Ms Arundati Roy is known as a Booker Prize winner in literature and a social activist.

However, the recent utterances made by Ms Roy represents an interesting behavioural  tendency of some of the activists who in the later part of their career start losing an ability to moderate their verbal utterances for the larger good of the society.

Psychologists need to assess why people tend to express such deviant views.

One possibility is that the gain of a group of followers and development of a myopic view of what is the “Society” to which they belong. These celebrities may tend that only their immediate vicinity is the “society” and what appears good for this society is good for everybody.

Otherwise to make a statement that “Kashmir was never an integral part of India” is to express an ignorance that cannot be credited to an  informed person.

It is necessary for us to remember that even “Pakistan was a part of India and got separated by force”. If Pakistan itself was a part of India, how can we accept Ms Roy’s statement that “Kashmir was never a part of India”.

She has made the statement knowing fully well that her statement would add strength to persons who are inimical to the interests of our country. It is for specialists in law to decide whether this should be construed as an act of sedition or not.

The object of this piece of writing is to invite the psychologists to analyze why so called Human Rights Activists who gain fame  turn anti national. We have seen some  human rights activists  turn in support of terrorists who kill hundreds of person but donot express any support to the victims of terrorism. 

How can we represent this deviant tendency  in terms of Psychology?

Is Ms Roy’s behaviour a manifestation similar to what Eric Berne refered to in “Games People Play” as a “Kick Me” game?

Does it give a psychological satisfaction for such people to be accused of grave charges such as sedition and more so if they are arrested and proceeded against?

Should their utterances be ignored so that they donot get a psychological “stroke”?

 The views in this regard from psychologists would be helpful to the Government in taking an appropriate decision.

(Naavi from a Behavioural Science Perspective)

Be Sociable, Share!