D.K.Kotwal
President Pranab Mukherjee within a few past few weeks has shown a grave concern regarding the growing intolerance in the country saying,”Our country has thrived due to its power of assimilation and tolerance. Our pluralistic characteristic character has stood the test of time. Raghu Ram Raja Governor Reserve Bank of India has too strongly pitched for ending vigilante acts in the pursuit of bans saying they will stifle the progress. Global ratings agency Moody has sounded a warning to the government in the midst of growing social tensions,saying Prime Minister Narinder Modi must keep BJP members in check on provocative statements or risk losing domestic and global credibility.
Besides, the concerns shown by the country`s top most ranked personalities and a global ratings agency -Moody, there is a buzz of words —intolerance and unacceptable dissent all around us hitting the media, politicians and intellectuals of the country. Unstalled authors, artists,filmmakers and others are busy in returning awards in protest against the governments alleged intolerant policy .In this way it is high time for the top brass of the country rather ruling dispensation to takethe callwithout any procrastination and trigger corrective measures sincerely before it is too late tosave, sustain and further the hard earned reputation and credibility on global and domestic fronts if there is really going something wrong.
Before coming to any conclusion I feel it is imperative moral duty of a sage and conscientious citizen to know the answer of two pointed questions; (a) what are the causes of such a grave situation? (b) Who is responsible for it? The situation otherwise was normal two months back.If we start analysing the issue unbiased and unequivocallywe are bound to admit that the fire sparked off from Kashmir where Gandhi had seen a ray of hope of communal brotherhood at the time of partition of the country when the whole nation was burning in communal fire .A lawmaker openly arranged an announced , Beef Party in the lawn, on the campus of MLA hostel Srinagar,the least concerned for the sentiments of his fellow brethren and sisters of other community who regard the animal cow as a sacred and pious animal calling her Gou Mata. The lawmaker becoming lawlessperson went berserk saying that he could do anything he liked and nobody on earth could stop him thereby challenging the authority and judiciary of the country . As a reaction of this happening the next day there was a thrashing of him by another intolerant lawmaker in the legislative assembly establishing an unheard precedent. The incident was condemned by various political parties and leaders. No less than the former chief minister of the state gave a clean chit to the lawmaker who had given rise to this unholy episode and condemned the other lawmaker. Is this not a communal act? Is this not intolerance? Another condemnation that was balanced one condemning both the parties came from the present Deputy Chief Minister. Even the former Chief Minister and well respected and tall leader of the country was unfair in his condemnation of only one lawmaker and being a sympathiser of the other. These irresponsible and self vested statements are but capable of doing irreparable loss to the civil society.
This shameful happening stirred up a hornet’s nest,demand for ban on cow slaughter gained momentum and the row of beef spread over the whole country. The infection reached Dadri where a precious life was ended by a frenzy and intolerant mob and there were occurrences of blackening and painting the faces of the lawmaker in aconference and Kulkarni at the launch of a book of the former Foreign Minister of Pakistan Mr. Kusoori. It was followed by echoing of certain unwanted statements of some political leaders particularly of ruling ones, spoiling the secular and plural fabric of thecountry.
I am reminded of an essay,”On the Rule of the Road” of A.G Gardiner in which he says,’ Liberty is not a personal affair but a social contract.’we have to be extremely careful for others liberty and their sentiments are not injured keeping enough space for debate and discussion. I am sure many of you have come across Richard Fexnmam’s lectures on physics, a must read .The noble prize winning physicist was one of giants of the 20th century. He found the atmosphere at the institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton stultifying. Advanced studies brings together some of finest scholars in the world to ponder problems in a multidisciplinary environment. But he found the atmosphere sterile because there was no student to ask him questions that would force him to rethink his beliefs and perhaps discover new theories. Ideas start questioning and alternative viewpoints, sometimes seemingly silly ones. After all Einstein built his theory of relativity. Pondering somewhat wacky questions of what someone travelling in a train at a speed of light would experience. So nothing should be excluded but everything should be subjected to debate and constant testing. No one should be allowed to offer unquestioned pronouncement. Without this competition for ideas, we have stagnation.
This leads to second essential : protection not of specific ideas of traditions but the right to question and challenge, the right to behave differently so long as it does not hurt others seriously in this protection lies societal interest fortunately India has always protected debate and right to have different views. Some have even embedded these ideas/views in permanent structures. Raja Raja chola , he built a magnificent Shaivite temple at Thanjavur also incorporated sculptures of Vishnu as well as the meditating Buddha thus admitting to alternative view point when Akbar invited scholars of all manner of persuasion to debate the eternal verities at his court he was only following older traditions of Hindu and Buddhist kings, who encouraged and protected the spirit of inquiry.
What then of group sentiments? Should ideas or behaviour that hurt a particular intellectual position or group be banned? Possibly, but a quick resort to bans will chill all debate as everyone will be anguished by ideas they dislike. It is far better to improve environment for ideas through tolerance and mutual respect. Let me explain, action that physically harm anyone shows verbal contempt for particular group so that they damaged that group’s participation in the market place for ideas, should certainly not be allowed for example sexual harassment, whether physical or verbal, has no place in society. The theory of confirmation bias in psychology suggest that once one starts looking for insults one can find them everywhere, even in the innocuous statements. Excessive political correctness stifles progress. Put differently while you should avoid pressing the buttons that upsets me to the extent possible, when you push then you should explain then why that is necessary so as to move the debate forward, you have to tread respectfully assuring me that a challenge I hold to ideas is necessary for progress
Tolerance implies a degree of detachment that is absolutely necessary for mature debate. Tolerance can take the offense out of debate and indeed instil respect. If I go berserk every time a particular button is pressed rebels are tempted to press the button which mischief mongers indeed do so but if you do not react and instead ask button pressers to explain their concerns, rebels are forced to do the hard work of marshalling the arguments. So the rebels do not press the button frivolously while thuggish mischief makers who abound in every group leftwithout easily trigger. Tolerance and respect then lead to a good equilibrium where they reinforce each other.
India is a land of saints, sufis,rishis and theirs teaching is replete with tolerance and if holli-polli follows the path of spiritualism the problem ofintolerance in whatever form it may bepresent —- religion, caste, region, etc. can easily be overcome.The modern polity of the country badly needs resurrection ,for example a few days back there was a statement in a local newspaper of the head of the political dispensation of the state in which he had said that the acquisition of education was amust for removing the economic backwardness of a particular community, the deliverance of such fanatic statements is detrimental to the psyche of pluralism as he is the ruler of all sections of the societyand all those who are economically backward need acquisition of education.Such narrow thinking be done away with otherwise such perceptions of the most responsible people are but catalysts in the polarisation of society on the communal lines.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel