The Hindu Rate of Wrath



The title for this piece is borrowed from Fracois Gautier’s passionate article in the Outlook magazine. His article is a response to the latest sensation in India about the ‘Hindu’ bomb blast in Malegaon allegedly carried out by Sadhvi Pragya Takur.

One of the most prominent pseudo-secular media houses in India CNN IBN smacked its lips when this issue was reported as they had a chance to proclaim that ‘Terror has no religion’ the phrase usually used in the meaning ‘Don’t blame Muslims for Islamic terrorism.’

In the article mentioned in this piece, Gautier scoffs at calling Malegaon blasts as Hindu Terrorism. He lists some of the atrocities committed in India for the past 1000 years and evocates Hindu’s nature of tolerance. The article’s most exciting closure goes like this:

There are about a billion Hindus, one in every six persons on this planet. They form one of the most successful, law-abiding and integrated communities in the world today. Can you call them terrorists?

Though Hindus, especially the Right Wing Hindus would be quite exhilarated by these words, a pause is required here. Gautier would do well to read Edward Said’s Orientalism and another of his book, Covering Islam. These two books are Said’s elaborate attempt to list out various Western atrocities on Muslim soil and in turn justify Muslim’s anger towards West, (which also indirectly hints that terror acts are their outlet for the historic anger.) Deeply researched and brilliantly written, Orientalism almost convinces you about Islam’s wrath. Only ‘almost’ because you ask several, several questions which are left untouched by Said. Gautier makes the same error in judgement of using history to either justify or overlook the present.

Gautier says Hindu’s response is only reactionary, a retaliation of centuries of oppression and organised atrocities of the invaders. V S Naipaul was the first to put forth this idea and not many followed it up and now it emanates from Gautier. Ironically, the Hindu Fundamentalism – created to retaliate Islamic Fundamentalism – now almost mirrors it’s foe in operation and attitude. The only thing that was pending in this process was resorting to organised terror and an amateurish start has been made now.

If Hindus are going to be drowned by Gautier’s passionate energy that smacks of mild Hindu atavism, then it would be a great mistake.

Because what is happening today in India is the natural reaction expected of a civilised society. The media screams foul and political parties rock the parliament about the Hindu brand of terror. The ordinary citizen is enormously concerned to see his Hindu brethren adopting the Al Queda attitude. This is the right response of a society for one amateurish action by their people. This should be encouraged and shown as the model for the rest of the societies where terror acts galore and the society remains mute, or justify either emotionally or worse intellectually like Edward Said.

Though the Sardesai/Congress sponsored phrase ‘Terror has no religion’ is much maligned and clichéd, does have a little validity. Only a little.

India responding angrily towards the terror activity speaks warmly about her compassion and guilt. BJP’s embarrassment sends comforting signals to the society that the second largest political party in India is not ideologically blinkered. India’s response to Pragya Singh’s case has a clear, confident message: Despite the atavistic clamour of Bajrang Dal and SIMI, fascistic force of Raj Thackaray, and destructive demeanour or Sonia and Laloo, Indian society remains sane and sensitive. For more than two thousand years, India has not tolerated violence. Nor will it ever in the future.

Image sourced from: Outlook India Website