Author: Rajeev Srinivasan
Publication: Rediff on Net
Date: May 22, 2003
URL: http://us.rediff.com/news/2003/may/22rajeev.htm
I have observed for some time that
there is a certain class of people who might best be called 'Resident Non-Indians',
or RNIs, for they apparently reside in India, manage to look and act astonishingly
like real Indians, even hold Indian passports, but are decidedly anti-Indian
in mindset. I wrote an open letter to them years ago, but given their hyperactivity
recently I thought I might bestir myself once again.
I stress the difference between
the RNI and the NRI: in fact, NRIs or Non- Resident Indians are frequently
targeted by RNIs, primarily because, with the wisdom that distance brings,
NRIs have seen through RNI propaganda. See my column, 'Fear of NRIs'. Non-Resident
Indians, being abroad, are also not subjected to the daily brainwashing
of the Indian public that RNIs specialize in.
When I think of these decidedly
ornery RNIs, I am reminded of the proverbial woodcutter from the Panchatantra
who saws away at the very branch he sits on. For reasons best known to
them, RNIs attempt to destroy the very system that sustains them. Theirs
is a self-fulfilling prophesy: by acting as though the Indian State were
ipso facto barbaric, they will succeed in making it barbaric.
Despite all their loud accusations
about the Indian State suppressing dissent, I am yet to hear of any censor
stopping any RNI from mouthing their nonsense anywhere. But let them continue
for a while like this, and there will be those 4am knocks on their door
that we all came to know and love during the Emergency.
RNIs use Orwellian terminology and
nomenclature terrorism. According to them, war is peace and terrorists
are poor, oppressed, misunderstood minorities. If RNIs call something 'x',
you can be sure that thing is 'not x'. A most undemocratic East Germany
called itself the German Democratic Republic. A most totalitarian country
calls itself the People's Republic of China. Similarly, RNIs call themselves
'secular progressives' whereas they are neither secular nor progressive:
a more truthful description would be 'regressive fundamentalists'.
There are many RNIs whose ethics,
and antics, are interesting: one 'resigned' from Indian citizenship, but
happily travels on an Indian passport. Another has a visceral hatred for
non-Marxists, but is alarmed at the prospect that Indian Marxists may not
get invitations to come over to the US to preach hatred of everything America
stands for.
RNIs also have started assuming
the mantle of 'patriots'. In every possible way, they demean and diminish
India; and yet they claim to be patriots: clearly, the last refuge of the
scoundrel. They are indulging in Patriot Games, as in the Tom Clancy novel.
But wait, there may yet be truth to their claim: they are indeed Chinese
patriots, doing everything in their power to help Chinese interests. They
stand ready to welcome the Chinese, to garland them with marigolds, should
they invade. They must be practising their speeches daily for the event.
They are ready to garland Pakistanis
too: this is what Wagah candle- lighting and people-to-people contact is
all about. Unfortunately, Pakistanis seem to think 'people-to-people contact'
means their people massacring our people. When Pakistani terrorists are
shot or captured, RNIs move heaven and earth to harass Indian security
forces.
These RNIs are willing to sacrifice
Indian security forces to protect foreigners or traitors. Anywhere else,
somebody who did this would be disgraced, or summarily shot, depending
on the tenderness of the authorities. For example, someone in China supporting
Uighur separatists; in the US supporting the perpetrators of 9/11; in Indonesia
supporting Aceh secessionists. Only in India are such specimens considered
'thought leaders'. Ah, the wonders of 50 years of Nehruvian Stalinist brainwashing!
I have been complaining about their kind of craven journalism for years:
see my old column J'accuse...
Talking of rotten journalists, I
was delighted to see the story of The New York Times' Jayson Blair, who
nonchalantly made up brilliant stuff for which he was considered a rising
star at the esteemed paper, which allegedly prints 'all the news that is
fit to print'. And then some, Jayson Blair demonstrated. I was happy to
see this story for two reasons: I was getting tired of all the Laci Peterson
stories and Jessica Lynch puff pieces, and it was good to see something
meaty for a change.
Second, I have long felt that the
NYTimes does not quite live up to its lofty self-perception as an exemplar
of journalistic excellence. In fact, with their correspondents in India,
for instance, the inimitable Barbara Crossette and the insufferable John
Burns, the quality of their journalism has been extremely poor. Much like
Jayson Blair, these NYTimes reporters did not quite do the research they
need to do, but instead depended solely on RNIs at JNU, and therefore specialized
in painting an unfair and extremely one-sided, negative picture of India.
When there are real incidents of
violence against India or Indian culture or the Indian Diaspora, alleged
RNI 'patriots' are thunderously silent. A case in point: the recent fuss
over golfers Vijay Singh and Annika Sorenstam. Singh, a Fijian of Indian
origin, merely said that a woman might find it difficult to play against
men because she lacks upper-body strength. Racists in the American media
immediately launched an attack on India, Hindus, Vijay Singh's ancestors,
Indian culture, alleged misogynism therein, bride-burning, and so forth;
yet none of the RNIs or even the resident American comrades of Indian origin
raised a peep. None of them came to the defence of what they claim is their
culture. I am not surprised: for, like the snatched ones in Invasion of
the Body Snatchers, they only appear to be Indian.
Yes, there are some Indian comrades
who live in America and abhor everything America stands for. They remind
me of an old IIT classmate of mine, son of a Kerala Communist leader. He
used to go on and on about how wonderful the Soviet Union was and how terrible
the US was; he generally got on everybody's nerves because we really didn't
care. But surprise surprise! After graduation, he did not go to Patrice
Lumumba University in Moscow; he went to America, and stayed on.
At least this gentleman keeps quiet
about his (one-time?) Marxist sympathies. This is not the case with a number
of Communist Indians, who are quite high-profile in the US. Unfortunately
for them, the times, they are a-changing. The US Immigration and Naturalization
Service wants them. Here is an excerpt from some relevant information:
The USA Patriot Act (November 2001)
included several post-September 11 revisions to the Immigration and Nationality
Act.
Examples of aliens [also] ineligible
for visas include those that fall under Section 212(a)(3)(C), regarding
"Foreign Policy" which states that "any alien whose entry or proposed activities
in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe
would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for
the United States is excludable."
Additionally, Section 212(a)(3)(D),
regarding "Immigrant Membership in Totalitarian Party", states that, "Any
immigrant who is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist
or any other totalitarian party (or subdivision or affiliate thereof),
domestic or foreign, is inadmissible."
In other words, green card-holding
Communist Indians in the US are liable to lose their status as immigrants.
Indian-Americans have started reporting these people's affiliations to
Homeland Security; and it is only a matter of time before a polite official
may be knocking on their doors, giving them 48 hours to pack their bags
and be deported. In the US, a hard State, there are limits to tolerance
for sedition. I wonder if the deported Communists will go back to the despised
India, the 'fascist communalist' State. No, they will go to the Promised
Land, China, where they will be welcomed with open arms and escorted straight
to a gulag.
There are other RNIs who violate
stringent laws, but because of their connections, get away scot-free. One
such had an inaccurate map of India, awarding all of Jammu and Kashmir
to Pakistan, on a Web site for years. This is a major offence, a felony,
in the Indian Penal Code: it is non-bailable, and many lesser mortals have
been jailed for it. But this particular RNI was not arrested. Why? Must
be because all people are equal, but some people are more equal than others,
as in Animal Farm.
Other RNIs write openly seditious
propaganda, advocating that their friends and financiers abroad should
invade India and take it over. India's territorial integrity is of no concern
to these traitors. The very existence of India is not high on their agendas,
either: they firmly believe in Marx's ignorant comment that Indian history
is only a succession of invasions. So what's one more, they ask, when they
can tear themselves from preparing garlands for the Chinese.
RNIs had a field day regarding the
Gujarat riots last year, shouting from the rooftops that Hindus were engaged
in a one-sided pogrom against Muslims. This blood-libel has been used as
a stick to beat India ever since, and will continue to be used for the
next century, I am sure, by RNIs and their friends at the NYTimes and CNN
and the Washington Post.
Yet, the Justice Nanavati Commission
officially investigating it has just tabled its report. Here is a direct
quote: "On the evidence that we have recorded so far, it would not be fair
to say that only Muslims were targeted. Initially though Hindus may have
been the perpetrators of violence because they were angry, later members
of both communities were engaged in the violence."
Isn't it a cognizable offence then,
which the RNIs need to be punished for collectively and individually, for
creating an atmosphere of great communal animosity? According to the Indian
Penal Code, this is a serious offence, and clearly this is what the RNIs
did. Why aren't they being held accountable for their purple prose and
wild exaggerations?
The RNI also disregards two cardinal
principles generally accepted around the world regarding human rights:
* The rights of the terrorist and
the renegade are not greater than the rights of the average citizen
* The rights of the citizen are
greater than the rights of the non-citizen.
Therefore, I can understand that
some RNIs' hearts bleed when Pakistani terrorists are killed in India.
But their hearts do not bleed for the victims of Pakistani terrorists.
Why, I wonder, do they not worry about the human rights of the innocent
pilgrims massacred by Pakistani terrorists at the Akshardham temple in
Gujarat? On the Amarnath trek? In Godhra? Or Hindus massacred in Nadimarg?
Or at Marad? One possible answer: extreme ideological stasis. Another possible
answer: thirty silver coins, Judas-style.
RNIs suffer from selective outrage
and indignation. They are the uber- dhimmis of India: for they are only
worried about pain to Muslims and Christians (whether said pain is real
or manufactured). I never see them worry about the human rights of Hindus;
therefore, I conclude that, according to them, Hindus are not human. The
word 'bigotry' leaps to mind.
There is a little-known aspect of
the Indian Constitution that was brought to my attention by S Kalyanaraman.
This is Article 51A, which lays out the counterpoint of the Fundamental
Rights, namely the Fundamental Responsibilities of Indians. Here is the
article in its entirety:
Article 51A. Fundamental Duties
- It shall be the duty of every citizen of India -
(a) to abide by the Constitution
and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National
Anthem;
(b) to cherish and follow the noble
ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom;
(c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty,
unity and integrity of India;
(d) to defend the country and render
national service when called upon to do so;
(e) to promote harmony and the
spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending
religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce
practices derogatory to the dignity of women;
(f) to value and preserve the rich
heritage of our composite culture;
(g) to protect and improve the
natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and
to have compassion for living creatures;
(h) to develop the scientific temper,
humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;
(i) to safeguard public property
and to abjure violence;
(j) to strive towards excellence
in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation
constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement.
I would like you, gentle reader,
to consider how many of these your favourite RNIs fulfil.
More to the point, how many do you
fulfil? I have certainly asked myself that question.
When we look only at rights, and
not at duties, we end up supporting many wrongs. This is precisely what
the RNIs do. Irresponsibility has a price, of course. And this price is
paid not by well-connected RNIs, but by the average, long-suffering, silent-majority
Indian.
Postscript
I have been following with interest
the new fora put up by rediff.com for responses to my column. In particular,
I was reading through the responses to my column on the massacre at Marad.
It was just as I expected: some people with Muslim names responded reasonably,
showing that they too feel that the incidents at Marad were deplorable.
My experience with the Muslims of Kerala has been positive: I have Muslim
friends, and they are extremely decent people (although we carefully skirt
all talk about religion).
There were a number of responses
from people with assumed names: and these were the most vicious. I jump
to a conclusion: these are stealth Marxists, that is, Marxists with Hindu
names. As I have said repeatedly, they are the real danger to the country,
as they are far more fundamentalist about Muslim issues than Muslims themselves
are: and they indulge the most obscurantist Muslims.
I would like to pose a challenge.
How many of these Marxists has donated any money to a Hindu temple? I am
fully entitled to ask this because a few months ago, I went to the Beemapalli
mosque in Trivandrum and donated some gold and a non-trivial amount of
money. My otherwise agnostic father has been giving money for years to
the Chisti Dargah in Ajmer. I bet not one of these Marxists can honestly
claim that they have been equally secular in regards to Hinduism.
Hindus in Kerala generally have
been kind to religious minorities. The problem has been bad infighting
between the two major groups of Hindus, the low-sudra Ezhavas and the high-sudra
Nairs. Ezhavas allied themselves with Muslims, and Nairs with Christians.
Both Muslims and Christians flourished, and both Ezhavas and Nairs have
suffered. Hindus in Kerala probably deserve their eclipse for their foolishness.
It is true that there has been little
communal violence in Kerala. In fact, I know Hindus with names like Salim,
Ayesha, Hashim; one of my cousins married a Muslim woman and as far as
I know neither of them has converted, and there was no major fuss about
it. But a few more Marad- type incidents, and all this harmony will go
for a toss. It is up to the moderate Muslims to ensure that their ranks
are not being infiltrated by ISI-inspired terrorists: for most recent violence
in Kerala has been Marxists killing Hindus, and Muslims have wisely kept
out of this mess.
Incidentally, I must thank Varun
Shekhar of Toronto, whom I have never even corresponded with, for being
very supportive on the online fora. Varun, I appreciate your kindness.
Also, I was entertained to see a
comment from a doctor who was amazed I knew a fair amount about infectious
diseases. Purely what an aware lay person should know from reading the
general news.
