Becoming a terrorist? What would one describe as to how an individual would be lead to joining a clandestine outfit? Is every case individual in nature or are there possible similarities between those who become the face and body of terror.
Some of the most bizarre findings have been those of Lombroso’s attributions of explanations in terms of vitamin deficiencies to explain bomb throwing; psychiatrist David Hubbard who proposed faulty ear functioning as a common among terrorists (I had a hearty chuckle on this one.); and most impressively of all: Paul Mandel, a biochemist …having studied inhibitory effects of gamma amino butyric acid and serotonin on violence in rats, extrapolated his findings on terrorism. (Andrew Silke, Terrorists, Victims and Society: 10)
The first and foremost argument is psychological. But could a psychopath have enough mental balance to work out some of the most ruthless, and if I might say, at times the most intelligent operations. One thing is for sure, these terrorists and not psychopaths.
The 92 Bombay Riots and the 93 Bombay Blasts were a terrible ordeal on a personal level. I was only six years old back then but I clearly remember a few standout incidents and how they will forever remain in my memory.
The movie Black Friday by Anurag Kashyap is based on these blasts and how the Bombay police worked towards catching those involved. One incident shows of a restaurant owner who was taken into custody cause some of the terrorism plots were etched in his restaurant. The police hassled him and tortured him for a few days before letting him go. He was so scared that once he reached home he took his wife and two kids and told them they were going to the temple.
Once he got there, he parked his car and shot his wife and two kids and then himself. The youngest daughter, who was perhaps only six years old as well back then, did not die immediately. She suffered and died in the hospital a few hours later. I knew this man and my father and him were good acquaintances.
Now till date, no one knows whether he was involved or not. But one must wonder what his state of mind would have been to wipe out his family. How would have another person reacted. Would it be possible to say that if he was not involved, he would have gotten involved after the atrocities he faced from the hands of the authorities?
The choice you make is not the easiest thing. Some parts of the world will have rejoiced if their sons join a terrorist outfit or rather freedom struggle in their terms. While other places, boys will be forced to join an organization against his will. Whatever be the reason, us as society will never understand them but will continue to comment as we do on things we don’t understand.
I was thinking about the 1984 Sikh riots and the events leading to it and its aftermath. Militancy grew in Punjab and many movies seem to depict it in their own way. The most prominent once being Maachis by Gulzar and Desh Hoya Pardes. The good thing was Punjab got rid of it, but lost 20 years of progress in transition. I never understood what people wanted, what were they fighting for. Were they fighting for a cause or they were fighting for a charismatic leader. The latter seems to be a bit more close to the mystery. Every organization seems to have a charismatic figure, whom people look up to and for whom they would do anything. Terror outfits are no different. Its charismatic figures like Osama, Bhindrawala that drew youth to such acts.
ReplyDeleteA 'face' is of utmost importance to any organisation, be it a clandestine one, or a political, or a metal band, etc. I for one, have never been part of any cause that I have strongly believed in, except perhaps my love for Man United. As for the 1984 riots, I wasn't born then, but my Mum told me a story about how her neighbours hid inside her house cause they were Sikh. I have never really understood the idea of Khalistan. But perhaps cause I don't identify with them or any other so-called separatist idea.
ReplyDeleteThe Idea of Khalistan came from the establishment of Pakistan. If a separate state for Muslims, why not for Sikhs. But sense prevailed at the time of partition and Sikh leader Master Tara Singh was not a myopic one. But then politics rose above sense and Khalistan was reborn and the rest is history. I really liked this post and will go through other ones before posting more. And thanks for the reply.
ReplyDelete