The heated debate on so called ‘intolerance’ and ‘Award Wapsi’ keeps throwing up an obvious question: why now? What has happened after the ascent of the BJP/RSS to power at the Centre and in some states since 2014 to cause such widespread alarm in the citizenry? One explanation is that those protesting against the growing atmosphere of intolerance in the country are inherently intolerant to the idea of BJP/RSS and Mr. Modi being in power. But for once, an explanation can be suggested by shifting the focal point of debate from intolerance to tolerance!
If writers/scientists/artists/filmmakers/actors/historians/intellectuals/free thinkers/social workers who are protesting or returning their awards now, are inherently intolerant to the idea of BJP/RSS and Mr. Modi, then why were they so tolerant during and after 2002 Gujarat riots when the same BJP/RSS and Mr. Modi were in power both in the State of Gujarat and at the Centre? Why did no one think of returning awards during and after such a humongous tragedy, which happened right under the nose of the same BJP/RSS and Mr. Modi? Does this mean that these intellectuals were agents of tolerance for BJP/RSS at that time? Deep anguish and concern were expressed from all corners of the country, but nobody thought of returning awards because the country was reassured by the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's statement to follow your 'Raj Dharma'. Just that – and it was enough to assuage the sentiments of wounded India! Unfortunately, this time the country has no such reassurance.
True, some incidents of violence generated by intolerance took place in non- BJP/RSS States. But even there, those involved in actual atrocities invariably belonged to the BJP?RSS or their affiliates. And if the blame of intolerance-generated violence must rest with the State Chief Ministers alone because law and order is a state subject, then who should take the blame for the 2002 Gujarat riots? Moreover, the involvement of the RSS/BJP in violent activities, directly or indirectly in the past, also does not give any reassurance to large sections of society. Contemptuous statements by the members of BJP?RSS from time to time keep adding fuel to the fire. Coming from BJP?RSS it is hardly surprising. What is different now is that they are continuing with their venom-spewing mode despite being the 'Ruling Party' of India. Further, the nature of attack on democratic values today is completely different from past incidents like 1984, 1992, 2002 or a host of other incidents of communal or sectarian violence. Earlier such violence was limited either by region, community, time span or the form of attack. But what we see now ranges from East to West and North to South, from the real world to the virtual world, from Dalits to Muslims, from writers to rationalists, from film makers to historians, from artists to scientists, from FTII to IITs, from beef to buffoons and from killing to ink spilling. It is simply unprecedented!
Never before in the history of our country (except during the emergency), have members of the 'Ruling Party' been involved in fascist activities on such a large scale. Killers of rationalists, writers, lynchers of innocents on stupid suspicion, rioters, hate mongers, prophets of violence all belong to 'One Ruling Party'. This creates apprehension of fascism taking over our motherland in an organized manner. The last time such anti-social, anti-rational and anti-national elements belonged to 'One Ruling Party', was during the initial days of Nazi Germany & Talibaani Afghanistan/Pakistan. No Indian nationalist would like India to either become Nazi Germany or Talibaani Afghanistan/Pakistan. The horror that followed wherever and whenever such tendencies could not be tamed at the initial stage is well documented in history books. At times like this it is the utmost duty of every Indian to raise the alarm bells as loud as possible and save India from the horrors of fascism. As I said, these are initial days and eventually it may all turn out to be gross exaggeration. But in the fight against fascism, it is always better to err on the side of caution than to see your country being ravaged by fascist violence.
Call for award wapsi was first given by Gandhiji against the mindless violence of the imperialist British. Tagore also returned his award in protest against the violence of the British colonizers, which proves that award wapsi is a legitimate and non-violent method of protest available to patriotic Indians. Thus, the conscience keepers of India, protesting against growing intolerance through non-violent Satyagraha, far from defaming the country, are performing a seminal national duty to save India from the ultimate disgrace of fascism. Every patriotic Indian
should support the protesting writers/ scientists/ businessmen/ artists/ filmmakers/ actors/ historians/ the RBI Governor/ the President of India and all those who are fighting to prevent the fascist forces from destroying our beloved country.
However, one very interesting aspect of the entire debate, which has gone completely unnoticed, is the caste profile of those marching militantly with the 'Flag of Tolerance'. Almost everyone bearing this ‘flag’, both political and not so political (the Jaitleys, the Sharmas, the Yogis, the Babas, the Khers, the Tandons, the Pundits, the Kapoors, etc.) belong to the upper caste Manuvadi Brahmanical order, beneficiaries of centuries of tolerance by Hindustanis (SC, ST, OBC). Perhaps for the first time acknowledgement of this fact is coming from Manuvadis who have exploited the tolerance of Hindustanis to maintain their vice-like grip over the Indian state, society and politics. But the irony of this acknowledgement is two- fold. First, the values which led to the sudden spurt in the temper of intolerance invariably belong to Brahmanical Manuvad. Second, individuals and groups both as spokespersons and foot soldiers of intolerance, also belong to the same Brahmanical Manuvad. Observers of Manuvadi strategic planning over centuries cannot lose sight of this irony. There is every possibility that the temperature of intolerance has been purposefully raised in order to pre-empt any effort to highlight the Manuvadi character of the 'Ruling Party' of the day which openly and shamelessly professes Brahmanism. Therefore, the response of Hindustanis to the intolerance debate should be measured and tempered, keeping in mind the strategic interests of Hindustanis and the chameleon character of Manuvadis.