Any nation state claims its sovereignty not only through keeping the outsiders at bay; rather it does so by maintaining a cohesive society binded by laws and cultural norms. One might argue the defining characteristic of a nation is that its people are bound to a singular set of laws which governs their existence. 

However, what happens when people do not feel the need to follow the letters on the page? Can the state enforce obedience? And if so, how can the state enforce obedience to an unapologetically stubborn resistance towards such laws? Through force? Is force even an option if society itself loses all belief in the effectiveness of laws and discovers its fragile and crumbling nature? This article hopes to answer these questions, if not, maybe raise some other ones.

What is a state?

By all theoretical accounts, the state is the greatest oppressor of human volition, yet societies do embrace states because it is supposed to guarantee some inalienable rights in exchange for taking away other not-so-good ones.

Aristotle famously termed the state as a partnership between men and their beliefs within a set of legal framework. However, in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s view, societies hand over their freedom to the state knowing full well that it is the ultimate oppressor. They do so in exchange for the ‘common good’.

Which means, I, who may derive utility from killing you, do not possess the right to kill you just as you do not, because we both gave up the right to murder for the greater good of not getting killed ourselves.

Therefore, a state can be defined as an entity to whom society hands over power in exchange for certain privileges.

A massive ask from the point of view of the state. Because a state is nothing but an aggregate of its weapons and political groups. As a result, if or when a society gradually turns away from the state’s rule, and when a society does not trust the state to do what’s right or protect society’s inalienable rights, anarchy becomes inevitable.

Before you fear too much, and start to believe that Bangladesh is well on its way towards anarchy, you should realise what factors are responsible for this predicament.

The rule of law and Bengal’s predicament

We, from all accounts slayed the evil dragon, rescued the state, and put a humble old soul in its place, so everything was supposed to turn out great, but the figurehead is nothing if the people who should be ruled by him believe otherwise.

In the last year, Bangladesh witnessed a massive uptick in mob violence, which was not surprising given the fact that a large portion of the ruling elite fled the crime scene, leaving behind empty hierarchical seats to be filled by ambitious local hooligans. 

This would have been nothing extraordinary, but this is not an isolated incident. Bengal and even other parts of the Indian subcontinent have a long history of ignoring laws and the so-called “social contract” between them and the state. As much of the state in its modern history had been controlled by non-native rulers, this trend is expected, and each effort for emancipation started with rejecting the legitimacy of the state in the first place. History is bound to stick and leave behind its footprint.

Bengal society has always had and still has its own sets of hierarchy that dictates social life. Yes, it too fears the state’s power of intimidation or imprisonment, but it also long ago realised the inherent flaws within the state apparatus, since the state is nothing but the representatives picked from its existing hierarchy.

As an analogy, the local Imam still holds jurisdiction, spreading messages of advice, rules, and his own interpretation of the law — so does the rich in the Imam’s place in modern times. 

At least the Imam held some oversight by the divine; the petty bourgeois has nothing. Therefore, the bourgeois exploits this inherited distrust in laws, and bends it to fit his needs. The proletariat (common man) is stuck between the institution which it does not trust and the greedy whom it dislikes, but chooses the greedy in the long run because the common man too hopes to sit in that chair, or hopes that his children would get to sit in it.

Why would anyone think to complain to the police when he rightly knows there may be a good chance of himself being exploited? Why would he trust the institutions which beat his grandfather in the 19th century, shot his father in the twentieth, and took Tk500 from him as a bribe in 2025? However, he too would gladly trust it if he had the confidence of manipulating the police or the law in his favour. He would only be in such a position if he is part of the petty bourgeois and not the proletariat.

This understanding is crucial for understanding the state because any law it hopes to enact can only be effective if the masses believe it to be effective in the first place.

After all, a law is nothing but a written word and after several centuries of violating the written word, it is no wonder that the public has lost trust in it completely.

The solution: Gotham needs a Batman

Only the caped crusader, the messiah, or some Christ-like figure can come and restore trust. If it were possible, he would have come centuries ago. There is no instance of a society suddenly jumping back from anarchy. Once the social fabric breaks, no needle can stitch it up effectively. But there is no reason to believe that the Bengali social fabric is completely damaged. Sure, it contains the loosely threaded parts, but its main advantage is that it is mostly of one color. The unipolar race of Bengali ethnicity may be the only thread that is durable enough to keep the cloth intact.

Before you accuse me of spreading nationalist rhetoric, you should probably accept the fact that strong unity in manifesting our own destiny is what led to us forming a nation-state in the first place.

There is no denying that Bengalis, time and time again, united under one roof to slay the proverbial dragon, but each time this unity faded away, and Bengali’s directionless polity built up another dragon for it to be slayed once again.

In order to break this loop, a Batman-like figure is needed, but not through divine justice. The honest participation of the Bengali in its polity should be the first step. We all know what reforms are needed, we all know where the flaws lie, but do we know anyone who is willing to make the sacrifices to correct these flaws?

Our legal system is stagnant, our administration is corrupt, our bureaucracy is bloated and slow, and our governance is ineffective. And any of these measures need immense courage and leadership to fix. We have witnessed the response from the bureaucracy when checks and balances were introduced — we saw time and time again meaningless demands put forth just to benefit one group while degrading others, and we have also witnessed our so-called liberators suck up to both political aisles just because they are too scared to take a stance on key issues of the future.

Such indecision and shortsightedness is precisely why society is lawless. Not because of the shortage of law enforcement, the police, and countless surveillance cameras, but because people do not trust the law to be just.

That is why, the mob dares to show its face as the police watch on because the latest dragon we slayed just opened the doors for them to extend their wings just a bit.