Thursday, January 19, 2006

Urban Syndromes - 1: "We are the world"

This series of posts is more of an anecdotal account. So, don't sue me. I won't be stating if these syndromes are harmful or how "good" or "bad" they are. At least not right now. Although the tone is light and there is enough sarcasm, the observations do hold generally. Though I will be talking about different syndromes, the sets of symptoms across these are not disjoint.

"We are the world" syndrome

We all are members of one or more "small worlds". Example small worlds are those of IT professionals, of urban dwellers, of beer lovers and so on. We absolutely love and hate our small worlds. We are so involved in them that we tend to forget the existence of a much bigger world. Even if are aware of the big world we often start believing that whatever is good for us is good for the big world as well. Similarly, whatever affects "them" won't affect "us". Not that we don't have our insecurities. So we say, technically what affects them should not affect us! We tend to get into a state of almost total oblivion caused by ignorance. That's what I call as the "we are the world" syndrome. There are many sub-syndromes of this. An important one can be termed as "Tax Payer's Money!!" syndrome.

Some examples would make it clearer. Although I am giving only a few examples, the syndrome is not restricted to these specific cases.

You would have heard a lot of people complaining about how subsidies to agriculture are ruining the industries in urban centres. And how farmers are absolutely "looting" all electricity. How tax payer's money is being misused and so on. A lot of the people who crib in this manner are belong to the second generation of families that have come out of villages. Typically they are government employees. Many times their fathers and grandfathers would have lost most of their lands due to the Land Reforms. However, this is not restricted to them. An extremely popular blogger had reportedly said something like this - "Let agriculture vanish; we can replace it with other industries."!

Another sub-syndrome manifests as "we are all too knowing". Some important symptoms of this syndrome are words like - "utility", "popularity", "logic", "rationality", "global reach", "libertaranianism" and so on. You would have also heard or used this line - "Everyone is comfortable with English; regional languages are dead". And how the "whole world" is connected through computers. Or how reservations are ruining the lives of the people with real merit. Or how easily "free markets" can solve all the problems.

"We are not morally responsible" or "the government is corrupt" is also a prevalent sub-syndrome. Urban centres are creating so many jobs. That 1 job supports 3-4 people in India, and that is why urban centres have to struggle due to a lot of overheads, is an incidental fact. Learn to look (only) at the positives! Even though we are not morally responsible we are "helping" the "society" by providing some basic amenities. Thus proceeds the argument. Ask them why a place like Electronic City with tens of thousands of employees hardly has any medical facilities, they will promptly explain how corrupt the governments are.

So, that is a very general description of the "we are the world" syndrome. I can give more explanations, symptoms, sub-syndromes, case histories and theoretical proofs. But I will avoid all that for brevity's sake. This itself should give you a general idea.

More syndromes, eventually.

13 comments:

Mandar said...

good one. couldn't agree with you more. this also reminds me of advani's "india shining" syndrome. :D

Anonymous said...

Dude, even non-communists and non-pigs will die, sooner or later than me.

On a slightly serious note, if this post makes people realize how communist I am, it will only amuse me.

And, on a more serious note, this post seems to have inadvertently touched a few nerves. Though I am not too bothered, it does surprise me. The intention was so totally not to "hint" at anyone! Whether or not you believe, this post and this blog definitely more than talking about the "attitudes" of bloggers. For those who visit this page, please read the "about this blog" if you haven't done so. You'll come to know how very "personal" intentions this blog has. If you have the time, kindly also read some other posts and try to get the drift. Thanks a bunch!

Ambar said...

Sanket, you can't expect people not to react personally. I don't think any of us ever evaluate an idea impersonally.

I'm a hardcore anti-communist myself and used to identify with libertarian ideas earlier. However, I see as many holes in libertarian logic as in communist ideas. Besides, what is disturbing is the way all these issues are trivialised by painting everything in black and white (reminds me) as Sir pointed out
http://randomgraphs.blogspot.com/2005/12/capitalism-communism-and-er-common.html

There was this article in the ToI last month written by one libertarian blogger. About how communism doesn't hold up when you use reductio ad absurdum on it. Using the same strategy on libertarianism gave me even more hilarious results.

Back to your "small world" post, aren't most of us guilty of "preaching to the converted"? The libertarian/communist/theist/atheist discusses only with other libertarians, and gets his/her ideas/dogmas more firmly entrenched.

Sanket said...

Ambar, you are taking me wrong. I have no problems with people reacting. That precisely is the intention of the blog. And when I post the kind of things that I do, I know what risk I am running. I do it because I feel I can manage the reactions, even personal ones.

I rather have a problem with the possibility of people considering this post/blog as potentially "hinting at" or "targetting" someone or a group or something! I am only making it clear that this blog does not intend to send out "personal" hints/reactions.

I agree totally with what you say about painting in black and white, and I also get disturbed about things like that and more. This blog is where I record some of such disturbances.

Your "preaching to the converted" sounds interesting. But I don't know if I understand it completely. I'd like you to throw more light.

Btw, in case you think my "update" was in reaction to your comment, it's not. Your comment was not serious, and my reply to it was not serious either, though I missed a smiley. :)

Ambar said...

"This post seems to have inadvertently touched a few nerves"

Sanket, I wrote about the entire "personal" angle in response to the above. But apart from a adverse comment on DesiPundit, I didn't notice any nerves touched anywhere. Anything I've missed?
:D

And as regards the "update" and my comment, and your comment in response to that, I am able to get the joke, smiley or no smiley! :-)

There was a typo in my original comment. I'd meant "The libertarian/communist/theist/atheist discusses only with others of his/her ilk".
Essentially a consequence of birds of a feather flocking together. For example, if we consider two contradicting schools of thought, X and Y. In any forum discussing X, supporters of Y rarely ever post their views, for fear of violent reactions and arguments. It is basically a follower of X, talking to and with other followers of X, thus leading to their dogmas/fallacies getting more and more entrenched. Reminds me of Koopa Manduka. Only here, you have lots of like-minded frogs in only one well.
I'm not necessarily talkin caps v/s commies here. vim v/s Emacs? :D

Anonymous said...

It was not at all with regard the "adverse" comment you are talking about. Once I have put something on the public domain, and someone finds it to be badly written, there in no question of reacting to it.

It was more about the focus on the "non-subtle hints" in the post. I just wanted to make it clear that there perhaps is something more subtantive in the post than "hinting". Probably the sentence you have quoted should have been rephrased as - "This post is being seen as having the potential to touch a few nerves. It was inadvertent."

What you say next is right. We all do that. That also is a another syndrome - "conformance syndrome". It is not strictly a bad thing to seek conformance or to form a cartel (oops.. please don't kill me; I don't mean 'that' at all! I swear!). It perhaps gives you a sense of security and belongingness. It also helps you make rational decisions. The group/cartel should evolve. However, what is not desirable is these schools of thoughts becoming "closed world systems".

I don't know what I should call myself. But let me call myself a "moderate", because it's easier to pronounce than "XYZ". Perhaps, this blog is an attempt to seek conformance from other "moderates". So, we are again running the same risk. But the only hope is that constant "argumentation". I hope that what prevails is not a set of dogmas, but a polemic sense.

Anonymous said...

By the way, when I say - "I hope that what prevails is not a set of dogmas, but a polemic sense.", I am strictly not talking about anything bigger than me. I hope that dogmas don't prevail within me.

Ambar said...

Sanket, the word you're looking for is probably "clique". :D

Anonymous said...

great post!

Anonymous said...

Ambar: "clique" is not that provocative :p

Shivam: Thanks a lot! There will be more posts in this series. Hope you keep coming back. :)

Anonymous said...

Great work!
[url=http://sdroiolh.com/ikev/czug.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://jgalxzkl.com/uirj/fqlc.html]Cool site[/url]

Anonymous said...

Great work!
My homepage | Please visit

Anonymous said...

Nice site!
http://sdroiolh.com/ikev/czug.html | http://tykutveg.com/lfst/yecx.html