Indian writers guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent: Taslima Nasrin

[vsdoc]

If anyone of you are curious about why I was banned, then you can look into my posts in this thread from page 9 onwards... How Bias in Text books fuels division in Pakistani society

Banning members on online forums by the administration itself is an act of intolerance.

As in real life it indicates the inability to counter arguments or go your own way.

I am strongly anti banning.

 

[Spectre]

A couple of writers and intellectuals said it is okay to urinate on Hindu idols, one of them actually urinated on Hindu idols to prove his point...now they were murdered and it should be heavily condemned, and the culprits must be punished suitably as per the law of the land, there is no doubt about it.

Glad we are on the same page.

But what about the other side, those writers may or may not have any respect for the Hindu religion and its gods, but there are millions who see the gods from a position of respect and worship them, I have seen people crying when the Durga idol is taken for Visharjan...as if their mother is leaving. What about their sentiments? Should freedom of speech (and action) be that absolute that it would be free to hurt others sentiments?

Freedom of speech must be absolute but not freedom of action - if sentiment of people are hurt then they should use the same freedom of speech provided to them to defend their faith and hurt them back. This is how a mature society functions

To put it bluntly and more realistically, is it okay for me to piss on anyone if I don't feel any sense of respect for that person? If you say idols are objects, then is it okay to piss on objects like photos of someones father or mother, or Mahatma Gandhi, or the national flag? How many will take my side even from the liberal western world if I say its is okay to piss on the Bible, or the on the statues of Jesus or Mother Mary, or draw Mother Mary in nude, or abuse Quran and Prophet Mohammad for that matter? If I am murdered in public beating for doing this, then it would be certainly condemnable, people shouldn't take law in their hands, but wouldn't my action will be condemnable also?

You cannot piss on a person or his property but you should be free to piss on anything you own be it photographs, statues or national flags. You should be free to use cartoons, movies, words, songs, poetry etc to express your thoughts freely without being concerned about how it effect other parties sensibilities. The offense given is intangible in all respects and the response should be in kind not murders and beatings.

So I assume you have no problems with lynching and riots while the society corrects itself ?

After all it would be a pity to have such a weak faith in the society that you need Laws to control it rather than let it correct itself.

laws are a part of society made by the society for the benefit of society not an alien entity sitting in judgement hence my faith in society encompasses my faith in it's laws.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

laws are a part of society made by the society for the benefit of society not an alien entity sitting in judgement hence my faith in society encompasses my faith in it's laws.

That is self contradictory. The very evidence of LAWS and a Armed force to implement it goes against the principles of letting society correct itself. It is evidence of a forced intervention to correct the social flaws.


To make matters simpler, consider the society an individual. Either you have faith in him to do the right thing and then let him be, or you demonstrate little faith and put armed guards around him. Monitor his actions and warn him.

You cannot have it both ways.



You cannot disguise your CONTROL as Law or Religion or brute majority and then say you are for life without external control.

 

[dray]

Freedom of speech must be absolute but not freedom of action - if sentiment of people are hurt then they should use the same freedom of speech provided to them to defend their faith and hurt them back. This is how a mature society functions

You cannot piss on a person or his property but you should be free to piss on anything you own be it photographs, statues or national flags. You should be free to use cartoons, movies, words, songs, poetry etc to express your thoughts freely without being concerned about how it effect other parties sensibilities. The offense given is intangible in all respects and the response should be in kind not murders and beatings.

If you take verbal abuse as freedom of speech, then please note that verbal abuse itself is a form of violence. That's why verbal abuse and hate speech are punishable offences as per the laws in most countries including India.

And there is little difference between pissing on someone or his/her photo as per the insult such an act intend to cause. The act of urinating is symbolic, the insult is real, and unlawful. Just to show you the difference, birds also do droppings on people, but people don't feel insulted and abused and defamed because birds don't intend to mean that by their action....intention is important.

Besides, sanctity of a few things need to be maintained forcefully to maintain law and order in the society, if people are free to insult and abuse anything in the name of freedom of speech, then the whole system of the civilized world will break down and we will go back to the dark ages of lawlessness. Let's be honest here, what we have is restricted freedom, and not absolute freedom that animals in the wild enjoy...and such restrictions are the other name of civilization.

 

[Mike_Brando]

If you haven't noticed yet, I am equally vocal against certain sadhus and sadhwis and their motor mouth compatriots. However, what mostly goes on in India in the name of secularism is another form of communalism.



Then we will start the party all over again.



Last year's Durgapuja was a dampener...this year it is again in full swing!

Police couldn't manage the crowd in Deshopriyo Park's Durgapuja with 88 feet Maa Durga, and closed the puja pandal itself. I am yet to see that puja.

Feast your eyes on pictures of world's tallest Durga idol because Kolkata police may not let you visit it - IBNLive

Dada,dohai aponar doya kore oi pujo ta dekhte jaben na!!Puro chaotic situation Deshapriya Park ghire toiri hoyeche.Amar barir theke ota khub beshi dure noy,amra bondhu ra age okhanei mathe adda ditam but e bochor oi rasta tai r maraini ei unwanted chaos er jonne!!
Btw Subho Saptami,amar pronam neben ebong barir sobai ke amar pronam deben

 

[Spectre]

consider the society an individual

The very fact society is not an individual but a collection is the basis for my argument hence accepting your premise is not possible

If you take verbal abuse as freedom of speech, then please note that verbal abuse itself is a form of violence. That's why verbal abuse and hate speech are punishable offences as per the laws in most countries including India.

There is a distinction between abuse and free thinking but it is a perceptional issue so I would not force it.

Most countries including India are still not mature enough as a society to handle freedom hence the laws restricting it. Hate Speech inciting violence is akin to violence - I concede, however personal opinion not exhorting others to act should be given a pass.

And there is little difference between pissing on someone or his/her photo as per the insult such an act intend to cause. The act of urinating is symbolic, the insult is real, and unlawful. Just to show you the difference, birds also do droppings on people, but people don't feel insulted and abused and defamed because birds don't intend to mean that by their action....intention is important.

As long as the act is self contained intent is irrelevant.

Besides, sanctity of a few things need to be maintained forcefully to maintain law and order in the society, if people are free to insult and abuse anything in the name of freedom of speech, then the whole system of the civilized world will break down and we will go back to the dark ages of lawlessness. Let's be honest here, what we have is restricted freedom, and not absolute freedom that animals in the wild enjoy...and such restrictions are the other name of civilization.

Such restrictions are a stepping stone in our way to a mature society - I hope future would bring lesser not more restrictions masquerading as civilization. Kindly note this is how freedom is taken - gradually with honeyed words and the force of false reason till one day we realize that we are in police state.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

As long as the act is self contained intent is irrelevant.

Intent is very important. Like motive is in any action. Even admissible in Law. Look, I fully support total freedom of speech. But then I will also say that an intellectual bully can't be expected to be protected from counter bullying in life. So yes, counter action is a part of the game. Whether you like it or not. Just that it should stop short of murder. Otherwise, naming, shaming of the half anna intellectuals is perfectly fine.

 

[Spectre]

Intent is very important. Like motive is in any action. Even admissible in Law. Look, I fully support total freedom of speech. But then I will also say that an intellectual bully can't be expected to be protected from counter bullying in life. So yes, counter action is a part of the game. Whether you like it or not. Just that it should stop short of murder. Otherwise, naming, shaming of the half anna intellectuals is perfectly fine.

Intent is important after the event - if the the event involves or leads to physical violence then based on intent punishment can be delivered otherwise in case of self contained acts intent is irrelevant.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

The very fact society is not an individual but a collection is the basis for my argument hence accepting your premise is not possible

You are not required to consider society an individual but the dynamics of self correction is the same.

Society is made up of many individuals so its behaviour as a macro organism will be along the same lines as the individual. Mathematical non-linear modelling that predicts huge cluster behaviour like weather, rain patter etc work on the same principle of integrating the sum to predict the behaviour of the whole.

Your rejection of my analogy has no basis in logic, only in pre conceived notions. (also know as prejudice)

 

[SarthakGanguly]

There is a distinction between abuse and free thinking but it is a perceptional issue so I would not force it.

Most countries including India are still not mature enough as a society to handle freedom hence the laws restricting it. Hate Speech inciting violence is akin to violence - I concede, however personal opinion not exhorting others to act should be given a pass.

Your idea of a mature free thinking liberal society is utopian is never likely to exist. It never did if you look close enough. Human beings are far too complex to follow a single unitarian line of thinking without exceptions.

Kalburgi was not a critic of Hinduism. He was a professional abuser of Hinduism. Which is not fine but I would tolerate it. His death was unfortunate. Mocking and shaming him, bringing his hypocrisy and selective outrage out, at this ripe age - shattering his self esteem and demeaning him in public, stripping him of all respect would have been a better thing to do. And people have as much right to offend as to get offended, regardless how many times 'seculars' scream against it.

Intent is important after the event -

Hence, it IS important. Always has, is and will be.

 

[Spectre]

Society is made up of many individuals so its behaviour as a macro organism will be along the same lines as the individual. Mathematical linear modelling that predicts huge cluster behaviour like weather, rain patter etc work on the same principle of integrating the sum to predict the behaviour of the whole.

False - Group behavior is distinct from the behavior of individuals. Group behavior is predictable, balances the extremes in absence of external stimuli and is a complex dynamic model far from linear aggregation. Hell even weather patterns are not linear.

Individual behavior as an analogy for group dynamics is laughably foolish - no offense!

Your idea of a mature free thinking liberal society is utopian is never likely to exist. It never did if you look close enough. Human beings are far too complex to follow a single unitarian line of thinking without exceptions.

Kalburgi was not a critic of Hinduism. He was a professional abuser of Hinduism. Which is not fine but I would tolerate it. His death was unfortunate. Mocking and shaming him, bringing his hypocrisy and selective outrage out, at this ripe age - shattering his self esteem and demeaning him in public, stripping him of all respect would have been a better thing to do. And people have as much right to offend as to get offended, regardless how many times 'seculars' scream against it.

Hence, it IS important. Always has, is and will be.

I agree with most of what you have said in the second para.

Regarding Utopian ideals - yes but we must try to get as close as we can. Otherwise the alternative is a suffocating blanket of laws

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I agree with most of what you have said in the second para.

Regarding Utopian ideals - yes but we must try to get as close as we can. Otherwise the alternative is a suffocating blanket of laws

Thank you.

We should not try to emulate utopian ideals at all. That was a 20th century dream. It never works. The pulse of the country needs to be taken into account. And then our own inbuilt conscience can be used to better it. We don't need to read Voltaire to know what should be done in India for example. We - you and I are better given the context ie India.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

False - Group behavior is distinct from the behavior of individuals. Group behavior is predictable, balances the extremes in absence of external stimuli and is a complex dynamic model far from linear aggregation. Hell even weather patterns are not linear.

Individual behavior as an analogy for group dynamics is laughably foolish - no offense!

Its a typo.. I meant non linear.

Individual behaviour is a subset of group behaviour so its not distinct. Group behaviour is no more predictable than individual behaviour. If it was predictable then we would already know who won in Bihar elections.

Why would there be a absence of external stimuli in group behaviour ? Media, wars, climate etc are ALL external stimuli for a group too. Fractal modelling is what is used to understand and predict how individual make up the group and how the group behaves. The largest part of that fractal model imitates the smallest.

So the analogy is quite apt, but in the end it is just that. An analogy, not the point itself.

 

[thesolar65]

Indian writers guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent: Taslima Nasrin
TNN | Oct 17, 2015, 01.00 AM IST

File photo of Taslima Nasrin at her residece in Kolkata. (TOI photo: Sayantan Ghosh)

The number of writers who have returned their Sahitya Akademi awards is now almost 30. The government has called their protest a manufactured protest. Now noted Bangladeshi writer and exile Taslima Nasrin has also entered the fray. In an interview to TOI'sSagarika Ghose she asks why writers were silent when she was being persecuted.

What is your response to the fact that so many writers in India have returned their Sahitya Akademi awards?

Writers have decided to protest against injustices by returning their awards. There is nothing wrong with it. Sometimes somebody gets an idea, others like it.

Do you agree with the government that this is a manufactured protest with a political agenda?

I do not think so. Writers are politically and socially conscious people.

Do you feel the writers were silent when you were targeted?

Most writers were silent when my book was banned in West Bengal, when 5 fatwas were issued against me in India, when I was thrown out of West Bengal, when I was kept under house arrest in Delhi for months and was forced to leave India, when my mega serial for TV was banned. I have been struggling alone for the right to live here and for my freedom of expression. Not only they were silent, famous writers like Sunil Ganguly and Shankha Ghosh appealed to Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, the then CM of West Bengal, to ban my book.

Are writers guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent?

Yes, I agree. Many writers are guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent.

Is intolerance rising in India —Dadri lynching for example?

Yes, I am afraid so.

You recently tweeted that there's a problem with the way secularism has been practised in India ...

Yes. Most secular people are pro-Muslims and anti-Hindu. They protest against the acts of Hindu fundamentalists and defend the heinous acts of Muslim fundamentalists.

Should writers return awards when they want to protest?

Come on, they are grown-up people. They should return awards if they want to. We cannot advise them.

Do you feel the Indian PM should speak more empathetically when it comes to Muslims and violence against minorities in India?

Politicians appease Muslims for votes in India. Muslims get so much favour that angers many Hindus. It is true that sometimes Muslims get tortured only because they are Muslims. But it happens to other religious community too. In Canning, a Hindu village in West Bengal, was burnt down by Muslim fanatics in 2013. If Muslims were brutally persecuted in India, they would have left India for neighbouring Muslim countries like Hindu minorities have been leaving Bangladesh and Pakistan since Partition.

Indian writers guilty of double standards when it comes to dissent: Taslima Nasrin - The Times of India

First of all "Welcome back" again!! I had it posted some days back.

 

[Spectre]

Its a typo.. I meant non linear.

Individual behaviour is a subset of group behaviour so its not distinct. Group behaviour is no more predictable than individual behaviour. If it was predictable then we would already know who won in Bihar elections.

Why would there be a absence of external stimuli in group behaviour ? Media, wars, climate etc are ALL external stimuli for a group too. Fractal modelling is what is used to understand and predict how individual make up the group and how the group behaves. The largest part of that fractal model imitates the smallest.

So the analogy is quite apt, but in the end it is just that. An analogy, not the point itself.

This would require a lengthy explanation along with citations and observed empirical results.

I do not currently have the time or inclination but if you can wait till tomorrow - i would put forth my arguments about distinction between individual and group behavior in a cogent manner

Regards