According to Edward Said, a ‘Critical Intellectual’ is one who is imbued by the spirit of questioning nationalism, corporate thinking and the sense of class, racial and gender privileges. He/She lives metaphorically on the margins as an “exile”, representing the underrepresented and disadvantaged groups of society, engaged in the political and intellectual battlegrounds of the contemporary public sphere. Ultimately it is a “lonely condition” is what Said claims.

After watching an episode of National Geographic’s ‘Taboo’ on the theme of what constitutes Justice, I concur with Said’s image of an Intellectual and call myself a ‘Critical Intellectual’ as my thoughts and the performance of various societal groups in various parts of the world conjoins both the specific (personal) resistance with social mobilization. Its backbone lies in the truth—its acceptance and its proclamation—and this truth drives its power from the ostracization, the brutalization and the ridicule it has had to endure over the years.

The physics of it is much like that of the Nuclear Reactor, deriving its power from a chain reaction to induce a controlled rate of nuclear fission to release energy and free neutrons to ultimately power up. Hence, Said associates words like “lonesome” and “exile” with the Critical Intellectual.

Take the concept of Justice as perceived in Togo, West Africa for instance. Justice for its natives is Trial by Public Ordeal, where a pot of burning oil decides whether a person is guilty or not (the boiling oil singes the hand of the guilty while the hand of the innocent is left unscathed); and since there is no cheating Nature, this is seen as only right to leave the test of a person’s moral conscience to that of nature.

What is otherwise considered as Taboo is considered just and fair to them as the burning oil solves their problem of differentiating between the victim and the criminal. The dictated methods of Trial by Law sans the barbarism of the burning of hand in the oil does not appeal to them. The oil is considered powerful as it brings a confession and provides good protection against false claims thereby paving the way for forgiveness and friendship in the future. It is a measure of their conviction and their belief.

For the people of Togo, public humiliation is an important part of justice and the brutality and inhumane angel of it is secondary; and while this might not be the acceptable and societal means of deciding between right and wrong, it sure is people-centric, representing their pleas, ensuring justice is the order of the day, as the Law is not effective enough and man can cheat his way through it, which can cause the altering the positions of the victim and the criminal which is not tolerated by the natives of Togo.

Righting a wrong with another wrong is yet another way to go as adopted by the people of Albania. And though their methods might be less primitive as compared to the oil of the Togons, it still is crass and barbaric in its execution. A gun is their Law and revenge--an eye for an eye--is the only way to justice. The offense is not just an offense in itself but is a direct insult to their honor and integrity and cannot be forgiven and hence the means adopted by them to restore justice involve blood feuds that run for generations after generations disrupting the lives of many innocent family members.

Some of these feuds date back to such a long time ago that the existing members have no idea about its origins, instead, it is the fear that has been passed down for generations rendering lives of isolation and social disembowelment. It is only normal in Albania to see people walking around with guns for death lurks close and the fear of being gunned down anytime is only but normal and not considered paranoia.

It is a constant battle between violence and peace (the peaceful system of state-ordained justice); but as much of an oxymoron it might be, the people of Albania believe in peace through violence. Thus, man taking justice into his own hands has left him isolated and in social exile. This disposition, otherwise seen as Taboo, is their only escape from the limbo of unlawfulness and unjustness.

The victims in each of these cases are not just individuals, but represent society and although most of these methods of bringing peace and order in the community is considered Taboo and violent, especially in the context of the modern day scenario of peace talks, discussions, and court-room orders -- a more humane way of treating the criminals thereby upholding man’s basic right of honour, integrity, and respect.

The alternative question that arises is, is this then enough? In the face of death and irreversible loss caused, are these punishments as cruel and unjust as it might appear on the face of it encroaching on the territory of ‘Taboo’ adequate enough to restore orderliness and balance in the world? The question that continues to haunt the halls of justice and what constitutes right and wrong is: Are these methods then Fair, Reasonable and Righteous? Left to each person’s personal discretion it is a question that never seems to be answered satisfactorily.

Indeed Said sees all intellectuals as public figures who redeploy both their learning and their language to speaking freely and conscientiously against every form of injustice that affect the brutalized and the marginalized of our social sphere. But that is never an easy position; never certainly a position of power; and certainly never an experience of convenience. One is bound to be hounded and ridiculed, brutalized and ostracized, ignored and tortured. Yet a ‘Critical Intellectual’ is the only position that one can hold if as Said suggests one has to speak “truth to power”.