Legitimation of hate: The Tribune India

Rajesh ramachandran

A DECENT bowler is selectively trolled for his religion; the greatest artist of our time being chosen for the same reason – something would have to be terribly wrong with our society to release so much venom upon itself. Have we always had it or have we stirred it up recently? Of course, group markers like religion, race, and language, by their very definition, must create “the other” to remain unique. But these markers cannot be blamed for our society consciously or otherwise acquiring a terribly sectarian character, which, if not corrected, will turn into something so ugly that we cannot live with it at all. ‘inside or outside the country.

If the Islamist mullahs have shaped the “other” Hindutva, the latter will create a worse monster among Muslims, because it is a dynamic process of creation and recreation.

Mohammed Shami and Shah Rukh Khan are Indian patriots who made all fans proud. All bowlers, especially in the T20 format, can be beaten all over the floor at any point in their career, just like any great batsman can be beaten for a duck. A poor performance was therefore only an excuse, not the reason, to target Shami. Likewise, how can a true Hindu society attack someone for consuming cannabis? In the most authentic dictionary and thesaurus of my native language, “ganja” is called Shivamooli – that is, that which originates from Shiva. For a friend keeping 6 grams of charas in his shoes, Aryan Khan was forced to spend 25 days in prison, while his father was relentlessly targeted not only by trolls, but also by poisonous TV stations.

In fact, the legitimization of hatred has been made possible not only by regime change, but also by television channels spewing venom on minorities, with or without smokescreens. This new national hobby began as a crusade against corruption during the Hazare unrest, when a TV station became a participant. Unknown to the domestic audience, what played out in prime time was the personal agenda of presenters trying to discredit others rightly or wrongly in the context of the Radia tapes. This variety of self-defense newscast sparked a floating anger and hatred against the elite initially, and now it focuses on minorities. These toxic TV channels – in English and Hindi and probably also in regional languages ​​- offer the legitimacy of public opinion to naked hatred. So what was unspeakable ten years ago is now part of public discourse.

The Hindutva right attributes all of this to the appeasement of Muslims by Congressional governments since independence. However, Congress appeased only despicable mullahs, thereby legitimizing orthodoxy, regression and superstition. The ban on Salman Rushdie’s satanic verses and the overturning of Shah Bano’s verdict was not meant to help hardworking, educated and progressive Muslims, but to promote orthodoxy in the worst kind, which could only harm forward-looking Muslims. Sadly, this reinforced its own “other,” which we see in the Self-Defense Cow lynching madness.

Islamist orthodoxy or the secessionist religious terrorism of the Kashmir valley could only create the “other” Hindutva because of the bankruptcy of the center-left political groups. The Jinnah Day of Direct Action riots in August 1946, the Partition carnage, population transfer and many other things could not legitimize Hindutva right or hatred of minorities due to Gandhi’s presence. Gandhi’s policy ensured that an “other” Hindu was not created by the formation of Pakistan. So instead of two hateful and religious fanatic nations, we had an Islamist Pakistan and a truly secular and welcoming India, which constitutionally guaranteed the protection of minorities. Nothing like Partition has happened in recent times and there is no reason for an entire society to become poisonous, other than the exhortations of a few toxic TV stations and the handfuls of bigots on social media. They obviously have no idea what they are trying.

If the Islamist mullahs have shaped the “other” Hindutva, the latter in turn will create a worse monster among Muslims, because it is a dynamic process of creation and recreation. The civil war in Sri Lanka offers an excellent model for India to understand the dangers of provoking a minority community. The educated, progressive, and pro-British Tamils ​​of northern and eastern Sri Lanka lost when Sinhala freedom fighters won the country’s independence. But the peaceful Tamil community came under attack in a series of riots that ultimately led Eelam Gandhi SJV Chelvanayagam’s peaceful leadership to lose to the ruthless killer Velupillai Prabhakaran, who didn’t bat an eyelid before blowing up buses and cars. trains with innocent women. and the children in them.

For nearly three decades, Prabhakaran’s terrorist tactics and battle plans prevailed against the military. But without realizing it, he was forcing the government to become an effective military machine, focused solely on defeating the LTTE. Major General Kamal Gunaratne (retired), whose 53rd Division killed (or executed) LTTE leaders, in his book Road to Nandikadal, writes that ordinary people who used to call an army of soldiers ” karaya ”(army man) began to refer to him reverently as“ ranawira ”(war hero). The LTTE should take credit for shaping this “other” militarist in Sri Lanka. After all, an army of around 20,000 soldiers was transformed into a force of two lakhs of men and officers to fight the LTTE, whose greatest effort was to match Tamil suicide bombers with equally Sinhala soldiers. courageous and dedicated. And once the Sinhala soldiers refused to flee the battlefield, Prabhakaran’s suicide squads turned into cannon fodder.

Sri Lanka holds a great lesson for the road not to take. We have grown used to peace for generations because Gandhi refused to allow the British and then the Muslim League to create the “other” Indian. From the failure of the Khilafat movement with the terrible murders of Malabar and the forced conversions to the Partition riots, Gandhi refrained from hatred which is gaining in legitimacy. Charismatic leaders have always motivated their cadres to kill for a cause and, if necessary, to die in the process, but Gandhi wanted his men to die for freedom without killing or hatred. And it is only this test of bravery that offers lasting peace without hatred.