Illiberal, Unintellectual Thinking!
INDIA THAT IS BHARAT
SATIRICUS was almost moved to tears the other day when he read that mournful “Missive to distraught liberals” by a distinguished columnist in a leading newspaper. At the same time he was also ashamed of his ignorance, for the said missive was also addressed to “dear sentinels of the republic.” On both counts Satiricus was exposed as an ignoramus. For in the first place Satiricus never knew we had ‘Liberals’ in India, and secondly he had no idea they were India’s sentinels. He only knew there are Indians intellectuals and there are secular intellectuals and the two are one and the same.
Satiricus, of course, is out on both counts. He is neither intellectual nor secular, he is just an illiterate journalist and a communal cuss. Consequently, he could not quite comprehend the cause of the grief expressed in the very opening of this piteous piece—“We goofed. Every assumption that we made in the election campaign has been savaged.” Ah, me, how sad! How on earth could every intellectual assumption be so savaged? This may mean only one thing—that the assumers were the only intellectuals, while all the others were savages. What is sadder, the said writer says these savaged assumptions were “premised on the values we cherish—freedom, justice and fraternity”. How noble! Satiricus must say we, the voters, were really savages to reject all of them. Maybe we illiberal unintellectuals thought according to the intellectual liberals led by the said columnist freedom meant the freedom to sing the praises of Macaulay, as another intellectual of the same species had done in another newspaper, when Macaulay himself had said in a speech in parliament that the surest way to mentally enslave Indians was to give them English education; that justice for these liberals meant to keep calling Modi a mass murderer and thumb their collective nose at the court that ruled he wasn’t, and fraternity meant a brotherliness that was reserved for the Ummah, the Brotherhood of the Believers. In short, we morons mistook the meaning of these precious premises.
Surprisingly enough for Satiricus, our Indian intellectuals-cum-liberals themselves apparently followed us savages in de-valuing their values. For, the writer ruefully remarks, “All that we did….was to create fear in the minds of the voters: fear of Hindu nationalists gaining control of levers of the state.” But wasn’t that exactly the right thing that needed to be done? Could there be anything more disastrous than “Hindu Nationalists” coming to power? Is not the very idea of India being a Hindu nation anti-secularly unintellectual as well as awefully illiberal? Now that it has come to pass, how long before 22,000 Muslims will be officially slaughtered, as Rahul Gandhi intellectually anticipated?
Unfortunately, on the other hand, even among the Muslims there have been eminent unintellectuals who crassly claim that those Indians who are Muslims by religion are Hindus by culture. One among them was the Indian Muslim MC Chagla. Another among them was the ex-Pakistani Muslim Anwar Shaikh. But then, it takes all sorts to make even the Muslim world, including such wretched retards.
Furthermore, the said columnist sadly says, “We missed no chance to harp on Modi’s RSS background.” That did it, No man with an “RSS background” can be anything but a monster. So the very mention of RSS should have frightened the voter to death. Still, to be on the safe side, some more fearful aspects were generously added to Modi the Monster for the urgent attention of the voter. But what happened? “On all these counts we came a cropper”….”Congress suffered its worst route in history….Caste-based formulations that wore secularism on their sleeves were flattened too.” Oh, my God! What the devil! It means the secularism preached by Sonia and Shahi Imam and practised by Mulayam and Maya was rejected and the unintellectual, illiberal Hinduism-cum-communalism of Modi the Menace bought wholesale by the vile voters.
So now what? How to save the sorry situation?
The answer: “A course correction is in order.” Aha! And what sort of correction? The answer: “What we need is to acknowledge the flaws in our idea of secularism.” Now this is something this communal cuss finds hard to believe. A secularism that does not need the support of the Jama Masjid Imam, a secularism in which the Muslims don’t have the first right on India’s assets, and a secularism in which even “perceived injustice” to Muslims is not required by Sachar to be immediately removed can never be Indian secularism.