In face of pervasive injustice which much easily evades the supposedly long hands of law, people sometimes face a choice of whether to step up and revolt or brood about it in dinner table discussions while they care about saving themselves from the wrath of subduing forces of crime. The crime that haunts an individual arouses fear in others at the minimal expense. The state is meant to protect us, however reality belittles this assumption. Who then is supposed to protect the law-the answer is nowhere which leaves just one option which entails people to protect themselves by united revolt, not just against the state but also the perpetrators of crime.
A murder on the streets will inflate of dominance but will have to burst at some time. This certainly requires people to go ahead and risk their lives in preventing the murder (a risk which is much of possibility). The simple idea that even if a thug who is allegedly harassing an individual has a single bullet will hold off masses from protesting by virtue of the fact that anyone who steps first will be the single target to that bullet. The question thus deduced is that at what point of time will people fell that the gravity of the issue holds higher importance than risking their lives?
A generic notion that serves as the answer is that when people realize that the crime ‘being done’ jeopardizes not just the life of the victim but also gravely humiliates the freedom they command, they will revolt as an overarching option to live in morbid mental state. The epitome of this theory finds itself in the independence struggle in India. The British regime found little civil opposition only as long as people found their freedoms being overwhelmingly compromised. It was then that extremists like Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru found ecstasy in being hanged for their fight against the British tyranny.
It is only till repressive states come under the lawful eye of the state (which seems like a faraway dream) that the masses have to be their own soldiers. Uniting against dominance of local thugs after the crime is committed will attract state attention. However, a life saved matters much more than the insincere cure of the innate disease of that crime.
In public places, where eave-teasing is common, the hesitation to intervene will have to broken possibly by gathering unity (which is much easier said than done). Tactics to distract the thugs can buy time to perform the onerous task.
‘The only thing as strong as fear is hope’ (the Batman series) – fear will have to be bogged down by hopeful wisdom at the need of the hour. If individual protests fail to incite unity, nerves will have to flex for intelligent action.