|
Why does a Hindu feel cheated
today? Why does his bid to imitate matching methods of contending for his faith,
just as Muslims or Christians adopt, bring a howl of protest from English media?
Is it a crime for a Hindu to talk of Hindu psyche, Hindu ethos, the faith
of his forefathers and act according to his own perception and on his own terms
for his religion?
Yes, if English press is given
credence to it is certainly an unforgivable crime of the majority community in
this country. Do you believe that
the only threat to the country today is coming together of the Hindus and this
discomforting unity has been described variously- Chauvinism, revivalism,
obscurantism, Hindu backlash, Hindu fundamentalism and plain insanity?
The hypocricy of academic
sophistry is matched by double standards of the Indian elite.
There is a moral and intellectual degeneration when it expresses
solicitous concern for minorities. No
fear of the Press Council, no respect for the majority sentiments, no shame in
voicing undemocratic views – the aim is undiluted appeasement of segments
which are used to give a thin cover on their intellectual and ideological
failure by their own brand of secularism. We
have gleaned a few comments from the press, purely illustrative, which can be
very educative for those whose hearts bleed for their country.
Here are a few samples in the sequel.
When resurgence of Christian
Church brought down the Secular Communist regimes in eastern Europe, the world
press including our own intellectuals were swayed by the significant role played
by religious leaders. When Bishops
and clerics battled against autocracies as far apart as in South Africa, Iran
and Philippines a few years back our journalists used such big words as religion
‘making pathway to the rediscovery of practical ethics in politics’.
But in India the rise of Hindu
unity has panicked pseudo-secularist and rootless intellectuals reared up in
tradition of spitting at their ancient faiths.
The same argument for which they adored Bishop tutu, Lech Walesa and even
Khomeini has been abandoned and united Hinduism is seen as a threat to
democratic processes. A new
semantics of ‘Hinduism versus Hindutva’ is created by already befuddled
journalists in their hatred for our religion.
They are crying hoarse and shedding copious tears over the loss of
‘tolerance’ and ‘broadmindedness’ of Hinduism because of new found
aggressiveness of Hindus.
There is everything wrong, for them, if Hindus imitate the method of
minorities. I have culled a
few gems from a leading article, by Shri Ashish Nandy in ‘Times of India (Feb
18, 1991) entitled ‘Hinduism Versus Hindutva’:” Hindutva will be the end
of Hinduism. Hinduism is a faith by
which majority of Indians still live. Hindutva
is the ideology of a part of the upper-caste, lower middle class Indians, though
it has now spread to large parts of the urban middle classes.
The ideology is an attack on Hinduism …. Hindutva is an ideology for
those whose Hinduism has worn off.” By
such churlish hair-splitting whom does author want to fool.
This is an object intellectual failure of a scribe whose hostility to
Hinduism can be seen through this pontification from a very high pedestal. Here are a few samples: ‘The sources of Hindutva are no
different from that of Islamic fundamentalism”.
‘The death of Hinduism in India will be celebrated by all votaries of
Hindutva. Hindutva is Western
Imperialism’s last frenzied kick at Hinduism.
It is an ideology meant for the super-market of global mass culture where
all religions are available in their consumable forms, neatly packaged for the
buyers’. The author, living in
his world of make-belief dreams of the inevitability of the inevitability of
confrontation between his own invented differences between Hinduism Versus
Hindutva and it is indeed a crass exercise utilizing Marxist jargon.
It appears that our countrymen
are required to be reminded that Salman Rushdie, author of Sanatic Versus,
rarely missed opportunity to slight the majority community also in this country. With a penchant for sensationalism and in a cynical outburst,
not long ago, Rushdie had screamed hatred for Hindus also.
In an article in the Times,
London (reproduced in the Telegraph, Calcutta on 14 Nov. 1984) while writing on
the late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, Rushdie singled out Hindus for all the
ills of Indian sub-continent.
Rushdie’s perverse logic took
him to abusing Hinduism, and entirely for wrong reasons.
Availing himself of every dishonest subterfuge and disguise to effect his
purpose, he seemed to be greatly concerned over the growth of Hindu
‘fanaticism’.
Rushdie, certainly no lover of
Congress (I) also seemed to be perturbed over desertion of Congress (I) by
Harijans, Sikhs and Muslims in increasing number since according to him Congress
was no longer considered a guardian of minorities in India.
While Rushdie gave vent to his
spleen over dynastic ambitions of Nehru Family in the same article he curses
Congress (I) for toppling Farooq Abdullah. He did not see G.M. Shah’s
installation as Chief Minister result of family feud between the son and
son-in-law of Sheikh Abdullah. Commenting on Farooq’s ouster, Rushdie goes to
the extent of saying that his toppling ‘seemed to legitimize the Jmmat’s
view that Muslims have no place in present day India’.
Promoting dissensions and
disaffection, Rushdie even attempts to negate the ancient historical unity of
the country by ridiculing the very concept of our nationhood.
He calls the very idea of India ‘a
paradox’. India itself is a mere
37 – year old’, Rushdie laments and ridicules its cultural and historical
unity.
Rushdie pours venom on the
Hindus and the tribe of such dishonest intellectuals seem to be bonded by a
mission of seeing our great nation disintegrated and balkanized.
An irrational analysis of issues is after all a small price to pay in the
advocacy of power for minorities by so called sensitive and secularist scribes.
‘Indian Democracy in
Transition’ by Iqbal Masud (Indian Express, 18th Feb 1991) is a
superficial, flippant and biased attempt to deprecate and unprecedented unity
amongst Hindus by comparing it to rise of Nazism in Germany.
He states that a myth of ‘minority appeasement’ is created in the
same manner in which German, in pre-war days, viewed ‘Jewish stab in the
back’ in the thirties. The writer
advises Muslims to align with ‘dispossessed, backwards and other minorities’
as a counter-vailing force against rise of Hindu nationalism.
This is out and out a mischief
seeking to divide Hindus and hoping that S.C. and OBCs will strengthen Muslim
cause. Similar orchestrated and
vituperative attack can be traced in several articles.
“Where
is the proof of Ram’s birth place?” Shahi
Imam Syed Abdulla Bukhari in an interview to Rashme Sehgal says as reported in
the Independent, Bombay in its October 14, 1990 issue.
Since then the thread was pocked up by scores of Muslim and other so
called secularist scribes causing irreparable hurt to Hindu minds.
In the opinion of celebrated
columnist Inderjit Badhwar only Hindus are butchers, murderers and baby-killers
(“Apocalypse Now”, India Today – Jan. 15, 1991). And they have no work but
to kill Muslims and demolish mosques. Again
the same periodical in its Feb. 1991 issue publishes a letter as if inciting
with its vitriol saying “Ayodhya, now a place
of shame”.
The Times of India reproduces a
comment from the Nation, Lahore on Nov. 23, 1990 announcing “birth-place of
Rama at Ayodhya is a baseless myth” and again referring to “undiluted
madness of Hindu fundamentalists”.
As if it is not enough there is
an unadulterated incitement to other communities by such a canard form Malvika
Rajbans Sanghvi in Sunday Midday December 23, 1990 : “Hindus regard Sikhs as
hot-headed duffers, Muslims as fanatics, Christians as fun-loving drunks”.
The tolerance of Hindus to such pervert journalists is almost abominable.
It is indeed shocking, there is no monitoring of such media reference in
Hindu Society. There would have
been demonstrations for such perversities and slights if other communities were
involved.
An article by Dileep Padgaonkar
in the Times of India, Bombay (December 16/17, 1991) unbars its disgusting
anti-Hindu bias, “Hindutva is threatening the unity of the country”.
In “Agenda for Theocracy” by A.S. Abraham published in the Times of
India (December 10/11, 1991) a very offensive and unwarranted reference is made
against cow-slaughter hurting the faith and sensibilities of Hindus.
No law in the country can force a Muslim to eat pork but our secular
journalists unashamedly try to change Hindu belief against cow-slaughter.
His ridicule for Hindus on this count is appalling.
He and his ilk unfortunately find Hindus in majority in this country and
that is their great woe. They
ruefully mention this in their articles, spouting their prejudice to insult
Hindus.
Nirad C. Chaudhary, an
octogenarian Anglophile, greatly irritated on the surge of revivalism of the
“retrograde Hindu masses” writes in Times of India on the 30th
December, 1990 that “Anarchy is inherent in the Hindus”.
He dismisses as a myth the belief that Hindu society is a peace-loving
and non-violent one. Calling Hindus
“fond of bloodshed”, he repeatedly refers to “incorrigible militarism and
belligerence of Hindus”. Shri
Chaudhary’s mischievous comment that “anarchy is endemic to Hindus” has
hardly been taken note of or retaliated by any journalist in this country.
Then there is Vinor Mehta who
gives us this gem in Sunday, Calcutta (December 16-22,1990): “Fortunately, the
Hindu rage, the Hindu sense of impotence has left a substantial section of
community unimpressed …”. He further writes: “Hindus have nothing to fear
but the myths fostered by Hindus about themselves”.
“Inward Shame and ruin”’
thus begins a diatribe in the Telegraph of Calcutta (Dec. 16, 1990). M.J. Akbar
in a leading article in the same paper the same day makes a vituperative attack
on Hindus entitled, “The Hitler Nerve: or Notes on Apocalypse Now”.
He writes: “Hitler had the Jews, Advani has the Muslims” and labours
hard to compare ‘India of today with Nazi Germany of 1930s’.
The Telegraph again writes on the Dec. 22, 1990 that “The RSS youth can
be in India what Hitler’s youth were in Germany”.
The examples are endless, of
such media mischief. Sometimes one
doubts whether we are living in our own country or in an Islamic State.
And one can clearly see where lies the roots of betrayal of India’s
dream.
|