You might have noticed that the world is becoming increasingly more polarized around different issues. According to Tantric philosophy, this is a sign that presages an era of spiritual harmony, or dharma.
Shrii Shrii Anandamurti:
“Whenever the world is at the threshold of a great ideal… the entire intellectuality, the entire world opinion, will be polarized. When polarization does not take place, and all movements are centred round the equator, that should be looked at as something very common, not at all as anything of importance… but when you see that polarization has become complete, you should know that something big is going to happen.”
The introduction of the true concept of dharma into the human society by a great Tantric personality at any point in time creates a subtle stir in the minds of all human beings and polarizes society around different issues. We are seeing that in our society all over the world right now: the polarization of people into dharmic and adharmic; moralists and immoralists. And that polarization also expresses itself as extremism in various other sub-spheres of life: political extremism, religious extremism, socio-economic inequality, and other social and cultural disparities and forms of division, oppression and exploitation.
We can see this, for example, in the increasing American political divide between liberal and conservative, the ever-increasing disparity of wealth, and socio-economic symptoms such as the opioid crisis, the homelessness crisis, and other crises of physical, mental and societal health.
Political extremism is an expression of either the right-wing conservative psychology or the left-wing liberal psychology. The racism, sexism and religious intolerance of the far-right conservative psychology is countered by the extreme expectations of personal rights by the far-left liberal psychology.
Anyone should have the right to identify as whatever they like, according to their own perception of reality. However to expect that others should refer to them by whatever pronouns they prefer, or that they have the right to use the opposite sex bathroom or changing room, or compete in sport as the opposite sex (especially biological males competing as females is blatantly unfair), or be incarcerated with the opposite sex, is extremism. Extremist ideologies of both the far-right and the far-left seek to limit free speech and expression. On the far-left the implication of the term “woke” has in many circumstances switched from that of enabling human rights and justice to restricting them.
No one should lose their job or suffer any other kind of “cancellation” for using the “wrong” pronoun. If someone sees the sky as green then that should be respected as their own reality. But to expect that their reality or “truth” should become the collective truth would be going a step too far. The truth of the matter is that the sky is blue and if their perception of it is anything other than that then it should not be imposed on the collective as a result of identity politics with the expectation that everyone else is to see it like that. Otherwise it would become a suppression of collective norms, not least of which would be the norms of the English language.
No one, not least women, should lose their right of being able to play sport on a level playing field (metaphorically as well as literally), or be imposed upon in a women’s bathroom or changing room, or suffer any other type of indignity where the lines between men and women have been unnecessarily blurred or crossed. Women’s rights must be protected. They must be protected from physical, psychic and sexual abuse in ever-new ways and forms. The Me Too movement was a positive step in that regard, although a statute of limitation should be placed on legal cases so a defendant can properly defend himself. Otherwise we risk the pendulum swinging too far the other way with the chance of innocent men getting unfairly accused and convicted. Children must also be protected, not only from domestic violence and sexual abuse but also from hormonal therapy such as puberty-blockers and bodily mutilation before they are old enough to decide what is best for them. This has been reported to have occurred even without the knowledge of their parents. Both children’s and parent’s rights must be protected so that irreversible physical and psychic harm does not occur. And while it is important to protect children from domestic violence, it is also extremist to pander to children’s whims without consequence or discipline, and for children to be able to litigate against their parents on the slightest premise.
The “all lives matter” response to the Black Lives Matter protests was reactive and extremist, bordering on racism. On the other hand the diversity, equity and inclusion initiative is also extremist. Affirmative action based on disadvantage is all very well, but DEI based only on its component parts without regard to merit would result in mediocrity rather than meritocracy, and can even put lives at risk if the standard of professionals in fields such as medicine and air travel is lowered. Logic would dictate that affirmative action be taken to encourage and support minorities in their quest for excellence in different fields, but that qualification in those fields is not influenced by one’s minority status. Indeed it should not be influenced by anything other than one’s personal merit.
The labelling of protesting injustice as hate speech is also a type of extremism, and a form of hate speech in itself. For example, labelling criticism and protests of Israel’s aggressive anti-Palestinian policies as anti-semitism. There may of course be anti-semitics within those critics, but it is not necessarily the case. Many Jewish people are amongst those protesting the actions of the Israeli state. Criticism of far-right Israeli actions such as illegal seizing of Palestinian land in the West Bank for settler communities and harassment and killing of Palestinians by settlers is not necessarily anti-semitism. It is a cry for justice for a peoples’ right of self-determination. At the same time not recognising the inhumanity of terrorist attacks such as the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel is extremism. However if we really want to get to the bottom of these social problems we have to look at the cause, not just the symptom. Western medicine generally only treats the disease, not the cause of the disease. The same is reflected in Western politics. One knee-jerk reaction only provokes another, and so on. In my book Consciousness: The Final Frontier I wrote: “Terrorism is seeded in the way in which we fundamentally see the world and treat others. It is a reaction to cultural elitism and the exploitation of one group of people by another.” And weaponization of terms such as anti-semitism, ethnic cleansing and genocide is not constructive to either the debate or the cause; it only serves to inflame the issues.
Both Jewish and Palestinian people have a right to their own land and security, to their own self-determination and freedom of expression — cultural, religious, economic and political — and protests against the infringement of anyone’s rights should be allowed as an expression of free speech. Protesting the inhumanity of Israel’s war crimes in response to that attack is legitimate and not necessarily anti-semitic. The reality is that Israel’s actions are an over-reaction to the fear of violence from the Palestinians. And the reality is that the Hamas attack (and other acts of violence in Israel in the past) was a reaction to decades of Israeli oppression and exploitation. The fact of the matter is that there is hatred on both sides that has been seething for many years and that the real crime has been extremist actions from both sides rather than conciliatory efforts from both sides. This is an extension of course of religious fundamentalism that has existed for thousands of years and has been the cause of many a religious war on the basis of unfounded beliefs of the “chosen few” or “holy people” fighting for domination of a “holy land”. Yes the Hamas attack was an atrocity but the Israeli response has also been an atrocity. Nothing can justify the bombing that they have unleashed on the Palestinians and their own people, the hostages. In my opinion the response was both premature (without the requisite thought about the consequences) and excessively disproportionate (by far). When there is knee-jerk reaction followed by knee-jerk reaction followed by knee-jerk reaction… where is the hope for a peaceful settlement? While I believe that both peoples (Israeli and Palestinian) are good at heart, both their leadership show inhumane signs. You cannot demonise one without demonising the other.
Russia’s war on Ukraine is a violation of human rights no doubt, but what is overlooked in its condemnation by Western media and interests (as with the Israel-Palestinian conflict) is the genesis of the conflict. If the Reagan-Gorbochev initiative of conciliation had been continued over the distrust and antagonism that actually occurred in the last three decades, including the expansion of NATO right up to Russia’s borders, then this conflict and the terrible death and destruction of Ukraine and its people could have been avoided.
Other examples of socio-political extremism in our present-day society is the proliferation of online misinformation and disinformation, not only that which is generated by real people’s personal opinions, but also for example that which is deliberately generated to influence political elections, the censorship of opinions that occurred at the time of the pandemic around the prevention, vaccination and treatment of the the Covid virus, and increasingly that which is generated by malevolent trolls and the use of artificial intelligence, especially in creating false and misleading photos and videos.
The problem is not race or culture or any other preconceived distinction between human beings, but the politics of hate that often transmigrates across lives and races and cultures, especially through the medium of social media. The more pervasive the media of communication, the more pervasive and invasive mis and disinformation can be. Social media and other forms of screen time can become obsessive, addictive and personally destructive if not balanced with real life personal and social interaction. In general we need less screen time and more real time.
And there are many other examples of personal and social imbalances in today’s increasingly complex and challenging society.
Communism was extremist and so is capitalism. Both are varieties of the same fruit. Communism was state capitalism: the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a few privileged state bureaucrats. Capitalism is the extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a few privileged technocrats and other business-savvy individuals.
Extremism towards any one side of an argument, be that sexism, racism or political or religious fundamentalism, can never be the solution. It is only a symptom of today’s ailment. The solution to any problem is found in the conciliation of both sides of the argument, as was found after apartheid in South Africa by the collective social trauma and many personal traumas being resolved by the actions of Desmond Tutu and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
As mentioned in the beginning, the current symptoms of extremism precede an era of spiritual harmony, or dharma, the essence of which will be a balance between the extremes of thought, opinion and practice. The answer lies in the middle path, as was beautifully illustrated in Herman Hesse’s book Siddhartha, where he portrays Buddha’s search for enlightenment first in hedonism and then in asceticism, before eventually finding the answer as a balance between the two: a disciplined practice of self-reflection and introspection combined with love and compassion for all beings and the fight for all beings’ wellbeing and rights; of soul searching and social justice; self-realization and service to all.
Leave a Reply