Codes of slavery and liberation

What is slavery? Even though educated persons are indoctrinated to connect this concept with the Black slaves of America of the yesteryears, the actuality is that the so-called Black slaves of US do not really represent slavery; rather they remain as symbols of the entry of codes of liberation inside human beings. It may seem quite a contrary idea.

Real slavery is a mental attitude. For example in India, the thread of slave and slave-master relationship runs right down to the bottoms from the heights. For example, if one goes to interiors in Kerala, one can find the master addressing his servant class with a Nee, eda, edi etc. and referring to them as Avan, Aval, Avattakkal etc. The serving class does not view this as insult, demeaning, snubbing etc. They address their master as chettan, thamburan, sar etc. Actually what is seen in this relationship is real love and affection between the two. What the master achieves through his words is a sort of enrolment of the others as his disciples and followers. The serving class see their master as their leader and idol. The master sees them as his disciples and followers.

Now if into this relationship, some English codes are allowed to enter, what would happen? Well, the unique placing of the master at the epitome and the serving persons as followers gets dismantled. A sort of lowering of the master and the rising of position of the serving class takes place. There is real dismantling of the serene relationships.

Actually there was one communist chief minister in Kerala, who was from a slightly upper caste. He was very liberal in his use of lowering words of addressing and referring of his party’s lower cadre. Yet, they did not take is as an affront. Instead, they took it as a sign of deep affection he had for them. The same sort of affection that the feudal lord has for his serfs.

It may be seen that this feeling is the total essence of slavery as a mental feeling. However, since this phenomenon has not been understood, no one sees it as a system of slavery. For, there may not be any visible signs of force and regimentation. Yet, the powerful codes in the language and in the virtual code area, does really bring in a regimentation and mental slavery that has the power of astronomical standards. For, the huge nation of India is enwrapped in this system.

This slavery is actually a regimentation that is connected to discipline and command route, and very compulsive. For example, when a man marries a woman, her parents, uncles, aunts, elder brothers and sisters, elder cousins and even senior neighbours come into positions of command over the husband. What can limit the power of this command can be the physical distance of the newlywed couple’s residence from them, the husband’s financial clout, physical prowess, power of words etc.

As for the wife, she remains an intimate component of the command lines that stretch from her parents, and the rest of the others mentioned above. In many cases of marital discord that can soon arise, the real reason may be the non-tangible presence of these command lines that pull and push the wife, even as the husband tries to get her to come into the functioning lines of the newly formed family unit.

The issue can also be that it is the wife who is trying to bring the husband in the functioning lines of the newly formed family unit.

The children in a family are essentially a sort of slaves of the parents in the feudal language. Yet, they also do not feel the burden of slavery, for they are mentally trained to feel at ease in its cosy comfort. Just as the serf is mentally at ease in the presence of his master and feudal lord. He feels the cosy protection of his master.

The idea that the children are a sort of slaves of the parents in a feudal language cannot be easily visualised, unless one were able to breed children from the same background in total English. Then one may be able to understand the difference in positioning of the children in relation to their parents. If one is able to do this, a totally different relationship and command lines can be seen.

For in the second case, many of the easily administered commands in the feudal language may become powerful draconian commands that can be enforced only with a bit of verbal power and at times physical intimidation. For, the children and their parents more or less exist at more nearer positions when seen vertically. As for the children in the feudal language settings, the children exist much below the position of their parents, when viewed vertically.

Now coming to the issue of formal slaves, there is this thing to be noted. Slavery is and was prevalent all over the world. For example, in India, in every kingdom, and even under every landlord there were slaves. Yet, they were willing ones, who would not accept that they are slaves. Yet, they would mentally find salvation in doing the biddings of their masters, and their master race. The more snubbing words are used to and about them, the more disciplined and obliging they become. The more respectful and non-demeaning words are used to and about them, the less disciplined and less obliging they become. 

For example, the servant is addressed as Nee. If the master’s liberal-attitude son addresses him as Ningal, the servant would not see it as politeness. It would be seen as pure ineptitude of the son, and the servant would stop obliging him and would soon act irascible and impertinent to him. For the word Nee is a actually a word of regimentation, and converts a person to an obliging disciple. What the son has done is literally removed the servant from that position and made him an equal. From this position, the servant finds it irritable to be treated as a subordinate. He revolts.

In many ways, this is what English also does. It raises the level of all persons who are subordinate, and brings down the levels of all persons who are at the master level. In this setting, the subordinate is quite aware of his equality with his master, and also of his right to dignified behaviour from his master. It is a feeling that is never there in a serving person who is a subordinate in a feudal language setting.

As for the master in the English setting, he or she can be quite aware and also quite uncomfortable of the fact that the slave is also a human being of equal dignity. In such a distressing mental state of the setting, slavery cannot be enforced other than by brute physical means, such as statutory laws, punishments, and in extreme cases, chains.

In other words, what the Negro slaves could be made to do by the force of statutory laws, and physical punishments, the subordinated people of India could be made to do just by the captive force inherent in the feudal languages.