PG-13 nation
No adults please, we’re proud Indians
(Published in Business Standard)
Another
day, another state. The Opposition alliance stands shell-shocked at the
altar as Nitish Kumar runs in slo-mo through tulip fields, hair
streaming prettily, into the arms of his old flame the BJP. Much has
been forgiven and forgotten. As @atti_cus observed on Twitter, Nitish
suddenly remembered that Lalu is corrupt, and suddenly forgot that Modi
is communal. With Bihar in the bag, the Opposition alliance in shreds,
and a friendly President at the head of the Republic, things are looking
bright and shiny for the BJP and Sangh Parivar in their relentless
quest to turn India into a PG-13 country with a mean streak.
Besides
cynically using soldiers on the border, besides tacitly-approved
lynching, besides failing to make any economic headway, besides creating
communal tinderboxes, besides trying to get everyone to accept Hindi as
the national language, the thing that most irritates Indians is the way
in which we are being culturally infantilised and sanitised.
Fully
grown Indians are being nannied by patriarchal relics like Pahlaj
Nihalani at the Central Board of Film Certification, who upholds his
loopy version of family values by, for example, saving ladies from
themselves. The CBFC refused to certify Lipstick Under My Burqa
on the following grounds: “The story is lady oriented, their fantasy
about life. There are continuous sexual scenes, abusive words, audio
pornography and a bit sensitive touch about one particular section of
society, hence film refused [sic to all of that].” The Film
Certification Appellate Tribunal overturned the decision, and the film
is currently in theatres, but my god, should the arts be at the mercy of
people like Nihalani?
We’re
being supervised by people like Dinanath Batra, the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh educator and educational activist who advocates
post-truth textbooks that re-design history in alignment with the
Sangh’s views. He’s willing to junk scholarship and academic integrity
wholesale, in favour of propaganda. Kids really don’t need to know too
much about Nehru or Tagore. Manmohan Singh’s public apology about the
1984 anti-Sikh riots in Delhi should be removed because it was only put
there to make the Congress look good—plus, it automatically makes
everyone’s eyeballs swivel to where Mr Modi stands, not being contrite
about the 2002 Gujarat riots. Kids don’t need to know that Hindu society
didn’t treat women well, or that Mughal rulers could be benevolent, or
that the destruction of the Babri Masjid helped the BJP grow. And why
not tell the kids that Maharana Pratap, not emperor Akbar, won the
legendary battle of Haldighati? Truth is entirely expendable in the
all-consuming quest to somehow, by whatever means possible, feel proud.
We’re
being administered by a central government whose opinion of Indians is
that we are too poor and socially backward to deserve a fundamental
right to privacy, and should instead be proud and happy to let proud and
happy businesses exploit our data. This is not only the very definition
of paternalism, but also at sharp and confusing odds with the same
government’s insistence on our mega-global-super-greatness.
We’re
being ordered, by our courts, to love and respect India—or, since
that’s not enforceable, being ordered to put on ritualistic displays of
such love and respect by standing for the anthem and singing patriotic
songs and installing flagpoles and bits of military hardware in
universities.
Confident
countries that believe in themselves don’t feel the need to regulate
citizens in this pathological fashion. It is the ferment of plurality,
dissent, individuality, and liberty that fosters creativity, innovation,
betterment, and excellence. It’s the feeling of being free, and treated
fairly, that makes people feel they have a stake in their country. That
feeling, of having skin in the game, is the definition of patriotism,
and it is earned, not legislated.
The
Sangh seems tormented by self-esteem that is not just low, but infected
and seeping. How terrible this unquenchable thirst for cultural
validation, a thirst so great that you’d think that the Hindu right has
been a tiny muzzled minority since Independence. They now have the
political and possibly even the cultural majority. Why, then, are they
still hankering to be included by the despised left-leaning media? Pride
typically manifests in calmly and confidently going about normal life,
so why are they spending their time insisting on red-eyed,
frothy-mouthed assertions of pride? If their worldview is so
self-evident, why are they having to force people into their way of
life? Why so much bluster?
The
Sangh stayed largely aloof from the freedom struggle. It may be that
its own preferences are for structure and instruction over freedom. Its
version of freedom may be the freedom to be culturally restrictive. But
you can boss around fully grown adults for only so long before they turn
around and start giving you lip.