I write this as I was rather amused by the "liberal" views expressed on the Mangalore episode in today's edition of "We the People". As someone who takes immense pride in calling himself a liberal, I was surprised and angered by the "liberal" response after the Mangalore episode. The Pink Chaddi campaign, organised by a group of elite indians, amused and irritated me at the same time. I was devastated today when I found Ram Guha, one of the greatest intellectual of our times, speaking the language of "pink chaddhi activists". I could see the manifestation of liberal fundamentalism in the face of Hindu fundamentalism.
The Muthalik episode has divided urban idea into two halves. (Rural India doesn't care) Students, teachers, professionals, politicians, intellectuals are being called upon to choose sides : Pink panties Vs Khanki chaddhis.The problem is that making such a choice is a lot like making a choice between Bush and Saddam or IDF and Hezbollah.
What happened in Mangalore is deplorable. The Hindu right ,which has seldom understood the language of democracy, unleashed it's terror on innocent Mangloreans. The state turned a blind eye as the BJP smelled blood: a new issue before the polls.
However the intellectual debate that followed changed tracks and focused on something deeper: the concept of "moral policing". I was surprised by the the moral indignation,shown by the " liberals", about the concept of moral policing. They spoke as if the concept of "personal freedom" is absolute and sacrosanct. Can we name a society that doesn't indulge in moral policing? When the state stops a person from flashing in the public, is it not infringing on his personal freedom? Will feminists see that act of masturbation in public as an expression of personal freedom? When I state it to my feminists friends, they argue that this is something that causes unacceptable psychological harm to others, while the act of wears a mini skirt/going to bar is harmless. However the very idea of "causing unacceptable harm to others" is subjective and differs from person to person. A person coming from the interiors of Budelhand might be scandalized looking at women in tank tops on the streets of Delhi. Ideas regarding acceptable public behaviour can change very rapidly as we move from Malad to Bandra, from Murshidabad to Kolkata or even when we move from Sahajanabad to Luytens Delhi. Now to which sets of values should our laws, action, political behavior conform in a country. As a unapologetic democrat , I feel that it is natural the laws should reflect the values of the majority. I realize that such a view has it problems.By stretching my argument one can justify the acts of Narendra Modi or Buddhadev Bhhatacharya, but is there a better( fair and just) way of dealing with this problem of preference aggregation. However I often feel Indian laws, reaction of the media and polity reflect the ideas, morality and aspirations on a "liberal" elite and doesn't represent the views of India as a whole. Since the time of Nehru (remember the Hindu Code Bill), the ideas of an liberal oligarchy has been thrust down the throat of an unwilling majority. If this continues to happen we will soon and up in a situation like Turkey. Nothing helped the radical Islam in Turkey more than the western ideas of modernity imposed on unwilling masses by Attaturk and his successors.Sagarika Ghose mentioned in one of her blogs that she fears that India might end up being like Iran where a coterie of elite liberals had their way before 1979. If we liberals want our idea of an idea of an ideal society to prevail, we will have to reach out to the millions who don't share our vision of an ideal society. Have the liberals lost faith in the democratic process or have they lost faith in the average Indian? "Pink Panties" don't help. A few people get to score brownie points but the chasm between the two India's widen. Gandhi's country should be mature enough to understand that two wrong never make a right."Liberal" intolerance in face of "Hindu" intolerance will only create a more divided India , rather than the liberal paradise we envision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
This post makes false assumptions like stating that liberals consider personal freedom to be sacrosanct. This is either ignorance of liberal tenets or intellectual dishonesty. Moreover, each time someone goes back to the hackneyed concept of "everything is subjective", it wants to make me groan at that new fad of post-modernism where everything is questioned for the sake of questioning alone and no alternatives are ever suggested. Unfortunately, though we can restrict public masturbation, we cannot restrict intellectual masturbation like that of the author of this post. And let me reiterate that seeing a girl wearing a tank top may scandalise a person but that doesn't amount to pyshoclogical damage. Public masturbation or flashing amounts to sexual harassment. Of course, the author is more concerned about his perceived right to display his gentitals to unwilling females.
psychological*
genitals*
An interesting piece which deals with two very basic tenets (and as largely perceived which are radically apart) of modern society. The concepts of fundamentalism and liberalism are both socially constructed, and thus as much as any of those claim righteousness, they cannot be devoid of the grey areas. For any social ideologies, whatever that might be, a black and white characterization is impossible. And I do agree that subjectivity has a role to play.
As I understand, any ideology if carried far enough without questioing (even by it's ardent believers) is in the danger of becoming dogmatic. And it is then when liberals often give into uncritical behaviours which are often guided by the instincts of defending the tenet. At this point I suppose the psychological funtioning of liberals and fundamentalists lie on the two sides of a thin line, barely distinguisable.
Regarding moral policing, I really do not see that as grossly problematic. What's questionable is where and how it's being implemented. Freedom of expression is important, but at the same time in some ways checks and balances are also required. Otherwise the much cherished freedom actually becomes the frankenstine and kills the substrate where freedom is to be enjoyed.
The basic vision of any protest or struggle should be a positive one. While negative venoms often stir up the situation unlike anything else, but it does not ensure the sustence of the struggle, neither it's outcomes. Ideally liberals are visionaries. And thus people claiming themselves to be liberals also need to shoulder the responsibility of matured thinking and action.
Unfortunately my recent thought process always seems to find a materealistic angle to every issue. So I claim that the topic under discussion is not as complex as it looks. I would just like to make two points here.
Firstly, this Ram Sena (or laxman or whatever) can not be seen as just moral police. They have launched a movement. It may not be a peaceful movement but it is a movement nonetheless. And, like all other movements they have political and hegemonic designs.
Secondly, the only sensible thing that the so called liberals can do, is to try and reduce the political mileage that the Senas and Lashkars get out of this. Here the liberals have left a lot to be desired. In fact the liberals are showing no inclination to be liberal about anything!! I attribute this phenomenon to the dissoriented state of the Indian intelectuals. What with all these terror attacks and global meltdowns, panic and delerium has set in.
I agree that we can be a bit more reflective and not give in to the media led campaigns that have vested interests in some news over others. Recently a leading news channel corespondent was given a warning for ignoring their urban clientele and choosing to submit a story on an irrelevant agrarian issue.
Amidst all this the real issue of whether liberalism gives us a fair enough answer to the problem of cultural diversity in a state still remains unanswered.
Unfortunately we tend to overlook the imperatives of a liberal state in terms of social order and tend to emphasize only personal freedom. The strength of liberal state(at least in theory)is in its claim to neutrality to any cultural community. It is supposed to refrain from prescribing for its citizens any one good way of life and just ensure that people deal with each other fairly. So it is not an issue if we feel uncomfortable by the cultural practices of a different community as long as we tolerate the difference and do not take law in our hands.
But in practice state agencies have never been neutral. They tend to support, promote or choose to remain indifferent to one community over others. I would still like to believe(like a naive romantic nationalist)that there could be a more culturally sensitive democracy than the crude majoritarian democracy that the author is honestly but rather pessimistically espousing.
@SRESTHA..
couldn't agree more...
As always :)
@AMLAN
1.You are right when you say that the sena is not just a moral police. The sena doesn't have the mandate to act as a moral police, only the state has that right.It is indeed a movement by people who don't share the morals reflected by Indian laws and are thus trying to attract the attention of the state.The state can either listen to them and thir oponents or t can systematically ignore their view. If the latter is done,India will see many more mangalores in the days to come.
2."the only sensible thing that the so called liberals can do, is to try and reduce the political mileage that the Senas and Lashkars get out of this."
and how do you do that? By ignoring them?? The Harkat ul Mujaheedin is the product of such an approach of the Indian state towards Islamic voices in the ways. I think the better way is to engage in an dialogue with them and understand their grievances. I am not asking to to give in. I am just asking the Indian liberals not to show a holier than thou attitude and treat them as intellectually untouchable.You will be driving them out of the democratic process by doing so and the experience of Kashmir teaches us that the effects can be disastrous.
@SUCHETA
"And let me reiterate that seeing a girl wearing a tank top may scandalize a person but that doesn't amount to psychological damage."
and who decided that?? US investigators routinely "torture" Muslim captives in Abu Gharaib and Guantanamo Bay by showing them pictures of scantily dressed women.They wouldn't have done it if it didn't effect the prisoners psychologically.
The rest of your post is Feminist rant as usual-low in content,high on emotion :))
godfather,prothomei ami khamaprarthi engrejite comment na koray..asha kori tomar blog-r 'elitist' purity nashto hbe na amar bangla-engreji meshano lekhay.jaihok ram sena-r byapare 2 to point..firstly why are we seeing this attack in isolation?This attack has been preceeded by a series of attacks by the Hindu Right on minorities..and there have been also instances where Hindu boys and girls have been beaten up for 'mixing' with people from other religions.Don't you think that we should see these attacks as just a continuation of that trend?Secondly the thing that angered me so much about the Mangalore episode was the vigalantism on the ram sena's part.I would not have been so angered had they protested in the usual democratic manner-picketing,staging dharnas etc.I would have respected their right to dissent in that case.But the moment they resort to vigalantism they become a bunch of thugs for me.Just to make myself clear in this respect it would also have angered me if a mob had beaten up a person who was flashing..because in that case too it would have been vigalantism.Amar kache physical security sacrosanct tai karur protest jodi setake adversely affect kore ami seta mene nebo na.Coming to the pink chaddi campaign I completely agree with you that it is not only a frivolous campaign it is utterly stupid too.The liberals could have done a much better job if they had resorted to more serious and meaningful means of protest.Finally I am always for a dialogue or for engaging people with different ideas about what constitutes appropriate Indian culture....but trying to accomodate the Hindu Right in the process would be too much of a compromise for me..to quote you "we will have to reach out to the millions who don't share our vision of an ideal society." We can directly reach out to the masses without having to compromise with the loony right.btw Amlan has an interesting yardstick for determing whether one is a fundamentalist liberal or not and the criterion whether is one can objectively criticise Arundhati Roy or not?goda banglay Arundhati-r andho bhaokto kina....:)
P.S-tumi abar amar bhul id-te pathiyechile..amlan forward krlo bole pelam...amar sab kota id delete kore shudhu eta rakho-gabuisi@gmail.com
captives in Abu Gharaib and Guantanamo Bay by showing them pictures of scantily dressed women
Provide me with a source or a link to prove this statement. Moreover, let me state a principle of law in support of my statement. There is a standard of reasonableness frequently employed by the judiciary while deciding cases regarding the validity of legislation. The standard is that of the "reasonable man". I might feel outraged and psychologically damaged by the sight of men with flat noses...but I cannot proceed against men with flat noses because my idiosyncrasy is not considered reasonable. Obviously there cannot be a purely objective standard but we have to create a criteria otherwise no law or principle can ever be formulated and we'd all descend into a state of lawlessness. A scantily clad woman may be looked upon with disapproval because someone's cultural upbringing may dictate the dress code of women. But it is hardly rational to ask women to wear only sarees and salwars. If you think that you can enforce Talibanisation by demeaning liberalism, you have some serious issues. Don't use post-modernism as a shield to promote Taliban-like culture. Liberals do not seek to promote any culture or demote any other culture. They simply state that people should keep their preferences to themselves and not try to impose them upon others. Nobody ever said that personal freedom is sacrosanct and cannot be tampered with...on the other hand, one cannot expose liberty to constant onslaughts by religious factions. I think your post is an absolute rant and to expect rational arguments to discredit an irrational post is expecting a bit too much. Anyway, I have answered your questions.
@ARKA
1.You know it very well that I am more comfortable using Bengali as a medium of communication.Writing in English causes pain in all the wrong places.the only reason for writing in English is to reach out the non-bong population and "bongs" who don't understand Bengali.So you are most welcome to reply in Bengali...tui janish je i cannot affordto indulge in linguistic elitism.ami nije bhugtobhugi...
2.There is nothing much in your post that I disagree with.Ram Sena's actions are unacceptable since they didn't conform to democratic norms.However they should have the democratic right to express the opinion and liberals will do a great service to the liberal cause if they answer rather than ignoring the questions.
3.I am not asking the liberals to accommodate the loony Hindu right.I want liberal to engage with them.Let there be a battle of ideas.Let us not act as if they don't exist or as if they are a microscopic minority.
4.Arundhati amar pratham prem. premika r byapar e manush ektu irrationally act korbe setai swabhabik...:)
@SUCHETA
"Obviously there cannot be a purely objective standard but we have to create a criteria otherwise no law or principle can ever be formulated and we'd all descend into a state of lawlessness."
AGREED.
Thus we need the concept of a reasonable man?But who defines the parameters that define a reasonable man.God didn't announce it while creating human beings!!!! Every society has a different notion about it. While it reasonable to smoke marijuana in Holland,it is not so in India. So we as a society need to define it. The basic question is: " how should preferences be aggregated in a society with heterogeneous preferences?" May answer: majority (sorry, if that makes me a crude majoritarian.I cannot think of a rule which is more just). I am not sure what your answer is.I hope you will give me the answer in your next post.
But who defines the parameters that define a reasonable man.
I think I already addressed this point. In India, the ultimate arbiter of "reasonability" is the judiciary which is guided by certain constitutional principles that were formulated with common consensus. If you next question the authority of the judiciary, of the constitution, of the law in general...as I said, we would have to begin redefining every word in the dictionary and destroy the system we function within and re-build it according to our whims. That's perfectly fine with me but as of now, as a part of the system we're operating within, I have to consider certain definitions as given so that we're able to communicate without hair-splitting over each term and word we put into use.
Ashok, you also did not provide me with a source to substantiate your comment about Abu Ghraib. Prove it if you can. Otherwise it is a fabrication.
I am amazed by your unquestioned faith in judiciary . I hope you had similar faith in the legislature and the democratic process.
Constitutional principles change over time.The legislature has the right to amend constitution and often they do so under pressure of popular movements.
NB. The links would be coming. Need to do some intelligent searching on Google...
However I find it ridiculous that you find it difficult to believe that a conservative individual might find the act of looking at a naked woman painful.
not the exact thing that I mentioned but something similar:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/world/article.html?FBI_sexually_tortured_terror_suspect&in_article_id=531330&in_page_id=64
The guy felt tortured because he was shown porn films. I am sure most of ISIians who have commented on this post(including myself) will love to attend such a "torture session", but it was difficult for this guy as he is a devout muslim.
The only reason for posting this link is to show that morals differ..what is fun for me is painful for others.
Sorry, I cannot find the link to the guantanamo bay episode.It was about a pakistani cleric who was shown nude photographs and was asked to describe it in vivid detail.It was published in the Indian Express. Since I cannot provide the link just now, you are free to suspect that it is fabrication....
You are an attention-seeker. Thats
what you are.
You should be ashamed of yourself. How dare you compare Liberal fundamentalism to Hindu fundamentalism?
The Urban India is not divided into 2 halves. (haha how many halves can there be?)
Morals are memes. Only the ones that can adapt to the environment can survive. The liberal logic is the one seems more fun and catches on pretty easily. Especially with the English-educated class. Better or worse is subjective. All that matter is what survives. Debates only complicate the whole process.
If the intellectuals have chosen a side, for whatever reason, it means that side has good enough reasons ...
Stop what you are doing and choose a side. Don't attempt a debate and force people to think. You only end up confusing the natural order of things.
Oh boy!! I was under the impression that 'Me' and Ashokda were the same people. Fortunately i have now realised that they are actually at logerheads. But, I dont quite like the way you guys are talking about this issue. Clearly, you all are deviating bigtime, you are talking about what might and might not scandalize a man which has very little to do with Ram Sena. 'Me' is right so far as the futility of engaging in any dialogue with the Sena. Beating up pub goers is a dominant strategy for them. The political gains of so doing far exceeds their losses. So they will never listen to your talks. On the other hand ashokda is right that the liberals of this country need to engage the conservative sections in dialogue. This section (which is by far the majority) is the reason and incentives for people like the Sena. Eroding this support base is the only way out. But a deeper issue here is, exactly what is under attack? I believe that niether the feminists nor the liberals need to feel threatened. The only thing under attack by the Senas and Lashkars is tolerance and understanding. Ram Sena would relish it if the liberals and feminists come out with a firebrand response. After all their very existence depends on this division.
Icarus: Don't we all have brains? Do we have to follow the intellectuals blindly?
Ashok, porn is not the same as a scantily clad woman. Get your fundamentals right. Besides, if you find a woman clad in a sareee sexually arousing and want women not to wear sarees, is that reasonable?
I protest because you have deleted a post of mine. If you don't have the guts to argue honestly, don't argue. Deleting posts is intellectual dishonesty.
1.I don't want them to stop wearing saris if I find them problematic.However I do want them to stop wearing saris in public if an overwhelming majority of Indians find saris offensive.
2.Your post was deleted because it had nothing to do with the issue being discussed. You had meaninglessly attacked a friend of mine, whose only fault was that he choose to write in Bengali.I will continue to delete such posts in future.
3.how scantily should a person be dressed for a video to be labeled as porn? What is porn? Do you have an objective definition??
@AMLAN
Icarus is priyank chandra saxsena at his sarcastic best:) Check out his blog. He has a post on the same topic:
http://sergeantcrap.blogspot.com/2009/02/damn-immoral.html
Icarus:Well, Priyank you got me! The unabashed stupidity of the comment did sound a little odd to me though...but with all the radically simplistic opinions floating arround one can't rule out any possibility.
Unabashed stupidity? I take offense. See therein lies the problem. Once you realized it was me, you decided to accept AD's view that I am being sarcastic.
This is what its all about. You believe and accept the intellectual view....
Actually I didnt need AD to tell me that you were being sarcastic. It suffices to say that "it was Priyank talking". So I wasn't really accepting Ad's view. Besides, one should avoid taking a fundamentalist stand against accepting the intellectual view...dont you think?
I too protest Ashokda's deleting of comments.You are violating somebody's fundamental rights-liberal-ra kelabe:)
Ashokda I get a feeling that you are speaking in favour of majoritarianism.Tomar amader ISI-te anti anandabazar campaign-r write-up tar katha mone ache-as far as I remember it was primarily written by you and it spoke against the dangers of majoritarianism.takhonkar sthe ekhnkar difference ki?
Dekh..crude majoritarianism kono din e kamyo noi.Ekti democracy tar minority opinion ke kibhabe deal korche setai tar maturity er porichoy..kintu if you remeber anandabazar issue o last abdhi amader pokkhe gechilo karon we could convince the majority that trampling on the rights of non-Bengalis is something undesirable.We could convince people like Donda.Kintu sei shomay jara lit comm e chilo tara jodi bolto "tomra bal chero,amara ja korar korbo" tahole kintu amra sympathy lose kortam.liberals ra thik sei bhul tai korche...democracy/majoritarianism might have a lot of problems, but oligarchy/dictatorship(se mehonoti manush,delhi hat-ian feminist,idi amin ba nehruvian liberal--jar ei hok)er shomashya aro beshi...
ram sena,renuka chowdhury,vagina monologues,chairman mao...sab bhule ja..proshno ta khub simple: In a society with heterogeneous preferences regrading `acceptable social/public behavior', how to you(state) aggregate preferences???
The writer and all readers of this blog seem to agree that the hindu fundamentalist acts are deplorable and that the course of protests undertaken by the liberals leave a lot to be desired. But I am a little confused about Ashokda’s philosophical stance. He has employed postmodern logic often in this blog to correctly ask important questions as to what constitutes right or wrong, good or bad and so on and so forth. But he has also spoken in favour of majoritarianism. Clearly I have missed something.
We agree that liberals have a lot responsibility when they protest to not end up mimicking fundamentalists. But have we (ashokda, me and arka) not in the past resorted to a similar brand of irresponsible protests when we were opposing saraswati puja in the isi hostel?
The other question that troubles me is regarding majoritarianism. India has a muslim minority which constitute less than 15 % of the total population, and a hindu majority. How are we to respond if the majority hindu someday wish to exterminate the minority muslim? What if the state is a party? In Gujarat there was a state sponsored pogrom instituted and all of us seem to oppose that even though that might be the state objective or that might reflect majority opinion.
Lastly, I too protest against writing in Bengali. Does this kind of behaviour stem from a sense of cultural superiority, that bengalis alone qualify to discuss intellectual topics? What completely baffles me is that with the complete knowledge that at least one non bengali is reading this blog and has responded with his opinions, Asokda and Arka still chooses to write in 80% english and 20% bengali. The two parties in question might have been exonerated had they not had good command over english. But in the present case both the writer of this blog and his friend has extremely good command over english ( a fact which I fear both of them might contest in their subsequent comments), and they have for their major part of their lives written exams in english. I am extremely pleased at the fact that Arka ( even I do) has protested Ashokda's act of deleting comments. But even after that he continues to write partly in bengali which I find a little disturbing. By writing in Bengali we are excluding other members form reading and commenting . The way the blog has been written gives me the impression that it was not meant to be read only by Bengalis. What is the point of writing your opinions in a public space and excluding other people from viewing your opinions?
@Ashokda:
You seem to be equating democracy and majoritarianism!
@Kanu:
Firstly I do not remember carrying out any frivolous protests against Saraswati puja in ISI.Could you please refresh my memory?
Secondly I do not think that Ashokda in his original post actually favoured majoritarianism(although his subsequent comments might lead you to believe otherwise).The point I believe was not to make the folly of ignoring the majority and pander to the wishes of the urban elite.
Coming to your protest against me writing in Bengali,it amazes me that after all these years we have known each other how come you reach the conclusion that my writing in Bengali represents Bengali chauvinism.The primary reason I comment in this blog is to relive those moments of ISI which we used to share with Ashokda and which I sorely miss nowadays.ebong seigulo bangla engreji meshano thakto!Anyway I think we are going off track by discussing my writing in Bengali.Let us leave it to the blog owner to set the ground rules.
@ARKA/KANU
1.A mature democracy is not majoritarian in nature.the tyranny of numbers is not something that is desirable.However any democracy needs time to mature.However, in India, the fear of majoritarianism has pushed liberals to the other extreme where we have started advocating a liberal oligarchy(sorry for using the term once again). A large section of Indian population has become voiceless in this oligarchic polity, which in turn has ensured that the support base of ram and shyam senas have grown exponentially.I understand that if India goes democratic on these issues ,there is a possibility that it will go the majoritarian way.However I feel that such a phase ill be short-lived, as the masses will soon realize the benefits of accommodating minority opinions.On the hand if nothing changes,India might turn into Iran or Turkey.
2. We didn't take part in any frivolous protests during Saraswati Puja. We boycotted it because we were not comfortable with it.It was Hansa's (Lohar Condom) conjecture that we might enter the puja room after having beef :))
3.I replied in Bengali for 3 reasons:
a) Even I wanted to relive those old moments...
b) Most of the people who have replied till now are Bengalis or they are non-Bengalis who understand Bengali(The only exception is Priyank, with whom I have discussed this issues a thousand times)
c)It was 21st February..couldn't resist the urge to write in Bengali ;)
@KANU
I agree that I have indulged in frivolous protest in the past and that is precisely the reason why I realize that they don't work.Our jokes about Ramakrishna's man boobs and Ma Sarada's underarm hair failed to achieve anything. We managed to irritate a few bhakts but could never convert anybody. in someways it was counterproductive as It as easy for our opponents to portray us as ganja smoking anarchists ho ridiculed Indians and blindly aped the west.There is no alternative to democratic dialogue..and this comes from someone who has idolized the naxalites for the last fifteen years :))
@Ashokda
Ashokda, I totally agree with all that you have said but probably do not share your faith in democracy. Or probably not as much maybe.
The upshot of all this discussion to me is that liberals have a huge responsibility. The media and the civil society will have to play a pivotal role to create public opinion. While we can expect very little from the corporate media, the intellectuals face a greater responsibility and it piques me when I hear from you that someone like Ram Guha has resorted to frivolous means of protest.
From a point of self retrospection I find myself guilty of the same charge. My example of Saraswati Puja was wrong. Ashokda in his last post, where he has directed his response to me, has correctly pointed out the exact mistakes that I intended to draw your attention to. So my point is that we too have made the same mistakes and we should be careful not to repeat them.
@Arka/Ashokda Regarding Bengali:
I apologise for having drawn the discussion to this new topic. But it seems to me that this is obtusely related to the responsibility that we have called upon ourselves to share.
I understand what might have prompted you to start writing replies in Bengali. But when someone registers his disapproval in writing then I can find no plausible reason to defend Ashokda's deleting of posts. And we know Arka agrees with that. Since in this case we know the identity of the person protesting and as we have admitted our objective is to reach out to "millions" who do not share our view of life, our insisting to continue to write in Bengali runs contrary to our avowed objective of being responsible. Let me take back my charge of cultural chauvinism. But depriving someone who does not share your opinion to read what you have to say on the subject and deleting his protest on the matter is still unacceptable to me.
Post a Comment