By Imlisanen Jamir
Rumours travel fast here. A person fails to attend a ceremony or speaks in a way someone deems improper. Within hours the story spreads and judgement follows. Words like duty, morality, and tradition are used to justify what is happening. The accused becomes a subject not for discussion but for condemnation. The language is calm and deliberate, as if the speaker were performing an unpleasant but necessary task. Cruelty hides in plain sight under the mask of righteousness.
The idea of righteous brutality is not simply an abstract concept. Bertrand Russell argued in his 1930 essay ‘Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?’ that the very notion of “righteousness” has often been used to justify cruelty. For Russell, calling an act righteous gives the punisher license and self-esteem even as it releases impulses toward punishment and exclusion. In Nagaland, the effect is easy to observe. People watch and take part without thinking. Messages are sent from one phone to another. Opinions pile up. Those who do not participate are soon suspected of sympathising with the wrongdoer. The affair gains a public life of its own. No one asks whether the accusation is true. What matters is that virtue is defended and the community shows its strength.
Moral outrage is selective. Theft, corruption, and the abuse of power receive remarks of disapproval but rarely the attention that breaches of custom or perceived lapses of faith provoke. A minor lapse in ritual observance can attract immediate attention. A man may be scolded for failing to rise during a prayer service, for speaking to a woman at the wrong time, or for not attending a local feast. Each small act is magnified. The offence itself may be trivial, the punishment disproportionate. People take pleasure in showing that they are right. Cruelty appears as duty.
Small societies are particularly good at producing this form of cruelty. Everyone knows everyone else. Every action is observed. Every misstep is noticed. Social approval and disapproval carry weight far beyond the immediate moment. A man may be innocent, but the judgement of the group does not require proof. It requires only attention. Even gossip, once repeated enough, is taken as evidence.
The result is a society that polices itself in ways that appear respectable. The appearance of virtue is maintained. Behind it lies an energy for punishment that is precise and effective. People rarely see the harm they cause. They see only the good that is defended. Russell’s insight is simple but enduring. Righteousness is no safeguard against cruelty. It can be its most effective disguise.
Comments can be sent to imlisanenjamir@gmail.com
