The Rediff Special/K V Bapa Rao

At 50, It is Time to Stop the Spanking

It is gratifying that at least one person had the good sense to speak up for the idea that free expression is for all, and not just for us and the ideas that we like. My heartfelt congratulations therefore to Dilip D'Souza for his eloquent defence of free speech, especially since it is in the cause Arun Shourie; I have no doubt at all that Mr D'Souza cordially despises the contents of that worthy's most recent outpouring.

I would, however, caution Mr D'Souza and Rediff readers against setting too much store by Mr D'Souza's implied allegation that Indian society has a unique antipathy towards free expression and knowledge for all. Particularly this month, this year, if you don't mind. Let's not line up yet again for the tedious ritual of self-flagellation (if we must look for ingrained, uniquely Indian pecularities, a good candidate would be the eccentric custom of draping the entire nation, past, present and future in sackcloth at the slightest provocation!), dragging in Ekalavya, Sambuka and God knows who all, averring in essence that, inability to countenance freedom is in our national blood, so to speak. (If that were to be true, would it then follow that we don't deserve the freedom that we never were born to, in the first place?)

Even here in the United States (by its own admission the free-est of free societies) freedom of expression has had a checkered career at best in the public eye. When the US Constitution was drafted in the 18th century, there was an almighty public uproar when it was realised that its freedoms would apply to Catholics as well. (Naturally, women, natives, Blacks, and presumably Muslims and Hindus were not even in the running!) During the 18th and 19th centuries, it was illegal throughout the South for Blacks to learn to read and write, let alone express themselves. The McCarthyist terror in the 1950s silenced a great many leftist voices. I believe it was sometime during the Reagan years that an organisation circulated, without identifying the source, a copy of the US Bill of Rights (which codify Americans's Fundamental Rights) among a broad section of the general public for comments. Apparently, a majority, unaware that they were looking at the law of the land, expressed the view that the ideas contained therein were subversive, un-American, probably communist!

In anticipation of the usual trite and tedious confusion that my little history lesson will no doubt occasion, let me spell out my intent. I am not saying that because Americans don't seem to care all that much for free expression, it is therefore proper for the mythical Ekalavya to have lost his thumb, or for the regrettably all-too-unmythical members of Parliament to play Dipavali with Shourie's book. I am asking the well-meaning India-bashers to please give serious consideration to the notion that, for all our faults, we Indians are not the designated embodiment of all sin in this vast human family, nor have we ever enjoyed that dubious distinction in our long history.

If we go around banning a Salman Rushdie or an Aubrey Menen at the behest of some group or the other, it is not because we Indians have always been unregenerate rascals at heart, but simply because most powerful people in all human societies believe that freedom is fine for themselves, but not for those that are vulnerable. It doesn't matter if the powers of the moment be brahmin or dalit, Black or White. This is a universal human trait, that exists side-by-side with others like compassion and altruism.

So, the next time an opportunity presents itself for bemoaning India's essential depravity, look it straight in the eye, and, as Bertie Wooster might have said, issue a firm nolle prosequi. Just say no. This exercise in self-discipline will have two benefits. First, it will affirm in our own minds and hearts that India is a first-class human society and culture, at least on moral par with all other such on this planet. It will help us tear off the national "kick me" sign that we seem to sport on our collective back. This is not to be confused with arrogance or a denial of our problems; it is simply an assertion of our inalienable, inherent right to consider ourselves human.

The second benefit is practical and stems from the first. When our self-flagellation gains surcease, it will free up our energy and attention to let us focus on finding sensible solutions. In the present instance, I suggest that a multipartisan organisation committed to the free expression agenda be formed. Each time an M F Husain or an Arun Shourie faces suppression, this organisation may take the opportunity to remind their respective supporters that freedom is something in which we all have a collective stake, and firmly and patiently nudge the politicians (who, worldwide, are sheep after all) into line. It may not be as much fun as breast-beating, but I'll match my idea any day against the current strategies of knee-jerk India-bashing and fair-weather espousal of free expression. In time, we may even be able to do something practical about that naughty little loophole in Dr Ambedkar's Constitution that allows the authorities to suppress freedom of expression any time they feel it would be too much trouble to do their duty and uphold it.

Our country is 50. Enough already with the spanking and scolding. Why not try dealing with India's social problems as mature adults with a shared stake in her future?

K V Bapa Rao is a computer scientist living in Southern California who writes frequently about India.

RELATED LINKS:

Worshipping A False God
Ekalavya and the Worshipping A False God
Dalits will respond to Shourie book in kind

Tell us what you think of this opinion