[I.<<How did a snarlingly communal, pseudo-nationalistic, anti-intellectual, misogynistic, Hindu chauvinist party like the BJP get a crack at reshaping the country in its own image, so that Indian democracy is in what feels like a death spiral? In part, because it does reflect a large section of society, but also because many, whose job it is to speak truth to power, failed to do so. Many people told themselves that Mr Modi wouldn't dare to be himself once he was Prime Minister; that treating him like a Prime Minister would make him prime ministerial material. You cannot downplay inconvenient truths and just hope that things will work out.>>
(Excerpted from the comment at sl. no. I below.) II. <<Shambhulal does not suffer from mental illness. He was cold and composed while he hacked Afrazul to death. But what was Afrazul’s fault? He is a poor man from a poor village in West Bengal. Many from his native village come to Rajasthan and other states as labourers. Afrazul was almost 50 years old, and he was not falsely enticing a Hindu-woman to marriage or converting her. ... Intolerance is at its peak now. I have discussed irrational Hindu rituals and oppression of women earlier but never received such threats. For me, humanity, equality, liberty and generosity have always been greater than any religion. Because I have criticised one specific religion does not mean that I like all other religions. If religious notions do not change with time, religion will continue to be intolerant. Then people will have to discard religion for humanity, or cleverly assimilate humanity into religion.>> (Excerpted from the comment at sl. no. II below.)] I/II. https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/in-response-to-pratap-bhanu-mehtas-assessment-of-modi-1787138 In Response To Pratap Bhanu Mehta's Assessment Of Modi Mitali Saran Published: December 16, 2017 18:42 IST Here are some thoughts about a recent column by Pratap Bhanu Mehta. Mehta's piece, 'Power and Insecurity' (Indian Express), is spot on. He excoriates the Prime Minister's Gujarat campaign as "dripping in communal innuendo", and says the PM "now wants to shed whatever last veneer of deniability was left and claim full-throated responsibility for spreading this poison." He talks about "the diminution of the moral stature of the office" and that "the politics of hope have been replaced entirely by the politics of fear". He says that "A combination of great power and a deep sense of insecurity does not bode well" and that Mr Modi, "instead of navigating constitutional values, ordinary decencies of discourse and civility, to safe harbour, is now bent on creating new storms...In shoring his power through conflict he is taking India down the road to ruin." Every word is true. But these words come out of some assumptions which we must learn from, if we are to reverse and pre-empt majoritarianism. First, we seem to assume that high office has a salutary effect on those who hold it. Prime Minister Modi and President Trump in the US are excellent examples of the fact that the office does not make the person - the person reshapes the office. How did a snarlingly communal, pseudo-nationalistic, anti-intellectual, misogynistic, Hindu chauvinist party like the BJP get a crack at reshaping the country in its own image, so that Indian democracy is in what feels like a death spiral? In part, because it does reflect a large section of society, but also because many, whose job it is to speak truth to power, failed to do so. Many people told themselves that Mr Modi wouldn't dare to be himself once he was Prime Minister; that treating him like a Prime Minister would make him prime ministerial material. You cannot downplay inconvenient truths and just hope that things will work out. Second, we falsely invest position with moral authority. Power does not come pre-loaded with morality-it is only power. The people who wield it determine its stature. Yes, Mr Modi has demeaned the office, but then he has a long track record of personal attack. Yes, he dripped communal innuendo, but he's done that in every election. Yes, he uses the politics of fear, but fear and hate are the wellspring of Hindutva. Yes, he is insecure, as is every person with a lot to lose, and every pride-hungry Hindutvavadi. No, he isn't into constitutional values, and neither is the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh where he was politically raised. All of this was very well known and well demonstrated by the time he came to campaign for the 2014 general election. Third, deniability is a political strategy that rests on the credibility of the denier. Denial does not make things go away. Fig leaves merely hide what everyone knows is there. We have always been a conservative society hostile enough to minorities, gender justice, and individual rights that maintaining constitutional principles is an uphill battle. It seems to me that Mr Modi first threw off the fig leaf in 2002. Since 2014, the BJP, backed by a brute majority and with RSS loyalists seeded in every institution, imposing food bans, encouraging religious bullying, and subverting individual rights, has been its truest self. This isn't new. Fourth, we assume that this government was sworn in to protect the constitution, but anyone who didn't see this as the wolf entering in sheep's clothing is deluded. It is committed to a religious Hindu chauvinist state with a defined social structure, not to India's Western-inspired, pluralistic, individual rights-based constitution. How can we say this? Because that's the definition of Hindutva. Please, good people, read V Savarkar and MS Golwalkar. The latter's "Bunch of Thoughts" is filled with prettily phrased hate that will enable you to draw a straight line from the RSS's revered 'Guruji' to what we're seeing now: forced citizen subjugation via things like Aadhaar and vigilantism; the nexus between power and godmen; the domino-like capitulation of institutions; the trampling of rights; and minority and gender intimidation through violence. It is a mistake to respect and submit to office and institution solely on the assumption that they must surely deserve it. Office and institution are only as good as the people who occupy them, and they do not inherit respect; they must constantly earn it. Vigilance and straight talk will make us a better country. I'll leave you with a useful cliche: You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If you can't or won't relate to that very Western idiom, just think of the story about the Brahman and the snake. (Mitali Saran is a freelance writer and columnist based in New Delhi.) II. https://theprint.in/2017/12/14/hindus-becoming-extremists-taslima-nasreen/ Why are Hindus trying to prove that they can become ISIS-like extremists: Taslima Nasreen TASLIMA NASREEN 14 December, 2017 (Representational image) Activists of Bajrang Dal during a bike rally in Jammu, India. Photo by Nitin Kanotra/Hindustan Times via Getty Images This is the kind of politics that divided India once, and may divide India again, writes author Taslima Nasreen. I have not watched how terrorists hacked to death the Bangladeshi freethinkers Abhijit, Bijoy, Washikur, Deepan. But I have seen how Shambhulal brutally murdered Afrazul in Rajasthan, courtesy his nephew’s video on the internet. The murder-video was broadcast on the internet, just like ISIS does. ISIS knows that in their strongholds in Syria, no police will come to arrest them. Shambhulal probably also thought that no one would punish him. Both kindness and savageness exist inside human beings. Some people mute the savage in them, others the kindness. Shambhulal does not suffer from mental illness. He was cold and composed while he hacked Afrazul to death. But what was Afrazul’s fault? He is a poor man from a poor village in West Bengal. Many from his native village come to Rajasthan and other states as labourers. Afrazul was almost 50 years old, and he was not falsely enticing a Hindu-woman to marriage or converting her. Friends of Shambhulal have said that the he used to love a Hindu woman but that woman had a relationship with another Muslim man. However, that man was not Afrazul. This woman once ran away with her Muslim lover to West Bengal and Shambhulal went after them to bring her back. Apparently, he got beaten up by some Bengali Muslim workers there. Many women ran off from Shambhulal’s village and married Muslim men. Some say Shambhulal killed the first Muslim man he got his hands on and killed him to instill fear in Muslim men who marry Hindu women to convert. The question is: how did Shambhulal gain this ISIS-like courage? Are there other people like him, who support his opposition to Muslims? He assumed he wouldn’t be condemned, but praised. When I criticised the brutal murder-video on Twitter, many people rose up to support him. Earlier when I condemned gau rakshaks beating innocent Muslims to death, I faced similar ire from the Hindus. They threatened me that I must not utter a single word against Hindus while sitting in India. If I don’t appreciate Hindu culture and traditions, then I should leave the country at once. Intolerance is at its peak now. I have discussed irrational Hindu rituals and oppression of women earlier but never received such threats. For me, humanity, equality, liberty and generosity have always been greater than any religion. Because I have criticised one specific religion does not mean that I like all other religions. If religious notions do not change with time, religion will continue to be intolerant. Then people will have to discard religion for humanity, or cleverly assimilate humanity into religion. The more religious intolerance increases in India, the more the non-religious people are hated and anti-women sentiments celebrated. This is why the release of Padmavati was stopped or people who kill Muslims for eating beef can enjoy impunity. Or why the people who murdered Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh cannot be traced. I do not want to accept this changed India and I hope these changes are temporary. Popular television channels or newspapers treated Shambhulal’s murder and the video like it was just another everyday murder. But it was not. ISIS terrorists wear masks when they kill, Shambhulal did not. The point of the video is that Muslims can be killed easily. They can be killed because they invaded India, destroyed temples and plundered villages, converted Hindus, took over a Hindu land and ruled over Hindus. And now, they have commenced ‘love jihad.’ Muslim men are apparently faking love to marry Hindu women and converting them to Islam. This is what Shambhulal wants to stop. He will not let Hindu women marry Muslim men under any circumstance. In opposition to ‘love jihad’, Hindus are doing their own ‘ghar wapsi’ where Muslims should leave behind Islam and accept Hinduism as their faith. Both ‘ghar wapsi’ and ‘love jihad’ are equally deplorable ideas and true love between a Hindu-Muslim couple should not be denied or made the subject of humiliation. However, the question is: why should Afrazul pay for the mistakes of Muslim invaders in the past? On 6 December, 1992, after Hindu fundamentalists destroyed the Babri Masjid, Muslim fundamentalists in Bangladesh took revenge by burning down a Hindu temple. Why did innocent Hindus in Bangladesh pay for the crimes of the Hindu fundamentalists in India? And those who think innocent Hindus are not responsible for Babri Masjid demolition, do they also think that innocent labourers like Afrazul should not have to pay for Muslim invaders? If people consider this fair, then they believe in divisive politics. This is the kind of politics that divided India once, and may divide India again. Supporters of Shambhulal want to prove that Hindus too can become extremists like Muslim extremists. Shambhulal may be in jail, but thousands of Shambhulals are walking about free with their anger, disgust, and hatred. How many of these people can be jailed to maintain peace? How many Muslim people can be liberated from their daily fears and apprehensions? We are all Indians, South Asians — religion, caste, language, history do not constitute our identity. Our love and compassion is our identity. Taslima Nasreen is a celebrated author and commentator. (Translated from Bengali by Neera Majumdar) -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
