.The whole nation is weak because these "servants" serve all the bosses but Public..
The method of showing resistance vary from person to person; if more specifically said it largely depends upon the section of the society to which he/she belong.Many a times a SILENT REVOLT turns into unexpected results.
What I believe is that the method of showing resentment mainly depends upon the sphere of influence we have and on the person or system against which these WEAPONS are to be used.
@Saint Uphar:
Even the might of Luftwaffe and SS combined could not bring down the Union Jack, so we were non-starters and there was no beating the British that way..
Talking of it as an alternative,I think people of the time had the option of taking to arms any day particularly after Jalliawala Bagh incident but the fact that they chose to march the 'Long Marches' instead is testimony to that fact.
well, after reading the scott article, i doubted on the long term effectiveness of this method. are those who at the receiving end of the events not intelligent enough to realise the ploys and develop methods to counter them in the longer run....
sanju (30038)
yeah i think they are..very much so.But as the title said ..They are the "weapons of the weak" and with revolution not forthcoming the weak are left with nothing but these silent protests to make their presence feel. Alternative is violent upheaval (read revolution ) which establishes a classless society.
Post a Comment