terror

The Love Jihad nightmare

On the shores of the Great Lakes of North America stand giant silos, into which are poured grain coming from many states of the USA, and provinces of Canada, and from different growers. The silos belong to the companies that buy the grain. Once upon a time, when the slave markets thrived in Africa and the Americas, people were similarly  bought and put into holds. Nowadays as the fervour of religious fundamentalism rises, there are several spontaneous attempts to herd people into silos and label them. One of the most threatening arises from the fear of ‘love jihad,’ and, we hear, even some educated Indian police officers are joining scare mongers in a cry to protect Hindu women from the designs of Muslim men.

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but men are coming back in numbers with murder in their hearts, as several khap panchayats have tragically demonstrated. Where then are we as a secular society? We are backing towards new definitions of a caste ridden society, or even worse towards a revival of apartheid, in which separate silos do not denote equal sharing of power or access, but clearly differentiate between those who have and those who don’t. The laudable introduction of political correctness into our vocabulary, so that we do not hurt others unwittingly, has also resulted in guarded hypocrisy, with affiliate groups closing ranks against the others.

If openness of dialogue is lost, the freedoms of everyone is imperilled. It may at times be better to be rude, than harbour secret hatreds. It was such societal refusal to bring out into the open the grudges and prejudices that people carried that led to the horrendous happening of the holocaust under Nazi control, for irrational and ‘un-Christian’ prejudice against Jews was known to pervade European societies for centuries. And transferring a white European shameful problem to Palestine has not absolved the Europeans of guilt. It has created fresh tragedies.

Scapegoating of a people, a religion, or a culture, merely creates impassable barriers to mutual understanding. Islamophobia is creating anger among Muslims in many nations, anomie in minority pockets, and breeding irrational hatred in a few. French law has decreed that hijab is not permitted to be worn by women in public places. If an open culture is to be protected, there should be open discussion in the context of the 21^st century, to know how much is cultural practice, and how much is fear of men, both Muslim and white. There are of course liberal Muslim voices being heard in the Middle East, in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, but Indians do not ask why there are so few voices heard in India, which is supposed to be a conglomerate of secular communities. Our social walls are dialogue proof, and even a polite enquiry from over a wall is considered offensive. We have lost the ability to help each other, of different religions, castes, ethnicities, linguistic groups. The tips of these multiple isolations can be seen in the arrogant ways of behaviour rampant in India. It can even be noticed in the ways scientists dismiss non-scientists; administrators non-officials; and feminists men. Guarding one’s turf should not lead to self-defeating isolation.

Much of our fear of loss of identity, of pollution of belief, of destruction, stems from an archaic dread of transgression of commandments, which we have inherited from the archetype of a stern father, of a vengeful god. Perhaps, one of the greatest of social movements was the emergence of the concept of a loving God, a beneficial and merciful God, but piety towards such a God has not erased the earlier fears that have come down from prehistoric life. Further, sexual fears are among the most atavistic, combining fears of our own inadequacies with an exaggerated notion of the potency of ‘the other.’

It is only patient dialogue across many such belief or cultural boundaries that can produce a sense that no identity is lost, no transgression has taken place, but only a fresh understanding, unalloyed by fear. Mr. Karamat Ali, a Pakistani national, who has worked untiring for better understanding between the peoples of India and Pakistan suggested in a recent conference in India that perhaps we should seek to embrace a new identity as ‘south asians.’ It was a worthwhile suggestion, but we may not have to seek a new ersatz identity to reach mutual friendship. It would be better to see that all identities are intact and flowering under contact, and all are complementary to each other. The courage to talk rather than politically correct indifference is the need of the hour. Harilal, the Mahatma’s son became a Muslim. None called him a ‘jihadist’ but the narrower minds of today may not be so broadminded, which is a pity.