Sponsored Listings:
THERE COMES a time when we, as a people, must acknowledge that no matter how smart we think we are, we are only as smart as the government we elect. Judging by the way things stand not just in India, but around the world, it is safe to assume that we, as a species, didn’t really evolve. Think about it, Donald Trump could be the next US President, China abducts anybody they think is guilty of speaking against the state and India has already managed to creep into our kitchens and bedrooms, trying to monitor what we eat or who we sleep with.
Privacy is a novel idea, one that intelligent minds collectively and covertly lust for, and yet, one that gets brutally gangraped by the Cabinet no matter who is in charge. Most recently, alcohol bans have been a topic of much discussion. Actually, there hasn’t been much discussion, just a lot of knee-jerk rampant action that threatens to jeopardise sanity and sensibility. If it wasn’t bad enough that Kerala has decided to roll out a step-wise ban on alcohol in the state, Bihar followed in its footsteps by first banning local hooch (an excellent move, really) and then imposing a blanket ban on alcohol. Now, there are many facets to this unbelievably senseless behaviour. The first is that banning alcohol to cure alcoholism and related woes is like banning driving because someone once had an accident.
If the huge amount in revenue that the states earn through excise is not a concern—only God knows how they plan to make up for the deficit—the bigger issue still remains that even if banned alcohol won’t stop being sold. On a recent TV talk show, panelists kept mentioning illicit liquor each time someone mentioned bootlegging. Did the educated fools not once think of liquor from nearby states making it over the border? Unless the ban is countrywide and simultaneous, alcohol will always be available. Don’t believe me? Just ask anybody who lives in Gujarat and he/she will tell you just how ‘wet’ the dry state really is. And bootlegging is dangerous. Imagine all that tax money—instead of going to the government—going to the mafia. Sure, petty crimes fall, but organised crime grows. Citing fewer cases of domestic violence might sound like a positive upside to banning alcohol (don’t get me wrong, it is), but its goodness is diminished by the larger evil that gets bred in its murky shadows. American gangster Al Capone rose in popularity (and prosperity) because he was able to produce and supply a very precious and in-demand commodity when the government refused.
Alcohol manufacturing—besides prostitution—is an industry that has survived for more than 500 years of human history. For one petty bunch of politicians to think that they can ban it and thereby change things for the better is extremely myopic. The argument that 90% of domestic violence is related to alcohol and hence it must be banned is wrong. Many more people drink and don’t go home to beat up their families. In fact, lack of formal education is a common factor among all these cases of domestic violence—and it isn’t just 90%, but a full-on whopping 100%. So they can argue vehemently and repeatedly, citing statistics and percentages about domestic violence, but nothing much will change till they realise that this ‘ostrich’ approach doesn’t work. You can’t stick your head in the sands of ignorance, while the real problems—accessibility of cheap booze, lack of education, proper rehab facilities—continue to exist.
I suggest using the excise money and putting it to good use. At least that way when we pay exorbitantly for a very average bottle of wine in some hotel, we will feel like we are doing our part to eradicate alcohol-related abuse in all its ugly forms. In the meantime, let us be. Stop trying to police things at the macro level and focus on bigger issues like your ignorance. Beef is gone and now alcohol is gone too. If this continues, very soon we will find––to borrow the words of the late actor Herbie Hancock—that ‘the thrill is gone’.
Source: financialexpress.com