The Need for Community

By: Digvijay Singh Chhettri (3A)

The talk about the invasion of cultures and how the integrity of culture is of paramount importance to
the community takes many fundamental axioms on whose foundations the argument is presented. One
of these axioms is the need for a cultural identity, which is seen as a must through which we become a
part of a whole and something which gives us a direction and moves us away from our animalistic
nature. If though we were to take a pause and truly look at this statement without any preconceived
notions and with an unprejudiced mind, would we truly see cultural identity as something so essential to
humanity.

The fact that there is a discussion about the invasion of one culture on another and how this leads to a
detoriation in the values of the latter, already takes for granted that the latter was far more superior to
the former. But can this truly be said to be true for culture is truly formed by the passage of time and
what is socially relevant, beating a woman on the head with a stick and taking her home may have been
totally acceptable, even lauded as heroic, in the stone ages but in today’s world would be thought of as
ghastly. Does this truly mean that one was wrong and the other was wright, sure we in today’s time
would call that a primitive though but isn’t covering the earth with plastics something even these
primitive people would have considered horrific, for whom the earth was truly a mother, and something
we truly turn a blind eye towards. Culture thus is truly a changing of times, nothing about being better
or worse and the talk about an invasion of cultures is only a talk from people who are really not ready to
accept change, people who would rather still be hunter gatherers than stay in one place and begin
farming.

The fact that culture is something totally relevant to the times and not truly an improvement surely
twists someone looking for the truth to really wonder the need for it. For if we truly look no matter how
much we may say we have progressed, we are really just doing what are forefathers were doing long
back just with a modern social relevance. They went out with spears and loincloths to hunt for food, we
go out with briefcases and suits to offices, they may have danced around a fire at night while we watch
some late night show on television. Culture thus truly is not something that keeps us together and
shows us the way to move away from our primitive nature, but in reality lets us do the exact same thing
with guileness that seeks to hide the truth from ourselves.

In whole of existence only man needs rules. No other animal needs rules.

The first thing that needs to be understood: there is something artificial about rules. The reason man
needs them is that he has left being an animal and yet he has not become human; he is in a limbo. That
is the need for all the rules

If he was an animal, there would be no need. Animals live perfectly well without any rules, constitutions,
laws, courts. If man really becomes man- not only in name but in reality there would be no need of rules.
(Osho, 1988)

With so many problems why should we really form a society and struggle to be a part of it and not do
away with completely. The simple answer is that society with its limitations on your freedom also limits
the misuse of it, for freedom without the right sense to use it is like handing a knife to a child, which
leads to him not only injuring himself but also others in the process. Society therefore must always
remember the need for its rules and traditions, as these are not some things which define life but
something which seeks to help and make it grow, like supporting wheels on the cycle of a child which
must someday be removed if he is to learn how to ride. The problem with most societies is that they
forget the reason for which they were formed and believe that without their support one could never
really ride the cycle.

To further understand though the need or a lack the lack of one for culture we truly need to look how it
impacts individual people. A person who is deeply involved in his culture and truly believes it to be true
and superior to others, can only be called one thing a fanatic. For this person everything is left ordained
to what his culture demands, even the sacrifice of his humanity, such a person if influenced in wrong
manner by the elders of his society could wreak havoc on others and all the while thinking that he truly
is right and thus not even have a bit of remorse. The examples for these kind of cases are many and to
blame cannot be truly said to lie on a particular society, as all of them to some extent have seeds of such
radicalism.

Another is a person who completely sheds society, seeing it as something which restricts and binds him.
Such a person always stands aside from the events of the society and in his own mind develops his own
ideals as to how people should be. Such a person is similar to the first kind only just an opposite it terms
of belief. Rather than fighting for the society he fights against it, an uphill battle which mostly leaves him
miserable. Even worse though is when he truly wins as he completely upheavals the society and leaves
many peoples live upturned and ending up forming a new social order which is mostly even worse than
the earlier one.

The answer now as most may think lies with the third man someone who conforms yet is not to extreme
on either way. This is a person who thinks society as a given in life and only tries to use it as a stepping
ladder to gain what he wants in a socially acceptable way. This person though it may seem otherwise is
even worse than the previous two, for he is a man who puts a blindfold over his eyes even when he sees
the truth. Such a person sees what the society really is but always disillusions himself into not seeing it
and either just exists in the society or like a parasite takes advantage of it. This leads to a person who
turns his gaze away from the problems that are happening in the world today, one who would rather
crib about it at a party and lay blame on others than doing what he knows should be done. Such a
person is worse than the previous two as they haven’t seen what is happening and are just guilt of
ignorance but this man is guilty of it all for he sees and looks away.

What then can be said to be the way a man who sees things clearly be. The answer in no uncertain
terms is a man who exists in society not by compulsions or aversion but as a thing which exists to bring
order to the general masses, a person who looks beyond his prejudices and follows the society wherever
it is good for the general public and seeks to change it wherever it is necessary. Such a person even
while being a part of the society is not bound by it for he accepts the limitations of it by choice and
leaves them whenever necessary.

Society thus is a necessity in the world something which must be formed only as a stepping stone to
allow a person the right atmosphere to break free from it. Society thus needs to understand its
limitations and the purpose for which it exists and allow the growth of a person beyond its limitations
rather than restricting him to it. Breaking completely free from societies where each person is in such a
way that there is no need for rules to enforce the behavior of people towards one another and where
people can behave as a larger group without being attached to an identity, is surely an ideal which may
never be realized. Till then there is surely a need for a society but one which understands its limits and
strives to be more.

Bibliography
Osho, 1988. Socrates Poisoned again after 25 Centuries. Pune: Rebel Publishing House.

Zukin, S., 1195. The Culture of Cities. New York: Blackwell Publishers.