Author: Dr. Vijaya Rajiva
Publication: Haindavakeralam.com
Date: November 2, 2010
URL: http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=12497
When a gifted novelist abandons her writing
and enters the world of political analysis for which she is ill equipped then
we have a disaster called Arundhati Roy. Her pronouncements on Kashmir are
embarrassing. Any Indian undergraduate would know the facts of Kashmir's accession
to India in October 1947 and Pakistan's subsequent invasion of Kashmir through
the so called tribal invasion (one assumes that Roy has a university degree
of sorts). Some commentators believe that her ignorance is feigned and is
intended to serve her larger (misconceived) goal of separatism.
The present writer believes that the ignorance
is genuine. Her knowledge of Indian history and politics is virtually non
existent. This is compounded by her singular indifference to the anguish and
suffering of the Kashmir Hindus, some 400,000, who were driven out of the
Kashmir valley by the very same leader Syed Shah Gilani with whom she shared
a platform at that infamous conference in New Delhi on October 21, 2010, a
meeting protested by Kashmir Hindus, and where she blatantly called for support
to the Gilanists.
These Kashmir Hindus live as refugees in various
places in India in dire conditions.Many have died in these camps owing to
illness and neglect. Prior to being driven out, many members of the community
were tortured and killed by the same forces now led by Gilani. Liberal historian
Ramachandra Guha has commented on this in his book India after Gandhi:
"These women and men were not killed
in the crossfire, accidentally,
but brutally targeted. Many of the women were gang raped before
they were killed. One woman was bisected by a mill saw. The bodies
of the men bore marks of torture. Death by strangulation, hanging,
amputations, the gouging out of eyes,were not uncommon. Often
their bodies were dumped with notes forbidding anyone - on pain
of death-to touch them."
(India After Gandhi, 2007, p.642)
After the criticism of her indifference to
the plight of the Kashmir Hindus, as an afterthought, she made a passing reference
to the topic and blamed it on the government of India! No criticism of her
ally Gilani and his cohorts. She also added that she has expressed her sympathy
for the Kashmir Hindus in the past. Where and when, Ms Roy? Could you produce
some evidence?
Her statements on Kashmir and as well on other
topics concerning the Indian polity are often laced with fabrications and
exaggerations. There is, ofcourse, a word to describe such a person, which
one hesitates to use, because Arundhati Roy, in the last analysis, is a victim
(The present writer has pointed this out in the article 'Arundhati Roy is
a victim' Haindava Keralam 25/10/2010).
Roy's condoning of Maoist barbaric violence
(the beheading of policemen, the chopping of their arms and then slitting
their throat) cannot be forgotten. The polite noises that emanate after the
fact, that she does not condone the violence, are hollow pronouncements.
What has been described as her ravings and
rantings against the Indian state are just that. The causes she espouses have
become a mere smokescreen for her hatred of the Indian state. She now stands
exposed as a fraud. What we see is the devolution of a once gifted writer
into a caricature of what might have been had she not succumbed to her ambition,
vanity and publicity seeking.
Why did this happen? Why is this a case of
mild pyschosis?
The present writer has speculated that it
is owing to her early victimization by her upbringing in a Kerala Christian
family. There was a double alienation at work here. On the one hand, there
was the alienation from Hindu India (and Roy still has no serious understanding
of Indian history, which is naturally the history of Hindu India). This was
brought on by the colonial missionary heritage and the monotheism of Christianity.
Grafted onto all this was the false secularism
(phrase used by Shri Nambiar in Haindava Keralam, in a comment on the article
by the present writer) she derived from her mother who was something of a
modernist, and from the larger world of contemporary Indian secularism. While
the deracinated Hindu secularist has misunderstood secularism, he or she is
also partially still grounded in his or her Hindu heritage. Roy, on other
hand, has no such stabilizing force.
Consequently, as she degenerated into a mere
rave and rant personality (rather than one who seriously critiqued social
conditions in India) she became a victim of the agenda of all those from outside
India, who are not interested in social justice issues but are looking either
to convert India to their religious world view or to destablise and balkanize
the country.
The Kashmir issue became a separatist/Pakistani
enterprise, disguised under her call for azadi. The Christian outfits were
disguised by the propaganda against alleged Hindu misdoings. The Maoist barbarism
was justified by the criticism of corporate interests, something others also
have criticised, without the Maoist fig leaf.
And so on. Her ambition, vanity and publicity
seeking compounded the problem.
What is the way out for this individual and
for the unfortunate situation in which she has landed herself? The present
writer would suggest a year of total silence, during which she can catch up
on her education, especially a thorough understanding of Indian history. She
could consider taking her Christian faith seriously, since there are many
in the community who quietly practise their faith. Many, if not most, have
retained their loyalty not only to the Indian state but to the country at
large, a country which has opened its doors to various religions. Many have
made important contributions to the country (among prominent politicians,
one name immediately comes to mind, the Defence Minister A.K.Antony). She
can quietly, without seeking publicity, involve herself in social justice
issues and even in political ones.
There is one thing she can also keep in mind.
Her latest shenanigans have only united the country. Bharat will certainly
continue, since it is the only extant surviving great civilization from the
past. Millenia have gone by and it is doubtful whether Hinduism can ever be
defeated by the childish games played by people like Arundhati. One can add:
not even the powerful vested interests behind her will unseat the Indian state.
Pity the state that would silence a writer,
says Roy. But she should worry about her own descent into a muddled frame
of mind that makes her an easy prey for dishonest agents.
Pity the writer who has lost her bearings!
Pity the writer who has silenced her own conscience
and sold out!
- (The writer is a Political Philosopher who
taught at a Canadian university)
