On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 5:39 PM, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 29 Feb 2008 12:15:31 am Charles Haynes wrote: > > So why is the official reaction to violent intimidation by right wing > > looney thugs one of appeasement? Is not what they did both clearly > > illegal and offensive to anyone who believes in a free society? Why is > > there not outraged reaction? What is it that keeps people of > > conscience quiet? > > The people who are doing the vandalizing in a mob consider themselves "people > of conscience" and their conscience tells them that their religious beliefs > are being messed with. In the absence of good opinion polls and with 50-60% > illiteracy it could well turn out that there are tens of millions of Indians > who are actually sympathetic to the views of the ABVP (the vandal) about the > Ramayama. In which case the sentiment is hardly a "fringe". Only the violence > is by a fringe. > > There are two separate issues here: > 1) The truth or otherwise of the vandals' (The ABVP in this case) accusation > 2) the issue of vandalism
Hm. I'm probably guilty of either cultural insensitivity, or at least ignorance, but as a free speech absolutist I'm not sure that (1) is actually an issue. I don't care how offensive the book is, how can violence, assault, and destruction of property be legitimate ways to show your displeasure? Is book burning ever appropriate in a nominally free, pluralistic, secular democracy? -- Charles
