"the American magazine with British  spelling"
 
The Economist
 
 
Indian politics
An illiberal turn
Hangings, limits on speech and intolerant politicians mark a  troubling 
moment for liberalism in India
Feb 16th 2013 |  DELHI
 
 
AFTER two years of wary peace, Kashmir is under siege again. This week the  
authorities banned newspapers, blocked television and the internet, and 
imposed  a curfew in Srinagar, the summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir, and 
beyond.  Police battled with protesting youths, three of whom died. 
It was all sadly predictable after the hanging on February 9th of a 
Kashmiri,  Afzal Guru, in Delhi. His family was officially told by post fully 
two 
days  later, and so far has been refused his body. Convicted for his part in 
a  terrorist attack in 2001 on India’s parliament, Mr Guru had been on death 
row  for years. Recently, politicians grew anxious to see him hanged.
 
Once Pranab Mukherjee became India’s president last year, it was assumed 
that  an unofficial moratorium on the death penalty would end. November 
brought the  first execution in eight years, of Ajmal Kasab, a Pakistani 
convicted 
for his  role in a dreadful terrorist attack on Mumbai in 2008. India’s 
public and press  cheered. 
Almost immediately Narendra Modi, a hardline figure who is fast rising on 
the  right of Indian politics, suggested that Mr Guru should hang too. Mr 
Modi, of  the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is seen by many as a likely leader 
of India  after the next general election, due in 2014. More hangings are 
possible. Omar  Abdullah, Kashmir’s embattled chief minister and an ally of 
the ruling Congress  Party, says authorities must show executions are not 
political, targeting only  Muslims. Why now delay executions of three Tamils or 
a Punjabi, all convicted  for assassinations of high-profile politicians? 
Politics are at play. Last month the home minister, Sushil Kumar Shinde,  
clumsily accused the BJP of promoting “saffron”, ie, Hindu, terrorism in 
India.  Furious, the opposition said it would boycott meetings with him and 
accused the  government of being friendly to Islamist terrorists. Soon after, 
Mr Shinde  suddenly announced that Mr Guru had swung. It was, says Pratap 
Bhanu Mehta, a  liberal columnist, an appallingly opportunistic move. 
To some, it fits a troubling pattern. Politics are today more moderate than 
 in the 1990s, when communal violence flared, or than under Indira Gandhi’s 
state  of emergency in the 1970s. Yet a host of incidents suggests a newly 
intolerant  trend. 
Authorities readily limit expression. Tamil Nadu’s government banned a film 
 unless it was re-edited to placate Muslim critics. Also hoping to please 
Muslim  voters, regional politicians routinely bar Salman Rushdie, whose “The 
Satanic  Verses” prompted a fatwa by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini,  from 
public appearances: West Bengal’s chief minister, Mamata Banerjee, is the  
latest culprit. And politicians ban books they dislike, as Mr Modi did in  
Gujarat with a biography of Mahatma Gandhi, the state’s best-known son.  
Religious leaders are often intolerant. A teenage girl band in Kashmir this  
month 
hung up its guitars after the Grand Mufti, the highest-ranking clergyman,  
called its members “unislamic”, and vitriolic abuse spread online. 
In November police arrested a woman in Maharashtra state for grumbling, on  
Facebook, that Mumbai had been shut for the funeral of Bal Thackery, a 
thuggish,  hard-right Hindu politician. Police then arrested a young friend who 
“
liked” her  comment. Supposedly, they had hurt religious feelings. In 
recent weeks prudish  Hindu protesters marched on a gallery in Delhi and 
threatened one in Bangalore,  demanding the removal of paintings of nudes. 
Intolerance is not new ..... But politicians pandering to interest  groups 
are perfectly happy to limit speech. Last year over 8,400 protesters  
against a nuclear-power plant in Tamil Nadu were charged with sedition.  
Cartoonists critical of politicians have also been charged with the same  
offence. 
Last month a sociologist at the Jaipur Literature Festival said  corruption 
was rampant among the lower castes, who qualify for certain  privileges in 
government and education. Egged on by a politician, police  prepared charges. 
Public figures rarely defend individuals’ “right to offend”, as Manish  
Tewari, the information minister, said on February 9th. The reason is that  
politicians compete for blocks of votes defined by religion or caste. Block  
solidarity grows when leaders declaim against even a mild, or imagined,  
offence. 
Mr Mehta says that mobilisation around hurt feelings is as old as Indian  
democracy. Yet three new factors may now be at play. Increasingly lively 
media,  especially cable-news shows, thrive on shallow, angry debate. They help 
stoke  controversy by seeking out extreme voices and those ready to be 
offended. 
Second, regional leaders are growing more influential, and readier to stir 
up  their main supporters. Whereas a national party may see virtue in 
compromise or  in such values as free speech, a regional figure usually gains 
by 
stoking  indignation. Mayawati, a former chief minister of Uttar Pradesh and 
a leader of  dalits (untouchables), is a case in point. 
Last comes the role of a growing, urban middle class. Mostly young and less 
 likely to define themselves by religion or caste, in theory such voters 
might  favour a more liberal politics. In practice, the evidence is mixed. 
Many who  decried the gang rape and murder of a young woman in Delhi in 
December called  for public hangings, and even torture of the perpetrators. 
Others 
want vigilante  squads to roam the cities. 
Such voters may not reliably prove to be liberal. A rising middle class,  
convinced of Indian might, may become just as nationalistic, for instance,  
towards Pakistan as voters were in the past. Along with India’s press, the  
middle class was notably bellicose over a spat on the border last month in 
which  two Indian soldiers and three Pakistanis died.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to