Us and Them

(That this post has been published on the anniversary of 9/11 doesn't really have anything to do with anything)

"Take all your overgrown infants away somewhere,
and build them a home
a little place of their own
The Fletcher Memorial Home for incurable tyrants and kings"
- The Fletcher Memorial Home by Pink Floyd (don't say "not again!" yet, the post is not about them, or the interpretation of their song lyrics)


The overgrown infants referred so affectionately to by Roger Waters in this lesser known song from one of the band's least known albums, are of course Messrs. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Brezhnev, Khrushchev, Nixon, Reagan, Thatcher, and their ilk. I really like the incurable tyrants expression, which I believe fits the bill quite perfectly for someone like Stalin, who milked the seemingly idealistic theory of communism in the worst way imaginable. Nixon, despite his staunch anti-communist views couldn't prevent himself from being cast in the same mould as his arch-enemies. Unlike Stalin, he didn't slaughter his opponents for the sake of one-upmanship. He chose to do it in his own unromantic and weasly way - by planting bugs in their workplace. If an attempt is made to imagine a common forum where all the legendary figures mentioned above can exchange high-fives (or maybe throw sheep at each other), it'd have to be a community with a cool title like "Lust for power" or "My chair and why I can't live without it".

The song was written during the early 80s, at the time Maggie decided that the choice between avoiding a costly, needless war and retaining power ain't no choice at all. Even though hippie counter-culture had died out long ago, the musicians of yore were not able to let go of their protesting ways. To their credit, the politicians never stopped giving them reasons. Cut to the early 21st century, and to pseudo-hippies sitting around in Indian engineering colleges. Add a little 9/11-and-its-aftermath theme to the mix, and you have on your hands a spicy discussion between sworn capitalism fans and even more sworn idealists-who-don't-know-yet-that-they-are-actually-talking-like-communists. Needless to say, the geopolitical frenzy of profit-driven wars hasn't changed the least bit with the inevitable dissolution of the Soviet Union. The US doesn't have anybody left to fight with, so they're just doing it alone in exotic middle-eastern locations. That these locations happen to have huge deposits of some hydrocarbons that fuel every non-living thing that moves, is probably just Jo-incidence with a C. Protests are no longer cool like the good old days, when agitation was symbolized by Mary Jane and an enduring image of Bob Marley. But hey, people are still pissed off at the overgrown infant-like ways of Bush, Cheney, Medvedev & Co.

It is also very interesting (for me, at least) that a large number of authoritarian rulers have communist inclinations. This is because I believe that communism at its heart is a philosophy inspired by the most idealistic notions of an equal and just world. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" appears a very noble concept, at least prima facie. However, I guess what I've learned is that the world was never supposed to be an ideal place, and it can't be forced to be that way. Which is why communism doesn't work in practice, and precisely why religion does. It is impossible to make humans work against their will, unless you scare them with the power of an unknown all-powerful force. Communism discounts God, and hence appears more cruel when implemented. Because cruelty is only permissible in the name of the father, the son, and the holy ghost.

My tone may have revealed my inclinations. Yes, I have invariably been on the communist-leaning side of the debate. Probably it's because of my obsession with classic rock, or maybe it's the other way round. Whatever, I used to be throughly sold out to the belief that people like Dubya need to like 'grow up dude' and stop 'fucking everybody's shit up'! Shrewd and cunning were words I never used without negative connotations. Politics as a motive in itself was something I never understood. Then, on the insistence of the biggest proponent of capitalism I've ever come across in real life, aka dassa, I watched the documentary Commanding Heights - aka "A shameless ode to Capitalism", aka "Capitalism ka munh mein kyun nahi le lete ho?"

The self-proclaimed "unbiased" look at the trends in world markets during the 20th century is actually quite intriguing, despite its obvious bias. It starts off pretending to be an innocent story of the transition of world markets from the free trading phase to Keynesian regulated economies following WWII, and back to free markets sometime during the early 80s. It ends up a we-told-you-we-were-right kind of chest-thumping proclamation by the capitalists. My own reaction to the movie has been kind of like the world markets. At first, I was impressed immensely, thanks in no small part to the sheer art of movie-making. It is extremely well-paced for a documentary, does not support any single viewpoint in any overt way, and is peppered with sufficient masala for an economics illiterate and political imbecile like me to not be completely lost. Then, after a whole lot of wiki-ing and googling, I became thoroughly convinced that it's a desperate capitalist ploy, presumably to support US's aggressive expansionist behavior. Now that I think about it, my view is more or less ambivalent. Have I grown up?

It was this question that actually drove me to write this post. Who exactly is a grown up? What does it mean to grow up? One particuarly interesting portion of Commanding Heights is the UK episode. In the early 80s, Thatcher was apparently trying her best to break the shackles and free the UK economy from unnecessary regulatory burdens and government control. However, the short-term effect of any such action is a state of chaos, speaking very broadly. In very simple terms, when price control is lifted, the immediate impact will be a rise in prices, sometimes a drastic one. However, the free market theory, propounded by Von-Hayek, argues that free markets tend to be the most stable in the long term. The bottom line is that Thatcher was nearing the end of her term at the time she proposed economic reforms, and would not have been in power to see those through. She needed to retain power to implement her policies successfully. The Falklands War gave her a chance to do that. Inasmuch as can be determined with absolute certainty, the war was not about the British economy in any real way. However, the improbable win brought with it a euphoria drenched in nationalism and gave Thatcher the much-needed breathing space, and allowed her to usher in globalization and a free economy.

Now, Mr. Waters wrote an entire album devoted to the Falklands War, the first track of which begins with the heart-rending plea
"Should we shout? Should we scream?
What happened to the post-war dream?
Oh Maggie, Maggie what have we done?"

Of course, this wasn't the first time Waters had been disgusted by a needless war, nor was it the last. The point here is, the accusation of immaturity that each group directs towards the other.
I really, really like the lyrics of A Fletcher Memorial Home. Dictators , autocrats, and in general rulers with an iron fist are very difficult people to understand. While some like Hitler and Stalin generate almost unanimous hatred for their murderous ways, others like Thatcher have a much more divided opinion about them. Almost invariably, they say that they are driven by some alleged greater good whch requires a few sacrifices - "the whole you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs" routine. The idealists find this particular political philosophy unimaginably inhuman. I can say because I used to be one. My feeling was that it is not okay for even one person to suffer needlessly for any purported greater good that may well be a political tactic designed to satisfy one person's lust for power. I was all

"Us and them, and after all we're only ordianry men.
Me and you, God only knows it's not what we would choose to do."

The rebuke I often was at the receiving end of went something like this.

"It's not an ideal world."
"What you're saying seems right in theory, but it's impossible to implement in practice."
"This is your inexperience talking. You haven't seen the real world."
"You're just a starry-eyed 20-something with romantic ideas of an ideal world. Get real."
"Grow up!"

It used to bug me no end. Even now, I am fairly certain that no matter what greater interest lies at their hearts, iron-fisted rulers are a selfish breed. There's a childishness about their way of not wanting to let go of their power - the fairly simplistic analogy of a child not wanting to give up his/her toy is pretty apparent here. Their obsession is disturbingly amusing to me, and I'm pretty convinced that if this obsession is in fact real, then it is a sign of genuine mental illness - hence back to the overgrown infant theme.They are incapable of growing up!

On the other hand, let's take a look at Roger Waters himself. His father died in action during the WWII. Following this, every incident in his life became an instrument of trauma, including his mother, his teachers, his wife (All this is conjecture by the way. Very, very likely, but not necessarily true). After he took over the band, he wrote numerous songs about war, and the one major war Britain fought during his lifetime (the Falklands War) troubled him enough to write an entire album. In a way, he was never able to rid himself of his childhood demons, and got angry or scared whenever those were woken up in much the same way as an overgrown infant would.
Ironically, his continuous whining against the childish behaviour of politicians itself seemed to gather a childish hue as time passed.

But overall, my stance now is of a passive observer. There are very few things that truly appall me now. Whether it be a needless war or an needless agitation, there is a sense of wonder in my reaction as I try to figure out the motivation of the people driving those. Politics as an art is something that I still don't approve of, but I'm most definitely intrigued by it. Conspiracy theorists and activists have started to appear as self-obsessed as the people they're up in arms against. I watch the machinations of politics and protests with equal abandon. Well, maybe not really equal. I still do have idealistic traits - which leads me to wonder who really is grown up? Us or them?