The “moral pygmy” comment, of course, is borrowed from Representative Tom Lantos, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who christened Internet giant Yahoo! thus, for their role in helping identify a Chinese dissident, who was later imprisoned [link]. While the pygmies wonder what they did to deserve for their name to be used in such a derogatory manner, we divert our attention to the desi blogosphere which is beginning to experience a meltdown of sorts because of a comment made by blogger Vikas who calls India a “moral pygmy” when it comes to civil liberties [link]. This post linked on Desi Pundit has drawn the attention, actually ire, of the “say-no-bad-about-India-at-any-cost” crowd which is resulting in attacks of a personal nature on both, Vikas, and DesiPundit’s Patrix.
While I don’t agree with Vikas’ reasoning for not returning to India, which he based on a few highly publicized incidents of blatant violations of civil liberties, I do think India has a long way in recognizing civil liberties for individuals.
While the situation in (most parts of) India is nowhere as dire as in China, the individual is largely still a repressed person. For your voice to be heard, either your thinking should be in line with that of a political party or of that of the largest crowd. The problem lies with the fact that civil liberties were never a big selling point in India in the past where most people, including the middle class, were more worried about the basic necessities of life like food, water and employment. After independence, our political leaders quickly caught on to this fact and quickly peddled us with a brand of government that indoctrinated generations of people with the lesson that as long as basic necessities like food, water and jobs were taken care of by the government, civil liberties could take a backseat.
This is a very unscientific poll but if you asked people across the country in India whether they would allow the government to tap their cell phones to keep them safe from terrorists, a large majority would approve, irrespective of their caste, region, religion or socio-economic status. To me, on a personal level, this would be unacceptable. Would you allow someone from the government to setup a microphone in your living room and listen in on every conversation you had with your family and friends? Surely not. Even if they said it was to protect you from terrorists? No? Then why allow them to do so on your emails or cellphones where you have carry on similar conversations with your families and friends.
That is but a simplistic example of the kind of lack of civil liberties that Vikas is alluding to. Vikas (and Patrix and myself) may live in the US, where in the past decade or so, civil liberties have taken a hit, under the guise of …. you guessed it …. the government protecting us from terrorists. But still, there is a major difference. I could go on but the point of this post is not to compare India with China or India with US but to highlight the fact that people are totally missing the point. While no one has come forward with a single positive counterpoint about civil liberties in India, or the lack of, what is happening in the comments section is personal attacks on Vikas and Patrix. Throw in a liberal dosage of NRI bashing and it’s all in a day’s work for these so-called “patriotic Indians”.
It is arguable whether the decision of Patrix or Vikas to move back to India or stay in the US will have a significant effect of the political landscape in India. What does make a serious negative impact on the current political landscape in India, is the lack of a mature dialog and the usage of nationalistic jingoism when serious issues are raised, as seen in the comments section of those two posts. Whether there is a “moral pygmy” is debatable, but we do have stunted dialog.
Loading ...