Freedom of Expression is the most debated, offended and defended topic in the whole world. Most of the narrative comes from media and intelligentsia. The common man does not even know what it exactly means. But, yet every now and then he/she reads about Freedom of Expression (I consider Freedom of Speech a part of Freedom of Expression). Some months ago a notion floated in the minds of some historians and then media injected the concept through their means into the brains of Indians, called ‘Intolerance’. Everyone who thinks he can think jumped into this debate of Intolerance and finally almost everyone from learned community or intelligent existence of India concluded that India has become ‘Intolerant’. So, let’s first learn the definitions of some terminologies.

Freedom Of Expression:

Article 19 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights by UN states that, Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Intolerance:

The dictionary definition, Intolerance is not being able to bear or endure beliefs that are different from your own.

Now, these are general and universal definitions and you will see nobody contradicting to these definitions. I personally believe that Freedom of Expression must be absolute. One must be allowed and free to express his/her opinions through any medium without being persecuted. But, in hugely diverse and religious countries like today’s India talking about absolute freedom is daydreaming. I want to stress particularly on Today’s because, from whatever I have read or seen about history of India, today’s India is definitely less tolerant about anything. Just to give one example, if you look at sculptures carved on the walls of temples of Khajuraho, in today’s India it will be certainly called ‘Pornography’ but, they are not called so because they’re created by previous generations.

The sculptures depict Kamasutra (another very important yet almost ignored literature of India due to explicit contents). Even if someone in today’s India writes a book on the same topic as Kamasutra. It will be most likely banned from printing or will be termed ‘Pornographic Literature’.

I think these two examples are good enough to prove my point. In almost all ancient temples of India (places where Gods are supposed to exist) you will see wall paintings, carving, sculptures of gods which, no one in today’s India will dare to recreate or create something like them. Remember M. F. Hussain? He was tortured by mob and was persecuted to migrate from India, because in his paintings he showed Indian gods and goddesses nude or semi nude. A Muslim artist painting Hindu gods and goddesses nude or a Non believer artist creating cartoons of Prophets or Upper caste artist expressing his views about lower/other castes, is the worst thing that can happen to any artist in India.

I have no shame in accepting that being born in an Upper caste, I am completely afraid of even opening my mouth against any other community in India. I am afraid of the people as well as the law, yes! some of the laws in India restrict Upper caste people from taking names of the lower castes. (By, writing this I hope, I am not violating any law or not hurting anybody’s sentiments). See? I have to write these words in brackets just to be safe because I am afraid. Do you think I have Freedom of Expression according to UN definition mentioned above? Plain answer is NO!

Second, favorite topic in the ecology of Intolerance-FOE (Freedom Of Expression), is sentiments. There are many definitions of sentiments, but roughly sentiments are basically what feelings you have about certain things, feelings which are derived from the culture, religion, social structure and upbringing etc. Now, for every strike on FOE, the common rationale given is ‘sentiments getting hurt‘. What do we exactly mean by that? It just means, I or we got offended by because you showed disrespect to something or someone we feel greatly about. People’s sentiments get hurt when you talk about gods, goddesses, heroes, heroines and founding fathers of anything.

Recently we had the case of vandalism in Pune, when a group of people vandalized a statue of a writer, who wrote a play around 80 years ago, which according to the group hurts their sentiments about their hero. Ram Ganesh Gadkari, one of the tallest play writers and poets in Marathi literature, in a play called Rajsanyas, had some dialogues of Sambhaji Maharaj, which were derogatory according to the group. (See, I am not even daring to mention the name of the group. I will not, I am just any other frightful writer.) Now, if you ask me, does the group have right to feel offended? Absolutely! Do they have right to protest? Yes, no doubt. Then where does the problem lies? Simple answer is violence. Vandalism is not the dignified way of protest in civil society.

Art is supposed to and must offend some people/ cultures/ traditions/ sentiments. What’s the use of art if it does not dare to critique the life in every aspect. Artist will be a liar if he does not express what he thinks is right. An artist must make people with status quo uncomfortable by destroying their comfort zones, raising valuable questions. It is viewer’s right to accept artist’s view or not. In any case artist and free thinkers must not be silenced.

As an ardent reader and student of Indian mythology and history, when I read the literature of ancient India till literature of 70’s India compared with today’s India, I can clearly see the ability of writers, poets to speak the truth on its face regardless of religion, faith, culture and tradition is lost. Unfortunately in this course of event, literature lost, it lost against tyranny and oppression. Anyone, who thinks he is not afraid to write about anything in today’s India, please contact me and I will challenge anyone to write and criticize on certain topics publicly. It’s sad but true that we are living in the days of political correctness. Where you can’t say anything that hurts someone. What’s wrong if some thoughts hurt somebody else? Don’t I as a poet and a writer get offended when I don’t feel safe enough to write on certain topics? What about my sentiments? My sentiments are as important as anybody else’s sentiments. What if my sentiments get hurt? Should I take revenge by violence? Obviously not, because I know one rule in civilized constructive and creative world.

Answer to a thought must be a thought, only a book and be an answer to a book, debate and discussions should pave the path of society and not guns and stones. When someone comes up with thesis, other comes with anti-thesis, together they form Synthesis. It’s like churning of ocean, which yields elixir as well as poison. The society has the responsibility to accept both without violence because Lord Shiva is no more amongst us to save us from poison. Life is an ocean, thinker, writer, poets provide their thoughts/ art as means for churning and society must stand in the middle to make sure churning is allowed.

Artists are also part of the society, and everyone in the society has complete freedom to ignore the artist. But, to the contrary society is in constant search of an artist, which people find offending someone or something i.e. hurting the sentiments. The biggest hypocrisy is that when one community remains quiet when other community is oppressing artist and thinkers, it claims to be tolerant, but does the same oppression when someone hurts their sentiments. Just to give a simple example, many Hindus take pride in saying that we did not persecute Taslima Nasreen or Salman Rushdie because we are a tolerant community but in the same breath they do not hesitate is saying that what happened with M F Hussain or Ram Ganesh Gadkari was right (Of course I am not generalizing any community, but the people who take up violence are often part of the groups following certain self righteous principles). Again, I do not intent to hurt anybody’s sentiments. I will write it wherever I can.

Do you see the hypocrisy? So next time when you take side of anyone or any organization which came down to violence against any artist or writer or poet think about their Freedom Of Expression.

Another dimension to the discussion on intolerance and FOE goes through media. By media I mean main stream media like TV Channels and News Papers. Although, TV channels have taken up the topic of Intolerance and FOE more strongly than any other media. But, unfortunately instead of informing and educating people TV channels have gone down the lines of sensationalism. Instead of educating people about FOE and standing by the people who are accused of hurting somebody’s sentiments by writing or speaking something, TV channels arrange debate fruitless shows. These TV debates if you have witnessed anytime, generate no solution and no actual support or help for the accused. TV channels get their TRP ratings but what about the artist or accused thinker? Nobody cares about them. As far as newspapers are concerned, most of the local newspapers have affiliations with either political parties or straight connections with politicians.

Pan Indian newspapers have certain set of rules and ideologies they have to follow. As the newspaper has become a commercial project rather than a social work, you see more advertisements than real news in newspapers. Big media stars and reporters have got so much power that they have one to one contacts with the power corridors of government. If you are so close with the authorities, how in the world will you be objective and neutral. Think about it, if there is a person in regular day to day contact with you, even though he is not your friend you will still refrain to write or say anything against him/her. There have been cases where media has cracked down individuals speaking up and expressing their view, search Chaitanya Kunte just in case you want to know what am I saying. I think this is where media especially today’s Indian media is lacking behind. Nobody will stand by you in case you go against authorities, conventional norms, customs, religions, media in one word establishment!

The most flammable topic in the debate of Freedom of Expression and intolerance is Religion. Most number of battles in the written history of mankind were fought on the basis of religion. Even today after the natural causes, the biggest reason of deaths in the world is religion. The intolerance begins with the sentence ‘how dare you belittle our god?’ and ends with either vandalizing or directly silencing the speaker or artist. Take a look around you, do you see any real logical critique of religion? I must mention here that I do not call so called NGO’s and self proclaimed leftists as critiques of religion. Most of the NGO’s have some or the other political agenda or ties with the power houses. Being leftist or being communist doesn’t make anyone critique of religion or even culture for that matter.

Rather, leftists in today’s India are the most apologetic creed. They are so biased that new generation out rightly rejects them. (This is new debate happening in today’s world about, rise of the right wing). In my view any ‘ism kills the truth when you identify yourself with any ‘ism you subscribe to the holistic philosophy and no philosophy in world is complete truth. This identity restricts the follower from taking a stand which may contradict to the core philosophy of ‘ism. So, instead of becoming an ever flowing spring of fresh thoughts today’s India has become a cesspool of politically correct, biased, untrue, fearful and toothless/spineless thoughts.

Added to this misfortune, the politics of India has proven to be the first violator of FOE. India lost it’s credentials to be a free country when Article 19 (1)(a) said that Freedom of speech and expression are fundamental rights, but these are not absolute rights, there are qualifiers. The qualifiers are, “interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence” will be paramount and freedom of expression will not be unconditional. Now, most of the oppression of FOE in India is caused due to public order, decency or morality, because of religions, castes, creeds.

Like I said, Indians’ sentiments get hurt very easily. Morality becomes paramount talking about religion (any religion), women’s rights and national heroes, but, it has no value when it comes to threatening writers and thinkers, throwing stones at them and in some cases killing them. Powerful people at powerful positions can make your life miserable over few words. This is the most I will talk about situation of FOE in today’s India for now, because I am afraid. I am afraid even while talking about, talking about FOE might cause me trouble. If you think I am exaggerating, think again and write an article which will be focused on mistakes or shortcomings of national heroes and see it for yourself. My nation was built on the basis of total freedom to write, say or express anything about anything without fear.