Taslima Nasreen Leaves Kolkata: A Giant Defeat for Secularism

Terrible, anti-globalization teaming up with regionalism - how could we not see this coming?

I see the Islamist reactionary movements as regional reactions against the globalized economy, and this seems to prove my thesis.

This is Scary, but one has to realize that indian was never a secular country to begin with :)

Keeping mum is a regular event and isn't particular to religious beliefs alone. It all boils down to our 'it is no concern of ours' mentality. Even if someone is speaking up against someone else, those that side with the dissenter would do so in private than say it out in public and be ostracized along with the dissenter. This is something we can see in any social circle. We'd rather pledge our troth to the popular bully than the not-so-popular idealist.

India's great cities have each slowly turned fundamentalist - Delhi in 1984, Bombay in 1992, and now Kolkata.

"This is a tragedy of colossal proportions, akin to Modi's support of the Godhra riots"

Inspite of documented evidence that the Modi administration did clamp down hard on rioting within a couple of days (and in the process killing more hindus than muslims), seeing the author of this article parrotting the lie spread by the ELM is sickening.

On Nandigram, the events that are transpiring are precisely because of the "secular" actions of the same people who keep bad mouthing a "Devtaa samaan purush" like Shri Modi.

[EDITED] Nandigram is one more reason why [EDITED] should not exist in India.

I can not understand why Taslima's presence would disturb peace in a place that is regarded as secular Mecca. If Taslima were a fundamentalist, one can even try to justify it on that ground. But Taslima is not a fundamentalist. It only goes to show that there is no place for moderate moslems in India, not even secular government or champions of secularism would protect them. As if Nandigram was not terrible enough, eviction of Taslima is even bigger embarrassment for WB government and entire secular establishment.

I wonder communist government is getting backlash for left's opposition to Nuke deal. Events seem to be spinning out of control.

It's glaringly obvious that the CPI-M is scrambling to appease the Muslim vote bank it has recently antagonized with its Nandigram pogrom. How much more obvious can it be?

Just goes to show how vacuous, shortsighted and opportunistic our politicians are.

The whole issue is of land takeover in Nandigram for a chemical hub. The poor people resisting the land takeover could have been anybody, they just happened to be Muslims.

Enter the politicians and suddenly it is a communal issue. What Taslima Nasreen has to do with it, is anybody's guess, just confusion and rhetoric fudging the truth.

The Center dithers and dawdles instead of taking action. Utterly ridiculous.

"This is a tragedy of colossal proportions, akin to Modi's support of the Godhra riots."

I agree with proud Indian that there is no real "kinship" between the two events. Buddhadeb Bhattacharya at worst is acquiescing an unjust demand with an eye towards politics---a rather banal act. Narendra Modi at best looked the other way when wicked hoodlums staged staggeringly brutal attacks on helpless citizens---shocking even to a world that has witnessed the Holocaust. Please show some respect!

If "secularism" means that someone can hurt the sentiments of any Indian community & then claim immunity on grounds of "secular humanism", then this is fake secularism. It is not wanted in India.

No one in India should be allowed to get away with this stunt, least of all a foreigner.

Sanjay G, in a secular country freedom of speech is as important as the spirit of tolerance. One has the right to protest but not threaten another's life.

Tasleema should be left alone now, she already received enough for hurting the sentiments of fellow Muslims. She is an example for wannabes, who want fame and limelight by writing against Islam. Though she was not so blasphemous soul.
But what happened to her now is nothing to do with Muslims, it is either the Communists or Trinamool Congress who instigated them.

She has the right to be as 'blasphemous' as she chooses, if someone's sentiments are hurt, they don't have to read her book, or they're welcome to refute her thesis, if it were published as non-fiction. If it's fiction, it shouldn't matter.

Deepti: In the real world (1) there is such a thing as hate speech and (2) there is the larger issue that "free speech" privileges those with money and power project their own personal views and opinions over the less powerful. For at least these two reasons, freedom of speech cannot be unlimited.

Erron: If Nasreen has a "right" to be blasphemous, then Muslims have the "right" to feel offended. The right of one person has to be balanced against the right of many.

Finally, the Indian court system has ruled fairly regularly that making objectionable comments in public is like shooting an arrow in the dark - you have no clue who you're going to hit. Better to avoid shooting off in the first place.

"Not So Proud" (aka Not-So-Truthful), that's just another lie you're telling. If you look at the huge number of Gujarat policemen killed, it's glaringly obvious that Modi tried very hard to stop the riots. And note that when Modi appealed to the Centre for help, they turned down his request for police reinforcements. But please keep deceiving everyone, including yourself.

in public is like shooting an arrow in the dark - you have no clue who you're going to hit. Better to avoid shooting off in the first place.

Which is why only the brave tread where the cowards even fail to dream.

Sanjay G/Shahid - I agree that freedom of speech must be balanced by respect for other's viewpoints in a pluralist country. But that works both ways, as Deepti pointed out...And how many of those demanding Taslima's departure, do you think, have actually read her book? Have you? Or do you let irresponsible politicians decide your agenda for you?

Proud Indian...if there is such documentary evidence, you're probably the only one with access to it. His statements inciting violence are on record.

There is a clear pattern between 1984, 1992, and Kolkata - in each case the government, instead of upholding the law and protecting law-abiding citizens, allowed a community to define policy through violence and hand out collective punishment based on mob rule. And because we either support such behavior in politicians, or simply remain quiet, means any of us could be next.

Taslima asked to leave Jaipur as well

After being hounded out of Kolkata, controversial Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen was again on the run on Friday as the Rajasthan Government asked her to leave for "lack of proper documentation."


Accordingly, after an overnight stay in the Pink City the Bangladeshi author on Friday morning left for Delhi, where the Cabinet Committee on Security held a special meeting to discuss the issue. Opposition parties have, meanwhile, slammed the CPI(M) Government in West Bengal, saying the episode exposed the 'so called' secular character of the Left.

Which is why only the brave tread where the cowards even fail to dream.

Often a fine line between brave and foolhardy. Not to mention that brave does not equal right - little doubt that the 911 guys were brave but.....

- little doubt that the 911 guys were brave but....

but....their means of protest weren't. The written words don't kill, how we react to those words shows the difference between a civilized society and one paralyzed by hooliganism.

Erron:
At the time she wrote the Book she was still a Muslim, and if she really had mentioned that some verses in Quran to be reviewed then she is Blasphemous, no solution for her other than repenting.
But whatever this time the Muslims are not to be blamed, after all no Muslim objected to her like this way for three years, then why now? This is the work of T.congress or Communists.

Blasphemy cannot be a crime in a secular nation/society

Communism is evidently theological in nature, and hence finds it easy to align to another religious construct/fiction

Erron she wrote the book when she is in Bangladesh, I am not sure at that time if B'desh was still a Secular nation.

I do not understand why she don't she just repent and let the matters proceed, Oh they will not because their Pride will come in between.
They do not learn from the examples of Pharaohs and Nimrods, how there pride was crushed.

I am talking about the Indian Muslim reaction, obviously, or rather the Indian Communist reaction - are they anti-national then, to be worked up to the point of violence over a book that does not contravene the secular principles of India?

Why should she repent? She's entitled to her creative opinion.

why should some one tell against some ones faith its sure to bring out anger

Erron Secularism in India is different from western Nations, there it develop to avoid religion and here it is accepted to accommodate all religions.
Hence the respect of faith is more important than there artistic creativity.
Who is Taslima by the way to comment on quran with her minimal knowledge of Islam?

Accommodate any religion why? You say potato I say Po-ta-to

Accommodate all religions because majority wanted that.

but....their means of protest weren't.

Who said 911 was a protest? To many, it was yet another round in an ongoing power struggle between two imperialistic ideologies and the 911 attackers used whatever power they could muster.

Likewise, Nasreen's activism has long ceased to be a personal protest ever since she was adopted as the poster child for "civil society" around the world. She clearly wields substantial soft power and her constant sniping against Islam has all the signs of an ideological power struggle. Even to a cursory observer, the fact that she sought safe haven in a BJP-ruled state against India Muslims immediately raises questions as to her motives.

Indians should not allow this ideological slug fest to be played out in India. Let it happen in Bangladesh.

This is where you and I differ- you sit on the sidelines and try to objectify the shedding of innocent blood and I having been a witness to 84 carnage rather insist on peaceful means of protest. 9/11 and what is happening in Iraq is just not about fight between Ideologies there are real people dying there but I guess its easy to pontificate when one's own life is not at risk.

And yes I see them as protests because whats happening in Kolkata is not war but uncivilized hooliganism and I am surprised that you support and excuse barbaric behavior that leads to loss of life and damage to property.

Shahid..#30

If secularism means respect for all religions or accommodating all religions, than it is rarely practiced towards Hinduism. It is more about offending hinduism and appeasing all other religions that defines Indian secularism - caving into oust Taslima is a case in point. Taslima's major Islamic crime was that she wrote a novel about genocide of hindus in Bengladesh. Moslems feel offended that a fellow moslem did not like the genocide of Kaffir Hindus.

The fact is we are a non-muslim country. Let us not forget that. Moving Taslima around is a sign of weakness. We are not afraid of muslim fundamentalists, they should be afraid of us, very afraid. Need we remind of them of what can be unleashed if they keep fooling around.

The fact is we are a non-muslim country. Let us not forget that. Moving Taslima around is a sign of weakness. We are not afraid of muslim fundamentalists, they should be afraid of us, very afraid. Need we remind of them of what can be unleashed if they keep fooling around. This is not 11th century India, I am sorry!

Secularism can only be practiced in one way: Lack of respect for any religion. Any other way is fraudulent.

Ketry , what have Muslims to do if M F Hussain drew nude paintings of Hindu Goddess, if hindu organizations do not protest it is either they are very much moderate or is indifferent to their religion.
And Chandra, Muslims of Calcutta could never had taken such a big rally without the active support of either Communists of T.Congress, and both are majority Hindus.

#36

Secularism has tried many caps occiliating between two extremes - respect for religions to disrespect for religions and in between ie separation of state and religion where both enjoy their freedoms in their own respective spheres without interfering with each other. In case of India, none of them seems to work. Because religion is more than a religion - its a way of life. Ideologically, Indian Secularism is afraid of being swallowed by religion of the majority that has a long history of producing and managing diversity and plurality - so secularism has maintained allergic distance to hinduism, relying instead on exploiting diversity and divisions among hindus to keep it at bay as it can not afford hindus to get united transcending diversity within. At political level, it can not survive without support of minority religions which means it has to constantly woo, appease and unite them, which makes secularists and fundamentalists kind of strange bed-fellows. It can not afford to antagonize minority religions and parties like BJP will not let it antagonize Hindus anymore without paying political price. Indian secularism is in a serious bind and does not know where to go from here or how to wriggle out of disarray. Secularism is indispensible for modern Indian state and it will have to acquire a positive character in India - secularism will have to push minorities away from fundamentalism and not towards it; secularism will have to move away from hostility to hinduism and reach some compromise position where both sides can leave each other alone and live with each other in mutual respect. Easier said than done, but which ever political party can mobilize political force in that direction has great political future in India.

Shahid

Please read comments of Gurdas Sengupta and Subhas Chakraborty.

It has been proven beyond doubt that fundamentalists of all religions are nuts!!

BTW MF has a legal case against him.....

rgds

Chandra...#39

Not only religions, but ideologies too have their own fundamentalists, fanatics and radicals. And since state and ideologies can not have any separation, they are much more dangerous. Religious fundamentalists can make people go into frenzy. Ideological fundamentalists can make state and its policies go into frenzy, screwing whole nation in the process.

Shahid..#37

MF is a moslem who likes to offend Hindus thru his art. If other moslems fail to condemn and distance themselves from MF, than MF vs Hindu issue becomes a Hindu Vs Moslem issue as well.

A good way to attribute if a person is Hindu or not: Does he or she is actively practicing Hindu? (mere birth in hindu family or merely bearing Hindu name does not count) Does he or she subscribe to or offer primary allegiance to hinduism or to ideologies that are hostile to Hinduism? Nehru was born as hindu and Brhamin, but never practiced being one, he hated them both, he was an ideologist rather than religious. Communists do not accept or recognize religion - so to call them hindu is incorrect.

all of this was in fact started by nehru and gandhi when they opted for "secular" india. india was divided on religious lines, muslim pakistan and hindu india. then why did nehru and gandhi allow muslims to stay back in india when millions of hindus were slaughtered in pakistan and the rest driven away?

muslims are creating problems all over the world. they all have one goal in mind, to convert everything they see to islam.

even the kashmir problem has its roots in the stupidity of nehru and gandhi and to think that we are still made to worship them and their generations.

Kerty:
Why do you take Nehru as a Non-Hindu and MF hussain as a Muslim, M F Hussain is just Muslim by name just as you said Nehru and Communists are Hindu by name.
In fact M F Hussains paintings in any form is against Islam as Islam prohibits painting of Human beings.

Shaid..

It is what they choose to oppose and choose not to oppose that defines them.

Because painting offends Islam, MF does not paint anything against Islam. Because Islam is against Hinduism, he paints exclusively to offend Hinduism. Now if he were to paint that offends Islam as well as Hinduism, I can accept him as a misguided artist who has transcended his moslem identity acquired by birth and name. If painting is really no-no to Islam, I have not seen any opposition to MF from even rabid Islamic fundamentalists. Clearly, they think MF is doing Allah's good work of attacking kaffirs. In Islam, killing is prohibited too, but not if it is doing Allah's good work. The day moslems start condemning MF, hindus will begin to realize that MF is a moslem in name only and has no support of moslems.

If you want I will join the protests against M F as done by the Muslims against the cartoons.
He did not paint Muslim figures not because it is prohibited in Islam, or not because it does not come under his artistic creativity, but because of the fear of Muslims on streets.
If Hindus did not protests against M F Hussain as done by Muslims why are we to be blamed, ask VHP or Bajrang dal , BTW they also can mobilize millions on streets if they want.

Shahid..(#45)

Your offer to join the protest against MF is a nice gesture in a discussion but it does not change any ground realities. There are many moslems who are offended by their good name being smeared by acts of few extremists and by passive acceptence of their acts by moslems at large. There are many moslems in BJP related organizations but they are immediately discounted as voice of hindutva rather than voices of moderate moslems. In political arena, moderate moslems are orphans and their voice is rarely heard.

When a moslem offends hindus, hindus will protest no doubt and they do. But it is also duty of moslems to protest, so hindu ire against one moslem is not turned into anti-moslem ire. The same is true when a hindu offends moslems, it is duty of hindus to publicly distance themselves from such acts and condemn it, and we do hear lots of hindu voices. But because there is lack of similar reciprocity from moslems, we see only polarization whenever such incidents occur. To build a bridge of goodwill between both communities, this is an essential first step - any time any of the two communities is sought to be offended, everybody irrespective of one's faith have to speak up. It would immediately demote any altercation to be a localized issue between two individuals rather than confrontation between two communities. But sadly, just the opposite happens. Any localized and minor altercations between two individuals even when their religions may have nothing to do it escalates into major religious confrontation between two communities. One can keep blaming the hindu religious leaders for such escalation, but that rarely helps or addresses the problem. The fact remains that neither moslems nor secularists have political interest in making peace with Hinduism, and hindu protests are used a badge of honor my them. MF whose art is otherwise mediocre goes on to become instant celebrity and fetch million. All one has to do is to offend and provoke protests from hindus and that author, that book, that movie, that painting becomes a critical success - all they have to tout in the marketing is that it was opposed by Hindus. Entire secular/leftist fraternity would come to its rescue for success. It is lose-lose for hindus. If they don't protest they lose, if they protest they lose. And that anger, humiliation and frustration finds an outlet whenever there is any provocation, thus repeating the cycle.

All religions are fairy stories told around a campfire and perpetuated down the ages, delusionary fictions, so its funny to see people who like different fictions disapproving of one creative artist or another author. It's quite similar to the evangelicals criticizing J K Rowling's books as propagating witchcraft and now homosexuality, when they believe in more fantastic fairy tales themselves.

Erron..

Those billions of people who have followed religions thru ages have no intellect or knowledge, are gullible fools, have been deluded to believe anything and they fight without convictions, they must live in dark age. But you are not. You have that special gift, have access to special reservour of intellect and knowledge that nobody else has access to, you are the chosen one and enlightened one. Funny that Jesus and Mohammad thought they were the specially gifted ones who felt urgency to pull wayward fools out of darkness of ignorance and save them. Apparently, they were imposters. Care to be the new messiah and saviour of ignorants, I am sure many will follow you and kill all those doubters in your name.

Nope, its not my job or anyone's to be a shrink to people who need psychological crutches to deal with the world. I can give them a reading list, if they like, but if they could think for themselves, they would need these psychological crutches they call religion/faith/etc.

Erron..#49

Apparently reading list you have has not been able to convince any of them - if fairy tales can do it, why not your reading list? Ain't they deluded gullible lot and if so, convincing them should have been a breeze for anybody. If seeming idiots and fairy tales can do it so easily, why not intelligent people of your caliber? Losing out to fairy tales must be very humiliating. You should not lose heart if people do not think like you do, but make some psychological crutches of your own they could use and rest not till they think like you do. Make them deal with world full of you or you will have to learn to deal with world full of them.

Sanjayji,

Pardon my ignorance: So how many policeman were killed during the Gujrat riots? (Depending on who you listen to, it seems between 1000 and 2000 muslims were killed.)

I also didn't know that the BJP-in-Delhi turned down the BJP-in-Gujarat's request for police reinforcements. Sounds strange, don't you agree, Sanjayji!

Think about this:

Not long ago when TN Chief Minister Mr Karunanidhi of DMK called Lord Rama a drunkard, the CP(I)M came to his defense citing free speech and secularism. The BJP claimed religious sentiments of the Hindus were being hurt.

Today the CP(I)M said that Ms Tasleema Nasreen has no right to hurt the religious sentiments of the minorities. The BJP on the other hand has come forward in her defence citing free speech and secularism.

Not long ago the CP(I)M gave refuge in Kolkata to a Gujarat riot victim with much fanfare to 'expose' the BJP. Yesterday it was the BJP's turn to give refuge to Ms Tasleema Nasreen in Rajasthan and thus 'expose' the CP(I)M.

Double standards and hypocrisy of our political parties in full bloom!

Soham...

How is Taslima writing about genocide and women's condition in Bengladesh same as Karunanidhi questioning existance of Rama? Rama is worshipped by millions of Hindus. Are genocides of Hindus worshipped by Moslems? Why would somebody writing about genocide of HIndus offend Moslems?

Karunanidhi is still the CM, still lives in India, have not been exiled from India or having been exiled, hounded out from there. So karunanidhi is not in the same boat as Taslima. Comparing apples and oranges to create moral equivallency and relativism appear far-fetched.

Kerty
Are you really aware why Taslima is banished from his country, you seems as Ignorant as the Muslims who are protesting against her.
Did you read enough about her? In of the books she did wrote about the conditions of Hindus in Bangladesh. But she is not banished for that reason, in an earlier book or writings whatever, it is alleged that she said that some of the verses in Quran should be changed and so on. Whether it is just a rumor or truth is not clear. But on that basis she is hounded not for taking the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh.
You seem to be well read but with respect to Taslima it looks you also is in the same boat with many Ignorant Muslims.

Kerty

The two incidents I mentioned are related as they expose the hypocricy and double standards of all major Indian political parties (CPIM, BJP, Congress etc).

The current campaign against Tasleema by Muslim fundamentalists is the same as the campaign by the Hindu fundamentalists against Deepa Mehta's Water. Sadly in a secular country - in both cases the religious fundamentalists won the first round. Deepa Mehta had to shoot in Sri Lanka and Tasleema had to flee Kolkata and is currently in Delhi.

So when the BJP or the CPIM or the Congress criticize each other on moral grounds, all these parties sound very hollow.

That is simply my point.

People on this site are so brainwashed they believe any and everything that the ELM in India dishes out.

For information on how Modi actually controlled rioting effectively within a couple of days and in the process getting people killed to police firing, the following is a must read.

http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/11/gujarat-ka-sach-truth-about-gujarat.html

The article above presents Shri Modi's case very well. Maybe that is the reason why most media outlets chose to ignore it. Because they did not want Modi to appear in good light even though it could be proved he did no wrong.

Until I see a convincing rebuttal to the article I pasted above, I am going to continue voting for Shri Modi in Gujrat.

Also read:

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14562098&vsv=SHGTpicslot

Regards,

Proud Indian

@Proud Indian, why don't you read the title of the article here before commenting. You missed the bus on the Modi debate. You are so brainwashed yourself that you throw around Modi propaganda here without analyzing it yourself. It is sad that it takes a goon like Modi to make you proud to be an Indian.

Soham #55

Once again, you are relying on apples and oranges to make a contrived comparision and apologetics. BJP neither ruled UP at the time nor BJP was involved in opposing Deepa Mehta. No government or political party had forced Deepa to stop her shooting or forced her to shoot elsewhere. It was her voluntary decision. She was asked to modify factual errors from her script and she felt it was better to shelve the project rather than modify her script. Varansi is a major hindu center and local hindus were upset at inaccurate depiction of their city and religion by a non-hindu Canadian - Deepa lives in canada with her christian husband and her project was funded by christian evengical organization. It is ironic that 80% of windows given shelter in Varansi and Vrindavan come from communist Bengal. Communist WB not only exile Tasleemas who dare to criticize genocide and women's plight, but they also exile their widows by wholesale too and dump them at Hindu centers as disposable garbage and than blame religion for it. And than Deepas of the world, egged on by missionaries and other anti-hindu interests, try to make propaganda out of it. It is bound to irk even average Hindus. However, the matter never rose beyond a local issue, which never got escalated to political level where BJP had to take it up. Comparing them to Nandigram or Taslima issue is very shoddy reletavism.

Abbas..

It seems you are not able to tell apart brainwashing based on propaganda of lies and half-truths from convictions based on facts and truth. It is a common dilemma for most people - people are seen vehemently asserting that their own actions and opinions stem from deeply held convictions derived from nothing but facts and truth while those who disagree suffer from acute brainwashing and manipulation for some agenda. If Proud Indian has thrown Modi propaganda without analysing it, onus is on you to rebut it if you disagree. Other than name-calling it propaganda, brainwashing or goon Modi etc without backing them up with facts or arguments, I am afraid your opinion will remain toothless and irrelevent.

Kerty

I have no problems if you disagree. That's what discussions are about.

What I have said is my view point and as far as I am concerned I am comparing apples with apples. I also don't have the baggage of trying to 'defend' any party or 'side' with any party.

There is also the case of the painter Hussain who has been hounded out of India by the self declared champions of Hinduism for "daring" to "hurt the sentiments" of Hindus.

"Hurting religious sentiments" is a very convenient excuse - all fundamentalists - Hindu, Christian or Muslim use to create divisiness and violence.

In India every political party uses religion and caste as a tool to divide and rule - be it the CPM or the BJP or the Congress. The common people suffer as a result.

Bengal is not 'communist'. Voting for the Left Front doesn't make a state communist just as voting for the BJP doesn't make Gujarat communal. Also those in Bengal who dump widows in Varanasi or Vrindavan are Hindus. The social reforms in Bengal have not touched their lives yet as religious fear and superstition is too deeply entrenched in them. The widows think they will attain salvation in Vrindavan or Varanasi. It is their belief or their limitation. Otherwise why do these widows live in Vrindavan where cows get better treatment than them?

BTW "Water" is a pretty good film.

I vote all of us who are sick of these stupid, insane, religious-sentiment-hurt brigade gang up and demonstrate against them. I swear they hurt my sentiments every day by being small-minded, holier-than-thou assholes...why can't I have a morcha? Taslima Nasreen is not a good writer but she has the right to write whatever the heck she wants to. Damn them!

Jawahara, we are protesting here as of now. Demonstrations are forgotten with the passage of time but the written word leaves a more lasting impression. Don't let censorship get to you ever;)

Dee, I must sadly disagree that protests such as ours carry any real weight at all. Only the protests (and hooliganism) of those with religious sentiments really matter.

I think now Taslima should be allowed back to Calcutta she can live there quietly and peacefully, I understand the difficulty living among people of different language. Also, looks that she will make no more controversies now, she is almost done, she already deserved more than what she had written.
She should be allowed to Calcutta on a understanding that she will no more write non-sense, let her write something productive.

Sigh...Jawahara I see what you mean

It's not even the question of her being allowed to live in Calutta, Shahid. It's the fact that people are so damned thin-skinned that they are so threatened by someone's writing. Whether or not she is officially allowed to return, her life will be in danger, not to mention her freedom to write what she wants.

For a truly diverse, secular, and thriving society to flourish artists and writers should have no strictures on what they create.

Those who disagree can protest, they can criticize...in a civilized manner. Violence and threats are deplorable. Christians protested The Last Temptation of Christ and the DaVinci Code, but without burning effigies or threatening anyone. Is it too much to ask for Muslims in India (and elsewhere) to display the same level-headedness.

The fact is that most of those protestors (for lack of a better word...they are merely goondas) have probably not read the book or any other book for that matter.

They have to get used to the fact that the whole friggin' world is not accountable to some uneducated louts. And if your religious sentiments (what the fuck does that mean, anyway) are so fragile as to be offended at the drop of a hat, grow a thicker skin or don't buy and/or read the offending material.

These fundamentalist muslims offend me...heck they deeply hurt my secular sentiments (not to mention my intellect)...maybe I need to do the secular equivalent of a fatwa on them.

Soham...

Society can not remain civil if society can not arrive at an understanding on what should be basic minimum norms of decency and code of conduct or the consensus that exists on such matters is attacked by daredevils in the name of freedom. Respect for beliefs and revered icons held by people is essential to maintain civil society. That does not mean they are beyond critical scrutiny and criticism - but they have to be done in not-so-brazen manner. It is not only true for religious or moral sentiments and cultural mores but secular as well. Try making a similar gross caricature of Gandhi, Nehru or Mother Terressa and you will see what I mean.

Your point about common man suffering because of parties using religion and castes does not make sense - Common men are the ones who vote for congress, BJP, Communists who use religion and caste to woo them.

Russian people were communists because they chose communism to rule Russia. If people vote for communists for decades and state is ruled by communists for decades, it does make them communists. BJP does not claim to be communal and those who support BJP claim to be Hindus championing positive secularism aka Hindutva. There is only minority communalism and so-called majority communalism is merely a political myth invented to justify minority communalism for sustaining pseudo secularism.

Hindus live in all other states too but their widows do not get dumped at religious centers. One wonders why only caricature and mal-practices can survive in communists WB. It has imported communism, Bengladesh and everything else and exiled Hinduism. There is nothing of hinduism, hindu infra-structure left that can enlighten, mobilize, reform, revitalize, support and sustain hindus - the creamy layers are gone, support systems are gone, organizations and leadership are gone - only those who do bidding for communism have survived. The only state that has a dubious distinction of en masse converting into Bangladesh and now communism.

BTW, water was a major flop in India notwithstanding all the hype and push received from abroad and in the media. If something is good, people speak with their pocketbook. Not even 1% of Indians bothered to see that boredom-fest.

Kerty, you sound like BJPs PR man..Wake up and smell the s*!t. Secularism is a lip service that political parties pay to claim higher moral ground. Religion based politics should be banned. That way hollow groups like the BJP will quickly sink into oblivion.

Protection to Taslima should not be based on her religion or which religious group she offended. If it was a Hindu writer criticizing Hindus, BJP would have done what Bangladesh has done to Taslima. Its all hypocrisy

Jawahara please do not explain the virtues of Christians for not protesting Davinci the way Muslims did for Cartoons. Muslims protest then was mainly political, what can Muslims do? they atleast protest violently not like Born-again Christian army of US or chosen people of GOD (JEws) bombing innocent Muslims. Muslims are far better than them.
They did not protest violently because they knew that their armies are bombing innocent Muslims, and Muslims protested because they can do only that much. Right?

Jawahara please do not explain the virtues of Christians for not protesting Davinci the way Muslims did for Cartoons. Muslims protest then was mainly political, what can Muslims do? they atleast protest violently not like Born-again Christian army of US or chosen people of GOD (JEws) bombing innocent Muslims. Muslims are far better than them.
They did not protest violently because they knew that their armies are bombing innocent Muslims, and Muslims protested because they can do only that much. Right?

@Jawahara, I am not sure if you meant it were the christians in India who supposedly did not violently protest the DaVinci Code. There were widespread protests in India leading to the film being banned. Religion does not have anything to do with the degree of violent protests.
In India, everyone is fanatical of their religion. You should visit a evangelical gathering in small town south india and see the fanaticism on display there. It is the culture of the people in India to be constantly insecure about their religion and hence produce knee jerk reactions to the slightest provocation.

Abbas, don't you think thats reason enough to demand that our communities grow thicker hides?

Abbas #68

Read my comments in the context of issues presented in the thread where BJP was brought into the discussion to create relativism - that all parties do it, all religions do it. If one is going to rely on relativism as an rationale or argument, better line up the facts and they better not be apples and oranges. Although it is important to expose the hypocracy of other parties, it is essential that it be factual and not twisting and stretching of facts to fit the analogy. Communists have ideological and political compulsion to twist the events of past as well as present, even events whose memory is still fresh in public mind. I am all for banning all sorts of things, but we live in a democracy and not Islamic republic.

You claim that BJP would have done the same to a writer critical of hindus just like what Bangladesh have done to Taslima. 'would have done it' is not the same as 'have done it' - former is hypothetical and later is a matter of fact. That is apples and oranges. One can only build bogus propaganda on such contrived relativism. Hindus have plenty of literature critical of every aspect of hindu faith and their culture. On the contrary, neither Islam or communism can tolerate any dissent or criticism. If you don't want me to defend BJP, just don't bring it into discussion when it is not relevant, and if you must, be prepared to back it up.

Abbas, there is a difference between protests and violent protests. I was not in India during the Code protests but I did not hear of any violence. There were widespread protests worldwide but no one put a price on Dan Brown's head or burned anything.

In a democratic country people have a right to protest but not to become violent and threaten and or physically harm anyone.

Personally, I find banning of any of these books extremely idiotic. Don't read the damn book if you don't want.

Any country that curtails freedom of thought and expression by continually banning whatever book someone from some religion finds distasteful will have no meaningul discourse left. Sad!

@Deepti, couldn't agree with you more. We have to grow thicker skins.
Which is why I was arguing Jawahara's point about christian violence during Da protests. Because nothing was burnt or no price was put on Brown's head does not make that community's protest a model to follow. European priests were not as vehement in their protests as Indian priests were of that book. So it is all in the region you come from not the religion. But I do agree with you that the christian priests tend to be more docile and do not openly advocate violence. That helps in keeping the community in rein.

@kerty, I do not think you understand how to use the 'apples and oranges' simile. I also do not understand your point. All I can say is that you keep popping up like a bad apple in these discussions.

Abbas, people *do* have a right to protest something they find offensive. It is the other side of the coin, when we talk of the freedom of expression. What they cannot do is to physically hurt someone or threaten them. Those are crimes. Protesting something is not.

Some do it publicly, without violence or, in the instance of the DaVinci Code, there were many, many writings worldwide refuting the book. Just what do you consider vehement, Abbas? Is vehemence just shown by being violent? The backlash against the Code and before that The Last Temptation, was vehement. It was just not violent and therein lies the difference.

I don't believe in protesting against creative works but if I was to choose a model, I'd rather choose the Christian one than the Muslim one. Others can choose what they want.

Sorry to go digress from the main topic of discussion here.
@Jawahara,
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Violence_halts_Da_Vinci_Code_screening_in_Hbad/articleshow/msid-1674892,curpg-1.cms it is an archival link from TOI of christian 'protests' in Hyderabad. They decided to ransack the theater in protest. Quoting from that article "...Police said the mob shattered the glass panes and damaged furniture and ticket counters..." Reading that line you will not be able to tell if it was a hindu, muslim or christian organisation.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C05%5C27%5Cstory_27-5-2006_pg4_17
punjab bans the film 'fearing violence' based on their intelligence reports.
I can dig into more of this just to emphasis my point.
These are typical acts of violence in india, and has got more to do with the people (call me racist) than their religion.

It is hard to draw a line between a vehement protest and a not so vehement one. My point, going by press releases and news reports at that time, is that in India the priests and christians as a community seem to take a stronger umbrage than the priests and community in Europe.

The larger Christian protest worldwide was by and large non-violent. If there were a few instances of violence in India, that is unfortunate. However, even in these cases, the author was not threatened with death. Physical threats and actual violence are a whole other thing. Ransacking a theater, while dangerously stupid and small-minded is not as bad as killing someone (Theo Van Gogh, in Amsterdam, for instance) or threatening others (Rushdie and Nasrin).

However, you are right, this thread should not be hijacked by who is more violent or not.

The fact remains that freedom of thought and expression are being hounded by those who believe that the laws of religion trump those of the law of the land. And that I find troubling.

Btw, this does not mean I am some kind of Christian apologist but I can see the difference between protests in these two scenarios.

Abbas..

I write in rather plain English and go to length to make my point. If you don't understand something, all you have to do is ask. If you don't want to understand something because it gets in your way and spoils your apples, not much I can do about.

While we are on a subject of protests, here is my take.

In no society, freedom are absolute or can be absolute. For every action, there is equal and opposite reaction. Its a law of nature. That is why freedoms are regulated in every society, even in democracies. In fact democracies make more laws than any other systems.

Your right to extend your hand ends where my nose begins. There is no right to hurt or harm others. That harm can be physical, psychological or economic. There is no right to deprive others certain benefits and comforts they may have chosen to derive from any source. It can be any benefit or comfort persons may hope to derive from beliefs, norms, traditions, institutions. Thus one has to enjoy freedoms in a way that does not harm or deprive others. But what if those beliefs, norms and institutions were practiced in way harming or depriving some people - well than, one has to redress the abuses thru laws so exercise of freedoms can remain within civilized parameters.

Thus, state has an unenviable job of protecting freedoms and regulating freedoms. Civil unrests occur when state fails in its duties to protect freedoms and regulate freedom. For whatever ideological complusions, when state decides some people have right to offend anybody, some people have more rights than others - than people are left to fend for themselves and find their own way to deal with such situations. If somebody punches me, I am likely to kick him back. That is what protest culture degenerates in to, when state exempt certain people with special rights. If someone offends a group of people, they have to come together to take some collective action against the culprit. Now if the culprit is repentent, the issue would get diffused. But if the culprit seeks immunity for his actions and they are seen as a part of larger agenda of hostility, than those who are offended or harmed may take their anger to political arena and if there is no scope for it to be redressed in political arena, it may turn to direct action at street level where it can not be controlled what shape and form protests will take. In a street level confrontations, eye-for-eye is the norm. You kick me, I slap you. Idea is to extract maximum harm from the culprit and the cause he is trying to benefit. Gandhi tried to revolutionize the street protests and gave it a new language . But that works only when both sides are civil and reasonable, if one side is not, than all bets are off. All it takes is few over-zealots to give a totally different character to protests, just as it takes only few over-zealots to offend and provoke protests. Since most of protests come from religions, it suggests they feel they are target of cultural war, have developed a sense of victimhood, political process is not able to or does not want to handle it or is active participant in dis-empowerment and victimization of religion. Its an explosive situation that needs to be handled with positive secularism and returning to civilized norms for freedom.

Jawahara, you rightly point out that the christian protests across the world were largely peaceful. What was disturbing for me was that most of the cases of violence that was reported were all from India.
Which makes one wonder whether south asians are more inclined towards violence when it comes to religion. Maybe it is in our genes :-)!

I have seen very sane and seemingly calm people completely loose it when you criticize their favourite swami/mutt or church. India is one of the fastest growing market for evangelical churches. These churches probably appeal to indians more because of their fundamentalistic and completely over the top show of faith. Hindus and Muslims already have tons of such fanatical organizations all across india.

Abbas,
I don't know whether you agree or not..World knew and agrees that all fanatics, jihadis orignate from "Middle East".Whether it is the people or the preachings come out from there.

@razorMirage
Thanks for letting me know, I was under the impression that it came from Gujarat or maybe the RSS camps in Nagpur and Pune :-P. But glad you cleared things up.

I first read the poem First they came in Taslima Nasrin's website. It touched my thinking very much. I thought then, I would write something on Taslima Nasrin with this poem. If I would not read this article, where you had already done what I had wanted to do, I would write the same thing written in here. This sub-continent was in British empire once. Now it is going to be a part of the empire of fundamentalists. Pakistan has already collapsed. We are not Pakistani. Soon may be India will collapse, if Indians do not start thinking about themselves. We are not Indian. But when Bangladesh will collapse? No one will left to save us. There will be no Taslima Nasrin, but hundreds of Baytulla Mehsuds. Please read my recent posts on Taslima Nasrin. Here are two links-
http://tamosodeep.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-sentiments-have-been-hurt-mordern.html

http://tamosodeep.blogspot.com/2009/04/liberation-of-taslima-nasrin-and.html