You know the ostriches I’m talking about. The moment the topic turns to something deeper than if Dunki is a hit or if the southern part of the country is indeed having a mild winter, some people get an uncomfortable look on their faces. They shrug, they smile painfully. Then they utter the fateful words, “I wouldn’t know.” Which is interchangeable with “I don’t want to know.”
These are the people who loudly and proudly proclaim, the first chance they get, that they are a-political. This statement is the catch-all one, the shield, the surakshakavatch that protects them from getting into any unpleasant or polarising discussion. Sometimes, it also is their protection from being outed as anti-vaxxers, closet right-wing conservatives, climate change skeptics, etc.
To not acknowledge something is to avoid taking responsibility for it. To remain ambiguous is to remain on the fence. The cogent argument can be made that these feinters are indulging in willful ignorance, refusing to look the matter in the eye, leave alone acknowledge it.
The downside is, they are often categorised as dumb, superficial, selfish. But strangely, they don’t mind the labelling, and just shrug it off. I have actually had a friend tell me she is guided by her boyfriend when it comes to casting her vote. I have actually had a relative tell me that as long as we are not personally affected by happenings, it’s okay to remain sanguine. And I have had people tell me in strident tones that nothing they or I do as individuals would change the situation.
Time was when I’d be impatient, even annoyed by these bailers, as I termed them. Refusing to factor in any nuances, I saw them as people lacking the courage to stand up for their beliefs.
Now I realise that they don’t wish to ignite a thought-provoking discussion. They don’t want to get mired in a debate that threatens to turn acrimonious any moment. They just want to keep the peace.
And really, can anyone blame them? Over the last handful of years, I have been witness to amicable chats, where everyone is agreed on a topic, suddenly turning raucous as some speakers show annoyance at others for being tepid in their assent. We have all seen dinner table conversations turn sour and acrid as hell, with raised voices, outrageous comments and banging of plates becoming suddenly de rigueur. We know of sharp divisions in families with some people desperate to escape the daily barrage of advice from in-family WhatsApp groups.
So, in the final analysis, maybe it’s not an abysmal level of indifference/ignorance/laziness that has put a spell on these people. It’s more about a wish to keep their beliefs to themselves. To continue keeping afloat friendships and relationships with people who don’t think like them.
Because the sad inescapable fact is, we can no longer indulge in peaceful debate with those who do not think like us. The schism is a wide and deep one, and here to stay.
kumar.sheila@gmail.com