Huge outcry in India over the paltry justice delivered for the victims of Bhopal's Union Carbide gas leak in 1984.
Not satisfied with the verdict? Why not increase the fine by say another five rupees...?
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
And that is justice for Bhopal...!
Huge outcry in India over the paltry justice delivered for the victims of Bhopal's Union Carbide gas leak in 1984.
Not satisfied with the verdict? Why not increase the fine by say another five rupees...?
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Trade, Religion and Politics: A Story from the Early Days of Colonialism
BUSINESS AND corporate rivalries in the Indian sub-continent are generally traced to the period when the British,French, Dutch, Danish and other East India companies started their operations in the Indies, with the launch of the British East India Company, known as the first multinational corporation in the world, in London in the year 1600. Ever since the Indian Ocean region, extending from the Near East to the Far East, has been a theatre of power struggles and business rivalries involving various European countries.
But historical records indicate that the global power struggles in the region date back much earlier, and even before Vasco da Gama launched forth with his fleet of ships that ultimately led him to the discovery of a new trade route to Malabar in 1498, rivals were planning to upstage and sabotage the Portuguese efforts. One of the very interesting, and less known incident connected with da Gama's visit to Calicut, was the mysterious missing of two engineers who came with him, who appear to have given the slip as they came ashore.
William Dalrymple, in his celebrated book, The White Mughals, makes a note of this incident: "Perhaps partly because of the Inquisition, a surprisingly large number of of Portuguese made the decision to emigrate from Portuguese territory and seek their fortunes at different Indian courts, usually as gunners and cavalrymen. Again this was a process whose origins dated from the very beginning of the Portuguese presence in India: In 1498, on his famous first journey to India, Vasco da Gama found that there were already some Italian mercenaries in the employ of the various rajahs on the Malabar coast; and before he turned his prow homewards two of his own crew had left him to join the Italians in the service of a Malabar rajah for higher wages." (The White Mughals, page 14.) Contemporary Portuguese chronicler Barros has said that by 1565, there were at least two thousand Portuguese fighting in the armies of different Indian princes.
Surprisingly, none of the major historians of Portuguese-Malabar relations like K V Krishna Iyer, who wrote The History of Zamorins of Calicut, makes a reference to the decampment of the two Gama crew during his first visit to Calicut in 1498. It is possible that the incident took place during a subsequent visit Gama made as he had returned to Malabar a few times in the next few years. In fact a book written in 1694, by an Anglican Church official on the history of Malabar Church, refers to this incident and enlightens us on the secret trade wars that went on from the moment Gama set foot on the eastern spice coast.
This book,titled The History of the Church of Malabar, is a unique contemporary record of the Portuguese efforts to tame the Malabar church and bring it to the Roman Catholic fold, dealing with the history from the "time of its being first discover’d by the Portuguezes in the Year 1501" to the incidents that led to the "Synod of Diamper,Celebrated in the year of our Lord 1599."
The book, written by MICHEAL GEDDES, chancellor of the cathedral church of Sarum, is printed for Sam.Smith, and Benj.Walford, London, at the Prince’s Arms in St. Paul’s Church-yard, 1694.
The author who translates much of the records o the Synod of Diamper from Protuguese to English also provides "some remarks upon the faith and doctrine of the chieftains of St. Thomas in the Indies, agreeing with the Church of Engand, in opposition to that of Rome."
This 500-page book,which remained hidden in the storehouses of the Church of England for long, recently became available to researchers on Malabar history through the Google Books, which has photocopied a rare copy and made it available worldwide, to the delight of scholars.
Geddes traces the arrival of the Portuguese to the Malabar coast late in 15th century and goes on to describe the various incidents in the next one hundred years, when Portuguese power expanded in the entire region and their religious orthodoxy and methods of inquisition became a matter of great anxiety and violent confrontation with the local church and its laity, which they knew existed in Malabar even before they arrived here.
This ancient Malabar church was part the church in Eastern Roman Empire, and they claimed it was established by St Thomas, who they believed came to Cranganore in the early days of Christianity, and they adhered to the Patriarch of Babylon based in Antioch, who had the power to appoint their bishops. The tensions started as soon as the Portuguese discovered that the Malabar Chrisitians were in no mood to follow them and the Roman Church, which they were determined to propagate and impose upon the faithful in the east.
It appears that search for the lost church in the east was one of the primary concerns of the Portuguese as they landed at Kappad, near Kozhikode, on a summer day in 1498. As the ships had anchored off the coast, two moors were approached by a Portuguese sailor (most likely a convict who was serving in the ship) who came on shore and one of the first questions the moor, a person from Tunis who knew Castilian and Genoese and who was evidently in Malabar doing a brisk business in spices, asked was what brought them there. Then the Portuguese replied they came in search of spices and Christians...
The moor then ensured them that they had landed at a place they would find riches in plenty; as for the church, on their way to the court of Zamorin, they stop at a temple which they thought to be a holy place of worship dedicated to Virgin Mary. The Portuguese chronicler who accompanied Gama reports:
"The kutwal said it was a church of great holiness. These the general believed to be the case, fancying it to be a church of the Christians; which he the more readily beleived as he saw seven little bells hung over the principal door." (K V Krishna Iyer, The Zamorins of Calicut, Calicut University, Page 69.)
But there were people in the entourage who had their misgivings. The chronicler says: John de Sala, however. being very doubtful that this was not a Christian church, owing to the monstrous images on the walls, said, as he fell on his knees, "if this be the devil, I worship God," on which the general looked at him with a smile.
But the Portuguese very soon came across the Malabar Church as they built up contacts with various rajahs in Malabar, among them the Cochin king, in whose territories there was a large number of ancient churches with their special practices and ceremonies, which the Romans described as hedonistic. Micheal Geddes, in his book, describes the eventful half century from the mid-1500s to the end of the century, during which the Portuguese had a violent and tumultuous relationship with their religious brethren in Malabar, finally bringing much of the Malabar church under the Papal control, at the Synod of Diamper in 1599.
But the book is very important from another angle, as this is perhaps the earliest account of the Portuguese-Malabar relations and confrontations in the religious sphere, narrated from an outsider's point of view as so far what we have seen are the accounts left behind by the Portuguese as well as the Malabar church chroniclers.
Geddes is writing about the Portuguese aggression on Malabar church as a sympathetic chronicler, because his own Anglican Church was firmly opposed to the Roman dominance. He tells us that the first news of this ancient, but remote church was brought to Europe by Padro Alavares Cabral, who arrived in Cranganore in 1501. Cabral had set sail from Lisbon on March 9, 1500, and on his way to Malabar, a storm had driven his ships to the south American coast where he discovered Brazil. However, he got back to Cape of Good Hope and eventally landed in Malabar in September that year.
Cabral's efforts to establish profitable trade realtions with the Zamorin were a failure but he was successful in making contacts with the local chieftains of Malabar church in Cranganore where he arrived the next year. He persuaded two of them, who were brothers, to travel with him to Portugal. Writes Geddes: The eldest, whose name was Mathias, died at Lisbon; and the other, whose name was Joseph, went first to Rome, and from thence to Venice, where upon his information, a tract was published in Latin of the state of the Church of Malabar, and is printed at the end of Fasciculus Temporum. (Geddes, Histoy of Malabar Church, page 2.)
This was the first contact the Malabar church had with Europe and the next year Gama was in Cochin, in search of better contacts with the local rulers in the southern parts of Malabar, where the Cochin king was in perpetual conflict with Zamorins. The local Christian chieftains met Gama and told him that since "he was a subject of a Christian king, they beg’d the favour of him to take them under his Master’s protection, that so they might be defended against the oppressions and injuries which were done them daily by infidel Princes, and for a lasting testimony of their having put themselves under the king of Portugal, they sent his majesty a rod tipp’d at both ends with silver, with three little bells at the head of it, which had been the scepter of their chieftain kings."
Those were the early days of Portuguese contacts, and Gama, not in a position to do anything more, offered them all support and went his way. Soon, the Portuguese set up Goa as their headquarters and slowly built their pepper empire on the western coast; along with their rising power came the Inquisition and its powerful hold on the local church which became quite firm by the middle of the 16th century.
Still, trade and trade rivalries took precedence over religion in those early days, and Geddes gives very interesting insights into the various intrigues played by rival partners in the game. He reveals that planting a fifth column in the fleet of the Portuguese General was one of the strategies employed by their rivals based in the influential and wealthy European city of Venice, whose traders had been involved in a roaring trade in spices from the east with the help of Arabs.
In fact the first moor the Portuguese sailor met at Kappad in May 1498 had asked him the question, "Why do the king of Castile or the king of France and the seignory of Venice not send men here?"
And he replied that the King of Portugal did not permit them to do so. (Sanjay Subramaniam, The Career and Legend of Vaso da Gama, 2001, page 129.)
The King of Portugal, who had sent Gama to the east to find a route to Malabar to wrest control of the spice trade, had great powers over the waves because of his strong naval forces, but the wily Venetian traders were not fools either. Geddes reveals how they managed to plant their own men in Gama's fleet and get them to the east, to sabotage the Portuguese trade chances helping the Malabar princes to rebuff the Firangi guns:
"In the year 1505, two Christians, who were famous for their great skill in crafting great guns, and whom, for that reason, Don Vasco da Dama had taken along with him to Indies, ran over to Samorim, and were the first that introduc’d the use of artillery among the Malabars: For the Venetians foreseeing that their great Indian trade would be utterly ruin’d by the new passage that was discover’d to the Indies by the Cape of Good Hope, if the Portugueze shou’d once get any footing in those parts, are said to have sent those two Engineers, who were their natural born subjects, into the Portugueze service, on purpose to go over to the Indians, to teach them the use of great guns, and other fire-arms, that they might be the better able to oppose the Portuguezes." (Geddes, History of the Church of Malabar, 1694, page 3.)
The Venetians did their best to help their trading partners in the Indies to defend themselves against Portuguese aggression, but unfortunately that had little effect on the history of the sub-continent. But it is interesting to note that in the two centuries since then, most of the Indian princes did make excellent use of the skills these renegade engineers taught them, as we see in the naval skirmishes between the Kunhalis of Malabar and the Portuguse, the confrontation of the Travancore rajah Marthanda Varma with the Dutch, and the heroic fight of Tipu Sultan against the English in the Anglo-Mysore wars, though ultimately it was the western skills and superior firepower that carried the day.
But historical records indicate that the global power struggles in the region date back much earlier, and even before Vasco da Gama launched forth with his fleet of ships that ultimately led him to the discovery of a new trade route to Malabar in 1498, rivals were planning to upstage and sabotage the Portuguese efforts. One of the very interesting, and less known incident connected with da Gama's visit to Calicut, was the mysterious missing of two engineers who came with him, who appear to have given the slip as they came ashore.
William Dalrymple, in his celebrated book, The White Mughals, makes a note of this incident: "Perhaps partly because of the Inquisition, a surprisingly large number of of Portuguese made the decision to emigrate from Portuguese territory and seek their fortunes at different Indian courts, usually as gunners and cavalrymen. Again this was a process whose origins dated from the very beginning of the Portuguese presence in India: In 1498, on his famous first journey to India, Vasco da Gama found that there were already some Italian mercenaries in the employ of the various rajahs on the Malabar coast; and before he turned his prow homewards two of his own crew had left him to join the Italians in the service of a Malabar rajah for higher wages." (The White Mughals, page 14.) Contemporary Portuguese chronicler Barros has said that by 1565, there were at least two thousand Portuguese fighting in the armies of different Indian princes.
Surprisingly, none of the major historians of Portuguese-Malabar relations like K V Krishna Iyer, who wrote The History of Zamorins of Calicut, makes a reference to the decampment of the two Gama crew during his first visit to Calicut in 1498. It is possible that the incident took place during a subsequent visit Gama made as he had returned to Malabar a few times in the next few years. In fact a book written in 1694, by an Anglican Church official on the history of Malabar Church, refers to this incident and enlightens us on the secret trade wars that went on from the moment Gama set foot on the eastern spice coast.
This book,titled The History of the Church of Malabar, is a unique contemporary record of the Portuguese efforts to tame the Malabar church and bring it to the Roman Catholic fold, dealing with the history from the "time of its being first discover’d by the Portuguezes in the Year 1501" to the incidents that led to the "Synod of Diamper,Celebrated in the year of our Lord 1599."
The book, written by MICHEAL GEDDES, chancellor of the cathedral church of Sarum, is printed for Sam.Smith, and Benj.Walford, London, at the Prince’s Arms in St. Paul’s Church-yard, 1694.
The author who translates much of the records o the Synod of Diamper from Protuguese to English also provides "some remarks upon the faith and doctrine of the chieftains of St. Thomas in the Indies, agreeing with the Church of Engand, in opposition to that of Rome."
This 500-page book,which remained hidden in the storehouses of the Church of England for long, recently became available to researchers on Malabar history through the Google Books, which has photocopied a rare copy and made it available worldwide, to the delight of scholars.
Geddes traces the arrival of the Portuguese to the Malabar coast late in 15th century and goes on to describe the various incidents in the next one hundred years, when Portuguese power expanded in the entire region and their religious orthodoxy and methods of inquisition became a matter of great anxiety and violent confrontation with the local church and its laity, which they knew existed in Malabar even before they arrived here.
This ancient Malabar church was part the church in Eastern Roman Empire, and they claimed it was established by St Thomas, who they believed came to Cranganore in the early days of Christianity, and they adhered to the Patriarch of Babylon based in Antioch, who had the power to appoint their bishops. The tensions started as soon as the Portuguese discovered that the Malabar Chrisitians were in no mood to follow them and the Roman Church, which they were determined to propagate and impose upon the faithful in the east.
It appears that search for the lost church in the east was one of the primary concerns of the Portuguese as they landed at Kappad, near Kozhikode, on a summer day in 1498. As the ships had anchored off the coast, two moors were approached by a Portuguese sailor (most likely a convict who was serving in the ship) who came on shore and one of the first questions the moor, a person from Tunis who knew Castilian and Genoese and who was evidently in Malabar doing a brisk business in spices, asked was what brought them there. Then the Portuguese replied they came in search of spices and Christians...
The moor then ensured them that they had landed at a place they would find riches in plenty; as for the church, on their way to the court of Zamorin, they stop at a temple which they thought to be a holy place of worship dedicated to Virgin Mary. The Portuguese chronicler who accompanied Gama reports:
"The kutwal said it was a church of great holiness. These the general believed to be the case, fancying it to be a church of the Christians; which he the more readily beleived as he saw seven little bells hung over the principal door." (K V Krishna Iyer, The Zamorins of Calicut, Calicut University, Page 69.)
But there were people in the entourage who had their misgivings. The chronicler says: John de Sala, however. being very doubtful that this was not a Christian church, owing to the monstrous images on the walls, said, as he fell on his knees, "if this be the devil, I worship God," on which the general looked at him with a smile.
But the Portuguese very soon came across the Malabar Church as they built up contacts with various rajahs in Malabar, among them the Cochin king, in whose territories there was a large number of ancient churches with their special practices and ceremonies, which the Romans described as hedonistic. Micheal Geddes, in his book, describes the eventful half century from the mid-1500s to the end of the century, during which the Portuguese had a violent and tumultuous relationship with their religious brethren in Malabar, finally bringing much of the Malabar church under the Papal control, at the Synod of Diamper in 1599.
But the book is very important from another angle, as this is perhaps the earliest account of the Portuguese-Malabar relations and confrontations in the religious sphere, narrated from an outsider's point of view as so far what we have seen are the accounts left behind by the Portuguese as well as the Malabar church chroniclers.
Geddes is writing about the Portuguese aggression on Malabar church as a sympathetic chronicler, because his own Anglican Church was firmly opposed to the Roman dominance. He tells us that the first news of this ancient, but remote church was brought to Europe by Padro Alavares Cabral, who arrived in Cranganore in 1501. Cabral had set sail from Lisbon on March 9, 1500, and on his way to Malabar, a storm had driven his ships to the south American coast where he discovered Brazil. However, he got back to Cape of Good Hope and eventally landed in Malabar in September that year.
Cabral's efforts to establish profitable trade realtions with the Zamorin were a failure but he was successful in making contacts with the local chieftains of Malabar church in Cranganore where he arrived the next year. He persuaded two of them, who were brothers, to travel with him to Portugal. Writes Geddes: The eldest, whose name was Mathias, died at Lisbon; and the other, whose name was Joseph, went first to Rome, and from thence to Venice, where upon his information, a tract was published in Latin of the state of the Church of Malabar, and is printed at the end of Fasciculus Temporum. (Geddes, Histoy of Malabar Church, page 2.)
This was the first contact the Malabar church had with Europe and the next year Gama was in Cochin, in search of better contacts with the local rulers in the southern parts of Malabar, where the Cochin king was in perpetual conflict with Zamorins. The local Christian chieftains met Gama and told him that since "he was a subject of a Christian king, they beg’d the favour of him to take them under his Master’s protection, that so they might be defended against the oppressions and injuries which were done them daily by infidel Princes, and for a lasting testimony of their having put themselves under the king of Portugal, they sent his majesty a rod tipp’d at both ends with silver, with three little bells at the head of it, which had been the scepter of their chieftain kings."
Those were the early days of Portuguese contacts, and Gama, not in a position to do anything more, offered them all support and went his way. Soon, the Portuguese set up Goa as their headquarters and slowly built their pepper empire on the western coast; along with their rising power came the Inquisition and its powerful hold on the local church which became quite firm by the middle of the 16th century.
Still, trade and trade rivalries took precedence over religion in those early days, and Geddes gives very interesting insights into the various intrigues played by rival partners in the game. He reveals that planting a fifth column in the fleet of the Portuguese General was one of the strategies employed by their rivals based in the influential and wealthy European city of Venice, whose traders had been involved in a roaring trade in spices from the east with the help of Arabs.
In fact the first moor the Portuguese sailor met at Kappad in May 1498 had asked him the question, "Why do the king of Castile or the king of France and the seignory of Venice not send men here?"
And he replied that the King of Portugal did not permit them to do so. (Sanjay Subramaniam, The Career and Legend of Vaso da Gama, 2001, page 129.)
The King of Portugal, who had sent Gama to the east to find a route to Malabar to wrest control of the spice trade, had great powers over the waves because of his strong naval forces, but the wily Venetian traders were not fools either. Geddes reveals how they managed to plant their own men in Gama's fleet and get them to the east, to sabotage the Portuguese trade chances helping the Malabar princes to rebuff the Firangi guns:
"In the year 1505, two Christians, who were famous for their great skill in crafting great guns, and whom, for that reason, Don Vasco da Dama had taken along with him to Indies, ran over to Samorim, and were the first that introduc’d the use of artillery among the Malabars: For the Venetians foreseeing that their great Indian trade would be utterly ruin’d by the new passage that was discover’d to the Indies by the Cape of Good Hope, if the Portugueze shou’d once get any footing in those parts, are said to have sent those two Engineers, who were their natural born subjects, into the Portugueze service, on purpose to go over to the Indians, to teach them the use of great guns, and other fire-arms, that they might be the better able to oppose the Portuguezes." (Geddes, History of the Church of Malabar, 1694, page 3.)
The Venetians did their best to help their trading partners in the Indies to defend themselves against Portuguese aggression, but unfortunately that had little effect on the history of the sub-continent. But it is interesting to note that in the two centuries since then, most of the Indian princes did make excellent use of the skills these renegade engineers taught them, as we see in the naval skirmishes between the Kunhalis of Malabar and the Portuguse, the confrontation of the Travancore rajah Marthanda Varma with the Dutch, and the heroic fight of Tipu Sultan against the English in the Anglo-Mysore wars, though ultimately it was the western skills and superior firepower that carried the day.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Looming Violence, Political Threats and a Dispirited Media: On the Media Scene in Kerala
THERE ARE strident calls upon the media to make amends for its omissions and commissions, its pervasive intrusions into the privacy of individuals and the havoc it has wrought in the lives of many unfortunate victims. As a media person, I have always been extremely worried about these tendencies on the part of the media and have expressed my views that the media should introspect, and try be a responsible player in our democratic polity.
But the media, at the same time, cannot remain a toothless entity. It has necessarily to be aggressive, it has to gate-crash into domains that are closed to public review, and bring an objective view of things and developments to the public.
This is a tricky situation. How to strike a fine balance between the concerns of the public's right to information and the individual's right to privacy? Who is a private individual and who is a public person? How to define them and how to strike this nuanced position while reporting on them and their activities? And what constitutes private activity and public activity and where does the line of private activity of a public person and public activity of a private person merges or demarcates?
For almost a quarter century I have agonized over these questions and recently when I saw these clamours for public apology from our media to an American academic for some reports against him, I was thinking about these things again.
Here let me say that I am taking up the case of Dr Richard Franke only as a case study and I do not in anyway wish to express an opinion on his personal or academic activity. I presume that he is a well-meaning academic genuinely interested in Kerala and its people and all the past calumny against him, enumerated in the recent book by Dr Thomas Isaac and Mr N P Chandrasekharan and known to us Malayalis through various news media in the past few years, are simply baseless and the figment of the imagination of a politically motivated media.
Now a few questions arise. I will take up only two right now. First, how far the demands for an apology are legitimate; and two, whether there is any substance to the charge that the reports in media against Dr Franke proved to be an infringement on academic freedom?
This plethora of media campaign against Dr Franke was launched by Patom magazine of Mr Sudheesh, which was later taken up by many other Malayalam newspapers and other publications. The motivated nature of these campaigns was self evident, and most readers remained un-persuaded by most of these charges levelled against Dr Franke, Dr Isaac and a few others. It was a political shadow-boxing within the CPM, to which most of those involved in this battle actually belonged.
That means, the entire episode was part of our contemporary political life in the past few years. All the players were public persons and most of them were in the game for gains of a political nature and are endowed with political power in various ways.
Still, they make a camouflage attack on the media as if there was an infringement on media ethics. Indeed there was twisting of media ethics because the media often failed to check the authority of news items fed to them, but that in no way could be a case for seeking an apology from the media or the launch of an Inquisition from politicians. If anyone had been injured in such a scenario, it was the media itself because they suffered in their credibility, but here again there is no way a media organization can cross check such items fed to them because the Communist parties work behind iron curtains. They will not respond to media inquiries, but they still expect the media to play by rules. That is a very funny idea about democratic ways of functioning, indeed. A similar example could be when someone say, "head I win, tail you lose...!"
The second aspect that needs probing is whether there is any infringement on academic freedom. Dr Franke appears to be a US academic with some long- term connections with Kerala and has done some serious works here. He has been generally enthusiastic about Kerala and its development models though many may have differences with his points of view.
The charge is that his explanations were not given its due and that the campaign had been continued without any hitch even after such an explanation was offered. But why did Dr Franke become an object of attack? Was it because he was from US or was it because he was inadvertently (or perhaps even deliberately) involved in the CPM inner struggles?
The fact of the matter is that Dr Fanke became a target not because he was an academic or he was from US, but because he was seen to be taking a big role behind the curtains; being close to leaders in one faction in CPM and was also seen to be working with them on certain areas of serious concern to Kerala society and politics. When you are in politics, you are bound to receive attacks. Here, you see nothing academic, but everything is political. And in a political society, if anyone wants to exempt themselves from public criticism, why not take a leave and go back to your ivory towers, gentlemen? Why blame media in an injured tone when you confront your own battered pubic image?
When I launched this series of thoughts on the need for critical engagement on the part of media, I was aware of the severe accusations launched by this book.
But now that even a normally sober Sajan joins the brigade of critics, I must respond. I know Sajan himself had some part to play in it because he was among those experts who had read the text before it was published. Hence when I go ahead with my comments I hope Sajan would not get hurt, like the good comrade Ramakumar who finds me weak and unconvincing
I must say I do share a large part of the criticisms raised against the media in the book by Dr Isaac and Chandrasekharan, though I am not convinced about the premises on which they do so.
First, what kind of a book is this? Is it simply a partisan propaganda work by a group of individuals who belong to a political party, or is it a sincere attempt to study the inner workings of the media and its limitations in our society?
It started out as a serious critique and then sadly ends up as a partisan propaganda work which falls flat in convincing the reader of the objectivity of the arguments and the sincerity of their purpose. They highlight issues that are convenient to them and ignore issues which are not suitable to their purpose.
I will take up just one or two examples from the book to argue my points. First, it says that after the days of 'liberation struggle' when media played a critical part in attacking the Communists, it was in 2000s that the media took up such a concerted role. The People's Plan and Lavalin reporting are two major points they use to drive home this argument.
What they conveniently refuse to discuss is the political origins of this media strategy. They are quick to deride the media while they are unwilling to discuss what were the reasons which prompted the CPM to set up a number of investigation commissions in the State and local level in these days? What were the findings of these commissions and what did it tell the party about its inner workings ?
Now the defence will come that these are internal matters of the party. But here they are attacking the media for reporting things based on internal information, and even in the cases where such official commissions were set up why can't the party reveal all that they came by?
That would put a question mark on the sincerity of purpose and the manufactured consent that the media is the villain of the piece. But the media has been mainly a tool in the hands of the two powerful groups in the CPM and both groups had made much use of it. But unfortunately such a complex scenario of cynical use and misuse of media in the internal power struggles and the naked fights for control of the party never gets any mention here.
In the study on People's Plan, they say it was the media which had destroyed such a major effort at decentralization of power. Then they go ahead with the Sudheesh-Patom sob story and says the media parroted all that ultimately killing the programme.
This is less than a half truth. They do not even look at the various steps in the evolution of the People's Plan and where it actually went awry. If they had, they would have seen that it was the inherent weaknesses in the plan implementation and its meagre results compared to the Himalayan hopes it had generated, that was the real problems for its failure.
This dichotomy of what is actually achievable and the insurmountable hopes it could generate, leading to inevitable disillusionment which the writers do accept as a fact, had been pointed out right from the beginning by experienced and sober critics as you can see from the critical articles in the anthology, People's Plan: An Experiment in Decentralised Planning, edited by me and published by Calicut Press Club in 2000 based on a workshop organized by none other than the media people who are now facing the music for its failure! One hoped at least almost one decade on, Dr Isaac and others would show a little more willingness for soul-searching on why it failed instead of the easy of option of media-bashing.
But the gem comes in a comment where they assert, it was a sense of guilty consciousness on the part of media people, most of whom were former SFI cadres, that led the media to this pseudo-left critique of the programme! What a cheek to rubbish people who had been in SFI, who had suffered much and at least some of whom had faced lathis, knives and even bullets, who had taken up work in the media instead of the much coveted full-time political work and tried to do their job of reportong of the goings on in the corridors of power!
I do not know whether this wonderful insight comes from Chomsky original or is a contribution from our neo-Chomskys to the critique of media in 21st century. I must admit, as a former SFI cadre, it left me gasping for breath as I too happen to be a critic of left politics now...!
I was struck by a phrase from Damodar on the contemporary media practice of media criticism familiar to us. He described it as third degree methods of criticism.
Most people would laugh it off as an exaggeration but those who are familiar with the way media-persons are forced to work these days in Kerala would know this aptly describes the reality that confronts us today. There is an atmosphere of latent violence in the every day life of a media-person and he/she has to face crude violence or abuses and threats almost on a day to day basis. Often they erupt into an act of physical violence on the person who represents the media in the field and in most cases he/she works fully aware of the threats to his/her safety. This is no exaggeration: ask any media person- whether male or female- and they would tell you how unsafe the profession has become in the most literate Kerala society. Very few of these incidents, which take the form of direct physical attacks, are reported in the media and most others like threats and abuses are hushed up or silently borne for fear of provoking further attacks or threats. This is a contemporary reality.
Some of these are so ugly and some really comic: When I watched the video of the threat to Vidhu Vincent, a female reporter, from a group of Church believers, I was horrified because the ugliness of mob violence on a feeble female was so evident in all its details. She later left the profession.
When I heard about a friend in Indian Express who was bashed up at a bus stop in Thalassery, I asked him what happened. It was a rally of a big political party there and the buses were all stranded in the roads and he said something to the person next to him about the way they were persecuting the public. Men from the jatha overheard and he was pulled out of the bus and bashed up. He refused to complain because he was afraid next day he would face a fresh bout of violence.
My worst days as a journalist were when I worked with a television channel and I remember with horror the continuous harassment, abuses and threats I faced. They were friendly fire, as they say coming from guys who had an ownership role in it! Some of the people who were abusive were men of some senior positions and one of them today happens to be a member of Parliament.
But the saddest part is not physical violence or continuous threats. It is the loss of means of livelihood which could completely paralyze a person. Most camera-persons are forced to buy their own equipment in small organizations and when they are attacked, the loss is huge. Once when I worked as president of the Kozhikode unit of KUWJ, there was an attack and around a dozen people were injured but when I went to the hospital to see them, the major complaint was not about the injuries or pain, but about the loss of equipment like cameras and lenses and there was no way they could get that back in shape.
Now what I suggest is that an atmosphere of fascist tendencies is fast growing in Kerala and politicians and local mafias are the main culprits. It is a fearsome thing that such attacks are now getting an official stamp as even senior politicians do not care when media people are attacked.
But the media, at the same time, cannot remain a toothless entity. It has necessarily to be aggressive, it has to gate-crash into domains that are closed to public review, and bring an objective view of things and developments to the public.
This is a tricky situation. How to strike a fine balance between the concerns of the public's right to information and the individual's right to privacy? Who is a private individual and who is a public person? How to define them and how to strike this nuanced position while reporting on them and their activities? And what constitutes private activity and public activity and where does the line of private activity of a public person and public activity of a private person merges or demarcates?
For almost a quarter century I have agonized over these questions and recently when I saw these clamours for public apology from our media to an American academic for some reports against him, I was thinking about these things again.
Here let me say that I am taking up the case of Dr Richard Franke only as a case study and I do not in anyway wish to express an opinion on his personal or academic activity. I presume that he is a well-meaning academic genuinely interested in Kerala and its people and all the past calumny against him, enumerated in the recent book by Dr Thomas Isaac and Mr N P Chandrasekharan and known to us Malayalis through various news media in the past few years, are simply baseless and the figment of the imagination of a politically motivated media.
Now a few questions arise. I will take up only two right now. First, how far the demands for an apology are legitimate; and two, whether there is any substance to the charge that the reports in media against Dr Franke proved to be an infringement on academic freedom?
This plethora of media campaign against Dr Franke was launched by Patom magazine of Mr Sudheesh, which was later taken up by many other Malayalam newspapers and other publications. The motivated nature of these campaigns was self evident, and most readers remained un-persuaded by most of these charges levelled against Dr Franke, Dr Isaac and a few others. It was a political shadow-boxing within the CPM, to which most of those involved in this battle actually belonged.
That means, the entire episode was part of our contemporary political life in the past few years. All the players were public persons and most of them were in the game for gains of a political nature and are endowed with political power in various ways.
Still, they make a camouflage attack on the media as if there was an infringement on media ethics. Indeed there was twisting of media ethics because the media often failed to check the authority of news items fed to them, but that in no way could be a case for seeking an apology from the media or the launch of an Inquisition from politicians. If anyone had been injured in such a scenario, it was the media itself because they suffered in their credibility, but here again there is no way a media organization can cross check such items fed to them because the Communist parties work behind iron curtains. They will not respond to media inquiries, but they still expect the media to play by rules. That is a very funny idea about democratic ways of functioning, indeed. A similar example could be when someone say, "head I win, tail you lose...!"
The second aspect that needs probing is whether there is any infringement on academic freedom. Dr Franke appears to be a US academic with some long- term connections with Kerala and has done some serious works here. He has been generally enthusiastic about Kerala and its development models though many may have differences with his points of view.
The charge is that his explanations were not given its due and that the campaign had been continued without any hitch even after such an explanation was offered. But why did Dr Franke become an object of attack? Was it because he was from US or was it because he was inadvertently (or perhaps even deliberately) involved in the CPM inner struggles?
The fact of the matter is that Dr Fanke became a target not because he was an academic or he was from US, but because he was seen to be taking a big role behind the curtains; being close to leaders in one faction in CPM and was also seen to be working with them on certain areas of serious concern to Kerala society and politics. When you are in politics, you are bound to receive attacks. Here, you see nothing academic, but everything is political. And in a political society, if anyone wants to exempt themselves from public criticism, why not take a leave and go back to your ivory towers, gentlemen? Why blame media in an injured tone when you confront your own battered pubic image?
When I launched this series of thoughts on the need for critical engagement on the part of media, I was aware of the severe accusations launched by this book.
But now that even a normally sober Sajan joins the brigade of critics, I must respond. I know Sajan himself had some part to play in it because he was among those experts who had read the text before it was published. Hence when I go ahead with my comments I hope Sajan would not get hurt, like the good comrade Ramakumar who finds me weak and unconvincing
I must say I do share a large part of the criticisms raised against the media in the book by Dr Isaac and Chandrasekharan, though I am not convinced about the premises on which they do so.
First, what kind of a book is this? Is it simply a partisan propaganda work by a group of individuals who belong to a political party, or is it a sincere attempt to study the inner workings of the media and its limitations in our society?
It started out as a serious critique and then sadly ends up as a partisan propaganda work which falls flat in convincing the reader of the objectivity of the arguments and the sincerity of their purpose. They highlight issues that are convenient to them and ignore issues which are not suitable to their purpose.
I will take up just one or two examples from the book to argue my points. First, it says that after the days of 'liberation struggle' when media played a critical part in attacking the Communists, it was in 2000s that the media took up such a concerted role. The People's Plan and Lavalin reporting are two major points they use to drive home this argument.
What they conveniently refuse to discuss is the political origins of this media strategy. They are quick to deride the media while they are unwilling to discuss what were the reasons which prompted the CPM to set up a number of investigation commissions in the State and local level in these days? What were the findings of these commissions and what did it tell the party about its inner workings ?
Now the defence will come that these are internal matters of the party. But here they are attacking the media for reporting things based on internal information, and even in the cases where such official commissions were set up why can't the party reveal all that they came by?
That would put a question mark on the sincerity of purpose and the manufactured consent that the media is the villain of the piece. But the media has been mainly a tool in the hands of the two powerful groups in the CPM and both groups had made much use of it. But unfortunately such a complex scenario of cynical use and misuse of media in the internal power struggles and the naked fights for control of the party never gets any mention here.
In the study on People's Plan, they say it was the media which had destroyed such a major effort at decentralization of power. Then they go ahead with the Sudheesh-Patom sob story and says the media parroted all that ultimately killing the programme.
This is less than a half truth. They do not even look at the various steps in the evolution of the People's Plan and where it actually went awry. If they had, they would have seen that it was the inherent weaknesses in the plan implementation and its meagre results compared to the Himalayan hopes it had generated, that was the real problems for its failure.
This dichotomy of what is actually achievable and the insurmountable hopes it could generate, leading to inevitable disillusionment which the writers do accept as a fact, had been pointed out right from the beginning by experienced and sober critics as you can see from the critical articles in the anthology, People's Plan: An Experiment in Decentralised Planning, edited by me and published by Calicut Press Club in 2000 based on a workshop organized by none other than the media people who are now facing the music for its failure! One hoped at least almost one decade on, Dr Isaac and others would show a little more willingness for soul-searching on why it failed instead of the easy of option of media-bashing.
But the gem comes in a comment where they assert, it was a sense of guilty consciousness on the part of media people, most of whom were former SFI cadres, that led the media to this pseudo-left critique of the programme! What a cheek to rubbish people who had been in SFI, who had suffered much and at least some of whom had faced lathis, knives and even bullets, who had taken up work in the media instead of the much coveted full-time political work and tried to do their job of reportong of the goings on in the corridors of power!
I do not know whether this wonderful insight comes from Chomsky original or is a contribution from our neo-Chomskys to the critique of media in 21st century. I must admit, as a former SFI cadre, it left me gasping for breath as I too happen to be a critic of left politics now...!
I was struck by a phrase from Damodar on the contemporary media practice of media criticism familiar to us. He described it as third degree methods of criticism.
Most people would laugh it off as an exaggeration but those who are familiar with the way media-persons are forced to work these days in Kerala would know this aptly describes the reality that confronts us today. There is an atmosphere of latent violence in the every day life of a media-person and he/she has to face crude violence or abuses and threats almost on a day to day basis. Often they erupt into an act of physical violence on the person who represents the media in the field and in most cases he/she works fully aware of the threats to his/her safety. This is no exaggeration: ask any media person- whether male or female- and they would tell you how unsafe the profession has become in the most literate Kerala society. Very few of these incidents, which take the form of direct physical attacks, are reported in the media and most others like threats and abuses are hushed up or silently borne for fear of provoking further attacks or threats. This is a contemporary reality.
Some of these are so ugly and some really comic: When I watched the video of the threat to Vidhu Vincent, a female reporter, from a group of Church believers, I was horrified because the ugliness of mob violence on a feeble female was so evident in all its details. She later left the profession.
When I heard about a friend in Indian Express who was bashed up at a bus stop in Thalassery, I asked him what happened. It was a rally of a big political party there and the buses were all stranded in the roads and he said something to the person next to him about the way they were persecuting the public. Men from the jatha overheard and he was pulled out of the bus and bashed up. He refused to complain because he was afraid next day he would face a fresh bout of violence.
My worst days as a journalist were when I worked with a television channel and I remember with horror the continuous harassment, abuses and threats I faced. They were friendly fire, as they say coming from guys who had an ownership role in it! Some of the people who were abusive were men of some senior positions and one of them today happens to be a member of Parliament.
But the saddest part is not physical violence or continuous threats. It is the loss of means of livelihood which could completely paralyze a person. Most camera-persons are forced to buy their own equipment in small organizations and when they are attacked, the loss is huge. Once when I worked as president of the Kozhikode unit of KUWJ, there was an attack and around a dozen people were injured but when I went to the hospital to see them, the major complaint was not about the injuries or pain, but about the loss of equipment like cameras and lenses and there was no way they could get that back in shape.
Now what I suggest is that an atmosphere of fascist tendencies is fast growing in Kerala and politicians and local mafias are the main culprits. It is a fearsome thing that such attacks are now getting an official stamp as even senior politicians do not care when media people are attacked.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Media, Religious Minorities and Terrorism: A Case Study of Kerala
This the text of a paper I presented at the two-day national seminar on Globalization, Religious Fundamentalism and Terrorism: A South Indian Perspective, organized by the Political science department of Kerala University at Thiruvananthapuram on April 8, 2010:
I PROPOSE to examine the role of media in generating stereotypes in the same ideological mould of global campaign against terrorism, launched along with the new policies of globalization and liberalization in Indian society starting from the 1990s, in the regional media as well as in every other sector of society, which has become a matter of serious concern even in comparatively progressive regions like Kerala.1
Kerala has been, for long, known as a place of communal amity and religious tolerance, with its social fabric consisting of a seamless mingling of various communities, the tradition dating back to pre-colonial times. In fact this region has been a model for social and communal coexistence with almost all religions finding a place in its shores without causing much friction, and finding ways and means to contribute to the social and communal well-being.
But this has not been a natural state of affairs, a social atmosphere that came on its own; but actually it was the result of conscious and deliberate policies pursued by various communities, and ruling classes down the years. In a sense, Kerala’s history of coexistence and cooperation between various communal groups can be described as a result of conscious efforts, a negotiated social space2 for each community which had the numbers and resources to demand a say in the system. There are several historical reasons for the emergence of such a negotiated space, which had often been disturbed owing to a number of external factors, like the sudden influx of colonial powers. The response to colonial challenge from the time of Portuguese to the English is a very interesting study in itself, as it was mainly a few communities which actually engaged themselves in resistance at various times, for reasons of their own. At the outset, we must also recognize that this negotiated space was not a free for all, not all sections of the society had a place in it. First and foremost, it was an elite social club with the upper caste Hindu rulers being the central and unifying force, with elite segments in other communities like Muslims and Christians accepting their legitimate social and economic role in it. The first and primary condition for such a social contract was that none questioned the prevailing social system, based on caste discrimination.
Then came the colonial experience, which, to a certain extent, emerged as a challenge to this existing, ossified and rigid social hierarchy, which Marx described as the Asiatic mode in his writings on India.3 Look at the earlier instances of resistance to the colonial aggression and a pattern emerges: Protection of ancient faith and protection of trade and economic interests were two primary reasons for the resistance offered to colonial aggressors. I will take up here, only two cases in our history: The first is the resistance offered to the Portuguese by the ancient churches in Kerala, who opposed the efforts by the Portuguese Roman Catholic arch-bishop in Goa to bring the ancient churches in Malabar Serra under the Roman Catholic Church. The Koonan Kurisu pledge in the 16th century by the members of local churches was an example of the expression of independence against foreign aggression. But it failed as at the Synod of Diamper (1599), the Roman Catholics declared their dominance over the local churches.4
The second example is the revolt of the Kunhalis of Malabar against the Portuguese. Here again, we see the operation of both trade interests and religious sentiments getting mixed up in resistance to foreign aggression.5 The Kunhalis and their supporters did evoke religious sentiments in their fight against Portuguese as we can see from contemporary texts like Tuhfathul Mujahedeen by Sheikh Zainudheen Maqdum of Ponnani, which calls for a war against infidels.6
The resistance of the local Syrian churches to the Portuguese domination in ecclesiastical matters and the resistance of the Malabar Mappilas under the Kunhalis to the Portuguese trade domination were taking place at almost the same time in the north and central parts of Kerala coastline. What is interesting is the strategy effectively adopted by Portuguese to win both the battles: They took religion into the political realm and effectively waged a war against their opponents driving alliances with local rulers. Once the local rulers got alienated from their own people, their slow disintegration and demise was only a matter of time. Hence my point is that this mutual alliance of various social segments was inter-dependent and once this mutuality got disrupted, it resulted in serious social tensions and disturbances.
In Kozhikode the Portuguese had succeeded in forging an alliance with the Zamorin, against the interests of a powerful segment in his own court, which soon led to the downfall of the Kunhalis against the combined forces of Portuguese and the Zamorin, and the eventual loss of power and influence of Zamorins themselves. In Cochin, they had forced the hands of the Cochin rajah to order the local churches to accept the dominance of Roman Catholic arch-bishop of Goa, who took the initiative of calling the Synod of Diamper in 1599 which effectively sealed this dominance, but we also see that once this local trust was broken the local rajah also faced severe isolation and loss of power and prestige.
Looking back at the subsequent history of these regions, we see the decline of the prominence of the royal families who were reduced to the level of mere vassals of foreign powers who rose to become the principal powers in this region. In Kozhikode, ever since the sea power held by the Kunhalis was cut down by the Zamorin and Portuguese, the local ruler lost his power progressively and finally he had to commit suicide in mid-18th century, unable to withstand external threats.
The point I am trying to drive home is that the ruling establishments in this coastal region, which had the first contacts with global forces and influences at every turn in history, derived their legitimacy, sustenance and strength from the internal cohesion of various social and economic interests that subsisted in this region. It was a complex system, with various groups holding special interests and privileges and in this scheme of things various communities like Christians, Muslims and Hindu upper castes had their own positions, privileges as well as responsibilities. The Hindu upper castes were the rulers and their legitimacy was ensured and sustained by the others who controlled various powerful interests such as trade and commerce, developing a web of mutual connections, responsibilities and liabilities. Once this intricate social web was disturbed as in the wake of Portuguese invasion, what we see is a natural disintegration of this social contract.
It was a social contract based on mutual interests and it was arrived at after mutual negotiations over centuries. It helped reinforce the conservative social system and guarded against any revolutionary change in its conservative social set up.
Take for example the caste system: The ruling establishment and the elite society gained its vast powers on the basis of caste oppression of a massive section of people, the lower castes. Kerala, with its long association with Christian and Islamic ideas--who had never accepted caste as legitimate--should have been exposed to a great social movement against caste, but instead it remained the most ardent bulwark of caste oppression till the mid 20th century while most other parts of India had seen much stronger anti-caste reform movements taking shape much earlier. We see that this negotiated social space and the inclusion of various community interests in this scheme of things helped this region remain itself as a exclusive conservative base, immune to change.
This has been the major and dominant pattern for at least five centuries, as we can see from the days of colonial invasion from late 15th century. This pattern has been in operation in the long period of English rule in Malabar with their power and influence extending to the southern princely states of Travancore and Cochin, through their resident agents and standing armies. Those who were left out, were forced to rebel as we see in the case of the chieftains of Wynad in Pazahassi revolts of late 18th and early 19th century7 or the Mappila revolts in South Malabar in 20th century,8 who faced severe discrimination and oppression. The land owing and revenue gathering system devised by the British give a clear picture of how it helped develop a network of dependents effectively co-opted into the colonial system.
After Independence, this has remained the cornerstone of the political system that developed here. Cronyism and formation of cartels has been at the heart of it, and in spite of the Constitutional safeguards for the protection of weaker sections, a substantial chunk of public expenditure has been cornered by the same forces who had control over society even in colonial times. A quick look at Kerala’s public employment pattern9 and the fact that almost 60 per cent of the total state revenues are expended for the salary and pensions of this segment10 speak of the horrible story of a society that consistently denied the rightful due to those massive sections without any regard for a redistribution of public resources in a more equitable manner.
Kerala's opposing political fronts which alternated in power almost continuously ever since the seventies, did actually exacerbate this situation as, for all practical purposes, these political fronts served as refuges for these interest groups. Veteran communist leader E M S Nambodiripad used to castigate the United Democratic Front (UDF) as a conglomeration of caste and community interests, which indeed it has been, but the reality is that even the Left Democratic Front also served a similar social role going by the experiences of those sections who were kept out of the power structure. From an analysis of the representation in power structures, political establishments and leadership positions in ruling parties we may conclude that those who still largely remain outside are Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims who are now facing the shrillest criticism of being harbourers of terror networks and anti-national activities from a media controlled by the same social groups and interests who are dominant in all power structures in our society.11
It is in this context we need to understand the recent media campaign against terrorism, which largely painted Muslims and Dalits as villains in its dramatics personae. The media reports linking these communities with incidents of terrorism were often without any substance, mostly planted by interested parties and such stories were published without any verification for authentic y or veracity and mostly without any direct quotes or evidence. Even when proved baseless later on, there were not many efforts to make amends for such violations of ethical media practices.
One of the serious criticisms that emerge from an analysis of the recent media trends in Kerala, is that the mainstream media is willfully manipulating news and developments with a view to malign these communities and there appears to be consensus among them that normal and universally accepted ethical media practices like cross-checking of facts, attributing claims, assertions and allegations to clearly identified and verifiable sources, enabling a a platform for the victims to make their own claims and defenses, follow-up coverage with clear and specific norms for authenticity, etc,12 are not at all followed by any of these newspapers in matters vis a vis these marginalized and vulnerable communities. There are innumerable case studies on such lopsided and unethical media practices in recent days which included the frenzy over Love Jihad (a long time Sangh Parivar bogey against Muslim youths), the completely one-sided coverage in the Beemappalli firing incident, and the reports about rise of Dalit terror networks following the murder of a person in Varkala under mysterious circumstances and the censoring of the news of mass arrest and persecution of Dalit youngsters who were organized under a new Dalit youth movement called Dalit Human Rights Movement (DHRM). The pattern of reporting that emerged was so evidently unprofessional and unethical and the continuation of such practices without any hitch or introspection only strengthens the view that this has been part of a conscious and deliberate policy decision, arrived at the highest levels of newspaper industry.
Now the question is, why such a media fixation about the Dalit and Muslim terror bogey and a complete reversal of its own sacred norms and professional checks and balances?
The answer lies in the assertive new political movements and ideas for social justice and equitable representation that is coming up from the lower segments of our society. There are clearly new movements and a wider alliance among the subaltern classes for a better chunk of the cake and that explains much of the ongoing frenzied responses from the society and its own mirror image and conscience-keepers, the mainstream media. What goes on is a process of delegitimization, a willful misrepresentation of social reality to preserve the social, economic and political privileges these segments have so far enjoyed. But right now, it appears they have overplayed their hands and are facing a serous credibility-deficit crisis, which might prove to undermine the very legitimacy of these mainstream institutions which have remained the unchallenged opinion-makers for a long time in our contemporary history.
When we consider why the media has abandoned its traditional watchdog role and 'impartial' umpire image, we also need to inquire into the changes in media ownership, financing and control patterns. Though the news media's editorial control is still theoretically, and in a legal sense, remain with Indian nationals, in reality it is an integral part of a global business network and its main concerns are no longer national interests or national consensus; it answers to the global forces of finance and capital who have come to dominate the Indian media and other business activities. A very interesting indication is the astronomical figures some of the chief executives and media celebrities in India are drawing these days, though as businesses they are often in the red, still their pay and perks are ensued and underwritten by an intricate web of media networks and corporate arrangements that go much beyond our national boundaries. this dichotomy appears to be the root cause of the alienation of Indian mainstream media from the common people, and its declaration of war on a substantial sections of our people, dubbed conveniently as anti-national.
notes
1 I would try to examine this issue mainly from my own experiences working in various Malayalam and English media organizations in and outside Kerala from 1983.
2 I am thankful to my friend Bobby Kunhu for suggesting this terminology to explain the present communal relationships in Kerala society.
3 See articles like Future Results of British Rule in India, in Karl Marx, The First War of Indian Independence, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1974.
4 For an interesting early description of the Portuguese, Syrian Church tussles in Malabar, see Michael Geddes, The History of Malabar Church, London, 1694, now available in Google Books.
5 For details, see Krishna Iyer KV, The Zamorins of Calicut, Calicut University, 1999.
6 An English translation of the text has been recently published by Other Books, Calicut.
7 See Pazhassi Samarangal, Dr K K N Kurup, State Institute of Languages, Thiruvananthapuram.
8 There are various studies on the Mappila revolts; see for an authentic version, Dr K N Panikkar, Against Lord and State, (Mal.) DC Books, Kottayam.
9 There are no official figures available for the community wise break-up of government jobs, but a broad picture may be available in the studies conducted by Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) in its Kerala studies. The break-up is as follows in the order of community, percentage of population and percentage of government jobs approximately (in brackets): Nair: 12.5 (21); other forward Hindu 1.3 (3.1); other backward Hindu: 8.2 (5.8); Christian: 18.3 (20.6); Ezhavas:22.6 (22.7); Muslim:24.7 (11.4); SC: 9 (7.6); ST: 1.2 (0.8). It reveals that the Muslims, SCs, STs and other backward Hindus are represented below their population figures in government service, the biggest losers being the Muslims. The biggest gainers are Nairs followed by Christians.
10 According to final figures for 2007-08, salaries and pension accounts for 59.78% of total revenue receipts of Kerala. It will be interesting to examine people from which communities and regions are pocketing a larger share of the public cake.
11 For a serious criticism and analysis of the media practices in Kerala in recent days with regard to these social segments, see the press release issued by a group of concerned citizens including poet K Satchidanandan, human rights activist John Dayal and others in Delhi, 29 December 2009:
Some of us concerned citizens had issued a statement on 18th December, 2009, appalled by the mainstream media reportage of the anticipatory bail hearing of Soofiya Madani in the Kerala High Court in connection with her alleged involvement in a conspiracy that led to the burning of a Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus at Kalamassery, Kochi in September 2005. Many of these reports bordered on pronouncing her guilt with complete disregard for Judicial processes and the Rule of the Law. This kind of reportage can be understood only in the backdrop of a disturbing new trend in the Kerala media and civil society vis-a-vis representation of issues and concerns affecting religious and caste minorities. This press conference has been convened to present some of our concerns regarding this and to appeal to the media and civil society actors to be more sensitive and balanced in their coverage of various events.
Apart from vitiating the communal harmony of the state, this trend also encroaches upon the fundamental rights of people to fair trial, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of association, freedom to practice and preach a religion and right to equality regardless of caste and religion; along with other fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. In this context, we would like to enumerate a few of these media campaigns and the obvious religious and caste bias present in them.
Love jihad: It was 2 cases of inter-religious love affairs that the media took up and blew out of proportion to create the bogey of “Love Jihad.” In both these cases, what was involved was love and attraction between Hindu women and Muslim men, which led to marriage and the conversion of the Hindu women into Islam. Following this the mainstream media in Kerala went on a rampage, claiming that thousands of women were being lured into converting to Islam by Muslim boys who were doing this as part of “Love Jihad.” This led to Justice K T Sankaran's remarks on "Love Jihad" and directions to the police to conduct investigations on it.
This campaign not only vilifies women as being incapable of decision-making, but also portrays young men of the Muslim community as members of “Love Jihad,” without any proper investigation or proof for doing the same. This regressive campaign was not stopped even after the Kerala Police clarified that such a phenomenon does not exist. It has come to a temporary end only after another judge of the Kerala High Court put a stop to all investigations on the issue, saying that saying that one could not target any particular community and that "inter-religious marriages are common in our society and cannot be seen as a crime." .
Dalit Terrorism: Following the murder of a middle-aged man in Varkala, the media in Kerala came out with a new term called “Dalit Terrorism.” Regardless of the identities of the Victim and the offender, media reportage on this case very often appeared to have been written in the police station. The press bought into the police story that it was activists of one dalit organization who had committed the murder. They joined hands with the police in reproducing unsubstantiated reports of the existence of a "Dalit terror network". This legitimized the large scale persecution of the organization's activists by the police and also led to violent attacks on them by members of the local Shiv Sena. The media in Kerala is party to these atrocities as it had stood with the police in accusing the organization and its activists, failing to control the excesses of the police and reinforcing the existing prejudices against a historically marginalised community.
Beemapally: On May 17, 2009 6 Muslim men from a fishing community were killed and 47 others injured (27 of them had bullet injuries) in a police firing in Beemapally. Later studies by Human Rights organizations brought out “the extremely unjust and criminalized violence" committed by the police in Beemapally (NCHRO, Kerala Chapter). The government also suspended some police officers as a token measure. However, when the incident happened, most of the Malayalam media observed silence on this issue. A few others reported the police version of the firing, branding it as "communal tension". They promoted the assumption that it was the provocation by a communally charged mob that had made the police resort to firing, and it was wise to keep silence. There was no analysis or even proper investigation of the whole incident. In this way, one of the worst incidents of state violence in Kerala against Muslim fish workers virtually went unnoticed in the mainstream media.
All this shows the impunity with which the Malayalam media is treating issues related to caste and religious minorities. It easily communalizes every issue related to the Muslim community and works to spread hate and suspicion about them. Similarly, it also misrepresents caste issues and works to reiterate existing prejudices. Here, we would like to reiterate that we do not hold a brief for any individual or organization and would like to see the Law take its own course and we would urge proper investigation, trial and conviction of any person mentioned above, provided that the procedure established by law and Constitutional guarantees are upheld and they are not singled out by virtue of their religious or caste identities. We call upon the media to fulfil its role and check excesses committed by the State, its agencies or other formations that is likely to infringe upon the quality of our democratic polity and uphold values of plurality enshrined in the Constitution of India.
12 For a sample of how serious newspapers deal with such issues, see the New York Times guidebook for their staff, Ethical Journalism: A Handbook of Values and Practices for the News and Editorial operations, updated September 2004, available at nytimes.com.
I PROPOSE to examine the role of media in generating stereotypes in the same ideological mould of global campaign against terrorism, launched along with the new policies of globalization and liberalization in Indian society starting from the 1990s, in the regional media as well as in every other sector of society, which has become a matter of serious concern even in comparatively progressive regions like Kerala.1
Kerala has been, for long, known as a place of communal amity and religious tolerance, with its social fabric consisting of a seamless mingling of various communities, the tradition dating back to pre-colonial times. In fact this region has been a model for social and communal coexistence with almost all religions finding a place in its shores without causing much friction, and finding ways and means to contribute to the social and communal well-being.
But this has not been a natural state of affairs, a social atmosphere that came on its own; but actually it was the result of conscious and deliberate policies pursued by various communities, and ruling classes down the years. In a sense, Kerala’s history of coexistence and cooperation between various communal groups can be described as a result of conscious efforts, a negotiated social space2 for each community which had the numbers and resources to demand a say in the system. There are several historical reasons for the emergence of such a negotiated space, which had often been disturbed owing to a number of external factors, like the sudden influx of colonial powers. The response to colonial challenge from the time of Portuguese to the English is a very interesting study in itself, as it was mainly a few communities which actually engaged themselves in resistance at various times, for reasons of their own. At the outset, we must also recognize that this negotiated space was not a free for all, not all sections of the society had a place in it. First and foremost, it was an elite social club with the upper caste Hindu rulers being the central and unifying force, with elite segments in other communities like Muslims and Christians accepting their legitimate social and economic role in it. The first and primary condition for such a social contract was that none questioned the prevailing social system, based on caste discrimination.
Then came the colonial experience, which, to a certain extent, emerged as a challenge to this existing, ossified and rigid social hierarchy, which Marx described as the Asiatic mode in his writings on India.3 Look at the earlier instances of resistance to the colonial aggression and a pattern emerges: Protection of ancient faith and protection of trade and economic interests were two primary reasons for the resistance offered to colonial aggressors. I will take up here, only two cases in our history: The first is the resistance offered to the Portuguese by the ancient churches in Kerala, who opposed the efforts by the Portuguese Roman Catholic arch-bishop in Goa to bring the ancient churches in Malabar Serra under the Roman Catholic Church. The Koonan Kurisu pledge in the 16th century by the members of local churches was an example of the expression of independence against foreign aggression. But it failed as at the Synod of Diamper (1599), the Roman Catholics declared their dominance over the local churches.4
The second example is the revolt of the Kunhalis of Malabar against the Portuguese. Here again, we see the operation of both trade interests and religious sentiments getting mixed up in resistance to foreign aggression.5 The Kunhalis and their supporters did evoke religious sentiments in their fight against Portuguese as we can see from contemporary texts like Tuhfathul Mujahedeen by Sheikh Zainudheen Maqdum of Ponnani, which calls for a war against infidels.6
The resistance of the local Syrian churches to the Portuguese domination in ecclesiastical matters and the resistance of the Malabar Mappilas under the Kunhalis to the Portuguese trade domination were taking place at almost the same time in the north and central parts of Kerala coastline. What is interesting is the strategy effectively adopted by Portuguese to win both the battles: They took religion into the political realm and effectively waged a war against their opponents driving alliances with local rulers. Once the local rulers got alienated from their own people, their slow disintegration and demise was only a matter of time. Hence my point is that this mutual alliance of various social segments was inter-dependent and once this mutuality got disrupted, it resulted in serious social tensions and disturbances.
In Kozhikode the Portuguese had succeeded in forging an alliance with the Zamorin, against the interests of a powerful segment in his own court, which soon led to the downfall of the Kunhalis against the combined forces of Portuguese and the Zamorin, and the eventual loss of power and influence of Zamorins themselves. In Cochin, they had forced the hands of the Cochin rajah to order the local churches to accept the dominance of Roman Catholic arch-bishop of Goa, who took the initiative of calling the Synod of Diamper in 1599 which effectively sealed this dominance, but we also see that once this local trust was broken the local rajah also faced severe isolation and loss of power and prestige.
Looking back at the subsequent history of these regions, we see the decline of the prominence of the royal families who were reduced to the level of mere vassals of foreign powers who rose to become the principal powers in this region. In Kozhikode, ever since the sea power held by the Kunhalis was cut down by the Zamorin and Portuguese, the local ruler lost his power progressively and finally he had to commit suicide in mid-18th century, unable to withstand external threats.
The point I am trying to drive home is that the ruling establishments in this coastal region, which had the first contacts with global forces and influences at every turn in history, derived their legitimacy, sustenance and strength from the internal cohesion of various social and economic interests that subsisted in this region. It was a complex system, with various groups holding special interests and privileges and in this scheme of things various communities like Christians, Muslims and Hindu upper castes had their own positions, privileges as well as responsibilities. The Hindu upper castes were the rulers and their legitimacy was ensured and sustained by the others who controlled various powerful interests such as trade and commerce, developing a web of mutual connections, responsibilities and liabilities. Once this intricate social web was disturbed as in the wake of Portuguese invasion, what we see is a natural disintegration of this social contract.
It was a social contract based on mutual interests and it was arrived at after mutual negotiations over centuries. It helped reinforce the conservative social system and guarded against any revolutionary change in its conservative social set up.
Take for example the caste system: The ruling establishment and the elite society gained its vast powers on the basis of caste oppression of a massive section of people, the lower castes. Kerala, with its long association with Christian and Islamic ideas--who had never accepted caste as legitimate--should have been exposed to a great social movement against caste, but instead it remained the most ardent bulwark of caste oppression till the mid 20th century while most other parts of India had seen much stronger anti-caste reform movements taking shape much earlier. We see that this negotiated social space and the inclusion of various community interests in this scheme of things helped this region remain itself as a exclusive conservative base, immune to change.
This has been the major and dominant pattern for at least five centuries, as we can see from the days of colonial invasion from late 15th century. This pattern has been in operation in the long period of English rule in Malabar with their power and influence extending to the southern princely states of Travancore and Cochin, through their resident agents and standing armies. Those who were left out, were forced to rebel as we see in the case of the chieftains of Wynad in Pazahassi revolts of late 18th and early 19th century7 or the Mappila revolts in South Malabar in 20th century,8 who faced severe discrimination and oppression. The land owing and revenue gathering system devised by the British give a clear picture of how it helped develop a network of dependents effectively co-opted into the colonial system.
After Independence, this has remained the cornerstone of the political system that developed here. Cronyism and formation of cartels has been at the heart of it, and in spite of the Constitutional safeguards for the protection of weaker sections, a substantial chunk of public expenditure has been cornered by the same forces who had control over society even in colonial times. A quick look at Kerala’s public employment pattern9 and the fact that almost 60 per cent of the total state revenues are expended for the salary and pensions of this segment10 speak of the horrible story of a society that consistently denied the rightful due to those massive sections without any regard for a redistribution of public resources in a more equitable manner.
Kerala's opposing political fronts which alternated in power almost continuously ever since the seventies, did actually exacerbate this situation as, for all practical purposes, these political fronts served as refuges for these interest groups. Veteran communist leader E M S Nambodiripad used to castigate the United Democratic Front (UDF) as a conglomeration of caste and community interests, which indeed it has been, but the reality is that even the Left Democratic Front also served a similar social role going by the experiences of those sections who were kept out of the power structure. From an analysis of the representation in power structures, political establishments and leadership positions in ruling parties we may conclude that those who still largely remain outside are Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims who are now facing the shrillest criticism of being harbourers of terror networks and anti-national activities from a media controlled by the same social groups and interests who are dominant in all power structures in our society.11
It is in this context we need to understand the recent media campaign against terrorism, which largely painted Muslims and Dalits as villains in its dramatics personae. The media reports linking these communities with incidents of terrorism were often without any substance, mostly planted by interested parties and such stories were published without any verification for authentic y or veracity and mostly without any direct quotes or evidence. Even when proved baseless later on, there were not many efforts to make amends for such violations of ethical media practices.
One of the serious criticisms that emerge from an analysis of the recent media trends in Kerala, is that the mainstream media is willfully manipulating news and developments with a view to malign these communities and there appears to be consensus among them that normal and universally accepted ethical media practices like cross-checking of facts, attributing claims, assertions and allegations to clearly identified and verifiable sources, enabling a a platform for the victims to make their own claims and defenses, follow-up coverage with clear and specific norms for authenticity, etc,12 are not at all followed by any of these newspapers in matters vis a vis these marginalized and vulnerable communities. There are innumerable case studies on such lopsided and unethical media practices in recent days which included the frenzy over Love Jihad (a long time Sangh Parivar bogey against Muslim youths), the completely one-sided coverage in the Beemappalli firing incident, and the reports about rise of Dalit terror networks following the murder of a person in Varkala under mysterious circumstances and the censoring of the news of mass arrest and persecution of Dalit youngsters who were organized under a new Dalit youth movement called Dalit Human Rights Movement (DHRM). The pattern of reporting that emerged was so evidently unprofessional and unethical and the continuation of such practices without any hitch or introspection only strengthens the view that this has been part of a conscious and deliberate policy decision, arrived at the highest levels of newspaper industry.
Now the question is, why such a media fixation about the Dalit and Muslim terror bogey and a complete reversal of its own sacred norms and professional checks and balances?
The answer lies in the assertive new political movements and ideas for social justice and equitable representation that is coming up from the lower segments of our society. There are clearly new movements and a wider alliance among the subaltern classes for a better chunk of the cake and that explains much of the ongoing frenzied responses from the society and its own mirror image and conscience-keepers, the mainstream media. What goes on is a process of delegitimization, a willful misrepresentation of social reality to preserve the social, economic and political privileges these segments have so far enjoyed. But right now, it appears they have overplayed their hands and are facing a serous credibility-deficit crisis, which might prove to undermine the very legitimacy of these mainstream institutions which have remained the unchallenged opinion-makers for a long time in our contemporary history.
When we consider why the media has abandoned its traditional watchdog role and 'impartial' umpire image, we also need to inquire into the changes in media ownership, financing and control patterns. Though the news media's editorial control is still theoretically, and in a legal sense, remain with Indian nationals, in reality it is an integral part of a global business network and its main concerns are no longer national interests or national consensus; it answers to the global forces of finance and capital who have come to dominate the Indian media and other business activities. A very interesting indication is the astronomical figures some of the chief executives and media celebrities in India are drawing these days, though as businesses they are often in the red, still their pay and perks are ensued and underwritten by an intricate web of media networks and corporate arrangements that go much beyond our national boundaries. this dichotomy appears to be the root cause of the alienation of Indian mainstream media from the common people, and its declaration of war on a substantial sections of our people, dubbed conveniently as anti-national.
notes
1 I would try to examine this issue mainly from my own experiences working in various Malayalam and English media organizations in and outside Kerala from 1983.
2 I am thankful to my friend Bobby Kunhu for suggesting this terminology to explain the present communal relationships in Kerala society.
3 See articles like Future Results of British Rule in India, in Karl Marx, The First War of Indian Independence, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1974.
4 For an interesting early description of the Portuguese, Syrian Church tussles in Malabar, see Michael Geddes, The History of Malabar Church, London, 1694, now available in Google Books.
5 For details, see Krishna Iyer KV, The Zamorins of Calicut, Calicut University, 1999.
6 An English translation of the text has been recently published by Other Books, Calicut.
7 See Pazhassi Samarangal, Dr K K N Kurup, State Institute of Languages, Thiruvananthapuram.
8 There are various studies on the Mappila revolts; see for an authentic version, Dr K N Panikkar, Against Lord and State, (Mal.) DC Books, Kottayam.
9 There are no official figures available for the community wise break-up of government jobs, but a broad picture may be available in the studies conducted by Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) in its Kerala studies. The break-up is as follows in the order of community, percentage of population and percentage of government jobs approximately (in brackets): Nair: 12.5 (21); other forward Hindu 1.3 (3.1); other backward Hindu: 8.2 (5.8); Christian: 18.3 (20.6); Ezhavas:22.6 (22.7); Muslim:24.7 (11.4); SC: 9 (7.6); ST: 1.2 (0.8). It reveals that the Muslims, SCs, STs and other backward Hindus are represented below their population figures in government service, the biggest losers being the Muslims. The biggest gainers are Nairs followed by Christians.
10 According to final figures for 2007-08, salaries and pension accounts for 59.78% of total revenue receipts of Kerala. It will be interesting to examine people from which communities and regions are pocketing a larger share of the public cake.
11 For a serious criticism and analysis of the media practices in Kerala in recent days with regard to these social segments, see the press release issued by a group of concerned citizens including poet K Satchidanandan, human rights activist John Dayal and others in Delhi, 29 December 2009:
Some of us concerned citizens had issued a statement on 18th December, 2009, appalled by the mainstream media reportage of the anticipatory bail hearing of Soofiya Madani in the Kerala High Court in connection with her alleged involvement in a conspiracy that led to the burning of a Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus at Kalamassery, Kochi in September 2005. Many of these reports bordered on pronouncing her guilt with complete disregard for Judicial processes and the Rule of the Law. This kind of reportage can be understood only in the backdrop of a disturbing new trend in the Kerala media and civil society vis-a-vis representation of issues and concerns affecting religious and caste minorities. This press conference has been convened to present some of our concerns regarding this and to appeal to the media and civil society actors to be more sensitive and balanced in their coverage of various events.
Apart from vitiating the communal harmony of the state, this trend also encroaches upon the fundamental rights of people to fair trial, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of association, freedom to practice and preach a religion and right to equality regardless of caste and religion; along with other fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. In this context, we would like to enumerate a few of these media campaigns and the obvious religious and caste bias present in them.
Love jihad: It was 2 cases of inter-religious love affairs that the media took up and blew out of proportion to create the bogey of “Love Jihad.” In both these cases, what was involved was love and attraction between Hindu women and Muslim men, which led to marriage and the conversion of the Hindu women into Islam. Following this the mainstream media in Kerala went on a rampage, claiming that thousands of women were being lured into converting to Islam by Muslim boys who were doing this as part of “Love Jihad.” This led to Justice K T Sankaran's remarks on "Love Jihad" and directions to the police to conduct investigations on it.
This campaign not only vilifies women as being incapable of decision-making, but also portrays young men of the Muslim community as members of “Love Jihad,” without any proper investigation or proof for doing the same. This regressive campaign was not stopped even after the Kerala Police clarified that such a phenomenon does not exist. It has come to a temporary end only after another judge of the Kerala High Court put a stop to all investigations on the issue, saying that saying that one could not target any particular community and that "inter-religious marriages are common in our society and cannot be seen as a crime." .
Dalit Terrorism: Following the murder of a middle-aged man in Varkala, the media in Kerala came out with a new term called “Dalit Terrorism.” Regardless of the identities of the Victim and the offender, media reportage on this case very often appeared to have been written in the police station. The press bought into the police story that it was activists of one dalit organization who had committed the murder. They joined hands with the police in reproducing unsubstantiated reports of the existence of a "Dalit terror network". This legitimized the large scale persecution of the organization's activists by the police and also led to violent attacks on them by members of the local Shiv Sena. The media in Kerala is party to these atrocities as it had stood with the police in accusing the organization and its activists, failing to control the excesses of the police and reinforcing the existing prejudices against a historically marginalised community.
Beemapally: On May 17, 2009 6 Muslim men from a fishing community were killed and 47 others injured (27 of them had bullet injuries) in a police firing in Beemapally. Later studies by Human Rights organizations brought out “the extremely unjust and criminalized violence" committed by the police in Beemapally (NCHRO, Kerala Chapter). The government also suspended some police officers as a token measure. However, when the incident happened, most of the Malayalam media observed silence on this issue. A few others reported the police version of the firing, branding it as "communal tension". They promoted the assumption that it was the provocation by a communally charged mob that had made the police resort to firing, and it was wise to keep silence. There was no analysis or even proper investigation of the whole incident. In this way, one of the worst incidents of state violence in Kerala against Muslim fish workers virtually went unnoticed in the mainstream media.
All this shows the impunity with which the Malayalam media is treating issues related to caste and religious minorities. It easily communalizes every issue related to the Muslim community and works to spread hate and suspicion about them. Similarly, it also misrepresents caste issues and works to reiterate existing prejudices. Here, we would like to reiterate that we do not hold a brief for any individual or organization and would like to see the Law take its own course and we would urge proper investigation, trial and conviction of any person mentioned above, provided that the procedure established by law and Constitutional guarantees are upheld and they are not singled out by virtue of their religious or caste identities. We call upon the media to fulfil its role and check excesses committed by the State, its agencies or other formations that is likely to infringe upon the quality of our democratic polity and uphold values of plurality enshrined in the Constitution of India.
12 For a sample of how serious newspapers deal with such issues, see the New York Times guidebook for their staff, Ethical Journalism: A Handbook of Values and Practices for the News and Editorial operations, updated September 2004, available at nytimes.com.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Some Ethical and Cultural Questions with Regard to Mayawati Cartoon Controversy
I WAS seriously in trouble last week as I decided to publish a cartoon of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Ms Mayawati, in a provocative posture, following the pubic outrage over her acceptance of a currency garland which is said to be valued anything between Rs 5 crore to Rs 20 crore. It was a disgusting scene, the chief minister of a state accepting such a garland from people who evidently had strings to pull. It was corruption through and through and a cynical expression of contempt for all norms of public decency by one who holds power under our Constitution.
That perhaps explains why our cartoonist Sudheernath decided to draw a very provocative cartoon with Mayawati in her toilet, asking for a bunch of 1000-rupee-notes for use as toilet paper.
I was in two minds as to what to do with the cartoon, whether to allow it to go or ask for a milder one. Finally I decided it to go in the paper, dated Wednesday, March 17.
Next day, there were severe protests from many friends, including Dr M S Jayaprakash, a long-time friend and a leader of the Bahujan Samajwadi Party, Kerala unit. The points raised were that the cartoon was per se obscene, and secondly it put a dalit leader in a poor light and thirdly, by using the image of a lady sitting in a toilet, the cartoon was demeaning to women. In addition to the protest letters, there was also an attack on the Thiruvananthapuram office of the newspaper on Friday, March 19.
I was anticipating objections to the cartoon, but I never expected the kind of fierce protest that was witnessed after its publication. I think this incident, hence, needs to be reexamined, to draw its lessons.
First, was it obscene? I am not sure where lies the dividing line between obscene and not obscene in a piece of art, whether it is a cartoon, a painting or a poem. This is an age old question and I feel there is no final answer. But of course for an editor, there is always this question to answer, what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in a particular newspaper. It is tough to arrive at a proper decision, keeping in mind the social attitudes, the readership's tastes and views, and the need for intellectual honesty, professional standards and ethics, artistic freedom and freedom of expression.
The second aspect was the allegation that the cartoon made a pointed attack against a dalit political leader. Why Mayawati was singled for such a demeaning treatment, was one line of criticism.
This, I realize now, is not a very easy question to answer. The evident and ready answer to this argument is that it was not because she was a dalit that she was attacked, but because she was a chief minister and she was corrupt.
This is absolutely true. A chief minister is holding a public office and hence under public scrutiny. The media cannot but criticize them in public interest. We cannot tone down the criticism only because one belongs to a weaker community.
But when I was deciding upon the cartoon one question I failed to ask myself was whether I would have allowed such a cartoon if it was, say Indira Gandhi or Sonia Gandhi on the seat of the toilet? And whether the cartoonist would have drawn such an image of them?
Well, here comes the cultural question; the question of middle class rationalizations of one’s preferences. I am sure no editor would dare to publish a cartoon of Indira or Sonia on the toilet seat because that would mean a massive public outrage on the part of their middle class readership and they know it beforehand. There the self censorship would work.
When I failed this test in Mayawati’s case, it is a reminder that I was insensitive to this cultural aspect. I was perhaps being dishonest intellectually as I failed to ask the right and most critical questions.
That perhaps explains why our cartoonist Sudheernath decided to draw a very provocative cartoon with Mayawati in her toilet, asking for a bunch of 1000-rupee-notes for use as toilet paper.
I was in two minds as to what to do with the cartoon, whether to allow it to go or ask for a milder one. Finally I decided it to go in the paper, dated Wednesday, March 17.
Next day, there were severe protests from many friends, including Dr M S Jayaprakash, a long-time friend and a leader of the Bahujan Samajwadi Party, Kerala unit. The points raised were that the cartoon was per se obscene, and secondly it put a dalit leader in a poor light and thirdly, by using the image of a lady sitting in a toilet, the cartoon was demeaning to women. In addition to the protest letters, there was also an attack on the Thiruvananthapuram office of the newspaper on Friday, March 19.
I was anticipating objections to the cartoon, but I never expected the kind of fierce protest that was witnessed after its publication. I think this incident, hence, needs to be reexamined, to draw its lessons.
First, was it obscene? I am not sure where lies the dividing line between obscene and not obscene in a piece of art, whether it is a cartoon, a painting or a poem. This is an age old question and I feel there is no final answer. But of course for an editor, there is always this question to answer, what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in a particular newspaper. It is tough to arrive at a proper decision, keeping in mind the social attitudes, the readership's tastes and views, and the need for intellectual honesty, professional standards and ethics, artistic freedom and freedom of expression.
The second aspect was the allegation that the cartoon made a pointed attack against a dalit political leader. Why Mayawati was singled for such a demeaning treatment, was one line of criticism.
This, I realize now, is not a very easy question to answer. The evident and ready answer to this argument is that it was not because she was a dalit that she was attacked, but because she was a chief minister and she was corrupt.
This is absolutely true. A chief minister is holding a public office and hence under public scrutiny. The media cannot but criticize them in public interest. We cannot tone down the criticism only because one belongs to a weaker community.
But when I was deciding upon the cartoon one question I failed to ask myself was whether I would have allowed such a cartoon if it was, say Indira Gandhi or Sonia Gandhi on the seat of the toilet? And whether the cartoonist would have drawn such an image of them?
Well, here comes the cultural question; the question of middle class rationalizations of one’s preferences. I am sure no editor would dare to publish a cartoon of Indira or Sonia on the toilet seat because that would mean a massive public outrage on the part of their middle class readership and they know it beforehand. There the self censorship would work.
When I failed this test in Mayawati’s case, it is a reminder that I was insensitive to this cultural aspect. I was perhaps being dishonest intellectually as I failed to ask the right and most critical questions.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Yeah, Food Prices are Going North...!
Indian Parliament Adjourned amidst protests over the rising price of food stuff:News.
Well, let us have a five-star lunch today...!
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Summit Concludes; and Warming...?
Global climate summit concludes in Copenhagen with no definite agreement: news.
Did anyone ask the planet how she feels now...?
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Role of Subaltern Classes in Future Indian Politics: A Critique of the Left positions
RECENTLY Dr K N Ganesh, of the department of history at Calicut University, published a long article in Sasthragathi, on the society and politics of Kerala and its future development perspectives.
The article and its timing is interesting in many ways, as Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) which runs Sasthragathi is one organization that influences the ruling left front’s policies to a large extent and Dr. Ganesh himself happens to be one of the foremost Marxist thinkers in the younger generation.
Some comments I made in a discussion forum and my response to some critics:
1. I would like to comment briefly on Dr Ganesh's article though he does not seem to be a member of this forum. I hope someone here would invite his attention to the views expressed here:
I do agree with his basic argument that what goes on in the name of development debate in Kerala is a political debate. I also agree that in development debates, what take upper hand is middle class vested interests which have all but buried the real class interests of the toiling segments.
But I disagree with his assertion that the newly emerging movements of various social segments (like minorities, Dalits, backwards, women, etc) are essentially reactionary and they are camp-followers of imperialism. He is refusing to look at the specific class and historical origins of these movements in Indian society in the past two-three decades and fail to address the objective conditions in which they came up and what historical role they have played. Without taking this into considerations, his assertions are baseless and made only to serve a specific partisan/political purpose.
It is very interesting to note that in recent articles, other left theorists like Prabhat Patnaik also raise similar allegations against Maoists operating in India, that they are serving the imperialist agenda. Ganesh also appears to be keen on attacking the emerging new movements of the oppressed sections with almost similar arguments. . Both are interestingly failing to address the issue why these movements sprang up and whether it had any reason in the failure of the established left in taking up slogans which were important to these people? Or perhaps whether the official left and its governments were in anyway responsible for actions that gave them the impression that their class interests did clash and hence they found to their utter dismay that the official left is at the other side of the barricade in recent times?
Why does he fail to ask the question, why the middle class interests came to dominate our left parties and their government policies? Why can't he look at the issue of development vs. political debate in the light of what has been happening in the left parties, especially the CPM, during the past two decades? Is it not time for us to put these questions of inner party disputes in the 80s and 90s in their proper historical perspective now and see why the left took such a right-wing turn, though Dr Ganesh deftly avoids entering such dangerous ideological waters?
2. I do not want to respond to all the points raised by John and I do not want to say anything on the prescriptions offered by Dr Ganesh. But without a proper stock-taking of the past, we are not going to build any future, I am sure. So before John proceeds to discuss his own prescriptions for the future, let me make some points here which might possibly influence him as he draws up his own action plan.
The question he raised about the class/caste basis of the so-called past politics based on class struggle is very relevant. In fact I do feel Kerala's left politics started in late 30s as a class-based movement but at some point it was obviously taken over by other interests and ended up in a middle class-controlled, upper-caste dominated movement which ultimately resulted in its present impasse. (Which Ganesh also seems to recognize implicitly.)
The development of the present subaltern class, identity-based movements (mainly of Muslims, Adivasis, Dalits, women, etc) are a natural extension/corollary arising out of the failure of the traditional left in carrying forward its original political agenda. I would also argue that these new movements do fill a vacuum left behind by the Left parties in our society. Here we must say that the new social movements of the marginalized groups are actually taking over the slogans practically abandoned by Left parties in the economic, political, social and cultural spheres for emancipation and equality. They are taking the Left's unfinished agenda forward.
To continue my point that the Left actually started out as the force that cemented the unity of the oppressed social/class elements in our society, I will revert back to the 30s when it was all started.
In the 30s Malabar, especially Kozhikode, was the major point of class struggle. The organization of the left movement actually started mainly among workers in this region and in the second stage it spread to the peasants in north Malabar which resulted in a series of violent struggles, in 30s and 40s.
On the political side, we see a coming together of these forces mainly opposed to the upper-class &caste dominated Congress leadership. In fact in 1937-38 we have the most beautiful alliance of all such forces with EMS as KPCC secretary, Muhammed Abdurahman as president, and people like P Krishna Pillai, A K Gopalan, K A Keraleeyan and E Kannan, a Dalit leader, as top leaders of the masses. Note that the left leadership even then was predominantly upper caste, just like the Gandhi Sangham in Congress which they opposed and displaced in 1937-38. Unlike the Gandhi Sangham which was exclusively upper caste, the left was firmly in alliance with the socially oppressed segments (mainly Dalits and Muslims in the 30s) which gave them their real strength and energy.
But in the post-Independence period, especially after the left formed governments, we see only the predominance of the elitist segments in the left while those who were their original allies in the 30s, slowly receded and drifted away.
Now these people who were left to the devil as the Communists took power are returning to the limelight and taking up the slogans their friends had abandoned. Why such a development should irritate people like Dr Ganesh is something which needs probing. When I read his diatribe against the dangers of identity politics, I see very well that in fact what irritated him was the rise of newly assertive subaltern politics in our midst.
3. Reply to Mr. RVG Menon,president,KSSP:
When I was reading your note, I was struck by the image of the new political and social movements, which are generally called identity political formations, being dismissed as of no serious consequence to the social/political transformation.
You seem to charge the new movements as being simply groups that would want to bargain some economic and political benefits for themselves (and their caste/community sub-sects) from the existing system, while giving no thought for the larger social and political change. That boils down to the charge that they are there to bargain and collect the benefits and not the change society through revolutionary means. So at best, they are only peripheral players and nothing more.
Reading Dr Ganesh, I felt he too accepted this limited role for the new movements though, as a historian, one should expect a more encompassing and larger picture from him. Or, as a senior KSSP person, is he simply projecting the 'politically correct' views the KSSP may hold and remain only a spokesperson for their views?
I ask this question because I have read the narrative of Kerala history Dr Ganesh made some time ago, in his book the Yesteryears of Kerala. The book is very important because it tries to study Kerala history and social evolution from a historical perspective and try to delineate the actual, deeper forces at work throughout our history.
That is why I thought it odd a person who has such an historical vision and deeper analytical skills do comes out with such a mechanical and automated response to Kerala's present problems and makes sweeping generalizations about its present process of churning, and provide a view for the future, which could have been done even by a computer at work on the data.
I am sorry for the harsh comments, but I just can't understand why you and Ganesh miss the point, why the crisis of confidence in the present dominant views that has given rise to the debate, after all. It is simply a fact that the present model is a failure, and is felt to be a failure at the larger social context, and you see there is a clamour for change, which actually is now overtaking all of us. The setbacks at electoral political level for the leftist ruling parties were an indication of the deeper setback they do face at various levels, including ideological, political and cultural spheres.
This failure or unwillingness to address the real issues, to face the reality of the utter debacle of what was once close to one's heart, one's world view, is the real problem that Ganesh and others from the left parties face today. It is this incapacity to accept this reality e that keeps them harp on the shortcomings of the new challengers to their dominance which is only laughable.
4. From a reply to JS, a friend:
Let me point out that I make a distinction between identity politics past and identity politics new (which I prefer to call New Politics because much more than identity what decides their ideology and nature must be class intermingled with caste/community).
Clearly there is a distinction between them as one can always see the line between the Kerala Congress groups, Muslim Leagues and NSS-SNDP formations, etc. They are more or less what RVG describes them; pressure groups who are content with bargaining for something for themselves and their offspring.
But the new movements which we, for clarity call groups of New Politics, are different and they do have deeper roots and wellspring. Their origins need not be local, but more national and even supranational. They acquire their strength and ideology from our recent historical experiences and developments, both national and global. In Kerala's context there might be regional issues also.
Just look at what these factors are: I would say the Mandal movement and the rise of backward castes is one; the Babri Masjid destruction and the churning in the Muslim community is another; the global war on terror and the rise of a global and national alliance against imperialism is a third, the onslaught of new economic policies and their impact tribals, dalits, farmers and others is a fourth; the rising forces of radical and Maoist politics might be another. There are so many new forces coming up and coming together in a new crucible of political experiments, that make it difficult for the present ruling classes to carry on as usual for long. For mere survival, they will have to accommodate changes.
The crisis in the left is an indication of what are the real forces at work today and the deep impact all these factors now have on our ruling elite. It appears that these huge churning are shaking up our crumbling traditional left edifice already and surely, as Lenin said, they would prove to be the weakest link in this imperialist-capitalist chain that rule India today.
Now you may ask: So what? Trinamool terror may replace the CPM terror; UDF corruption may replace LDF corruption, etc. But I am not sure this phase will continue for long. Every revolution sets off a series of big changes. There are other forces everywhere and it is only a matter of time before they come together and make the push into a shove.
5. A friend criticizes the new movements that originate from the Muslim community in parts of India as merely fundamentalist outfits. Here is the relevant text and my reply to it:
Where in socially regressive, reactionary and politically progressive. Anti-Imperialist on the one hand and pro-fundamentalist on the other hand. Such a politics do no add up. Because without democratic content of emancipation at the social and political level, there can not be a genuine subaltern politics.
I hate to fight with you but I am appalled by the exhibition of a set of preconceived notions about some groups and communities that is seen in this post, something that reminds me of Samuel Huntington.
As you can see I was making an effort to look into the future and speculate the strategy and alliances of various forces in future India, as the present dominant forces are showing unmistakable signs of fatigue and are likely to be crumbling down.
Your criticism is that some of these forces are clearly regressive in social outlook, and most have disparate and often mutually exclusive visions and agendas. Hence like water and oil, they don't mix.
But political alliances are complex mechanisms and I have never seen any alliance in the history of India where all partners were agreed on all issues. They came together on a minimum agenda and worked together; some times they failed, as in the case of the Janata experiment in 1977, and some were fairly successful as the United Front in the nineties and a few were successful to a large extent as the NDA and UPA in recent times.
So what does it tell us? It tells me that despite differences and cultural problems, people and political formations can come together and hang together. What helps them stick together is the commonality of interests despite differences. Also, it tells us that as years pass by and our politics gains in depth and experience, there is a growing willingness on the part of all parties (at least mainstream parties who were experimenting with alliance model) to stick together and work together.
In the case of subaltern mass movements that grow up from grassroots, what is going to be decisive is the common interests and the joint struggles they conduct. We have had many such experiences already. For example, I have not heard of any person who kept away from the Nandigram struggle simply because some of those who were at the receiving end of state repression and those who fought the police were Muslims with long beards and a possible patriarchal outlook when they go back home!
(My comments were originally made at fourthestatecritique.googlegroups.com.)
The article and its timing is interesting in many ways, as Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) which runs Sasthragathi is one organization that influences the ruling left front’s policies to a large extent and Dr. Ganesh himself happens to be one of the foremost Marxist thinkers in the younger generation.
Some comments I made in a discussion forum and my response to some critics:
1. I would like to comment briefly on Dr Ganesh's article though he does not seem to be a member of this forum. I hope someone here would invite his attention to the views expressed here:
I do agree with his basic argument that what goes on in the name of development debate in Kerala is a political debate. I also agree that in development debates, what take upper hand is middle class vested interests which have all but buried the real class interests of the toiling segments.
But I disagree with his assertion that the newly emerging movements of various social segments (like minorities, Dalits, backwards, women, etc) are essentially reactionary and they are camp-followers of imperialism. He is refusing to look at the specific class and historical origins of these movements in Indian society in the past two-three decades and fail to address the objective conditions in which they came up and what historical role they have played. Without taking this into considerations, his assertions are baseless and made only to serve a specific partisan/political purpose.
It is very interesting to note that in recent articles, other left theorists like Prabhat Patnaik also raise similar allegations against Maoists operating in India, that they are serving the imperialist agenda. Ganesh also appears to be keen on attacking the emerging new movements of the oppressed sections with almost similar arguments. . Both are interestingly failing to address the issue why these movements sprang up and whether it had any reason in the failure of the established left in taking up slogans which were important to these people? Or perhaps whether the official left and its governments were in anyway responsible for actions that gave them the impression that their class interests did clash and hence they found to their utter dismay that the official left is at the other side of the barricade in recent times?
Why does he fail to ask the question, why the middle class interests came to dominate our left parties and their government policies? Why can't he look at the issue of development vs. political debate in the light of what has been happening in the left parties, especially the CPM, during the past two decades? Is it not time for us to put these questions of inner party disputes in the 80s and 90s in their proper historical perspective now and see why the left took such a right-wing turn, though Dr Ganesh deftly avoids entering such dangerous ideological waters?
2. I do not want to respond to all the points raised by John and I do not want to say anything on the prescriptions offered by Dr Ganesh. But without a proper stock-taking of the past, we are not going to build any future, I am sure. So before John proceeds to discuss his own prescriptions for the future, let me make some points here which might possibly influence him as he draws up his own action plan.
The question he raised about the class/caste basis of the so-called past politics based on class struggle is very relevant. In fact I do feel Kerala's left politics started in late 30s as a class-based movement but at some point it was obviously taken over by other interests and ended up in a middle class-controlled, upper-caste dominated movement which ultimately resulted in its present impasse. (Which Ganesh also seems to recognize implicitly.)
The development of the present subaltern class, identity-based movements (mainly of Muslims, Adivasis, Dalits, women, etc) are a natural extension/corollary arising out of the failure of the traditional left in carrying forward its original political agenda. I would also argue that these new movements do fill a vacuum left behind by the Left parties in our society. Here we must say that the new social movements of the marginalized groups are actually taking over the slogans practically abandoned by Left parties in the economic, political, social and cultural spheres for emancipation and equality. They are taking the Left's unfinished agenda forward.
To continue my point that the Left actually started out as the force that cemented the unity of the oppressed social/class elements in our society, I will revert back to the 30s when it was all started.
In the 30s Malabar, especially Kozhikode, was the major point of class struggle. The organization of the left movement actually started mainly among workers in this region and in the second stage it spread to the peasants in north Malabar which resulted in a series of violent struggles, in 30s and 40s.
On the political side, we see a coming together of these forces mainly opposed to the upper-class &caste dominated Congress leadership. In fact in 1937-38 we have the most beautiful alliance of all such forces with EMS as KPCC secretary, Muhammed Abdurahman as president, and people like P Krishna Pillai, A K Gopalan, K A Keraleeyan and E Kannan, a Dalit leader, as top leaders of the masses. Note that the left leadership even then was predominantly upper caste, just like the Gandhi Sangham in Congress which they opposed and displaced in 1937-38. Unlike the Gandhi Sangham which was exclusively upper caste, the left was firmly in alliance with the socially oppressed segments (mainly Dalits and Muslims in the 30s) which gave them their real strength and energy.
But in the post-Independence period, especially after the left formed governments, we see only the predominance of the elitist segments in the left while those who were their original allies in the 30s, slowly receded and drifted away.
Now these people who were left to the devil as the Communists took power are returning to the limelight and taking up the slogans their friends had abandoned. Why such a development should irritate people like Dr Ganesh is something which needs probing. When I read his diatribe against the dangers of identity politics, I see very well that in fact what irritated him was the rise of newly assertive subaltern politics in our midst.
3. Reply to Mr. RVG Menon,president,KSSP:
When I was reading your note, I was struck by the image of the new political and social movements, which are generally called identity political formations, being dismissed as of no serious consequence to the social/political transformation.
You seem to charge the new movements as being simply groups that would want to bargain some economic and political benefits for themselves (and their caste/community sub-sects) from the existing system, while giving no thought for the larger social and political change. That boils down to the charge that they are there to bargain and collect the benefits and not the change society through revolutionary means. So at best, they are only peripheral players and nothing more.
Reading Dr Ganesh, I felt he too accepted this limited role for the new movements though, as a historian, one should expect a more encompassing and larger picture from him. Or, as a senior KSSP person, is he simply projecting the 'politically correct' views the KSSP may hold and remain only a spokesperson for their views?
I ask this question because I have read the narrative of Kerala history Dr Ganesh made some time ago, in his book the Yesteryears of Kerala. The book is very important because it tries to study Kerala history and social evolution from a historical perspective and try to delineate the actual, deeper forces at work throughout our history.
That is why I thought it odd a person who has such an historical vision and deeper analytical skills do comes out with such a mechanical and automated response to Kerala's present problems and makes sweeping generalizations about its present process of churning, and provide a view for the future, which could have been done even by a computer at work on the data.
I am sorry for the harsh comments, but I just can't understand why you and Ganesh miss the point, why the crisis of confidence in the present dominant views that has given rise to the debate, after all. It is simply a fact that the present model is a failure, and is felt to be a failure at the larger social context, and you see there is a clamour for change, which actually is now overtaking all of us. The setbacks at electoral political level for the leftist ruling parties were an indication of the deeper setback they do face at various levels, including ideological, political and cultural spheres.
This failure or unwillingness to address the real issues, to face the reality of the utter debacle of what was once close to one's heart, one's world view, is the real problem that Ganesh and others from the left parties face today. It is this incapacity to accept this reality e that keeps them harp on the shortcomings of the new challengers to their dominance which is only laughable.
4. From a reply to JS, a friend:
Let me point out that I make a distinction between identity politics past and identity politics new (which I prefer to call New Politics because much more than identity what decides their ideology and nature must be class intermingled with caste/community).
Clearly there is a distinction between them as one can always see the line between the Kerala Congress groups, Muslim Leagues and NSS-SNDP formations, etc. They are more or less what RVG describes them; pressure groups who are content with bargaining for something for themselves and their offspring.
But the new movements which we, for clarity call groups of New Politics, are different and they do have deeper roots and wellspring. Their origins need not be local, but more national and even supranational. They acquire their strength and ideology from our recent historical experiences and developments, both national and global. In Kerala's context there might be regional issues also.
Just look at what these factors are: I would say the Mandal movement and the rise of backward castes is one; the Babri Masjid destruction and the churning in the Muslim community is another; the global war on terror and the rise of a global and national alliance against imperialism is a third, the onslaught of new economic policies and their impact tribals, dalits, farmers and others is a fourth; the rising forces of radical and Maoist politics might be another. There are so many new forces coming up and coming together in a new crucible of political experiments, that make it difficult for the present ruling classes to carry on as usual for long. For mere survival, they will have to accommodate changes.
The crisis in the left is an indication of what are the real forces at work today and the deep impact all these factors now have on our ruling elite. It appears that these huge churning are shaking up our crumbling traditional left edifice already and surely, as Lenin said, they would prove to be the weakest link in this imperialist-capitalist chain that rule India today.
Now you may ask: So what? Trinamool terror may replace the CPM terror; UDF corruption may replace LDF corruption, etc. But I am not sure this phase will continue for long. Every revolution sets off a series of big changes. There are other forces everywhere and it is only a matter of time before they come together and make the push into a shove.
5. A friend criticizes the new movements that originate from the Muslim community in parts of India as merely fundamentalist outfits. Here is the relevant text and my reply to it:
Where in socially regressive, reactionary and politically progressive. Anti-Imperialist on the one hand and pro-fundamentalist on the other hand. Such a politics do no add up. Because without democratic content of emancipation at the social and political level, there can not be a genuine subaltern politics.
I hate to fight with you but I am appalled by the exhibition of a set of preconceived notions about some groups and communities that is seen in this post, something that reminds me of Samuel Huntington.
As you can see I was making an effort to look into the future and speculate the strategy and alliances of various forces in future India, as the present dominant forces are showing unmistakable signs of fatigue and are likely to be crumbling down.
Your criticism is that some of these forces are clearly regressive in social outlook, and most have disparate and often mutually exclusive visions and agendas. Hence like water and oil, they don't mix.
But political alliances are complex mechanisms and I have never seen any alliance in the history of India where all partners were agreed on all issues. They came together on a minimum agenda and worked together; some times they failed, as in the case of the Janata experiment in 1977, and some were fairly successful as the United Front in the nineties and a few were successful to a large extent as the NDA and UPA in recent times.
So what does it tell us? It tells me that despite differences and cultural problems, people and political formations can come together and hang together. What helps them stick together is the commonality of interests despite differences. Also, it tells us that as years pass by and our politics gains in depth and experience, there is a growing willingness on the part of all parties (at least mainstream parties who were experimenting with alliance model) to stick together and work together.
In the case of subaltern mass movements that grow up from grassroots, what is going to be decisive is the common interests and the joint struggles they conduct. We have had many such experiences already. For example, I have not heard of any person who kept away from the Nandigram struggle simply because some of those who were at the receiving end of state repression and those who fought the police were Muslims with long beards and a possible patriarchal outlook when they go back home!
(My comments were originally made at fourthestatecritique.googlegroups.com.)
Friday, November 27, 2009
Liberhan Report and Future of BJP & the Indian Right-wing
Kerala concerned about leak in Mullapperiyar dam; Parliament is rocked over the leak of Liberhan report: news.
Yes comrade, leak is a common problem, for you and me...!
WHILE DISCUSSING the Liberhan committee report on Ayodhya, and its implications for the future of Indian politics, I made the following points in response to some questions raised by a few friends:
a). My points are as follows:
1. The coming together for a second time of the malicious forces in the Hindutva right-wing is an idea they would surely pursue but they would see it does not work any longer.
2. The report and its debate in Parliament and outside in the public sphere would prove to be a severe indictment of the politics of communalism unlike the 90s when the right-wing carried the day almost wholly.
3. I am reserving my comments on the future of RSS and its right-wing agenda as one setback or a series of setbacks are unlikely to diminish their fortunes. Even the murder of the Mahatma did not do it.
4. But the future of Indian politics is going to be more assertively influenced by the forces from below, the sections who are genetically opposed to the right-wing, elitist politics of the right, that gives rise to the Hindutva phenomenon.
5. With the rising levels of social awareness, better communications and more aggressive questioning and nailing of the untruths and half-truths that helped the rise of the Hindutva agenda in the 80s and 90s, the battle for minds would be better fought and won by progressive forces. It is a more vigilant society and polity they have to encounter and their ancient Chanakya tactics might not wash any longer.
6. The global situation is also changing. Criminals in one country used to travel to another to escape the law. But things are changing and those who are able to stop the arms of law in their country with strong-arm tactics might find themselves running into trouble elsewhere. It is a matter of time alone for the gentlemen named as culprits in the report finding their nemesis.
b.) On a question on the possibility of new communications strategies from the right-wing:
I am sorry that I have to be very brief on how the changed circumstances in society and communications could defeat the criminal intent of all sections who would want to come to power through devious means.
If you look at the conclusions of Justice Liberhan, I think one of the major points to note is his conclusion that even then the Indian public had not endorsed the movement for a temple in the same place of the mosque. It was a constructed image and only a few people, like the writer of the letter Bina forwarded, were hoodwinked by it.
Now we have to ask why the Indian public actually rejected their claims?
I remember the widespread rumours they spread that hundreds had been killed in Ayodhya but it took little time for the people to realise what was the truth. In fact post 90s despite the crescendo of the Sangh Parivar campaign, what you see is that their political effectiveness was coming down though they were able to win power with the help of allies. But their campaign was showing a decline.
Why? I feel because truth ultimately prevails. Cynicism cannot hold itself for
long and other systems that depended on falsification of truth, iron curtains, media manipulations, etc, were also crumbing post 80s as we see in Eastern Europe and Soviet Union in the same period. So if you want to build a political movement, as the BJP might want to once again rebuild itself, they will have to think of new strategies based on truth and competition on an equal footing.Then, of course,they will no longer be the BJP we know but a right wing party which is welcome in any democracy.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Laughing Gas
former Jharkhand chief minister Madhu Koda made billions during his days in power: news.
Crorepati rule...!
Thursday, October 8, 2009
From Jawaharlal to Rahul: On a Second Reading of Nehru’s Autobiography
Rahul Gandhi's visit to Kerala campuses trigger a wave of enthusiasm among the youngsters: news
AS ONE crosses fifty, a realisation slowly takes hold that one is no longer part of the present. Maybe not quite passé but still there is something that forces one to think about the past as well as the future. A person at 50, is a person like the Greek god Janus, he looks both to the past as well as to the future, with mixed feelings for both. At 50, a considerable part of one’s life is already behind, and of course there is another considerable part waiting in the future also.
I am at such a juncture, having left behind five decades behind and now I realise one of the things I always think about these days is the future; not my own-- there is nothing much to think about there-- but about our society’s, our country’s.
In the seventies when we were young people and active in politics, we were angry and impatient. We wanted change and nothing short of a revolutionary change, and hence we took up the red flag, the symbol of a revolutionary future.
Now more than thirty years on, I know that these dreams were nothing but pipedreams. We said the freedom from colonialism, from the white bosses to brown bosses that took place at Red Fort, was nothing but a sham. It was not real freedom.
But we grew up in such a country and slowly, but surely, we saw it coming to grips with the massive problems that beset the new nation. Not that we are a completely successful democracy, but what makes me happy now is the fact that we are surely not a failed nation, either.
That is why I was keenly watching the new generation of our leaders at the national scene, trying to come to grips with the Indian reality. Most of them make me sick and tired, but somehow Rahul Gandhi is one person on whom I pin much of my hopes right now.
I was keenly watching his performance at the national scene, and his visit to Krala’s campuses yesterday gave me the feeling that this young man has something quite similar to the spark shown by his great grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru, as he entered Indian politics as a young aristocrat almost a century ago, in the 1920s.
What I liked about him is his simple, straightforward style, his disarming frankness and palpable sincerity. All these qualities were evident in his numerous interactions with youngsters in all parts of the state in a one-day tour.
I was reading Jawaharlal Nehru’s Autobiography again last week and I could not but notice the same frankness, sincerity and straightforward nature of the person who wrote those lines, and his personality that comes through this thick volume that he finished as he spent so many solitary years in jail in the early forties.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
YSR Succession: One Must Earn Power and Not Land it as Family Legacy
THE DEATH of Andhra Pradesh chief minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy is sad indeed, but sadder seems to be the sudden pitch for making his son, Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy, the new chief minister.
The Hindu report, by my old colleague, S Nagesh Kumar -- who was with Indian Express in the mid eighties when I was in Hyderabad-- today refers to this move by a section of the legislators who claim that there are around a hundred MLAs who are fans of the younger Reddy. Another report in the inside pages tell us that these gentlemen are now threatening a split in the party if the claims of the son is not accepted by the Congress high command, even before the body of the senior leader, who was one of the most successful Congress politicians in Andhra Pradesh for many decades, has been cremated!
I do not think this is the time to think about the legitimacy of the claims of Jagan Mohan Reddy, a 36-year- old Parliament Member, who runs a new media company with newspapers and television channel in Telugu, which came into being during the tenure of YSR who came to power in 2004.
But the trend is unmistakable and disturbing. It goes against the legacy of democracy and democratic principles in succession. But the Congress itself is to blame, as this party has, over many decades, converted itself into a family concern, a private property of the Nehru-Gandhi family.
The benefit of that legacy is now being claimed by other regional satraps, and our own K Karunakaran was one of the early practitioners of this Doctrine of Family Legacy when he was powerful enough to make his son an MP and then KPCC president and minister and all that. Let us also remember that it was Defence Minister A K Antony, then KPCC president and now a member of the Congress high command’s core committee, who helped Karunakaran to get away with it as he himself nominated Muralidharan to the Congress list of candidates for the Lok Sabha as the leader had gone for a leak…!
Now the story has come full circle. Those less fortunate guys who had to give way to the Leader’s son way back in eighties are now in control of the KPCC and Muralidharan is out in the cold, trying to get back into the party. He wants a simple membership and nothing more but the party leaders here do not want him at all despite all the pressures his frail father could exert with the high command.
I do feel there is lesson in it for Jagan Mohan Reddy and all other highly ambitious Congress siblings (and of course to non-Congress siblings too): You earn power and not get it as a family legacy which you cannot keep.
The Hindu report, by my old colleague, S Nagesh Kumar -- who was with Indian Express in the mid eighties when I was in Hyderabad-- today refers to this move by a section of the legislators who claim that there are around a hundred MLAs who are fans of the younger Reddy. Another report in the inside pages tell us that these gentlemen are now threatening a split in the party if the claims of the son is not accepted by the Congress high command, even before the body of the senior leader, who was one of the most successful Congress politicians in Andhra Pradesh for many decades, has been cremated!
I do not think this is the time to think about the legitimacy of the claims of Jagan Mohan Reddy, a 36-year- old Parliament Member, who runs a new media company with newspapers and television channel in Telugu, which came into being during the tenure of YSR who came to power in 2004.
But the trend is unmistakable and disturbing. It goes against the legacy of democracy and democratic principles in succession. But the Congress itself is to blame, as this party has, over many decades, converted itself into a family concern, a private property of the Nehru-Gandhi family.
The benefit of that legacy is now being claimed by other regional satraps, and our own K Karunakaran was one of the early practitioners of this Doctrine of Family Legacy when he was powerful enough to make his son an MP and then KPCC president and minister and all that. Let us also remember that it was Defence Minister A K Antony, then KPCC president and now a member of the Congress high command’s core committee, who helped Karunakaran to get away with it as he himself nominated Muralidharan to the Congress list of candidates for the Lok Sabha as the leader had gone for a leak…!
Now the story has come full circle. Those less fortunate guys who had to give way to the Leader’s son way back in eighties are now in control of the KPCC and Muralidharan is out in the cold, trying to get back into the party. He wants a simple membership and nothing more but the party leaders here do not want him at all despite all the pressures his frail father could exert with the high command.
I do feel there is lesson in it for Jagan Mohan Reddy and all other highly ambitious Congress siblings (and of course to non-Congress siblings too): You earn power and not get it as a family legacy which you cannot keep.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Jaswant Sigh and the Need for Examining the History of India’s Partition
JASWANT SINGH has paid a price for being an objective observer of the history of Indian sub-continent in its most crucial period. The division of the country has always been a matter of serious and grave disputes, but what has been most critical as far as historical inquiry is concerned is that all facts relating to the division were never made available to the public or even the scholars.
What we had, instead, was one version of history written by the winners in this game played out on the country in the run up to division. In this Nehru, Patel and the entire Indian elite, upper caste Congress leadership came out in flying colours and people like Muhammedali Jinnah and B R Ambedkar were the demons. This official history held good for almost five decades and our children learnt this history in their schools and colleges and we, the first generation Indian after Independence, also imbibed such a history in our younger days.
I was a particularly keen student of history from my school days and I had spent a lot of time for reading history. In fact, I remember reading such huge tomes like the History of the Freedom Movement by Tara Chand (a multi volume project launched by Government of India), and the History of India prepared by a few Soviet scholars, during the days of Emergency and curiously withdrawn from the market in 1978 or 79 when Indira Gandhi returned to power) and many others. What these volumes had in common was that they carried the official line of the freedom movement, the official version of what led to the partition of the country.
But it was definite that such a totally one-sided history would not stand scrutiny of the times, especially as historical inquiry is a continuous process and every generation would seek fresh answers to the questions that keep up popping up, like persistent ghosts from a long buried past.
And in the case of India’s division and what were the circumstances that led to it and who were the people responsible for it, there has always been so many yawning gaps in the narration, which were papered over by our official historians. It suited our ruling classes very well, as both the Congress and the right wing Hindutva forces shared in the benefits of such a demonisation project, painting the Muslims and the Muslim League as responsible and Muhammaedali Jinnah as the wily villain of the peace.
But politics has never been such a neat black-and-white business. There has to be elements of grey in it and there are forces which benefited out of such tragic events in history. The Muslims never benefited anything out of it and in fact hey became second class citizens in their own country. They were reduced to be a non entity in Indian politics despite the fact that they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.
And the Congress and Nehru family benefited with a decades-long grip on power in India. All other streams in our national movement, whether it be the socialist, dalit, minority or communist, remained in the periphery and what we have come to see is the sharing of power alternatively between the congress an the Hindutva rightwing in India’s independent history.
Not that there were no voices which feebly complained about this elaborate hoax that is called India’s contemporary history, and read carefully even Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s autobiography is a cry in the wilderness. If one reads accounts of the activities of people like K M Munshi, the man who launched the Somanatha temple movement, who was a major force in the Nehru-Patel administration in the partition days one cannot but wonder how effective were these schemes of these wily gentlemen who decided the destiny of this nation at its most critical hour.
Now a person like Jaswant Singh, who spent a lifetime in the BJP, has dared to question this sham of history and I am sure it would prove to be a great contribution to understanding modern India and its history in demystified context.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Panakkad Muhammedali Shihab Thangal: Politician, Religious Leader and Human Being
I HAVE had a pretty long association with Panakkad Muhammedali Shihab Thangal, the president of the Indian Union Muslim League Kerala unit, who passed away yesterday. Today I was watching his final journey on the television channels even as I had to comment on his contributions to a few channels. I also had to comment in a cyber discussion forum, which provided me with an opportunity to see how ill-informed are sections of our mainstream society about the politics, culture and religious practices of the most dominant minority community among us.
It was in 1989 when I returned to Kozhikode as a reporter for Indian Express that I started seeing him and listening to him. Those were very tempestuous days in the League politics as there were sharp differences within the party and community about its approach to the Congress, its weak-kneed response to the rising Hindutva threat, and its compromises even with Congress which failed to uphold the secular principles of our Constitution.
He was not a tough leader or a person who aggressively pushed his line; instead he was a man of soft manners and affability. People used to complain that his mild manners had been misused by some of his close confidantes. But I do not believe that is true. In fact, on some occasions he did show his toughness, his decisiveness, though even that was expressed without raising his voice, without any externals show of strength.
I remember visiting him with Prasannarajan, senior writer with Indian Express in Delhi some time in mid-nineties during a Lok Sabha election. He was pleased with the visit, and treated us with tea and snacks in his room even as dozens of people came to visit him the morning; some of them seeking political recommendations, some for blessings, some with complaints to sort out…
There were a few new vehicles like jeeps and cars waiting in the courtyard of Kodappanakkal house, as the owners believed his blessings would keep them safe from accidents. After our meeting, we saw him walk up to them and then he got in the vehicle and took the driver’s seat and managed to ignite them ceremonially.
The last time I met him was only last year when Amrita TV was shooting a special programme on him with actor Siddique as the anchor. It was called Samagamam, part of popular series of celebrities’ meeting with old friends and relatives, and I was invited there as a journalist who had known him for a long time. In my few minutes with him at the set, what I recalled was his decisive actions to uphold peace and communal amity in Kerala in December 1992, when Babri Masjid was demolished and the Muslim community was seething with rage.
There are many more memories to write about, but I think they should remain for another occasion.
I reproduce a few paragraphs from my comments to some questions form friends at fourth-estate critique, in a discussion on Shihab Thangal:
Is he the head of a sect. or something like that? Is this more like the `Supreme Leader' of Iran type? Or is this more like RSS head?
These questions in a way point to the deep chasm in our society. Even the best informed, highly educated, mobile sections in pars of Kerala do seem to know precious little about another section who live in the same place, who have contributed immensely to our lives but still seem to live as far away as the South Pole, with no contacts, no understanding in between.
It has always troubled me, why do we allow ourselves to be completely ignorant about such vital parts of our own self?
Now what is Panakkad Syed Muhammedali Shihab Thangal?
Is he the head of a sect?
By a sect, if you go by the contemporary reality in Muslim Kerala, you mean some groups which are opaque, somewhat secretive groups like say Noorisha Tareequat, which has been in the news for some time with their association with characters like Thammanam Shaji. Sects are groups which revolve around some individuals and they are at the fringe of the society with their own rituals and practices. Shihab Thangal is far form it; he is the leader (both spiritual and political ) of a substantial section of our population which constitutes something around 24 per cent of Malayalees.
It would also be wrong to think Shihab Thangal someone like the supreme leader in (predominantly Shia) Iran either. Because he is first and foremost a Sunni religious leader who came to his position by way of his lineage and his deep roots and contacts among the people, the Sunni masses in Malabar. The IUML has always been a party which made clever use of the religious sentiments of the people and hence they were often putting the Sunni religious leaders at the helm of the party, (like P S M O Pookoya Thangal, Shihab Thangal, Bafaqui Thangal, etc) though it was basically controlled by the traders and other vested interests in the community.
Now is it a party of communal and exclusivist politics and ideology like the RSS?
I do not accept this view because I have always found the League willing (even eager) to accept the secular practices in a democratic politics and they never even dreamt of establishing a religious state in this country. They did in the past and Pakistan is the result of such a calamitous ideology. Ever since Partition, the League has been part of the Indian democratic system and they were a pressure group in our politics for the benefits of the Muslims, may be the richer segments among them primarily.
Is there any implied understanding within the community that such leaders should not hold parliamentary positions? Is this implied understanding that makes ML to readily take him as the leader?
I think the question whether there is a clear demarcation of the role of the leader and the people who wield power in IUML need a little more serious probe. As far as I can see, there is nothing that stops a leader from holding public offices, though it is not generally practiced. The reason seems to be in the social practices of Malabar Muslims as the thangals in this area had a temporal as well as spiritual role in the community for the past three decades or so. You will see they were directly involved in anti-imperialist politics, some of them had to face official actions and punishment like the famous deportation of Fazal Pookoya Thangal by Collector Conoly, and the call for jehad against the British by another thangal.
But the thangals are known to have taken public offices and there is nothing that prevents them from holding such offices and many have done so too. If you take a look at the list of MLAs from Malabar, you will see such names listed there.
In the case of Shihab Thangal, during the election to 14th Lok Sabha I had written an article in Madhyamam which called upon him to directly stand for election from Manjeri or Ponnani and come to Delhi so that he could see the real and sad situation of Muslims in other parts of the country.
I had no occasion to talk to him on it later on but after the polls, I met E Ahamed, now IUML national president (technically a position higher to the one Shihab Thangal held as state unit chief), at his home and he told me the party would be happy if Thangal accepted such a position, only that it was his decision not to go for such positions.
The IUML for all practical purposes is an umbrella organization of various Muslim groups, sects and interest groups like Sunnis (two dominant factions), Mujahids, (again two factions), Jama-athis, thareeqathwallahs, Shias, Ahmadiyyas, and so many others. The differences are ironed out through mutual consultations and normal democratic practices and I had witnessed the sharp rift in 1989 -94 when Sulaiman Sait and others left the party. I think being the senior-most leader and a dominant spiritual presence in the most powerful group that explains his special position in the party. It is far from the way RSS or Shiv Sena had set up their organizations.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
So Is It the End of the Road for Comrade V S Achuthanandan?
SO FINALLY, has comrade V S Achuthanandan been shown his place? Can we say the four-day efforts of the special politburo followed by an urgent session of the central committee of the CPM, which announced his expulsion from the PB, and then a three-day session of the party state committee, found an effective antidote to the inimitable comrade’s antics; a way to defang this valiant fighter?
On last Sunday, when the CPM central leadership announced this decision from the PB, I had to spend many hours in the various news channel studios discussing the pros and cons of the disciplinary action against Achuthanandan. In fact I was at Asianet News at about 12.30 noon and then I had to attend sessions at other channels like India Vision and Manorama News and again around 8.30 pm I returned to Asianet from where I finally emerged at 10.30 at night. During this ten hour period, Comrade Achuthanandan had been expelled from the PB, he had left Delhi and landed at Thiruvananthapuram Airport, making just one comment in the meanwhile: I do accept this decision of the party and there is no change in my position on SNC lavalin case. There was nothing more, nothing less.
And from the next day started the three-day session of the state party meetings, which concluded yesterday. CPM general secretary Prakash Karat has been present in the state meetings and he is scheduled to address the lower level party workers meetings in all three regions starting from Kochi today. All these elaborate arrangements are being made to convince the party rank and file that the action against the veteran leader, the only surviving Kerala leader from the 32-member group who walked out the CPI’s national council session in 1964, thus launching the CPM in a historic split in the Indian Communist movement.
We have very little information on what transpired at all these secret meetings in Delhi and the state capital, but news media says that there were severe differences of opinion in the top leadership including PB and CC, and also there were a few voices of dissent even in the state unit which generally supports the official leadership in Kerala.
I am not going to speculate on what would be the end result of all these expulsions and disciplinary actions in the Communist Party (Marxist.) But I had to react to it while discussing it in the news channels. One of the points I raised was that the situation in the party and the issues thrown up were not going to be solved through disciplinary action against one individual; they needed a thorough examination and soul-searching in the public space. The effort to stifle any dissent, through an expulsion form PB, was bound to be counter-productive and I felt since this was a most anti-democratic and one-sided step on the party of the leadership, it was a black day in the history of the left movement in this country.
People like comrade M M Lawrence, a veteran now humbled through factional activity in the party, opposed and even ridiculed me but I still feel that the issues raised by VS in the past and the differences which resulted in his expulsion from PB, would not go away. They are substantive issues of public accountability on the part of public individuals and the only way the party could tackle it is through the normal, democratic ways like fighting in a court of law. The party now says they would fight it; but I am doubtful how far the party would be able to convince the masses that they have nothing to hide in this most unhappy affair.
On last Sunday, when the CPM central leadership announced this decision from the PB, I had to spend many hours in the various news channel studios discussing the pros and cons of the disciplinary action against Achuthanandan. In fact I was at Asianet News at about 12.30 noon and then I had to attend sessions at other channels like India Vision and Manorama News and again around 8.30 pm I returned to Asianet from where I finally emerged at 10.30 at night. During this ten hour period, Comrade Achuthanandan had been expelled from the PB, he had left Delhi and landed at Thiruvananthapuram Airport, making just one comment in the meanwhile: I do accept this decision of the party and there is no change in my position on SNC lavalin case. There was nothing more, nothing less.
And from the next day started the three-day session of the state party meetings, which concluded yesterday. CPM general secretary Prakash Karat has been present in the state meetings and he is scheduled to address the lower level party workers meetings in all three regions starting from Kochi today. All these elaborate arrangements are being made to convince the party rank and file that the action against the veteran leader, the only surviving Kerala leader from the 32-member group who walked out the CPI’s national council session in 1964, thus launching the CPM in a historic split in the Indian Communist movement.
We have very little information on what transpired at all these secret meetings in Delhi and the state capital, but news media says that there were severe differences of opinion in the top leadership including PB and CC, and also there were a few voices of dissent even in the state unit which generally supports the official leadership in Kerala.
I am not going to speculate on what would be the end result of all these expulsions and disciplinary actions in the Communist Party (Marxist.) But I had to react to it while discussing it in the news channels. One of the points I raised was that the situation in the party and the issues thrown up were not going to be solved through disciplinary action against one individual; they needed a thorough examination and soul-searching in the public space. The effort to stifle any dissent, through an expulsion form PB, was bound to be counter-productive and I felt since this was a most anti-democratic and one-sided step on the party of the leadership, it was a black day in the history of the left movement in this country.
People like comrade M M Lawrence, a veteran now humbled through factional activity in the party, opposed and even ridiculed me but I still feel that the issues raised by VS in the past and the differences which resulted in his expulsion from PB, would not go away. They are substantive issues of public accountability on the part of public individuals and the only way the party could tackle it is through the normal, democratic ways like fighting in a court of law. The party now says they would fight it; but I am doubtful how far the party would be able to convince the masses that they have nothing to hide in this most unhappy affair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
