“Defending Thackeray” – excerpts
This is a column from more than 9 years ago but, interestingly, the points made by Pritish Nandy – especially with regards to our attitude towards Pakistan – still appear to be relevant.
I have added my views at the end.
Pritish Nandy on “Defending Thackeray” – excerpts
“…The media loves those who wear their secularism on their sleeve. Who claim to fight for artistic tolerance, cultural freedom and secular values, however fake they may be. Even Manjit Bawa and Jatin Das, who have made their careers out of badmouthing Husain are now grabbing front page headlines by defending him in the name of secularism and free thinking.
…
But what is secularism? Is it an euphemism for liberal politics or is it a true understanding of what constitutes right and wrong in a multi-religious, pluralistic society like ours?
Is a secular person someone like Mulayam Singh who speaks for the minorities and voices their political concerns or is it someone who stands up for what is actually the right thing to do, irrespective of whom it benefits, the majority or the minorities?
Take the massacre of the Hindus in Kashmir. My friend Anupam Kher has been branded communal by some sections of the media (and these so-called secularists) simply because he had the temerity to question conventional wisdom.
He argued, rightly in my view, that disrupting Ghulam Ali’s concert and banning Jansher Khan were not exactly examples of Sena intolerance. They were protests born out of anguish and despair which the secularists have deliberately chosen to misread.
This is not new. Every time a writer or a painter or a musician is attacked by the religious majority in a society, he or she immediately becomes a victim and a hero. Like Salman Rushdie. No one ever bothered to look at the point of view of the Ayatollah Khomeini or millions of conservative Muslims who were outraged by The Satanic Verses. Why? Simply because the media finds it unfashionable to be conservative.
Everyone jumped to Rushdie’s defence. He was seen as an innocent victim of Islamic fundamentalism, a heroic writer standing up to injustice and intolerance. No one bothered to look at the real issue. Was it right, was it necessary for him to make his reputation (and his millions) as a great twentieth century novelist by deliberately hurting the sensitivities of millions of conservative Muslims whose only crime was that they were believers?
But that was not a fashionable question to ask. The fashionable stance was the liberal one: How dare these bigoted Muslims get offended by a work of artistic merit? Anyone who disagreed was labelled a zealot, undeserving of being part of a modern, liberal society. The real issue (Was Rushdie right in hurting the feelings of millions?) was conveniently brushed under the carpet and everyone zoomed onto a non-issue (Was Khomeini justified in putting out a fatwa against him?) and the whole world rooted for Rushdie (as a great novelist, deserving of the Nobel Prize) and abused Khomeini for wanting his head (as a frumpy, filthy fascist, with no understanding of modern literature).
It was politically correct to spit on Khomeini. Rushdie was this brave, liberal, secular, and enormously talented author being harrassed by a wicked, brutal, ugly, fundamentalist state. It became a fight between art and authoritarianism, right and wrong, good and bad. Rushdie was the nice guy. Khomeini was the evil emperor of crime.
Very glib. Very pat. But was it true? Was Khomeini really a bad guy or was he simply standing up for what he thought was unjust to his faith, his people? No one had time for the truth. Public opinion, spearheaded by the intolerant Western media, was clearly prejudiced. No one could defend Khomeini without getting tarred by the same brush.
This is exactly what has happened to Thackeray.
No one is ready to look at the real issues. Which are: Why did the Shiv Sena disrupt Ghulam Ali’s concert? Why did the Bajrang Dal ransack Husain’s flat?…Are these signs of intolerant Hinduism? Or is it outrage at the insensitivity of the media to the anguish of the majority community?
Is it fascist to stand up against those who hurt us, knowingly or unwittingly? After all, no one is saying anything against Ghulam Ali or Junoon or Jansher Khan. Their excellence is not in question. Nor are they being accused of any crime. They are only being identified for what they are. Pawns on the chessboard of our complex political life.
Pakistan is happy to send us their best talent, who win our hearts by their art, their music, their poetry, their excellence in sports. At the same time, they subvert us by sending in terrorists who bomb and kill and loot hundreds of innocent men, women and children whose only crime is that they are Hindu. How can we separate these two issues? How can we say that art and sports unites our nations while terrorism is a crime we must rebut? That Pakistani artistes must be welcomed with open arms but Pakistani-trained terrorists must be fought back?
Is this possible? Is it possible to keep art and life in separate compartments? To fight the Pakistanis at the frontier and welcome their writers, poets, singers and musicians to our cities and fete them? To say that culture has nothing to do with terrorism, sportsmanship is more important than human life? That the murder of the innocents in Kashmir must not be allowed to bloody our ties?
…It is time we called the bluff of our fashionable secularists. For we cannot remain blind to the truth. That the ISI today is subverting our life, our freedom, our political choice.
It is easy to be secular when your father, your brother, your son is not tortured and killed before your eyes. It is easy to be liberal when your mother is not gang raped, your sister is not molested by strangers. When your village is not razed to the ground, your home is not looted. Your means of livelihood are not destroyed by a brutal, meaningless war that runs on and on and on.
…
We believe that art cannot pretend to be superior to life. It is not possible to allow a gaggle of city socialites to sit back and enjoy a ghazal night by Ghulam Ali or a rock concert by Junoon while thousands of innocent people in Kashmir remain terrorised by Pakistan.
…It is time we stopped thinking in terms of what is secular and what is communal and, instead, focussed on what is right for India, good for India. If that, coincidentally, happens to be a Hindu point of view, so be it. After all, even the BJP is ready to forsake that position today. In desperate search of minority votes.
…Who is interested in Husain’s credentials, whether he loves Hindus or not? The question is: Does he have the right to hurt others?
Would he have dared to paint Allah naked? Would he have dared to paint Allah at all? Or is he brave only in hurting those who do not hit back because they think it is politically unfashionable? Because they think that modern India must enshrine secularism and kick everything else in the butt?
I have fought for all the secular causes and I am ready to defend secularism with my life. But not at the cost of India. Not at the cost of what is right.
And what is right is simple: We cannot allow Pakistan to make monkeys out of us. Our tolerance must not be taken for granted. Artistic freedom cannot have precedence over our lives, our honour. The blood of innocents must not be allowed to be shed in vain.
*****
As most of you would know, Pritish Nandy was Shiv Sena’s representative in the Rajya Sabha between Jul ’98 – Jul ’04.
*****
MY VIEWS on some of the points above:
I agree with his question about secularism. I think it needs to be answered by our leaders.
I disagree with his distinction between the “real issue (Was Rushdie right in hurting the feelings of millions?)” and the “non-issue (Was Khomeini justified in putting out a fatwa against him?)”.
How can a “fatwa” be a non-issue? It is a matter of life and death. There is no doubt that feelings were hurt but the same thing happens when Husain paints deities and national icons in the nude – Does that make it alright to issue a “fatwa” against him asking for his head? I do not think so.
If, as Pritish Nandy says, Khomeini was “simply standing up for what he thought was unjust to his faith, his people”, surely there are other ways of doing that than by threatening the life of a person?
But with his view on Pakistan and how we should deal with their musicians, singers and actors, I completely agree.
We really cannot separate the two issues of exporting culture and exporting terror when it comes to Pakistan.
As Pritish Nandy says, it is time we “focussed on what is right for India, good for India. If that, coincidentally, happens to be a Hindu point of view, so be it.”
Jai Hind
Extremely well said. Secularism has become a flash card brandished by the most conceited of the pigs present in our country. As is said in this article, the media does not find it fashionable to be conservative. As a result, we, as an entire nation suffer the results of their imbecile judgments.
Very well said by Pritish Nandy. These are the points that people of India must explore on its own and be aware of. Now a days nobody wants to go beyond the picture and media is to be blamed for its 50% of its attitudes towards the issues. If Hindus are fighting, there must be some reason for that. Today there are organisation like RSS, Bajrang dal, Shiv Sena and must be many. They have not erupted like this. There could have been some kind of threat to society in particular and so they are there. No one would like to fight in vain.
Shiv Sena has done everything right for preserving secularity of India which govt. has failed to do so in this 60 years if we read by the oint of view of Pritish Nandy and that is 100% true.
Our oppenents( non-Hindus) doesnot like this idea that we are fighting back in protection, so they start describing all this orgs, anti secular.
I am still surprised, how come Hussains pictures denigrating Hindu dieties comes under the defination of Art. and not a Danish cartoon? In that context I fully agree with Pritish Nandy.
But my views are the same of Shantanu, in case of Rushdi, fatwa and khomeni. Khomeni can never be right in his standing for fanatic religion.
In hope hindus(mainly media and reporters) open up their closed eyes and bring justice to those who are real victim.
I would also like to post this report which is worth reading. It is long so Shantanu please take care of it by editing.
***** EDITED by MODERATOR *****
Human Rights Groups Censures Eleven Countries for Abuses Against Hindus http://www.hafsite.org
WASHINGTON, D.C., July 11, 2007: (HPI note: Following is a press release.) The Hindu American Foundation (HAF), the leading U.S.-based Hindu human rights group, released its third annual report today on the discrimination against Hindus in countries across the world. …
This year’s report includes documentation of significant human rights abuses directed against Hindu communities in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Fiji, the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, and Trinidad and Tobago.
Endorsements for the third annual report were received from several academics and from organizations, including the B’nai Brith International and the Human Rights First Society of Saudi Arabia.
“Several years ago in testimony to Congress regarding Religious Freedom in Saudi Arabia, I called for adding Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists to oppressed religious groups who are banned from practicing their religious and cultural rights in Saudi Arabia,” said Ali Al-Ahmed, Director of the Washington, DC, based Institute for Gulf Affairs. “This report is a great effort in bringing to attention the religious rights and freedoms of 1 billion people with magnificent culture and a great civilization. ”
As in past years, Bangladesh warranted added censure for the most egregious violations with 461 documented acts of murder, rape, arson, temple desecrations and other atrocities.
Ramesh Rao, Executive Council Member of HAF, and the primary author of the report (said) “What is important in the report is the careful documentation of attacks against Hindus, Hindu institutions, and Hindu places of worship – providing a unique record of human rights abuse that other human rights agencies either gloss over or report only in general terms.”
Download the report from here .http://www.hafsite.org/pdf/HHR2006.pdf
One can see from above report how the govt. is concerned about the issue. Can we imagine happening this kind of atleast small reporting presenting the ruling govt. in India. No way! Govt. itself is the most insecular.
It is argued by some that art transcends religion and it is just a means of “artistic” expression! So if Husain paints something which happens to be objectionable to Hindus, that is not really his problem. But is it really that simple? Is Husain naive enough to think the huge number of Hindu population would be thrilled or happy to see his paintings? Or he is deliberately trying to be provocative?
Going by the same standards, as someone above points out, would Husain dare to paint something that is insulting to muslim viewpoint, since it is a religion that really rigid and intolerant about such matters (just look at Rushdie or the Danish newspaper cartoons)? Or would he be too scared to attempt something so clearly “suicidal”?
Violence is not justified, but how does one prevent these so-called artists from hiding behind artistic licenses to freely hurl insults and insensitivies against a religion or a group? Would using violence to put “fear” in such people to prevent such incidents be justified for the religion? Or is religion really beyond all this and strong enough to withstand tests such as these? Do events such as this actually call for “taking the high road” and showing others what true Hinduism is. It is an open question with no right or wrong answers. I would like to hear what other posters think. However, before one acts, I think one should always remember the principle: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!
Oh and nice article by Nandy, btw!
Ritwik, Indian and Harry: Thanks for your comments and sharing your thoughts.
@ Harry: To your questions, my responses (in brief):
1. Husain is not naive but I guess he is being provocatove.
2. I doubt he will paint anything that is insulting to Muslim sensibilities – it would be far too dangerous.
3. How does one prevent these so-called artists from hiding behind artistic licenses to freely hurl insults and insensitivies against a religion or a group? We have recorse to the judicial process and the state can also intervene when there is a clear threat to public order.
4. Would using violence to put “fear” in such people to prevent such incidents be justified for the religion? I think not.
5. Is religion really beyond all this and strong enough to withstand tests such as these? I guess Hinduism is.
6. Do events such as this actually call for “taking the high road” and showing others what true Hinduism is? Yes, that would be my preference.
But as you said, there are no right or wrong answers here. Others may have a different (and perfectly valid) viewpoint.
Thanks.
The state is never going to do anything. The state — as a single entity — has lost its spine long back. The latest indication is the act of forwarding six Muslim candidates for the post of a vise-president by the leftists.
Not that there is anything wrong about a Muslim taking that post. But there are better non-Muslim candidates.
It is too much to expect the Indian Government to do anything to control artistic freedom, especially, when such freedom affects the sentiments of the majority community only. During a debate on this subject on NDTV some time ago, Ms Renuka Chowdhary, wearing a Bindi as big as the full moon, vigorously defended Mr. Husein’s artistic rights. She seemed outraged and disgusted that certain sections in India found anything objectionable in his drawings. She confirmed all his paintings were a beauty to watch rather than being offensive. She believed that the Hindutvavadis must be shown their place so they would not indulge in such absurd activities in future.
We also have a renowned Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu who believes that majority of the Hindu temples must be pulled down or at least closed. According to him naked idols are worshipped in many temples. The temple priest are so embarrassed that the idols are clothed before the doors are opened for public view. When such is the case in our own temples, why go after Husein for making some innocent caricatures? For him the temple idol is explicitly erotic and Husein’s work creatively artistic.
As far as the artists are concerned, they understand the limitations of a secular Government. Therefore, the impulse of artistic freedom is aroused only in relation to Puranic characters and Indian cultural symbols. The flame gets mysteriously doused and they find helpless in conceiving any images of characters mentioned in the books of “Revelations”. It is understood that the community that gets hurt does not wait for a discussion on NDTV before passing their judgment. These creative minds are well aware that such judgments are so swiftly executed, there may not be enough time to react. They also know in such cases the Government and the likes of Ms. Chowdhary will be equally incensed. They all know their secular limits.
Very well said Nandan!
*** COMMENT EDITED by MODERATOR ***
24/07/07
” Do events such as this actually call for “taking the high road” and showing others what true Hinduism is? Yes, that would be my preference.”
The danger in this route is the Hindu majority will be deemed to be secularly eunuch; the term Baburao Patel coined in sixties; he is the greatest Hindutva icon and a great editor. The response should be measured and telling; how about a few blows.
Secularism and multi cultural societies, the draem of the socialist scoundrals have flopped throgugh out the world; Europe has collapsed and it is in serious trouble in UK and Australia.
***
Comment by Moderator:
Thiagan: I have edited the last bit of your comment as it contains an assertion but does not cite any reference/ links to substantiate it. If you have any such references (and more importantly the link between the two figures you cite), I will put it back on again. Thanks
From We were hurt that Pak singers didn’t call: Sonu
Sonu Nigam is understanding pakistani Muslims mind slowly by slowly. Great news! And I hope others too understand as quickly as posiible without meddling with peace words in it. Only problem with Indians is, Its too late by the time they get to know their mind.
I always admire Sonu Nigam for his straight forwardness.
Seen at a distance, time telescopes, so it is easy to make things seem the way you want. In the hands of a good essayist, this is easier, However, Pritish Nandy was once a journalist, and this misuse of his talents does not become him.
The Ayatollah was seen as an obscurantist AFTER he came to Iran – till then he had been a freedom fighter – whatever Pritish Nandi wants to say.
Well-wishers of Husain say that he should not have provoked the Hindus again. I protest against this indiscriminate use of the word Hindu for lumpen hoodlums whose creative urge is consummated by breaking up a frail old man’s home. I am a Hindu myself. Even though I understand that the word Hindu encompasses a wide microcosm and I have no exclusive title to the name, I cringe at being clubbed with these. My religious sentiments are wounded by them. Further, the same well meaning advice has been aimed at rape victims too. The logic is clear – their fault is being there. If you asked these modern day Hillarys why they attacked the poor painter, their answer would be ,†Because he was there†.
The issue was not an old defenceless Painter Mian. The issue was not a twenty year old painting which came in handy for taking offence at. The main issue was the SS wanting a nice and juicy issue to divert the people’s attention from their abysmal misgovernance and inability to deliver on their promises. To divert attention from tales of corruption and high-handedness which were increasingly being found credible and being raised by people like Anna Hazare. To divert attention from the edifying spectacle of the brave Tigers grovelling before the Prime Minister to put the cork on the Srikrishna Commission report. And to urgently do something to remedy the wholesale rejection they suffered in the Lok Sabha elections. Forgot all that, MP mine?
The SS is a blue chip company, and it is but natural that a shareholder should defend it. The Board of directors will probably pass a special resolution to thank him.
The SS has over the years honed this technique of bashing up a highly visible minority.
It has paid them great dividends and brought them quita a long way from where they started out from. With control over the riches of the BMC for so many years, a Chief Ministership, social acceptance, the SS has now become a well-diversified commercial organisation. And all on the basis of identifying someone to bash up with impunity. First the Gujaratis, then the Madrassis and so on. The least amount of resistance was enough to make them choose a new victim. MFH was an ideal victim. With his big mouth overshadowing his creativity, his having come up from the pavements, his obvious lack of breeding and not being one of us, it would be very difficult for us to not enjoy the spectacle of his humiliation and pontificate,†Well its all very unfortunate, but this man should not have provoked them again “. So conveniently forgetting the fact that the painting of Sita in the nude is twenty years old.
Oh, and by the way, are we having a competition in being stupid? Because all this “sentiments being wounded” doesn’t quite jell with me. Hindus and Muslims refuse to be offended by the prostitution industry which drags lakhs of our women and children into a life of slavery. The same sensitive brethren pay extra for a young girl-child. Everyday live Sitas and Ayeshas are initiated into this profession, and while we are not queuing up for our turn, we talk of it as a routine matter. What sentiments are we talking about? An inanimate book or a painting more offensive? Nandi talks about acts of violence questioning one’s secularism – maybe these do not qualify as violence?
Anguish? Moral lepers like us? Don’t insult the word.
Sahir ki aatma Jayadevan mein. Vaah vaah. Jala do ye duniya, vagerah vagerah. Sahi bola na, Mr. J? 🙂
Maaf karo bhai, aakhir mein hun aulaad insaan ka. Sahir ki beizzathi na karo, kahan Raja Ram aur kahan Gangu Teli?
@Jayadevan
Prostitute industry is such that one cannot do much. Because some of them are in to this because of personal choice. It is not like only poor and downtrodden get in to this way of living. Wealthy families having everything what they can ask for are more in to this business. Where to use their money? Whats your opinion about oil rich countries who are making maid a slaves and pay extra for a young girls? It is easy flow of money that attracts many. Why you make India a lame duck in your response. One must admit what is happening in so called developed countries too. You think prostitute industry doesnot exist in other parts of the world and is restricted to poor class only? Think again? Did that took away their right to speak about Danish cartoon? We all know what happened next! And the same here, that doesnot take away someone’s right to complain about MFH’s paintings. Its his responsibility to show some respect and dignity in his paintings. He cannot get away by hurting others faith in the name of creativity.
What I find is –He is regrdless and unfaithful to his country. He has shown careless, ruthless and insensitive attitude in his paintings. No person with high moral ground and sensitivity can do that kind of paintings, Creativity is just an excuse for him and many.
Indian,
Agreed, MFH is bad, Rakshas, Haivaan, Iblis,Lucifer. So Balasaaheb took twenty years of thinking to realize that he was a modern Dusshashasana? This is called playing the card at the right moment. My only point was about this. I am no artist, so I cannot comment about artistic content
Indian Muslims are, judging from their behaviour, congenitally – the word is unparliamentary, and I cannot force myself to use a lighter word. Otherwise, they would also be thinking about the disproportionately high level of representation of their community in my favourite industry. Great hopes!
So let us handle the easier issues/create some to take the janta’s mind away from the real ones? Like drinking water, maybe? I know how satisfying a stomachful of tapwater is as a substitute for a meal, so I know how important this one is.
I do not know the prostitution scene abroad, so I cannot offer my comments. Has to be as bad as ever.
But forget the personal choice, man. I have no moral qualms about a woman renting out her body. I do not feel she demeans herself any further than quite a lot of quite educated people do, selling their souls to some business organization or taking bribes or stealing from the people. I have greater respect for a whore who gives value for money and takes her meagre share of the earnings home to buy her family the next meal.
Look at this. The prostitution scene in Ahmedabad (Gujarat) was full of respectable married women after the textile mills closed down. They set out from home, telling their out-of-work husbands that they were going for work, substituted mangalsutras (if you wear one, the police don’t notice you – and a normal Indian wife cannot possibly wear the same one) serviced some customers and went home with the cash.
Now, before you blame the husbands, most of them had bysinnosis ( Ahmedabad had cotton mills) and could not work. And when more than a hundred mills and their ancillary businesses in a textile town close down, you can estimate the job market.
Would you imagine that she went into prostitution the moment her husband lost the job? She would have tried everything and in the end come to this. Now consider her career prospects. Middle-aged, so working life short. Chances of promotion – nil due to educational disadvantages. Retirement benefits – nil. Fringe benefits – free service to cops, musclemen, blackmailers. Costs – hafta and commission. Risks – STD, AIDS, rape, violence. Hidden cost – the fear of exposure and social opprobrium, condemnation by the same family that feed from her earnings.
Personal choice belonged to the customer. And to society, which deprived her of the chance to get a proper living by working at a “respectable” trade. What do we pay your “bai” or “kaamwali”? Would this make a decent school’s fees for just one child? Isn’t a dream of a good education for your children a legitimate need?
These are our own mothers, sisters, wives, daughters. Chhodo, izzat nahin karte, madad bhi nahin karte, thodasa hamdardi to bataa sakte hain na? Koi kharcha bhi nahin. Sorry, English does become a foreign language at times.
By the way, I had noticed that most of the lodges and hotels frequented by whores were owned by “shareef aur izzatdaar” people. They were never bothered by the (minimum) 1000% occupancy rate and the consequent profits. Maybe they made donations to organizations working with “fallen” women from the same money.
Who ruled India all these years? What Congress did for the upliftment? They will get away by giving some reservation and quota? We talk much about women, progress and development but when someone is already working on it will not be applauded. And we will bring out old “GHISA PITA” case against him calling Hitler and what not!
How many are ready to praise amd applaud Mr. Modi? He has done excellent job in Gujarat and working on all these fronts. When some business personalities applauded him, Did not we see the cry in the media and in the political parties. Fact is nobody other than Mr. Modi is interested in progress and development.
Excerpts from two recent articles – in the context of TOI’s “Aman ki Asha” project.
From TOI’s Cunning “Aman ki Asha†Plan by Atanu Dey:
…To start off with, the Pakistanis whom the TOI wants Indians to get into bed with are not in charge of the nukes or even the army. The military-jihadi complex is not run by cricketers, qawwali singers and assorted movie actors and their hanger-ons. The constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is not interpreted by consulting those cardboard cutouts who fly into India to play footsies with their counterparts in India. The sharia — Islamic law that rules Pakistan — is not for the convenience of the glitterati.
The generals and the mullahs control Pakistan. It is said that the three A’s matter to Pakistan: America, Army and Allah. But it appears that the Taliban, the soldiers of Allah, are giving a good fight to the Army and America. There’s infighting among the forces that dictate Pakistan’s fortunes. In a sense, India, even if it meant to harm Pakistan — and I am sure that India does not mean harm — it would be wholly unnecessary. The three A’s are more than capable of destroying Pakistan, without India’s help.
But I don’t suppose the TOI will allow facts to intrude into their fantastic wet-dreams of love transforming the foaming at the mouth mullahs into peaceniks or dismantling the Islam nukes that ummah celebrates.
The TOI published a hilarious piece titled “Peace with Pak: Pitching for friendship, On And Off The Field†today. A bunch of cricketers from India and Pakistan writing about how wonderful they all are.
I think it is unfair to publish what cricketers write or say about matters not related to cricket or their own bowel movements. They are not for the most part celebrities for their ability to reason or analyse matters. Their reasoning ability compares rather unfavorably with my ability to play cricket — and I don’t even know what is the proper way to hold the racket for playing cricket.
…
Actually, the cricketers are not the worst offenders when it comes to the paeans they sing to how hospitable the Pakistanis are. The jhollawalahs are much worse. They go to Pakistan, sit around in mushairas, eat biriyani and give each other hugs. Then they come back and lecture Indians that they are evil and that India should disband its military and disarm because how can anyone have anything to fear from such loving people.
The people you meet at fancy parties can afford to be loving. They can afford to stuff you with rich food, even as a hundred million of their fellow Pakistanis are starving. They can tell you how much they appreciate your wonderful friendship. But that does not change the reality that Pakistani state policy is dictated by America, Army and Allah.
***
and from The Amazing Certitude of Rajmohan Gandhi:
…
How exactly, for instance, Rajmohan Gandhi knows that “at least 19 out of 20″ Pakistanis hate the violent Jihadists and not 18 or Lord be praised, 20 out of 20? This is not a rhetorical question: It is infuriating that serious scholars–Gandhi is the author of multiple books and is currently a research professor of History at the University of Illinois– would so casually drop figures merely to strengthen their pre-decided conclusions. Indeed, Gandhi could have made the same arguments without such utter disdain for empirical work but perhaps to the casual reader that would not have carried the same conviction. What is particularly galling is that Mr Gandhi concludes there is no difference across the spectrum with even the military turning against the militants. Forget all the talk about strategic depth or reluctance to act against the Haqqani network in Afghanistan despite strong warnings from President Obama.
Now, actual empirical work does suggest that there is growing concern among common Pakistanis about the extremism ravaging their country. But to argue that the military jihadi complex–the real power center in that country–has been dismantled and the entire nation of Pakistan marches as one against the militants abandoning a policy which that state has pursued for pretty much its entire existence is just wishful thinking. Worst of course is the demand that Indian policies should be guided by such errant and muddled thinking.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Pak-cricketers-angry-disappointed-at-IPL-snub/569251/
Is this a New Awakening in India ( link above).
Not being the one to believe in “Don’t mix Sports with Politics” messages. For once, I feel good that a new message is being sent back. The question is how long will this continue.
It’s so sad to reach the comments by the Pakistani cricketers, who blame India. Want to ask these same blokes, how many of them came out and condemned the Mumbai attacks.
I agree Vijay.
A response I left on Nitin’s latest post:
Nitin: Re. “…it is self-defeating to turn away influential and talented Pakistanis…”
I am not so sure…How many of these influential and talented Pakistanis have raised their voice against the Jihadi mindset (or indeed the military-jihadi complex) that dominates the average Pakistani’s perception of India?
As for “It is in India’s interests to be a magnet for the subcontinent—and the world’s—talent”, yes, indeed…but it is also in India’s interest to act…and send a strong signal when certain lines are crossed, rather than to continue in “business as usual” mode.
Should TimesOfIndia rename itself as TimesOfPakistan. It seems all their headlines are geared towards “A Finger Pointing towards India” stance.
Here is the today’s link
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Addictions/entry/no-pakistani-in-ipl-is