Friday, October 18, 2024
Home Blog Page 887

Making sense of India’s intolerance to Aamir Khan

Mayuresh Didolkar
-
0

Even the most impassioned supporters of Aamir Khan would agree that as far as perception goes, he has lost the battle over his “leaving the country” remarks fair and square. Other than a few devoted Hindu-phobe journalists and celebrities with iffy credentials at best, India spoke unanimously yesterday and their message was simple “Knock it off Aamir”.

What was equally clear was most people did not think Khan was over-reacting or was under a false impression, most people that I read on social media seemed to think Khan was playing a mischief. I must confess I agree with the majority opinion.

And here is where I truly admire the liberal brigade. When it comes to defending the indefensible, they are second to none. So since today morning I see a new onslaught of posts that substantially seem to say “you reacted so strongly to Khan’s remarks. It kinda proves his point about intolerance”.

No, no and no. It does not. And don’t you dare to make this muzzling free speech debate. I will explain why.

First of all the constitutional right that we all have is about free speech. It simply means I cannot be harmed or persecuted for stating my beliefs in either writing or through speeches and the law will protect me if somebody makes a stand against my aforesaid right. It says nothing about Consequence Free Speech. Let me say that again- free speech- part of the right. Consequence Free Speech- not part of the deal. Let’s expand on this a bit.

To truly understand the ridiculous nature of the “opposition proves intolerance” let’s examine what options we have when someone makes a statement we do not agree with. One is to fold in, to surrender and agree that the other person is right. Other than the moral wrongness of it, unfortunately liberals all over the world are not only sour losers but even worse winners. Three days back, Indiatimes was forced to pull a series of pics since some feminists like Kavita Krishnan found them offensive. In their apology Indiatimes stated they were committed to gender equality. Kavita’s churlish response was “no you are not”. This after she got her way with Indiatimes. In a serious issue like intolerance, God only knows what kind of restrictions will be put on the majority, if we admit the intolerance slur even for the sake of avoiding unpleasantness.

The other option is for you to ignore the debate altogether. Many people think this to be a safe mid-way option of keeping your beliefs to yourself while not trying to change other people’s mind. Unfortunately, like the “None of the above” option in the elections it does nothing to stop the wrong opinion from gaining majority. Social media and media can be seen as actual, physical space where if one party leaves the space the other one must invariably get to own the same. So by keeping your opinion to yourself you have just allowed the opposing view point to gain more ground.

That leaves the third and rather unpleasant option. That is going out there and voicing your opinion and opposition to the said views. That is what happened yesterday. And since the overwhelming majority of the people expressing their thoughts disagreed with Khan, he got bashed. To infer the majority expressing their disagreement with Khan is a proof of their intolerance is like claiming a vigorous defence to be the proof of the accused’s culpability.

I have mentioned in my blog a year back that social media has made the conflict between the liberals and the right wing strangely symmetrical. All the right wing thoughts and opinions that mostly left minded media chose to simply sweep under the rug has come to the fore with the advent of social media. Journalists who were used to bully their line of thinking on an unarmed public suddenly realized that not only they were failing in making their opinions popular, but most of the public was wise to their act. That also partly explains the incidents like Rajdeep Sardesai trying to beat up a NRI at Madison Square Garden last year and the generally abusive, insulting language used by mainstream journos on their twitter handle.

However, it is clear that the liberal brigade having realized that they do not have numerical superiority are now pushing back with the shields of civil rights. And hence now the argument is that the people’s response to Aamir’s statement is an attack on his personal liberties and free speech. It is not. He is free to say he feels threatened, we are free to say he is politically motivated. There is nothing in this that will trip a neutral observer.

To expect people not to react to Khan’s statement is an expectation of consequence free speech. And not only consequence free speech is not a part of free speech but it is expressly in conflict with the same. Just think what do we call countries where prominent people hog all the media bandwidth, say what they like to say without being asked to substantiate it, and do not brook rebuttal, no matter how logical. The word for these countries is dictatorship and when it comes to expressing opinions liberals seem to think that is just a fine way to work things. Mr. Tufail Ahmed referred to it today as “monopoly of expression” and I think it is as apt a description as any.

The trap set is three steps and should now be clear. Step one is a baseless provocative statement is made that is calculated to cause offense to the majority. Step two is allow the inevitable negative reaction and step three is to use the said negative reactions to provide proof of the allegations made in first place. However, due to the reasons explained above, the media and social media mind-space cannot be left vacant for the liberals to occupy.

Remember the final sequence in Aamir’s Lagaan where he tells his team-mates something like “for these guys this is just a game, for us it is a question of our lives”?

Please understand for millionaire superstars like Aamir such incidents are merely tools to achieve more power/money or fame. For common people like us allowing the rhetoric of intolerance to win will literally have life or death consequences. So let’s stop being nice guys and refuse to vacate the social media and media space. Occupying wall street was a way for the commoners in USA to protest the greed in wall street, occupying FB and Twitter will be a good way for us to protest those opposed to our tolerant way of life.

Oh yes and one last thing Aamir- you don’t need certificate from us about patriotism. Agreed and understood.
We don’t need certificate of tolerance from you- try and wrap your head around that one bubba.

Jai Hind!!

There have been acts of intolerance, but the average Indian is as tolerant as earlier

Rocker Marx
-
0

All the acts of intolerance which we have witnessed in past few months be it Dadri murder case, or threatening people of getting out of country for what they eat or because of their religion or slamming fatwas against the creative work of an artist, killing of rationalist and forcing apology from a writer for writing, have come from politicians, religious leaders and political and religious organisations.

I don’t see any common man self motivated and taking a self initiative to act intolerant. Personally I see the both sides of this intolerance debate be it right or left religious or political as the clash of elites to secure the privileged position and using the common individual as an instrument to fight their own ideological battles. This has been happening for long in history. They are all free to say anything but the consequences of it are practically borne by artless common individuals.

I’m yet to witness an act of intolerance self initiated by a common individual for political religious or ideological motives forsaking his/her daily struggle for livelihood. And isn’t that individual regardless of his/her of any kind of majority or minority is actually in majority and is the real India?

And in the generalized statements we concede a space to the actual culprits of intolerance to escape by distributing the onus of the crime equally over every individual in the country. How is this approach going to solve the problem?

What else could be our condition when the hot topics of intellectual discussion of our country are either opinions which are never fully factually correct or the facts which are useless or have not much immediate bearing on a common individual’s life.

Development comes when there’s a culture of development. Democracy comes when there is a culture of democracy. Till then it’s all a game of vested personal interests or egoistical satisfactions of biases.

Our priorities as citizens of the national are badly fucked up and this is being exploited by everyone in a better or higher position in society to manifest and perpetuate their position-be it Politicians, Media, business tycoons, elite leftists or rightists, religious leaders of every religion.

PS: views are dynamic and evolving for better perspective and fact based empirical logical clarity as opposed to idealistic assertions.

Let’s not change the narrative from ‘Sabka Saath’ to ‘We and They’

sanjay kapur
-
0

Mr. Narendra Modi was overwhelmingly elected with much hope from a nation that had collectively fallen into a state of depression due to the ‘non-performance’ and other shortcomings of the UPA dispensation. Now, just 18 months later, millions watch in dismay at the several conflicting signals emerging from within BJP on contentious matters, leaving people to draw their own conclusions.

A case in point would be the recent rush to comment on Bollywood star Aamir Khan’s stance on intolerance in India. For example, within a span of just a day, three different versions have emanated from the BJP ranks. First, Mukhtar Naqvi says Aamir Khan isn’t going anywhere (“In fact, we won’t let him go.”). Second, Yogi Adityanath says Aamir Khan can go wherever he likes (“In this way at least our population will decrease.”). Third, Shahnawaz Khan says at a hurriedly called press conference that Aamir Khan’s statement is political and motivated (“Who’s advising you, Khan Saab?”).

Consider the path that events post-May 2014 have taken. The fringe elements and motormouths  went into overdrive, airing dubious declarations on multiple issues with the more prominent among them – Yogi Adityanath, Sakshi Maharaj, and Sadhvi Prachi – and add in the Sangeet Soms and Giriraj Singhs, crossing barriers of prudent public utterances with an impunity that no Indian born after independence may have seen.  When the nation expected the man of the moment, Prime Minister Modi, to step in and nip this burgeoning menace right in the bud, they were dismayed to find total silence from him. BJP spokespersons went around from one TV channel debate to another, pompously outshouting other debaters and offering unconvincing answers, and even questioning the integrity and nationalism of all dissenters. To such levels had their arrogance grown resting on the assurance that they were now in ‘ruling’ mode and there was a lot they could ‘do’ before having to re-compose themselves into ‘pre-election’ mode. Even the defeats in the Delhi and Bihar polls didn’t shake them out of their hubris.

If in view of all this, many members of our society felt that things were getting alarmingly out of hand and not enough was being done to rein in the motormouths, and these celebrated and nationally awarded intellectuals decided to record their protest in the only manner they were capable of, to draw maximum attention while being democratic, what was the need to condemn their action like was done? Why jump to question their motives instead of looking for possible merit in their protest? Why put forth petty arguments of timing and whataboutery to the action they’ve chosen in the present context? If people are representing to a government on the prevailing undesirable situation, hoping for solutions, isn’t it but obvious that it will be “political”? So why condemn it for being political? Is politics bad? Condemnable? And who’s saying it? Every spokesperson – official or otherwise – of our political ruling dispensation!

When people are pointing out to a government that there is growing intolerance in society and emergent steps are needed to quell it, a prudent dispensation must first and foremost look into the merit of such claims especially when there’s such a large diverse group of serious thinkers of our country making them. If there is substance in their representations, these must be addressed immediately.

Why? Because we, the common people of Indian society, are all at risk of serious harm when radical elements get an unimpeded run to act as per their free whims.  These ‘free minds’ will imagine different levels of licence and liberty depending on their individual intelligence and on their capabilities to whip up spontaneous mob hysteria.

A poster shot of the 1986 TV serial "Tamas"
A poster shot of the 1986 TV serial “Tamas”

One has only to imagine the fear of the person whose door is being smashed by a mob out to kill him (e.g. the Dadri incident, and also what all migrants faced during India’s partition, which is well depicted in Govind Nihalani’s 1986 TV serial ‘Tamas’). And then imagine also members of a community who live in constant fear that at any moment they could be next. Even imagine the fear of people who are at risk just for their ethnic looks (remember that some Sikhs in the US were attacked post 9/11, being mistaken for Muslims).  Jeffrey Archer’s short story ‘The Perfect Murder’ from his book ‘A Twist in the Tale’ poignantly describes the terrifying emotions experienced by a man hiding from someone, at every sound or movement outside his home. The hundred deaths he experiences in that air of fear. One has to be able to gauge this first, to at all begin to address the problem.

It does not pay to be smug about such things. That “it can’t affect us, surely?” In 1994 India suffered a deadly pneumonic plague epidemic which started in Surat, Gujarat, and spread to a few more states. In fact, such was the dread of the disease among the people of Surat that as per Wikipedia some 3,00,000 residents migrated from the city in a span of just 2 days. Then, as awareness of the disease grew and the rich and powerful people learned that it was a disease communicable through the air, and it wasn’t just the poor but they too who could be affected, did they raise a big hue and cry for immediate steps to be taken arrest the epidemic.

Such is the galvanizing power of fear.

Some of our country’s celebrities, intellectuals, and thinkers have seen a case for drawing the government’s attention to the problem of growing intolerance. They are from society as a whole – the society that forms the nation that Mr. Modi is the Prime Minister of. Our society, our Prime Minister. It is in everyone’s interest that such matters are addressed appropriately. For once things get out of hand, what initially appear as sporadic bush-fires will grow into one another to form one huge inferno that could engulf all – even the rich and powerful.

It seemed in May 2014 that the only way the UPA could get back into serious contention in national politics would be for the NDA to forfeit their mandate, which in turn didn’t seem likely to happen. The people who voted for you Mr.Modi are still hopeful, though some are shaken. Let not this “we-they” attitude towards dissenters spoil your vision. “Sabka Saath” is better any day.

For more information click here

Review of Economic Policy of Modi’s Government

Smiran Bhandari
-
0

A large section of political and economic analysts in India are deriding the Modi Government for not doing enough to change the fortunes of our economy. “Where is the big bang” they ask. Any important measure undertaken by the Government is downgraded as incrementalism. But, none of the analysts craving for big bang reforms have been able to define it properly. They are hard-pressed to provide an answer as to what would actually constitute as big-bang reforms. A more productive exercise would be to dive deep into the analysis of our current situation and provide pragmatic solutions. Unfortunately, very few analysts have been able to study the nuances and go beyond the surface.

A sensible approach would be to temper our expectations and start dealing with reality as it is. Initially, there was hysteria surrounding the future performance of the Government. Later on, as things settled down, the hysteria transformed itself to enthusiastic hype and has now eventually petered down into circumspective hope. What one must realise is that when the Government took control, the coffers were nearly empty. Our fiscal situation did not look good. Inflation was raging and current account deficit was spiralling out of control. After eighteen months, we are in a far better environment.

Of course, it was quite fortuitous for India that oil prices plummeted substantially from its recent highs. But we have to give credit where it is due and recognize that the Government has also undertaken a slew of measures across the board to improve the situation. Most of the measures will take time to unravel and the benefit will only be witnessed in the long run. For example, Banking and Power reforms are much needed and will prove to be fundamental in developing our economy. The Government has also reduced unnecessary expenditure while ensuring efficient auctioning at the right prices for our natural resources like spectrum and coal. Also, there is a perceptible change with regards to corruption especially when compared to the previous regime. The Government needs to be extra-vigilant to ensure that corruption be minimized and eventually eliminated.

The previous NDA government headed by Atal Bihari Vajpayee had a natural affinity towards Infrastructure Development. Even today, the Golden Quadrilateral highway project is highlighted as Vajpayee’s pet project. Given the high gestation period and long term nature of the benefits accruing to common people, the progress in Infrastructure did not translate into electoral victory for NDA. Ironically, the ensuing UPA government greatly benefitted from the platform laid out by the previous Government. It also provided UPA substantial fiscal headroom in undertaking mass Government sponsored programs like NREGA and the highly populist Loan Waiver Scheme. The present Modi Government is taking a leaf out of the previous NDA regime and is wholesomely focusing on Infrastructure Development. It is even taking it a step forward by comprehensively attacking all areas of Infrastructure like Railways, Ports and Airways and not just limiting itself to Roads.

With such massive importance placed to Infrastructure, the Modi Government seems to be doubling down on a strategy which did not yield a positive electoral outcome and yet proved to be beneficial outcome for the economy. This aspect is core to the principle of Economic Reforms. Policy should be based on Economic outcomes and not on Electoral outcomes. Eventually, in the long-run, the twain does meet as effectively displayed by Modi’s Government in Gujarat. Infrastructural Development paved way to attracting investment from across the country thereby quickening the pace of growth and development. To cut a long story short, the development of Gujarat catapulted Modi as a national leader to reckon with. Eventually, Gujarat’s track record proved to be a major catalyst for Modi’s electoral victory in the general elections.

The current Government is applying the formula of the Gujarat model into the national context. Implementing this model across the nation will entail dealing with far more complexity than at state level. There are too many moving parts and variables and hence the policy should also evolve to meet the forthcoming challenges. Any well-thought out policy needs to be backed up with proper intention and implementation. There is enough evidence to show that the policy-makers at the helm are rising up to the challenge and are taking a comprehensive approach to develop the economy. But, since many measures are long term in nature, the detractors of the government and even well-intentioned analysts are taking this as an opportunity to portray that not enough is being done to improve the economic state of affairs.

My only submission is that we should go beyond labels like big-bang reforms or incremental reforms and focus on the nuances of the situation. There is no two word solution and there never was. Like all things in life, the devil lies in the details. Let us be patient and give development a chance.

For more information click here

Defenders of Aamir Khan may be wrong, but they will still win the perception battle

varsha
-
0

When many Indians outraged over Aamir Khan’s (in)famous remark on intolerance in India yesterday, the response from the “eminent” club was expected. Anybody who has followed news in the last one year can predict the cycle that every controversial/disturbing remark goes through – when the remark is made by one of their own.

Remark > Outrage by common man, expressed via social media route > Creation of a sense of victimhood for the person people were outraging against > defending this person’s right to speak freely > proclaiming dissent with his remark amounts to abuse/everyone dissenting is a frustrated sanghi > eventually winning the battle of perception

This is exactly what happened in Aamir’s case also.

Aamir’s remark > Hurt (more than outrage) among common people expressed over WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter > Voices from the eminent club claiming he is being victimized because of his religion, being asked to prove his patriotism > Defence that he has every right to speak his mind > Claim that everybody who is speaking against his remarks is abusing him, is a communal, frustrated sanghi > Successfully create a perception where Aamir is now a victim of this abuse (which basically means he has had the cake and eaten it too)

The defense has come from all quarters. Most of them, expectedly, smacking of a patronizing, condescending attitude, and based on twisted logic.

Thousands of people who are expressing outrage are all a ridiculous mob

The contention obviously comes out of the belief that somehow the common man is a stupid moron who cannot think for himself. It doesn’t matter that the same common man was lauded for taking a “wise decision” in the recently concluded Bihar elections.

Registering protest against a statement is abuse of freedom

This is pretty self-explanatory but still for the benefit of those who need some clarification, is freedom of expression a self-entitlement of only a few accomplished souls in India? If you have the right to express your opinion, do I not have the right to express my dissent on that opinion?

India has not made Aamir Khan a star, he has made himself one with his hard work

Really? In real life, no matter how hard you work, if there is no one to see it, appreciate it and reward it, you are not going to reach anywhere. Whether it is an artiste, scientist, innovator or even a regular office going person – unless his manager knows about, appreciates and rewards him, it doesn’t matter how hard he is working.

Any star becomes one because of his fans, it is never vice versa. It is these fans who pay for his movies, run after his cars, open his fan clubs, buy products endorsed by him (otherwise, why would companies pay hefty amounts to stars for endorsements? And, you can see the correlation in the way people have downgraded Snapdeal on Google Play since yesterday), and basically worship him.

It really must take some arrogance to demean the fan when it comes to a celebrity!

NRIs go out to earn, so what is wrong if Aamir wants to go for safety?

If there ever were a contest for stupid comparisons, this one might become a winner. Understand who is thinking about taking this step. For a common man to move out of his country for better opportunity is not same as a superstar contemplating leaving his country on the pretext of lack of safety. It would have still been a bit understandable if, for instance, Akhlaq’s son (from Dadri) had said he wanted to leave – because he might have felt vulnerable. He may not have the social backing or set up to give him a sense of security after such a ghastly incident (though that is not the case thankfully in India).

But, if Aamir Khan says his kid is unsafe, then I don’t know which kid is safe in India. Aamir Khan, today has one of the best security set-ups as compared to any Indian. Should we all then migrate to another country? It is one thing to express concern for your country, it is quite another to create a false sense of alarm and victimhood. And, when you are a superstar who has the ability to influence others, you have to be doubly careful!

Question is, remark is questioning his patriotism

Heard Shashi Tharoor saying to NDTV yesterday that Aamir Khan and Shah Rukh Khan have proved their patriotism over the years, so they shouldn’t be questioned. Now, what is the parameter of patriotism. You made films, you made money, you made name in this country – therefore you are patriotic? Is that the benchmark?

Citing someone’s personal success as a symbol of his patriotism is as unreasonable as questioning someone’s patriotism for voicing his concern toward the country.

How is voicing concern about his country wrong?

Not at all; in fact, influential people such as Aamir must voice their concerns. But there is a difference between voicing a concern with hope, and voicing a concern with despair. He could have said, a few exceptional incidents have happened. They must be dealt with well and we are all in this together. But, he chose to raise his concern by spreading paranoia. Why should the responsibility of keeping the social fabric of this country intact fall on the shoulders of the political class alone? Isn’t it the responsibility of all influential people to instill hope during difficult times?

People are overreacting

No Sir, we are not! We have supported you in your journey from being nobody to a superstar, without ever asking where you came from or what your religion was. We listened to what you said, sat through your shows. The least we expect in return is respect. As people whose words carry immense weight, you are expected to speak responsibly. And, then if you let us down we have every right to react!

But, Aamir is going to win this one too!

In life, everything is about perception. While your outrage may have been justified, you do not have the political correctness and manipulative articulation that the people who drive the discourse have. So, irrespective of the validity of your anger and hurt, eventually Aamir Khan will be declared a victim of intolerance and a hero who dared to open his mouth, all at the same time. You can do nothing but watch this drama unless you learn the ropes of this trade.

Who was the ‘Mole’ Behind 26/11 or it was just a story? Will the PM tell us?

Ashish Tickoo
-
0

As we remember 26/11, the horrific day memories of which will last in the minds forever, we will also remember that the victims till date are awaiting justice. 7 years and all we hear is dossier after dossier given to Pakistan while Hafiz Sayeed roams free and unfortunately, we all know nothing is going to happen to him.

Not even two weeks since similar Paris attacks happened and we already have been told that the mastermind has been killed. While we await Pakistan to do something on Mumbai attacks and BCCI meanwhile plans next cricket series with Pakistan one thing which has been missed out in all this is the Mole which was mentioned behind 26/11 attacks. Do Indians need Pakistan to give them that answer to this or Indians can be easily distracted away from it by picking up daily prime-time political wars?

An Article titled ´A Mole in Mumbai helped 26/11 attackers´ appeared in The Hindu on 27th Nov 2013. It was an interview with Mr Ram Pradhan, former Union Home Secretary who had led the two-man inquiry w.r.t 26/11 attack. In the article it is mentioned that how Pradhan Committee had informed the then Home Minister Mr. Chidambaram about the possibility of a mole in Mumbai who had assisted in the terror attack further adding that the central intelligence agencies didn’t cooperate with the committee.

The first question of the article talks about book The Siege which also seems to have made a claim that there was a local support to the attack in the form of a mole in the Indian security establishment and answer from Mr Pradhan clearly shows that there was no doubt about the local support and that he had communicated it to the state govt as well. Mr Pradhan clearly had stated in the interview that the information they had  could have helped in identifying the mole.

How do I remember this? I am Bhakt and it was noone else but our PM Narendra Modi who had referred to this issue and interview on 26 Nov 2013 in series of his tweets which thanks to twitter advanced search I could find and refer them here

UPA never explained but will now PM Narendra Modi tell the nation the real story behind the mole and what have we done about the committee report now? What are the steps been taken and when will we have the true story. Or should Indians forget about the Mole behind 26/11 and continue to hear the dossier stories. In PM´s own words from his tweet 2 years back on the same day

So, who was the mole behind 26/11, or was it just a story?

The Intolerant Elite: How Distorted Narrative is Hurting India

Upendra
-
0

India is hands down one of the most tolerant countries in the world, and I say this not just as a hunch, but also out of personal experience. There is no other country in this world that would celebrate diversity quiet the way India does. We have all the known and unknown religions in the world equally revered here, and linguistic and cultural diversity of this country is unparalleled anywhere in the world. Despite this diversity, people in India have lived in harmony for centuries and will continue to do so, in-spite of all the elite crying “intolerance” these days.

It is one thing to worry about the status of our nation, and quite another to deliberately spread malicious lies and unfounded rumors, scaring not only the citizens but also forming a negative opinion of India with the global community. The current “intolerance” narrative is a pure and simple ‘political rhetoric’ spread to malign the image of India and there by undermine the chances of India securing a Permanent seat in United Nations under the BJP government. Also the fact that crying ‘intolerance’ helped so called “secular” parties to win the Bihar elections was an additional bonus.

Here are the proofs.

The ‘intolerance’ narrative started with the murder of MM Kalburgi – a writer and “rationalist” from Karnataka on August 30, 2015. Earlier another ‘rationalist’ Narendra Dabholkar, from Maharastra had been similarly murdered on August 30, 2013 and Govinda Pansare on 20 February, 2015.

Three heinous murders happened, two Kalburgi and Dabholkar were killed when the state government is/was governed by Congress, and Pansare when the state government is governed by BJP. There were some outrages, of course at the time of those murders, but what made the “intellectual elites” to protest in October of 2015 against the murders that happened relatively much earlier?

Bihar elections.

The mainstream media in India have their biases and if it wasn’t for social media, even I was used to taking all their reports as gospel. The news fed by the mainstream media was pretty much a one sided flow of information, and we – the general public did not have the means to verify the information and venom they spewed. Thankfully post 2010 all that changed due to Twitter and Faecbook and now What’s App etc. Today people who know the facts surrounding certain cases do not need to wait for their version to be reported, they can report all the facts on their own via the social media, and that has left the mainstream media unnerved and at the same time exposed their lies and hypocrisy.

Let us run down each incidents of “intolerance” highlighted by the mainstream media and check it against facts.

Church Attacks

Prior to the Delhi elections the mainstream media repeatedly reported attacks on churches – in less than a month in February media reported 6 church attacks – Dilshad Garden, Jasola, Rohini, Vikaspuri, Vasant Kunj and Vasant Vihar and created a sense of doom and gloom, and cried “intolerance.”

However, as the elections ended and AAP won, the truth emerged, all six incidents had nothing to do with hate crime, rather all six had mundane innocuous explanations as detailed here and here.

CStdeKQUsAAX8dT

In fact if you compared the number of attacks on all religious institutions, Mandirs had been more vandalized, yet no one cried “intolerance” then

CApxP0cUUAEbywi

Around the same time the “minorities under attack” narrative was in full display when a 71 year old nun Sister Mary was raped in Kolkata. The main stream media once again went on overdrive and protests erupted all across the nation against “intolerance.” Even the Archbishop of Kolkata blamed Modi government in Center for a crime that happened in West Bengal.

Nun_Gang_Rape_Case_Archbishop_clears_Mamata,_blames_Modi_govt_for_rising_violence_against_minorities_The_Indian_Express_-_2015-11-24_14.43.10

A vocal champion of “minority rights” in India and ‘journalist’ Rana Ayyub wrote this scathing piece blaming everyone PM Modi, Subramanian Swamy, RSS, BJP and ‘Hindutva’ for the heinous crime.

However when truth emerged that it was actually a crime perpetrated by Bangladeshis  Bangladeshis who had nothing to do with Hinduism, none of the mainstream media including Ms. Rana Ayyub had the decency to extend an apology to their readers

Ranaghat_nun_rape_case_Man_who_‘raped’_nun_arrested_in_Sealdah_The_Indian_Express_-_2015-11-24_14.52.03

This is how the narrative that “minorities are under attack since Modi took power” has been built and rebuilt.

Beef Ban

I do not support any form of state sanctions, it is the fundamental right of every individual to eat what they want to, dress how they feel like and express themselves in any way they deem fit. I find banning beef or any other food for that matter idiotic. The constitution of India, however explicitly states under Article 48 that, “the State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and PROHIBITING THE SLAUGHTER, OF COWS AND CALVES AND OTHER MILCH AND DRAUGHT CATTLE.”

This puts the ball in the courts of the respective state governments. According to a BBC  report BBC report “in India 19 states and six union territories ban the slaughter of cows… [e]leven states and two union territories ban slaughter of cows, calves, bulls and bullocks.” These bans have been in place for decades, yet the outrage only happened following Maharastra and Haryana imposed similar bans.

Where_in_India_can_you_get_beef_-_BBC_News_-_2015-11-24_15.29.01

I guess the outraged was justified; an Evangelical pastor Reverend Dr. Enos Das Pradhan wanted to organize a beef festival in Darjeeling, and so did Mr. Jyoti Mukhia who was earlier with World Vision (an evangelical organization).

Evangelicals wanting to start beef festival

I do not mind outrage over government banning food, however it is the selective outrage that I have problem with. Those crying foul over beef ban in Maharashtra have remained quiet over beef ban elsewhere, all this while, and majority of these bans were put in place by respective Congress governments.

The ban on beef controversy got further impetus with ban on meat consumption during a Jain festival in some of the Municipalities of Maharashtra, with Shiv Sena  and MNS protesting by cooking meat outside Jain temples.

index

Later it emerged that the meat bans during Jain festival had been imposed since 1964 by the then Congress led board and upheld by municipal resolution in 1994 and 2004 (again Congress), there was no apology or regret issued over over-blowing the issue.

COUIEoEUYAAEQoG

Dadri

Stakes were very high during Bihar elections and one of the key factors is the minorities, which includes Muslims and Dalits. The mainstream media went on overdrive with two incidents – Dadri where a 50-year-old Mohammad Akhlaq was “allegedly lynched for eating beef.” The entire country outraged and mainstream media fed to this frenzy with headlines such as these.

Dadri_Mob_kills_man,_injures_son_over_‘rumours’_that_they_ate_beef_The_Indian_Express_-_2015-11-24_15.58.10

However, a few days ago, it emerged that the Dadri incident might have had nothing to do with beef or religion, rather it could have been a personal grudge which led to Mohammad Akhlaq’s murder, which had been given Communal Colours

CUEfDxvUcAEJsqB

Once again, the mainstream media and all those shouting “intolerance” or “minorities under attack” have remained quiet and have not issued any apology.

Dalits

Another news that made headlines was the “alleged” killing of two Dalit children who were burned to death by upper caste Rajputs in Sunpedh, a village in Faridabad near Delhi. Once again the media went on overdrive and claimed “intolerance.”

Caste_violence_Two_Dalit_children_burnt_alive_in_Faridabad_revenge_killing,_mother_critical_-_Firstpost_-_2015-11-24_16.03.04

Only recently it has emerged that the fire had actually started from inside the house and not outside.

Faridabad_Fire_that_killed_Dalit_kids_started_in_room,_not_outside,_say_Forensic_experts_The_Indian_Express_-_2015-11-24_16.05.35

No one debating on TV, claiming ‘intolerance’ against minorities have come forward to apologize for this misplaced outrage on this issue yet.

Intolerance

This brings us to the final part of the sham and manufactured outrage on so called “intolerance” in our country. As I have stated above out of the three murders, two happened under Congress and one under BJP, however Nayantara Sahgal the niece of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru (obvious Congress connection) started this whole trend of returning awards – Award Wapsi – as a means of protesting against murders that had taken place a while back, she squarely blamed “Hindutva” (without any proof) for the murder, and at stake was Bihar elections.

Nehru’s_niece_returns_Akademi_award,_slams_‘dangerous_Hindutva’_india_Hindustan_Times_-_2015-11-24_16.13.12

Outrage over the murder of an eminent writer like Kalburgi does deserve outrage and condemnation, yet why did Nayantara chose to blame “Hindutva,” instead of questioning the current Karnataka government (run by Congress) on why they chose to remove his security cover?

Prof_Kalburgi_murder_Why_was_security_withdrawn_-_Oneindia_-_2015-11-24_16.14.56

Following Nayantara, 34 writers of various hues and cries and directors returned their award. But as most people active on twitter had expected, all the Award Wapsi drama ended the day Bihar election results were declared.

How did India go on to become tolerant overnight?

Now, Mr. Aamir Khan said, “I am alarmed, my wife suggested moving out of India” indicating how intolerant India has become. There are two issues, 1. Ms Kiran Rao who is the wife of Aamir Khan has every right to her opinion, and if they feel so threatened they are more than welcome to leave. 2. While Ms. Rao and Mr. Khan feel threatened in India due to rising ‘intolerance,’ here is what the wife of recently Martyred Col. Santosh Mahadik…

CUktb8wVEAE278K

India is one of the most beautiful, diverse and tolerant countries in the world, and the fact is that instances of communal riots have come down since Modi government took over.

24_11_2015_001_008

However, there is a concentrated efforts to undermine the current government, at the peril of our country.

We can chose to believe what we want to, however we should not allow people with vested interests to weaken the core strength of our country i.e. UNITY IN DIVERSITY

Jai Hind

The Azadpur-Prembari Pul elevated corridor and Kejriwal’s claims

sandip
-
0

The Azadpur-Prembari Pul flyover road was inaugurated on 10 November 2015. It was celebrated as a unique project that used less money (various reports suggest expense of Rs 140 – Rs 150 crore) than estimated (Rs 247 crore). Media also celebrated Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Union Minister Harsh Vardhan congratulating previous Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit for initiating the project. However Kejriwal smartly added that only 20-30 percent of the work was completed by the Dikshit government and that the remaining was done by AAP government as shown here. He also claimed this as evidence of an ‘honest government’ as shown here. Because Delhi was under Central government rule through the Lieutenant Governor for a good 12 months, this raises some questions about Kejriwal’s and media’s claims. Let us do some investigations.

Azadpur-Prembari Pul corridor project was initiated by the Sheila Dikshit government. Both Kejriwal and Harsh Vardhan have also said the same thing and facts also prove this – so that’s very clear. Construction started in July 2013. Dikshit government ended in December 2013, followed by the famous 49 day Kejriwal government. This was followed by President’s rule from February 2014 to February 2015, for a whole year. Now let us examine Kejriwal’s claim – as per media reports, he claimed that 20-30% work of the corridor was done during Dikshit’s time and the rest (70-80%) was done during Kejriwal’s time. This can be possible only if 0% work was done by the PWD during President’s rule. In other words, the PWD under the Lieutenant Governor’s rule stopped constructing the flyover and restarted it as soon as AAP came to power again. Though plausible, the question is, how likely is it realistically? The answer for this can be given by the PWD, but I don’t have access to all their documents. For argument sake, let’s agree with Kejriwal. However, a screenshot of Delhi PWD website as shown below says that 64% of work was completed in March 2015 at an expense of Rs. 94.35 crores. aap-flyoverIf we believe the PWD website, only 36 % was remaining to be completed by November 2015 and was probably completed at an expense of approximately Rs 48 crores. But 36% is very different from 80%. So did Kejriwal lie? Or did media mis-report him? Both media and Kejriwal cannot be right at the same time.

Another implication of Kejriwal’s claim is that the lower expense of the project was because his government was honest. While even 36% of the remaining work could have been corrupted and probably wasn’t is a good thing about his government. But is it right to not acknowledge the ‘honesty’ of previous governments under which 64% of the work was done? Interestingly, a report in Dailypioneer shown here says that 28 per cent of the cost reduction was possible due to change in technology used in the project, 6 per cent in the bidding process and the remaining 66 per cent due to fall in cement and steel prices. Of course it can be argued that dishonest officials and politicians would have stolen the money saved from lower cement and steel prices but is that enough to claim that the saving was all due to ‘an honest government’?

Please don’t get me wrong. Being able to complete a project at a cost much less than expected is a fantastic achievement. And let us all hope that more projects will have a similar fate. But shouldn’t the facts be presented to the people as they are? Let us excuse politicians from telling the truth and grant them the liberty to manipulate facts. But shouldn’t main stream media be more responsible and do some fact finding? Or is that not part of journalism?Does modern Indian journalism only involves printing whatever material is provided by a news agency and manipulating facts for vested interests?

How the political and intellectual class have made the Hindu-Muslim relations complex

varsha
-
0

I was born in a lower middle class Jain family about 31 years ago. For 17 years, we stayed in a narrow galli, an intersection on M.G.Road in Kolkata’s Burra Bazaar area. The locality used to be heavily populated with both Hindus and Muslims. Our building was placed in such a way that we were surrounded on three sides with Muslim households. The loud speaker for azaan was right behind my house; azaan was a part of our daily experience.

Since the lane was narrow, during Durga Puja, Kali Puja, Saraswati Puja, etc. pandals used to take up its entire breadth. Often during Eid, mehfils were organised and shamiyanas would be built, much the same way as the pandal. Every year, before Eid, a goat would appear at the shop run by one of the Muslim neighbours, at the corner of the street. I remember, while crossing that shop on our way to school, how we used to giggle at the goat, “Ye bechara jaane wala hai thode dino mein”. And, during Muharram, I remember getting scared at the sight of people’s bloodied backs.

One of the bigger Puja pandals of Kolkata used to be erected at Mohammad Ali Park near my house. On Eid, the road running parallel to this park used to be shut for traffic for morning namaaz. During India-Pakistan matches, there used to be tension in the bylanes of my galli – because some Muslim neighbours would invariably support Pakistan. Sometimes, there would be a minor scuffle also.

My mother tells me that during the riots of 1992-93, though everyone was prepared for the worst, Muslims in our neighbourhood, whom we used to chat with from our bedroom window during curfew, assured us that they wouldn’t let anything happen to us. Our galli escaped the riots, like many others.

From a kid I became an adult in these bylanes, watching people make adjustments for each other. In college, because I didn’t have enough money then, I used to often share my coffee with someone so that I would have to pay half its price. The person with whom I used to share that coffee, which by the way cost just Rs.5 then, was a Muslim. We used to spend hours at each other’s homes, studying together. Her mother would cook food for me and themselves in different vessels because I was a vegetarian. In winters, I would look forward to the kahwa they used to serve after lunch.

When I got my first job at a stock broking firm, my senior, who supervised and trained me, was a Muslim. Actually, there were a lot of Muslims in that small office. During Ramzaan, evenings were a jolly affair as iftaar would be laid out in the conference room and everyone would take part. Diwali puja and Mahurat trading were enjoyed much the same way. In my present job, many of my colleagues and even my reporting manager are Muslim.

When I started earning, I adopted a baby through an NGO. Adoption basically meant funding the kid’s expenses according to one’s ability. I used to send money for this child’s education. His name was Roze Khan. I used to get progress reports with postcards on which the child would scribble something. Seeing the illegibly written alphabet on those postcards was a beautiful experience. I supported Roze for about three years until circumstances brought me to a point where I could not support even myself for a while.

A lot happened in between and then I finally arrived in Mumbai. For about two weeks, until I found a place for myself, I stayed at a friend’s house – again a Muslim. When I moved to Thane, after my wedding, the society in which I lived was a mix of Muslims, Bohras, Gujaratis and Marathis. The man I married used to live happily with a Pakistani Muslim among others, back in the US. He considers an Iraqi Muslim colleague like his elder brother.

My in-laws’ house is in Howrah, West Bengal. It is one of the most densely populated places of India, housing both Muslims and Hindus. In fact, the area has a huge concentration of Marwaris and Jains. Culturally, there cannot be a starker contrast. Beef is sold openly (as it is legal in West Bengal). All festivals of each religion are celebrated with fervor. At the same time, during India-Pakistan matches there is always tension and crude bomb blasts are not uncommon if India wins. The amazing thing is people expect this to happen, and there is no shock value in these bombings or scuffles.

There is nothing unique about what I have written above. It is more or less the story of every Indian; this is how we live – adjustment and tolerance, despite our differences, culturally and politically. In fact, the very reason why we move on after each riot – and there have been way too many, though the media remembers only one – is because of this ethos. Not every Muslim in Gujarat is ghettoized in Juhapura, like the media will tell you. They have moved on wherever they were, just like their Hindu neighbours whose loss of lives and property doesn’t even figure in media’s riot reports.

The mob that killed Akhlaq in Dadri was Hindu, but so were his neighbours who were the first to attempt to help him, though they failed. I am yet to find anyone I know who has not condemned this incident. Yet, instead of treating it as an exception which it really was, this incident is being used to define India. Instead of treating this as a one-off heinous, motivated crime, it is being projected as a practice. Not that such incidents haven’t happened before, but media and intellectuals outrage when it suits them. And, to assume that one man or one party could brainwash a billion people (i.e. if at all they are trying to do any such thing), is an insult to the latter. It not only reeks of this ‘eminent’ club’s arrogance, but also its stupidity.

Neighbours help Muslim family in Bisada escape mob

Dadri lynching: Akhlaq’s last call was to his Hindu childhood friend for help

In every job that I have taken up, and I have taken up many, I have seen many Muslim colleagues going for namaaz every Friday during office timings. During Ramzaan, they go for namaaz every day. Special arrangements are made in offices for iftaars. I haven’t seen a Hindu asking for or being allowed to take time off from office to go to temple.

Azaan is not a particularly pleasant thing to hear when it wakes you up from deep sleep at dawn (though I personally like it when it is recited well), and it is not even part of your religion. Yet, no one ever complains. We may not wear burqa, we may not wear skull caps, but we do not stop others from wearing them. There are probably more Hindus visiting Haji Ali and Ajmer Shareef every day than even Muslims. During Ramzaan, one might want to do a survey of how many Hindus are found on Mohammad Ali Road in Mumbai, savouring the delicacies.

You have to go only as far as Bollywood to realize how little a role religion plays for the common man in India, when it comes to public life. Nobody cares about the religion of a person before buying tickets of his movies and eventually making him a superstar. If today Shah Rukh Khan and Aamir Khan cry victim, in my opinion, it is only because they are astute businessmen, actors in their fading years, who will do whatever it takes to stay relevant.

Hindu-Muslim chemistry in India is a complex affair, to some extent naturally, but largely because of the mess created by our political and intellectual class. Neither of the two religions can claim to be exclusively secular or communal. The man on the street is aware of this reality and knows how to handle it. We somehow manage to put every tragedy behind to go on with our lives. And, that is the beauty of India. But, there is a parallel universe in which the media and intellectuals live.

The intellectual’s yardstick of secularism and “Idea of India” is all about wearing or not wearing skulls caps, attending or not attending iftaars. If you haven’t married a Muslim, you aren’t that secular. If you haven’t attached “bhai” to a Muslim name, you aren’t secular. If you are a practicing Hindu, you are not secular enough. A Muslim saving a Hindu is pathbreaking; Hindus making adjustments for Muslims is news.

The media and intellectuals have an agenda to fulfil, and we have a life to live. They are secular; we are Indians. For them, tolerance is a fashion statement. For us, it is a way of life.

The states where cow slaughter is legal in India

To Shahrukh Khan – ‘Secularism’ Is Counter-Patriotic

PS: I feel sick to mention the word, Muslim, so many times instead of just people or their names. But, such is the nature of discourse today that if one wants to respond, she has to get dirty. What is also pathetic is that for the media, secularism, minorty, tolerance – everything is in reference to Muslims alone. Therefore, this post mentions only them.

Note: This article was first published on my personal blog

What are “intellectuals” doing? Fighting intolerance or stereotyping Indians?

Rocker Marx
-
0

OK without rambling around unnecessarily I’ll get to the point- “INTOLERANCE”

This growing intolerance in our country is so mysterious, evading that everyone except a common individual (be he/she of any religion or region) going about their everyday routine of earning hard earned livelihood can see it. Only a single shade of elites (be it in politics, art, literature, academics or journalism) have the eye to see it.

And as one barely is able to see faults in him/herself for sure the reason a common individual like me who’s roaming around with a Sikh and Muslim friend in the middle of a overcrowded streets in a city in India where people of almost every religion is going about their ways without caring less about the religion of other in their interactions, can’t see ourselves and our country getting intolerant as it is we who have become intolerant. Who else they address when they say India has become intolerant? (What is India if not its common people?)

And as only a person (or group of such individuals) who doesn’t mingle with us the common toiling Indian and stays standing far away can see and appraise this fault of intolerance in us as we are not enlightened enough to see our own faults.

May be the reason why even after so much intolerance (which makes these elites feel unsafe in country), everyone instead of going about their day is not breaking into a rage and spontaneously killing and attacking each other is because mutual intolerances cancels out.

Taking this further,

Is questioning criticizing or logically refuting some one’s biased irrational claims, intolerance (not including the blatant direct verbal abuse and name calling)?

Should one silently get labelled as anything these so called elite intellectuals say without giving any factual background. Doesn’t one have the right to ask the basis of such brazen statements. And if one do asks, then one becomes intolerant as they claim?

That’s like “chit bhi meri pat bhi mari”

I don’t support the personal abuses and attacks on Aamir in the tone that he should be thankful for what this same country which he’s calling intolerant has made him because he didn’t force anyone to spend money watching his movies.

But my point by calling the country intolerant, it is actually the common man who’s only concern is to get a living out of the day gets pointed as intolerant and is made to share the burden of guilt with the actual culprits. And we all know how bad generalizations and stereotyping can get it won’t hurt the actual culprits but the common individual who has nothing to do with is gets needlessly mingled.

1...886887888...890Page 887 of 890

Contact: [email protected]

About us

User generated chapter of OpIndia. Selected articles submitted here are published at main English or Hindi websites of OpIndia.

ऑपइंडिया

OpIndia

© OpIndia.com