On Becoming a Political Millennial
A chronicle of the privilege of my apolitical existence and my recent political baptism
A child runs into the living room, dressed in her pajamas and ready for bed. She religiously goes to everyone in the house and salutes them goodnight cheerfully. The last person she goes to is her grandfather who is taking out extra pillows and blankets from a bedroom drawer. He turns, ruffles her head and laughingly remarks to her mother, “Shiv Sena will be happy to see the BJP logo” pointing to the child’s bright green pajamas that have a magenta lotus stitched on to it. The mother laughs, “Oh we have to be careful now. We aren’t trying to make a political statement.” The child watches the adults, clueless, before being shepherded off to bed.
I put this anecdote in this piece with good reason. That child in the story, if it wasn’t evident, is me, and in this essay, I want to talk about a truly contentious topic: politics. In 2000-something when this conversation took place, Shiv Sena had ascended to power in the state of Maharashtra and started forging a relationship with BJP which had recently transitioned from a Vajpayee to Advani leadership (I think, I am basing this mostly on memory). But this essay is not about the Shiv Sena, the BJP or any number of political organizations that populate the voting slip in my country (if you’re Indian, then our country).
My grandfather grew up in the haze of a post-independence India. He had seen, with his own eyes, the British collect their belongings and finally nope tf out of the country — and naturally, his own political ideologies were skewed based on the circumstances of his upbringing and environment. The important point here is not the direction he leaned but the fact that he leaned at all. But once he passed away, I rarely had any reason to pay attention to what my family or friends believed in — if they believed in anything at all.
Growing up, I have had the supreme privilege of an apolitical existence — something that my grandfather’s life did not afford him. In fact, ‘apolitical’, as a word did not come into extensive usage until 1950. (I find it extremely amusing considering that that was also the year the Indian Constitution was put fully into effect. They are quite obviously not directly connected events but who knows what bearing one had on the other?)
Semantics aside, the truth of the sheltered and mostly blissful life I’ve been allowed to live is that I had no political identity & my existence was largely untouched by the subversive actions of any given government. And if I am honest, this is the familiarity I often yearn to return to. And why not? With the largest democratic exercise in the world coming to an end (read: Indian elections, by country or EU elections, by region), it’s difficult to navigate any media feed without seeing heated debates between stubbornly seated individuals. The alternate option to such violent word exchange is to hide, delete, unfriend, block, ignore and assume some form of an enlightened state where you are untouched by the chaos. And I find neither option remotely appealing.
Yet, about a year ago, I was equal parts repulsed and intrigued about the political status of my country, and consequently the world, and embarked on what would be one of the most enlightening researches of my life thus far. And what would emerge from this chaos would be my own personal, political identity.
It all started with a hashtag — #SmashBrahmanicalPatriarchy. (That I saw on Instagram, by the way *smirk*). Note that this is not new coinage — I found a paper from 1993 on Brahmanical patriarchy. Anyway, if you do not know what that # is about, you are free to pause, read and return. While I was busy with my equations, complaining about the weather and trying to survive the month’s end on bread to avoid going broke, the world — and my beloved India — was getting progressively “woke”. Social media was now a tool and hashtags an agency for change. (If you have not caught up on the latest trend of checking your privilege, I suggest you do so ASAP! LOL. Also, I do not intend to sound mocking in this essay but anything trending I automatically veto, so please excuse) More importantly, the colors on my feed were no longer an aesthetic. They had turned into a deep, bright political shade.
When I launched myself into a world I had truly been oblivious to (PRIVILEGE ALERT), I found an endless list of things that made me sad, uncomfortable and defensive. My immediate response was to call those who I thought believed the same things as me and show them the content. “Do you see this? What’s this going on?” “It’s rubbish, man. Just empty vessels” would be the reply. Of course, just like everybody else, my community also successfully sustains my confirmation biases. :)))
Despite this, I had a hard time letting go. I wanted to work my way around what was being said — what *I* had to do with it and become self-aware, politically. I decided I would set up, for myself, a mental map of how to handle the influx of information, the rage-inducing or the seemingly ignorant & narrow-minded captions. This mental map would lend to my political identity and vice versa.
Furthermore, living in Europe, I had a firsthand view of the debates and dissent surrounding Brexit but also sufficient informal narratives that explained the sentiments behind the most disastrous referendum in recent times. Back home, I heard democracy, socialism, capitalism, nationalism, and feminism questioned, debased, celebrated and redefined at will. All the more reason I needed to have strong principles to rely on when assimilating an internet of information, I thought to myself.
My guiding principles, I realized, would, in essence, be an abstraction of things I learned from various sources. My primary source was obviously myself and my experiences. As a woman who had worked in a male-dominated and sexist environment, I had, in an act of bravado, wholeheartedly swept the anger I felt at authority figures, who made questionable remarks, under the carpet. I wanted to be “strong” and capable of “handling” the industry.
There is nothing more heavy to carry than anger that has been buried deep and as I read more, I unraveled more and I truly began understanding the essence of feminism. My rage matched my understanding but I also gained so much clarity on the movement that is so often (and so erroneously!!) branded as man-hating, polemic women with an agenda to oppress men. I know this now — the anger that comes from being an oppressed individual is inexplicable and attacks you at the very core of your being. While I was feeling this way and trying to sit with this explosive outrage within, the #MeToo movement flooded my nation. The shock and agony were so terrifyingly immense that I cried almost every night, for a week.
Once I placated myself, I continued reading Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Michelle Obama, Gloria Steinem, Emma Watson, Elizabeth Anderson, and Anne Thériault— all of whom allowed me to explain to myself and consequently to others, what women (and men) stand for when they call themselves feminists. The existence of years of feminists and different feminist waves gave me perspective on how the same ideological narrative can undergo tremendous shifts in approach and execution and how nascent movements need to be tempered with the same understanding.
Soon, I began to recognize the myriad ways in which a patriarchal upbringing has molded my choices, my judgments, my prejudices and even my desires — what I find attractive, what not etc. On International Women’s Day, I wrote a column for my university newspaper lauding the very brilliant podcast that helped me learn even more by providing practical insights. The podcast, The Guilty Feminist, introduced me to Sofie Hagen’s existence who in turn introduced me to the world of fat acceptance and the excellent Medium.com columnist, Your Fat Friend. YFF is an excellent source for understanding what it is like to navigate this world with a body type that is never considered in industrial design.
The key principle that I recognized in all this, though, was the upholding of the fundamental right to freedom no matter what. And freedom is an umbrella term for ingredients that are considered indispensable for living a fulfilling life. India’s Supreme Court when they struck down Section 377 that criminalized LGBTQ+ communities wrote, “It is our duty to strike a law the moment we find a law in conflict with fundamental rights.” The right to find fulfillment in a certain kind of love was deemed essential for “a society that believed in freedom under a constitutional order based on rights.”
If this is all becoming difficult to handle or if you have conflicting opinions, I will understand. At this juncture, I felt similarly. Writing is as necessary as reading. Making any kind of art from what you feel and understand is almost crucial to process all your feelings. In Brainpickings, Iris Murdoch expounds on this excellently. She reminds us that all art is political and is meant to upset the system. She underlines that artists are but instruments of change clarifying and delivering the truth if not encouraging revolution. It is not surprising then that the most interesting political feed is Instagram where illustrators, writers, and photographers thrive. And by making art is exactly how I got by. I wrote extensively, privately, in my journal, and publicly on my profile for anybody who would listen.
More than anything, though, I asked questions. I had an abundance of them and I found it necessary to understand the # that started it all. Understanding caste in India as a privileged person has been the most important endeavor to undertake. With my apolitical blinds, I could not see what I could see now. I asked people for their opinions on India’s caste reservation system and my inbox was flooded with a spectrum of opinions that were based on fiction, fear as well as fact. I used India’s census statistics to see beyond my personal or others’ anecdotal logical fallacies and found key points in arguments FOR caste reservation. Primarily, I realized, we owe something to those who have been discriminated for YEARS and an economic sense of equality is not the same as social equality. This is not my place/piece to elaborate on but I do urge you to explore this for yourself.
I did not stop there, though. A political identity cannot be constructed without understanding the opposition and when I got the chance, I heard those who had differing viewpoints. Some of my closest friends believe very different things and have justified their position and I am forever grateful for their patience and their capacity to disagree with openness and allowing a civil conversation to take place. It was crucial for me to develop a political conversation with someone close to me without it descending into a sentimental & frustrated volley of words. There are a lot of excellent resources that show how to hold such conversations with kith and kin and a simple Google search directed me to:
Especially, at a time when we are all shouting above one another, listening and understanding with openness seems to be the most important tool. In fact, I gained excellent insight from this article:
Because the title is so incendiary, most leftists won’t waste time reading it and the right wing would read it and rejoice. It’s a caustic article but there are some useful questions posed in the piece, especially ones that aid in the construction of a political identity, for any political inclination:
- Do we have an open mind to opposite wing policies and can we assign value to what needs to be valued rather than be blinded by partisan politics?
- Are we only keeping the opposition in check? Are we fact checking ourselves in equal measure?
- Do we still love the poor, the minorities, and the rural masses even when they don’t vote in favor of our beliefs or do we then label them as “uneducated” or “idiots”?
- Is our belief in democracy really a mask for our elitism, intellectual hubris and intolerance?
These are the questions I strive to answer but in the meantime, a new hurdle appears. It might be fine to debate intellectually with friends and colleagues over politics but what happens when you have viewpoints that conflict with family? I have learned it the hard way (and as someone who regrets conflict) that it is far more difficult to sustain a mature and civil discussion when those you love support things that strongly disagree with your ideologies. Ultimately, these are situations one can handle only by experience — and by learning which battles to pick and which to let go.
If you’ve reached this point, hurray! This piece is a culmination of a personal exercise and as everything published on lightness, it is a personal exercise to understand myself better. Forming a personal political identity is anything but easy but I have found the principles with which I plan to evaluate any political ideology:
- a political ideology must match the values I believe in: those being kindness, equality, freedom/agency, anti-oppression, anti-patriarchy
- an ideology must allow openness of thought and a curiosity to understand viewpoints from across the table — it must aim to avoid groupthink (the phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome by trying to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences.)
- I must possess a lack of bias and sufficient self-awareness of the shortcomings of my current ideologies as well as fact check myself as well as other proponents of the same ideology
- I must explore my own motivation behind the support for an ideology
- I must avoid reductionist explanations/oversimplifications for they only serve to be rage inducing
- I must always remember that it is not my job to change another’s mindset but to state my opinions respectfully
These may seem like hefty goals and I believe they are. But without heft, we will all be lost at sea.
Thank you for your time.
Image Sources:
[1] Apolitical
[2] Conceptualising Brahmanical Patriarchy in Early India: Gender, Caste, Class, and State
[3] Rules for respectful political discourse
[4] Opinion | Why ‘liberals’ fully deserved to lose this battle
