JNU Row: The bad news is that we are all intolerant

I feel I am too ignorant to comment on the current Kanhaiya-my-hero and Kanahiya-the-seditionist debate. For starters, I am not an intellectual from any university like JNU. Second, I do not have any political leanings. Third, I don’t know what campus politics is, as I stayed away from it most of my unintellectual college life. Lastly, I do not know Marx’ communist philosophy as well as I know the principles enshrined in our Constitution.

For over a month now, I have been bombarded with original or forwarded messages from my friends who are either Modi haters or Modi bhakts. Each is trying to convey to me their perspective on the issue and what they mean by nationalism and free speech. In the end, I feel I am the one who must have the right to speak my mind freely as everyone expects their perspectives to be re-articulated. Unfortunately, these deadly forwards, not giving my friends their timely likes and not hitting the share button have alienated me from my friends.

PTI

I like all my friends but they have stopped liking me. If I genuinely ask a question to either side, each believes I am bashing them. Maybe I need to train myself a little more in writing and speaking eloquently, follow the hard-hitting styles of Kanhaiya or Modi. While they are both great orators, I find myself struggling to express the confusion and pain that I am going through these days. 

I do not have the gift of words, so I shall say it like it is. Bad news, my friends. You are all intolerant. At some level, you are all political by nature, which means you enjoy playing politics— be it in a circle of friends or colleagues in a corporate set-up. You have no first hand experience of the subject matter. You were not present on campus on February 9, yet you feel you know who is right and who is wrong, and you go about spreading your version of right. Is this not playing politics? You have formed a strong opinion on the basis of your confirmation bias— you believe only those reports that support your already made up mind. The funny part is all of you say you are open to another point of view while all along you try to make me see your version of the truth. You have stereotyped me, your friends, your country and revealed more about your own deep-seated biases and intolerance. And you call yourself a liberal or a nationalist? The fact of the matter is you are all so very insensitive.

Reuters

Yes, there is a big difference in being insensitive and in being intolerant. They are not synonymous.

When Vijay Mallaya says ‘I have no regrets as such’, he is being insensitive to the countless Kingfisher Airlines employees who suffered for months and maybe years without getting any salaries. The ones whose kin committed suicide because of the airlines’ shut-down must be feeling even more helpless at their loss, some may be seething with rage at the callous, insensitive remark.  The employees have been striking for many years but it is only now that his more recent, lavish three days of birthday celebrations in Goa is being seen as a blatant act of insensitivity. People cannot tolerate him now and by people I mean, now, the large majority who were not even affected by the airlines’ loss. Media focuses on him now only because the insensitivity became too egregious for everyone.

Something similar happened in the JNU campus. “Bharat ki barbadi, bharat terey tukde tukde” are insensitive comments to make in front of any Indian who is remotely proud of his/her country. I was hurt too. The action of the police was nothing but what Kanhaiya referred to as the scientific outcome of any equal and opposite reaction. He referred to Newton’s law of motion as a precursor of what he may do because he found the police/lawyers insensitive to his feelings. But he must stop and ponder over the insensitivity he fomented by being the president of such students who in his presence were allegedly spewing insensitive remarks.

From what I understand, he did not make those anti-national comments and, thus, was released on bail. He himself does not want to talk about the anti-national comments as he says the matter is sub-judice. His protest on azadi could still have been carried out without causing any public disorder had he not been seen as the president of the group who changed the agenda of the cultural evening to something else.

Insensitivity begets intolerance. Intolerance is not the bigger enemy. Insensitivity is. One is insensitive to somebody’s feelings and intolerant of somebody’s views. Therein lies the crux of the ideological polarisation we are experiencing these days. The boundaries between the two are blurring. We have become more insensitive than ever— be it with our neighbours, colleagues or staff, on TV channels during primetime news debates, in Parliament the way the PM’s chair is addressed, in election rallies where the most incendiary speeches are belted out, in daily governance the way aspersions are cast without verifying the details. It’s not just happening in India. Look at how Donald Trump is getting the conservative Americans’ support. It is a sign of times.

What triggered the entire JNU drama? It is bound to be some insensitive comment or an act by someone that conflagrated into intolerance. It usually begins with something personal. Then it becomes national. For Kanhaiya, it is now more personal than ever, hence he invoked Newton’s law. If you are unsure of how it all began, please do not jump midstream to form your opinions and then do the disservice of spreading them through articulations of vested interests. At least have a modicum of respect for our Constitution.

PTI

The Indian Penal Code has various sections on spreading of lies and rumours, misrepresentation of facts in public and annoying or inconveniencing others through modern devices and software. So please spare me the opinionated forwards! Please be sensitive to my feelings and let me remain objective, let the spirit of reasonable enquiry be alive in me. Even Kanahaiya told Barkha Dutt, “Azadi to me is the freedom to implement the Indian Constitution.”

I have still not understood this ‘intellectual’ definition of freedom. Are we not doing that already? The articles and provisions that got him arrested and subsequently released were a part of that very same constitutional practice. When Barkha Dutt asked the Kolkata audience if they agreed with that definition, she did not get any response. The bhadralok were themselves confused with this new spin on freedom. If you want to change this nationalism versus anti-nationalism narrative, at least question the narrator who is doing such an interview or question the new narrator who gives such obscure definitions.

If you do not want to research the intricacies of constitutional provisions and our fundamental rights and duties, then leave it to the courts to decide who is wrong and who is not. But first and foremost, please be sensitive to the feelings of others. If an insensitive remark does get passed inadvertently, do not allow it to gain egregious proportions that it starts affecting even those who are not directly involved. The result will be a more tolerant India.