GG News Bureau
Poonam Sharma
For centuries, the world’s great philosophies, religions, and ideologies have come together on one universal moral lesson: anger is dangerous. Whether in Buddhism’s emphasis on detachment, Christianity’s call for forgiveness, or Gandhi’s ideal of ahimsa, anger is often cast as a poison — a destructive force that clouds reason and leads to ruin. And yet, beneath this near-universal condemnation lies a paradox: without anger, there would be no resistance to injustice, no fire in the fight for survival, no provocation to challenge oppression.
India stands today at the crossroads of this very paradox. We take pride on the one hand in being a tolerant, pluralistic, peace-loving nation. Yet, on the other hand, we are pummeled regularly by terrorism, extremism, political betrayal, and systemic corruption. How long can mere tolerance be a shield against forces intent on exploiting that very virtue? At what stage must righteous indignation be accepted — not to burn blindly, but to shape the courage and determination required to fight evil?
Anger, as fire, has always been a two-edged sword. Unchecked, it burns and destroys. But with discipline, it is a mighty force for transformation. Every revolution, every justice movement, every fight against oppression was created out of a spark of anger. Would Bhagat Singh have picked up arms against the British if he had only endured colonial oppression? Would the Dalits have revolted under Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s leadership without resentment against centuries of caste oppression? Would India have retaliated after the 26/11 attacks if fury had not flowed in every citizen’s blood?
The statesman should never be afraid of anger; he should learn to use it, instead. To deny anger is to deny a natural, even necessary, human reaction to evil. A nation that does not feel anger at the murder of innocents, at the violation of its borders, at the betrayal of its citizens — that is a nation in decline. Anger is the immune system of the moral body; without it, injustice festers unchallenged.
And yet, there is a universe of difference between constructive anger and mindless rage. The one provokes action, organization, courage; the other careens into chaos, violence, and self-destruction. The task is not to repress anger, but to direct it — to transform it into disciplined resistance, legal reform, policy change, collective will.
Take India’s long fight against terrorism. For years, we have been subjected to bomb explosions in our cities, infiltration at our borders, targeted assassinations in Kashmir, temple and marketplace attacks. Each time, a familiar sequence: shock, grieving, candlelight marches, pleas for peace, and then — silence. The machinery of tolerance comes into play, asking people to “move on,” to “not let hatred prevail.” But what has this over-abundance of tolerance brought? Another attack. Another tomb. Another open wound.
Complacency is the enemy, not anger. A strategic anger — sharp, purposeful, and fearless — is necessary for survival. It is what compels governments to increase security, what calls for leaders to take responsibility, what will not accept violence as a way of life against its citizens. No anger, no urgency. No urgency, no action. No action, no protection.
Suppose that our freedom fighters had answered British oppression with only tolerance. Suppose the oppressed groups of this country had answered discrimination with only patience. History is absolute: tolerance without end turns into complicity. When injustice reaches a point, tolerance has to give way to resistance — and resistance must be fueled by wrath.”.
And, of course, we need to be wary of anger’s darker aspects. Demagogues, extremists, and hate-mongers are all strengthened at the expense of unchecked anger being transformed into riots, mobs, and mayhem. The answer, though, is not to suppress; it is to lead. The duty of leadership is to ensure the anger of righteousness by a people does not translate to vendetta but justice, nor revenge but reform.
The most threatening danger to a nation is not the presence of anger — it is the lack of outrage where outrage is needed. It is apathy in response to injustice, passivity to danger. A society that instructs its citizens never to become angry is inviting them to be passive in the face of their own pain.
India’s future will not be guaranteed by vacuous slogans of peace alone. Real peace is not the absence of war, but the presence of justice. And justice cannot be attained without the fuel of anger — the moral outrage that says: enough is enough.
When we confront terrorism, political subversion, cultural decay, and external aggression, let us never forget that anger is not something to be embarrassed about. It is something to be conquered. It is fire in the soul of our nation that will not bow down to violence and tyranny. Without that fire, survival equals surrender.
Anger is wrong, yes — when it blinds, when it burns indiscriminately. But anger, when grasped like a torch in firm hands, illuminates the way to resistance, to defense, to dignity.
India doesn’t require rage. But it needs badly the courage which only righteous anger can evoke.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.