The Intolerance Point. Part 2

The readers’ reactions to my earlier article threw interesting questions and perspectives, mainly:

-          Was I suggesting that all is well in our country, and no such glaring issue of intolerance that swamps the wider public attention?

-          Does the idea of individual tolerance, be an effective vaccine when media (including social media) and the political discourse stoke the intolerance debate harder?

Hence, the objective here is to test the idea of individual tolerance and be discerning, against the backdrop of current political discourse, views from intelligentsia and media-led quick service opinions; to also look at what elected Government needs to do that can reinforce positive sentiment.

An affiliate purpose is to define an image of India that I want my children to grow up with.

Demons we fight

When Gandhi and many of our freedom fighters decided to follow a path of non-violence and channelize civic engagement without force, implicit in this approach was the understanding – that we may become the demons that we choose to fight.

The intensity of rebellion would have drawn even greater resistance from the British, summoning upon greater deployment of force until the side suffering the most chose to give up. The level of acrimony and distrust does not end there, and we would have ended up as bitter as our opponent.

This model of tolerance and non-violence, that our freedom struggle taught the world – applies to our daily life, even with current political discourse.

When the idea of a multicultural society remains unshaken, we render the hate mongers and the propaganda toothless.

Confrontation without conscience only gives greater validity to the delinquent.

The cacophony of who says what

I gave up my habit of watching prime time debates few years ago – for a peaceful sleep. Now occasionally when I do, it only reaffirms my step few years back.

8 people over 45mins with a news anchor try to debate issues ranging from national importance to not even of office pantry or, college canteen discussion – all in the name of breaking news. To make the discussion broad-based the panel has people with credible background to “I don’t know what I am talking” background. Given the desire of the anchor to have a larger pie of the time – remaining speakers get 2-3min, unless they want to elbow out few others and speak out of turn, with or without substance. Throw in a burning political issue and the usual responses – “They did worse when they were in power” or “They should not be preaching us”.

Thus, most of the time inconclusive, poorly moderated discussion gets labeled as the mood of the nation.

The limited point I want to make is – opinions derived from these discussions need to be tested, than just adopted.

Similarly, FB and Twitter trolls can’t be substitute for doing some own reading, or understanding of the subject, or we may just choose to reserve our opinion; much like the way we conduct in classrooms , offices, and families.

Engaging into debate for every irresponsible statement someone makes, or conclusions drawn from correlating perfectly exclusive events that a large section of the country may not have time and attention to the underlying details – are unworthy distractions.

Is everything well?

The answer is - no; it never was. 

Below the surface of the debate and differences – we are a unique and vibrant country, a democracy with healthy and unhealthy exchange of views and opinions, and an evolving society that learns from its experiences.

The fact that we are having a national discussion on intolerance without forces muffling it – is in keeping with the spirit of tolerance.

The fact that there is greater social justice than hundred years back and disparity is on a decline – there is progress and hope.

Our institutions of justice, regulatory and governance – have continued to deliver, and continue to reform.

Like US society has problems with gun laws and black-white skirmishes, but doesn’t sink into outright intolerance debates and awards-wapsi, we need to deal with our issues, with our realities and our differences.

The Government and discourse

A decisively elected majority Government needs to do more to wring in its spokespersons, and some unauthorized persons and stay true to its development agenda, not limited to economy.

This expectation cannot be restricted to Center, and Modi.