[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Frenchman's Article

Postings not related to the writing of the Manifesto or policy chapters
are likely to be summarily rejected. Thanks for your understanding. IPI

I would like to thank Ram Narayanan for bringing this article to our
attention. The writer does definitely raise some very pertinent
questions to which I had earlier alluded when I talked of our selective
morality and the wave of "Political Correctness" in the media.

This doesnt in any way make the lifes of the Missionaries or the honour
of the nuns any less than the many lifes lost elsewhere in the country.
The point is this

There is an overwhelming, all-pervasive school of thought which in its
efforts to appear politically correct,I dont know to whom, goes
overboard in champioining Minorityism (that is still fine) but carries
it to a perverse extreme where any advocacy for the Majority howsoever
legitimate it be is deemed "parochial", "narrow", "communal" and not
before is coloured saffron.

It is precisely this lop-sided Minoritism I have a problem with.

This school of Political Correctness needs to be examined and debated.

It has plusses and minuses.

- By being highly circumspect and critical of Majoritism it makes us a
very self-exacting majority, quite rare to find in the world.

- At the same hand this criticism is more often than not at the expense
of the interests of the Majority. A glaring example is the plight of
Kashmiri Pandits in J&K.

- Another aspect of this criticism is the tendency to be
self-apolegetic. A question that is often raised 'what will the world
think of us", "what image are we projecting in the world". I dont care
two hoots about what the average American thinks of me, it simply is
quite irrelevant to me, yes if there is something wrong with the way my
soceity is I am going to correct it, and I am going to correct it
because its wrong and not because I am conscious about what the world
thinks. I am proud of what I have inherited, it may not be a utopia, but

it is not hell either and I shall work to improve it, why should I be
aplogetic about its shortcomings, especially to an International
Community which has its own idiosyncracies and dubious moral standards.

There is a reason why extreme philospohies like those espoused by the
VHP & Shiv Sena sound very attractive and credible especially in those
areas of the country where Minoritism was overplayed at the expense of
Majority interests. The reason is the inability of intelligenstia to
call a spade and spade and espouse the majority cause explicitly,

Its some kind of diffidence, I dont know if its out of fear or some
social conditioning or what, but those who voice could be heard just
simply failed to speak out.

I see it in the reaction to Ms. Gandhi's visit to Tirupathi, She
blatantly brushed aside, ignored a tradition. She didnt debate it, she
didnt take a public stand on it and she just simply ignored the
sentiments of the sanctorum which she entered ostensibly with
"reverence". There is no accountability for that. There is none, the
mainstream intelligenstia will not question it. It would be politically
incorrect to do so.

I am reminded of Tagore's poem, I fail to recollect its title, but it
kind of ends like this

"where the head holds high without fear into that heaven of freedom my
father let my country men arise"

I hope I have got the verse right, pls. somebody correct me on that.

The interests of the minorities are important, the interests of all
those who have been historically sidelined in the country is very
important but not in this lop-sided manner.

I just hope we rid ourselves of these lop-sided standards of Political


This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/