Zero tolerance for violence and intolerance

Given the depths of intolerance, the threat to free speech is ever present in any utterance today. Any expression of opinion can provoke the most violent reaction. Bolstered by complete impunity, political and social groups don’t stop at mere threats of violence, swiftly instigating physical attacks and even death.

 

Over the last few days, two incidents illustrate the low levels of tolerance in society and the reactions from ‘offended’ parties. The two incidents, disparate as they may seem, are connected by the extreme reactions they evoked. Both haven’t actually resulted in direct physical attacks as yet and one hopes they will not. However, if we don’t learn from the past, will we be condemned to suffer a repeat of history?

 

In Karnataka, the respected Kannada writer U R Ananthamurthy expressed anguish at the nomination of Gujarat’s Chief Minister Narendra Modi as the prime ministerial candidate for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).  Speaking at a literary function, he is reported to have said that he wouldn’t like to live in a country where Modi is Prime Minister!

 

Predictably, the local BJP reacted angrily. But instead of engaging with the writer, especially about his disquiet about the Gujarat politician, the party’s supporters began campaigning to tell Ananthamurthy to get his passport ready and prepare to leave the country. With a misplaced sense of patriotism, they demanded he apologise or face the consequences! According to local reports, it was reminiscent of the way Hindutva forces hounded the late painter M F Husain, forcing him into exile.

 

The octogenarian writer was unfazed and reiterated his view that Modi and his supporters are fascist, attacking those who opposed them instead of engaging with his views.

 

In the other incident, feminist activist Kavita Krishnan was participating in ‘Badi Khabar’, a television programme hosted by NDTV on September 19. A fellow participant and khap leader, Satyapal Chaudhary, threatened her during the break for an incredible reason: he repeatedly addressed her as ‘tum’, was enraged when she returned the compliment. He reportedly told her he must be addressed by the respectful ‘aap’ and when she continued, he threatened her: “think you are safe in Delhi. I’ll get my women to beat you up”!

 

The feisty Krishnan, who is also secretary of the AIPWA (All India Progressive Women's Association), refused to be cowed down. She tweeted about it and subsequently filed a criminal complaint of intimidation against Chaudhary. The latter is an advocate practicing in Ghaziabad and a supporter of a group for reservations for Jats. He hasn’t apologized for his remarks as yet.

 

 

As Kavita Krishnan said in another tweet, the issue was not about whether the man was older and deserved to be referred to with respect (for the record, he wasn’t much older than her). The real issue was whether a ‘mere’ woman dared to respond in kind to the familiarity of a paternalistic and patronizing form of address. That’s what outraged the jat leader, steeped in the feudal notion that a woman was socially unequal to him and had no right to express her dissenting views.

 

Both Ananthamurthy and Krishnan are not strangers to such extreme reactions. While Hindu traditionalists attacked the Jnanpith awardee when he published his famous book ‘Samskara’ in 1965, Krishnan was threatened with rape by a guest in a chat on Rediff in April this year that she had been invited to do after the anti-rape protests. She was disappointed that the news portal didn’t act fast enough to intervene and protect her. (It put up an edited version later). At least in the present instance, NDTV has acted quickly, condemning the comment made by Chaudhary.

 

And that’s what we need – zero tolerance for intolerance. And a swift response to violent threats.