Goodbye to Values


The votaries of liberty have known that the struggle demands persistence to defeat their enemies completely. So, on the way they have been persistent and accepted to wrest away the control in bits and pieces, writes SYED IQBAL ZAHEER.

Richard Dawkins, the famed British evolutionary biologist and a powerful atheist author begins one of his books with the words, “We animals …” But he is only a revivalist, not the originator of the idea – and an ideology which is its bedrock. Socrates had preceded him by defining “man” as a “featherless biped.”

A brief history of atheistic ideology might take us back to the sons of Adam. Over the centuries the idea has gradually matured: first it was skepticism, which came out of incredulity, accompanied by skepticism. Over time, the malaise has left the individual and has infected societies, giving birth to those ending up with outright denial of God. Yet, even though it had become a visible psychological disorder on the part of growing numbers, there was no intellectually sophisticated or articulate ‘atheism’ in the Middle Ages when it acquired adherents in visible numbers.

It is the advancement of Science in the Medieval times which gave a strong push to the idea. As it progressed, the plot thickened and atheism went from strength to strength, to become a slogan in societies, institutes and homes. Although, to the disappointment of the philosopher, thinkers, professors, ideologists, savants and their cabal, the liberty-seekers failed to dislodge the idea from the human soul. The outright deniers of God have secretly allowed a niche for Him in their hearts.

So, the idea will not go away. What has been the objective behind the denial anyway? The answer can be expressed in one word: liberty. It has been the prevailing objective throughout the ages, and could remain the prevailing objective until humanity is in the dust. The Knower of what the hearts conceal, said: “But rather, man desires to continue with his debauchery (in days) ahead of him.” (75: 5)

It was a hard fought battle. The seriously committed of the Jews, Christians, Muslims, and even many of the godly who subscribed to no religion have fought against the idea and the trend. What idea was it? It was unbridled liberty. The votaries of liberty have known that the struggle demands persistence to defeat their enemies completely. So, on the way they have been persistent and accepted to wrest away the control in bits and pieces.

Take the case of women. During the Medieval period, women wore fashionable dresses which fully covered their bodies. They were full-sleeved, and far from the feet, even the shoes were not visible because the hoopskirt lengths went nine inches below the ankles. The liberals went after them and kept on scissoring at the hems until, by about the start of the previous century, skirts shrank in lengths to expose women’s calves. By the end of the century, miniskirts were being commonly adorned. By now sleeves are gone, unless for fashion. But liberty demanded more. Ungodliness is being old-fashioned. So the blouses became shorter and shoulders were exposed. Then the low-neck ones began to appear. By now, it is shorts, plain and simple – thighs displayed. At work, co-worker males have been noticed distracted. That has forced the (“output” conscious) employers to ask women employees to better show up in pants. Pants are cheap too.

Along with the lofty flowing attires, women have lost something else. It is innocence written on their faces, innocence of their souls. Today’s woman is courageous, frank, unabashed, outward going, bold. In a recent case, an Engineer was interviewed by a lady, and, although she couldn’t find anything wrong with him, she penned the remark: “He seems to be the Taliban type – avoiding eye to eye contact with women.” But, thanks to liberalism, women have lost even more.

Even up to 1950s in America, girls could not go out of homes without one of the two parents accompanying them. “I am a slave” she would complain. But, decades come, decades gone, women have been winning greater and greater freedom. By now, parents have lost complete control. Her blunt reminder to them is, “Father, I know what I am doing, and can take care of myself.” Marriage is out of the question until 30, or later. From teen-age until then, it is the girl’s pleasure time. She would have had several partners before she decides to marry. She is not obliged to inform where she was the last night. Parents are not to be consulted in the choice of a life-partner. If the interference is too much, they will only be informed after the court ceremony.

Children are a burden. In USA, they allow four weeks as maternity leave. She must work. There is no question of parental support. As she has to work, they too have to work. With her earning, a woman can just manage to pay her own bills. (Not to be acknowledged, the “compromises” she has to make in her proud job).

So who pays for the child’s stay in Children’s Home? Therefore, no children until maybe 40, and if the husband agrees to foot the bills if she stays out of work for a few months. But that situation does not always arise. Ten years together, and the two decide that both have had enough of each other. What’s so strange about it? There are more than a million divorced women living in New York alone. These are the fruits of limitless liberty. But she is still under pressure of the “liberalists.”

One of the Muslim ladies recently appearing for an interview in the West was asked by one of the three male interviewers, “Can you show us your legs?” She asked, “What has that got to do with my job?” They said, “Everything” and laughed. She left without a word. But not everyone looking for a job would like to storm out of an interview. That was what the liberals meant when they demanded liberty.

A lady in USA has recently acknowledges that she has been having sex with her son. If anyone said anything, she is expected to ask back, “What is wrong with that?” A woman was raped in open, only to the amusement of the by-standers. None would interfere. Another lady had intercourse with a man inside a railway carriage. An apartment resident heard some disturbing noise. He opened the door. A boy and a girl were having sex in the corridor. When he made noise, the boy got up, came to him, forcefully thrust the man back, and slammed the door.

Women still have miles to go seeking after liberty. Few days back, former hostesses of the Italian Airlines Alitalia, decided to protest for poor working conditions. How was it conducted? Well, first it was a normal protest. After a while, the airhostess removed their uniforms. After another gap of time, they removed their clothes, to be standing stripped, but for their underwear.

“We animals”: well said the emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford, who was Professor for Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford from 1995 to 2008.

Goodbye to values.

About YMD

Past Issues