Shoma Choudhary, editor Tehelka, writing in the Hindustan Times has let the cat out of the bag.
For those of you in Gujarat who believed the sting, the expose on Gujarat riots from last week, was about justice to the riot affected, think again.
Shoma has made it amply clear in her latest piece that this is not about justice but it is about making you the voters of Gujarat feel guilty of the choices you make.
Offstumped critiques this latest sanctimonious piece from Tehelka.
Shoma makes no secret of where she is going with this piece with her opening remarks. She then goes on to make a startling admission with none of the sensation and hype from last week.
It is true that ?Operation Kalank? is about things we already knew.
She follows up with more sanctimony and some lament that the sting has only been met by empty counter-arguments and conspiracy theories.
But the most dangerous elements of her piece become evident when she questions the “assertion of majority” in Gujarat and accusing it, the majority , of nullifying justice.
While talking of a “state sponsored pogrom” Shoma offers no new evidence nor any clarification on how the Sting establishes complicity of the state.
?This is the fundamental problem with last week’s sting. It showed what was previously known. It had accused go on record to incriminate themselves. It reminded us of the horror in all its gory detail as recounted by the perpetrators. But last week’s sting did nothing to establih the complicity of thye State. It neither presented new facts nor new incriminating evidence.
It is this gaping hole that Tehelka has glossed over with all the hype and sensationalism. It is this gaping hole that Shoma covers up as she goes onto sanctimoniously defend Operation Kalank. She does so with some ludicrous remarks that Gujarat is a failed state. This remark on Gujarat is important for it is the foundation for the rest of the defense of Operation Kalank.
We are all content to continue with the charade of treating Gujarat as a democratic state facing an on-coming election.
So what does Shoma want ?
It is the X-factor that seems to have paralyses everybody: the fear of the ?Hindu vote?. This fear and the unquestioning acceptance that it will blow in Modi?s favor if anybody speaks out against his depraved state has made a mockery of every check and balance that lies at the heart of a democracy.
That is not all, Shoma is questioning the credibility of our democratic process and the judgement of the people of Gujarat
The real faultline in India today is not between Hindus and Muslims. It is between Hindus and Hindus. If the Hindus of Gujarat are going to re-elect Modi after being confronted with visual proof of what he stands for, we have to aggressively reclaim what being Hindu means.
So here is Offstumped’s poser to Shoma and Tehelka:
If last week’s sting was about justice to the riot affected and if it was about facts and evidence to establish the complicity of the “state” then the responsible thing for Tehelka to do was to present the facts to the Commissions of Enquiry and the Courts. Having done so Tehelka should have presented to the public on how Operation Kalank could contribute to the process of justice with specific references to pending cases.
We heard none of that.? Instead we had Tehelka selling its footage to the highest bidder who then went on to broadcast sensational soundbites interspersed with clips from a movie with not even the fig leaf of a disclaimer.
By glossing over the lack of hard factual evidence on the “complicity of the state”, Tehelka is taking recourse to a dangerous argument in defense of Operation Kalank.
That defense is premised on the fiction that “Gujarat” is a failed state. It then extends that fiction to question the sanctity of Institutions in Gujarat while raising dobts if the Constitution still applied to Gujarat.
One wonders what the riot victims who were delivered justice yesterday in Godhra for Erla, those who were delivered justice in 2003 in Anand, Ghodasar, those who were delivered justice in 2005 in Angswana, think about that. Perhaps all of those trials should be declared flawed and all the sentencing that has happened reversed, for?Shoma and Tehelka want us to believe there is no Constitution in Gujarat.
But that is not all. The more dangerous argument that Tehelka is forwarding to justify Operation Kalank is that there is no credibility or moral sanctity to the democratic process in Gujarat. To accomplish this Tehelka is basically characterising the system of majority vote as immoral for the minority is overruled.
So if we were to apply Tehelka’s perverse logic every democratic majority in India must feel guilty of expressing itself democratically in an election sanctioned by the Constitution for the fear of overruling the democratic minority.
It is very important to understand this because, Tehelka is making the argument that “justice” is nullified by the “assertion” of a majority in Gujarat.
So what Tehelka is saying here is that if Gujarat re-elects a BJP Government by going through a democratic process and Narendra Modi is returned as Chief Minister in adherence to the Indian Constitution, it would be a denial of justice.
So in the Tehelka scheme of things Justice cannot be delivered by Courts based on factual evidence. Justice according Tehelka, requires us to trash the majority judgement of a democratic process in favor of a campaign of slander and insinuations based on hearsay and boasts.
Complicity of the State in the 2002 riots must be established legally in a Court of Law with factual evidence. In the absence of such evidence the morality of the State’s?actions can only be judged by the will of the people expressed through a democratic process. By dismissing the assertion of the majority, questioning its morality Tehelka is attempting to ascribe guilt based on slander, insinuations hearsay and boasts.
This is a dangerous precedent.
Offstumped Bottomline: Tehelka is confusing the legal question with the moral question by glossing over the gaping hole in its sting and transferring the burden of guilt on to the voters of Gujarat. By questioning the democratic judgement of the majority in Gujarat Tehelka is questioning their morality, their faith in Hinduism and their faith in the Indian Constitution.
Filed under: Uncategorized
[...] http://offstumped.nationalinterest.in/2007/11/01/silence-of-the-lambs-sanctimonious-defense-from-teh… Let Others Know About This PostThese icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
“So if we were to apply Tehelka’s perverse logic every democratic majority in India must feel guilty of expressing itself democratically in an election sanctioned by the Constitution for the fear of overruling the democratic minority.”
I believe you are confusing democratic republic with mobocracy.
Jujung – tell that to the election commission, that elections conducted it by are not about law abiding citizens expressing their will but about mobs running amok and forcing their will. I am sure it will indulge your enlightened views on mobocracy.
General public in Gujarat is feeling deeply insulted by media and congress in general. There will be two ways in which this anguish will be channelised, first as democratic process and other as throwing complete media out of Gujarat. Choice of option is open for media, it depends on what media wants.
check this out..
http://www.fansofnarendramodi.org/index.htm
In a democratic republic like ours, the expression of the majoritarian will is curtailed by constitutional safeguards for minorities (includes individuals – this has nothing to do with minority appeasement), to prevent mobocracy.
The notion that Modi’s win in the previous Gujarat election has somehow (even if partially) absolved him of his role in abetting the riots is absurd. It just says that people felt he’s a better choice than others in the race. And that the opposing leaders are weak and indecisive regarding the positions they have to take in the elections.
isnt junta ki adalat the last refuge of every scoundrel ? why just modi, even laloo was vindicated by the junta of Bihar year after year even though he was milking the state. didnt see such secular outrage then. and what does this female propose that we do, in the event that modi is re-elected ? shall we impose president’s rule ?
So what is the solution?
The solution is for bearded adult males to stay away from ladies compartments in trains in Gujarat.
If you are looking for free hindu women to entertain you go to Bangladesh (ask Taslima Nasreen)
All those people asking about “minority rights” – Human rights will exist only as long as the minority does not behave like animals.
This is how Muslims behave everywhere they go-you think this statement is very prejudiced – Look at Norway
Norway: The Country of Peace Meets the Religion of Peace
another version with lots of comments
Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway—Authorities Look the Other Way
You feel this is happening only in Norway and Sweden. Look at Australia
Muslim Gang Rapes and the Aussie Riots
This is happening all over the WESTERN Countries
Western Muslims’ Racist Rape Spree
Muslim Rape, Feminist Silence
My dear PSEC “brothers”
Please stop trying to cover up for bad behaviour by young Muslim men by using loaded words like “minority rights”. A spoilt child becomes more and more spoilt as his parents keep covering up for him. You are NOT doing a favor to Muslims, Hindus, India, Europe, the WORLD, the Universe, or anyone else by constantly appeasing and coming up with new theories to cover up rotten uncivilized behaviour by Muslims.
Everybody who lives near Muslim neighborhoods knows most of these things perfectly well.
About Minority rights
1. Parsis have lived in Gujarat for over 1300 years without any persecution- ask yourself WHY?
2. Jews have lived in India for over 2000 years without any persecution- ask yourself WHY?
3. Before Portuguese arrived and carried out the Goan inquisition, christians had been living in India for hundreds of years without any persecution-ask yourself WHY?
Stop trying to apply rules of morality to only one side of the fight. It is highly unfair and continued cockeyed intellectual dishonesty is going to lead to bad consequencies for everyone (that means all 100% – not only your beloved 10%)
there has to be a higher justice which is truth.
truth will triumph,we can manipulate as much as we can in the interim.
How to become an Intellectual in India
http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/05/how-to-become-intellectual-in-india.html
If the argument is that no one has the right to question the “elected leader” – then I would see it as a desperate attempt to defend Narendra Modi or any other such politician who is elected! A political mandate may be given by the electorate but that does not give the elected leader the licence to loot or kill people…
It is a fact that “junta ki adalat” has become the last refuge of many scoundrel politicians ! Many crooked politicians like Shabuddin of Bihar or Amarnath Tripathi of UP always thought that no body could touch them since they are elected by their contituencies and supported by their party leaders.
Be it Tehelka or the Supreme Court of India, they have every right to question the morality or ethics of a politician – irrespective of the democratic judgement of the majority in Gujarat or any other State.
ROW – Nobody is challenging the right to question. In a democracy everybody has the right to question and it is a continuous process. What is being debated here is how we settle the questions that have been posed ? How do we come to an answer ? In a democracy you cant have the public official in question answer every single individual to his or her satisfaction. So the only way to settle the moral question is to go by the judgement of the majority as expressed in their will via a democratic process.
I do not necessarily agree that the only way to settle the moral question is to go by the judgement of the majority as expressed in their will via a democratic process !
This is where a competent authority like the PM, the President or the Supreme Court needs to step in !..
I may here like to highlight the case of JD(U) MLA Anant Singh who assulted NDTV reporters in Patna today ! He is a known criminal who has raped and murdered scores of women with impunity. Left to the judgement of his constituency – he will never be stopped from his immoral activities. His leader (Nitish Kumar) may not have the political will to stop him. So what do you do ? Let him carry on because he has the mandate from his contituency ?
Somebody needs to stop such politicians !!
Row – the example from bihar is easily handled. This is a criminal question not a moral question. Criminal evidence exists and it has been acted upon with the mla’s arrest. If you are point is what do we do when the criminal justice system fails to deliver, the answer is fix it. Goes to what manmohan said recently on vigilante justice. If criminal justice doesn’t deliver people will take law into their own hands. So I am with you in demanding that we fix criminal justice to make it effective/deliver ontime
However, continuing from above, we should not confuse moral questions with criminal questions. If modi actively colluded it is a criminal question. If modi did not to do enough to stop the riots it is not a criminal question but it is a political and moral question. It can cease to be a political or moral question if a conspiracy to not do enuf can be established. Which is exactly what tehelka and the ngos led by teesta and mukul sinha are attempting to do. They are trying to make a moral issue a criminal
Grapes are sour clearly for Tehelka advocates, Congress henchmen, and even BJP dissidents, who are all out to dislodge NM from his pedestal. They have all taken resort to calumny, mudslinging, and underhand dealings. Instead of bringing the best from out of them, to match the wit, political acumen, progressive ideas of NM, they are doing their worst in stooping low to try to defeat the man. Electoral verdict may bring surprise in store for many, but you simply have to outwit this man to gain better control of the situation. News from Rahul Gandhi’s camp have begun to filter out that he is only to address a few meetings. Meaning is not going to campaign aggressively?! This news if correct have begun to show defeatist mentality of the main opposition from the very start.
Forget about political situation. Many saints, highly reputed for their neutrality, from different walks of life, from Gujarat and even India, have come to Gujarat and appreciated the humanity of NM, the man in the jaundiced eyes of people described as ‘mass murderer’, ‘rapist’, ‘looter’, ‘autocrat’, and even worse.
Are these saints fool enough to pawn their prestige for the sake of this little man in Gujarat?
Yossarin,
You are confusing moral issue with electoral. Electoral sanction doesn not/cannot mean moral right to continue.
There are three issues basically
1. Criminal – handled by court
2. Electoral – handled by elections/people
3. Moral – handled by ethics of society/humanity and conscience of the self & society.
And in most cases there is an overlap. It cannot be that any issue is “purely” criminal or purely moral. Modi too, like you, has been advocating electoral victory as the sacrosanct holy cow, so to speak, which can bulldoze over the other two. But then morality is above electoral sanction. And sooner or later…..it is bound to catch up.
Nikhil- you are partially correct. Best example is clinton campaigning in wisconsin. The lady senatorial candidate said she wanted clinton to campaign for her but did not want him anywhere near her daughter. So extending that if modi is popular in an election it settles the moral qn from a public office standpoint. However personally a nikhil cud still abhor him and avoid him while still voting him back to office.
Continuing the confusion arises when we mix up morality from a fitness to hold public office with morality from a personal or community relationship standpoint. The election will settle the fitness to hold public office question. The personal relationship or community relationship question has to be left to the conscience of the individual and social consensus within that community.
Yossarin,
The logic is getting more & more contorted now.
I disagree with the use of word ‘fitness’ used by you. I would call it ‘eligibility’ which is technical.
Electoral victory or popularity means he is ‘eligible to hold public office’ not necessarily ‘fit’. Because ‘fit’,in my opinion, has to pass morality angle.
One might be visibly corrupt or a criminal like Laloo & Shibu Soren respectively. But they are not ‘fit’ though ‘eligible’. And please do not make it as a personal like/dislike issue..mine or yours. This is in the public domain purely on society concerns.
A winner of a reality TV music show, elected by popular vote…cannot be equated to a Lata Mangeshkar.
Nikhil – eligibility is decided by the rules to contest. Once eligible your fitness to occupy the role of winner is decided by the judges of the contest. Once you have won there is no debate on your fitness to occupy that role. The act of winning settles it. If you want to declare someone ineligible to contest go modify the rules of the contest but dont crib after the contest that the winner is ineligible.
We are getting into semantics now which is quite pointless actaually !!!
Well, to give you an analogy which you might like..Sonia Gandhi is fit (in your words) to be the PM of this country as per the rules of EC/constitution and SC…but whether a foreign born should rule is in the same realm of social conscience( Although it is not immoral/criminal like Modi’s case). I guess Shushma & her ilk should not be threatening to shave off their heads…..in case she decides to be the PM tomorrow !!
Nikhil – yep you are right. if they cant change the rules they should not crib. they can express their disagreement but they have to learn to live that disagreement till the next contest. they cant go about mongering conspiracy theories to invalidate the contest that has already been won.
When bad losers want to whine, they become sanctimonious windbangs. “You may have kicked my butt, but ‘moral’ victory is mine” kind of pretense.
Vox populi, vox dei, “The voice of the people is the voice of God”.
This is a democratic country. People’s court is the best democratic court to give electoral success or defeat.
You may hate a man, who wins. You may love a man, who is defeated.
Till next election, this electoral verdict holds good provided: a) the man winning is chargesheeted and loses the court battle- Shibu Soren’s case; b) the man involves himself in post electoral crimes and has to vacate his office by social pressure or legal indictment; c) the man is found guilty in law court for his crimes and demeanours; and finally d) the man resigns on moral grounds – Lal Bahadur Shastri’s case.
Rule of law requires the elected man to conduct himself according to Constitution and laws of the nation. He can be impeached gross dereliction of duty.
Modi is accused of many things. Someone must bring a caveat from a law court to prevent him for contesting election. Till then, he is a free bird. Mere accusations or nexus to supposed crimes do not implicate a person to the guilt. It has to be proved.
Many (excluding the blind supporters of NM) would view this statement – “if they can’t change the rules they should not crib. they can express their disagreement but they have to learn to live that disagreement till the next contest. they cant go about mongering conspiracy theories to invalidate the contest that has already been won” – as an opportunistic view to defend Narendra Modi !…
Yossarin – I agree that “they” have to learn to live till the next elections (or till the time convicted by the Judiciary). But nothing should stop them from going about “mongering conspiracy theories” if they want to, since they believe in it !
Remember the conspiracy theories launched by BJP leaders and many of their supports against Pratibha Patil ?….
“Remember the conspiracy theories launched by BJP leaders and many of their supports against Pratibha Patil ?”
What are these conspiracy theories?
Did the bank run by Ms Patil do extremely well and have the poor people who invested in it become rich, instead of losing the money as was claimed? In fact, did Patil lose a lot of her property and money in the bank but the poor depositors gained a lot at her expense?
Did the relatives of Patil give free donations to the bank instead of taking loans from it and defaulting on them as was claimed?
If the answers are yes, the BJP did indeed spin some nasty conspiracy theories.
[...] paper’s mask is quickly slipping away. Read Offstumped’s neat dissection of an article by one of its [...]
[...] the mainstream media to rally behind it. This becomes evident from the desperate attempts to defend its expose first from within its ranks and now from friends in the Outlook. This time it is Mahesh Peri, publisher of the Outlook Magazine [...]
[...] of the mainstream media to rally behind it. This becomes evident from the desperate attempts to defend its expose first from within its ranks and now from friends in the Outlook. This time it is Mahesh Peri, publisher of the Outlook Magazine [...]
[...] the cast of characters, Tehelka Editor Shoma Chaudhury chose a movie reference for the title of her column on HT. You will require some background in order to appreciate her [...]
[...] Silence of the lambs – Sanctimonious defense from Tehelka … [...]