(The words in blue are from the original article with those in black, response to them)
Dear Mr Parnal
Chirmuley,
You are the Associate Professor, Centre of German Studies, School
of Language, Literature, and Culture Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru
University. By this very designation, you are supposed to be moulding
young, impressionable minds about what's right and wrong. However,
having read through your entire opinion piece, I find myself, as a
tax payer, ashamed that my tax money goes to pay salaries of the
likes of you as well as subsidise the education of the students whose
lives you obviously are spoiling. This open letter is therefore aimed
at highlighting the dangers of your thought process, not for you, of
course, not for me, never, but for something I hold dearly and close
to my heart (and wish you too did). My motherland, Bharat Mata
(There, I just got labelled as a Sanghi bhakt, didn't I? Never mind.
Am happy to be called so).
Here
is yet another ‘half baked’ piece by an academic you might be
tempted to call an anti-national, simply on account of institutional
affiliation. This is how Arnab Goswami described the entire spectrum
of serious, sober, well informed, nuanced, if anguished engagement by
the academia with the present moment of crisis unfolding at the
Jawaharlal Nehru University, where student leaders are being
arrested, picked up for interrogation, intimidated, as though they
were dangerous criminals, because a few ‘anti-national’ slogans
were heard on the campus.
If
you felt what was happening in the institution you represent was
wrong, what have you done about it, Sir? If Arnab Goswami (or any one
else, for that matter) described the entire sequence of events which
unfolded in the JNU as anti-national and amounting to sedition, I
don't see anything wrong in it. What exactly is a “few
'anti-national' slogans”? Like “Down Down, India” and run away?
Or softly whispering “India is to be broken into pieces”? By not
reacting and opposing it, are you also not party to the act? Did you
bother to inform concerned authorities to take requisite action
against those “few” when it happened? Collusion to illegal acts
is also illegal (that, sir, is the law, not my opinion, by the way).
Let me also enlighten you, sir, since you seem to be blissfully aware
that the few slogans included “breaking India into pieces, Pakistan
Zindabad and Azaadi for Kashmir”, all of which are seditious, and
that's putting it mildly.
We
are all used to media trials now. Those of us watching things from
the ‘inside’, as it were, are watching the disturbing
repercussions and consequences of this trial. The social media are
awash with calls baying for the blood of innocent students, calling
for a shutdown of the country’s most prestigious university, ranked
as the best by the State’s own ranking mechanisms. Many are given
to an outright dismissal of the news media, but most recognise its
vital importance in sustaining a democracy. That is also why there is
great alarm at journalism that is not only irresponsible, but an
instance of criminal intimidation, using hate speech to incite
violence against those who voice their opinions and stand by a
progressive politics.
When
you say you are used to media trials, you seem to forget that our own
beloved (oops my own beloved) Prime Minister has been the biggest
victim of media vilification. There was not one single day when 2002
did not flash on my TV screen on at least one of the news channels as
if 2002 riots was the only event that happened in India since
Independence (and by the way, including Times Now too). Where were
you then? Where were the calls for “sustaining democracy”? Why
didn't you react against this “criminal intimidation” as you love
to call it? While the Congress and other parties hostile to BJP were
using hate speech to incite hated, why did you remain silent? That Mr
Modi not only lived through it, but also went on to prove to each of
those hostile news channels how wrong they were and how people of
India knew better is a different story. 282 seats for the BJP itself
and 300+ seats for the NDA was as decisive as it could possibly be,
in the opinion of voters. Obviously, as a secular JNU professor, this
has been the biggest upsetting factor for you. You hoped against hope
till May 2014 that opinion polls were wrong and Congress-led UPA
would somehow be back in power. Your upset at it not happening is
resulting in this outpouring.
Arnab
Goswami of Times Now is on the front lines of this parallel war
against nuanced thought, against honesty, against intellectual
freedom, and against truth. Over the past week since ‘news broke’
(yes, the truth is shattered to pieces when presented by Him), he has
used a range of careful strategies to achieve the end of the
demonization of public education. It is easy to see these if you put
aside the sick froth of vitriol.
First,
he asks the wrong questions, deliberately, to mislead the audience.
Here is an example: ‘Why did Kanhaiya not try to stop those
slogans???’. Absolutely everyone in their right mind knows that the
Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU) did not organize
this program, that Kanhaiya Kumar and other JNUSU members went there
in their capacity as elected representatives to alleviate the
confrontational situation created by the right wing Akhil Bharatiya
Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). Kanhaiya’s speech is ample testimony to
this fact. Arnab does not ask why the law on sedition (124[A]) is
inapplicable, and what can be done to stem this travesty of justice.
Who
gave you the absolute right to determine what's right and wrong kind
of questions? You would prefer that Mr Goswami question why JNU was
being attacked for expressing their opinions when those opinions were
merely supporting a convicted (and executed) criminal? Of course, you
would. Since when did nationalism mean anything to the Left leaning
people anyway? If my memory serves me right, the Left parties were in
the forefront supporting China against India in 1962 war. Maybe, that
is your concept of “free speech”, but, am sorry, sir, it is not
mine.
What
exactly do you mean by “everyone in their right mind”? Again your
opinion of right? If Kanhaiya Kumar went to alleviate the situation
created (as you put it, by the “right wing ABVP”, why didn't he
utter one word against the open anti-national speeches that were on
display in the campus? Am sure you too would have been aware of the
event being planned and could have asked you what your contribution
was to try and prevent the open adulation of an anti-national terror
perpetrator but I will give you the benefit of doubt here, sir.
He
uses specific terms repeatedly, ad nauseam: ‘Anti-national’,
‘secessionist’, ‘unpatriotic’ are urgent favourites. In fact,
exactly a year ago, when he did the same to civil rights activists
protesting the harassment of Priya Pillai of Greenpeace, there was an
open letter signed by prominent feminists, lawyers, and civil
liberties activists pointing out that this was hate speech, that this
was incitement to violence against those who expressed their views.
They rightly pointed out that in the current political atmosphere,
such figures are subjected to hate crimes, and are even killed. What
he does is not to simply wipe out the possibility of nuance in a
discussion, but rather use every weapon – be it language, gesture,
or decibel – to brand people in order to feed into the imaginations
of fear and anger among the viewers. It is always people from
minority communities, civil rights activists, prominent voices from
women’s and people’s movements, everyone from the Left that are
subject to this vitriol. He has never levelled these accusations
against the organization whose very emblem (the Khaki Shorts) is said
to be an import from Italian fascism. Interesting, isn’t it?
Since
you quote Ms Priya Pillai of Greenpeace as an example, let me remind
you, sir, that Ms Pillai was intent on going to a foreign nation in
an attempt to defame my country. If Ms Pillai had protested in India
itself, I would have supported her right to freedom of speech and
expression. However, when the aim is becomes only to paint my nation
black outside the country, especially when India has been desperately
looking for foreign investments to boost development, and the move is
likely to affect the investment climate, I would definitely term it
as anti-national. Greenpeace, incidentally, was also under the
government scanner for illegal foreign funding and not following the
laws of the land. That, even if not related, does tend to indicate
the slant of the organisation and its members. When you talk about
minority communities, you conveniently chose to ignore the fact that
in no other nation is the minority community safer than in India. I
would request you to refute it with facts, if you can, and I will
accept it gracefully. About the Left activists, I have already told
you about their stand vis-a-vis nationalism. Equating khakhi shorts
with Italian (deliberate?) fascism is laughable and I will deign to
comment on something you typed out merely out of frustration.
He
uses coercion and intimidation through the means of right wing
members on his panel. On Monday night, the only time He was quiet on
the show was when Sambit Patra of the BJP shouted at Shabnam Lone,
Saba Naqvi, and Waris Pathan and challenged the three to chant Bharat
Mata Ki Jai after him. This is extremely dangerous intimidation. And
he does this on absolutely every show.
Asking
Indians to chant “Bharat Mata ki Jai” is intimidation? Seriously,
sir? I don't even have feel the need to comment here! Unless of course, Shabnam Lone, Saba Naqvi and Waris Pathan are not Indians.... unless.....
One
other strategy is suggestion: he ‘suggests’ through the
apparently casual use of words such as ‘infiltrator’ as he did on
the same show, that JNU is not a university, but a space that
harbours ‘infiltrators’ from across the border. A baseless, yet
devastating allegation. With serious consequences.
As
fresh inputs from IB reveal, there have been infiltrators from across
the border. One of your dear students,
Umar Khalid, has also been identified as having visited
Pakistan and having links with the dreaded terror organisation
Jaish-e-Mohammed. The IB has also indicated that outsiders frequent
the hostels of the JNU and even stay there for lengths, unauthorised. If I were in a position of responsibility in any such
university, I would either be angry or upset. You seem upset at
having been caught out.
What
are these consequences, and are they limited to a few students? No.
We have seen that the Delhi Police has begun picking up young people
for ‘looking like JNU students’. A woman journalist covering the
court proceedings at Patiala House was asked if she is a JNU student,
and was told that they would ‘break her phone, and break her
bones’. Faculty members present there with legal representation for
Kanhaiya Kumar, both women and men, were roughed up and beaten by men
dressed as lawyers. A CPI activist was brutally beaten up by BJP MLA
O. P. Sharma who was present there.
If
indeed men “dressed as lawyers” were present in court, that is
illegal and I would whole-heartedly support you in opposing their
actions. However, the version I heard was completely different, about
how Kanhaiya wanted to incite violence even in the court premises and
how the lawyers opposed it in their own way. Well, you are entitled
to your opinion on this.
But
between Monday and Tuesday, the tide has turned. A journalist was
beaten right inside the courtroom, with the police watching. On
Tuesday, journalists marched together in protest against the violence
unleashed against the Fourth Estate. Lawyers came forth and
categorically condemned the condemnable.
We
must remind ourselves that journalists are also amongst the bravest,
ferreting out the truth at great risk to themselves, from the State,
from warlords, from disease, bearing a deep commitment to the voice
of the oppressed and the dispossessed. Why go as far as Ken Saro-Wiwa
- there are examples closer home. Take note, nationalist Arnab. In
1886-7, Dwarkanath Ganguly set newspapers alight with his expose on
the ‘Slave Trade in Assam’ that laid bare the indentured ‘coolie’
system in Assam, that continued even after the abolition of slavery
in British dominions. Ganguly went to great lengths, undertook
arduous journeys, took great risks to expose this dark history. So
much so that this was taken up as an important issue in the
nationalist movement. He showed integrity and great bravery, lauded
in the history of journalism, that resulted in real change for
oppressed people. Arnab is a traitor to that tradition.
The
tide has indeed turned with journalists coming on to the streets,
except that something similar was prominent by its absence when one
of their own was brutally killed just a few days ago. Oh, that
happened under a secular government in Uttar Pradesh. My bad, sir.
This support against the Modi government is obviously justified. I
fully endorse your statement that “journalists are the bravest,
ferreting out truth....”. Unfortunately, we no longer have
journalists in India. Instead, barring a few, they all have been
replaced by news-traders (easier and more apt term would be
Presstitutes) who sell their soul to the highest bidder. News as
produced by them and shown ad-nausea on channels and printed in
newspapers are no longer fit to be called news. Instead, they have
degenerated to opinions, something akin to what you have published
today, sir. Reporting no longer is honourable and I don't hold a torch
for Arnab either. However, you chose to tarnish just one individual
here. Just because he refused to subscribe to your opinions on what
reality is/was? That's being judgemental, sir.
This
needs saying: not only is this form of journalism doing a disservice
to society in spreading lies and misinformation, it is taking on the
role of fascist propaganda machines that single out individuals for
intimidation, coercion, and at times elimination. Do not forget
Narendra Dabholkar, M. M. Kalburgi, Govind Pansare. As I write this,
we have information that faces of students have appeared on posters
put up in parts of this city, urging the public to lynch them. In
doing what Arnab does, he is guilty of incitement to violence against
an entire academic community, the very foundation of a young nation.
Who, I might ask, is anti-national in this case? And a society that
targets its young minds is teetering on the brink of fascism. For
this, I will lay the blame at the feet of the likes of Arnab Goswami.
Finally,
we both seem to have got something to agree upon. Journalism is now
restricted to spreading misinformation. I too said the same in the
last paragraph. If faces of students have appeared on posters, it is
condemnable but why blame Arnab for the same? When face of Afzal Guru
and Yakub Memon were put up prominently in your “esteemed”
University campus, did you protest against it? Instead of blaming
Arnab, thank him for opening eyes of those students who have still
not been brainwashed into supporting terror perpertators in the name
of free speech. Thank him for preventing more Afzals and Yakubs being
born. By the way, Malda too happened to be in India and your knights in shining armour made their reporting prominent by lack of it. Outrage? No, Malda was secular violence!
I am sure no parent sends their children to learn to be
anti-national. And, as a professor there, you would be the one
accountable, if one of the alumni was found indulging in seditious
activities. Would you be able to bring yourself face to face with
his/her parents when they question your involvement in preventing
such occurrences? I, sir, would lay the blame at the feet of everyone,
every professor, every teacher and every citizen, who did not raise
his voice against what happened in JNU (and now in Jadavpur
University too). If not directly by act of commission, you are
indirectly responsible for it by the very act of omission. Think over
it.
Your
sincerely,
One
concerned Indian
