The Lost Sheep

The Reluctant Fundamentalist.

My father suggested I read it and so I went on to whip it out on the warm summer mornings and evenings in the bus, tube or car on the way to new days in the office for the few weeks I lived in London. The reasonably sized text and chapters encouraged me to cover quite a bit of ground quite quickly...for once. The layout was intriguing, switching back and forth between past and present, but I never got far enough to read what I saw in the movie. Maybe it was the marvellous direction or the actors, but whatever it was, it proved to be moving.

It got me thinking about the price of life. Although most people you ask would say that we are equal, is that really the case? The line that I will never forget from studying Animal Farm (George Orwell) for GCSE English is "ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL, BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS". To understand the context, you'd have to take a read or a watch but the novel echoed a dystopian society, where a utopia was intended, but greed corrupted it. When I first heard the pig in the movie squealing this phrase I laughed for ages. How ironic, how oxymoronic! The two phrases, all are equal but others are not, cannot exist simultaneously. Which is it? The leaders were now making exceptions for themselves, to excuse themselves from tasks that 'less equal' animals had to do etc. Anyone who has read a bit of George Orwell, knows that he creates metaphors to prove a point, hence, I believe he is implying that the state says or acts as if everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others.

The Lost Sheep

Tying this to the storyline of The Reluctant Fundamentalist, towards the end, the protagonists asks if the extraction of one life, an American life, is worth injuring or killing the lives of many others, Pakistanis. The author also focuses on the impact of 9/11 on the life of the Protagonist, how at first, all he wanted was to live the American dream, until America began to reject and resent him, for his religion and his race, after the disaster. Here, the protagonist felt torn, experiencing an identity crisis. On one hand, he was disgusted at the terrorist act, along with the American people, yet on the other, he felt they deserved it because of the volume of Pakistani lives that had been taken away at the hands of Americans, 10,000 he quoted. Whether there is truth to this, or not, it comes to show that sometimes, the state may not see outsiders as people.

Although it is fair to say that states should only be responsible for their citizens and when one is kidnapped or taken hostage, the lost sheep, then they should go find it. But to what lengths? Yes, they, 2, 3, 4, 1000 of them took your citizen. Yes, your citizen should be taken back, physically safe and sound (emotionally and mentally may be slightly difficult). But to what extent should force be proportionate? I'm not too sure where I stand in this regard, I suppose it depends on how dangerous the captivators are. Yet, that is the key word, 'captivators'. I believe that no innocent person should suffer. Of course, no one is truly innocent, except children arguably, everyone has acted or thought in a way that makes them fall short of perfection. If you are Christian (not sure about other religions), then you know that we were all supposed to die for our sins, but Jesus took our place. However, by innocent here, I refer to individuals who were in no way involved in the capture of the captive. The force used to retrieve the lost sheep, in my moral compass, should not be used on innocent citizens.

The Price of Life

In one of my favourite books, Cupcakes and Kalashnikovs (written by all female journalists), one author puts focus on war crimes; when American soldiers physically and sexually abused locals in 2005 (or around there I believe). I don't remember the specifics except that it was for the purpose of their entertainment, and that I was sickened to the depths of my stomach, by what they had done and the images that were shown in the book. If they were back in their own country, would they abuse and torture their own innocent citizens? Yet in another another country, 2nd or 3rd world, it suddenly becomes okay? You could argue that they're country has wronged ours, therefore, everyone deserves to be dehumanised. But put patriotism and nationalism aside. Our brains, bodies, experiences are all the same, the things that make us human. Therefore, those who have done no wrong, should also not be punished, as all life is equal. Generally, one normal heart cannot be much more expensive than another normal heart.

Nonetheless, even in our own countries, some lives are more 'valuable' than others, meaning they are 'more equal'. Not too much needs to be said on racial tension and 'Black Lives Matter' in America. Whether you are pro 'All lives Matter', White, Black, Asian or Hispanic lives matter, it is clear that America has a problem with murder at the hands of police brutality. Moreover, even in the justice system, I am sure most would agree, that some lives are treated as less important than others because of bias, stereotypes, etc.

This may be the case with class or capitalist systems all over the world. The richer you are, the more important your life is because you are smarter or worked harder, may be the opinion that some take. When a celebrity commits suicide, the whole world is in dismay whereas if an ordinary or homeless person did, it barely makes news. This may be because we look up to celebrities and expect that they should be happy with the amazing cars, house, partners. Or that if we wrote about every person that ended their lives, the world would be a super depressing place. But it is the same even in regards to treatment. In the documentary 'Black is the new Black' on BBC, a black priest explained how he got stopped and searched by the police for now reason. He was trying to find out why from the policeman but would not get an answer. Yet, when the policeman realised that he was a man of extreme importance, he apologised to the priest and let him on his way. What if that was your father, husband, brother, son, boyfriend? They wouldn't get an explanation or an apology because they are ordinary people.

Some lives can be more equal than others through country of origin. Being an immigrant, 95% of the people I associate with are also immigrants. But I consider myself to be British for reasons I'll explain when I touch on identity. My accent is very English, so much so that if you could not see me, you'd think I was White. British people, including myself in the past, struggle with accents that are... different... foreign, so to speak. Therefore, when one speaks, an impression is immediately gained and if they're accent is not 'British', thoughts such as lack of intelligence or inability to understand may cross your mind, meaning their lives may be valued as less than.

Therefore, the state and human beings on an individual level do not explicitly admit to some lives being of higher value than others, but it is fairly clear in our conduct. Will we ever get to a stage where the price of life is the same?

Animal Farm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGzRf0Ow1qU