I had written about the house-nigger, Anita Pratap, earlier in my blog. She the Ardent Upholder of the Torch of Pseudo Secularism stoops again! She sees a battle, nay a Mahabharata, a Grand Battle of Secularism versus Hindutva. Before I examine her trash arguments, I’m curious to learn her understanding of the much-maligned Hindutva.

However, she stumbles and falls on her face at the outset, before she gets into the “meat of her argument.”

For two decades, the Hindutva brigade has been criss-crossing the country, accusing, lampooning and attacking their adversaries. Now the secular warriors have come out into the battle arena. This is not a bad development. At last, secularism is getting back its spine.

Beautiful! The secular warriors have come into the battlefield eh? That’s mighty! Truth is that the “secular warriors” are making a last-ditch effort to salvage whatever reputation they still have. If anything, it is these secular warriors who have systematically, for 50 years, denigrated every institution, symbol, and icon of Indian culture: they have done this under state patronage, first under the USSR-Chamcha Chacha Nehru, then Indira Gandhi and subsequent Congress governments. Secularism getting back is spine is nothing but a sigh of relief for Anita and her ilk: “ah! the Congress and Commies are back in power!”

And then Anitha pontificates about the true ideal of Secularism, church-state separation, and the rest. But she’s not yet done.

It?s the pursuit of this ideal that propelled France to ban Muslim headscarves in government schools and simultaneously oppose the inclusion of the description ?Christian? in the EU constitution.

Pinch the baby’s bottom and then console it when it weeps. The word “Christian” in the EU constitution was banned due mainly to the fact that Europe is headed on a path of self-destruction: it is giving in to the demands of the much-maligned minorities. I’d blogged about this earlier following an essay by Bat Ye’or, who calls Europe as Eurabia.

But I’ve been too harsh on Anita. I must make amends for she says,

Sadly in India, secularism became synonymous with appeasing minorities. The Congress must take the blame for giving secularism a bad name.

Lest my sympathies are wasted on her, she reverts back. In style.

In retaliation, the Hindutvawadis adopted a scorched-earth policy toward secularism, morphing it into the phantasmagoria of “pseudo-secularism”. Ceaseless, strident and vitriolic smear campaigns drove “pseudo-secularists” to the ground. Secular votaries were browbeaten, bullied and buried under the debris of this bombardment.

Now, Anita needs to make her mind up. There is either genuine secularism in India or there’s only pseudo-secularism, or there’s plain hate-mongering. First, she says the Congress must take the blame for perverting secularism. Can we logically conclude that any perversion can reasonably be termed, “pseudo?” (as in Pseudopodia=fake legs) How are the ghastly Hindutvawadis wrong when they merely point at this perversion and call is pseudo secularism? Would you rather prefer, “perv secularism?” “secular appeasement?” Okay, I’m impressed by your vocabulary: browbeaten, bullied, debris of bombardment. But let’s see the luminaries that you uphold as “secular votaries.” But before this, I have one more issue on hand.

The Hindutvawadis have the gall to call themselves patriots when they waged a systematic onslaught against the nation?s most important and secular institutions?the Supreme Court, the Election Commission, the National Human Rights Commission. ngos, journalists, historians, parliamentarians, artists, human rights activists, all came under their hail of fire.

Yes, you need to definitely condemn the Hindutva Hoodlums for their evil misdeeds. They have insulted all lofty institutions. Now, when we look at the eminences that dot these institutions, the fog clears a bit, methinks. A partial list follows:

• Human Rights Activists: The Eminently Secular Shabana Azmi, Arundhati “Booker” Roy, Teesta Setalvad…
• NGOs: Do you have Action Aid in mind? Harsh Mander?
• Journalists: La creme da la creme–Your Own Exalted Self, Kuldip “Candle” Nayar, Resident Idiot, Rajdeep Sardesai…
• Historians: Queen Romila Thapar, S.Gopal, Irfan Habib…
• Artists: But of course, Maqbool da “Meenaxi” Hussain!
  

True, indeed, all these are highly secular people against whom the ire of these hoodlums have borne out. However, is it a coincidence that these are the very people who take regular liberties to insult Hinduism in the name of secularism, in the name of the very tolerance that epitomizes Hinduism? On that count, I too, am a virulent Hindutvawadi.

Debate degenerated into abuse. Decibel, not argument was used to discredit and undermine opponents. Against this, secularists became defensive, weak, confused, robbed of their strength and credibility to assert themselves.

Sad indeed! There’s no objectivity or decency left in public debate any more. Shouting matches are the order of the day: the loudmouth wins. And to nobody does this apply more appropriately than to the secularists themselves. The motley bunch that mainly comprises the Leftists have routinely used this technique. Witness their performance when China invaded India in 1962; or their deafening silence all those years when the Kashmiri Pandits were systematically butchered and/or driven out from their homeland; or their howling when as much as a mention is made about their treachery during the Quit India Movement; or their cry of “fascism on the rise” when Hindus protest against insults meted out to them… need I give more examples? Physician, heal thyself.
Enough said. Now let me concentrate on the previously-mentioned note about the luminaries of secularism: in Anita’s words, “secular warriors.” These are:

Arjun Singh, Mani Shankar Aiyer and a few others in the Congress regime have emerged as the new warriors of secularism.

Sorry, but I can’t help asking the question: how much has the Congress (or these luminaries themselves) paid for this “article?” I won’t even bother about asking Anita’s “wisdom” in her choice of naming secular warriors. What follows is even worse:

India?s predominantly Hindu. The spirit of Hinduism is tolerance and it is this spirit?not our laws and Constitution?that makes India secular. Hinduism unites, Hindutva divides. Therein lies the difference. India?s destined to be democratic, socialist, secular.

She harps on the now-worn out “Hindu tolerance” line. The present-day character of Hindus isn’t one of tolerance: it’s cowardice. Tolerance admits the existence of diversity, but if diversity seeks to divide and/or destroy, “tolerance” isn’t quite the right word to apply to a situation where these forces of destruction aren’t challenged and/or fought against. Now that she pontificates so eloquently about the “Hindu spirit,” I’d like to know her understanding of the “Hindu spirit.” Hinduism unites, Hindutva divides. That’s classy. The Final Judgement! She’s found The Answer! Therein lies the difference! But did you notice how insidiously she lets the word “socialist” creep in? Oh and I also notice that she possesses amazing powers of clairvoyance by predicting India’s destiny.

The rest of her meaningless tripe harps in glee about the BJP’s defeat, and contains some warnings for the Congress not to “slip into its old bad habits.”

I’d given up deconstructing these “secular” articles, because no matter what I say about these patent lies, I don’t see any difference; but stuff like this usually bothers me and I begin ranting. In passing, I also feel that more than politicians and their fellow-travellers, it is trolls “journalists” like Anita who inflict maximum damage on a nation, on ideals, principles and the rest.

Incidentally, Outlook carries the following cartoon just above the “article’s” title:

I’ve modified–my puerile attempt at cartooning–it as follows:

This I think, is truly representative of the present government, its retarded constituents, and its brainless “red” policies. Any suggestions for a caption for this picture are gratefully welcomed and appreciated.

Tags: Commentary, Indian Politics, Pseudo Secularism Hall of Shame, Society & Culture