Why must intellectuals be second-class citizens?

Shameful. That is the only way to describe the treatment meted out to writer Salman Rushdie. What can be more depressing for a country than a bunch of fanatics forcing world citizens of such eminence to stay away from the country? But more than the threats of this bunch, what should trouble the collective conscience of the nation is the naked vote-bank politics at play in  Jaipur. The Rushdie controversy was never about The Satanic Verses or his presence at the literary festival; it was about electoral politics in Lucknow. Had the writer not been in the picture, the political people would have invented or manufactured some other controversy to reach out to the target audience. In 2007, when he graced the festival, there were only murmurs of protest in some quarters in the Muslim community. The difference in reactions now points to other aggravating factors. Sadly, the issue would be dead in a couple of weeks. Before that, there will be furious debate on freedom of expression, the quality of our secularism and our brand of cynical politics that holds intellectuals at such low esteem vis-a-vis locally powerful groups with some leverage with leaders. Surely there would be talk about lack of unity in the intellectual class and their inability to influence electoral fortune of parties. [caption id=“attachment_192843” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“The politicisation of our minds has been self-defeating. Reuters”]  [/caption] Such debate has been going on for decades but there has been no change in equations. There is little hope that it would change in the next half century. With the circumstances of politics remaining unchanged, the community of writers, artists and other creative people is destined to remain a dispensable entity in the democracy, second-class citizens with no freedom to express themselves. Celebrated painter MF Husain was hounded out of India by fundamentalist elements. He died abroad, pining for a barefoot walk in his beloved city, Mumbai. Rushdie may not be allowed to enter India ever. Must the situation be allowed to continue like this? The creative, intelligent community must sit back and think. They have reduced themselves to non-entities by being passive in their resistance to vandals and self-seeking politicians. With the power of immense intellect to back them they could change that. Why not retaliate? No, they cannot be expected to indulge in fisticuffs with goons with a political support system but they can certainly organise themselves into a pressure group. With the option of the media, the social media in particular, within reach, they could easily influence and mobilise intelligent opinion in their support, and more importantly, against antagonistic forces. The political class will be forced to take note if they build strong enough a support group. Had they been organised this way in Jaipur, the local government would have been much more careful about handling the Rushdie issue. Politicians are opportunists. They have no special love for any group, neither Muslim not Hindu. They would back off at the slightest hint of resistance. Moreover, we have reached a time when pressure works the best, not civility. Governments do not react unless there’s pressure, either on their image or their electoral prospects. Treat the intolerant groups as separate entities from the wider communities they claim to represent. Our treatment of the problem of communalism remains flawed because of faulty generalisation and ill-considered stereotyping. The ordinary Muslim is not much different from the ordinary Hindu. They are neither given to extreme thinking or violent actions nor supportive of groups who indulge in it. Are the sentiments of the groups claiming to be hurt by books or paintings shared by the larger community too? To quote Rushdie, who was speaking to NDTV: “The vast majority of Indian Muslims really, frankly, don’t give a damn whether I come or go. They have many other pressing concerns of their own, to do with their own economic conditions, their own educational conditions, their own prospects in the country, and they are concerned with those. They are concerned with their personal lives and not whether a writer comes to speak at a literary festival or not.’’ Nothing is closer to the truth. The point is: let’s not overestimate their strength or pull in the community. Politicians, by pandering to small groups, have perpetuated the myth of their incredible power. That has to be demolished. That is why defiance is something the lovers of literature at Jaipur should have tried. The politicisation of our minds has been self-defeating. If voices have to be raised against fanatical forces, there has to be no difference between a Hindu militant group or a Muslim militant group. Both are obnoxious and dangerous to the country. The Congressisation and BJPisation of our minds have distracted us from looking at these groups dispassionately and cutting them to size. Why don’t we see much cross-community support for someone like lyricist Javed Akhtar who have been vocal in his opposition to the fanatical Muslim groups? Our intellectuals must get out of that constricted societyview if they do not want to remain as second-class citizens. We have reached the point we have to make a choice. The mix of opportunistic politics and religious intolerance must not be allowed to bulldoze free thinkers.