Three years into the 2020s decade has been nothing short of catastrophic in many ways. Be it the everlasting COVID, current political and economic turmoil in Pakistan and Sri Lanka, or the recent invasion of Ukraine by Russia. Things are going bad to worse and the call to sway away from the conventional ways of co-existing is on the rise.
How Does One Define Tinyism?
To put it in simpler terms, Tinyism is a practice or a political belief that depicts that the current system of government or nation should be fractured or split up into smaller states or regions to improve the governance or the rule of law.
But why has there been a surge in demand to endeavor an ideology which is largely a myth?
The answer to the inquisition is anything but straightforward. Firstly, there have been instances in the past where a large region has been broken up by internal factors or foreign forces into smaller nations and those smaller nations have thrived well throughout.
How can one forget the dismantling of the USSR in 1991 into 15 countries and pretty much each one of them has shown more or less decent economic and political growth since then?
If we go further back, let’s say by a couple of decades, who can forget the Indo-Pak war of 1971 which liberated Bangladesh. However, it’s a little debatable whether Bangladesh can be considered a prime example of Tinyism or not.
When East Pakistan broke off from Pakistan and became Bangladesh, it had an estimated population of 65 million, while conventional Pakistan was 58 million, which means the mother nation was the minority as a result of the division.
Crux of Tinyism
It is extremely difficult to determine why a particular individual or the masses are willing to adopt Tinyism. The rationale could be none to a million. For Bangladesh, it all started with their right to their native tongue which soon turned into a fight for their self-determination.
It could be cast, creed, language, ethnicity, politics, or literally anything one could think of, there’s really no end to it. If logically spoken and the idea of Tinyism can be materialized, then there would practically be thousands of tiny nations across the world.
And if all of them have distinct ideologies with administrations functioning differently from each other will make the job harder for people to barter. Let’s just consider one aspect, for instance, if all nations have their exclusive currencies, the exchange system will have to be out of this world to balance it out.
The idea of Tinyism is not something that hasn’t been materialized yet. There already have been many micronations that have been floating around for a while now. Countries like the Principality of Sealand or the Republic of Molossia have already been in existence for a while now.
They’re functioning somehow, let’s say, they aren’t thriving and are extremely dependent on their ‘so-called neighboring’ countries for even their basic supplies. Don’t know what is the basis of their sovereignty which they proudly claim.
There have been quite a few educated individuals as well who have advocated very thoroughly for Tinyism for a while now. To further shove their agenda down the throat, they have argued that many pretty much all the nations in existence have been built on graves and genocide of the indigenous people.
Thinking neutrally, their points seem valid to some extent. The ‘world’s only superpower – the USA’ literally eliminated 95% of the Indian American population and colonized everything.
There’s no surprise as to why the Indian American population fell from 4.7 million in 1680 to 198,000 in 1923. The worst part, the entire genocidal episode carried across centuries has been hidden from the history books, as if nothing happened, nor are any efforts made to declassify that.
Murder of innocent people can never be justified, but the USA can never go back to being tribes of Indian American groups and western colonies. It is as stupid as it sounds. On the contrary, the best that one could do is give reasonable recognition to the indigenous people for their contribution to building the country.
Failure of Tinyism
Some individuals have taken the more extreme route. By mentioning that, one can never forget the damning stain called the KKK (Ku Klux Klan) and the impact they’ve had on American society for decades. Building a cult out of hate and the sick mentality of white supremacy hasn’t done any good to anyone.
History hasn’t been kind to people who think they are above everyone, especially to those who’ve honed assault and exploitation as their primary armory.
if one would around the world, one is sure to find many individuals live around the ideology of Tinyism and are not ready to abandon and explore the modern world. The most frequent example of the Tribes of North Sentinel Island.
Since they are hostile and have been uncontacted for thousands of years, one can’t tell what they think, one can only speculate.
Tinyism has miserably failed to make a mark on the global stage, those who advocate having only hollow promises of thriving democracy, corruption-free society, alike minded individuals, but the fact of the matter is that it can never be materialized.
There are 7.7 billion individuals in the world, no two people have the same mindset, so the theory of alike minded people falls flat.
One very simple explanation that we lived in pre-historic times and we can’t go back to it is the single most dominant reason why Tinyism must not be taken seriously, the after-effects can be fatal for all.
It's not hidden from anyone about the current situation in Afghanistan. When the US and its allies decided to pull out, the country which was just recognized as the land of tribes fell into the abyss in no time to such an extreme extent that it is unrecognizable.
The need of the hour isn’t to find new ways to co-exist, but rather to find ways to rectify and amplify the existing ones. The empires were built on the beliefs of mutual respect and understanding, the belief can always be brought back, not the empires.
Written by - Shubhankar Singh
Edited by - Akanksha Sharma
0 Comments