What's new

‘India is witnessing a war within itself’: Arundhati Roy

Yeah she was an Indian when her book won the international prize.

I wont be surprised if suddenly bhartis jump in glee and claim her as true Indian if she was even nominated for nobel peace prize :angel:

I remember when MBI Munshi posted the thread abut Peepli live every Indian was on his throat but as now it is being weighted for Oscar oh yeh all of you are suddenly owning it up.

Yeah Jana I was hoping you would bring it up.

That one incident shows the hypocrisy of this so called intellectual.

She renounced the Indian citizenship because of India's nuke blasts but went on ,throwing away all her principles, to accept the Booker prize from a nation that had conducted hundreds of nuclear tests.

Is the opinion of this lady worth debating.?

A former Indian disgusted to be an Indian then.... Bloody hell all these semantics.

Munshi bhai,actually its the reverse thats true.Many Indians were ashamed of this lady being their compatriot that they heaved a collective sigh of relief when she did that citizenship-renouncing tamasha.
But being what she is,she again came back and calls herself an Indian now.
 
.
"Eminent writer and social activist Arundhati Roy alleged India is witnessing a war within itself since independence and is actually a poor super power."

When does india become the super power.....they are not even near super power....
 
.
Is Lahore DISPUTED TERRITORY? NO, unlike Kashmir which IS, no matter how much you try to portraty it as an "integral matter"

So make up your mind. Is it because of the Disputed nonsense or blood ties because of which you claim Kashmir to be intrensic to Pakistan.



PS: You do need to look up the dictionary meaning of intrinsic..
 
.
Kashmir is an disputed territory for Pakistanis because you are obsessed with kashmir....you are frustrated people because you know Kashmir was,is and will remain an integral part of India


Sorry, the whole world through UN recognises Kashmir as "disputed" so you can go on living in your dreams thinking it is only we who think Kashmir is disputed. Yes, we are obsessed with Kashmir because it is our right, and in order to achieve what is yours you have to fight for it and be obsessed with it, otherwise it goes away.
 
.
Ahh you posted it already.

Just look at the highlighted parts. And look at the red part on which you are banking on. Which development ??? if it was of any good to the locals then this would not culminated to this insurgency

No one is contesting that GoI neglected the area in the past that led to the manifestation..

Going by the reports, 25% of the area that was infested with maoists has already been cleared. Do understand that this 40000 sq miles area was proliferated over last 3-4 decades. So things seem to be moving in the right direction pretty fast.

And its both actions .. Bullet for militants and development for tribals that is jointly being acted on..
 
.
Govt regains control over 10,000 sq km areas dominated by Naxals

Read more: Govt regains control over 10,000 sq km areas dominated by Naxals - The Times of India Govt regains control over 10,000 sq km areas dominated by Naxals - The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a silent but significant win over the Maoists, security forces have regained control over more than 10,000 sq km area dominated by the Naxals in six worst-affected states.

Official sources described the success of the security forces as "very significant" as nearly 40,000 sq km area had been controlled by the red ultras in Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Bihar and West Bengal for last several years.

"We have got maximum gain in Chhattisgarh. We hope that the success will continue in the coming days," a source said.

More than 60,000 central paramilitary forces have been assisting the state police forces in their fight against the Maoists.

The success of the forces in last few months was largely attributed to the joint coordinated efforts of the police forces of the states as well as the Centre and better intelligence networks.

Naxal violence has claimed the lives of over 10,000 civilians and security personnel in the last five years.

Out of a total of 10,268 casualties between 2005 and May 2010, 2,372 deaths have been reported in 2009 as against 1,769 in 2008 and 1,737 in 2007.

Besides, Naxals targeted 362 telephone towers, many school buildings, roads, culverts in 2009 alone.

The ultras have killed at least 100 policemen in Chhattisgarh since April. Their hand is also suspected behind the derailment of an Express train in West Bengal that claimed the lives of nearly 150 people.

Government has been maintaining that accelerated development and calibrated police action are the two pillars of its anti-Naxal policy.


Read more: Govt regains control over 10,000 sq km areas dominated by Naxals - The Times of India Govt regains control over 10,000 sq km areas dominated by Naxals - The Times of India
 
.
So make up your mind. Is it because of the Disputed nonsense or blood ties because of which you claim Kashmir to be intrensic to Pakistan.



PS: You do need to look up the dictionary meaning of intrinsic..

Oh cut the crap, yes i am very well aware of the meaning of intresnsic and yes Kashmir is intrensic to Pakistan due to many reasons. If you want to i can list them again but i feel it will be a massive waste of time because you guys are stuck in your nutshells refusing to accept reality which is that the vast majority of Kashmiris want to have nothing to do with India.
 
.
Sorry, the whole world through UN recognises Kashmir as "disputed" so you can go on living in your dreams thinking it is only we who think Kashmir is disputed. Yes, we are obsessed with Kashmir because it is our right, and in order to achieve what is yours you have to fight for it and be obsessed with it, otherwise it goes away.

Sometimes one is obsessed with his own view.

East Pakistan went away....
 
.
Sorry, the whole world through UN recognises Kashmir as "disputed" so you can go on living in your dreams thinking it is only we who think Kashmir is disputed. Yes, we are obsessed with Kashmir because it is our right, and in order to achieve what is yours you have to fight for it and be obsessed with it, otherwise it goes away.

I have asked this of our Pakistani friends a number of times in this forum but have never received a response..Asking again

When was it when UNSC last passed a resolution on Kashmir?

When was it when a major world power formally asked India to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir?
 
.
Yeah she was an Indian when her book won the international prize.

I wont be surprised if suddenly bhartis jump in glee and claim her as true Indian if she was even nominated for nobel peace prize :angel:

I remember when MBI Munshi posted the thread abut Peepli live every Indian was on his throat but as now it is being weighted for Oscar oh yeh all of you are suddenly owning it up.
Yes, people like Arundhati Roy help us in keeping a tab on our Reality ; In fact i remember another name whom pakistanis will be "proud" of ; His name is Abdus Salam and in fact pakistanis were so proud, that they rubbed off his religious identity (of being a Muslim), because he was an Ahmediya.

The Union of India has a lot of freedom than the GoP when it comes to freedom of expression ; So though Arundhati Roy may be right in her perspective of Social Disparity and the lack of sound initiatives to correct this disparity by India, the Indian intellectual society is aware of when she takes her point too far.
 
.
Sorry, the whole world through UN recognises Kashmir as "disputed" so you can go on living in your dreams thinking it is only we who think Kashmir is disputed. Yes, we are obsessed with Kashmir because it is our right, and in order to achieve what is yours you have to fight for it and be obsessed with it, otherwise it goes away.

Sorry but them which world power mentioned about the k-word last time,except 1 china who act on ur behalf,not a single nation want to get involved in this issue,not even the Arab world mince anything about Kashmir,this case will finally die down no matter how much pakistan cry for it
 
.
Oh cut the crap, yes i am very well aware of the meaning of intresnsic and yes Kashmir is intrensic to Pakistan due to many reasons. If you want to i can list them again but i feel it will be a massive waste of time because you guys are stuck in your nutshells refusing to accept reality which is that the vast majority of Kashmiris want to have nothing to do with India.

I understand that concept of Democracy is a little hard to understand for some Pakistani due to constant failure of this form of govt in Pakistan.

In such a system, a particular state does not have a say in deciding whether it wants to continue to stay with the country or not. On issues that big, its the whole country that decides.

So unless it is vast majority of Indians who dont want Kashmir to have anything to do with India, Kashmir will always be a distant fantasy for Pakistan.
 
.
So unless it is vast majority of Indians who dont want Kashmir to have anything to do with India, Kashmir will always be a distant fantasy for Pakistan.

Though just sematics I would like two corrections in your posts.

1)vast majority of Indians - Absolute majority of Indians.

2)distant fantasy for Pakistan - not near or distant, just a fantasy.
 
.
Just a word before you read further, don't get angry, think - work begins with THINK:

And please don't post angry rejoinders, just read and THINK - a Brighter future is build on critical thinking not on anger

October 2, 2010
Games India Isn’t Ready to Play
By PANKAJ MISHRA

Mashobra, India

ON Friday afternoon, public spaces across north India were flooded with policemen and paramilitaries. Thousands of alleged “troublemakers” were arrested. The sending of bulk text messages from mobile phones was banned. These precautions had nothing to do with the opening on Sunday of the Commonwealth Games, the athletic competition among the nations of the former British Empire that so many Indians have hoped would be their country’s symbolic coming out as a world power.

Rather, the police were out in force because an Indian court had pronounced its verdict on the site in the town of Ayodhya that has been long claimed by Hindu nationalists as the birthplace of Lord Rama. The government did not want a repeat of the horrific mob violence that in 1992 had followed the destruction by Hindu nationalists of a 16th-century mosque standing on the land in question.

Shortly after the verdict, which split the disputed site unequally in favor of Hindus and to the detriment of Muslims, I went for a walk through the Himalayan village near my home. Even here, 600 miles from Ayodhya, people seemed to be playing it safe, the market partly closed, and shopkeepers clustered around television sets behind shutters.

Only the migrant laborers, who have come hundreds of miles from central India to the Himalayas, were still at work, men, women and even children carrying heavy stones on their heads at the construction projects that litter the hillsides.

Easily identified — the parents small and thin and dark, and the children with distended bellies and rust-brown hair that speak of chronic malnutrition — these migrant laborers have been a regular sight here for some years, building summer homes for the affluent of Delhi all day, and then huddling under tin shacks at night.

I stopped to talk to a couple I know. All morning news channels had been working themselves into a frenzy of fear and anxiety. Even the more sober commentators fretted whether our “rising economic superpower” would be torn apart again over the question of whether the mythical Lord Rama was born in a ramshackle provincial town.

But the laborers hadn’t heard of the court verdict. As colder weather approaches, their greatest anxiety seemed to be to protect themselves: the punitive rains this summer have blown away the roofs of their living quarters. And it seemed only right that these helots of India’s globalized economy should be indifferent to the possible despoiling of India’s image in the West.

So who is anxious over India’s image in the wealthy world? That particular burden is borne by India’s small affluent elite, for whom the last few months have been full of painful and awkward self-reckonings. Certainly, the fear of violence over Ayodhya was only the latest in a long line of reminders that, as the columnist Vir Sanghvi put it, “as hard as we try to build a new India ... old India still has the power to humiliate and embarrass us.”

Since June, a mass insurrection, resembling the Palestinian intifada, has raged in the Indian-held Valley of Kashmir. Defying draconian curfews, large and overwhelmingly young crowds of Kashmiri Muslims have protested human rights abuses by the nearly 700,000 Indian security forces there. Ill-trained soldiers have met stone-pelting protesters with gunfire, killing more than a hundred Kashmiris, mostly teenagers, and ensuring another militant backlash that will be exploited by radical Islamists in Pakistan.

A full-blown insurgency is already under way in central India, where guerrilla fighters inspired by Mao Zedong’s tactics are arrayed against a government they see as actively colluding with multinational corporations to deprive tribal people of their mineral-rich lands. In recent months, the Maoists have attacked the symbols of the state’s authority — railroads, armories, police stations — seemingly at will, killing scores of people.

Yet the greatest recent blow to wealthy Indians’ delusions on the subject of their nation’s inexorable rise has been the Commonwealth Games, for which Delhi was given a long and painful facelift. For so many, the contest was expected to banish India’s old ghosts of religious and class conflict, and cement its claims to a seat at the high tables of international superpowers.

But the games turned into a fiasco well before their scheduled opening. Two weeks ago, a huge footbridge connected to the main stadium collapsed. The federation that runs the games has called the athletes’ housing “uninhabitable.” The organizers have had to hire an army of vicious langur monkeys to keep wild animals from infesting the venues. Pictures of crumbling arenas and ****** toilets are circulating more widely than the beautiful landscapes of the government’s “Incredible India” tourism campaign.

As the ratings agency Moody worries that the debacle has “tarnished” India’s image, commentators here angrily hunt for blameworthy politicians and officials over what they call “national shame.” The contrast to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, in which the Chinese government largely overcame controversy and staked a claim to a dominant place in the world order, is all too depressingly clear.

These shocks to the Indian self-image are traumatic. But then the illusions about the new India have been too blinding. Vigorous economic growth, high-profile Indian businessmen congregating at the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, and the greater visibility of successful and articulate Indians abroad have combined to make India, or English-speaking Indians, anyway, appear a perfect fit for the Western model of modernity — a “roaring capitalist success story,” as Foreign Affairs described the country in 2006.

It has helped our self-image, too, that Indians have many democratic institutions that are missing in most non-Western countries. Thus the major narrative that has developed internationally about democratic India in recent years assumes it to be more “stable” than authoritarian China. Yet Beijing faces no political problems as severe as the many insurgencies in central India and Kashmir, or tragedies as great as the waves of suicides of tens of thousands of overburdened farmers over the last two decades.

Certainly, the narrative of India as vibrant democracy and booming economy suppresses more than it reveals. Business-lounge elites around the world revel in statistics about economic growth and Indians rising up Forbes’s rankings of billionaires. At the same time, they simply ignore the alarmingly deep and growing inequalities of income and resources in India.

The newspaper Financial Express estimated that the private wealth of the 49 Indians on the Forbes list is nearly 31 percent of India’s gross domestic product — a ratio that makes them three times more crucial to the Indian economy than their billionaire counterparts in the United States are to the American economy. In July, a United Nations report revealed that there are more poor people in just eight Indian states than in all the 26 countries of sub-Saharan Africa, with the large state of Madhya Pradesh comparable in intensity of deprivation to war-ravaged Congo.

India not only lives, as the cliché goes, in several centuries at once; it is also a land of multiple narratives, which continuously and often painfully overlap. The Commonwealth Games, the showcase of India’s progress, uprooted as many as 100,000 of the most deprived Indians in Delhi no less ruthlessly than the Chinese cleanse their ultramodern cities of the ungainly poor.

The laborers building the vacation retreats of the privileged in my village — part of the explosion of cheap labor that has helped build private fortunes in India and abroad — are refugees from the part of India where longstanding feudal cruelties are now compounded by the battles between Maoists and multinational corporations seeking precious minerals.

Well-to-do Indians fear that Hindu nationalists emboldened by the verdict on Ayodhya might scare off foreign investors. But it was Hindu nationalists who, coming to power in 1998 through successive bloody anti-Muslim campaigns, followed policies that expedited the country’s grossly uneven economic development and entrenched corporate special interests in India’s politics.

More fatefully, the Hindu nationalists exploded nuclear bombs underground and threatened Pakistan with all-out war, creating a legacy of hard-line nationalism — which the Indian military in Kashmir and successive governments in Delhi have embraced.

Certainly, the four million Muslims of Kashmir, who every day suffer the brutalities of what’s arguably the world’s largest military occupation, cannot be blamed for failing to make meaningful distinctions between Hindu nationalists and the current government, led by the more moderate Congress Party. Their fate remains that of a minority kept under perpetual siege by a paranoid nation-state.

Like hundreds of millions of other voiceless Indians, the migrant laborers in my village are even less able to distinguish between the oppressions of old feudal India and the pitiless exploitations of the new business-minded India. I wonder if the recent destruction of their fragile shelters doesn’t hold some symbolism. Perhaps the greatest danger to India’s image is that they may one day cease to cower in those shacks, and, like their counterparts in central India, erupt in armed revolt.

This summer’s setbacks to India’s image may soon fade from memory. But their lesson for the rhapsodic narrators of India’s modernity seems clear. “There is no document of civilization,” Walter Benjamin once wrote, “which is not at the same time a document of barbarism.” This is the melancholy truth that all narratives about “rising” India must acknowledge if they are not to be trumped by pictures of a collapsed bridge and a leaking toilet.



Pankaj Mishra is the author of “Temptations of the West: How to Be Modern in India, Pakistan, Tibet and Beyond.”
 
.
Below is the second of a series of pieces I hope to post, that will allow us a forum to look at issues with a view to re-defining what the content of nationalism ought to be, I encourage you to think about these and not be sidelined by emotional positions - just read and think -- there will be many more challenges ahead, it's more important to think properly than it is to respond emotionally :


Respecting our multicultural heritage


Malini Parthasarathy

It is to the credit of India's mature civil society and political system that despite the contentious nature of the Ayodhya judgment which ordinarily might have activated the usual fault lines and sparked communal tensions, the aftermath has been remarkably peaceful. It would appear that the exhortations by political and community leaders to ensure that the Ayodhya dispute was seen as past baggage that needed to be speedily put away and that “India has moved on from 1992” have had real effect on our collective consciousness.

The horrifying story of the Babri Masjid demolition in December 1992 by Hindu chauvinist vandals who sought to preempt a judicial resolution of the ownership of the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site on which the 500-year-old mosque stood, by reducing it to rubble, was one of the darkest chapters in our history. It also severely dented India's image as a pluralist democracy committed to the secular character of its public space.

Fortunately, with the phenomenon of Hindu cultural nationalism receding from the centre of India's political discourse in recent years, it has become possible to rebuild the faith of minority communities in the capacity of India's political and judicial system to deliver justice. The Supreme Court's direction in March 2008 to set up a special investigation team to probe afresh a bunch of cases pertaining to the 2002 post-Godhra riots in Gujarat was a significant intervention. It signalled to the minority communities that the judiciary would strive to uphold the principles of the rule of law and equality before the law as mandated by the Indian Constitution.

A major reason for the retreat of Hindu cultural nationalism in recent years is the recognition by large sections of the Indian middle classes that the aspiration to make India a power to reckon with globally in terms of economic clout would require an underpinning of a secular public culture in which personal identities are consciously subdued. It is also clear that this aspiration, in which many young Indians have invested their hopes and dreams, requires a national narrative scripted in an idiom of modernity.

Religious clashes drawing upon imagery of tridents battling crescents are clearly out of place in this unfolding narrative which requires an emphasising of identity as an Indian citizen rather than any other affiliation. This is why the recent Ayodhya judgment with its implied reaffirmation of concepts that have no place in a modern democracy founded on the rule of law is deeply unsettling
.

It has opened the backdoor for the return of the Hindu cultural nationalist narrative with its strong majoritarian political overtones. A judicial pronouncement which includes an assertion that “the disputed site is the birthplace of Lord Ram” and that “the place of birth is a juristic person and is a deity” not only admits Hindu mythology into the public arena but also accepts unquestioningly the claim that the disputed site is indeed the Ayodhya mentioned in the Ramayana epic, belongs more in a theocracy than in a modern democracy.

Also reinforcing the impression of theocratic overtones was the observation by the special Bench of the Allahabad High Court that the portion under the central dome of the three-dome structure of the demolished mosque where the idol of Ram Lalla had been placed was the birthplace of Lord Rama “as per faith and belief of the Hindus”
.

As leading historian Romila Thapar has pointed out in this newspaper (October 2) “the verdict has created a precedent in the court of law that land can be claimed by declaring it to be the birthplace of a divine or semi-divine being worshipped by a group that defines itself as a community.” Noting that the deliberate destruction of the medieval mosque found no mention in the summary of the verdict, Dr. Thapar has also expressed concern that “there will now be many such janmasthans wherever appropriate property can be found or a required dispute manufactured

This is the core of the Hindu cultural majoritarian challenge to India's democratic framework. The rallying of mass sentiment on the Ayodhya issue, which hinged on the metaphor of Ramjanmabhoomi, essentially utilises Hindu sacred geography to build a political movement around religious pilgrimage centres. Ayodhya, Mathura, Varanasi, are metaphors designed to evoke primordial religious fervour and channelise this into a political movement. By making Hindu sacred geography the landscape on which the Indian nation is to be imagined, it becomes much easier to exclude those who are not Hindus and render them second class citizens.

The second premise of Hindu cultural majoritarianism that had perhaps unwittingly been given credibility by the Ayodhya judgment is the fallacious concept of prior antiquity. The sharply contested findings of the Archaeological Survey of India's excavations suggesting the ruins of a 10th century temple lay underneath the mosque's rubble, a point repeatedly highlighted by the Hindutva temple agitation, have been given credence by two judges of the Special Bench who observed that the mosque was built after the demolition of a temple.

Given that the Babri Masjid had been razed to the ground precisely to avenge an act presumed to have been done centuries ago, to provide any link in juridical terms between the ruins of the temple, the razed mosque and the proposed temple of the future, would be setting a dangerous precedent in a democracy governed by modern civil laws. Basically, the idea that shrines existing today can be knocked down on the basis of unproven claims that they stand on the ruins of temples destroyed centuries ago is to suggest that prior antiquity of shrines, even if not really proven, can be a ground to tear down present day structures.


It was the Narasimha Rao administration which had first given respectability to the Hindu cultural majoritarian argument that if the prior antiquity of a temple's existence could be established, it would be sufficient ground to insist that the mosque be shifted from the contested place. This specious concept which seemed to have no time bar and could span over centuries was placed on the agenda of the negotiations between the VHP and the Babri Masjid Action Committee that were held under the aegis of the Prime Minister's Office. The saving grace was the Supreme Court's refusal in 1993 to legitimise this line of inquiry. It categorically rejected the Presidential reference put to it under Article 143 on this issue of whether a temple pre-existed a mosque or not, thereby ensuring that this idea lost all credibility as a point in the negotiations.

Ayodhya as an issue appeared to dwarf all other concerns in the agenda of Hindu cultural nationalists because it became a point of competitive contestation between the Congress and the BJP. Since 1986, by a series of gestures intended to rally a vote-bank of Hindu voters, the Congress under Rajiv Gandhi gave substantive credibility to the temple agitation. Of course it was the BJP and L.K. Advani whose Rath Yatra pitchforked the Ayodhya issue into the public spotlight, which made the temple issue the centre piece of the resurgence of Hindu cultural nationalism in the 1990s.

It is possible to argue that Ayodhya is an exception, particularly so because of its historical circumstances, and that the momentum has ebbed from the political tide of Hindu cultural nationalism and that the issue is indeed moving to closure, even if it goes to the Supreme Court. It is also heartening that there is the Places of Worship Act (1993) which is a strong legal bulwark against similar disputes erupting over other existing shrines elsewhere in the country.

Yet what we need to guard against is the reemergence of a narrative that harks back to an imagined past and draws from cultural and mythological traditions of a particular community. This is not to suggest that in our own homes and in the private sphere, we do not have a right to celebrate our own cultural or religious identities. The danger manifests when we assert that these identities have political rights attached to them.

The ascendancy of cultural majoritarianism and its attendant narrative would only be at the expense of the entitlement of every Indian citizen to have equal cultural space in India's democratic framework.
For those of us who take pride in the idea of India as a rising power, we cannot afford backward-looking or unidimensional narratives that cannot really capture India's sensational success story as an economy and as a democratic republic. We must script a new narrative that puts the Indian citizen in the forefront as its central protagonist.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom