What
I am going to describe below is a true incidence, but the protagonist shall remain
anonymous.
We
were travelling in a car and the hero, a 75 year old man of some standing in
society was sitting in the front. I suggested to him that wearing seat belt was
a prudent thing to do. His response was truly outlandish.
We
were on a short (20 km each way at best) trip to Thanjavur and there was no way
we will be crossing the state border between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The aged
person – and I am arrogating to myself the right to deem him a role model to our
youngsters – blurted out that in Tamil Nadu, not wearing seat belts while
travelling in a car is a non-issue. He more than implied that if and when we
crossed the border into Karnataka, where the regulation about wearing seat belt
is supposedly duly enforced, he will wear the seat belt.
I
could have been wrong in being offended at this dismissive attitude of my
companion traveler. After all, it is I who tagged him as a role model to our
youngsters without any such invitation from him. But, I think that living in an evolving
society we do have the obligation to carry out our duties as per acceptable and
accepted norms, whether codified in a law or not, and further, whether it is implemented or not.
One
such norm is that elders guide youngsters. If the elders show scant respect for
the law under the protection offered by it in the guise of it not being
implemented, I do not know against what I should bang my head. More personally,
can the hero of this real life drama accuse the next generation, and the
generations after that, of being “lawless”? The role model himself is behaving in a “lawless”
manner, I will counter. In fact, he is teaching that a law should be obeyed only when there is evidence that it is being implemented! A nice lesson for our youngsters!
I
do not think I am wrong.
Raghuram
Ekambaram
7 comments:
I also feel Raghu that it is fear of possible penal action by authority that makes people obey rules, it does not work any other way with most of our countrymen and women. This inherent trait does not change with age, which is just a number.
I remember that an aunt-in law used to stay in the suburbs of Calcutta. She insisted nonchalantly that no train tickets were necessary and were a waste of money for local trains at night from Howrah to her place, because no ticket checker was present at the Exit at night.
What you say is absolutely correct, Aditi ... I have seen thousands of such instances but this one caught my attention enough to post on it, because of the age of the protagonist.
Thanks.
Raghu
The following, in quotes, is the response I got from a close friend of mine (personal communication".
"How to change this? You’ve taken exception to this gentleman’s contempt for the law. I would take it a step further. This law is in place to help all of us. By making sure most people are wearing seat belts the expectation is that accidents will be less damaging and related health costs will be lower. This keeps insurance costs down for all of us. By not following the law just because it is not strictly enforced in Tamil Nadu this fellow is thumbing his nose at all of his societal fellows. The better approach is for all of us to follow the recommendations for our safety so that laws such as this are not even needed.
To me this is akin to the argument that capitalism (rewarding greed) is the only viable economic system because it utilizes “human nature”. Greed then and punishment avoidance are two facets of human nature. But many of us operate from a base of altruism. Is that not also a part of human nature? What about those of us who believe our character is revealed by our behavior when no one is watching? Is this not also a part of human nature? Why can we not structure society and economics to play on these more positive constructs? Why not have rewards and expectations built in such that we feel compelled to behave properly even when no one is watching or there is no reward?"
I have responded to the same as below, again in quotes:
"Tackling the question you have posed at the end will definitely be the next step Bob, but I am afraid it is more than a little Utopian - "...laws such as these are not even needed". I accept your position almost unreservedly. Why "almost"? Because my aim is here to "preach" to, to "teach" the long-in-the-tooth, so-called and anointed "role models" and not systemic change, which as you rightly pointed out is a step further.
My lament is the ready excuse that is offered by people of this gentleman's generation - "the younger generation is wayward!" Is this irony or what?
"
Raghuram
People should realise that the need to wear a seat belt has been arrived at after a lot of research and it should be respected for their own. We as a country lack civic sense.
You said it best Balu. So you agree that this elderly gentleman is no role model. Thanks.
RE
He can be a model not to be emulated
That is, Balu, a role non-model! :)
Thanks.
RE
Post a Comment