What’s in a name? Writing across borders of poetry and music

June 21, 2017

Bob Dylan’s recent speech to the Swedish Academy led to a flurry of commentary about the “smoky, meditative jazz-piano arrangement” of the speech, what Dylan did and didn’t say, and whether he’d used Sparknotes to quote from Moby Dick. It takes me back to the high feelings and combative discussions that circulated last year, when the Nobel Prize committee announced that it had awarded the 2016 Prize in Literature to Dylan “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition”.

Bob Dylan in 1991. Xavier Badosa, CC BY-SA

One side of the debate was occupied by those who deny that a songwriter should be identified as a poet. The Swedish Academy, supported by popular opinion, presented the counter-argument, and Dylan is now listed first among the “Most Popular Literature Laureates”, ahead of such luminaries as Pablo Neruda, Albert Camus or Toni Morrison.

This is a surprising spot in literary history for someone who once described himself as a song and dance man, but Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy Sara Danius insists that Dylan “can be read and should be read, and is a great poet in the grand English poetic tradition”. Dylan himself seems to demur: toward the end of his Nobel address he says, “songs are unlike literature. They’re meant to be sung, not read”.

The sung-not-read distinction has long been a key issue in this debate. Composer Pierre Boulez argues that specialisation has divided speech from music, so that now each must obey discrete and specific laws of semantics and structure. They are no longer necessarily in harmony, though they still find points of connection, in song. As poet and critic David Orr notes, “A well-written song isn’t just a poem with a bunch of notes attached; it’s a unity of verbal and musical elements”.
Orr doesn’t offer the Academy’s argument that a songwriter can be a poet, insisting instead that there is a distinction between a poem and a song. He has a lot of support for this, because though there are songs that are remarkably poem-like; and poems that work better in spoken than in written form, there are distinct differences, in terms of genre and of function, between the two forms.

Poems, generally speaking, behave on the page, and operate against silence. Song lyrics, generally speaking, perform in sound, and operate in a relationship with musical apparatus.

The use of language differs too, in the two forms. Both song lyrics and poems exploit and rely on linguistic devices such as imagery, expressiveness, rhythm, cadence, concision, and word association. Poets have at their disposal little more than grammar, syntax and lexical choices.

Musicians have all that, plus a stack of sonic resources. These include melody, harmony and instrumentation; the stressing or slurring, and stretching or truncating of words, as needed to fit the musical shape; as well as meaningless but useful utterances. While rarely found in any but the most experimental of poems, oo-oo-oos and la-la-las can perfectly punctuate a song, enrich its song texture, and capture its listeners.

Songs also make more use of repetition than do poems: in part because the music may demand that a phrase or line be repeated; in part because the conventions of song include the use of a refrain, which is rare in contemporary poetry, largely because it doesn’t suit the poems though it is often vital in a song. Tom Wait’s Time — a very poetic song — includes a chorus that is all repetition:

And it’s time time time / and it’s time time time / and it’s time time time / that you love / and it’s time time time.

I love this, when Waits sings it, and it provides an important transition between the wild imagery of the verses. But when I read these lines, in the absence of the music and the voice, I feel as though I am in the presence of a mistake.

Does any of this matter — need the boundaries between song and poem be patrolled and policed? Possibly not. After all, as 18th-century Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico suggests, we humans came to language through song; and song and poetry together built the linguistic domain we now inhabit.

But there’s more to it than theory; there’s also taxonomy, and the distribution of resources that follows cultural classifications. Musicians can become rich and famous from their work; poets rarely do. Musicians can compete for the distinction associated with what is still called “high” culture, but poets rarely get to enjoy the rewards of “popular” culture.

Bob Dylan, for example, has won a shelf full of Grammies for the same body of work that delivered his Nobel Prize in Literature. Oxford Professor of Poetry Simon Armitage has won the Ivor Novello Award, but that was specifically for his song lyrics: his poetry was not eligible.

As long as the river flows in only one direction, it seems likely that poets will continue to resist attempts by songwriters to occupy their patch.

Jen Webb, Director of the Centre for Creative and Cultural Research, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Finsbury Park attack shows the harm Islamophobia continues to inflict on Muslim communities

June 21, 2017

Following the attack on a group of Muslim worshippers in Finsbury Park that left one person dead and 11 injured, Londoners have once again demonstrated their strength and unity in the face of violence.

Prayers in the street in Finsbury Park after the attack on June 19. Yui Mok/PA Wire

Neil Basu, deputy assistant commissioner for the Metropolitan Police and senior national coordinator for counter terrorism, commended the response of the Muslim community, who stopped the man suspected to have carried out the attack before turning him over to police. One man who apprehended the man told the BBC that the individual had said he “wanted to kill Muslims”.

The Finsbury Park attack occurred just after the murder of a teenage Muslim girl in Virginia and an attempted vehicular attack on Iraqi migrants in Sweden. There is little doubt that this incident targeted the Muslim community, and while we cannot speculate as to what exactly motivated this violence, such an incident demands that we reflect on the harm that Islamophobia can cause.

Heightened tensions

The attack took place near Finsbury Park Mosque and the Muslim Welfare House on Seven Sisters Road, north London. Finsbury Park Mosque is infamous because the violent extremist, Abu Hamza, preached there before his arrest in 2004. Since then, under new leadership, the mosque and its leaders have made outstanding contributions to the local community, which has been recognised nationally. Regardless of this recognition, parts of the press continue to demonise the mosque.

On the night of the attack, Mail Online referenced Hamza – who was sentenced to life in prison in the US in 2015 – in their headline for a report on the attack.

As a researcher on Islamophobia, I have had the opportunity to speak with members of the mosque’s leadership a few times. I recall a conversation I had with Mohammed Kozbar, then chairman of the mosque, in 2012 about a pig’s head left on the gate to the mosque in 2010 and a hoax anthrax threat sent to the mosque in 2011. He told me then that the community was feeling vulnerable and fearful. He reminded me as well that the media rarely, if ever, reported on the positive contributions made by members of the mosque.

In 2015, in a report for Tell MAMA (the UK’s primary watchdog for anti-Muslim hate) and the Metropolitan Police, I identified a cluster of nine anti-Muslim hate crimes and incidents targeting the mosque. The misplaced association of the congregation with violent extremism continues to make the site a target for hate. In this sense, it should sadly come as no surprise that Finsbury Park has been targeted once again.

Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred have demonstrably increased year on year. This is evident in police data that I have reviewed from 2012 to 2014 and in reports by Tell MAMA that include data from victims, charities, and police forces across the country. Between May 2013 and September 2016, 100 mosques were targeted and attacked.

Members of the community speak to police in the wake of the attack. Victoria Jones/PA Wire

Spikes of hate tend to follow attacks perpetrated by Muslims in the UK and abroad. These dynamics are evident in research on the attacks in Paris in 2015. The three atrocities that claimed lives in Westminster, Manchester, and London Bridge have led to a major increase in anti-Muslim hate based both on police evidence and reports from Muslim communities.

These spikes are not localised and they affect Muslim communities across the country. In this sense, the way that Muslims are framed in reporting on terrorism directly harms communities by putting them in the cross-hairs of lone criminals, angry citizens, and extreme right-wing terrorists.

Anti-Muslim hate plays a role

This attack, as the Metropolitan Police were quick to note, has all the hallmarks of a terrorist incident, and it is being investigated as such. More details about the attacker’s motivation is likely to emerge as the investigation continues.

There is a blurry line between hate crime and terrorism. And it is difficult to impute any kind of causality between far-right extremists and such an attack.

What is clear, however, is that irresponsible sensationalism and the growth of Islamophobia inspires fear, anxiety, and hate towards Muslims. A report published in May from the Home Affairs Select Committee showed that social media is an important medium for sharing and distributing these sentiments. Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter provide an environment in which cliques of users normalise and legitimate anti-Muslim ideologies.

It is important that the Finsbury Park investigation questions whether or not the attacker was influenced by extreme right-wing opinions disseminated online. However, it is also crucial to see if this individual was influenced by the press when he selected Muslims in the Finsbury Park area as his target.

Whether or not this incident is considered a terrorist attack should not distract us from the bigger problem: the failure of politicians and the media to effectively counter Islamophobia has caused Muslims to become targets of violence on their way home from prayer.

Bharath Ganesh, Researcher, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

It is Demonetisation that has Crippled Indian Agriculture, Let’s Admit It

June 21, 2017

More than 7 months after the announcement of demonetisation, its impact is still visible. The protests by the farmers in MP, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and other states agitating due to thefall inprices of various agricultural products is a sign of demonetisation’s continuing impact.

Image Courtesy: Welthungerhilfe

After consecutive years of drought, the Farmers in different states were looking forward to a profitable agricultural year in 2016-17. Though their hopes of good crops have materialised, the prices have fallen so low that in many places farmers are leaving their unsold harvest on the roads. In some cases they are simply leaving the crop un-harvested.

The prices of potatoes and onions have fallen by half. The prices of tur dal, moong and sunflower have fallen substantially below the MSP. Similarly, the prices of vegetables and other agricultural products have taken a beating.

The present crisis comes in the wake of demonetisation and is a direct consequence of it.

While demonetisation was complete, with at least 97% of the currency back with RBI – the remonetisation is not complete even after 7 months. On the even of demonetisation, there was nearly Rs. 18 lakh crore worth currency in circulation in the economy, including the demonetised notes. More than 7 months after the announcement, as on March 26th the currency in circulation is little more than Rs. 15 lakh crore.This means that government still has not replaced 20% of all the cash that has been demonetised.
The pinch of this missing Rs. 3 lakh crore of currency is acutely felt in the rural areas, which are thinly banked and poorly supplied with currency. While, some fall in agricultural prices were anticipated due to bumper crop – the scale of the price drop, much below the production cost, is due to the shortage in cash.

More over, the traders of agricultural commodities, who were badly affected by demonetisation, have not yet recovered. According to senior journalist, Harish Damodaran, the ‘traditional agro commercial capital was dealt a body blow’ with the demonetisation. The traders who stock up during good harvest have been less active due to the lack of liquidity and the damage that has been done to their capital during the demonetisation. As a result of this collapse of the trading capital, a good harvest in production led to the steep fall in farm prices.

The much touted cashless transactions have not come to the farmers’ aid either. Considering that most of the PoS machines are there in urban areas, electronic transactions are of no use to the farmers.

Looking back on last 7 months, it is clear that the promises of demonetisation have not materialised. Demonetisation, which was supposed to cure India of black money, tax evasion, corruption and bribery, terrorism, fake currency and every other problem under the sun – has not only failed in all of the stated objectives, but is now pushing farmers to the brink. Agriculture, which has experienced robust growth in production, is now crippled because of the price crash.

The least that the government can do now is meet the farmer’s demands of increase in Minimum Support Price high enough to make farming profitable and waive off farm loans.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author's personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

The Muslim Presidents of the Indian Republic

June 21, 2017

2002, the Gujarat genocidal carnage happened when India’s President was RK Narayan, a Dalit, a man who was bitterly shaken by the happenings in the western Indian state. He had expressed his anguish to then prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and had even expressed his desire to visit the state and the relief camps with the hapless victim survivors. He however did not visit Gujarat, and, in 2002, the NDA I reeling from national and world criticism over the seven month long anti minority violence in Gujarat in 2002, pulled out their surprise nomination for the post of India’s President. India’s Missile Man, APJ Abul Kalam, a man with a humble background and a darling of aspirational youth was the name that compelled the opposition, Congress to back the move. The left fielded Lakshmi Sehgal as its nominee.

APJ Abdul Kalam he 11^th president of India.There have been 13 presidents of India since the introduction of the post in 1950. Pratibha Patil was the 12^th and first woman president of the republic.

Though for the Sangh Parivar, Abdul Kalam has been portrayed and promoted with specific zeal—given their obsession with a militarised mind-set—APJ Abul Kalam’s contribution should be seen in the context of at least two other Muslim presidents of India have left their reflections — Dr Zakir Husain (1897-1969) and Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed (1905-1977). [Justice Mohammed Hidayatullah, who was acting president when Dr Zakir Husain died in office in 1969.]

The trajectories are a stark contrast, while Dr Zakir Hussain will be remembered for his lasting contribution to education and the lasting message of peace and communal harmony, post-partition, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed’s tenure is ignominiously linked to Indira Gandhi’s declaration of internal emergency and attendant repression of civil liberties and press freedom.

Of those Indian Presidents who also happened to be Muslim, arguably Dr Zakir Husain’s contributions, especially in the field of education stand out. In 1920, when he was just 23, he became one of the founders — along with Maulana Muhammad Ali and Hakim Ajmal Khan — of what later developed as a great centre of learning in India i.e. Jamia Millia Islamia (National Islamic University). [It was at behest of Gandhi and other senior leaders from the Congress that Zakir Husain left the MAO College and established in Aligarh a new college that was later shifted to Delhi with Maulana Muhammad Ali as its first vice-chancellor and Hakim Ajmal as the first chancellor. Husain completed his PhD in economics in Germany at the age of 29 and in 1926 came back to become Jamia’s vice chancellor, a position he occupied for more than two decades.]

It was Zakir Hussain’s contribution in the area of basic and primary education that made it’s most lasting mark. He presided over a National Committee on Basic Education established by Gandhi at the advice of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad who was to later become the first education minister of India. After independence, Aligarh Muslim University faced tremendous problems, because most Muslim teachers who were supporters of Pakistan migrated, and the university was seen as a stronghold of the Muslim League, opposed to the INC. Some elements in Congress even saw Aligarh University as a hotbed of pro-Pakistan sentiments and a threat to secular India.

That was the time when Dr Zakir Husain was asked by the union education minister, Maulana Azad, to take over Aligarh University and he remained it’s vice chancellor from 1948 to 1956; then in 1957 Nehru appointed him the governor of Bihar, where he remained till 1962. In Bihar when the state government tried to curtail the independence of universities through a bill in the legislative assembly, he threatened to resign rather than sign an act that was to be a blow to intellectual freedom of universities. The state government had to backtrack, and no such law saw the light of the day.

In 1962, Dr. Radhakrishnan, then vice-president was elected as the second president of India. This was after the completion of Dr Rajendra Prasad’s second term as the first president of India after Independence. Dr Zakir Husain was then elected the vice-president and ex-officio chairman of the upper house, the Rajya Sabha. In 1967, when Indira Gandhi had taken over as the prime minister and wanted Dr Husain to become the president, which he did. Though his tenure as President was short –he died in office in 1969, Dr Zakir Hussain’s seminal contribution in bringing sanity and harmony to an India still reeling from the after effects of partition, was significant.

It is also a tribute to the political leadership in post-Independence India that a man of his stature could and was considered for the top post, President of the Republic. Dr Zakir Husain’s books, especially Dynamic University, outline his ideas about education that is free from prejudice and indoctrination. His translations of Plato in Urdu still critical reading. He possessed doctoral degrees in various disciplines.

Unfortunately, history will remember India’s second Muslim president as being acquiescent to the declaration of emergency by Indira Gandhi in 1975. Indira Gandhi was known for her manipulation of institutions and over-centralisation of power, and Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed allowed himself to be used as a rubberstamp to impose the state of emergency in his name. Officially issued by the president, the emergency remained in force for 21 months from June 1975 to March 1977. This allowed Indira Gandhi to rule by executive decree, and authorised her to suspend elections and curb civil liberties.

The year before, in 1974, opposition led strikes had caused political disenchantment at various levels. On June 25, 1975, Indira Gandhi declared the Eemrgency, rubber stamped by then Indian President, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. By this declaration, elections were delayed, press was censored, non-Congress governments were dismissed and several freedom fighters like Jivatram Kripalani and Jaya Prakash Narayan were arrested.

Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed remained silent when most of the political opponents of Congress were put behind bars, the press was censored and a compulsory, mass-sterilisation campaign was launched by Indira’s son Sanjay Gandhi in September 1976. One of the worst atrocities of the emergency apart from the compulsory mass sterilization programme, was, when Sanjay Gandhi accompanied by Jagmophan, the vice-chairman of the Delhi Development Authority, brutally bull-dozed, on April 13, 1976, residential tenements at Turkman Gate. Brutal police firing resulted in 150 deaths and over 70,000 persons were displaced by the episode. The internally displaced were moved to the Trans Jamuna area.

He died in February 1977, in the same bathroom of the President House where Dr Zakir Husain had collapsed eight years earlier.

Will Meira Kumar’s Nomination as Opposition Nominee for President, both Right a Historical Wrong and Beat the NDA at its Game?

June 20, 2017

An efficient minister in Nehru and Indira’s cabinets, Jagjivan Ram left the Congress to join the Janata Party during the emergency and blamed ‘entrenched caste interests’ (Sanjiva Reddy was then President, 1979) to not call him to muster up a majority when Chaudhary Charan Singh failed to hold the Janata combine together. Nominating his daughter, Meira Kumar, an accomplished politician to the post of President would right a historical omission, if not a wrong

At 72, she is a woman and a Dalit. Daughter of former deputy prime minister of India, Jagjivan Ram, also a freedom fighter against the British, she is five times elected member of Parliament, being elected to the 8^th,11^th, 12^th, 14^th and 15^th Lok Sabhas. She was Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment from 2004-2009 and then from 2009 to 2014 she became the first woman and Dalit Speaker of the lower house of Parliament. A lawyer and qualified bureaucrat from the Indian Foreign Service, Meira Kumar’s nomination could well be a return coup by the Opposition for the candidature of President.

Most of all, nominating Meira Kumar for President would correct a historical injustice, perceived to be inflicted on her distinguished father, Jagjivan Ram, an efficient minister in Indira Gandhi’s cabinet but who did not make it to the highest post.
Will Meira Kumar’s name as the united Opposition’s candidate, after the meeting on July 22, beat the BJP-led NDA at it’s own game?

Meira Kumar’s inspired Welcome Address to then USA’s President Barack H. Obama on February 28, 2013 was befitting of the occasion. Obama’s victory and leadership as the USA’s first black president was mentioned in eloquent terms by India’s first woman Speaker of the Lok Sabha, also a Dalit. She spoke of the ‘power of people’, of the ‘diversity of religions and ideas and that India represents.’ She spoke of India’s respect for all persons regardless of faith and belief, and how Gandhi expressed this ‘oneness of human beings in modern paradigms.’ She addressed Barack Obama directly, ‘Your journey to the office of President of US” revived people’s hope in a just world order, especially the disinherited ones.’

In 2013, it was Barack Obama in the USA and an India represented by Meira Kumar as it’s Speaker who spoke of the two great democracies and the need to ‘strengthen the edifice of global peace. Quoting from the inspirational Martin Luther King, she had said, “Sooner or later, all the people of the world will have to discover a way to live, in peace.” Today, the USA is led by Donald Trump and India is represented by Narendra Modi.

Righting a Wrong

On July 7, 1986, Sanjoy Hazorika wrote on Jagjivan Ram’s death at 78, in the New York Times, “In the course a political career that spanned more than 50 years, Mr. Ram, an ally of Mohandas K. Gandhi in India's fight for independence, held almost every important Cabinet post except the Prime Ministry. …His bids to become prime minister failed in 1977 and 1979, and Mr. Ram and his supporters later blamed high-caste Hindu politicians for blocking his chances, saying that they wanted to prevent an untouchable, from the lowest rung in the country's outlawed but ubiquitous caste system, from becoming India's top leader.”

A biography of the former union minister Jagjivan Ram released in 2010 has claimed that the late prime minister Indira Gandhi used the Dalit leader as a "bali ka bakra" (scapegoat) during the Emergency in an attempt to remove any possible challenge to her leadership. The biography in Hindi, Babu Jagjivan Ram: Ek Jivani, was authored by by writer Mangalmurti. It was released in 2010 by then Union Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal in the presence of Jagjivan Ram’s daughter, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar. Meira Kumarhas also written a blurb for the book.

According to the biography, while Jagjivan Ram was used by the Congress and the government for his popularity and competence, he was never given any position of eminence because the "prime minister's chair was deemed to be the birthright of uchchavargiya (high-class) leaders only". "It is clear from Indiraji's continuing distrust in him that… Jagjivan Babu's popularity, political diplomacy (kootnitigyata) and competence was always taken advantage of by the party and the government. But when the question of giving him a position of eminence came, he was always pushed behind — probably because he hailed from the most neglected, deprived community while the prime minister's chair was deemed to be the birthright of uchchavargiya leaders only," it says.

"Along with Indiraji, Jagjivan Ram was the most senior and competent leader, who was the most eligible for the post of prime minister also… The biggest threat was from none other than Jagjivan Ram and therefore, he was considered the biggest scapegoat to move the resolution on Emergency," says the biography (page 188).

When Meira Kumar first entered electoral politics in 1985, she was elected to the Lok Sabha from Bijnor in Uttar Pradesh defeating political heavyweights like Ram Vilas Paswan and Mayawati. In 2014, in the wake of the Modi wave, she however lost to Chhedi Paswan of the BJP, from the Sasaram constituency, by over 63,000 votes.

An Old Vicious Stereotype is Peddled Again, Against Muslims, Belying Facts

June 20, 2017

“Hum paanch, hamare pachees” – Narendra Modi himself mocked the Muslim community.

“HUM paanch, Hamare pachees” – Narendra Modi himself mocked the Muslim community. The slogan ‘Hum do hamare do’ (we two, our two) implied a couple of wife and husband having two children. Modi meant that a Muslim man generally was having four wives, this counted to five and these five persons were having a total twenty-five children. The then chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi made this comment in 2002. In February of that year, we witnessed the carnage in Gujarat after Godhra incident. The election was after few months. In several places, he was delivering speeches at that time. On the issue of not providing relief camps for Muslims after the carnage, he simply replied – “What should I do? Run relief camps for them? Do we want to have baby producing centres?” Interestingly, a chief minister who had taken oath under constitution had been mocking an entire community of his state (about 9 per cent of population) and isolating this community from the rest people of Gujarat by branding them as ‘them’.

HUM PAANCH?
Generally, this campaign is still going on that a Muslim man has four wives, and several children and that is leading to the high population growth of Muslims. It is true that one Muslim man can have four wives at a time, according to their religion and also the law. Many people believe that most Muslim men are doing that. According to 2011 census report, the number of total married Muslim men was about 3 crores and 61 lakhs. If each of them had four wives, then the total number of married Muslim women could count about 14 crores and 44 lakhs, which was far above the population of Muslim women in total (about 8 crores 40 lakhs) in 2011. This total population included the baby girl who was born even one day before. Thus, if even we arrange the marriage of the girl born yesterday with a Muslim man, it is not possible to supply four wives to each Muslim man.

Census data provides us the religious wise number of married men and women. Obviously, each of the total married women is a wife of a married man. If we calculate the average from census data, we can see that per 1000 married Muslim men, there were 1043 married women, according to 2011 census. It implies among these 1043 women, there were 43 women who had husbands having more than one wife. The Muslim men who had more than one wife, if each of them had four wives, then about 14-15 among 1000 Muslim married men had four wives, which was just 1.43 per cent. It implies that almost 99 per cent of Muslim men did not take the opportunity of four wives provided by the law and their religion. Thus, the comment “Hum paanch” is a blatant lie.

What about the men of other religions, where both religion and law do not allow more than one wife? Do any of them have more than one wife? If so, how many? If we look at Table-1, we can see that men of different religions had more than one wife in accordance to 2011 census. Consider the case of Hindu, per 1000 married men there were 1019 married women in 2011. This could not happen unless there were some men who had more than one wife. Those who had more than one wife, if each of them had only two wives, then 19 among 1000 married Hindu men had two wives, which was prohibited according to the law and their religion. RSS is campaigning ‘Ghar wapsi’ and ‘Love Jihad’ to bring back the Hindu girls who married Muslims, but why is BJP not thinking about the conditions of these 19 distressed Hindu women, whose marriages were completely illegal and they were debarred from getting any legal right as wives?

HAMARE PACHEES?
Modi mocked the Muslims – “Hamare Pachees” implying a Muslim man’s four wives generally give birth to 25 children. If we take the average of this 25, we may say that one wife has seven and each of the rest three has six children. However, Modi associates did not stick to only 6-7. On January 7, 2015, BJP MP from Unnao, Sakshi Maharaj said in a meeting in Meerut hinting at Muslims –“The concept of four wives and forty children just won’t work in India”, thus implying that each Muslim woman is giving birth of 10 children. He continued in the same speech by addressing the Hindu women – “It is high time that every Hindu woman must produce at least four children to protect the Hindu religion”, as if the task of Hindu women is only to give births! Other leaders of BJP also think so. Hitler in Nazi regime also opined like that. In 1943, a law was discussed among Nazi leaders that all women – married or single – should have four children, though this law never came into being. In 1929, Joseph Goebbels wrote – “The mission of women is to be beautiful and to bring children into the world. This is not at all as…unmodern as it sounds. The female bird pretties herself for her mate and hatches eggs for him. In exchange, the male takes care of gathering food…”

Is it a fact that on an average a Muslim woman gives birth to 6-7 or 10 children today? The answer is – no, according to census report of 2011. In the census report, we get figures of number of ever married women of different religions and the number of their surviving children. Thus, we can get the average number of surviving children per ever married woman. Table 2 shows the average number of surviving children per woman of different religions. It can be observed that the average number of surviving children per woman lies between 2 and 3 for all religions including Muslim, though it is higher in case of Muslim. But the story of 6-7 or 10 children per woman as stated by Modi or Sakshi Maharaj is absolutely false.

One point must be mentioned here. The relation between a woman and a man, the birth of their child, the rearing of their child, generally all come from a passionate emotional relation and a social responsibility. It does not resemble to that of the lives of other animals. Specially, in our country, it is absolutely true where the parents take lot of responsibility in the growing of their child. In that case, counting the children per head as generally done in case of other animals is a matter of bad taste. Even if we do that, generally for all animals, the number of future children is estimated by counting the female animals, not the male. Suppose, if anyone keeps cows, dogs or other animals, then he or she estimates the expected number of future animals by counting the females. How many calves will be born in a cowshed is estimated by the number of cows, not by the number of bullocks. But Modi, Sakshi Mharaj and other BJP leaders start their counts with the male gender! The matter did not end here. On September 22, 2002, Modi moved from ‘Hum paanch and hamare pachees’ to ‘Paanch na pachees ane pachees na 625’, which translates into ‘from five to 25 and from 25 to 625’. What the arithmetic is! Even if Modi’s ‘Hum paanch, hamare pachees’ had been true, to go to 625 from these 25, each of these 25 has to be male child, not female. Unfortunate for our country, Modi could deliver these speeches easily and many people accepted those. It is an extreme outcome of supremacy of male in a patriarchal feudal society.

THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION
In 2001 census, the Hindu and Muslim population was 80.45 per cent and 13.43 per cent respectively. In 2011 census, it changes to 79.8 per cent and 14.2 per cent. There is a campaign by the BJP leaders including Modi that many infiltrators are coming from outside countries, specially Bangladesh to India, causing the increase in Muslim population. Nothing is published till date in 2011 census about the illegal immigrants in India. Census in 2001 reported that there were 3,084,826 people in India who came from Bangladesh . Obviously, all of them were not Muslims. Even if we consider that all these 30 lakhs people were Muslims, that counts to only 2.2 there of total Muslim population. Even if we deduct this number from the total, the Muslim population could have been decreased very slightly from 13.43 per cent to 13.06 per cent in 2001. Thus, the theory of infiltration to increase the Muslim population is entirely wrong. Still, BJP often campaigns about this infiltration in high dose. In the last parliament election, Modi himself used to do this very strongly, specially in the border districts of Bengal.

As stated, the percentage of Muslims has increased slightly between 2001 to 2011 (13.43 per cent to 14.2 per cent). It is true that Muslim population is increasing at higher rate. According to 2001 and 2011 census, the number of Hindus and Muslims has increased at the rate of 17 per cent and 25 per cent respectively between 2001 to 2011. Why is this rate of increase in case of Muslims higher? The reason for this can be easily observed from Table 2. It can be seen that the tendency of giving births is higher in case of Muslim women (surviving children per Muslim woman was 2.82 in 2011). One reason for it may be that the consciousness about birth control is comparatively lagging behind in Muslim society. Generally, a society having backwardness is lacking the consciousness about birth control. There is no doubt from the statistical figures and also from Sachar committee report that Muslims are lagging behind socially and economically. Some states in the southern India which are ahead in education, say for example Kerala and Tamil Nadu, the number of surviving children per woman is 2.20 and 1.98 respectively – well below the national average. Obviously, the consciousness about birth control is at higher level in these states. But the records also show that this consciousness about birth control is also increasing in case of Muslims. Because, in 2001, the number of surviving children per ever married Muslim woman was 3.15, and it decreased to 2.82 in 2011. In several foreign countries, research was done about the tendency of giving births among women. It was observed in some papers that this tendency is low among the working women. The number of working women is very low in Muslim community. This may be one reason of increasing fertility rate in case of Muslim women.

But, the question is, is it true that Muslims are going to be a majority in near future as campaigned by the RSS? If so, how far is this near future? Even if we consider that the present rate of increase in population will continue in the coming years, then the Muslims will be a majority in 272 years after 2011 – that is in 2283. If we go 272 years back from 2011, we get the year 1739 – even before the British period. In these 272 years, not only our country, the world has changed a lot. Railways was not invented at that time. Michael Farady invented electric motor in 1821 – 82 years after 1739. We witnessed the invention of so many things and incidences in the last century – aeroplanes, televisions, computers, mobiles, the journey to space, two world wars, etc. In our country, we also witnessed many changes in the last century – the independence, the partition of the country, etc. There is no doubt that the world will change at an unprecedented speed in the next 200 years than that happened in the last 200 years. Will there be a BJP party in the year 2283? Moreover, if the population growth continues to increase at this rate, in 2283 the population of India will be 10,230 crores – 14 times of world’s present population. Can we imagine it? Thus the verdict to chase Muslims or produce four children per Hindu woman on this plea that the Muslims are going to be a majority after 266 years from now, is simply unacceptable. We must have to foil all the ill political motives of the RSS and the BJP behind these unscientific, illogical and nonsensical talks.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author's personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabranginia

The Dirty Face of Swacch Bharat Abhiyan

June 20, 2017

Zafar was repeatedly beaten on his head by the group of civic officials.

Political activist Zafar Hussein from Pratapgarh, Rajasthan, was beaten to death on Friday by a group of government officials. The 55 years old Husseinwas lynched when he tried to prevent municipal officials from clicking photographs of women defecating in the open.

Municipality team was taking videos and photographs of women from the Bagwasa Kachi basti, when Zafara CPI(ML) activist and trade union activist stopped them.

Amid cries of “Maar Dalo SaleyKo ”, Zafar was repeatedly beaten on his head by the group of civic officials, said the family members of the diseased.

Zafar’s younger daughter Sabra said that her father was trying to protect the women by objecting to the officials’ action. “It was about 6:30 am and we had gone for latrine [to relieve ourselves] there when the car of municipal officials came. They started clicking our photos, abusing us and kicking our water mugs. Abba came out and told them to stop after which they started beating him,” said Sabra.

She also added that an official at the municipality official, known as Kamal, was battering Zafar’s head with a stone. “The commissioner, who was sitting in the car, egged him on. ‘Maaro, maaro, jaan se khatam kar do’,” said Sabra.

According to the FIR filed by Hussein’s elder brother Noor Mohammed, Zafar Hussein was kicked, punched and beaten to death. Noor has lodged the complaint against five municipal commission officials including Kamal Harijan, RiteshHarijan, Manish Harijan and Nagar Parishad commissioner Ashok Jain.

Ironically Zafar Hussein himself had submitted a memorandum to the Nagar Parishad some days back protesting against the campaign of public shaming and bullying of women for defecating in the open. The memorandum demanded community toilets and repairing of the non-functional public latrines constructed under the Swacch Bharat campaign. He also urged to link the Basti with the Swach Bharat Abhiyan by giving Rs. 12,000 per toilet to individual households earmarked in the program. DM had refused to accept the memorandum.

Mehtab Shah (Jagwas) KachhiBasti provides accommodation for more than 450 families from all castes and communities. The women of the Mehtab Shah (Jagwas) KachhiBasti, have no options as the community toilets are very less and out of order. It clearly shows the failure of the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan.

Demanding the arrest of persons who have been named in the FIR, CPI(ML) made a press statement.

“We demand that the Central Government and all State Government officially declare public shaming and lynch mob tactics in the guise of Swacch Bharat campaign to be illegal and punish officials promoting the use of such tactics,” the statement said.
The statement added, “The drive to end open defecation cannot proceed on the basis of inflicting indignities on the poor and helpless people who have no access to private or public toilets. The present strategy of Open Defecation-Free villages (ODF) campaign is giving rise to corruption, fake claims and public humiliation of deprived people. The Governments must reverse this draconian strategy and unleash a positive campaign popularizing toilet use, with a focus on theconstruction of toilets, assured availability of water, and proper arrangements for toilet-cleaning”.

“All over the country, sanitation workers are fighting for their dignity and rights against oppressive and inhuman working conditions. It is highly unfortunate that the Rajasthan Government, which denies sanitation workers their due rights, used them as fodder in the public shaming and lynching campaign on the pretext of Swacch Bharat.”

Appealing the forces which are struggling against mob lynching, for women’s rights and dignity, and for sanitation workers’rights, CPIML urged to fight for the justice for Zafar.

In the last three years under Modi led BJP government, country has witnessed many cases of mob lynching. Cow protection and love Jihadhave becomes a tool in the hands of vigilante groups. Mobs are being mobilized by Hindutva groups which have a clear motive. The victims of this “instant justice” are mainly Muslims and Dalits, be it Mohammad Akhlaq in Dadri, Pahlu Khan in Alwar or Dalits in Una.

Courtesy: Newsclick

Related Articles

Open Letter to Rajasthan CM,Vasundhara Raje on Gruesome Lynching of Zafar Hussain, Political Activist, Zafar Khan: PUCL

Jan Swasthya Abhiyan Protests Killing of Zafar Hussain

CPI(ML) Activist Zafar Hussein lynched to death for Resisting Demeaning Photography of Women Defecating in Open/Swacch Bharat Campaign: Rajasthan

One Week, the Last, under the Modi Regime

June 20, 2017

ICF begins a series of selected “blessings” in times of Achhe Din. A monthly list would be too long, and a daily list too depressing, so here is a weekly update.

1. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting denied three documentaries permission to be screened at the International Documentary and Short Film Festival of Kerala. The films are on Rohith Vemula, unrest in Kashmir, and protests in JNU.

2. In Pratapgarh, Rajasthan, activist Zaffar Hussein was beaten to death by civic officials because he objected to their taking photographs of women defecating in the open. Apparently such photography is the naming-and-shaming strategy of the government’s Swachh Bharat scheme. The irony is that according to the villagers, Zaffar often petitioned the municipal councillor to release money for the construction of toilets.

3. Veteran activist Nikhil Dey of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sanghatan, known for his work on the Right to Information (RTI), was sentenced, along with four other activists, to imprisonment for a nineteen-year-old case on the retrieval of information from a sarpanch. The sentence has been suspended pending an appeal by the activists.

4. UP Chief Minister Adityanath discovered that the Taj Mahal is not Indian.

5. The Kamasutra may or may not be Indian; figurines sold in Khajuraho may be replicas of what is in the temple. But the Bajrang Sena wants it all banned because they are not part of “our culture”. Remembering perhaps that the temples are not exactly prudish about the human body or sex, the president of the Sena’s Khajuraho unit, Jyoti Agarwal, said, “Whatever has been depicted can’t be allowed to happen here now.”

6. In Goa, Sadhvi Saraswati of the Hindu Janjagruti Samiti described her India: “People who eat beef must be publicly hanged… We need Hindu rashtra… Hindus should carry arms…” Time to go to Pakistan?

7. The film Phullu, about menstruation and sanitary napkins, was given an “A” certificate, and Censor Chief Pahlaj Nihalani declared that menstruation is adult. In fact, Nihalani was hesitant to use such an adult word. He called the blood-that-must-not be-named “that time of the month” or simply “that”: “…in our society, we still do not talk about ‘that time of the month’ with our daughters. Mothers keep their discomfort during ‘that’ time a secret from the family and a daughter, when going through ‘that time of the month’ is not allowed to go to school during those difficult 3-4 days.

Conclusion of the week: Films on real life, the right to information, functioning toilets, the Taj Mahal, the Kamasutra, beef and menstruation are not Indian. Lynching and hanging are.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

1...2,0772,0782,079...2,697 Page 2,078 of 2,697

What’s in a name? Writing across borders of poetry and music

Finsbury Park attack shows the harm Islamophobia continues to inflict on Muslim communities

Heightened tensions

Anti-Muslim hate plays a role

It is Demonetisation that has Crippled Indian Agriculture, Let’s Admit It

The Muslim Presidents of the Indian Republic

Will Meira Kumar’s Nomination as Opposition Nominee for President, both Right a Historical Wrong and Beat the NDA at its Game?

An Old Vicious Stereotype is Peddled Again, Against Muslims, Belying Facts

“Hum paanch, hamare pachees” – Narendra Modi himself mocked the Muslim community.

The Dirty Face of Swacch Bharat Abhiyan

Zafar was repeatedly beaten on his head by the group of civic officials.

One Week, the Last, under the Modi Regime

ICF begins a series of selected “blessings” in times of Achhe Din. A monthly list would be too long, and a daily list too depressing, so here is a weekly update.

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT