“…perfection is the disease of the nation”
Perfect: adjective
Having all the desirable qualities or elements; as good as it is possible to be
Synonyms: ideal, model, flawless
It is an elusive word, perfect. Does it indicate that everything must be a particular, standardised way? Or that as long as something serves its purpose, then also it may be ‘perfect’?
Naturally, to assume that there is a one-fits-all, watertight definition to perfect is also incorrect. How, then, could an entire nation be ‘perfect’, and if in some sense of the meaning it can, then what problems does such a nation face?
While in theory, a perfect nation could be one with sound systems, zero unemployment, astounding social security and smooth bureaucratic processes, this need not be true. In this paradigm, we assume that there is no standardised ‘perfection’ that a nation can reach, i.e. a democratic state (as the USA would have you believe). We further assume that nations can adapt to themselves systems that best suit them. We understand, also, that these systems and structures are perfect in the sense that they serve their purpose and broadly, exist without flaws that might make them tumble.
However, a nation, by its very definition, must include ‘people’. People, we understand, have particular roles as citizens and contribute to the public conscience. These people may be perfect as having ideal values or be a homogenous population as with having the same culture, a shared history or language. By this definition, too, there is not much scope for perfection posing as a threat to a nation.
An intangible factor which may act as such a threat is the public conscience. The morals and values of a people dictate this, and they may hence be called fundamental to their identity. However, it is not very difficult to shift public morality using the ‘perfect’ state’s machinery. Through the systematic use of propaganda, the politicians or leaders (we do not forgo the human trait of selfishness) can alter facts to their benefit. This may also be done by having a controlled, perfect stream of communication to the people. This makes it easier for those in power to capitalise on their people’s ‘perfection’.
It is this theoretical public conscience’s perfection in favour of the ruling elite, that may fester like a wound in a country. It forces everyone to abide by this ‘perfect’ ideology which takes this ‘perfect’ nation to pre-eminence.
Unlike institutions, ideology spreads. Using the secure networks that the state possesses, people can be given pragmatic reasons or monetary benefits, making them subscribe to the doctrine. This ideology which seeps into and shapes the public conscience is itself seen as being ‘perfect’, immune to any theoretical criticisms. This takes the form of ‘you are with us, or against us’. Such ideological polarisation of the people is not unheard of.
In a nation as diverse as India, it is impossible to have perfection in the eyes of all. The sheer breadth of views, languages and cultures makes it difficult to have one conception of perfection. What can exist is perfection or absolution of ideology in the eyes of the ruling elite and their supporters.
Despite its many problems, democracy allows and even praises dissent. That is not to say that it is immune to the said problems of propaganda; instead, it leaves scope for a constructive political culture before a ‘perfect’ public conscience sets in and actively avoids it.
…
The Japanese have a concept called ‘wabi-sabi’. This emphasises on the beauty of the fleeting and imperfect and doesn’t search for beauty in perfection. The natural world is imperfect and transitory; there is no need for our nations or us to be ‘perfect’, only the best version of ourselves.
By Rohan Chopra, for the Trans Solidarity Fundraiser