Extremism asphyxiates moderation

Perhaps it is not just a Pakistani but a human trait. And to dream is not to err, but to err in order to realise your dream could be questionable. May be a reason extremism is becoming rampant is this urge to realise those dreams, be it spreading religion or a religion-like theory or a conceived ideal world. Erroneous paths leading to the ultimate realisation of ones dreams are often strewn with fanaticism.

This leaves one no choice but to be impeccably correct, for which not just courage but a lot many things are needed, most of all being spontaneity, as it cannot breed fanaticism.

Humans’ fixation with control and order is perhaps breeding fanatics’ right, left and centre. However, it is not just breeding it but also asphyxiating moderation, the anti-dote of radicalism.

The more some idea is being indoctrinated, the less room moderates have. Some by virtue of embracing it become fanatics, others in their opposition. So, despite being opposites they remain each others strength. But their polarity is responsible for the general instability, like two bulls going in opposite directions make a rope snap.

They forget that this duality is what is giving this world the needed diversity for the evolution and creation of a million myriad ideas, including their own, and to keep it so the idea does not have to be implemented in totality. As uniformity would distort all bounds of the world as we know it.

Unfortunately, the horrors of uniformity are still not conceivable for many who preach of the world united under one religion or one theory or some perfect ideology that proposes heaven on earth, or a heavenly afterlife.

Either way, the in-betweens who have nothing to gain or loose from any of the dreams’ realisations, get to bear the burden of responsibility. Not because of their strength or ideals, but because of their sheer power for being the catalysts. They are like maggots on a diseased, rotten body, who have to do away with the dead tissues, namely radicals or their opponent fundamentalists.

Atheist prophets or losses?

I have come across several youngsters (omg am so old.. lolz) who are atheists and claim to be preaching and teaching in their surroundings to make people see more reason (which of course is reason only because they are a-theists, which is so cool btw..) Somehow, it sounds just like a ‘tableeghi’ when it comes to wanting atheism to spread and all. The whole purpose of being an a-theist merely dies when people start doing that. Perhaps most of the people will not agree and would argue that is the only course of action left. To spread reason atheists must form an alliance and wage a “jihad of reason” against all these stupid religious people in their vicinity. Who have nothing better to do but to be the moral judges of the so-called civilised society based on their mere belief, which with atheists becomes a mere lack of it.

So how does one differentiate between the atheists and theists any more? Both are on a rampage, both are haters of others, or almost, and both are on some moral high ground considering the other to be inferior in some way. Of course with theists it is an extra baggage of God Almighty, but then how come Science or (omg) Reason is becoming the opposing almighty. Here’s another commonality, which often we forget when comparing the two, and that is pity for the other side.

How many times have I come across those extremely annoying, irritating preachers who consider it as their duty to show me the right way, of course without reason. Equally annoying have become those who are with reason but are on the same path, actually, they are more annoying, because they not only pity someone who is reason-less but they show towards them a condescending attitude which makes it a double doze of reason-less-ness.

Perhaps it is some pseudo-religiosity in disguise playing tricks on us again. After all, it hasn’t been long that we got rid of that shit.