Frankly, 1919, 84, 93 etc are no different from 2002. Nor is Gujarat genocide any different from Sikh genocide of 1984, Nazi persecution of the jews and gays, Armenian genocide, Myanmar Buddhist extremism, Al Queda, LeT, Naxals, Lankan crisis etc. So, numbers of how many H types were killed or how many M type did is of no consequence. These stats only feed the political agenda, which if required will drag you out of your home if you pose threat electorally! What needs to be debated is criminal culpability of heads of state under whose watch such mass massacres have taken place. If you dont do your job, you lose your job. But if your job is to protect your subjects and your own ministers are involved in mass murders, shouldnt you lose anything? Not even elections? Not even your ego? Naren Pais goes on to say this : After going through a lot of loosely made statements about priorities of human rights and us not being western enough yet, Im compelled to comment. I come from a family that has strong Sangh roots. You cannot stand in front of them and say what is the big deal about women not wanting to draw rangolis. I have been to RSS camps early in my life and I have shouted har har mahadev and agar Shivaji nahi hota toh Mathura Masjid hoti aur sabki sunnath hoti. I have never been outside India. I know over 100 bhajans and mantras. As I grew up in such environment, the free spirits of Vivekananda, Kabir, Sarvagnya, Bulleh Shah et al attracted me more. The othering of Muslims and Christians affected me on so many levels and I could see through the hollowness of the fundamentalist ideology. So, I believe Im liberal, Indian liberal, born in Hindu family, shunned religion on my own. I am not a well read person, frankly, till date I have no clue what communist is! So, to the person who introduced the idea that ultra-liberalism is also of western import among other things, my liberalism comes from my parents who let me have my views without fear after a while, and they arent influenced by anything outside the sub-continent. Indian brand of liberal always existed amidst majority fundamentalist voices. On this article, along the lines of locus standi of the author- to even suggest that only Indians are capable of deciding what is the moral line for India is to embrace a world where no nation can be allowed to opine about the sorry state of affairs of any other nation, even if millions are killed everyday. Given todays state of upholding public morality against constitutional morality, Id go one step ahead and say- even Indians arent capable of defining Indias moral line. We might as well get an objective worlds view on how they see us so that we pull our sock up. What struck me most about the post is the mass okaying of 2002 carnage based on the time elapsed. Frankly, 1919, 84, 93 etc are no different from 2002. Nor is Gujarat genocide any different from Sikh genocide of 1984, Nazi persecution of the jews and gays, Armenian genocide, Myanmar Buddhist extremism, Al Queda, LeT, Naxals, Lankan crisis etc. So, numbers of how many H types were killed or how many M type did is of no consequence. These stats only feed the political agenda, which if required will drag you out of your home if you pose threat electorally! What needs to be debated is criminal culpability of heads of state under whose watch such mass massacres have taken place. If you dont do your job, you lose your job. But if your job is to protect your subjects and your own ministers are involved in mass murders, shouldnt you lose anything? Not even elections? Not even your ego?
Posted on: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:51:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015