|
| Devangshu Datta: No to competitive intolerance | | In the battle to defend fundamental rights, one should be prepared to undergo many hardships |
| Devangshu Datta / New Delhi Feb 13, 2010, 00:03 IST |
|
In the battle to defend fundamental rights, one should be prepared to undergo many hardships. However, watching My Name is Khan (MNIK) crosses the line. Not even my ardent support of freedom of speech and artistic expression will lead me into three hours of likely purgatory.
It is precisely because MNIK seems an unremarkable work that one can focus with clarity on the real issues in Shah Rukh Khan versus the Shiv Sena (SRK Vs SS). Where politicians have interfered with free speech, there’s usually been some focus on content.
Not here. Nobody is arguing about the artistic merits of MNIK. The Sena is plain and simple demanding the right to punish anybody who dares to disagree publicly with its party line. That is plain and simple wrong.
Actually, content is always irrelevant when attempts are made at censorship. SRK or anybody else, has the right to make as good or bad a movie as he can. Anybody has a right to watch or not watch it, just as they have a right to choose ice-cream flavours.
The controversy arose from something much more morally complex. There has been no credible official explanation for the lack of enthusiasm in the IPL auctions for Pakistani cricketers. There have been several “off-the-record” explanations — parsing those for meaning is not very useful.
However, whatever SRK may feel about the subject, both as an individual and an IPL franchisee, he does have a right to say it. The SS has every right to disagree with his opinions. But they don’t have the right to muzzle him.
Obviously, the SS hopes to gain vote share in the upcoming Mumbai municipal elections by creating a row centred on SRK-MNIK. It hopes this will help it compete with the MNS, which has opted instead to play the racist card.
That the SS and the MNS between them could find no campaign issues other than competitive intolerance shows great paucity of imagination. It would be a different matter if Mumbai was a squeaky-clean environment where everything worked perfectly. That is scarcely the case.
Anybody with even cursory knowledge of the western megapolis is aware of its problems. Choked transport, poor utilities, corruption in land registration, deteriorating law and order, high rates of inflation, etc., are all dominant concerns for residents, like elsewhere in India.
Unfortunately, remedying any of those lacunae would require governance skills. Those are harder to acquire than rhetorical ability. The average Mumbaikar, wherever he or she may hail from, would vote for anybody who could knock 20 minutes off the daily commute, and deliver better water, power and sewage services. Instead, the MNS promises to drive out private transport operators, while the SS promises to muzzle anybody who disagrees with its posturing.
Both the SS and the MNS are taking big bets with their respective strategies since they have abandoned all ambitions at national level. The SS has broken off with the BJP. The MNS has ensured no party with any North Indian exposure can afford to ally with it.
There is a suo moto petition before the Bombay High Court to take action against political leaders who incite vandalism. That would be grist to their mill since it would give them a chance to put muscle on the streets.
In the long run, the only thing that may work against the escalation of competitive intolerance is the ballot. If both parties lose ground in the munis, they would be forced to rethink their respective platforms. Mumbai’s residents have received much acclaim for their stoicism in the face of hard knocks. It would be great if they proved they were smart as well by refusing to endorse either of these divisive and unimaginative agendas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
