12-13-2005, 08:32 AM
http://www.indiblog.com/63/us-professors-f...eligious-riots/
US Professorâs faulty logic blames Indian government for religious riots
Martha Nussbaum, a professor of Law in the University of Chicago and a romancer of Amartya Sen in an earlier life, is seriously prejudiced against the BJP in India. Her article that constantly rebukes Modi and the BJP and flowers immense praise on Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh raises serious questions about the professionalism and ethics of her writing. It is the numerous faults of the article, however, that has incensed me into writing this rebuttal.
Until the spring of 2004, its parliamentary government was increasingly controlled by right-wing Hindu extremists who condone and in some cases actively support violence against minorities, especially the Muslim minority.
In her first paragraph, she has criticized the BJP Govt. both at the centre and state of abetting with religious extremism in Gujarat State. Although there have been many wild allegations of this sort, none of them have any weight because the matter is currently sub-judice and so far there is not enough evidence to incriminate the Government. While she mentions the Godhra train burning incident, the lack of respect given to this stands starkly against her vivid descriptions of the aftermath. The Gujarat riots clearly have a religious premise and the Govt. is still not found guilty of any conspiracy charges. On the other hand, the Sikh riots of 1984 had a political premise based on the death of Indira Gandhi and the riots themselves were justified by Rajiv Gandhi in his irresponsible words, âWhenever a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shakeâ. Moreover, quite a few people in the Congress Govt. have been incriminated in participating in these riots. Therefore, her outspoken support in favour of Congress is tainted and clearly biased. I am not trying here to clear the BJP of any wrongdoing, but only pointing out that while there is evidence for Congressâ indulgence in religious riots, BJP has not been convicted of involvement in similar mischief. Consequently, her painting of Congress all rosy betrays her prejudice.
The fact that it has yet to make it onto the radar screen of most Americans is evidence of the way in which terrorism and the war on Iraq have distracted Americans from events and issues of fundamental significance.
It is grave of any academic from any part of the world, more so from the US, to indicate that terrorism and the unjust war on Iraq are trivial matters. Clearly, Martha has gross imbalance of faculties in suggesting that terrorism and Americaâs conquest of Iraq are not âissues of fundamental significanceâ in todayâs global scenario.
Amidst her rather graphic description of violence, which she wholly and unjustly blames on the Hindus, she alleges that two thousand Muslims were killed in the riots. The official death toll revealed by the Indian Govt. is: 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus. It is rather disconcerting that distinguished academics should make fantastic claims without due references.
But Gujarat also shows us something else: the resilience of pluralistic democracy, the ability of well-informed voters to turn against religious nationalism and to rally behind the values of pluralism and equality.
The state of the economy, however, was not the only major electoral issue. Prominent as well was a widespread popular rejection of religious extremism.
Martha goes on to tell us that it is the riots of 2002 that led to the fall of the BJP in 2004. For her kind information, in the elections in Gujarat state that were held after the riots, Narendra Modiâs BJP government came back with a resouding victory. My aim here is not to justify the riots, but to clear misinformation.
She would also have us believe that Congress was voted into power at the Centre partly because of the alleged religious extremism of the BJP. She may be naive in the political history of India, but that is no reason to concoct false relations between two incidents. The Muslims of India have always voted for Congress in the past. Suggesting that the Muslims switched to Congress from the BJP after the riots is an untruth. Therefore, the fall of the BJP was only because of the rural vote, which indicates that the reason was wholly economic, confirming and conforming with the opinions of numerous analysts.
Over the next few days, I want to blog about this story â- a story of democracyâs near-collapse into religious terror and of democracyâs survival (at least for the time being) â a story that has important lessons to offer to all nations struggling with problems of religious extremism. The posts are all drawn from a book manuscript I am now finishing up.
Martha tells us that she is writing a book on this. Having seen her standard of writing, I can only hope that her book is classified as âFictionâ rather than anything else!
US Professorâs faulty logic blames Indian government for religious riots
Martha Nussbaum, a professor of Law in the University of Chicago and a romancer of Amartya Sen in an earlier life, is seriously prejudiced against the BJP in India. Her article that constantly rebukes Modi and the BJP and flowers immense praise on Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh raises serious questions about the professionalism and ethics of her writing. It is the numerous faults of the article, however, that has incensed me into writing this rebuttal.
Until the spring of 2004, its parliamentary government was increasingly controlled by right-wing Hindu extremists who condone and in some cases actively support violence against minorities, especially the Muslim minority.
In her first paragraph, she has criticized the BJP Govt. both at the centre and state of abetting with religious extremism in Gujarat State. Although there have been many wild allegations of this sort, none of them have any weight because the matter is currently sub-judice and so far there is not enough evidence to incriminate the Government. While she mentions the Godhra train burning incident, the lack of respect given to this stands starkly against her vivid descriptions of the aftermath. The Gujarat riots clearly have a religious premise and the Govt. is still not found guilty of any conspiracy charges. On the other hand, the Sikh riots of 1984 had a political premise based on the death of Indira Gandhi and the riots themselves were justified by Rajiv Gandhi in his irresponsible words, âWhenever a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shakeâ. Moreover, quite a few people in the Congress Govt. have been incriminated in participating in these riots. Therefore, her outspoken support in favour of Congress is tainted and clearly biased. I am not trying here to clear the BJP of any wrongdoing, but only pointing out that while there is evidence for Congressâ indulgence in religious riots, BJP has not been convicted of involvement in similar mischief. Consequently, her painting of Congress all rosy betrays her prejudice.
The fact that it has yet to make it onto the radar screen of most Americans is evidence of the way in which terrorism and the war on Iraq have distracted Americans from events and issues of fundamental significance.
It is grave of any academic from any part of the world, more so from the US, to indicate that terrorism and the unjust war on Iraq are trivial matters. Clearly, Martha has gross imbalance of faculties in suggesting that terrorism and Americaâs conquest of Iraq are not âissues of fundamental significanceâ in todayâs global scenario.
Amidst her rather graphic description of violence, which she wholly and unjustly blames on the Hindus, she alleges that two thousand Muslims were killed in the riots. The official death toll revealed by the Indian Govt. is: 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus. It is rather disconcerting that distinguished academics should make fantastic claims without due references.
But Gujarat also shows us something else: the resilience of pluralistic democracy, the ability of well-informed voters to turn against religious nationalism and to rally behind the values of pluralism and equality.
The state of the economy, however, was not the only major electoral issue. Prominent as well was a widespread popular rejection of religious extremism.
Martha goes on to tell us that it is the riots of 2002 that led to the fall of the BJP in 2004. For her kind information, in the elections in Gujarat state that were held after the riots, Narendra Modiâs BJP government came back with a resouding victory. My aim here is not to justify the riots, but to clear misinformation.
She would also have us believe that Congress was voted into power at the Centre partly because of the alleged religious extremism of the BJP. She may be naive in the political history of India, but that is no reason to concoct false relations between two incidents. The Muslims of India have always voted for Congress in the past. Suggesting that the Muslims switched to Congress from the BJP after the riots is an untruth. Therefore, the fall of the BJP was only because of the rural vote, which indicates that the reason was wholly economic, confirming and conforming with the opinions of numerous analysts.
Over the next few days, I want to blog about this story â- a story of democracyâs near-collapse into religious terror and of democracyâs survival (at least for the time being) â a story that has important lessons to offer to all nations struggling with problems of religious extremism. The posts are all drawn from a book manuscript I am now finishing up.
Martha tells us that she is writing a book on this. Having seen her standard of writing, I can only hope that her book is classified as âFictionâ rather than anything else!