If you ain’t a Left-libber, you ain’t human
Poet and secularist par excellence Javed Akhtar was hauled over the coals by Twitterati for his comment on former Tehelka editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal which was seen as supporting the beleaguered editor. But what has escaped the notice of the mainstream and social media is much more insidious. In a debate at Times Now, he tried to distinguish two sets of people who are slamming Tejpal: the liberal, progressive people—people like us (PLU)—who take up causes like diversity, environment, and women empowerment; and then there are the politically incorrect hypocrites—people like them (PLT)—who uphold regressive values and are likely to vote for the Bharatiya Janata Party. In short, only the enlightened souls like Javed Akhtar, Vinod Mehta, and Vinod Sharma are entitled to express their anguish and dismay at the Tejpal affair; their revulsion is authentic, that of PLTs is just deceitful.
And I thought all along that sympathy, empathy, and compassion are noble feelings every human being possesses or is capable of possessing in some measure. As Adam Smith wrote in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, howsoever selfish a man may be, “there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it.” Men and women of any race, creed, color, or country, and belonging of any ideological persuasion, feel anger when they see somebody wronged and they are pained when they find a person in pain. So, it was not unnatural for the middle class, BJP leaders, and others to sympathize with the brave young girl who was (allegedly?) sexually assaulted and castigate Tejpal.
But the climate of opinion, that the Tejpals and the Akhtars have polluted, has subverted all that is time-honoured and reasonable. Therefore, nobody has a right to feel disgusted by depravity unless they unquestioningly follow the accepted canons of public discourse; nor do they have the right to sympathize with a victim of sexual assault. Only Left-libbers have such rights. Worse, anybody outside the incestuous coterie of professional radicals and bleeding heart activists lambasting Tejpal and showing compassion for the victim is immediately dubbed as a hypocrite and an adversary.
It is true that BJP leaders like Arun Jaitley and Meenakshi Lekhi have not concealed their glee at the woes of Tejpal and the discomfiture of the politically correct grandees who surround him. But that is neither unnatural nor hypocritical. Tejpal’s success was built on his various tirades against the BJP; concomitantly, he ignored or downplayed the misdeeds of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) in the last nine years; not for him the multiple billion-dollar scams, the mishandling of economic policy, the grievous neglect of national defence and internal security, the shameful pandering to the most regressive sections in the Muslim community, and the foreign policy flip-flops for which the Sonia Gandhi regime is responsible.
Tejpal has been called the Congress “doormat.” That may have been the use of extreme language, but his proximity to the top bosses of the ruling party is well-documented. In 2004, after coming to power, Sonia Gandhi had urged (read ordered) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to favorably mold the pending probe against Tehelka. In an “open letter” to Sonia after the UPA was reelected in 2009, Tejpal wrote: “You have given us of yourself, and of your son. Now will you kindly also give unto us your luminous daughter?”
Rahul Gandhi, according to Tejpal, was no less luminous: “He has humility, decorum, diligence, and he takes the long and inclusive view. We do not like the idea of dynasty, but we abhor the idea of divisiveness more. In an ideal world we would do away with everything feudal and undemocratic, but for the moment let us concentrate on getting rid of the engines of hatred” (emphasis added). One need not be a Vinod Mehta to know that “the engines of hatred” are the BJP, PLT, etc.
That is the crux of the matter, and this is where the pathologies of PLU and the interests of the grand old party converge: Tehelka is the most conspicuous sangam of fellow travelers and the ancient regime. And since pinkish intellectuals and the popes and bishops of the unholy Nehruvian empire—some would prefer to call it the unholy Roman empire—lord over the perverted public discourse in India, they think that they reserve the right to describe what is compassion and what is not. PLU have captured and colonized the centres of opinion making; they should not be allowed to colonize morality and humanity. Otherwise, they would pronounce most of mankind as less than human.
How come NO ONE has picked up the details that were published on firstpost regarding the financial dealings of tehelka.?
It was written by an ex-staff of tehelka and he was able to piece together the fact that only TT’s family and Shoma made out big while tehelka was lossing crores. Shoma turned her 5000 investment into 66 lac return in three years. TT’s wife , sister, father made it even bigger amounts
The supposed liberal values espoused by Tejpal and his appalling ilk were also asserted by the British, especially after the early twentieth century, although such obfuscation is as old as the history of imperialism itself – conquest to save the conquered! The British were appalled at the idea that Hindu casteists, who were by then seeking a greater say in governing India, would ‘usurp’ colonial power. They mournfully insisted it would prevent them discharging their sacred obligations towards the downtrodden of India, ie. the so-called ‘untouchables’ and the Muslim minority! By the 1930s, such imperious sentiments were standard fare. The au pair and her awful domestic retinue are merely parroting them with greater desperation as Indians are poised to take back control of their own destiny!
As for Javed and his uber feminist spouse, do ask them how much pain they suppose his wife suffered when they waltzed into the sunset together. As the Irish novelist, Edna O’Brien once commented, it is women who cause each other the greatest pain, by which she meant that losing your beloved to another exceeds most sources of anguish for a woman! There is more than a grain of truth in this truism though it is men who are responsible for the larger and more egregious crimes against women and India remains an appalling place to be one!
Three related comments on the fragrant Shoma Chaudhury: 1) She definitely broke the Vishaka guideliness, a sacking offence and she has fallen on her proverbial sword for it, having admitted this serious lapse herself. Between her employer, Tejpal, and a lowly, employee, she made the obvious choice in favour of the employer. The full truth of her relationship with him will only possibly become unearthed under cross examination in a court of law; 2) did her conduct over the rape claim of the victim amount to violations of the criminal statute? Since there is prima facie evidence that she also sought to prevent investigation of the serious crime, lawyers and judges will decide if that is indeed the case. However, she is sufficiently influential, meaning knows the secrets of politicians, to possibly escape with minor public chastisement;3) did she violate her own feminist principles in the way she behaved? The answer is an emphatic NO because she had none in the first place! She and her entire tribe are basically business people (do the Radia tapes leave any room for doubt?!) and the values they espouse a mere ideological facade for the main business of making money!!
Please change “poet and secularist par excellence” to “secularist par excellence and occasional poet”. Rest all is fine.
Or better still change to “phony secularist par excellence and an occasional third rate rhymester”.
Amarnath Wanchoo