DNA Edit: The Taliban Mindset

It’s the season of discontent in the world’s most populous democracy where fringe elements want to take the country back to the Medieval Age. The culture of violence — an actor fears the prospect of facial disfigurement on account of starring in a period film; a politician, not long ago, threatened to rape the wives and daughters of his rival party’s supporters; the murder of social activists and journalists — attempts to stifle civilised discourse in the quest for mob justice. 

What’s particularly sinister is how ill-formed opinions are trampling upon artistic liberties and freedom of expression in the guise of popular anger over perceived insults. That a film is after all just a film and people are free to criticise, celebrate or simply ignore it; that a political opinion is just an opinion and can be trounced with counter arguments in public space — are the sacrosanct traits of democracy. 

There are robust institutions for redressal if one feels the need to battle it out with an intellectual, political or cultural adversary. But threats of bodily harm, of dismemberment, cannot be an option. Does society really want hoodlums to take over? The answer is most obviously, no! 

Democracy is noisy, messy, and on many occasions, simply too much to deal with. At the same time, it’s the most evolved form of a civilised society which advocates and practises tolerance for all kinds of opinion. Ironically, the very tendencies we denounce as Taliban-inspired have entered the mainstream space as laws of the land take a deep nap. 

The growing clamour for blood is the manifestation of lawlessness; it’s dangerously close to being institutionalised unless a stronger, unified voice of the people drown it. If civil society doesn’t act now, it could be too late; the country will find itself in a violent storm of bloodletting.