We all blog in gated communities. Not by choice, but it happens that way. We mostly read those people whose views we agree with. As a result on most personal blogs, the comments on each post read something like this:
- You’re so right!
- I couldn’t have said it better!
- I agree completely
- etc etc…
But what are we doing really? A lot of us blog on issues that matter to us. And I’d like some change to come about as a result of that. But it can’t happen if the only people I engage with are those who already agree with me! I need to go out, and talk to those who disagree with me. That way, I can learn how they really feel and get to understand them.
Fundamentally, I believe that everyone is decent and wants to do the right thing. I won’t go and take a superior attitude. I go with the intention to talk – with the understanding that we’re all decent folks. That way, I hope to not only get some of my main ideas across, I seek to understand why they feel the way they do. If I do that, perhaps some of my own opinions will change. And I’m willing to let that happen if it’s a better opinion based on logic. So here goes…
I started with this right wing post. The basic idea of the post is that Muslims and Christians are ganging up on Hindus to fight them. I made an honest attempt to engage in dialogue with those who commented in an attempt to understand where they’re coming from. It wasn’t easy – there were lots of ad hominem attacks on me questioning my education, my character, my motives etc.
One person even asked me why my blog has posts from 2006 when my domain name was registered only in 2008! When I explained that I was blogging on blogspot and migrated all my posts, this was the reply:
“That explains it man. The seeming timing mismatch of your blog posts is wonderfully explained just as I thought it would be. Though if I were you I’d have retained blogspot also, for record’s sake.”
54 comments later, I’m still trying to reach a proper dialogue with those are interested. But in spite of this, there were many cogent responses and some were partially cogent. From what I was able to understand these are the main points (I’m not passing judgment on any of these opinions as of now – I just want to understand):
- They feel that Muslims and other minorities are a threat to Hindus
- Minorities are trying to eradicate Hindu culture
- They feel that the “Liberals” and the “sophisticated intellectuals” forgive the Muslims anything but severely criticize any violation by a Hindu group
For my part, I kept finding these recurring themes:
- A willingness to generalize. The word “Muslims” encompasses every single Muslim with no allowances made for the vast majority of non violent members
- Many refuse to discuss a particular incident against Muslims (like the Godhra riots) and bring in all the other incidents of violence by Muslims they can remember. They do this because they feel that Muslims are getting a “free pass” by the press and society in general while any violation by Hindus is decried strongly.
I want to dispel some of the paranoia here. If those on the right are reading this, let me set the record straight:
- No violence is ever excused. If the violence is committed by a Muslim, they will be criticized as much as possible. Many bloggers have dedicated posts talking about injustices by the Taliban and how stupid fatwas harm soceity etc…
- We have nothing against Hindus and Hindu culture. We all have the right to follow any Hindu tradition we like as long as it’s in accordance with the law and the Constitution. Our Constitution is an expansive one. This means that you can do almost anything you want and no one has the right to stop you. If someone tries, all of us “liberal” bloggers will back you up and roundly denounce those who want to stop you from following your traditions irrespective of whether they’re Muslim, or Christian or any other religion.
- Our biggest concern is that innocent people will get caught up in any acts of retaliation against a particular community. That is why we denounce statements against “Muslims” in general – it’s because there are lots of innocent and non violent Muslims who don’t deserve hatred.
- Importantly, none of us are trying to downplay incidents of Islamic terror. Everyone cannot focus on everything. You have our deepest respect and admiration if you wish to address injustices to Hindus or Sikhs – like the 1984 Sikh massacre. Let’s use our strength in numbers to fight everything and not to bring in other incidents of violence when we’re discussing one particular incident. Let’s bring all the guilty people to justice without getting in one another’s way!
And most importantly, let’s not be at cross purposes. We all want to address injustices to everyone and anyone. Let’s have a dialogue instead of abusing one another. I assure you, we want to do what’s right – and I’m sure you do too. We’re in the Internet age and have the tools of communication. Let’s use this communication to achieve something that has never been done before – achieve harmony, or at least an understanding of where the other side is coming from.
I’m going to be commenting on your blogs from now on and I encourage you to read those written by liberals. Let’s put in some effort to understand where we’re coming from. I suggest tools like guest posts where you can air your views and we can do the same. Let’s be creative.
What say?
Hi, It was very nice to see you to go to far right for starting dialouge through the blog. But, a point should be considered before that. Why you are writing the blog ? You are writing this blog to express yourself or remove the doubt of others. Then, it would be easier to start dialouge with others. I had also thought on the point of having dialouge through blog on different issues. But, it fails miserably. My blog has became limted for the people who can come, read and go. Beliefs can only be questioned by us but the answer should be searched by the believer only. If point of clarity doesn’t solve problem at first place, more discussions over it is futile. I give only one advice to all orthodox people : Don’t stereotype and be creative.
In reply to yayaver
Hi Himanshu, nice to have you here!
You're right. This is blog is primarily to express my views. But I'd like it to mean more than that if possible. I'd like it to help improve things…
And you're absolutely correct that if clarity doesn't solve a problem, then it's likely that further discussions will fail. But why not try and obtain clarity first? When I commented on Sandeep's blog, I found that many people thought I was defending Muslims and giving them preferential treatment over Hindus. I'd like my blog to clarify that there's no preferential treatment being given.
If only we can at least clarify things and really understand why people feel the way they do, I will call that a success…
In reply to yayaver
You posed the right question – why is Jal Park writing this blog? He is not just reaching out, he is actually behaving like the self-appointed spokesman of the sickular establishment.
He took the liberty of "setting the record straight". As if he knows exactly what all lefties/sickularists are thinking and doing. Is he not making a generalisation himself, the sort that he seems to be whining about so much in his blogs and posts, when he makes broad statements and declarations on behalf of ALL leftists/communists?
Who made him the spokesperson for all the India-hating (synonymous to me with Hindu-hating) leftwingers?
And as far as reaching out is concerned, why doesnt Babar Jal Park also reach out to the commies, the jihadists, and others? Oh, but then, he is secular. (Or perhaps just scared of the consequences?)
Be fair. Be bold. Be Hindu.
In reply to Babbab
You're repeating your comments. Please don't waste comment space by doing this on my blog.
Hi bhagwad
came to yr site via hubpages comment by you. Thank u.
I am neither from left nor from right. But over all I feel in the current atmosphere in country it is the so called left or people who claim to have passion for their own brand of secularism etc. who look to me to be much more away from the reality and lost in useless games.
For example is it not clear that just now our country faces the problem of terrorism which is mainly oriented from Pakistan and created by its army top and feudal ruling class and from similar ruling class sin some other countries. They are helping and manipulating this terrorist machinery and giving it a Muslim color mainly to use it as a tool to continue their corrupt and weak rule in their own country and to become powerful outside their country.
But in India I find any talk of handling this machinery against us is always confused unnecessarily by left oriented politicians and media (Congress, Communists or parties like sp, bsp etc. with one person feudal rule -who claim to be leftist). They create confusion about it by saying that it is against Muslims in India. Your article also seem to have been affected by this kind of confusion and propaganda.
I wrote some articles about this terrorist turmoil now affecting whole world. see for example
http://hubpages.com/hub/NewsViews-April-2010-Terr…
http://hubpages.com/hub/Reasons-for-Current-Sprea…
Almost similar is the case with a very different problem of Naxalism and similar other local terror type groups. There is little doubt that some of it is being generated by help from China and some times again by criminals and spy agencies based in countries like Pakistan. There are also social issues involved with in the country. But again domination of this so called left oriented politics does not allow a proper discussion and analysis on the topic.
Irony is that while it is this so called left oriented lot which is confusing the issues involved and do not want to listen to even other side, they always accuse others. For example all left oriented parties accuse regularly BJP and other right oriented groups of uncompromising etc. But they do not want to have any even conversation in public with them by calling them communal, while BJP etc. are ready to discuss issues – (I do not call parties like Shiv Sena, MNS, AIDMK, SP, BSP or DMK etc. right oriented or left oriented, they are mainly ruled in feudal manner by one family, who will use any principal to keep their hold on party etc. to some extent even Congress has similar ruling pattern but it is too large, so is forced at least to have some grace) . Is this attitude not strange? For last 60 years they have been forced to deal with so called right then why this posing and denying that other people do not exist or do not deserve to be addressed in public.?
Over all while so called right in India (BJP etc. ) generally says that our country's basic culture is "sarva dharma smana bhava" the so called left accuses them ( and not just them practically every body in India- specially Hindus) quite unreasonably that they are communal. While I find in practically every decision making, it is mainly the left which confuses the issues much more, brings in religion, communal aspects etc. unnecessarily even where it is not there. While so called right parties may not be all that great, it is the so called left which has ruled India for most of the time and has created much more confusion and trouble for average people some of it to hide its mismanagement.
As far as silent majority in India is concerned they are among the most liberal in world. We have tradition of "sarva dharma saman bhava" in our blood and culture and it is followed for centuries by all, irrespective of their religion — Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian etc. in India. We do not need much discussion about it, to see that. Just go to any temple mazar or church and see who are the people who visit there. I have written articles about these aspects also . Here is a link to one , http://hubpages.com/hub/religions-and-science-Ind…
I feel your article has also been affected by this false propaganda and unnecessary confusion creation by left dominated political and media ruling class. It has very little to do with behavior of silent mass in India.
In reply to soumyasrajan
As of now, I'm not going into talking about one party over another. I'm interested in engaging people in dialogue.
My concern is over the vitriol being spewed by a large number of people on blogs all over the net. One day that vitriol could erupt into real world violence, and so my desire is to clear the air. I want to make it clear that not everyone belonging to a certain religion is violent – so they must never be stereotyped.
Also, there are a lot of trolls around who need to get jobs…
Hinduism is a cool religion that is also oriented towards peace and prosperity."""
I just read the link…I thought your comment was accurate and so can’t understand people’s objection…
I’ve come to realize from experience that being an atheist or agnostic is considered ‘bad’ by most Indians…Like that commentator who blamed the education system for creating atheists (people without roots)…What an idiot!
Keep writing…Your posts are thoughtful and interesting…
BTW, it's interesting that you are getting upset over "lumping all Muslims in one category" but you yourself indulge in such labeling ("far right") of all who disagree with you or show pro-Hindu tendencies. :)
I’d love to engage in a dialog with you, but perhaps you could answer these two questions for me and indulge my curiosity:
1. Why do you think you have the handle on what is cogent and what is not cogent? And how do you judge your own writings/responses whether they are cogent or not?
2. Why did you use the label “far right” without quotes, but used “liberal” in quotes? And why “far right”? What are the factors that make some thoughts “far right” and how are that different from “right”?
Oh, and BTW, I am the only person who will decide whether your response to the above questions – if it comes across – is cogent or not. In other words, if your answer does not match my pre-determined idea of why you wrote what you wrote (i.e. I’m putting you in a convenient box with a label on it…ummm…let’s go with “sophisticated intellectual”), your answer will be considered dishonest. :)
As for your assertion that —
“They feel that the “Liberals” and the “sophisticated intellectuals” forgive the Muslims anything but severely criticize any violation by a Hindu group” –
1. Have you done your research on this issue with an open mind??
2. Do you think that there’s no truth to this assertion based on what you read in newspapers and what you see on TV after violent incidents involving religion happen in India?
If all Indians are indeed equal and the media believes in secularism, then you should see equal amounts of outrage as well as same/similar decibel levels for all such incidents. If you are really being honest, you will agree that it doesn’t happen that way, with much lenience shown to Muslims. Pick any 5-6 incidents from the past few years and compare the outrage over it and you’ll see that for yourself. If you are unable to do that, let me know and I’ll pick those incidents to help you get started.
cheers.
In reply to Kaffir
Hi Kaffir, thanks for getting a dialogue going. Here is what I feel:
1. You yourself have commented on the blog post in which I participated. Many comments involved personal attacks and conspiracy theories.
For example, take this comment by Incognito:
“The education system that these people underwent never allowed them to grow respect for their culture. It deracinated them, cut off their cultural moorings, making them seek refuge in the porus shadow of ‘secularism’, ‘atheism’ and ‘modernity’.”
These are sweeping statements that we call ad hominem arguments, where you attack the person instead of the thing they’re saying. Many comments were like this. So I called them not cogent.
2. I just took the definition of “right” from Wikipedia which says:
“In politics, right-wing, rightist and the Right are generally used to describe support for social stratification with the preservation of traditional social orders and values”
Since many comments in that post were in favor of special treatment on the basis of religion, I used this term. If it’s offensive or you feel it’s wrong, I will gladly accept my mistake and change the term. But I have to use some word to describe the feelings espoused there, which you should admit are quite different from the views I hold.
Moreover, many comments in that post called my views “liberal”, and so I just picked up that term. Again, if you need me to use another word, let me know how you feel.
For the second points, here is my reply:
1. Comments like those of Anand clearly show that he feels I forgive Muslims and criticize Hindus. Here’s one comment:
You wanna protect Muslim and Christian extremists. I shake my head in disbelief and sadness.
or this comment by Malavika:
You deliberately completely ignored supari of Danish cartoonist by a ‘secular’ politician of a particular religion. Perhaps, you should open your eyes and be aware of events
2. As far as outrage goes, I and lots of other “liberal” bloggers react equally to all incidents of violence. If you don’t believe me just two days ago, we participated in a campaign to protect a woman sentenced to be stoned to death in Iran. The protest seems to have worked.
We also attacked the Taliban for lashing a young woman and protested against that as well. I hope you believe me when I say that we protest against whatever violence we come across and are not biased towards any particular religion at all.
And why should there be a bias? As a non religious person myself (and there are lots like me), why on earth should I prefer one religion to another, or one community to another? It makes no sense…
There is also a difference in outrage when the violence is systematic and organized by a political party. The reason there is extra outrage over the Godhra riots for example, is because it was implied that the government itself was directly or indirectly complicit. Similarly, the pub attack by Muthalik was carried out by a political group who was blatantly on TV. If Muthalik had just shut up and not talked to the cameras, there would have been much less outrage. Instead he had to go live and claim that he was “protecting Indian culture etc.” Naturally everyone got more irritated with him!
And I would love to know about incidences which you feel are being ignored.
One more question. :) (Hey, you wanted a dialog, so here are my thoughts.)
From an emotional point-of-view, which incident made you more upset – Muthalik pub violence, or the recent chopping of hand by some Muslims? If there was some difference between your two emotional responses, how do you explain it, since you claim to be an atheist and view all people – and all incidents of violence – as equal?
In reply to Kaffir
The hand chopping incident was terrible and was protested by lots of bloggers all over. Here is one example by Nimmy.
Muthalik’s pub violence was a different kind of incident. This is what made it different:
1. He was moralizing. He made sweeping statements against every single woman who drinks or goes to a pub. He didn’t attack any single woman in general, but all women with a certain “attitude.” This naturally gets people’s goat up since we’re all potential victims at his mercy of what he thinks is “right.”
Also, as mentioned above, Muthalik is a political guy. Violence is more dangerous when it’s organized by a political party who’s trying to make a name for itself. If that guy gets some real power in the system, he could be very much more dangerous. That is why there’s so much outrage against Muthalik.
There may be other reasons that I’m missing here…
The hand cutting incident makes us afraid. But (so far), no single person has stood up and said: “Listen everyone in India. If you dare write the name of Mohammed or say anything against him, the xyz party will deal with you”.
If the above happens, I can guarantee you that the amount of outrage will be ten times that of what was vented on Muthalik
In reply to bhagwad
I agree with you Bhagwad – it’s bad enough to hurt, it’s more dangerous to preach that hurting for a given cause is justified. Making hate and hate related crimes look like saving a culture or faith is more dangerous.
You wanted dialogue, you got dialogue :-)
Very interesting…Keep it going…
In reply to Sraboney
It’s nice to be able to discuss fundamental ideas in a non emotional way :)
In reply to Sraboney
@Sraboney – LOL :) All the endless dialogues one can ever imagine can be started if one speaks about this one issue.
Hi! Bhagwad
Place where I live in Mumbai has all around me Muslim Business people owning small shops to big industries. Place where I work has people from all communities Hindus, Muslims, Christians, lower caste, Upper caste, atheists, poor, rich middle class, any class you can think of. Near my home on the side of the raod there is a small statue of Christ, I see as many Hindus or people from other religions bowing with respect as Christians. I travel to many other cities very often in India (also aborad) including cities of Gujarat. No where I see these people from any community of class are that much worried about the questions so called liberals or extremists (from left or right or feudal rule supporters) want them to dragged into. All are mainly worried about how to improve their life style and life styles of their family members. How to improve management in their business or their employing organization. None seem to be that much worried or threatened by any other communities as your article tries to create impression. Main threat they face is from badly managed economy and infra structure, despite our country being full of resources.
Main focus in India should be on these issues. Issues for example to which among public figures like Kalam will like to have debate on (though looks like so called liberals do not find him exciting). Aim should be to have an economy and business atmosphere in the country in which every working person can have a life of minimal decency for himself/herself and all his/her family. This requires our improving our infra structure (electricity, roads, rails, education etc.), working conditions etc. a lot. This aim can be used as a driving force of our economic growth and better social life. Most of the problems for Muslims or any other communities will automatically get solved if we first get this minimal life style. Most other countries in world have achieved this long back.
The debate in which you want to drag people and keep engrossed the country looks a little empty and being carried out in vacuum in the absence of this minimal life style. Let West or countries like Japan, Singapore have such debates – they have achieved this minimal already long back. Let us first talk about bringing a decent life to every one– is that not liberal?
In your debate you do not seem to be ready to give space to one important aspect today in our country. The harm caused in the name of liberalism, by people in Media, press, politics etc. who are filling practically whole space in India for all discussions, debates on only on one issue “Muslims in our country or in some region are being harmed by other communities” or similar other issues about one community against other community etc. ((their pet region is Gujarat — though Gujarat must be among most liberal state and most welcoming to any community and other communities for them mainly means Hindus- Though Hindus as community are among the most liberal ones in whole world towards other communities, In fact all Indians belonging to any community must be among most liberal in their attitudes towards others. That comes from our multi cultural attitudes for milleniums).
As a result, when our focus of the country, which may have among best resources in world but is still among poorest (in terms of number of poor) should be on issues I mentioned above or on issues I mentioned in my previous comments, our so called liberals want to drag whole country only on these useless discussions of putting one community against others etc. All our media, press, political space is filled with only such issues (interestingly Muslims themsleves by and large do not like this focus on them but the so called liberals think they are doing service to them by keeping whole country engrossed only in these issues, fortunately Internet gives some relief).
I hope you realize that even though we have strong democratic traditions, most of this space in our media, press and politics is being controlled in very feudal manner by a selected few who own them or rule over organizations. It is they who are dragging our country to these issues, partly to keep discussion away from mess they were responsible to create.
Way you want to carry out this debate it looks to me that you are also effected by their charms. You think of your self as liberal but to me (and I think to all silent majority of Indians including that from Muslims) in the above discussion Kafir looks to be more liberal and more open and respectful to all communities and all thought process.
In reply to soumyasrajan
Soumya, these things (development and human rights) can and must go together. We have enough people to handle both issues without getting in each other’s way. I can’t directly do anything for the economy. But I have the power to do my best in other ways. My purpose in starting this dialogue is to try and increase the understanding of disparate groups and prevent violence like Godhra from happening which I’m sure you’ll agree isn’t good for our country.
After all, economic development is nothing without human rights. I would rather live in India than in China for example where there is no freedom of speech and you and I won’t be able to have this discussion on an Internet forum if it criticizes the government.