Bezwada Wilson Remembers B.R. Ambedkar on his 61st Death Anniversary

December 8, 2017

Ambedkar does not need monuments, but implementation of his philosophy.

On December 6, 1956, Babasaheb Dr B.R. Ambedkar died, leaving behind his mission of annihilating caste and making a just society. He left behind a document in the form of the Indian Constitution, which if implemented in letter and spirit, could have gone a long way towards eradicating the inequality prevalent in society.

Commemorating the 61st Death anniversary of the Father of the Indian Constitution, Bezwada Wilson, National Convenor of Safai Karmachari Andolan and a practitioner of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Thought and Philosophy, spoke to Newsclick discussing implementation of the Constitution and the Dalit movement.

Dr. Ambedkar is remembered on this day, and lakhs of followers pay homage to him throughout the country. What do you think is his most important contribution towards bringing equality in this country?
Wilson: BR Ambedkar took the 3,000 year old problem of caste and dealt with it in a scientific manner. He has given tools for all of us. Indian Constitution is one such tool. We are here to see that the provisions ofthe Constitution are implemented. The problem today is that people (the government) are turning their backs on the values and spirit of the Constitution. They have their own interpretations. That’s why, we have to look through the lens of Dr. Ambedkar. He was one of the pillars of the Constitution. Although many have contributed, but his views on the Constitution were very clear. Each person and each Prime Minister has had their own dreams (for the country), but those dreams have to fit into the constitutional framework. If something (government programme) does not fit into the constitutional framework, then that should be viewed as anti-national. Constitution should be the scale to measure if something is for the country, or against the interests of the country. Ambedkar stressed on the conditions of Dalits, Adivasis, women, and other minorities and marginalised groups. But their situation has not changed much. Each government report shows the lack of development of these groups. Even the NCRB crime data documents the increasing attacks on the marginalised. We are not bridging the gaps between the rich and the poor. Article 38 of the Indian Constitution states very clearly that the state has the responsibility to strive to “promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life.” But we are not doing that.

We should not regress and start struggling to implement the Constitution again. We have to come back on track.

If one building is constructed, we say we are contributing to the legacy of Ambedkar. No! Ambedkar does not require any building. His main aim was implementing the Constitution for social change. Social change is the path of Ambedkar. If we are not going in that direction, that means we are going against Ambedkar’s philosophy.

Dalit movement has always operated within the democratic framework, but the backlash has been in the form of violence, which can be seen in all caste atrocities.
Wilson: Dominant castes and power coming together is dangerous for the country. From the beginning, dominant castes have been violent. Otherwise, they can’t downgrade any group or person to the status of untouchable … they take power into their own hands. These dominant castes also constitute non-state forces and use their power to suppress the voices demanding equality. That is not good for democracy.

How should the Dalit movement strive for equality when the state has not brought in the equality as envisaged in the Indian Constitution in 70 years?
Wilson: We have to put pressure on the state to bring in equality. The government is elected to implement the Constitution. They have no other business. But now, the government gives all its support to corporates by giving thousands of crores as subsidies. And when it comes to the poor, the government says they have no money.

The Dalit movement and other marginalised movements should put pressure on the state. It is the responsibility of the state to look after the interests of these groups. ‘We the People’ constitutes the entire population of the country, not just the big corporates, the military or the Prime Minister’s Office. The government, or the ruling party which comes to power for five years, has the responsibility for building a just society.

But the problem is that from day one, they have no clear understanding about what they are supposed to do. What the ruling parties are doing now is furthering their own hidden political agenda. They claim to be working towardsdevelopment, but whose development is not clear.

The state is not actually bridging the gap,there is no economic equality, no cultural equality, or social equality. Only politically we can be considered equal[one person one vote.

Like Ambedkar said, we are “a society of contradictions”. Instead of addressing these contradictions, we are actually institutionalising them. That is why inequality in the society is rising. There is glorification of the rich without questions, even though their money was made by exploiting workers. Now the rich talk about charity, but they made their money through exploitation. The state conveniently forgot Article 38 of the Constitution that mandates it to ensure that the gap between the poor and the rich is bridged.

Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar stated, “I feel that the constitution is workable … Indeed, if I may say so, if things go wrong under the new Constitution, the reason will not be that we had a bad Constitution. What we will have to say is that Man was vile.” How do you see this in the present context?
Wilson: 31 percent of people voted for the present government. That does not mean there is no opposition. The 69 percent are the others who can make the Constitution workable, and bring justice.

Worshipping the constitution, or memorising the constitution is not enough, one has to implement the constitution. Ambedkar’s values in the constitution have to be taken forward.

Getting a little self-introspective, how do you see the Dalit Movement as a whole taking up the issue of manual scavenging?
Wilson: The wider Dalit movement has been supporting the issue but they have not put their heart into the eradication of manual scavenging. The electoral system also has been such that the Dalits are dependent on the majority for getting elected. Hence, a person who strives for the issues of Dalits would not be elected.

What about the autonomous Dalit movement?
Wilson: They are doing their bit. But there are certain issues, such as — Devadasi, Jogini, manual scavenging, and concerns of the people who are employed at crematoriums to dispose dead bodies — which are not on the agenda of the mainstream Dalit movement. The Dalit movement needs to come together as one and address these issues, like Dr. Ambedkar did. The whole Dalit community must speak out in a unanimous voice. These issues must be a priority and we should seek the whole nation’s help in eradicating them.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

2017 Deadliest Year For Cow-Related Hate Crime Since 2010, 86% Of Those Killed Muslim

December 8, 2017

After the recent murder of a dairy trader by cow vigilantes on the Rajasthan-Haryana border, 11 deaths have been reported in 2017, the highest toll from cow-related hate crimes since 2010, from when IndiaSpend’s database records hate crimes. The database is being launched in a new, interactive format today.

No incidents of hate crime were reported in 2010 and 2011, but over the eight years since 2012, 29 persons have been killed in cow-related hate violence, 25 of whom were Muslim.

Until 2015, 76% or 13 of 17 cow-related hate crimes were reported from northern India. Since then, during 2016 and 2017 to-date, more incidents have been reported from the east, west and south of the country.

Data collation

The National Crime Records Bureau does not collect data on cow-related hate crimes, the Home Ministry told Parliament on July 25, 2017. Our database does. Explore data over eight years here.

To build our database, our team collected, analysed and verified print and online news reports in the English media, which tend to have the widest nationwide coverage. All reported incidents were cross-referenced to eliminate discrepancies and, where needed, verified with local reporters or those who had filed original stories.

Our dataset includes the number of crimes committed each year since 2010, the severity of attacks and the reported cause of each incident. Most entries include the names of districts, towns and villages.

Since each observation is based on a newspaper report of the crime, details such as the severity of crime, the number of victims and their identities and ethnicities vary. While reportage in cases of death has been fairly comprehensive, in cases where victims are injured, the details provided differ depending on the extent of news coverage available.

Each crime is also geo-coded in the database. This is useful in viewing the geographic spread of such crimes and their concentration.

The database is an evolving initiative to record all hate crimes committed across India. Readers can report incidents too, which our team will then verify before adding them to the database.

How to use the database

To access the database, visit http://data.indiaspend.com/hate-crime.

You can view the geographical spread of hate crimes in ‘Map’ view or an index with brief descriptions of incidents by clicking ‘List’.

To view details of an individual incident, click on the red “pin” marker on the map. It will open a window, as shown here:

——

The window will give details of the incident such as its date, location and brief summary. You can also click on the source of the incident as well as on ‘Incident Details’ at the bottom right to view further details.

——

Incident details are categorised as ‘Cause’, ‘Action Taken’, ‘Victims’ and ‘Sources’.

Analysing incidents

Besides viewing the incidents on a map or in a list, you can also filter your search by ‘Year’ and/or by ‘State’. For the filters selected, you will be able to view the numbers of: incidents, victims, deaths, major assaults, and minor injuries.

The database also provides information on the identity of the victims, wherever available, including details on their gender, religion and/or location.

Since maintaining law and order is a responsibility of the state government, the database gives information on which party was in power when the incident occurred.

You can also ‘Report an Incident’ by clicking on the top right link. The information will be verified and, if found accurate, will be added to this database.

——

Key findings

Our team gathered information about cow-related violence from 2010 onwards, and found no cases reported during 2010 and 2011. From 2012 until today, 78 cow-related hate crimes have been reported across the country. Most of these–97% of all incidents–have occurred over the last three years since the Bharatiya Janata Party and Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed power in May 2014. Only one incident each was reported in 2012 and 2013.

Source: IndiaSpend database

In the eight years since 2012, most of those killed–25 of 29 persons–were Muslim. Of all victims–killed or injured, whose identity was reported in news reports–53% were Muslim, 12% were Dalit, and 10% were Hindu. (Newspaper reports did not include the religious identity of 22% of the victims.) In a third of all cases–26 of 78 cases–the police filed cases against the victims under cow-protection laws.

Geographically, from 2012 to-date, most cow-related hate crimes–64%, or 50 of 78 incidents–were reported in north India. Since 2015, the attacks spread towards the east and south of the mainland at an increased pace.

Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, with 10 incidents each, reported the most number of crimes, followed by Gujarat where seven incidents have been recorded.

Why this database

Hate crimes are violent manifestations of intolerance against entire communities. They have a deep impact on not only the immediate victim but also the community with which the victim identifies, affecting social cohesion and stability, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) said in its 2009 guide for framing hate crime laws.

For more insight into the Indian context, IndiaSpend spoke to experts in criminal law and human rights.

The effects of hate crimes are deeper and wide-ranging than those of other serious crimes such as murders and assault because their motives perpetuate hatred and instigate others to commit similar crimes, senior advocate Rebecca John, an expert on criminal law, told IndiaSpend. “In this case it would be minorities and those on the margins of a majority community.”

Attacks based on race, religion, caste or ethnicity in India often occur when the attackers believe that they have political cover and will not be prosecuted and punished, Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director for Human Rights Watch, an international non-governmental organisation, told IndiaSpend.

“When religious/political leaders go on stage or television and urge followers to take up arms to protect the cow, they are not merely inciting a single individual to commit a single act of violence. They communicate a sanction inciting several followers to commit such crimes across the country,” senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, founder of the Human Rights Law Network, told IndiaSpend. This not only motivates violence, it also destroys law and order because the police become reluctant to prevent the crime and/or arrest the perpetrators, he said.

As a society, we have not talked enough about cow-related violence or assessed its impact, John said, adding, “We hear the news… an incident in Rajasthan, another in UP, one in Delhi… but because of the prevailing atmosphere, the norm is to trivialise the incident and valorize the offender. Our conscience is not shocked as it should be.”

It is crucial for the state to respond immediately to establish the rule of law, and insist that any provocation or suspicion be handled by the criminal justice system and not through mob justice, Ganguly said. “Otherwise, people lose faith in the justice system, and there is risk of a cycle of revenge and violence,” she added.

Even in cases where those attacked may have been illegally smuggling cows for slaughter and tanning, the law does not allow a disproportionate response to the infraction. “The response to seeing a crime committed is to stop the perpetrator and wait for the police to deal with her or him–not to take matters into one’s own hands–especially if the so-called criminal is unarmed and pleads, with folded hands, for forgiveness and for his life. Unless there is a parallel threat of violence, and it is an act of self-defense, such a response is not acceptable under any law,” John said.

All the experts IndiaSpend spoke to said the political dispensation under which these crimes take place must be held accountable. “There appears to be some amount of political complicity in these attacks carried out in the name of cow protection,” said Ganguly, pointing out that in many cases–a third according to our database–instead of prosecuting the attackers, many of whom are allegedly linked to extremist Hindu groups affiliated with the ruling party, the police have filed complaints under laws banning cow slaughter against the assault victims, their relatives and associates.

“You cannot look at these stark statistics alone without understanding the political linkages,” John said. She added that the increase in the incidence of such crimes reflects a lack of will to uphold the law.

Ganguly agrees, and adds that the state cannot fail to prosecute criminal acts simply because the perpetrators might be supporters of the ruling party. “Once members of a political party are elected into office, they have to uphold the Constitution and rule of law,” she said, “Political patronage of criminals destroys institutions, causes a breakdown in human rights protections.”

Gonsalves too believes religious and political leaders who instigate such violence must be strictly prosecuted. “They are the masterminds behind these murders and assaults. In law we call this person ‘the main conspirator’ which is a term often used in dealing with terror cases. To my mind this sort of violence is no different than terrorism–in fact it is terrorism of the worst kind,” he said.

This is why a database is important, John said. “We are good at creating a record that suits us–the police, the courts and the government are complicit in this. To show this is not an aberration, and prove these are consistent patterns of violence on the rise that must be addressed, we need to create data. Else how are we to assess the need for parliamentary, judicial, or societal intervention to curb discrimination on ethnic identity?”

Our database is a starting point

Many countries explicitly penalize hate crimes through their criminal justice system. Some have separate criminal offenses for violent attacks carried out with racist or other hate motivation. Others provide explicitly for higher sentences for violent hate crime.

After the recent string of cow-related lynchings, some concerned citizens and law experts got together to draft a Manav Suraksha Kanoon (MASUKA Law) that would contain provisions to curb and punish mob lynching, whether in the name of cow protection or anything else. Although John worked on the draft, she told IndiaSpend, “We don’t need new laws… the existing laws are sufficient to deal with these crimes.”

Gonsalves said IndiaSpend’s database must be recognized as a start point. “Citizens should now use this information to follow up it up with action,” he said, suggesting how:

Using the data, citizens can get in touch with lawyers to help these people get justice.
Through these lawyers, citizens may follow up on counter cases filed by assailants and the police against the victims of hate crimes, which prevent them from receiving justice.
In cases where cases are filed against the assailants, citizens may reach out to victims to show what is called “practical solidarity”: “Find out if they and their families are doing OK, reach out through NGOs to see what help is now needed to rehabilitate their lives.”
Citizens should also use this data to find out at what stage a case is currently at and help victims take appropriate preventive action: “Find out if all the assailants have been released. In most cases they are, then they go to victims and threaten them to withdraw the cases or face further consequences.”
Come forward with information that can serve as ‘action alerts’ for their respective areas: “For example, whenever a countersuit is filed or an assailant is released, people should come forward to give information, notify the larger community who may then follow this up by writing to the National Human Rights Commission and the state director general of police.”

“This [database] has to expand and become more proactive and actionable. The legal system can be oppressive. These cases of violence stay with the victims for a long time–very often when the prosecution sides with the assailants–victims do not receive justice for 6-8-10 years at a stretch,” Gonsalves told IndiaSpend.

Database reconciliation

On reconciliation of our dataset, we found the following discrepancies, which have been corrected:

1. An incident dated July 18, 2016, was reported from Una, Gujarat. Two news reports published on different dates carrying different details of the same incident were considered as separate incidents in the earlier version of the database. This has now been corrected, bringing down the incident count by one, and the injured count by four. This has not affected the figure for deaths.

2. An incident dated March 27, 2016, was reported from Kurukshetra, Haryana. An update on the case was considered as a separate incident in the earlier version of the database. This has been corrected, bringing down the incident count as well as the death toll by one.

3. An incident dated March 18, 2016, was reported from Latehar, Jharkhand. There were two news reports of the same incident in the same newspaper but citing different names. This has been corrected after telephonic confirmation from the newspaper’s Jharkhand correspondent. This brings the incident count down by one and the count of deaths down by two.

(Saldanha is an assistant editor with IndiaSpend.)

Courtesy: India Spend

Civil Society demands Vasundhara Raje’s Resignation

December 7, 2017

Demand in wake of Afrazul’s murder

Update:
Deplorable Act, criminal to be prosecuted in the shortest possible time – Chief Minister

Jaipur, 7 December: Chief Minister Smt. Vasundhara Raje has condemned the gruesome murder committed in Rajsamand on Wednesday, videos of which went viral on social media. She appreciated the prompt action by the police and directed that the criminal be prosecuted in the shortest possible time. She stated, “This is a deplorable act which needs to be condemned in strongest possible terms”.

In a joint statement released on 7^th December 2017, prominent Civil Rights bodies in India have demanded the immediate resignation of Rajasthan Chief Minister VasundharaRaje and Home Minister Gulah Chand Kataria and urged the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to condemn the “cold-blooded murder” of Mohammed Afrazul, a 48 year old migrant from West Bengal in Rajsamand, Rajasthan.

The groups demanding this include Peoples’ Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL), MazdoorKisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), NagrikManch, Dalit ShoshanMuktiManch, National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW), All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA), National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) and others.

The statement said, “All organisations of Rajasthan are shocked at the recent developments of what is happening in the State in terms of lynching of Muslims, the latest one being carried out on the 25^th anniversary of Babri Masjid demolition, a murder in cold blood of Mohammed Afrazul” Mohammad Afrazul was hacked to death before being burnt. This came to light today when a video where attackers can be clearly seen hacking Afrazul to death, was circulated today on social media.

In the video, the prime suspectShambhu Lal Regarjustifies his actions saying, “People with Islamic belief systems are all around use. They wear black clothes outside Masjids, in public places and around, they are a threat to our cultural heritage and are destroying it. Just like MaharanaPratap had decided to fight Islamic Jihad, we too have to eliminate the present Islamic Jihad. So I have done it, it may be good or bad, but I have done it!” He also speaks about the Babri Masjid demolition in a bid to strengthen his claim. “25 years ago the Babri Masjid was demolished but even that has not changed anything,” Regar is heard saying.

Their other demands of theCivil Society groups include clear and unambiguous condemnation of this and other hate attacks by the Prime Minister and the Chief Minister, the immediate arrest of all the killers and attackers in hate crimes in Rajasthan, provision of absolute security to all the Muslims in the State, an end to the culture of hate and violence against Muslims and stopping the protection to such killers by BJP in power in the state with 160 MLAs out of 200.

Activists from the organisations who signed the statement also urged the police to arrest those who encouraged and aided Regar and his accomplices. “Although the police have arrested the murderer Shambhu Lal Regar and the nephew who had shot the video, but it is important to reach the people who motivated him to carry out this murder,” the statement said.

The statement goes on to list other lynchings and religious violence in the recent months in Rajasthan including the brutal murders or Pehlu Khan, Zafar Khan and Ummar Khan. It draws attention towards the disturbing pattern of systematic and premeditated violence against minorities in the state.

Complete list of Organisations that have signed the statement:

Peoples’ Union for Civil Liberties, Rajasthan,
MazdoorKisan Shakti Sangatha,
Rajasthan NagrikManch,
Dalit Shoshan MuktiManch,
National Federation of Indian Women,
All India Democratic Women’s Association,
Jan VicharManch,
Dr.Ambedkar VicharManch,
Welfare Party, Jamait
Islami Hind,
Zari Handloom Work Union, SIO,
Rajasthan SamagraSewaSangh,
AkhilBhartiyaKisan Sabha,
SFI,
MazdoorKisan Shakti Sangathan,
SuchnaevamRozgarAdhikarManch,
Dalit Adhikar Kendra,
National Muslim Women Welfare Society,
Vividha, Mahila, PunarvasSamooh,
NAPM,
SDPI,
SamtaGyanVigyanSamiti,
RUWA,
Pink City Zari Handloom Work Mazdoor Union,
Aaritari Zardoz Ekta Sangathan,
HRLN,
ZamayteUlema Hind,
JDU,
Samajwadi Party,
Rajasthan Kacchi Basti Federation,
Jaipur Kacchi Basti MahaSangh,
Jaipur district unit of CPIM,
CPI,
CPI ML, Liberation,
MCPI,
Banjara Yuva Shakti Sangathan,
AIDMAM,
Rajasthan MahilaKamgaar Union.

Palestinian officials say, Trump ‘destroyed’ the two-state solution

December 7, 2017

President Donald Trump officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel this afternoon in a much anticipated speech at the White House, followed by condemnations from Palestinian leaders who said Trump is unfit to be a peace broker and effectively killed the two-state solution.

President Donald Trump speaking at the White House in Washington DC in an announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

“While previous presidents have made this a major campaign promise, they failed to deliver,” Trump told reporters, “I am delivering. I’ve judged this course of action to be in the best interest of the United States of America and the pursuit of peace between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Trump called recognizing Jerusalem as the capital is a “a long overdue step,” adding, “it is also the right thing to do.”

The U.S. embassy will be relocated to Jerusalem, Trump said. “This will immediately begin the process of hiring architects, engineers and planners, so that a new embassy, when completed, will be a magnificent tribute to peace,” he explained.

Palestinian leaders renounced the move.

Speaking in Ramallah Saeb Erekat, a former senior Palestinian negotiator, told reporters, “I think President Trump tonight disqualified the United States of America to play any role in any peace process.”

“Unfortunately, president Trump just destroyed any possibility of a two-state [solution]. He has taken an action that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, this is in total contradiction of an agreement signed between Palestinian officials and Israelis,” he continued.

Erekat did not indicate if the Palestinians would not longer continue with Trump administration’s efforts to seek a peace deal.

Ayman Odeh, the leader of the Joint List party released a statement, citing “ignorance and arrogance” on the part of Trump,

“Trump is not interested in the fate of Israelis, and certainly not in the fate of Palestinians. His speech this evening was a combination of ignorance and arrogance, with complete disregard for its implications. Today Trump threw a match on the Middle East, and the price will be paid by both nations. Trump’s United States officially announced today that it is part of the occupying power, and therefore cannot serve as a broker for talks between Israelis and Palestinians, in any sense. The Palestinian people, along with Israelis working toward peace, will continue their courageous struggle until the occupation ends and a true peace is established.”

In Washington the Arab American Institute President’s James Zogby said,

“Listening to President Trump’s announcement regarding Jerusalem was profoundly disturbing. It’s a devastating blow: to Muslims and Christians living under harsh Israeli rule in occupied Jerusalem; to Arab and Muslim sensitivities; and to U.S. relations with our Arab allies. It also damages U.S. leadership worldwide, since we have now broken ranks with the E.U. and the rest of the international community. Trump is playing with fire and the consequences will be grave. It was especially troubling to hear the President announcing measures that are bound to provoke and incite violence while at the same time absurdly preaching non-violence and peace.”

Conversely, Israeli leaders applauded the announced embassy move and defended it a means to advance peace.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said,

“The President’s decision is an important step towards peace, for there is no peace that doesn’t include Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel. I share President Trump’s commitment to advancing peace between Israel and all of our neighbors, including the Palestinians. And we will continue to work with the President and his team to make that dream of peace come true.”

President Reuven Rivlin said in a statement,

“The recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the relocation of all embassies to the city, is a landmark in the recognition of the right of the Jewish people to our land, and a milestone on our road to peace – peace for all the residents of Jerusalem, and the whole region.”

Courtesy: http://mondoweiss.net

Violence against Women: Why the UN Secretary-General Got it Wrong

December 7, 2017

In his remarks on the recent International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women – see ‘Violence Against Women is Fundamentally About Power’ http://www.ipsnews.net/2017/11/violence-women-fundamentally-power/ – United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres inadvertently demonstrated why well-meaning efforts being undertaken globally to reduce violence against women fail to make any progress in addressing this pervasive crisis.

Hence, while the UN might be ‘committed to addressing violence against women in all its forms’ as he claimed, and the UN might have launched a range of initiatives over the past twenty years, including awarding $129 million to 463 civil society initiatives in 139 countries and territories through the UN Trust Fund to End Violence against women, his own article acknowledges that ‘Attacks on women are common to developed and developing countries. Despite attempts to cover them up, they are a daily reality for many women and girls around the world.’

And, without realizing it, the Secretary-General effectively nominated (by omission) why so little progress has been made on this vital issue: ‘As Prime Minister of Portugal, one of my most difficult battles was to win recognition that family violence and especially against women was a serious issue’. The omission here is appalling and yet few reading the line will be able to identify it.

While I want to acknowledge the commitment of those within and outside the UN who work on this critical issue, it is simply the case that if we do not understand the cause of violence against women then any ‘strategy’ to address the problem must fail, as the record in recent decades (since the issue gained a significant profile in response to feminist agitation) demonstrates.

In fact, of course, if we do not understand the fundamental cause of violence, then attempts to address it in any context must either fail outright or meet with only limited success.

So what is the cause of violence, including violence against women?

Perpetrators of violence learn their craft in childhood. If you inflict violence on a child, they learn to inflict violence on others. The terrorist suffered violence as a child. The political leader who wages war suffered violence as a child. The man who inflicts violence on women suffered violence as a child. The corporate executive who exploits working class people and/or those who live in Africa, Asia or Central/South America suffered violence as a child. The racist or religious bigot suffered violence as a child. The individual who perpetrates violence in the home, in the schoolyard or on the street suffered violence as a child.

If we want to end violence against women then we must finally end our longest and greatest war: the adult war on children. And here is an additional incentive: if we do not tackle the fundamental cause of violence, then our combined and unrelenting efforts to tackle all of its other symptoms must ultimately fail. And extinction at our own hand is inevitable.

How can I claim that violence against children is the fundamental cause of all other violence? Consider this. There is universal acceptance that behaviour is shaped by childhood experience. If it was not, we would not put such effort into education and other efforts to socialize children to fit into society. And this is why many psychologists have argued that exposure to war toys and violent video games shapes attitudes and behaviours in relation to violence.

But it is far more complex than this and, strange though it may seem, it is not just the ‘visible’ violence (such as hitting, screaming at and sexually abusing) that we normally label ‘violence’ that causes the main damage, although this is extremely damaging. The largest component of damage arises from the ‘invisible’ and ‘utterly invisible’ violence that we adults unconsciously inflict on children during the ordinary course of the day. Tragically, the bulk of this violence occurs in the family home and at school. See ‘Why Violence?’ http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’. http://anitamckone.wordpress.com/articles-2/fearless-and-fearful-psychology/

So what is ‘invisible’ violence? It is the ‘little things’ we do every day, partly because we are just ‘too busy’. For example, when we do not allow time to listen to, and value, a child’s thoughts and feelings, the child learns to not listen to themselves thus destroying their internal communication system. When we do not let a child say what they want (or ignore them when they do), the child develops communication and behavioural dysfunctionalities as they keep trying to meet their own needs (which, as a basic survival strategy, they are genetically programmed to do).

When we blame, condemn, insult, mock, embarrass, shame, humiliate, taunt, goad, guilt-trip, deceive, lie to, bribe, blackmail, moralize with and/or judge a child, we both undermine their sense of Self-worth and teach them to blame, condemn, insult, mock, embarrass, shame, humiliate, taunt, goad, guilt-trip, deceive, lie, bribe, blackmail, moralize and/or judge.

The fundamental outcome of being bombarded throughout their childhood by this ‘invisible’ violence is that the child is utterly overwhelmed by feelings of fear, pain, anger and sadness (among many others). However, mothers, fathers, teachers and other adults also actively interfere with the expression of these feelings and the behavioural responses that are naturally generated by them and it is this ‘utterly invisible’ violence that explains why the dysfunctional behavioural outcomes actually occur.

For example, by ignoring a child when they express their feelings, by comforting, reassuring or distracting a child when they express their feelings, by laughing at or ridiculing their feelings, by terrorizing a child into not expressing their feelings (e.g. by screaming at them when they cry or get angry), and/or by violently controlling a behaviour that is generated by their feelings (e.g. by hitting them, restraining them or locking them into a room), the child has no choice but to unconsciously suppress their awareness of these feelings.

However, once a child has been terrorized into suppressing their awareness of their feelings (rather than being allowed to have their feelings and to act on them) the child has also unconsciously suppressed their awareness of the reality that caused these feelings. This has many outcomes that are disastrous for the individual, for society and for nature because the individual will now easily suppress their awareness of the feelings that would tell them how to act most functionally in any given circumstance and they will progressively acquire a phenomenal variety of dysfunctional behaviours, including some that are violent towards themselves, others and/or the Earth.

From the above, it should also now be apparent that punishment should never be used. ‘Punishment’, of course, is one of the words we use to obscure our awareness of the fact that we are using violence. Violence, even when we label it ‘punishment’, scares children and adults alike and cannot elicit a functional behavioural response. See ‘Punishment is Violent and Counterproductive’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/punishment/

If someone behaves dysfunctionally, they need to be listened to, deeply, so that they can start to become consciously aware of the feelings (which will always include fear and, often, terror) that drove the dysfunctional behaviour in the first place. They then need to feel and express these feelings (including any anger) in a safe way. Only then will behavioural change in the direction of functionality be possible. See ‘Nisteling: The Art of Deep Listening’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/nisteling/

‘But these adult behaviours you have described don’t seem that bad. Can the outcome be as disastrous as you claim?’ you might ask. The problem is that there are hundreds of these ‘ordinary’, everyday behaviours that destroy the Selfhood of the child. It is ‘death by a thousand cuts’ and most children simply do not survive as Self-aware individuals. And why do we do this? We do it so that each child will fit into our model of ‘the perfect citizen’: that is, obedient and hardworking student, reliable and pliant employee/soldier, and submissive law-abiding citizen.

Moreover, once we destroy the Selfhood of a child, it has many flow-on effects. For example, once you terrorise a child into accepting certain information about themself, other people or the state of the world, the child becomes unconsciously fearful of dealing with new information, especially if this information is contradictory to what they have been terrorized into believing. As a result, the child will unconsciously dismiss new information out of hand.

In short, the child has been terrorized in such a way that they are no longer capable of learning (or their learning capacity is seriously diminished by excluding any information that is not a simple extension of what they already ‘know’). If you imagine any of the bigots you know, you are imagining someone who is utterly terrified. But it’s not just the bigots; virtually all people are affected in this manner making them incapable of responding adequately to new (or even important) information. This is one explanation why some people are ‘climate deniers’ and most others do nothing in response to the climate catastrophe.
Of course, each person’s experience of violence during childhood is unique and this is why each perpetrator becomes violent in their own particular combination of ways. This explains, for example, why the violence of some men against women manifests as sexual violence, including rape.

So what is happening psychologically for the rapist when they commit the act of rape? In essence, they are projecting the (unconsciously suppressed) feelings of their own victimhood onto their rape victim. That is, their fear, self-hatred and powerlessness, for example, are projected onto the victim so that they can gain temporary relief from these feelings. Their fear, temporarily, is more deeply suppressed. Their self-hatred is projected as hatred of their victim. Their powerlessness is temporarily relieved by a sense of being in control, which they were never allowed to be, and feel, as a child. And similarly with their other suppressed feelings. For example, a rapist might blame their victim for their dress: a sure sign that the rapist was endlessly, and unjustly, blamed as a child and is (unconsciously) angry about that.

The central point in understanding violence is that it is psychological in origin and hence any effective response must enable both the perpetrator’s and the victim’s suppressed feelings (which will include enormous fear about, and rage at, the violence they have suffered) to be safely expressed. For an explanation of what is required, see ‘Nisteling: The Art of Deep Listening’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/nisteling/

Unfortunately, this nisteling cannot be provided by a psychiatrist or psychologist whose training is based on a delusionary understanding of how the human mind functions. See ‘Defeating the Violence of Psychiatry’. http://old.warisacrime.org/content/defeating-violence-psychiatry Nisteling will enable those who have suffered from trauma to heal fully and completely, but it will take time.

So if we want to end violence against women, we must tackle the fundamental cause. Primarily, this means giving everyone, child and adult alike, all of the space they need to feel, deeply, what they want to do and to then let them do it (or to have the feelings they naturally have if they are prevented from doing so). See ‘Putting Feelings First’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/putting-feelings-first/ In the short term, this will have some dysfunctional outcomes. But it will lead to an infinitely better overall outcome than the system of emotional suppression, control and punishment which has generated the incredibly violent world in which we now find ourselves.

This all sounds pretty unpalatable doesn’t it? So each of us has a choice. We can suppress our awareness of what is unpalatable, as we have been terrorized into doing as a child, or we can feel the various feelings that we have in response to this information and then ponder ways forward.
If feelings are felt and expressed then our responses can be shaped by the conscious and integrated functioning of thoughts and feelings, as evolution intended, and we can plan intelligently. The alternative is to have our unconscious fear controlling our thinking and deluding us that we are acting rationally.
It is time to end the adult war on children so that all of the other violence that emerges from this cause can end too.

So what do we do?

Well, if you are willing, you can make the commitment outlined in ‘My Promise to Children’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/my-promise-to-children/ If you need to do some healing of your own to be able to nurture children in this way, then consider the information provided in the article ‘Putting Feelings First’. https://feelingsfirstblog.wordpress.com/putting-feelings-first/

You might also deeply consider, and act in response to, the extraordinary damage inflicted on children by sending them to school. See ‘Do We Want School or Education?’ https://nonviolentstrategy.wordpress.com/strategywheel/constructive-program/school-or-education/

Why are these so important? Because if you want a boy (or girl) who is nonviolent, truthful, compassionate, considerate, patient, thoughtful, respectful, generous, loving of themselves and others, trustworthy, honest, dignified, determined, courageous and powerful, then the boy (or girl) must be treated with – and experience – nonviolence, truth, compassion, consideration, patience, thoughtfulness, respect, generosity, love, trust, honesty, dignity, determination, courage and power.

So each one of us has an important choice. We can acknowledge the painful truth that we inflict enormous violence on our children (which then manifests in all directions) and respond powerfully to that truth. Or we can keep deluding ourselves and continue to observe, powerlessly, as the violence in our world proliferates until human beings are extinct.

In addition to addressing this violence, you are also welcome to consider participating in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth’ http://tinyurl.com/flametree which maps out a fifteen-year strategy for creating a peaceful, just and sustainable world community so that everyone has an ecologically viable planet on which to live. And, if you like, you can join the worldwide movement to end all violence by signing online ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’. http://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com

In essence, if you want a man who doesn’t inflict violence on women, then his mother and father should not inflict (visible, invisible and utterly invisible) violence on him as a boy.

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence His email address is flametree@riseup.net and his website is at http://robertjburrowes.wordpress.com

Courtesy: NewAgeIslam

What Our Self-Declared Nationalists (Read the Hindu Right) Owe to British Historians for their Claims on Babri Masjid or Ram Temple

December 7, 2017

Like Padmavati, there is no historical evidence to suggest that there was Ram Temple at the site where Babri Masjid once stood.

Image courtesy The Wire

Today, on the 25th anniversary of the planned demolition of Babri Masjid, if we see the way the Padmavati controversy has raged over the last month, we will realise how little we have progressed from the events which took place on this day, 25 years ago. Even today, historians are the last people to be consulted on matters of history. Even though historians such as Irfan Habib write articles confirming the lack of historical evidence that confirms the existence of Padmavati, television debates have hardly paid any heed to historians. Compare this to the number of times the Karni Sena was allowed to air their hurt sentiments on the issue.

It is the same sentiment of historical hurt that drives popular support for the Hindu right. Yogi Adityanath, the current Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, has again given the clarion call for the “Ram mandir” which must be built on the same site. The now redundant L K Advani (probably due to affinity with the supposed poet and former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee) had said with poetic flourish: “We will remake from the same stones which now lie crumbled at the site”. The Ayodhya dispute, however, is still an incomplete project for the Hindu rightwing. If there is one temple for which the aspiration of rebuilding has been satisfied, is the Somanatha temple in Gujarat. Looking back at Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s speech at the Somnath temple on 31 October, 2001, let us try to understand what the vision of the Hindu right, on the matter of rebuilding temples, is:

Today is a day of great joy. Today, it is exactly fifty years since the idol of Lord Somanatha was sanctified here at the temple… Somnath is the symbol if our sanatan sanskriti (timeless culture), our shaswat dharma (eternal religion, way of life), the symbol of the successive shifts and changes in our history. History had also witnessed that moment when conquering invaders razed Somnath to the ground.

Somnath Temple

Two opinions on time emerge here: one, that Somnath, and by extension the envisioned Ram temple, is a part of sanatan sanskriti, a timeless culture that cannot be measured by history. (By implication, if the Ram temple is indeed rebuilt – though that seems unlikely, as the matter is sub judice — the Hindu right will find other spots for political mobilisation, as the matter of reclaiming our timeless culture cannot be bound by one moment in the present time). The other opinion, however, is that “history” has been a witness to “conquering invaders”. Suddenly, the timeless historical time is fixed to a specific moment in time. We know exactly when our timeless culture had to bear the brunt of time that could be measured. This begins in medieval India with the favourite adversary of the Hindu Right: the Muslim invaders. Vajpayee, interestingly, takes the refuge of “history” as facts or objective truth the moment he introduces the origin of hurt: it is a fact that we are hurt now, just as it is a fact that our temples were destroyed by outsiders. The former may be true, but the latter is clearly Vajpayee’s clever subterfuge to pass belief as history, as fact.

Scratch the surface and it will soon be revealed that the “history” Vajpayee talks about is the history written by the British. These include books such as the influential History of India as Told by Its Own Historians, first published in 1849 and edited by Henry Miers Elliot with John Dowson. The book contains translations of medieval Persian chronicles. In his reading, Elliot is hardly objective. Notice the similarity in tone between Elliot and Vajpayee:

The few glimpses that we have, even among the short extracts in this single volume, of Hindus slain for disputing with Muhammedans, of general prohibitions against processions, worship, and ablutions, of other intolerant measures, of idols mutilated, of temples razed, of forcible conversions and marriages, of proscriptions and confiscations, of murders and massacres, and of the sensuality and drunkenness of the tyrants who enjoined them, show us that this picture is not overcharged.

Image courtesy Archive.org

It will hardly be surprising to know that Elliot should be such a darling for the Hindu Right. As Romila Thapar says in her speech, delivered at the launch of the website Indian Cultural Forum, it is ironic if one sees how much our self declared nationalist parties owe their views on history to the Britsh.
The British imperialists were clear that the Indian subcontinent would see them as outsiders. But, they wanted to say to their Hindu subjects, the Muslims too were outsiders who ruled your land. Listen to us. Better to have us as outsiders who rule over you than Muslims. Elliot and Dowson go on to write that, with the advent of British rule, “a more stirring and eventful era of India’s History commences…when the full light of European truth and discernment begins to shed its beams upon the obscurity of the past”.

This is not to say that there were no temple desecrations in medieval India, or that there was some kind of eternal Ganga jamuna tehzeeb in Northern India. Instead, one must ask, if temples were indeed desecrated or destroyed, why, and by whom; for what purpose. This is exactly what Richard M Eaton’s essay, “Temple Desecration and Indp-Muslim States” does. Romila Thapar’s book on the Somnath temple is another project written with the same intent.

Eaton says that it was S K Banerji, who suggested the presence of a Ram temple at the site where Babri Masjid stood. There is, however, no historical evidence that proves the presence of a temple, let alone the claim that Mir Baqi, Babur’s officer, destroyed a non-existent temple and built a mosque in its place. Eaton says, “The erstwhile mosque’s inscription records only that Babur had ordered the construction of the mosque, which was built by Mir Baqi and was described as ‘the place of descent of celestial beings’ (mahbit-i-qudsiyan)”. This “commonplace rhetorical flourish in Persian” can hardly be a reference to Lord Ram, as Banerji, in his 1936 essay, “Babur and the Hindus”, (and published in Journal of the United Provinces Historical Society) concluded.

It is strange that the walls on which this inscription was written – the only supposed evidence for the Hindu Right’s claim – have been razed down. It will be nice if Mr Advani, now out of bounds of his own party’s power centre, realises his mistakes and rebuilds the mosque from the rubble they have created.

Featured image courtesy The Wire

Souradeep Roy is part of the editorial collective of the Indian Writers’ Forum

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

Muslim Labourer Hacked to Death in Rajasthan

December 7, 2017

A half charred body of a man was recovered from Rajsamand in Rajasthan on Wednesday by local police. The deceased has been identified as 48 year old Mohammed Afrazul, a labourer who originally hailed from Malda in Poshchim Bongo.

Afrazul was hacked to death before being burnt. This is based on a video where attackers can be clearly seen hacking Afrazul to death. The video, that has gone viral, helped the police identify the assailant. We have identified the assailant in the video as Shambhulal Regar, a resident of Rajsamand. Our teams are on the lookout for him,” Manoj Kumar, superintendent of police, Rajsamand, told Indian Express. The police have registered a case under section 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) against Regar.

Regar has a history of stirring communal passions by making inflammatory statements. The police have confirmed that there are several videos where Regar is seen making inflammatory and communal statements. Infact, one such video was shot at a temple shortly after the murder. Meanwhile, a two wheeler belonging to the deceased was found at the crime scene. Extra police have been deployed to maintain law and order in the district.

In 2016, NCRB Recorded 869 Communal Riots; Home Ministry Says 703

December 7, 2017

In 2016, 869 cases relating to communal riots were recorded by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) compared to 703 communal incidents by the ministry of home affairs, Factly, a data-journalism portal, reported on December 2, 2017.

A view of a house that was destroyed in Atali village of Haryana’s Ballabgarh where communal riots broke in June 2015. The home ministry’s records of communal incidents/riots do not match the figures released by the National Crime Records Bureau for 2016–the third year in a row.

NCRB reported almost twice the number of incidents compared to the home ministry for 2014. The gap closed in 2015 and widened again in 2016.

NCRB reported 336 cases of “offences promoting enmity between different groups” in 2014, of which 323 are offences for promoting enmity between groups based on–among other things–religion and race. In 2015, the corresponding numbers were 424 and 378, respectively.

In 2016, 478 cases “offences promoting enmity between different groups” were reported by NCRB, of which 447 were offences promoting enmity between groups based–among other things–on religion and race.

If the number of communal riots cases and cases of promoting enmity between groups from the NCRB report are added, then the difference between the NCRB data & MHA data widens further.

NCRB data collection on riots

NCRB, which is part of the home ministry, is tasked with collection and dissemination of a secure national database on crimes, criminals and law-enforcement agencies. Every year, NCRB collects data from the police departments at the state level, and compiles them into a Crime in India report. The report has detailed information on various crimes.

The current template for collection of crime-related data has a section on riots, as defined under Sections 147,148,149,150, 151 and 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

There is also separate section to collect data on offences that promote enmity between different groups as defined under Sections 153A & 153B of the IPC.

The template makes it clear that cases reported under Section 153A with other sections of riots (Section 147 to 151) should be shown in the category of riots whereas cases reported specifically under Sections 153A & 153B should be shown separately.

Before 2014, all the data related to riots used to be collected under one head called ‘riots’. From 2014, the data on riots is categorised into sub-heads, namely communal riots, industrial riots and riots for political reasons. There is also a separate section on ‘offences promoting enmity between different groups’.

NCRB gets all the data from state police departments, and these data are based on the sections mentioned in the First Information Report (FIR) of the cases filed.

NCRB also follows the ‘Principal Offence Rule’ for counting of crime. So, among many offences registered in a single case, only the most heinous crime (maximum punishment) will be considered as counting unit, thereby representing one case. Sometimes, it is also possible that multiple cases will be filed for a single incident.

Why government’s explanation does not add up

The government, on multiple occasions, maintained that the NCRB collects police-registered communal riots cases (FIRs) from states, and there could be multiple FIRs in a single incident of communal violence. So, NCRB data vary from the ministry data, which are based on communal incidents and not FIRs.

As per the government’s explanation, NCRB numbers should be equal to or higher than the ministry’s data for every state.

For 2014, in states such as Haryana, Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, the NCRB numbers were significantly higher than the ones reported by the home ministry. But in states like Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat & Uttar Pradesh, the home ministry numbers were higher than those reported by NCRB–suggesting FIRs may not have been filed in some incidents.

In the case of Uttar Pradesh in 2014, the NCRB reported 51 communal riots cases and 26 cases of promoting enmity between groups. Together, they add up to 77 cases in NCRB records, while the home ministry reported 133 incidents.

The trend was repeated in 2015, where the discrepancy was observed in as many as 24 states/UTs. In 2016, the discrepancy has been observed in 25 states/UTs.

The home ministry reported 63 communal incidents in Rajasthan in 2016. NCRB did not report a single case in Rajasthan in 2016 while it reported 22 cases of promoting enmity between groups.

The home ministry may also be getting data on communal incidents from the state police in which case, a lower number in NCRB data for a particular state suggests that cases were not filed in some instances of communal incidents. A reconciliation by the home ministry and NCRB could help address such issues.

(Dubbudu has been working on issues related to the Right to Information for a decade. He is a data/information enthusiast and is passionate about governance/policy issues. Factly.in is dedicated to making public data meaningful.)