The two faces of hate?

So the nation ushered in the new year on a sombre note, and the first two weeks of 2013 and have been volatile, to say the least. With the entire nation seething with hurt, anger, hopelessness, introspection and a keen desire to change over the 16th December Delhi incident, this year seems to have opened up the Pandora's box with respect to India's problems; from communal clashes in Maharashtra, dirty politics over the Delhi gangrape incident, hate speeches, to tensions along the border, miserable state of affairs on the cricket pitch, and a hostile weather across North India.

With intense outrage and serious debate carrying on for nearly a month now over women's safety in the country, and gender issues in general, one hopes that this incident serves as the inflection point marking the change in the country's psyche, as well as the administration, laws and policing. Its easy to point fingers at the management, but the need of the hour is introspecting and weeding out the flaws in our own attitudes, mending the cracks in the institution of family and marriage, and bringing in systematic changes and awareness so that the future generations are spared of this maligned, rotten and despicable part of our heritage. Education, of course is a key tool in achieving this goal, but the real change on ground level will come when it starts right in the family, for instance when women stop gossiping and pointing fingers at the girl next door for coming late at night in front of their sons, and men start actively teaching them that its not okay to harass a woman and lead by example - right in the household. 

Shoot! I had resolved not to write anything on this issue, as enough has been said and written already, but I guess I couldn't help it. What had bothered me off late was how the whole hate speech issue played out. An MLA from Andhra Pradesh, Akbaruddin Owaisi was under the fire for delivering hate speeches against the Hindu community, and the nation in general. His accusation, the outcry by the principal opposition party, the delay in his arrest and the soft handling of the issue by the state government and police were all issues that drew a lot of media attention. So did another hate speech, which resulted from political opportunism as a fallout of the Delhi incident. The head of a major political party in Maharashtra, blamed people from Bihar for crimes like the Delhi gangrape. This is not the first time his party has attacked North Indians, and more specifically Biharis, even venturing as far as literally attacking aspirants for a Railways exam arriving in the state through trains from North India, as well as autowallahs allegedly hailing from northern states in a separate incident. His comments on this occasion did invite the ire of media, and politicians form Bihar, but that is as far as it went. While Owaisi's speech was of a communal nature, and hence automatically attracted a lot of attention and criticism, regional and ethnocentric parties like this one have constantly tried to agitate and influence people against others of a certain community, state or speaking a different language. However, they rarely invite any political or judicial reprimand or action. They might have been arrested a couple of times, or might have been banned form contesting elections for a period of time, but these are drops in an ocean. They get away by paying measly fines and carry on with their ways.

I wonder, why these double standards when it comes to hate? Is inciting hatred against a religion a bigger crime or in some way, a more morally corrupt offense  than advocating hate against people form a particular region/ethnicity/state? Doesn't our constitution and its preamble denounce both regionalism and religionism in equivocal terms? Then why does one invite instant hue and cry and results in action, even if delayed, while the other just gets swept under the rug after ruffling a few feathers?  One doesn't have to dig deep to find the answer. While religion offers a bigger, stronger vote bank, regional integrity isn't so strong that flaring up these sentiments translates into large scale political gains. Also, it was easy to make Owaisi a convenient scapegoat, as he belongs to a minor party which doesn't hold much influence. But action against these powerful, towering leaders of ethnocentric parties in Maharashtra and other states for that matter, who enjoy massive clout and considerable public support, will definitely amount to a risk, and thus is conveniently ignored. 

There is an urgent need to instill fear into the minds of the people in position, that they can't just get away with saying whatever they want, especially when it causes grievous hurt to even an individual, leave alone a community, or the entire nation for that matter. We have all seen the foot in the mouth complex most of our public figures suffer from in the wake of the Delhi gangrape case, with every other person blurting out his worthless two cents without so much as thinking once as to the meaning and the consequences of their words. And this is a particularly dangerous phenomenon when such figures, whether political, 'spiritual', or in any other public domain, command a following of hundreds of thousands of people in a complex, diverse society like ours. It would serve us a great deal of good, if an example is made out of a few of them with harsh actions and retribution for openly flouting laws, or violating the principles of our constitution. Even better, we all should really start introspecting and take a closer look at who we are raising to such a pedestal.

P.S. - 50th post of this blog to inaugurate the new year!