One of the worst things in a democracy, particularly in India's case, is the manipulation of the majority by an aggressive but tiny minority—and the failure of a supposedly liberal party to protect the voices of the former.
Take, for instance, the recent ban on English writer Rohinton Mistry’s book Such a Long Journey from the literature syllabus at Mumbai University, thanks to opposition from fringe Hindu rightist group Shiv Sena, which claimed that the book's language is abusive and derogatory towards the party.
Following a protest led by Aditya Thackeray, a third-generation heir to the regional Hindu party and a Mumbai University student, the vice chancellor of one of the best liberal universities in India surrendered meekly and withdrew the book from the curriculum—without holding a meeting with the teachers or other concerned persons in charge of deciding the curriculum.
This isn’t only a capitulation to the demands of a fringe political group, but also an insult to the liberal tradition and an attack on freedom of expression. Such attacks have, unfortunately, become quite frequent in India where small groups or political parties, on some pretext or another, continue to target artistic freedom and creative expression if they deem it to be insulting to their leader, culture or religion.
What saddens me most is the silence, and thereby subtle endorsement, of such intolerance by supposedly liberal political parties like the Congress Party.
Congress Chief Minister of Maharashtra Ashokrao Chavan, without reading the book or understanding the context and time in which the novel is set, has also declared the book to be abusive and not fit for students. In doing so, he gives legitimacy to the protests of the rabid rightist party (which Mistry in his book describes as ‘fascist’).
Who are the politicians to decide what is good or bad writing? Writer C P Surendran, commenting on the issue in Times of India, says writing is all about the right to offend. Suppression of thoughts is for diplomats and politicians—writers must write to challenge the standard notions of correctness and decency. This how the status quo is challenged and how change comes about. The right to offend, in short, is central to the liberty of free speech and thought. The strength of a democracy, on the other hand, is its tolerance to dissent.
I’ve grown up watching the Congress party since the mid-1980s and feel disappointed by its continuous failure to take a stand on any issue affecting liberal and secular politics—be it the Shahbano case to give equal rights to Muslim women, or the banning of Rushdie’s book, The Satanic Verses, or its taking a purely secular stand on the Ayodhya issue, or curbing the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena’s chauvinistic and violent activities toward immigrant populations in Mumbai.
And now, the Congress has again failed us by letting the Shiv Sena create an atmosphere of fear at the campus of Mumbai University.
At this time of restlessness and anger, some lines from the great Rabindranath Tagore’s poem Chitto Jetha Bhayashunyo (Where the Mind is Without Fear) come to mind:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.








Richa Rajesh
Quite agree with the writer. In a modern democratic country a political party should not be allowed to dictate universitites what is to be taught to young students. That is where modern ideas and new breed of people are cultivated by intellectuals. Young minds should not be restrained by stale political battles. A famous saying goes like this: ” Let a hundred flowers bloom and let a hundred schools of thought contend.
Hariharan
> The right to offend, in short, is central to the liberty of free speech and thought.
Arundhati Roy takes undue advantage of free speech, openly supports sedition while shamelessly trampling on the constitution, all under a false pretext — “Kashmir was never an integral part of India” just to offend the majority, supposedly with fake band-aid for “peaceful protesters” just to draw attention to herself. Why are other journalists so quiet? Why are Indian journalists so shy to exercise their right to offend on the basis of facts?
Why hasn’t anyone questioned her, WHY:
1) These “peaceful protesters” have killed 60,000 people over the past 20 years during their “non-violent struggle” for Kashmir to join Pakistan?
2) They have ethnically cleansed over a million Kashmiri pundits and Sikhs from the Kashmir valley?
3) They have launched a campaign of terror and intimidation against all secular Kashmiris and imposed their own brand of virulent intolerant Wahabi Islam in the Kashmir Valley?
4) They have no popular support and have never won any election in Kashmir where the people have defied threats from the terrorists to vote overwhelmingly for state governments who want to remain a part of India?
5) Pakistan has been giving “moral assistance” to “peaceful protesters” in addition to infiltration of madrassa-trained “freedom fighters” across the LoC for the last six decades?
6) Roy needs the “evil” Indian army for her protection in Kashmir?
Without any hypocrisy, MNS and Shiv Sena should be exposed too. No two ways about it. However, when you call Biharis as “immigrants” in Mumbai instead of “migrants”, you are unwittingly supporting the cause of MNS and Shiv Sena!
As for the Shahbano case or the ban on The Satanic Verses — “blackmail” (as in accept Sharia or die) is the politics of Islam worldwide for the last 14 centuries. Study history and the Koran. The question that should be asked is why is Islam above the constitution of a country? And if Muslims want medieval law, then that’s what you get. What has that got to do with Congress or BJP?