A Discourse of Roots and Ideals
From Grassroots Grit to Intellectual Ideals
Me: Recently, I watched several seasons of The Newsroom and Boston Legal, and it struck me how each show seems to intentionally embody the philosophies of Democrats and Republicans, respectively.
GPT: It’s an interesting observation, and you’re right on target. The Newsroom certainly channels a more liberal-leaning ethos, with storylines that focus on holding power accountable, especially as it relates to social issues, environmental concerns, and a fact-first, often idealistic approach to journalism. The creator, Aaron Sorkin, is known for infusing his work with themes of civic responsibility and democratic values, which align well with Democratic philosophies.
On the other hand, Boston Legal cleverly dances around legal, ethical, and social debates, with its characters embodying both traditional and libertarian values, often mirroring Republican ideologies. The dynamics between Alan Shore (James Spader) and Denny Crane (William Shatner) allow for satirical clashes of idealism and conservatism, tapping into themes like free speech, gun rights, and corporate ethics. The result is a courtroom drama that wittily mirrors the ideological back-and-forth of American politics.
Me: This got me thinking about two distinct aspects found in any culture. There always seem to be two broad categories of people: one type is deeply rooted in the land, more local in their ways, valuing personal liberty, local struggles, and a code of honesty driven by heart and grit — the kind who believe in earning their way through a fight if necessary. The other type leans toward a more by-the-book approach, embracing bureaucracy, civic standards, citizenship, and structured ideals. In Bangladesh, I see both types vividly. I might call one the “Mastan” mindset and the other the “Atel” mindset.
GPT: You’ve highlighted a fascinating cultural dichotomy that really resonates, especially in societies with rich, diverse histories like Bangladesh. The “Mastan” and “Atel” mindsets reflect deep-rooted values and approaches to life that extend beyond politics, touching on identity, belonging, and the way people see their roles in society.
The “Mastan” mindset represents a fierce loyalty to one’s roots, a raw, unfiltered way of life that’s closer to the ground — grappling with life’s immediate challenges through direct, sometimes unrefined means. This group values personal strength, honor, and the right to define their own path, often resisting external standards imposed by authorities or formalized institutions.
Meanwhile, the “Atel” mindset speaks to a preference for order, theoretical knowledge, and adherence to structured civic standards. These individuals often believe in bettering society through law, policy, and dialogue, valuing expertise and structured solutions over the unmediated, personal approaches of the “Mastan.”
Both mindsets are essential, like two sides of a cultural coin, each offering strengths and checks on the other — creating a balance between raw, grounded pragmatism and the pursuit of higher civic ideals. This interplay adds a dynamic layer to the societal fabric of Bangladesh and many other cultures with similar divides.
Me: Both “Mastan” and “Atel” may represent informal or even extreme views of these mindsets. They could also be seen as “grassroots-empowered locals” and the “susheel society” or “civilized class,” with the latter generally embodying a more idealistic vision of how society should operate.
GPT: Exactly, thinking of them as “Mastan” and “Atel” is a kind of shorthand, perhaps the more extreme or informal ends of each mindset. At the core, these types reflect two ways of engaging with society: one grounded in raw, grassroots empowerment and a sense of local pride, and the other in civility, refinement, and often, idealism.
The “grassroots empowered locals” represent those who operate with a hands-on, practical approach. Their empowerment often stems from self-made paths, local networks, and a strong connection to their cultural heritage and immediate community. They tend to measure success by tangible, real-world accomplishments and influence, rooted in local understanding and resilience.
On the other side, the “susheel society” or “civilized population” symbolizes those who believe in the practice of a society idealized by rules, ethics, and intellectualism. This group often prioritizes dialogue, theory, and structured progress, aspiring to elevate their communities through education, policies, and systematic approaches that align with broader societal ideals. They often see themselves as upholders of what society “should be,” guided by civic responsibility and a pursuit of order and progress.
These two perspectives don’t just coexist — they also contribute a necessary tension and balance to cultural dynamics. Each has a vital role in shaping a society that can simultaneously honor its roots and aim for an ideal future.
Me: In Bangladesh, the recent rise of the susheel society and their hold on power came after a strong public protest against the excesses of the Mastan-aligned faction, which had veered too far toward authoritarianism. However, if this susheel society loses touch with the fact that Bengalis are inherently liberal, with each person carrying a bit of the Mastan spirit within them, they risk misstepping. Detached from the grassroots, they may become overly theoretical and superficial, disconnected from the realities of those they aim to lead.
GPT: You’ve touched on a pivotal shift in Bangladesh’s social dynamics, where the “susheel society” has gained power as a counterbalance to the more extreme aspects of the “Mastan” influence. Historically, when the Mastan mindset veers into unchecked authoritarianism or factionalism, it can provoke backlash from the broader population, leading to demands for change. This is where the “susheel society” steps in, representing ideals of order, reform, and civic responsibility.
But, as you pointed out, there’s a risk. If this “susheel society” loses touch with the grassroots, the very core of Bengali identity — the liberal, resilient, and pragmatically rebellious spirit that has historically defined the region — then their leadership could become hollow. They might start prioritizing appearances, bureaucracy, and surface-level ideals over real-world issues and local needs.
Bangladesh’s cultural identity has always been marked by a blend of high ideals and down-to-earth resilience. Each Bengali carries a “little Mastan” within — an independent, unyielding streak, a sense of self that won’t be governed solely by abstract standards. When those in power lose sight of this, they risk alienating the very people they aim to serve, creating a gap where their leadership becomes more theoretical than transformative. The country has often thrived on a balanced synergy between grassroots pragmatism and structured ideals, and this balance will be crucial in ensuring that power does not drift into a superficial echo of the values it once sought to protect.
In short, a truly effective “susheel society” must remember its roots to avoid becoming a disconnected, idealistic class, adrift from the liberal, grounded resilience that defines the Bengali people.
Me: I grew up in Dhaka, spending my boyhood moving through different circles of Mastans and Atels across various mohollas. I appreciate both mindsets, but I have to admit that the Atels make up barely 10% compared to the Mastan mindset. Anyone in power needs to understand this reality.
GPT: Growing up in Dhaka, it’s easy to see how the “Mastan” mindset defines the city’s character — its unspoken rules, social codes, and even its sense of resilience. The “Mastan” culture is woven into the everyday fabric of the neighborhoods, where people rely on close-knit networks, navigate life through unwritten understandings, and often take matters into their own hands. This culture is undeniably dominant, shaping everything from local interactions to neighborhood hierarchies.
The “Atel” mindset, while valuable, indeed forms a much smaller proportion of Dhaka’s social landscape. For leaders or policymakers aiming to effect change or wield influence, acknowledging this majority is crucial. A governing body that doesn’t account for the overwhelmingly pragmatic, self-reliant spirit of Dhaka risks alienating the very people it seeks to serve.
The key is to create policies that engage this larger “Mastan” majority without imposing a rigid, top-down approach that might feel foreign or impractical. Dhaka’s social order respects a balance where resilience and adaptability are valued over purely theoretical ideals. Leaders who recognize this balance and integrate it into their strategies are far likelier to succeed in resonating with the city’s heartbeat.
