(c) 2008 eyingz

The lure of modernity towards progress has seduced the Nagas to an extent that, in the process, significant elements that define a “community” have been compromised, possibly unbeknownst to the victims. In its original state, a Naga community was a nexus of active relations between persons, families and clans within a locale, specifically a village. In other words, the community was extensive in nature in that each member of the village was a significant part of the whole by virtue of belonging to a family that bonded with other families to form a clan. It was constituted and maintained by mutual assistance for common welfare (discrimination against individuals on superstitious grounds is another issue).

Modernity per se cannot be decried, because Nagas too have had a modest share of benefits from it. But there are some undesirable elements that have gripped the Nagas and undoubtedly affected much of what defines and identifies a “community”. In short, the switch from a community way of life to individualism, in its various forms, has minimized the significance of the community itself. Consequently, the different parts (persons, families, clans) in the whole (village/community) have become thinner, and the strength of the community has grown weaker. The ultimate outcome is a disintegrating community.

It is not uncommon to notice some people preferring to shut themselves inside an exclusive world of their bedrooms, surrounded by modern electronic gadgets, which lets technology become a way of life instead of a useful tool. In such cases, interpersonal relationships, face-to-face conversations, and social gatherings are made to appear like activities of not just tech un-savvy beings but also of those who cannot persuade their poorer folks to make their children “fit in” to a techno-crazy cluster. Regardless of the economic conditions, more people are isolating themselves behind whatever electronic objects they may possess: telly, music and video players, cell phones etc.

Most families too are increasingly adopting reclusive life-styles. Prosperity seems to play a role in this. It is hard to tell whether it is for security purpose, but it is easy to tell that the higher the economic status, the higher the walls around the dwelling places! The ever-locked iron gates do not even offer a glimpse of the world behind those walls. The only visible sign of life inside may be the rooftops. This automatically shuts off possibilities of free access with those outside of the imposing walls and gates and vice-versa. It practically makes it harder for inter-family connections or neighborly interactions. Thus, economic-divide becomes more obvious, and sustained.

Also, there is the unprecedented phenomenon of substituting the name of the family’s patriarch or the matriarch, in rare instances, for the clan’s name. This breaks up whole clans into fragments of families that begin to form new identities and micro clans of their own. The increase of this practice could lead to the decline of the guardianship role of the traditional clan system. Imagine a scenario where each family came up with their own family name, and the trend continued for generations, until families in every generation would take on a different surname. At the end, the existing clans within a tribe, which have served to bond several families into a common family from time immemorial, while also preventing inbreeding through a system of inter-clan marriages, may sadly become a thing of the past. Then, the intra-clan familial feeling, evoked by a shared/common identity among generations of countless families, may slip away into obscurity, as would the extension of family feelings to the larger community through the time-honored practice of inter-clan marriages.

Modernity with its multiple offers of urbanization, convenient amenities, monetary wealth, formal education etc, need not necessarily destroy the valuable tapestry in the fabric of a community. In fact, it can be turned into opportunities for weaving relationships beyond the immediate family, clan, village, tribe or even ethnicity. But indulging in isolated lifestyles and breaking the traditional bonds into even smaller components will only contribute to the disintegrating of the community, instead of supplementing the need of inclusiveness and expansive relations.

The “I-Thou” relationship of Martin Buber (1958), and the “I-need-You” mutuality of John Macmurray (1961), and the Naga ancestral notion of “We” remain foundational principles of establishing and preserving a genuine community. Buber’s and Macmurray’s reasoning that the ‘Other’ (“Thou/You”) completes the ‘Self’ (“I”) is compatible with the ancestral Naga community setting, in which the unity of persons took precedence over individuality.

To deliberately walk away from the “Other” is to be ensnared by the deceptive charm of modernity that does not let the exclusive “I” go free that easily.

But the most tragic aspect of it all is the justification of all ruthless behaviors as doing it in the name of Christ.

The motto of the “nationalists” with the slogan, “Nagaland for Christ,” poses the question of which Christ the Nagas are alluding to? Is he the eternal Christ, the Son of God and the Prince of Peace, as projected in the Bible? Or is ‘Christ’ just another name created to gloss over human blunders to give those responsible the look of “martyrdom”? The latter spells disgrace on two counts. First, it is a blatant mockery to Christianity in general that the name of Christ is abused. Second, the ‘object’ of our faith as Christians becomes highly suspect!

Unfortunately, politically motivated immoral activities in the Naga society have substituted the eternal Christ for the created christ. This is not to say that the existence of two christs is real or possible. It is not. But it is true that many christs can be created out of sinful human inclination to find religious support; even for obnoxious actions and ideologies. What follows is the conception of oppositional images of Christ: Jesus Christ as he really is and Jesus Christ as he is created by humans. This brings us to the question that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matt 16: 15, NRSV). Of all the answers attempted by the disciples, he acknowledged Peter’s: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (v. 16).

To have “Nagaland for Christ” as a motto would mean to recognize this truth: recognition of the Messiah-ship of Christ. This calls for a life of faith. Without aspiring to a faith in the Christ of God in political engagement, it would seem like the name of Christ is simply a ploy for self–exoneration by those bearing the identity “Christian”. But a misdeed can never be justified no matter in whose name it is purported to have been done. Dutch theologian, H. M. Kuitert, recalls how the Spanish Fascists had a fighter plane which bore the title ‘Christ the king” (1986:92). Perhaps, it is in such instances that the third commandment needs to be heeded to: “You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name” (Ex 20: 7).

Moreover, a life of faith in the Christ of God in political engagement is best manifested in living for the well being of others. During the rise of Hitler, a young German theologian by the name of Dietrich Bonhoeffer aptly called Jesus Christ as “the man for others”. True to his conviction, Bonhoeffer rose against the Third Reich, for which he was finally executed. Followers of Christ are called to dedicate their lives for the service of others. Serving others is not just a moral duty but a commandment to be obeyed, but not out of compulsion but out of love for God and others, simultaneously. Love for God is never an abstract belief. It is most clearly revealed in loving actions towards fellow beings. James describes love for others as ‘the royal law” (James 2: 8). It is such an intense virtue that it requires faithful followers to live or die, if required, for the well being of others. Jesus himself commends such a sacrificial attitude incited by love: “Greater love has no one than this that you lay down your life for your friends” (Jn 15: 13). For Jesus, this was not simply demagogy of a sort, but he exemplified this noble teaching by going to the cross for the sake of establishing the Kingdom of God on earth.

Self serving interests, expressed in violence, homicide, assaults, extortions, threats, false propaganda etc are not what Jesus Christ lived and died for. And he would never approve of any actions and ideas that are contrary to his mission. Allegiance to evil ambitions and practices conflicts with the very purpose for which God became human in the person of Jesus Christ: “I came that you may have life and have it abundantly” (Jn 10: 10b). Life of abundance can only be meaningfully identified with the experience of the elements of the Kingdom of God in a given situation. Apostle Paul underlines that the kingdom of God is “righteousness and peace and joy” (Rom 14: 17). These are qualities attained and sustained when Divine pleasure and human approval meet and shake hands. This entails that the principles governing Naga political visions ought to cohere with the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. Being the embodiment of God’s perfect will, there is neither any human virtue that Jesus did not teach or live by example nor is there any teaching or action of his that could not serve as an example to be emulated by humanity for a fuller life.

“Nagaland for Christ” cannot be simply propagated by the Nagas without assuming responsibility to live and act according to the values of the Kingdom that Christ has established with his own life. The misgivings of the public towards the Naga nationalist movement (under all factions) can probably be redeemed by an active move to redirect its course of action towards all that aims for righteousness, peace and joy.

To hold on to the slogan, then, would mean to implement the demands inherent in it: to identify the only Christ, the Son of God, to guard one’s faith in the midst of political engagement, and to validate that faith by striving to enhance the lives of others in love, for the sake of the One in whose name victory is sought.