Don't pseudo-sentiments get hurt, not even pseudo-hurt?

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by Oracle, Sep 3, 2012.

  1. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Right-wing politics all over the world seeks to victimise the weak and powerless by falsely claiming victimhood, says Shivam Vij.


    In neighbouring Pakistan, an Islamic cleric recently accused a young Christian girl, Rimsha Masih, of blasphemy, a charge punishable by life imprisonment. He said she had burnt some pages that contained verses from the Quran. The 14-year-old girl hails from a poor family and suffers from downs syndrome. An eyewitness to the event showed courage and told a magistrate the truth: it was the Muslim cleric who had put those burnt pages in Rimsha's bag. The cleric has been arrested and is set, in turn, to be charged with blasphemy.

    I have been thinking about the incident. Insulting somebody's religion is bad. It may cause offence. Often it is intended to cause offence. If somebody insults Islam, by doing things like burning pages containing verses from the Quran, it is bound to outrage a Muslim.

    But what happens when the Muslim has burnt those pages to implicate a Christian? Where does the outrage disappear? Why are the right-wingers and the mullahs in Pakistan suddenly silent? The cleric's lawyer had threatened the judge that if the girl is let off she could be lynched -- such was the outrage! Where has the outrage suddenly disappeared? Where are the calls for lynching the blasphemer to death?

    And what does this hypocrisy tell us? It tells us that such outrage is, in the first place, fake. That their religious sentiments weren't really hurt when they said they were hurt. It was just that they wanted to persecute Christians and for doing so they were happy to commit blasphemy that they could then accuse Christians of doing!

    What does that tell you of the claims of such people over how strong their religious, nationalist or whatever "sentiments" are?

    I have noticed several such incidents in both Pakistan and India in the recent past. Let me give you a few examples.

    In April this year, in Hyderabad, the police had to impose curfew to prevent violence when two Hindu temples were desecrated -- raw beef had been hurled at them. Note that the rioters who began destroying public property and pelted stones at the police had taken care to examine whether the meat thrown was chicken, mutton or fish, and concluded it was beef! A Hindutva website noted, 'The naturally agitated Hindu youth protested against this sacrilegious act,' and then went on to falsely claim that the street violence was being conducted by Muslims.

    It turned out that the beef was thrown by four Hindus! The police went looking for them but they were absconding. I don't know the status of the case since one of them, G Shiva Kumar, was arrested. Apparently, a local politician was trying to heat up the atmosphere to divide the electorate on Hindu-Muslim lines and become a Hindu messiah and win votes. Politicians do this sort of stuff all the time.But what about the people? Those who were pelting stones and burning buses, where did they disappear when the beef-throwers were identified? Where was the outrage?

    Now, I am not arguing that throwing beef at a temple is okay. Far from it. As a Hindu it hurts my sentiments too. I feel outraged at G Shiva Kumar. But what about Hyderabadis? What about those Hindutva websites? What about their sentiments now? Or shall we say pseudo-sentiments? Pseudo-sentiments don't get hurt? Not even pseudo-hurt?

    I could give you dozens of examples of the pseudo-hurt of pseudo-sentiments.

    Some in Pakistan, as we all know by now, did not think twice of using images of events like an earthquake in Tibet to pass them off as images of massacres of Muslim Rohingyas in Myanmar. The people who made those fake images and added text of outrage and circulated them on social media -- what does it say about them?

    Here's what it says about them: they are not really outraged by people dying, because Rohingyas were indeed being killed. But not in numbers large enough to shout 'genocide'. It is almost as if they wanted more Rohingyas to die, so they could show more outrage. When these images started emanating from Pakistan, many, many Pakistani liberals pointed out in Pakistani mainstream and social media that the people showing this outrage were not being outraged by the persecution of minorities in Pakistan -- Hindus, Christians, Hazaras, Shias, Ahmadiyas or even by the atrocities of militant groups who did not check religion and sect of people before bombing them.

    I saw many appeals on social media to 'Protest the Genocide of Muslims in Myanmar'. Sceptical as I am of all claims of victimhood, I looked up mainstream news sources and thought something wasn't right. And then a Pakistani blogger exposed the fake images. Again, no outrage at those who created those fake images which cheapened the suffering of both the Rohingyas and Tibet earthquake victims!

    Hindutvawaadis have a long tradition of copying Islamists. So when Muslims in Mumbai violently poured their outrage on the streets in an organised protest, there was outrage amongst Hindutvawaadis. How dare they disturb public order! And when they saw an image of a green religious flag, they immediately lied on Twitter it was the Pakistani flag. When many exposed this lie on Twitter, the Hindutvawaadis fell silent. Similarly, fake news and images were circulated in order to cause outrage so that one community could be condemned, and their own community could be presented as the victim.


    I could still give you many more examples but I think you've got my point.

    It is not just Hindus or Muslims or Indians or Pakistanis whose pseudo-sentiments are prone to pseudo-hurt. Right-wing politics all over the world is like that: it seeks to victimise the weak and powerless by falsely claiming victimhood.

    Be very afraid of people who claim to be victims, because the real victims often don't have a voice.

    Rediff
     
    blank_quest, Tronic, ani82v and 3 others like this.
  2.  
  3. Oracle

    Oracle New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    1,541
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Nice article. Please read and then offer your comments.
     
  4. thakur_ritesh

    thakur_ritesh Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,434
    Likes Received:
    1,719
    Location:
    Land of the GODS - "Dev Bhomi".
    Nice article, if anything, it shows the hypocrisy within.

    Why do such things happen? The idea is simple, suppression of the other who can be suppressed, in this case the majority suppressing the minority, but that in no way means that when the other happens, pseudo behavior isn’t at play. Some from the minority could do something, and the national media won’t cover it, but if the exact same happens and gets done by the majority on the minority, the coverage could be humungous, the impact of coverage many times over and that happens in India but not so much in Pakistan and that is where the two countries fundamentally differ.

    It is only now that the liberal English media is waking up to the ugly side of Pakistan, and they feel the need to alter it, but the reporting is far and few in between, and even when they do report, the impact in most cases is nothing or nearly negligible.

    At end of the day it is about which side of the divide we are in, something I have been referring to for sometime here. Which means if I am a staunch Hindu, I would never talk about the beef incidence, on the contrary hide, at worst defend it, similarly if I am a Muslim I would display the same behavior, and behave as if nothing is wrong with Islam. Take it at the level of nationalism, and I would highlight all the wrong in Pakistan and never about India, and a similar behavior would be of a Pakistani with role reversal.

    It is more a question about independent, neutral mind really. Can we accept the fact that we or things we associate with can have an ugly face, if yes, which is very rare, we would indeed be very neutral, if not, which is what happens in most cases, then all wrongs will be overlooked, underplayed, defended.

    Indeed, so is the case most of the times.
     
    ani82v, Oracle and Singh like this.
  5. Jim Street

    Jim Street Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    126
    Indians have become used to of Hypocrisy. On Facebook, they share pages on corruption, scams etc. but whenever they are caught by traffic police, they easily give bribes to them Its just one aspect.

    Most of the politicians involved in Scams are not Muslims but if a Muslim do something wrong, all these VHP/RSS etc. jumps in to protect "India".

    80% of Indians have no right to curse Congress or any other party ? By being silent, they are enabling them.
     
    ani82v and Oracle like this.
  6. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    And you think VHP/RSS supports the 'Hindu' corruption of A Raja or Chidambaram..What are you talking man ?

    The only people who should not curse Congress for corruption are those who voted for it . Why should people who did their democratic duty and voted against the Congress not curse it ?.


    Can somebody explain to me was that such an evil thing to get outraged at the protests, the desecration of the Amar Jawan Jyoti, the desecration of Buddha and Mahavira statues ? Did only the Muslim blood drinking 'Hindutvadis' got outraged at those images....would not an ordinary patriotic Indian get outraged at the sight of a fanatic kicking the Amar Jawan Jyoti ? Seriously what is the author trying to prove by this ? That whatever happens, nobody should get outraged because a particular community happens to be the 'minority' ? That whoever gets outraged is a Hindutvadi ? That the Hindutvaadis are the real culprits here and the protestors who were on a rampage were infact victims ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2012
    parijataka likes this.
  7. parijataka

    parijataka Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,893
    Likes Received:
    3,688
    Location:
    Bengaluru
    Why do you assume those who criticise Congress either voted for them or stayed away from voting ? When has VHP/RSS jumped in to criticise corruption by Muslims, in any case 99% of the crooked politicans are Hindus ? VHP is into archaic Hindu ideas such as cow protection and building of temples AFAIK and is a strident critic of Modi in Gujarat for demolishing temples for road widening or being built in unauthorised manner or not doing enough for cow protection in the state. RSS has criticised BJP leaders such as Yeddyurappa and even Modi has been chastised as well so dont accuse in a pseudo secular manner and jump on VHP-RSS for everything.
     

Share This Page