Uttar Pradesh has again become the center of communal violence. This time it is Kasganj. I am extremely saddened by the use of the words “religious” or other similar labels but it is what it has become. A boy from Hindu community, Chandan Gupta was killed by some religious fundamentalists for participating in a Tiranga rally. But should they be called religious fundamentalists? I would have rather used the term anti-nationals, but the term nationalist has been defamed to such a large extent by the left, I’ll stick to religious fundamentalists.
Chandan Gupta was lynched by a mob of religious fundamentalists for participating in Tiranga rally and raising pro-Bharat slogans. Because the slogans irked the sentiments of a particular community who resorted to violence and subsequently a young man died. Apart from the fact that his death is a huge blot on Bharat and its culture, what saddened me to the core was that the left, who for decades has been the champion of “freedom of speech” deserted the cause altogether and started blaming the victim.
First and foremost, anybody being killed for the views they express is an evil thing to do and I am not the only one who is saying this, the left has been saying this from the very start. But they abandoned the cause when they saw it turning against them. As if the weapon turned against the wielder. Soon, and quickly, the narrative changed.
A few questions were raised and a ‘scathing’ reply was issued by the DM of Kasganj. Had someone been killed by the right wing or the so-called ‘saffron terror’, this ‘scathing’ reply would have become a symbol of patriarchy, misogyny and majoritarianism which is used to oppress minorities. It would have been called a symbol of fascism. But since it came from one of their own, it became ‘scathing’. So, let us look at the post by the District Magistrate.
“These days, a strange trend of visiting Muslim-dominated localities and shouting anti-Pakistani slogans has started. Are they Pakistanis? The same thing happened in Bareilly.” 59-year-old Singh wrote on social media.
I would really like to understand the meaning of Muslim dominated areas. Are they somehow different from the rest of the country? Or is that the law of the land is not followed in those particular areas. Or are we not allowed to raise pro-Bharat slogans there because it hurts the sentiments of the community. Some people say that anti-Pakistan slogans were raised. So? And the question raised is “are they Pakistanis”? Exactly. Are they Pakistanis that they would somehow be hurt by the raising of anti- Pakistan slogans?
I have never seen or heard a more hurtful argument to the Muslim cause and that also from within its folds. This argument is somehow trying to establish the fact that Muslims are not Indians and they support Pakistan. And I don’t believe in such obscure reasoning. Muslims are as much Indian as Hindus or people of any other religion.
The post and a lot of left-leaning news outlets suggest that because it happened in a Muslim majority area, it was offensive, and the resultant violent reaction was somehow justified. Some of them take the same route but a different approach. They state that since no permission was taken for the rally, therefore it was unjustified and therefore the killing was somehow justified. If we use such a logic, then any killing in the name of cow vigilantism is justified because Hindus consider the cow to be holy and cow smuggling/slaughter hurts the sentiments of the Hindu community, so they are justified to kill the smugglers because it ‘hurts their sentiments’, or since the smugglers didn’t have the permission to transport so it is justified to kill them.
Also, let us take a trip down memory lane. When anti-Bharat slogans were raised in JNU, no permissions were taken, and the protest took place in the heart of Delhi. When the government acted, remember the hue and cry made by the so-called liberals that nobody should be arrested for his/her views. The same people who gave us this logic hitherto, are now justifying violence in a somewhat similar and extremely less intense scenario. But alas hypocrisy has now become a virtue.
Another feigned narrative was built that since the people carried saffron flags, it was a pro-Hindutva rally and not a pro-Bharat rally. Saffron has always been an auspicious color in Hindu Dharma. And I see no harm in carrying it with the national flag (on a different mast). But if we use the same above logic, then Muslims can’t carry the national flag while wearing skull caps, or the constitution while carrying the Quran. Would I call it a rally of Islamic fundamentalists if some Muslims wearing skull caps raise pro-Bharat slogans whilst carrying Bharat’s national flag!? It is completely nonsensical to do so.
Now let us look at how the mainstream media reported 2 different incidents.
This is how Hindustan Times reported when a few people were put behind bars for raising pro-Pakistan slogans. They said that it was against multi-culturalism (one may wonder how) to put people behind bars for such slogans. And the people who raised these slogans were not even assaulted. But I am yet to hear from them about the Kasganj violence and I have a feeling that the status quo will remain the same. All these news outlets reportedly quickly & ceaselessly when Akhlaq or Pehlu Khan were killed.
This reminds of the famous line inspired by George Orwell “All men are equal, but some men are more equal than others.”
And this is the irony of today’s Bharat.
Did you like this article? We’re a non-profit. Make a donation and help pay for our journalism.