Different Places, Same Patterns

Maybe the self-proclaimed liberal and secular folks should take a step back and see why India seems to be headed the RSS/Hindutva way (Actually, they should check whether that’s even true on the scale they believe it’s happening but that’s too much to ask).

Steven Emerson proclaimed on Fox News that there are “places where the governments — like France, Britain, Sweden, Germany — don’t exercise any sovereignty. . . . You basically have zones where sharia courts were set up, where Muslim density is very intense, where the police don’t go in, and where it’s basically a separate country almost, a country within a country”. (Note that Fox is a notoriously right-wing, Bush-supporting news channel in the US, but that doesn’t change the validity of the rest of this blog). As expected, this triggered a huge reaction including a threat to sue from the Paris officials. Emerson and Fox apologized.

Daniel Pipes, however, says that we should do a reality-check. Sure, he concedes, the authorities in those areas with “their overwhelming advantage in force — including military, intelligence, and police” have not entirely ceded control. But, and this is important:

“On the other hand, governments often choose not to impose their will on Muslim-majority areas, allowing them considerable autonomy, including in some cases the sharia courts that Emerson mentioned.”

Based on this weird situation, Pipes says that the English language needs a new term to describe what these areas really are:

“The English language lacks a readily available term for this. And for good reason: I know of no historical parallel, in which a majority population accepts the customs and even the criminality of a poorer and weaker immigrant community.”

A historic parallel does exist: it’s called India. But term or no term, this reality needs to be part of the discussion, argues Pipes. Many others in the West feel the same way.

Heard similar accusations and feelings in India? In India, we ban the Satanic Verses because it offends Muslims but allow PK to run even if some Hindus protest. The liberals and secular folks dismiss the latter as a fringe, crazy element but refuse to check whether the former was exactly the same (Or if they do check, they still cave in to their demands). When the Church in India wanted the Da Vinci Code movie banned, some states obliged. When the RSS wants PK banned, the UP state government made the movie tax free!

It’s time the liberals and secular folks realize that a lot of BJP supporters are not right-wing, frothing at the mouth RSS/Hindutva fanatics. Rather, they want the same, consistent course wrt all religions. As Vir Sanghvi points out, those people are just asking for the constitution to be followed!

“Yes, Islam has injunctions against visual representations of the Prophet but those are valid only within the faith – they can have no legal or Constitutional validity in a secular country.”

And with no real choices, they are just falling into the BJP’s lap.

So I say to the self-proclaimed liberal and secular folks, be consistent and demand that the constitution be followed and you would take away a big chunk of the BJP supporters overnight. And the rest of the blame for the increasing BJP support lies with the self-proclaimed moderate Muslim who keeps silent all the time. Because, then “it is the mullahs who will continue to speak for the community”. And every such action will have a reaction. Or if you don’t like Newton, it’s just karma at work. I guess the secular, liberal folks wouldn’t like that term either since they hate everything Hindu.