Intellectuals and scholars like the leaders, at times hold
a place of such high reverence in one’s mind that any minor slip, any pettiness
on their part, breaks the heart of those who had at one point of time, admired them. I was like most of the Nineties youth was always charmed by Arun Shourie, the
Journalist-turned-politician. He, with over-sized half-shirts with pens prominently
parked in his pocket was probably the first common man politicians in the
post-emergency era, much before Kejriwal turned that uniform into a political
attire of Twenty-first century. I was quite young when Shourie came into the
political arena and like all young men was quite a fool and romantic. Like
Arvind Kejriwal, Shourie moved about with the air of middle-class men, hiding carefully
and successfully his background of affluence- like his having been schooled in
the elite Modern School and St. Stephen’s in Delhi, and his stint in the world
bank, much like Arvind Kejriwal who almost made one believe as if the Deputy
Commissioner in IRS is as poor a man as a teacher in a municipal school. But I
am not angry with him for that. Those days what he wrote was strong, sturdy and
substantive. Even his today cannot negate his yesterday. It is more of a
disappointment when you find what negativity and unfulfilled ambition does to
an illuminated soul especially when accompanied and nudged by someone who has
built her own reputation out of bitterness.
For someone who had fiercely fought emergency, when it was
imposed in real terms, with thousands jailed, censorship on free speech clamped
down with a heavy hand, it is pitiable to come down to what can be only
construed as rhetoric and unfounded allegation. If it were only a person record
of lamentation confided to Swati Chaturvedi and not meant for public
consumption, one can live with it. But with the reputation of the interviewing
Journalist regarding the interviews, fake and real one, we might never know.
There is an interesting quote by JRR Tolkien, where he
writes in one of his letters, “Criticism- however valid or intellectually
engaging- tends to get in the way of a writer who has anything personal to say.”
And in The Picture of Dorian Gray, Oscar Wilde writes, “Intellect is in itself
a mode of exaggeration, and destroys the harmony of any face.” This interview
illustrates both the points. It leans on lies and struggles to stand on its
feet. The slip begins showing from the very start. The cunning craftiness of
the interviewer shows in the first sentence where she, inaccurately, begins the
interview with a contention that Modi is only one among with leaders who follow
abusive handles. The lady has been herself a most abusive troll and has been
thoroughly exposed on the internet for being that. There is no evidence that
none of the millions who follow the so-called world leaders are abusive, but
that when the idea is to build a rhetoric, who cares about fact. Talking in
absolutes, to exaggerate on extremes, is good politics, it sways people. It is
poor journalism. But then what our journalists do is barely journalism; it is
more of politics. So she falsely positions a lie and to a great disappointment,
Shourie meekly surrenders to her propaganda. He quotes Modi calling for his
Social media volunteers meet, some of abusive trolls might or might not have
been a part of it. But by quoting the even Arun Shourie legitimizes Swati’s
inaccurate assertion.
Swati then quotes emergency, which by her own admission,
she did not witness. I believe the only truth I discover in this interview is
that Ms. Chaturvedi, like many others who loosely quote Emergency without
knowing what it meant, have not seen it first-hand and that she is many years
younger than me. Mr. Shourie again goes with the flow with vague, obtuse “feels
like emergency” statements, made loosely by haters of the government, while they throw choicest abuses at the elected head of government with complete impunity. Shourie even claiming that unlike today, Emergency imposed
by Mrs. Gandhi, which had the entire opposition imprisoned, was legal and in
some sense, legitimate. He largely ignores the state excesses of those time, in
his urge to attack Modi, legitimizes the darkest era of Indian democracy. Swati
then quotes Ashish Nandy’s statement, calling Narendra Modi a “textbook fascist’
and seeks Arun Shourie’s views. As with most questions, much like most
journalists these days, unlike treating Interviews as an opportunity to bring out
the views of the guest, she uses it to substantiate her own views. His worse is
however, yet to come, Shourie’s that is, when he refers to Kashmir and in some
roundabout way tries to link vigilantism of cow-protection groups elsewhere with
the violence in Kashmir. He says that people who get into such skirmishes
elsewhere in the country should beware of the reactions it will cause in
Kashmir. But the same logic, reversed, never deterred the terrorists in
Kashmir. The fear of how will mainland Hindus respond if we murder one Hindu in
Kashmir, as a complete genocide was effected in the valley. Thus in his zeal to
attack Modi, prodded sufficiently by Ms. Chaturvedi, he ends of legitimizing
not only Emergency, but also the unpardonable terrorism in Kashmir. Swati then
refers to some morphed pictures about Dadri, as if entire set of handles which
she marks as Right-wing trolls were responsible for it. She never discusses it
as an internet phenomena, but takes a one-sided view, exonerating Left-winger
journalist friends like Rana Ayyub and Aditya Menon who had shared fake
pictures from Palestine of decade back to fuel the unrest in Kashmir. She
ignores the fact that the fake news shared by unknown handle will cause much
less damage than the fake news shared by those who proudly write Journalist on
their bio.
Swati in the end asks Shourie if his hatred of Modi emanates
from the fact that he did not get the finance portfolio in the cabinet post
elections (in which he had campaigned for Modi). Some pangs of old conscience
probably does not allow Arun Shourie to deny that and he answers in some roundabout
way. If one could use mumble unintelligibly in print interview that is what he
does. He quotes as per his version, Vajpayee weeping after Gujarat riot, much
like Salman Khurshid’s claim that Sonia Gandhi wept after Batla house encounter
in which terrorists were killed, and one seriously feels sorry for how low this
man has fallen that he looks more like a failed Congressi today. I would agree
with Chaucer, with sadness and great disappointment, that, “the greatest
scholars are not usually the wisest people.”
(To read the interview of Arun Shourie on Wire, Click here)
Comments