Kartikey Sehgal
(Rated Mature)
A relation between ‘media writing about rape and society reading about rape’.

1. Media Covers Rape

The media knows all about rape. How it happened. When it happened. How many and what they did. If they are connected to someone powerful. What was the girl wearing. The time. If she was alone. Should she be alone. If she shouted. If she was gagged. Her sisters or brothers. The family of the rapist. And much more.

Newspapers give front page preference to many rape stories. News channels cover almost every rape story in detail; they have half hour modules for rape and crime stories.

However, this intensity and inquisitiveness is lost during the ‘non-rape’ times. Politicians and policy makers are not hounded for information on how they plan to prevent rapes.

The media—as it seems—does not even realise that education is a factor in reducing crimes. Education—confidence—self-assurance—dignity—respect for self and others. It is interested only in ensuring punishment for the perpetrators; a step anyway guaranteed by the courts.

It does not disturb the policy makers to open libraries and schools in villages. It does not stand outside their government-sanctioned homes and ask questions on the same.

‘Sir, after the last crime, what have you done to ensure that the youth of the village/city/Delhi does not indulge itself in sex crimes?’ No. This doesn’t happen.

Instead, details of the most sordid aspects of the crime are reported. Lectures on sex crimes are printed in newspapers and news channels add background music to an enactment of the crime.

The media reports a rape. And in its heart it knows that the next one will come soon. It is prepared to ‘cover’ it.

2. Society Reads Rape

The media covers rape because society loves to read about rape. The repressed (even non-repressed) men of cities and villages love the sex part of the rape. They may condemn rape but they want to know about the intercourse. They want to read about the setting; whether it was a lone room or an abandoned building.

This may not be unhealthy; the ‘excitement’ of reading about the rape is simply the body telling you that it wants sex. It does not imply that the reader is wicked and wants to rape.

Excessive fascination with rape related stories could be a sign of boredom and massive repression. No parks or gardens, minimal interaction with the opposite sex, religious tensions—all these could lead to a sense of loneliness and boredom. But this does not mean that the repressed individual would commit crimes. He could, instead, shy away from society and women.

However, certain individuals are not able to distinguish between their body’s demand for sex and the pleasure derived from reading rape stories. They may equate pleasure with rape. They may go out of their way to obtain information on sex crimes.

Such individuals form the primary audience of newspapers and news channels who write explicitly about rape. The media writes about and shows sex-crime stories keeping these individuals in mind. They should push for education (as written above in part one) so as to minimise sexual confusion in such individuals. So that they don’t go on to commit sex crimes.

This doesn’t happen. Media feeds on the rape obsessed individuals who in turn feed on media.

Santa Singh

One
Have a look at this lady [photo top: right]. She has acted in renowned and mostly-art-house filmmaker Shyam Benegal’s ‘Well Done Abba’. You would say that she is in the movie because she is pretty, graceful or beautiful. But then you learn that she has had a nose surgery done to rectify the nose that Mr. God gave her. While there may be something or nothing wrong in that (I find her pretty), it means that she does not consider herself as proper or even beautiful.

So you would imagine that she was chosen solely for her high powered acting skills. Oh, well…

Let’s face the truth. She may have been chosen because she is marketable, because that face is recognised and because she took little money. She represents the merger between ‘art films’ and ‘commercial films’. The producers wanted to add some sexiness to the film. So that the costs are recovered. So that—going by her earlier films where she wore almost nothing—people have something to look at. Something to imagine. So that even if she doesn’t wear bikinis and tube tops in this movie, people come to the theatre remembering her earlier… outfits.

 
(source)
“Hey look, it’s that girl from the earlier movie where she wore close to nothing. She is acting in a new movie. She won’t remove her clothes but do you want to check her out?”

This is better than people saying…”Who is this new girl? I have never seen her before. She won’t even remove her clothes in this movie. Do you really want to see this movie?”

So effectively, the ‘art’ filmmakers are drawing from the earlier underwear show of the heroine. This, my friends, is the power of the bikini. Do something sexy, anything, just get noticed and then do some art films to ‘complete’ your career.

I have written about Shyam Benegal in an earlier story. I quote from there…

“Why not theatre actors or some unknown ‘ugly’ chap who’d share the passion for cinema? Oh yeah! you want somewhat saleable actors for the market. But then, didn’t you make some low budget lovelies before?”

Two
Jahnu Barua, winner of one, two, three, four… eight national awards is making a film, which, according to our friend Wikipedia features Preity Zinta, Shiney Ahuja, Isha Koppikar and Dharmendra. No, No… nothing against the actors. But do you have to work with commercial actors to make films in Hindi. What about the time when you made low budget films in Assamese? Can’t you do something similar here?

Here’s more from Wikipedia:
”Initially, Dipannita Sharma was supposed to play the supporting role of Zinta’s room mate, but was later replaced by Isha Koppikar.”
Don’t you feel blessed to read the multiple options available to our talented director? Do you feel the power of plenty?

The shocker doesn’t end here…
”Dino Morea makes a special appearance in a song composed by Pritam Chakraborty.”
I claim again that I have nothing against commercial actors. I even enjoy their work. They are good for a rainy day when you are homeless, foodless and need some acting skills to revive yourself.

I am not saying that the film won’t be good and that the actors won’t act brilliantly. It is all possible. But it shows that Jahnu has to bow down to the Hindi screen demigods. It should be the other way round. He should work with the best actors and the demigods should try to fit into his scheme of things.

Sadly. Aisa nahin hota.

Santa Singh

(On Amitabh Bachchan being hounded by a political party
Read: One, Two)

Hello ____ (insert your name here). How are you. Come, we will now embrace. Say (I wink), the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world eh?

(You look blank)…uh of course… Earth laughs in flowers. Heh heh heh…

Which flower?

Um… sorry?

Which flower does the earth laugh in.

Oh it’s a quote by Emerson.

(I shout) No WHICH flower does the earth laugh in.

Ummm… any flower… say lotus.

How dare you, you murderer!

Sorry?

I am sorry I embraced you… you minority murderer. I talked of the hand you reply with lotus. How dare you? I should have known that you dream of minority bashing.

On The Streets

Hit him hit him, he does not support secularism. The son of a gun was pelting me with lotus. If you stand for Gandhi peace then hit him. Show him the path to peace and secularism.

Look… I just happened to mention Lotus… that was a quote by Emerson.

Was Emerson supporter of the Hand or did he like the Lotus?

How do I know if he liked the Hand or not… I guess he had one and so he wrote that quote. And most people like flowers so I guess he liked Lotus but that does not mean I…

How dare you suggest that most people like Lotus… beat him up. Show him what happens when the might of the Hand is questioned.

You cannot bash me for liking a flower. Oh hell! I only mentioned it…

Quick, do you think the Prince is the most handsome of all?

Prince? India does not have a Prin… oh i get it now. Of course, I like him.

Stop beating him. Good. So you like the Prince?

Of course, he is long-standing and evergreen. I love his work.

I am glad you are on the right path.

Oh thanks for that. I love Dev Anand.

Hit him again. This fool does not understand the language of the Hand.

But wait… I thought that the Princely states were abolished…

Give him to Daku Bhayanker Singh.

Now wait, he is a daku, don’t you have to arrest him and all?

He is a self-sacrificing daku. When it was time to anoint himself as the head daku, he quietly gave the position to his accountant. He imbibes the philosophy of the Hand. We love him. He is a true secular Indian. Get him Daku.

Kartikey Sehgal

If you want to have a clear picture of the events,… then you may watch these videos instead of relying on the contents of the traditional media that holds the ongoing Indian Premiere League as more important than the ongoing riots.

The participating minority community has not endeared itself to the nation by indulging in riots at Karnataka and Bareilly. The media has been relatively silent on the riots till now—apparently to not blow it into a national issue—but the shopkeepers and bylane residents of small towns don’t rely on the English papers to direct their emotions and outrage. Many of them will either actively or passively support action against the perpetrators of violence. So let’s brace ourselves for another round of riots.

Among the residents whose women were attacked and homes were looted would be the peace lovers who believe that the nation belongs to all; to every community, caste and religion. They would in a bout of outrage, and in the assured absence of justice, wonder how the minority community can dare to attack members of a community that makes up for most of the nation. His sense of nation-for-all would be dearly disturbed and he would set out on what the media houses would eventually call—communalism.

However, sitting in cities highlighted by swanky buildings and urban-only development, many people are unaware of the nuances of small town riots and would be unfettered by their dreadful living conditions; their life marked by the expectancy of killing and looting and the promise of peace as only a temporary reprieve. The channels would do intermittent features on the event but not of the scale of Godhra. That is until a large number of people die; they will, eventually, when hordes of formerly peace loving citizens will join to defend themselves or plan for revenge. Then the media will bring out it’s favourite card—secularism.

Don’t fret if 10-20 people die
For the rest have just invited me for dinner.

Dissemination of news is among the chief duties of media houses. It must not blow the trumpet only during major big-time riots. The populace is already weaning away from them and looking to alternative media to provide for actual perspectives on issues. Residents of Bareilly have put up videos of the riots/destruction on the internet and bloggers have written extensively on the recent riots, often showcasing the reluctance of the ‘mainstream’ media houses in covering the ongoing riots.

–*–

Whatever community, sect or religion you belong to, it would not be wise to ignore these riots as the handiwork of mad men and sit back in peace; the cast of those affected in the violence includes educated people. Except that they don’t belong to the politically controlled environment of cities. Even in cities, certain areas—non high-profile—are affected by small clashes. An area in Mumbai (probably Chembur) was recently affected by rioters who resorted to stoning cars. The incident did not get much media coverage. However, it affected the local residents of the area, some of whom may resort to revenge-violence in the future. And you may be the next victim of that violence.

That is why people are resorting to alternative media to report their problems. They want to escape from their dependence on the traditional media. They don’t want to be pawns of a secular process that suppresses their issues in the name of peace and semblance. That is why they have uploaded videos onto YouTube and have invited discussions on their problems. If you want to have a clear picture of the events, in the form of examples, then you may watch these videos instead of relying on the contents of the traditional media that holds the ongoing Indian Premiere League as more important than the ongoing riots.

As I write this story, I learn that the police have already released one of the main causers of the Bareilly riots. Purportedly to maintain peace and sanity in the area. Never mind that the accused has already caused much damage to people and property.

–*–

In the videos, you will see:

*weak police
*rioters with swords
*a woman describing her ordeal
*burnt shops
*police fighting the rioters with… stones
*disgust of the people who have uploaded the videos

The Index of Videos
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bareilly+riots&search_type=&aq=f

–*–

Sifting through the religious taunts that make up the comments’ section, here are a few responses to the videos:

*Law and order failure
insult of court
hell to bloody politics
some thing has to be done in future to save our beloved city

*12 days ke lambe time ke baad bhi agar media abbhi tak nahi jagi hai
akhir yah media kya karna chah rahi hai kya yah sab uhi chalta rahega aur hum aise hi sabkuch dekhne ko mazboor rahenge…

Even after 12 long days the media has not wakened
after all what does this media want, that all this continue forever and we become forced spectators to all this…

Kartikey Sehgal

Rated Mature.
Swami: A title given to a monk or a spiritual master

It may be an uncomfortable truth but swamis have hair on their body. When they recline on their bed and if the robe around their body is loosely tied, then it will pull up, exposing to anybody interested, hairy thighs. Sometimes they may even scratch those thighs.

Yet when they sit in their robes and talk about spirituality and science, many listeners don’t imagine such basic truths about the swami. They think about and talk of his mind and his spirituality, with their fulcrum in the brain that they describe as holy or brilliant.

Since sex has been relegated to a secondary or tertiary position by the society, they don’t imagine that the swami must be indulging in something so trite and lowly. This is true especially for women; consciously, many of them imagine that the swami sees them ‘purely’ i.e. without sexual thoughts. Perhaps that’s what draws them to the swamis in the first place, that he would be able to help and explain without the entrapments of a sexual brain.

They expect him to talk of worldly matters and of matters pertaining to beauty but without a direct involvement or any experience. The experience is supposed to be spiritual, which for them means that the swami should be guided by ‘pure’ thoughts and observances on matters relating to sexuality. Since he is enlightened, they imagine, he is supposed to have successfully parried the lesser affairs of life that include sex and money.

Why would you listen to a swami who talks solely out of observance and not a psychologist who has experienced stress and health and sexual issues.

The fact of the matter is that swamis are supposed to have experienced life before guiding others about its nuances. They may remain celibate and successfully preach about a better life but nothing stops them from marrying, which would include, obviously, partaking in sexual pleasures.

This shouldn’t be a surprise if you consider the fact that a swami is not like the priests of other religions. He is supposed to be guided by his own sense of propriety. He should be a thinker. This is substantiated further if you consider that the Indian scriptures are reference books and not the absolute law. To regard them would be to hold their contents in high esteem and to draw lessons or ideas from them. They were not written so that the followers could be punished for their deviance from the book.

Evidently, if the swamis are defined by their thoughts and subsequently their work, and if the thoughts and work are not binding to the book, then any common man or woman can assume the prestige associated with the title of ‘swami’. Or if not the title, then they could attain every prestige that comes with the title solely through their work. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was not a swami and he was given the title of ‘Mahatma’ because of the density of his work and ideas. But his admirers give him the respect reserved for swamis and saints. And while Mohandas gave up sex after consultation with his wife, he did mention to his associates about his failed attempts at curbing sexual thoughts and penile erections. No respect for the man was lost among his followers because of this failure. It was not considered a failure in the broader spectrum; it was an issue between a man and his beliefs.

So unless a swami announces his celibacy he should not be considered as sexually inactive. The rule shouldn’t hold the swami as sex-free, and for that to happen, the societal perception to the place of sex in life must change. Sex should be considered as a part of man and not distinct from him.

Women, especially, should not expect the swamis to not see them in the idiom of beauty and desire, for there’s nothing wrong in admitting the natural dynamics of man-woman relationship. The society that holds sexual pleasure as inferior is corrupted in it’s thoughts owing to misplaced conceptions about Indian scriptures and general miseducation.

And though they are not forceful to existing societal mores, the Indian scriptures contain insights to the nature of humans and their various relations; they are not averse to sex. The society must recognise this truth and recognise the nature of their being. And who better than the swamis to promote this thought.

Ananth Venkatesh

Secularism is a laudable concept that has been constitutionalised in several countries of the world. France and Turkey are two examples of nations that come to mind. They have an intransigently secular constitution that is vehemently opposed to the infiltration of religion into the affairs of the state.

The Turkish military remains a bastion of obdurate secularism that feels threatened by the Islamist personality of the party that is currently guiding the country. However, it would be prudent to mention that the Justice and Development Party, though Islamist and conservative ideologically, has largely protected the secular nature of the Turkish polity. The example of the justness of Turkish laicism has, deplorably, not been emulated by a majority of the Muslim world. The secularism of the Turkish nation is laudable and must be a ‘role model’ for other Islamic nations. One mustn’t forget that Turkey is a predominantly Muslim nation. It underwent constitutional secularisation in the aftermath of the dismantlement of the sickly Ottoman Empire.  Mustafa Kemal, the procreator of modern Turkey, believed that Turkey must journey on the secular path.

Of course, French laicism is accompanied by the notion of the identity of the French civilisation. Now, the Frenchification of the immigrants is integral to them being embraced by the French society, which is a wholly legitimate demand. In this regard, the legislative decree that debars the ‘burqa’ in public and penalises the imposers of the ‘burqa’ has been defended by many French secularists as a measure that is compatible with the French laicism. A right-wing national government, shepherded by Nicolas Sarkozy, was the progenitor of this motion. 

 
(Photo Source)
What the Islamic opponents of this move fail to grasp is that the French identity, of which secular principles are intrinsic ingredients, is implacably attached to the intellect of a majority of French citizens, who are, predominantly, white Gauls.  The burqa or the Islamic veil that is symbolic of the subjugation and submissiveness of Mohammedan woman is incompatible with the French civilisation. In any case, French secularism doesn’t demand the obliteration of mosques in France or doesn’t decree that the French Muslims, largely of Arabic descent, from the ex-French colonies in North Africa, disassociate themselves from their faith in their faith. It merely calls for the acceptance of certain norms of public behavior that embody Gallicisation. It asks for conformity to the tenets of the French constitution that anyhow are not vitriolic detractors of the idea of freedom of speech and religion.

Mohammedanism, according to many honourable Islamic theologians, doesn’t mouth that the embracement of the oppressive veil is mandatory for the Islamic females. This can certainly be said. What the Muslim fanatics in favour of the veil claim is that Islam mandates the wearing of the burqa. This is nothing but poppycock. The declaration of such claims stems from a parochialist and chauvinistic mindset that is ill at ease with the reasonable thought that Islamic ladies too can compete in a fair manner with their male counterparts.

Those who unswervingly smack Hinduism as the principal force that has the potential to bulldoze the constitutional secularism of India fail to remember that it is the paradoxical Hinduism that permitted the two ancient religions of the world, Zoroastrianism and Judaism, to function in India. Zoroastrians, who fled Persia after its subjugation by Islamic marauders, arrived in a dire condition in India. Hinduism, the dominant religion in Bharat, requested the Zoroastrians to amalgamate significantly with the Hindu characteristics. The Parsees, as the Zoroastrians are also known, did assimilate terrifically in the sense that they acquired knowledge of the Indian languages, principally, Gujarati of Gujarat, where many of them settled. There is no better method of integration than being able to speak in the language of an area to which you have emigrated.

 
(Wadiaji’s Atash Behram Agiari, Marine Lines, Mumbai; photo source)

Also, the Parsees acquainted themselves with some of the Hindu mores. Mostly, the delegates of Hinduism in India never dictated that the Parsees jettison their religious traditions. Bellicose and macabre evangelisation, for the most part, didn’t exist in the vocabulary of Hinduism like it always did in the voyage of Christianity across the world. So, the Parsees constructed ‘agyaris’, many of which exist and continue to operate even today. If the history of Hinduism was indeed as barbarous as the self-appointed secular brigade in India would like us to believe, then the Parsees would have undergone conversion to Hinduism or faced slaughter at the hands of Hindu bigots.

In fact, Hinduism allowed Judaism, a religion that predates Christianity, to live in India. Some Jews of Iberia, who encountered and witnessed the butchery of hapless Jews by the uncivilised warriors of Christianity during the ‘reconquista’ of the Iberian Peninsula by the Christian forces, fled to India. Bharat is probably the only nation or mass of land in the universe that didn’t subject the Jews to the indecorousness and venomousness of anti-Semitism, a tradition that prevailed throughout Europe for centuries, much before the political ascension of the National Socialists in Germany. Again, if Hinduism was the manifestation of demoniacal tendencies, Judaism wouldn’t have survived in India. The pulchritudinous synagogues in different parts of Bharat are the testimonials dedicated to the enlightenment of Hinduism. Such was the decorous reception for the Jews here that many of them voluntarily intermingled with the natives of this land. These instances demonstrate that the persona of Hinduism has been synonymous with secular ideals. After all, one of the many meanings of laicism is the coexistence of several religions within a specific zone. Hinduism, being the predominant religion, exhibited a gigantic heart by letting the foreign religions reside here. Axioms such as ‘the whole world is one family’ and ‘guest is akin to a God’ that are immanent components of the Hindu evolution serve to remind us that tolerance has always been a virtue associated with Hinduism.

Yes, Hinduism has experienced intellectual debauchment, which led to several ill customs that simply bloodied the reputation of India universally. Unhealthy traditions such as ‘child marriage’, ‘suttee’, maltreatment of widows were evidences of the degeneracy of Hinduism. But every religion on earth has behaved degenerately at one point in time or the other. One mustn’t fail to point out that the egalitarian nature of Hinduism in India produced ‘reformist’ movements during the era of British imperialism. Many of these movements for the rejuvenation of Hinduism were immensely victorious.

Secularism doesn’t mean that an honest discussion of the deathly persecution of Hinduism in Bharat during the Islamic reign and the Christian governance, especially in Portuguese Goa, mustn’t be conducted. The fact is that several small and enormous places of worship of the Hindus were razed by the invading barbarians and on which the transgressors built their holy sites. An expression of this historical reality doesn’t make one a vampirical communalist. The indefensibly wicked proselytisation of the helpless Hindus by the Christian and Mohammedan aggressors is, indubitably, a sordid historical fact with which the soul of Hinduism and of this land will always have to progress.

The ills that plague Hinduism today are candidly debated. Fair enough! But what is pretty revolting is that the scum that has permeated the Islamic community, even its literate constituents, is not debated with as much candidness. The answer is that nobody wants to offend the fundamentalists of that community. This fear of inviting the wrath of the fundamentalist Mohammedans prevents the country from having a constructive conversation about the future of the Mohammedan community and the path on which it must voyage. The ferocious but eloquent denunciations of the mistreatment of Mohammedan women by eminent Muslim women such as the controversial Tasleema Nasreen and the educated Somali, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, are not given adequate coverage. These two passionate females have acknowledged the rottenness that has percolated into the domain of the Islamic clergy and, thereby, into the wider Islamic society, more so, in a nation such as India. But to provide a forum to these valiant women so that they can voice their voice freely is considered an affront to secularism, specifically, by the mainstream media in India. There are robust discourses and dissertations on the need for further renovation in the Hindu society, which is splendid. But a corrupted and brazenly improper definition of secularism that has captured the psyche of the Indian media has killed the chances, at least in the near future, of a frank discourse on the status of the Islamic community in India.

It is necessary to state that it is the benevolence of Hinduism that has maintained the secular identity of India. It has sustained and stabilised secularism in Bharat.  It is the generousness or selflessness of Hinduism that has, historically, educated the Hindus about the necessity of the maintenance of the revered sites of the invading religions. The fact that, today, there are thousands of mosques, majestic and modest, and hundreds of churches, extraordinary and decrepit, in India, is an illustration of the welcoming and all-inclusive persona of Hinduism. Muslims can adhere to the teachings of their religion and the Christians too can practice Christianity. Hinduism has never claimed that it is the truest and holiest religion in the world unlike some of the Semitic religions, especially two of them that altered the status of a large part of the world through proselytisation and conquest.

Ananth Venkatesh

“Undue reliance on tranquil international diplomacy and forceless intranational diplomacy can backfire badly, thereby humiliating the national ego.”

The monstrosity of terrorists demonstrated by the recent bloodletting in Pune [Photo: top; source] illustrates the deviousness of Islamist fundamentalism. The blameless victims of the blast at a popular store of bakery in Pune are the latest in the enormous list of unfortunate Indians who have been wolfed by Islamist bigots.

India is a nation that has juddered continually due to the remorseless personality of Mohammeden violence. The appearance of an Islamist insurgency in the paradisiacal Jammu and Kashmir in the 1980s signalled the ascent of Islamist fundamentalism in India, which has been aided incontrovertibly by our western neighbour in order to solidify its extra-territorial goals.

The brutalization meted out to our security forces and the blameless villagers by the terrorists of the far left in the ‘blood corridor’ highlights the excruciatingly inept contestations of the federal government to the gruesomeness of the Communist terrorists. In this regard, credit needs to be given to the West Bengal CM for enabling the anti-Naxal operations to continue uninhibited. But the lack of adequate knowledge of the Naxal designs and the even shoddier execution of ruthless measures against the Naxalites has exposed and maimed our police personnel and our paramilitary forces. With inconvenient equipments at their disposal and the predominantly abysmal infrastructure offered to the security people, especially the constables, who have to do the bulk of the work of battling the menacing Maoists, the task before them seems insuperable. Refined weaponry and sophisticated military gadgets, often used to buttress our politicians, must be bequeathed to the departments of the police of the provinces bulldozed by these terrorists.

The technological renovation is a measure for the satiation of the police forces, which direly needs fructification. Ultimately, ruthless force will have to be employed to crush the Maoists. This will enable real development to happen in the ‘blood corridor’ since the Maoists have disrupted developmental work in villages consistently by killing, raping, kidnapping and wounding people.

In order to uphold the national constitution, the state will have to use power because the other tactic is to succumb to the Naxalite goals, which is the elimination of the present constitution, and the enslavement of India to the brand of terroristic communism. The Naxalites will never behave like the ‘moderate communists’ in WB, Tripura and Kerala by throwing themselves into the democratic arena. One must memorize that the eventual aim of the evil ‘far left’ in India is the dismantlement of democratic civilization and the installment of a regime of barbarousness, like the Stalinist regime of Communist Russia, with all of its purges and bloodiness.

Initiatives in India for tranquility with Pakistan are laudable but are appallingly idealistic. Peaceableness is an idiom with which the terrorists are unacquainted. These racists, desirous of the Islamisation of India, and their strengtheners and sustainers across the western frontier, have always interpreted the tranquil moves of India as a sign of the limpness of the soul of India. All in all, such serene ideas might augment the sale of newspapers and enable them to attract luminaries to their ‘peace functions’ [Photo: top]. But on the ground, the reality doesn’t transform.

This year, the indefatigable military personnel in J & K have encountered a ceaseless flow of barbarians nurtured by Pakistan. Encounters have led to the evaporation of the terrorists but also of our gallant ‘jawans’, who, in any case, perform a thankless vocation. Industries and factories of anti-Indian terrorism are functioning brazenly in Pakistan-held Kashmir; that is an argument backed up by credible pictographic and telephonic evidence. Not that we need American approval of our evidence, but the U.S. too has consistently, in the recent past, acknowledged the legitimacy of the Indian claims. The weak-kneed pacifism advocated by the influential members of the Indian electronic media is bamboozling and quite obnoxious. Pacifist advocacy might win you a Nobel Prize but it is the feeblest way of overthrowing the terrorists. History has manifested that a perspicacious application of power is necessary for a nation in order to instill fear in the minds of its opponents. Lamentably, our foes in Dhaka, Beijing and Islamabad have never evaluated that India is a nation that has a secret service and a polity to be feared and lauded. Can’t say the same about Mossad, can we? The answer is a resounding ’No’.

A dialogue with Pakistan is going to be fruitless. Pakistan wants the issue of Kashmir to be resolved. The only interpretation of that can be that Pakistan wants to control Kashmir in one way or the other. Surely, any other solution, which doesn’t involve the direct or indirect absorption of Kashmir, is not going to satisfy Pakistan. Joint administration of Kashmir by Pakistan and India is a solution that is bandied about by Indian pacifists and idealists, but that is like opening a route for the frightening political Islamisation of J & K, with all the vitriolic ramifications it will have for the religious minorities there, and outside the province i.e. the exiled Kashmiri Hindus. Their piteous plight must be kept in mind.

Anyway, our soldiers haven’t been mutilated and haven’t sacrificed their precious lives so that a time will come when their sacrifice and valour is disregarded by officially allowing the Pakistanis to manage the politics of Kashmir, joint rule notwithstanding.

Sincere peacefulness can be a valid diplomatic option only if the nation you converse with is eager to reciprocate with the same earnest peacefulness. The Irish Republic unequivocally condemned and refrained itself from supporting the Irish extremists (the IRA) in Northern Ireland, who wanted all of Ireland to be one. It enabled the British government to isolate and defeat the Irish terrorists. The Irish Republic enacted a constructive role in the peace process. The Irish State never strengthened the members of the terrorist Irish Republican Army (IRA). One can’t say the same about the ‘quiet intentions’ of Pakistan.

One must, however, credit the sagacity of Pakistan since it has carefully satisfied American demands by periodically arresting Pakistani terrorists wanted by America. No tangible action has been taken against anti-Indian ideologues, who continue to flourish in Pakistani madrassas. A conclave organized recently by the influential terroristic ideologues to mark the ‘Kashmir Solidarity Road’ at Mall Road in Lahore had Hafiz Saeed as one of its speakers. India has declared him to be the principal mastermind of 26/11 and has reliable evidence as well. Saeed had the audacity to claim during his speech that the execution of ‘jihad’ was the only option unless India ‘unchained Kashmir’. He ranted about unshackling Hyderabad from Indian governance. We don’t want to surrender Kashmir or let the foe enter Kashmir to govern it with us in the name of peace, do we? That the Pakistani government allowed this function to take place, which glorified and warned of terrorism against India, is indicative of the disingenuousness of the Pakistani establishment.

Undue reliance on tranquil international diplomacy and forceless intranational diplomacy can backfire badly, thereby humiliating the national ego. If we continue to believe in peace when our enemies misinterpret it as a symbol of our scrawny fervour and bony zestfulness, when our rivals misconstrue it as an embodiment of our pathetic resolve to defend our motherland, then the future of India will be lugubrious. India will have to acquaint itself with the art of perspicacious projection of force nationally and externally in order to deter our demonic enemies and to make them respect us, even if it be grudgingly.

Kartikey Sehgal

“Happiness will not come from happiness; but only from pain. We know the value of standing in shade only after roaming in the hot day sun.”
–Atharva Veda

Pain is fun. Pain is natural. Pain is the word given to describe a feeling that is not like happiness. Humans crave pain. Often they are not able to understand the true nature of pain and hence they give in to drugs and sadism. To know pain is to understand a simple duality.

You know about night because of the day. In summers you think of winters and in winters you think of warmth.

Happiness is different from pain but pain can be a happy experience. It can heal you and make you stronger. And I say again, humans crave pain.

When you walk barefoot on hard and cold rocks you feel pain. When you walk alone on a lonesome night and cry you feel pain. This is the nature of pain. It exists to remind you of the times you didn’t remember it. So the next time you are happy you remember it and be prepared for it. Pain is a reminder of individuality. Of the uniqueness of an individual that lives and functions in a community. So that the next time you are in a group, you will remember your individuality.

Some people are scared of pain so they give themselves pain. Better I control pain than the other way around, they feel. They wait for pain and they shy away from happiness because it would be followed by pain. They become unhealthy masochists. Such people confuse fear with pain. Pain becomes fear for them. Separation from a friend for them is not pain but fear.

There is pain in the open green meadows for once an army lay dead in it. For farmers were moved or killed by governments. For lovers were separated here.

There is pain in nature for it is destructible. For you will not be by its side forever. For you wish your child would be here to see it.

The passing of sunrise and sunset reminds you of your time on earth. With the pleasure, there is the pain.

Kartikey Sehgal

Discipline is to do with fear. Basically we fear what we should do with our time and so we invent discipline. With discipline there is no fear as to what we have to do with our time. Though I am not fearful, I had decided to use this time for other kinds of writing but I am now writing on fear and discipline

So discipline should come from within. You should be bothered as to what you are going to do with time so that you make discipline. External discipline is then useless; it is at least not as useful as internal discipline. With external discipline fear persists and it is not lessened; the fear of punishment; of verbal abuse and more.

Nature is disciplined. The river flows and trees grow on the banks. Pollination of flowers. I imagine that discipline is a state of human misery. As living beings we should naturally be disciplined, which means that we should be doing the things we like. If we do the things that we like then we won’t make trouble for others and we will learn from others’ lives. But we are brought to misery by people tampering with our nature, i.e. instilling fear in us, and to get rid of the fear we have to invent discipline. We have to be disciplined to achieve our natural state of creative existence.

Kartikey Sehgal

India is losing land to her neighbour. The author says that “it should be no surprise that Indians are getting restless or communal or impatient as is often reported by writers and thinkers in the print and television medium.”

Land is sacred for Indians and it presents one difference between the nationalists and the others. They former love land and land is equal to religion for them; you can pray to the universe or you can pray to the idols or alternatively you can pray to the land. That is why the ones removed from religion, actually dharma, are willing to make compromises over land.

Take this conversation: “The government is losing land to the neighbours. That is because they have communist influence.” An innocuous conversation in a train except that the talkers are concerned and looking at reasons for the government’s lack of interest in reclaiming lost land.

This does not necessarily question the government’s intentions and credibility. It definitely shows a certain disrespect for the masses, most of who are far removed from politics and concerned in gathering a few meals a day. Were they to get educated they would question and probably not elect a government that is averse to their aspirations of ‘land as a deity’. That is why keeping the people uneducated works in the government’s favour.

Maybe that is why the rise of education in India coincides with the rise of non-Congress governments at the centre.

This author at his table and the 9 to 6 employees sweating in the train are concerned about the country’s land somewhere in Ladakh. The train people and many like them may not have read about the tenets about communism but they make simple calculations. Politician + Communism = Soft on China.

As evidence they refer to statements like:

• The concern on the Indian side is that these incursions by China are taking place a little more frequently than India is comfortable with. (source)
• The area along Line of Actual Control with China has "shrunk" over a period of time and India has lost "substantial" amount of land in the last two decades, says an official report.
  "Though this process if very slow but we have lost substantial amount of land in 20-25 years," it was said at the meeting held last month. (source)
• "But at the same time, the situation that is prevailing right now on the border and along the LAC, there is no need of pressing any panic button. Peace and tranquillity are being retained there. (source)

Therefore, it should be no surprise that Indians are getting restless or communal or impatient as is often reported by writers and thinkers in the print and television medium. They are concerned for land; the concern is seemingly not shared by those in power. And just like they are easily labelled as communal they will label their opponents as ‘pseudo-secular’ and ‘commie’.

Meanwhile, what about the land?