The ultimate Truth: Nor can goodness and evil be equal (41:34)
The Contestation: The description of a supposed conflict between modern and anti-modern is utterly fallacious. 'The only thing that is constant is change', therefore how is it possible to oppose a change, the dynamics of time?
The conflict, an ever constant one, however, remains between values and anti-values. The progression of civilization is undeniable that is simply impossible to resist. What, however, can never be defended is fast depletion of values. The conflict between West and Islam at geopolitical level is superficial in nature. Actually deep down it's a clash of values, precisely absence of values. The premeditated Western thought processes cursorily reject Islam as anti-modern. That simply implies that Islam is oblivious to the dynamics of change. That's absolutely a flawed prognosis. How is it possible for a faith to remain thriving and living and also continue to oppose the progression of time. What, however is to be contested is the continued regression of time. Family is the real essence of civilization. Since the structure of family is being allowed to erode fast, by design or by default, is human civilization progressing? Or just being put on the course of a self-destruction? Shall the civilization be allowed to continue to tread on the path of self-destruction, is the real moot point. The most important question, however, is that why this perpetual decay of civilisation is to be described as a conflict between them and us? When the civilization dies, both; we and they are bound to perish, together.
Woman, quintessence of a family is now simply rendered as an object of desire. Is this woman empowerment or a way to self destruction? "The client needs an 'eye candy' to be placed adjacent to the vehicle in order to attract the crowd. Some of them have very specific demands while others don't really care as long as the girl looks presentable". This is how an organiser of an annual Auto Show in Delhi that routinely attracts thousands of footfalls per day during the entire period of exhibition, tends to justify the presence of a beautiful model with an artificial smile standing besides an automobile. For a barely clad model to keep standing erect all day that too with a forced smile adoring her face must be a backbreaking task, obviously. More demanding will be to remain safe from the prying eyes, initially enticed only by the thought of an eye candy. A beautiful woman a real precious creation of the nature, to be publicised as an eye candy is most absurd rather nauseating a thought. That's how the modern economy has reduced a woman, actually an anchor of the human life, to an abject level of an eye candy. Go and simply ask a child to describe a candy. For sure she will recount, sugary juicy a craving to relish, on each and every available occasion. And ask a wicked mind the description of an eye candy. An object to satisfy the licentious desires, on each and every created occasion, evidently will be the answer. Now we understand the import of an eye candy; beautiful woman selling a Truck tyre, men's underwear or a shaving cream. It's not to sell the merchandise only but to satisfy rather arouse the wicked desires also. What a pity, woman branded as an evil desire is now packaged in the grab of a women empowerment.
Does this perverse woman empowerment insure preservation of family values or leads to destruction of a civilization, only? Presently it seems that obsessed with a false notion of equality of genders, the so-called woman empowerment is the sole driving force of the modern society. Men and women both deserve the equal respect and all securities of life. Still why we are shying away from a basic reality that both men and women are able but differently. A woman being a woman should ideally never face any indignity of life. But life never has been anything perfect. Historically besides the women many other segments of the society too have faced worst discriminations on the basis of race or religion, or simply due to their weak status in the society. While doing away the discriminations, values had to be preserved. The disempowered were to be empowered and not to turn the equilibrium of the society, upside down. Do we want our woman to be more educated and equally sharing the economic well-being moreover being a stabilising factor binding the overall structure of family together, or else a source of the destruction of the family itself?
The modernity is the name of many ills, the most far-reaching being the destruction of the family. Individual freedoms are a must but not at the cost of institution of a family. Men and women both enjoying all the freedoms should still be committed broadly to a family life, is a real empowerment. The more the individual freedoms are being stressed in the West; lesser the commitment is being experienced with the family. Sorry to say, the modern woman is portrayed as the driving force of the individual freedoms. Now even in India wicked sexual behaviours, homosexuality and same sex marriages, may get sanctity of law, hence society. Whatever the circumstances, evil can never be equal to good. The more wicked sexual preferences get precedence over the need to preserve the family values; will modernity not be posing challenges to the existence of civilization itself?
The sublime idea: Actually it is not a conflict between them and us but ought to be a mission to rescue humanity from a self- destructive path of annihilation. They are all powerful, why should that instil a fear in us. And why should we be awestruck. They are prosperous and developed, why should we envy them. The power and prosperity has led the men and women to go astray, that indeed is cause of worry. In case modernity simply connotes to remain attuned to time, it's the blessing of the nature. If the modernity is a way to self-destruction, how that could be allowed to take place?