A letter, fair or foul, is the question

The second round of DNA Samwad had its trigger in the open letter written to the Prime Minister by 49 filmmakers and well-known personalities, expressing concern about the alleged environment of intolerance, hatred and anger in the country. Also discussed was the letter that 62 artists and intellectuals wrote claiming the former as ‘selective outrage’. The invited panellists included experts, political leaders and social media influencers from both sides of the ideological spectrum who analysed and debated the claims made in the letter.

Those present were Dr Ashok Dhawale, senior CPI(M) leader; Priti Gandhi, social media influencer;  Rueben Mascarenhas, social media influencer; Ratan Sharda, columnist; Suresh Nakhwa, BJP spokesperson; Ram Puniyani, author; Ranjit Savarkar, director; Savarkar Rashtriya Smarak; and Sachin Sawant, Congress spokesperson.

Questions were raised as to whether the ‘Jai Shri Ram’ slogan had been actually converted into a battle cry by the current dispensation as mentioned in the letter. The panellists raised concern whether the current government too is curbing dissent and like the Emergency period,  censoring the news papers. Congress spokesperson Sachin Sawant, in response, said, that the BJP, even after five years of governing the country, is yet to gain ‘Sabka Vishwas’ of the citizens.

LEFT

Dr Ashok Dhawale, CPI(M) leader

I would like to place my opinion in four bullet points. Firstly, the statement by 49 celebrities and intellectuals is very timely and very significant. It expresses the opinions of a large number of people in this country. Not only the members of the minority communities, but also a very large section of secular majority, who stands by the Constitution of India. Lynching cases have gone up since 2014. Ninety per cent of the religion-based crime has increased since 2014 up till now. The very first lynching crime took place in Maharashtra — the Mohsin Shaikh incident in Pune.

There is no doubt that such anger and intolerance has been increasing. Secondly, coming to Dalits' issue, there have been three incidents which have been documented and covered by the media. One is the incident in Pune, the other one is the riots in Sarangpur and the last, the attacks on Dalits in Bhima Koregaon. There has definitely been a crackdown on dissent. Manohar Bhie and Ekbote, have been left free, but Sudha Bharadwaj, who has done nothing, is in jail for months. Five journalists in Uttar Pradesh have been arrested for saying something to the chief minister.

The third point that I would like to stress is that it is not only about the attacks on Muslims and Dalits and minorities. In the last five years, the biggest attacks have been on the majority community, Hindus, who comprise 82% of the population of this country. Hindus have been attacked as well due to the flawed economic policies that the government has unleashed which have impacted everyone. I agree that Jai Shri Ram is being used in a way that it shouldn't be used. It is not used in anger, instead, it is a form of greeting. Either Allah hu Akbar or Jai Shri Ram, if being used as an instrument of hatred, is wrong. Dissent is heart of democracy, but now it is being associated with anti-nationalism. This is being done for the last five years. Any kind of dissent, demanding basic rights, and you are being labelled as a Naxal. The supression of dissent went so far, that a group of lawyers went to court and beat up Kanhaiya Kumar, and this is nothing but going towards fascism

Ram Puniyani, Author

Lynching is guided by a manufactured, constructed or a structured hatred. So the hatred against the target is something which is a guiding factor in such crimes. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, in 2016 there have been 840 incidents against Dalits and the conviction rate has come down. That 90% cases of hate crimes based on religions in last nine years have happened after 2014, while 62% of the victims are Muslims which is 14.24% of the total population; 12% of the victims are Christians which is 2.3% of the total population. It is uncomfortable for us to accept the social reality, but I think unless we accept it, we can't control it.

Once the state gives a signal, and conveys that such crimes are not acceptable then such cases will come down. But in many cases, the guilty people got a subtle signal that it was wrong but nothing was really being done to prevent it. Many of culprits were even honoured whereas the families of the victims in most of the cases rather than being empathised or being taken into confidence, had cases put against them. There is no systematic force sitting there in Delhi or Nagpur asking to lynch people. It is the atmosphere of hatred that has been intensified. Also, after 2014 many of these people (accused) feel, "well it is their government, saiyyan bhaye kotwal toh dar kayeka".

The letter is being misinterpreted. All they want to convey is that Jai Shri Ram is becoming a war cry and we do not like it. Jai Shri Ram is the slogan to greet each other, I still say Ram-Ram when I meet my parents. Kabir, Mahatma Gandhi and everyone has seen him in various forms. But the way the slogan of Jai Shri Ram is being used in Parliament to heckle MPs of Opposition, from there people got a signal that is can be used as a war cry. Nothing is static, and this slogan is being used in a wrong context that is what the letter says, and to which I agree. The slogan should be used in a positive way and to greet each other.

Dissent is ground for democracy, this is the way for the government to learn why people are unhappy with their policies. Based on this they can modify and evolve.

Rueben Mascarenhas, Social media influencer

Let me start my remark with a quote, 'Mosquitoes are more socialist than Karl Marx', it doesn't make a distinction between rich or the poor. There is commonality of fate, if something is happening to someone in some part of our country, if we don't react to it, sooner or later there are chances of it happening to another person as well.

In the last two years, we have seen mainstreaming of hate. We have seen desensitisation of population towards human rights of a particular community. You first say that a particular community is responsible for all the ills in the country and that 'community' can be replaced by Muslims, Dalits or other communities depending upon what is the political context of the particular state. Other than this, they do not have any other rights and so if they died, it has to be always validated.

Secondly, our Constitution is extremely cosmopolitan in its spirit which is about acceptance. We may have individual likes and dislikes, the problem is with the active hatred and active promotion of the hatred. If the state wants to put people in place then it can. In this issue, the state is not taking the initiative to reach a logical conclusion. I am not saying that there is a command centre that asks people to go out and hit others.

The pot needs to be kept simmering, any slogan when someone is forced to say it, then there is a problem. There's a video of the act of lynching being made, the whole act is being put up as a badge of honour. But if anyone asks a question you are undermined, if anyone dissents with popular narrative you become anti-national, the relevant discourse is being hijacked.

What we are witnessing here is dog-whistle kind of politics. Certain things are innocuous like 'Jai Maa Kali' or 'Allah Hu Akbar'. We have seen the highest rate of unemployment for so many years, there are so many other issues plaguing our society, the sloganeering is nothing but a diversionary tactic from the real issues.

Sachin Sawant, Congress Spokesperson

When you talk about certain issues you say that Hindus are the problem and this has been there since 2014. From 2014 to 2019, the slogan of BJP was Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas. After 2019 the BJP had to add the phrase, Sabka Vishwas because definitely Sabka Vishwas was not earned in the last five years. You have to understand that BJP comes with a RSS baggage. It is basically driven by the RSS ideology. RSS, driven by Golvalkar, or Deendayal Upadhyay believed that Muslims are an internal threat, and they are a problem in this country. This is so definite that it is in their books and the BJP leaders have followed that ideology.

As Puniyani said that criminals were being honoured. Now I question, who was honouring them? Jayant Sinha, who is a minister, and Giriraj Singh went and met an accused, and there are many people who have been felicitated and are given an extra honour. It doesn't give a supportive environment. You cannot have equilibrium in this country, you cannot equate the majority with the minority. We need to create a practical equilibrium in the country. The opinion of those 49 people who have written the letter to the Prime Minister matters because those 49 are the citizens of the country. I don't want to take names, but people going about intolerance have been felicitated in the country. They have received honours like Padma Shri and this will continue. In Bhima Koregaon case, neither Ekbote nor Bhide have been called for questioning even once. The moment someone has a question there's a narrative to undermine them.

Use of Jai Shri Ram for political reasons is wrong. We will oppose if someone forced Ranjit Savarkar to say Allah Hu Akbar. The autocratic way of government has been evolving over the past few years. They are using several democratic means to become autocratic, the gaps in Constitution are being misused to become autocratic. Influencing and controlling the media is a part of autocracy, when we talk about institutions that are being influenced or being taken over by the government, it is called autocracy.

RIGHT

Ratan Sharda, Columnist

A rationalist on the Shivling, and in another instance a temple was being desecrated at Chandni Chowk, but no one was offended that time, no one said anything. But when someone quotes from the Quran, then people say that there should be a limit to dissent. Right to offend should be fundamental or it should be available to nobody. So, blasphemy cannot be one way.

The film celebrities kept quiet when Vivek Agnihotri was hounded, when a school going girl was killed when she wanted to go to a school in a Naxal area. What type of tolerance and anger are we talking about here? I believe that all violence should be condemned. Everyone is talking about the lynching of beef eaters but what about cow protectors and the police who go by law and lose their lives?

In earlier intolerance version of 1.0, there were similar letters, and issues of intolerance, attack on churches, rapes of nuns, and all these were proven false. And then all these brave people of the highest order, did they ever apologise, did they say that "we regret that we made wrong statements. When you raise such horrifying statements then let me tell you last time they were proven wrong. Either you wait for the results to be out or wait for what the government is doing. You cannot make statements that are rhetorical and then run away. Hence I call these people intellectual stone-pelters. They will throw the stones and run away and will return when they see another opportunity.

The protection of minority under Article 30 has evolved to be discriminatory against the majority. This discrimination is constitutional discrimination. Fascism is the force of abuse on others and it stops the people in forming their opinion. In Kerala, there is no dissent where Christians, Muslims and Dalits were killed. Bhima Koregaon has been happening for 100 years, there were no riots ever but this time it happened because there were Urban Naxals invited. Jai Shri Ram is not a war cry. It started as an act of defiance when Hindus were persecuted in Bengal, when Dalits were beaten up, then Jai Shri Ram became an act of defiance. It was used in Parliament to defy the people, I criticised it.

Ranjit Savarkar, Director, Savarkar National Memorial

The whole issue is politically motivated and I am of a firm opinion that a narrative is being deliberately made. If you go by percentage, then how many lynchings have really happened. Just a couple of days ago, two incidents in Aurangabad have been proven to be false.

Do you want to say that whenever something happens to a Muslim by a Hindu criminal, then Muslims are being targeted? If you divide crimes based on the criminal's religion, then let me give you figures that in Maharashtra, the Muslim population is 11% but if you go to see in prisons, 32.8% of inmates are Muslims. So are you saying that Muslims are from a criminal religion? No then how is it being held for Hindus?

Let me give an example. Three years ago in a village near Murbad, a person was killed by cow thieves in the night, the villagers were so affected that they started patrolling in the night and the psychology was such that if they would have found a cow thief, they would have killed him. This is not because they were killing cows, but they were murdering farmers, these are the reactions against criminals.

In Mumbai, if a pick-pocket was caught in earlier days, in most of the cases the anger in people was so much that they would kill him. So are you going to say that the pick pocket was a Muslim, and a Hindu mob killed him. Earlier this wasn't the case, but now it is happening and people are pointing fingers, based on the religion of the victim and the accused. The problem is that in every case, we look out for a religion.

In India, there is no majority. The Hindus are divided into several castes and Muslims are not in minority. After suffering from years of oppression, we were very tolerant towards them. But now we are not going to tolerate people who are oppressing us. We are raising our voices. People are now voicing their opinion by casting votes for the candidate of their choice. Yes, we are intolerant and we are not going to tolerate encroachment on our rights.

Priti Gandhi, Social media influencer

The first letter has very clearly insisted that minorities are being targetted. I would like to say that is not true. The description of lynching is different. If we see the official figures of the Home Ministry, during UPA 1, we had 3,821 lynching cases and in the NDA 1 (2014 to 2019), there are records of 2,920 lynching cases. The number of cases has reduced but the noise about the cases is being made more.

The 49 number of people who have written the letter is a very small number to count. They are personally affected by the change in the government. All this is politically motivated and this agenda is now creating a lot of unrest in the country within our people.

Specifically talking about Aparna Sen, she has said, Jai Shri Ram is a war cry. I take a very strong objection of Jai Shri Ram being called a war cry. A war cry is a call made to destroy, it is a call to kill. You cannot say that Jai Shri Ram is a war cry. We all are aware of cases where Islamic terrorists blowing themselves up after saying Allah Hu Akbar. But no one dares to question those words or there is no outcry over this.

The crackdown is not on dissent, it is on anti-nationalism. If anybody is going to talk about breaking the country, then all of us support the crackdown. In West Bengal, when you are not allowing Durga idol immersions, they are stopped because of Moharram, at that time where does human rights go?

In a picture, Aparna Sen is spotted with Binayak Sen, a convicted Naxal who is accused of killing tribals, that is dissent. Aparna Sen has no business to give her views on intolerance if she is sitting and encouraging Binayak Sen.

It is not wrong to chant Jai Shri Ram, what is wrong is being beaten up and using the slogan wrongly. If you consider Jai Shri Ram as heckling then there's nothing more left for me to say. If people on the JNU campus are shouting slogans of Bharat Tere Tukde Honge and top Congress leader Rahul Gandhi is seen supporting them, that is not dissent.

Suresh Nakhua, BJP spokesperson

You don't have the ultimate freedom of expression, it comes with certain reasonable restrictions. Talking about the letter, the prime signatory of the letter was Aparna Sen, she is sitting with Binayak Sen and convicted Chhatradhar Mahato, so they don't have credibility. It is selective outrage. Why aren't Sikh killings of 1984 being talked about, thousands of Sikhs were massacred. Sikhs are a minority too. After May 23, 2019, there are 37 documented cases of Dalits lynched by Muslim mobs and in this letter, they are not talked about. This is a pure case of selective outrage and they just want to target the current dispensation because of the upcoming elections in Bengal and Mamata Banerjee has a weak wicket against Modi.

I would like to come to the gentleman from Congress, he was talking about people honouring someone who has lynched. Sir, you have made them chief ministers, one of them was even adorning the party post six months ago, now he's in jail. Kamalnath was made chief minister, and (Jagdish)Tytler was holding a party post. Coming to Bhima Koregaon, have you heard the speeches of Jignesh Mewani, they were asking people to come on roads and fight. When they are talking about lynching, then why aren't lynchings of Ayub Pandit being talked about, why not the FIR filed against Pehlu Khan being talked about, this is selective outrage. Talking about Sudha Bharadwaj, and Gautam Navlakha, a charge sheet has been filed and he (Navlakha) has been connected to the Hizbul.

Dissent isn't curbed. During the debate one person talked about Mussolini, fascism and compared the current regime with Hitler and Mussolini. Naxal, a terror apologist representative conveniently forgot the support given by communists to UPA 1 that had Antonia Maino aka Sonia Gandhi as super PM. Who is Antonia Maino? She is a daughter of Stefano Maino, who as a per Mussolini's forces, proudly fought against the Russian Reds alongside Hitler. The rich representatives of the political party now exist only in JNU, Media and Kerala.