I am a proud Hindu.
Ah! What was that? A
declaration of self-confessed Hindu pride! I must definitely be communal. For
when does a right-thinking person (with no reference to the political
definition which can send the media lambasting everyone under its ambit) even a
Hindu, declare so outrightly his love for his religion?
No sir! I must definitely be
communal.
In a world charged with
religious overtones where religion is no longer a merely personal pursuit which
instead dominates world politics, terrorism, film-making, book-literature,
facebook updates, election issues, it is still all right to declare yourself a
proud Muslim or a Christian or a Jew, but a Hindu declaration must indeed be
the right-wingedness of politics or at least an overt display of a
newly-branded word: Extremist.
It is ironical and yet in many
ways it isn’t, for after all, aren’t we in India – the land of contradictions,
that calling yourself a proud Hindu and wearing the obvious badges of the religion
on sleeve in an overwhelmingly Hindu population is publicly looked upon most
disapprovingly and most suspiciously. You utter the ‘H’ word and the media, the
people, the peers will point guns at you. Sarcasm and comments labeling you as
a right-winger or as a Hindu extremist or as a communalist or as a BJPiite,
will be thrown at your mercilessly.
It is another matter that this
declaration is only an expression of one’s preference, with no intention to
insult, invoke or slander any other religion, sect or community. Also, more
often than not, statements to do with one’s religion are bereft of any
purported signaling to any other.
However, that is exactly the
meaning attributed to a harmless statement.
Nevertheless, my problem is
much more latitudinous than the expression of one’s religiosity. It is the
overt, repressive pressure to be all-conforming to the public-media-asserted
holy line of “Moderation”. Political correctness has reached a never-before
docile and obsequious standard.
And hence, I admit publicly
that I am afraid. Afraid of the expansive and unsuppressed nature of this
political correctness pervading our homes, our workplaces, media, discussion
forums, facebook, and the worst of all - inter-personal relationships.
Somehow it is not right to
express your opinions clearly if they go against the holy line of moderation.
It is not right to say that you “hate” something or you “love” something. No
sir! We all must dilute it to express our conformism to a ‘Moderate’ ‘like’.
Worse still, eliminate the preference. Express the neutrality: This way or that
way, I am ok, you are ok.
Riots break out for no
explicit reason whatsoever if a word, a phrase or a declaration enrages
someone. Calling a spade a spade is a thing left for English storybooks or literature
from colonial era. I remember this conversation
where I was telling someone that I love Sachin Tendulkar. Within a few minutes
while talking about cities and lives, I said that I hate Delhi because of the
insecurity it offers to girls. Having ably supported my preferences with some
reasons, irrespective of someone else’s agreement with them, I did not hesitate
while saying them aloud. In no time, I was an extremist with strong opinions. Strong
opinions, apparently, are to be frowned upon, as long as they do not toe the
line of moderation.
The worst of all is the
penetration of this attitude in small sections of society and personal
relationships. Wearing a saffron kurta to work will invite at least one joke
about ‘being RSS-wadi”. The same is not true for a green garment.
Expressing political opinions
frequently, especially by a girl, will invite the ire and the frown of the
moderation-practicing populace. Saying things as they are, as they should be,
factually pointing out anomalies is the symbol of an active mind, not of a
demented one. That in no way dents the humaneness of a person.
Conformism suits the present world
of traders and organizations. Euphemism is the new mantra. I shudder to think
what would have been the outcome of our freedom struggle if our leaders were
afraid and every non-approved, non-moderate sentence would be opposed using reductio
ad absurdum.
And so, it is with being
Hindu.
So for the left-leaning media
and the majority of those conscientious Hindus who are afraid of being labeled
extremists; criticizing kar sevaks for demolishing Babri masjid is justified,
so much so that we can play the same record year after year, openly castigating
the people involved but to talk of Muslim-led genocide against Kashmiri Pandits
in one of world’s largest cases of ethnic cleansing is being - you are right –
Hindu Extremist.
No normal, right-minded Hindu
will support any of these two activities, least of all any riots. However, when any
of them expresses a preference of voting for BJP, he is automatically labeled
in a derogatory tone as a ‘RSS wadi”. Why can’t someone vote for BJP without being
called so, simply because he or she is disgusted with the corruption of the
Congress or with their flawed sense of economics or their misplaced idea of
appeasement or the worst of all – their conniving sops to public, permanently
damaging the exchequer without any effective ‘build money to spend money’
program.
A religion should be gauged by
the way it treats its minorities when it is itself in majority. And India
should be proud because despite being majorly Hindu, she has welcomed all
religions with open arms. All communities, sects which were persecuted in the
world found a refuge in this motherland. And that should make us delightfully
proud of being Hindu. Pride as defined by dictionary also means “self-esteem”
without any negative overtones. Why should that offend anyone?
“I am proud to belong to that
Hinduism which is all inclusive and which stands for tolerance.” – Gandhi
proclaimed a long time ago. He never went down in history as being communal.
His love for other religions was so much that a real Hindu Extremist
assassinated him.
Our democracy and its
constitution gives the “Right to Free Speech” to each and every individual,
limited only by its potential to invoke incendiary feelings in a community
enough to cause destructive rampage or fuel insurgent emotions.
Apart from that, we are free
to express. Unfortunately, what the constitution blesses us with; the society
takes away – the Right to be an Individual.
A new thought emanates from a
conflict of ideas. For conflict of ideas, there should be opposing opinions and
the right to express so. Toeing the middle line has never revolutionized
anything, neither any political nor any social or industrial change. The
Moderates never got us freedom, so didn’t the Extremists. The conflict between
them produced Gandhi - a new political awakening.
Moderation should not be an
excuse for tolerance of the bad and the ugly – specks of terrorism, acts of
vandalism, conformism to mediocrity, snubbing of free opinions, preferences and
a societal snobbery for euphemisms. Continued practice of this has made us a soft
and weak nation, which will tolerate just about anything: rapes, appeasement,
terrorism, hijacking, naxalism, corruption and blatant misuse of power because
as a community we are afraid of being labeled as “Extremists”.
Moderation is good, albeit in
moderation.
In Sanskrit, there is a
saying: “Ati Sarvatra Varjayet” , i.e. ‘Anything in excess is bad”. Even ‘Moderation’.
Aparajita Tripathi
PGDM, IIM Kozhikode
