Case 1: When a news/media outlet publishes an opinion piece by a chief minister with not only a disclaimer but also claiming copyrights on the opinion (to which they claim they are not liable), asking not to quote even a part of the article coupled and warn with a strict legal action, what does it mean?
The media establishment is NDTV and the writer is none other than the chief minister of Bihar Mr. Nitish Kumar – setting records straight on the ‘liquor ban in Bihar’.
After reading the warning, without money bags coming from over shores, a columnist like me would never dare to question the logic or the lack of it in Nitish Kumar’s ‘record’ nor the ‘warning’ of NDTV. Is this the free speech NDTV wants to have all Indians? But, then what should one expect from a media outlet wherein only those who vent venom against India can write something?
The fact Nitish Kumar and NDTV should note is that no one is against the liquor ban except those who make money out of it. But, it is the way of enforcement by Nitish Kumar that is being questioned. Is it correct to arrest entire family (while most or all of them are victims) when one person indulges in ‘boozing’? Is it correct to take action against policemen if someone in the area policed by him prepares/drinks liquor? If the answer to these two questions is YES, then why not take action against the entire family, if one from them is a thief or a rapist or a murdered? And why not the chief minister resign from his post, for he failed to uphold law and order in the state, which he had taken an oath to maintain? Any answers Nitish babu?
It seems everyone in Bihar wants a quick solution with a short-cut of sorts. If the chief minister can enact a law and suspend policemen so much so that policemen have refused ‘promotions’, what is wrong with a family that wants their daughter to top the board examination?
Morality is top driven. Perhaps it is time to remind Nitish Kumar on this. By enacting a law on liquor prohibition, does he think he could become Mahatma Gandhi overnight?
Let me remind him about the last attempt at alcohol prohibition. After two year struggle by women’s groups, NT Rama Rao had declared he would enforce prohibition immediately after coming to power. And the man famous for his dramatics, he got the file ready before taking oath and signed it immediately after taking oath, on the stage itself. If Nitish Kumar wants to gain popularity with his decision, he should have done something similar. And then prohibition of alcohol failed in Andhra Pradesh – miserably.
It is time to remind Nitish Kumar on so many other aspirations of Mahatma Gandhi. One of them is corruption. Laloo Prasad Yadav, the man who was synonymous for corruption and was doggedly haunted by Nitish Kumar for two decades is his new found ‘friend’. A friend in need is a friend indeed. It is high time Nitish Kumar removes the ‘naqab’ of morality and show his true colours. But, it appears he is afraid of being questioned! He was not ready to get questioned the illogical argument he presents supporting his ‘good’ decision of banning alcohol.
Case 2: There was another opinion piece in circulation how the Modi’s deal with Gau-Rakshaks lacks ‘moral base’. Though it is not from NDTV, but from Firstpost by Mr Sandipan Sharma. By selectively quoting Gandhi, they put the onus of morality on Modi. I suggest Sharma to read the following letter (perhaps the last one by the great man) to increase his understanding of Gandhi.
In fact, the original Gandhi wanted Congress to become a Lok Sevak Sangh (I could see Mani Shankar Aiyyar turning his face to the other side on reading the name suggested by Mahatma) to have five affiliations, of which one was meant for ‘Cow Protection’. That an affiliation is named ‘Goseva Sangh’ (Again Mani squirms!).
What type of journalism ignores Gandhi’s opinion on Cow Protection and talks of only the rowdy vigilantes? Why none of the so called Gandhian followers ignored the words of Mahatma? In contrast, many of the states have banned cow slaughter by the then congress governments. Why they have banned cow slaughter, ignoring the directive from the union government that warned about the collapse of leather industry, if hides are taken only from naturally died cattle, preferring slaughtering of cattle for ‘good quality’ hides?
If I state Sandipan Sharma and Ramchandra Guha, who could never question the wisdom of Indira Gandhi for writing to states to enforce the ban on cow-slaughter in letter and spirit, am I wrong? Who was behind the continuous cow-slaughter that happened in the country – against the law of the land? If the past governments could not uphold the law, why they claim they have done service to the nation by passing more laws that gave rights to the common citizen, from the right to information to education?
Few days back cattle smugglers fired on a cop in Jaunpur and killed him. In fact smugglers drove the pick-up van over him. Not so surprisingly, there were no debates or high shrilled campaigns against cattle smuggling. Maybe he is neither Dalit nor Muslim to evoke any empathy from the liberal media. But, even he does have a family, which the liberals wish don’t exist.
It is the accumulated wrong deeds of the Congress that gave rise to the birth and growth of BJP. Similarly it is the collective and selective dementia of liberals that ‘frustrate’ normal people like me and force us to respond. And don’t blame us for our response, for sure it would be strong.
PS: For anyone who think we support cow-vigilantism, we spoke one week before Modi spoke.