No one individual critic has taken on the Indian State like Arundhati Roy has. In a fight that began with Pokhran, moved to Narmada, and over the years extended to other insurgencies, people’s struggles and the Maoist underground, she has used her pensmanship to challenge India’s government, its elite, corporate giants, and most recently, the entire structure of global finance and capitalism. She was jailed for a day in 2002 for contempt of court, and slapped with sedition charges in November 2010 for an alleged anti-India speech she delivered, along with others, at a seminar in New Delhi on Kashmir, titled ‘Azadi—the only way’. Excerpts from an interview to Panini Anand:
How do you look at laws like sedition and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or those like AFSPA, in what is touted as the largest democracy?
I’m glad you used the word touted. It’s a good word to use in connection with India’s democracy. It certainly is a democracy for the middle class. In places like Kashmir or Manipur or Chhattisgarh, democracy is not available. Not even in the black market. Laws like the UAPA, which is just the UPA government’s version of POTA, and the AFSPA are ridiculously authoritarian—they allow the State to detain and even kill people with complete impunity. They simply ought to have no place in a democracy. But as long as they don’t affect the mainstream middle class, as long as they are used against people in Manipur, Nagaland or Kashmir, or against the poor or against Muslim ‘terrorists’ in the ‘mainland’, nobody seems to mind very much.
“India’s democracy is for the middle class; for Kashmir or Manipur, it’s not available. Not even in the black market." Are the people waging war against the State or is the State waging war against its people? How do you look at the Emergency of the ’70s, or the minorities who feel targeted, earlier the Sikhs and now the Muslims?
Some people are waging war against the State. The State is waging a war against a majority of its citizens. The Emergency in the ’70s became a problem because Indira Gandhi’s government was foolish enough to target the middle class, foolish enough to lump them with the lower classes and the disenfranchised. Vast parts of the country today are in a much more severe Emergency-like situation. But this contemporary Emergency has gone into the workshop for denting-painting. It’s come out smarter, more streamlined. I’ve said this before: look at the wars the Indian government has waged since India became a sovereign nation; look at the instances when the army has been called out against its ‘own’ people—Nagaland, Assam, Mizoram, Manipur, Kashmir, Telangana, Goa, Bengal, Punjab and (soon to come) Chhattisgarh—it is a State that is constantly at war. And always against minorities—tribal people, Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, never against the middle class, upper-caste Hindus.
How does one curb the cycle of violence if the State takes no action against ultra-left ‘terrorist groups’? Wouldn’t it jeopardise internal security?
I don’t think anybody is advocating that no action should be taken against terrorist groups, not even the ‘terrorists’ themselves. They are not asking for anti-terror laws to be done away with. They are doing what they do, knowing full well what the consequences will be, legally or otherwise. They are expressing fury and fighting for a change in a system that manufactures injustice and inequality. They don’t see themselves as ‘terrorists’. When you say ‘terrorists’ if you are referring to the CPI (Maoist), though I do not subscribe to Maoist ideology, I certainly do not see them as terrorists. Yes they are militant, they are outlaws. But then anybody who resists the corporate-state juggernaut is now labelled a Maoist—whether or not they belong to or even agree with the Maoist ideology. People like Seema Azad are being sentenced to life imprisonment for possessing banned literature. So what is the definition of ‘terrorist’ now, in 2012? It is actually the economic policies that are causing this massive inequality, this hunger, this displacement that is jeopardising internal security—not the people who are protesting against them. Do we want to address the symptoms or the disease? The disease is not terrorism. It’s egregious injustice. Sure, even if we were a reasonably just society, Maoists would still exist. So would other extremist groups who believe in armed resistance or in terrorist attacks. But they would not have the support they have today. As a country, we should be ashamed of ourselves for tolerating this squalor, this misery and the overt as well as covert ethnic and religious bigotry we see all around us. (Narendra Modi for Prime Minister!! Who in their right mind can even imagine that?) We have stopped even pretending that we have a sense of justice. All we’re doing is genuflecting to major corporations and to that sinking ocean-liner known as the United States of America.
Is the State acting like the Orwellian Big Brother, with its tapping of phones, attacks on social networks?
The government has become so brazen about admitting that it is spying on all of us all the time. If it does not see any protest on the horizon, why shouldn’t it? Controlling people is in the nature of all ruling establishments, is it not? While the whole country becomes more and more religious and obscurantist, visiting shrines and temples and masjids and churches in their millions, praying to one god or another to be delivered from their unhappy lives, we are entering the age of robots, where computer-programmed machines will decide everything, will control us entirely—they’ll decide what is ethical and what is not, what collateral damage is acceptable and what is not. Forget religious texts. Computers will decide what’s right and wrong. There are surveillance devices the size of a sandfly that can record our every move. Not in India yet, but coming soon, I’m sure. The UID is another elaborate form of control and surveillance, but people are falling over themselves to get one. The challenge is how to function, how to continue to resist despite this level of mind-games and surveillance.
"Contemporary Emergency has gone to the workshop for denting-painting. It’s come out smarter, and more streamlined.” Why do you feel there’s no mass reaction in the polity to the plight of undertrials in jails, people booked under sedition or towards encounter killings? Are these a non-issue manufactured by few rights groups?
Of course, they are not non-issues. This is a huge issue. Thousands of people are in jail, charged with sedition or under the UAPA, broadly they are either accused of being Maoists or Muslim ‘terrorists’. Shockingly, there are no official figures. All we have to go on is a sense you get from visiting places, from individual rights activists collating information in their separate areas. Torture has become completely acceptable to the government and police establishment. The nhrc came up with a report that mentioned 3,000 custodial deaths last year alone. You ask why there is no mass reaction? Well, because everybody who reacts is jailed! Or threatened or terrorised. Also, between the coopting and divisiveness of ngos and the reality of State repression and surveillance, I don’t know whether mass movements have a future. Yes, we keep looking to the Arab ‘spring’, but look a little harder and you see how even there, people are being manipulated and ‘played’. I think subversion will take precedence over mass resistance in the years to come. And unfortunately, terrorism is an extreme form of subversion.
Without the State invoking laws, an active police, intelligence, even armed forces, won’t we have anarchy?
We will end up in a state of—not anarchy, but war—if we do not address the causes of people’s rising fury. When you make laws that serve the rich, that helps them hold onto their wealth, to amass more and more, then dissent and unlawful activity becomes honourable, does it not? Eventually I’m not at all sure that you can continue to impoverish millions of people, steal their land, their livelihoods, push them into cities, then demolish the slums they live in and push them out again and expect that you can simply stub out their anger with the help of the army and the police and prison terms. But perhaps I’m wrong. Maybe you can. Starve them, jail them, kill them. And call it Globalisation with a Human Face.
Arundhati is a B-grade Chomsky wannabe (‘Terrorism isn’t the Disease...’). While I applaud her standing up to authority, her views are neither principled nor unbiased.
J. Reddy, San Francisco
For us Manipuris, what Arundhati says is not an imagined reality—it is reality. We have lived 50 years with AFSPA, caught between the army and the insurgents. In this, the remotest corner of India, who will speak for us?
Amit kumar Mayanglambam, Imphal
Arundhati is right. The state, with the help of the army and police, can easily stub out the anger of the impoverished with ease.
Nitaidas Saha, Dhaka
Ms Roy’s disjointed conjecture and subterfuge is only another example of the inherent dichotomy and blatant hypocrisy of Indian fiction writers who masquerade as political/economic commentators. It’s all just aimed at pleasing the garbage-loving publishers and media houses, who revel in exotic, well-written hocus-pocus.
M. Singh, Nashik
Even democracy has manufacturing defects but it is better than the alternatives, anarchy or a dictatorship. We can’t lose hope, a bullet may silence a protest for now, but after every silence there is a storm. A democratic storm which will wash away the muck, ring in a new day.
Mayank Shah, on e-mail
Ms Roy’s crib about the middle class being the epitome of all the nation’s ills is just incredible. It’s they who’re keeping the nation together.
P. Surendranath, Hyderabad
The only time the middle class tried to support a cause (Lokpal bill), they were ridiculed and shown their place by these commentators.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Thumbs up to Roy again for saying it like it is!
I try and do so too, in my small way - and so do other people in my circle!
-- Manoj Pandey, Baguiati, Greater Calcutta Urban Agglomeration
[dont feel lke being so anonymous anymore, for now...]
Arundhati Roy is wrong when she says 'India is certainly a democracy for the middle class'.
Whenever the Indian middle class will come up against the Indian upper class, it will find that India's democracy - ie, police, judiciary, netas, journalists - exists only for the Indian upper class.
Empathy Dialogue Approach that will disable “A Stick Called 124(A).-
(Outlook Dated: 2nd July 2012)
We limit to the violence in Dandakaranya between the Maoists and the Government. We avoid using the word Terrorism since we do not think it is terrorism. All said and done Arundhati Roy desires a reasonable just society and Adivasi population living in Dandakaranya to live in Peace with reasonable Justice. The disease is egregious injustice and symptom is the Maoists violence. The Maoists violence is in response to the structural violence of the Government. In the land of Gotham Buddha and Gandhi, can we share the ANKUR of AHIMSA approach being initiated by Samatha Swaraj Mitra Mandal- SSMM, an initiative of Sarva Seva Sangh? We also appeal to as many activists to explore our new strategy and ‘absolute AHIMSA’ path that will disable “A Stick Called 124(A)”.
The approach is through expression of genuine empathy and Trust. The approach does not aim at shaming and humiliating anybody, but sincerely developing deep empathy for the other. We do not condemn, complain, fight cases in the court or hold demonstrations. Empathy needs to be defined and redefined as we move ahead in our process. The major strategy of the approach is to understand the stands of both the State and Maoist and all other stake holders. We commend them for their contributions to the nation. In the process we understand the stand and needs of other stake holders like the corporate. We totally refrain ourselves from any criticism and condemnation of their actions, however heinous they are. We would however, show a sincere, non-sarcastic disappointment with the acts of violence. Trust needs to be openly expressed so as to build positive pressure. It should work because we are expressing a great amount of trust on them and then forcing them to act on that trust. The process also should make it difficult for the State to paint every human rights activist as a Maoist sympathizer and for the Maoists to call every middle class Indian as insensitive and greedy.
Parallel and also as an outcome of the above dialogue process, we need to restructure Grass root Democracy towards Gram Swaraj- Village Republics that was the dream of Gandhi. What the Maoists are building in their ‘liberated territories’, it is our challenge to build by invoking and rejuvenating Volunteerism and Humanism. Though the constitution has mandated Local Self Governance it is perpetually threatened and literally made impotent by parallel bodies to Panchayaths- "creatures of executive orders”. We challenge this virus by Satyagraha.
Like Gandhi starting Sevagram Aashramam SSMM proposes to start an Aashramam in every block to nurture Adivasi and other Youth to become a true Peace Force by practicing Equity and Swaraj that the surrounding Panchayaths can emulate. The first Aashramam is being initiated at strategic location at Chatti village in Khammam District of Andhra Pradesh bordering Chhattisgarh and Odisha. For more information contact: email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org . We like to share similar constructive initiatives in Dandakaranya and invite Gandhians, like minded people and Youth to visit or join us.
With High Regards
Peoples’ Peace and Prosperity Mission,
Sponsored by Girijana Seema Welfare Association,,
Under the Aegis or Auspices of: Samatha Swaraj Mitra Mandal.
Chatti Post, Chinthur Mandalam, Khammam District - 507 129
Email: email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
lets not take arundthi roy seriously guys... she is on the payrolls of anti india ngo s... she is probably a part of the 'paid news' journalism rampant today... therwise she would explain herself on the blatant one sidedness of her views...
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT