Nerve Endings Firing Away

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

While bemoaning the lack of civil discourse in comments all over the generic blogosphere, I find that the quality of debate and discussion on the desi blogosphere is somewhat better. Probably the size and multitudes of connections amongst prominent bloggers are responsible. You are less likely to slander a blogger if he or she knows you at some level even if the connection has been entirely online. We see regular discussions on a variety of topics in the desi blogosphere be it plagiarism, gender discrimination in IIT-JEEs, or the current hot button issue of art censorship at MS University in Baroda.

While understanding that most prominent voices in the desi blogosphere are libertatian, there is a healthy chunk of bloggers that are not. This divide has in fact helped further the cause of rational debate and although I haven’t seen large-scale conversions from one side to another, the quality of argument at least to me personally is highly enlightening (and at times, entertaining). Personally, I am not a libertarian since I believe that the state has a role in governance however miniscule it might be and although I don’t lie completely on right-of-center (of political discourse), I agree with many of their rationales including national interest and psuedo-secularism. I am what you might call a moderate, confused if you so prefer :) Regarding such blogospheric discussions, DesiPundit at times plays the role of a moderator (rather that of a host) and presents several such discussions but mostly these debates occur in the comment boxes of individual blogs that offer serious commentary.

Reverting back to the current issue, I have offered my take on the issue criticizing the goondaism of the Hindutva right and voicing my support for artistic freedom and expression. But Nitin and Sandeep have offered a different take on the issue. Nitin presents us with the Moynihan’s Law that states:

“The amount of violations of human rights in a country is always an inverse function of the amount of complaints about human rights violations heard from there. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country.”

In other words, countries in which human rights are most severely violated are those where no freedom of speech or press is permitted. Also, complaints tend to be a direct function of the possibility of redress. This can be known as Moynihan’s law or Moynihan Syndrome [Wikipedia].

While mostly agreeing with his contention, I will add that the dominance of one side [in the discussion] should be factored in while measuring the number of complaints being aired and also if possible should be compared against the general opinion of the silent majority. While such anti-Hindutva complaints might be frequently aired in Gujarat, the fact that they continue to be aired mostly with rising frequency might be indicative of increasing violations rather than the fact that protectors are able to do so. And it is disturbing that there are no signs of improvement and protestors are merely seen as irritants. Public protests are now thankfully a frequent phenomenon in India or at least thanks to the news-hungry media (as opposed to people), are more likely to be reported. But have such protests reduced the incidences of human rights or free speech violations in Gujarat?

Admittedly, there might be far more serious violations in UP, Bihar, or other perceived backward Indian state and there might be little or no protests but the way we handle debate or protests where they are actually occurring might send a signal to the places where they aren’t (yet). Perhaps irrational dismissal or brutal squashing of protests in some parts of the country might just dissuade slightly interested protestors in other parts of the country. I am no fan of the pseudo-secular Congress or minority-appeasing Left but at the same time, the high-handedness and slide into ridiculousness by the Hindutva right is not appealing either. The BJP is not scoring any points by being completely apathetic to the antics of its miscreant arm that are VHP and Bajrang Dal.

Sandeep’s blog has been a host of some interesting debate [61 comments so far] on the issue of so-called fascism in Baroda. If you have been following his blog, he is unabashedly a fierce proponent of the Indian Right. But I largely disagree with his opinions on the Baroda issue. His contention that art that is intended to offend should be reprimanded is going down the proverbial slippery slope. We have plenty of idle minds who actively seek an opportunity to be offended and then resort to clearly criminal acts of violence in order to voice their disagreement.

I suggest you go read the comments on his post. While not addressing his post directly, my two cents is that even if the art in question was intended to offend, the protestors had no right to resort to violence which in my opinion is a far greater crime. The argument that the artist intended to incite violence and provoke disharmony in society is facetitious as his work was viewed by adults who are perfectly capable of not being provoked if they so wish. Even if they are offended which they have every right to, the mode of disagreement should be anything but violence. If you want to be offended, trust me you will find a way.

Also, comparing lack of protests by the current crop of artists during the Danish cartoon scandal or Da Vinci to hypocricy is faulty. People will protest only if their immediate interests are threatened [e.g. see the instant drop in interest on blog censorship as soon as the Blogger ban in India was liefted although 17 sites continued to be banned] and just because they didn’t protest enough then doesn’t imply that they supported censorship of that art. Tushar Saxena commenting on Sandeep’s blog makes an excellent point on adopting an American-style First Amendment.

Also, frankly how many of us really understand art and even if you do, considering how subjective art appreciation is, wouldn’t you think that something that might be offensive to you might be appreciated by others.

What is the lesson here? Be offended; no one stops you from that but do not impose any restrictions on future utterances or creative works of art that you fear might be offensive to your subjective sensibilities. And yes, no violence. Go ahead; say something offensive back in return until all debate drops to the level of a cat-fight. It says more about the person that does so than it does about what he or she is saying. Note that I don’t complain only when Hindu right miscreants protest but also have similar opinions when overly-sensitive Muslims across the world and Christian right cry foul.

Lastly, any debate or arguments even if there are a few illogical trolls around will only help clear the fog regards freedom of expression in the minds of Indians. I admit that I wasn’t completely familiar with extent of free speech until I got to the U.S but I have changed. And I believe most of us can. I am glad that the artist, Chandramohan now out on bail has stuck to his guns and refused to acknowledge that he might have erred by offending some people.

by Patrix | on Thursday, May 17th, 2007 at 4:01 pm | Current Affairs, India, Society Culture . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Tweet This Post!