Of Selective Mutism and Double Standards
Swami Gulagulaananda quoted Animal Farm:
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"
In the month of January, 2015, there was an attack on the offices of the French satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo in which 12 people died. This sparked an international outrage with people everywhere saying 'Je suis Charlie' (I am Charlie) to show solidarity with the families of the dead as well as the rattled survivors. The cowardly attack was executed by fanatics and is definitely condemnable and deplorable. People on Facebook protested by putting the French flag overlay on their profile pictures. I saw my Facebook feed filled with strong words against attacking freedom of expression, some sharing cartoons of how a pen is mightier and expressed outrage in the strongest of terms.
A couple of days ago, there was a deadly attack in Somalia in which 500 people died. There has been no outrage, nobody on Facebook putting up Somalian flag overlays and nobody saying "Je suis Somali"...
And this brings me to the central point of this post - Why the double standards?
People worldwide seem to have developed a way of looking at things - Perhaps consciously, perhaps subconsciously. It appears that some lives are more important than others. Some attacks are vehemently condemned while others are dismissed as routine.
People have made movie after movie about the Holocaust while we don't hear much about the the great Bengal famine that resulted in millions of deaths - As many, if not more deaths when compared with the Holocaust, though it happened at the same time. And what we see in the macrocosm, we also see at microcosmic levels of countries and states.
In India, for example, an attack on a man called Akhlaque for holding/consuming beef received wide coverage with people blaming the central government for emboldening attackers. Why? The victim was a Muslim man, while the ruling party is considered to be a Hindu right wing party. Has the Modi government done anything to appease the Hindus or create problems for non-Hindus? Not a thing. And yet, the government was widely criticised. Meanwhile, a techie and animal rights activist in Bangalore was attacked with bricks for requesting police assistance to close down an illegal slaughterhouse and save cows. Her vehicle was heavily damaged and she herself has sustained pretty major injuries. This time, the victim was a Hindu and attackers were Muslims. There has not been much outrage.
This selective outrage and mutism is quite baffling to me. Why is it that some random journalist like Gauri Lankesh receives a funeral with full state honours while others like RSS workers who were lynched barely receive mentions in newspapers? Is it because one is a left leaning journalist while others are right leaning? Does ideology define the value of life?
And this argument is not restricted to attacks and killings. Every year, during Deepawali, we see some people crawl out of the woodwork talking about a pollution free Deepawali with slogans like "Say no to crackers" and "Our animals will get scared". These arguments would have been fine had they been consistent in their protests. Yes, pollution is a major problem and animals are perhaps affected by sudden loud noises. However, I don't find this concern for the environment in the rest of the year. People continue to purchase bigger cars that guzzle fuel, keep their air conditioner running all the time and drive individual vehicles rather than opt for public transport because they are inconvenient. How many of these people have opted for electric vehicles? There are quite a few in the market right now.
The Supreme Court overreached and went to the extent of banning the sale of firecrackers in Delhi. To quote a comedian on WION, "Banning crackers on Diwali to curb pollution is like fasting for one day to cure obesity".
The ban itself is ridiculously myopic. When the Yogi Adityanath government started closing illegal slaughterhouses (remember, they were illegal), a lot of people came out protesting the move saying that it had a communal tinge. The main argument was that the livelihood of these people was affected. However, isn't the livelihood of people who have stocked firecrackers to sell in Delhi getting affected? What about them? Why was this hastily implemented at the last minute? Why not regulate instead of outright banning? More importantly, why not an equal outrage?
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"
In the month of January, 2015, there was an attack on the offices of the French satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo in which 12 people died. This sparked an international outrage with people everywhere saying 'Je suis Charlie' (I am Charlie) to show solidarity with the families of the dead as well as the rattled survivors. The cowardly attack was executed by fanatics and is definitely condemnable and deplorable. People on Facebook protested by putting the French flag overlay on their profile pictures. I saw my Facebook feed filled with strong words against attacking freedom of expression, some sharing cartoons of how a pen is mightier and expressed outrage in the strongest of terms.
A couple of days ago, there was a deadly attack in Somalia in which 500 people died. There has been no outrage, nobody on Facebook putting up Somalian flag overlays and nobody saying "Je suis Somali"...
And this brings me to the central point of this post - Why the double standards?
People worldwide seem to have developed a way of looking at things - Perhaps consciously, perhaps subconsciously. It appears that some lives are more important than others. Some attacks are vehemently condemned while others are dismissed as routine.
People have made movie after movie about the Holocaust while we don't hear much about the the great Bengal famine that resulted in millions of deaths - As many, if not more deaths when compared with the Holocaust, though it happened at the same time. And what we see in the macrocosm, we also see at microcosmic levels of countries and states.
In India, for example, an attack on a man called Akhlaque for holding/consuming beef received wide coverage with people blaming the central government for emboldening attackers. Why? The victim was a Muslim man, while the ruling party is considered to be a Hindu right wing party. Has the Modi government done anything to appease the Hindus or create problems for non-Hindus? Not a thing. And yet, the government was widely criticised. Meanwhile, a techie and animal rights activist in Bangalore was attacked with bricks for requesting police assistance to close down an illegal slaughterhouse and save cows. Her vehicle was heavily damaged and she herself has sustained pretty major injuries. This time, the victim was a Hindu and attackers were Muslims. There has not been much outrage.
This selective outrage and mutism is quite baffling to me. Why is it that some random journalist like Gauri Lankesh receives a funeral with full state honours while others like RSS workers who were lynched barely receive mentions in newspapers? Is it because one is a left leaning journalist while others are right leaning? Does ideology define the value of life?
And this argument is not restricted to attacks and killings. Every year, during Deepawali, we see some people crawl out of the woodwork talking about a pollution free Deepawali with slogans like "Say no to crackers" and "Our animals will get scared". These arguments would have been fine had they been consistent in their protests. Yes, pollution is a major problem and animals are perhaps affected by sudden loud noises. However, I don't find this concern for the environment in the rest of the year. People continue to purchase bigger cars that guzzle fuel, keep their air conditioner running all the time and drive individual vehicles rather than opt for public transport because they are inconvenient. How many of these people have opted for electric vehicles? There are quite a few in the market right now.
The Supreme Court overreached and went to the extent of banning the sale of firecrackers in Delhi. To quote a comedian on WION, "Banning crackers on Diwali to curb pollution is like fasting for one day to cure obesity".
The ban itself is ridiculously myopic. When the Yogi Adityanath government started closing illegal slaughterhouses (remember, they were illegal), a lot of people came out protesting the move saying that it had a communal tinge. The main argument was that the livelihood of these people was affected. However, isn't the livelihood of people who have stocked firecrackers to sell in Delhi getting affected? What about them? Why was this hastily implemented at the last minute? Why not regulate instead of outright banning? More importantly, why not an equal outrage?
Why is it that I don't see this animal lovers during Bakr'Id? Why are they animal lovers during Diwali? And why are some animals more equal than other animals?
Celebrities, especially, like to come out and show that they are hip. Shraddha Kapoor and Yuvraj Singh are fine examples of this hypocrisy by requesting for no pollution via crackers - and yet, they celebrated their movie release and wedding respectively with a fine display of crackers. And please don't go into matters of scale :)
And it's the same with all Hindu festivals in India - with some claiming that Dandiya should be banned for noise pollution and Holi is a waste of water. But I don't hear these people talking about mosques blaring prayers causing noise pollution. Anyone who spoke against these celebrities were labelled trolls by left leaning media outlets.
Another observation that I have made is with regard to the different approaches when it comes to handling Rohingyas, Kashmiri Pandits and Yazidis. All were driven out of their homes and thousands displaced. And yet, the media coverage on the Rohingyas has been extensive while we don't see similar support for the Kashmiri Pandits and the Yazidis.
It is important to note that the arguments posted here are not Hindu vs Non Hindu, but more against a lack of consistent approaches to the same problem. People who find fault with one don't seem to find fault with another doing the exact same thing, thus, double standards.
People who are serious about the environment will take clear, decisive actions to curb pollution, rather than resorting to mere tokenisms such as Earth Hour. These have to be sustained efforts by one and all. Let us work towards rain water harvesting and replenishing ground water.
The media clearly knows what sells and what doesn't. In India, an attack against a Muslim is guaranteed to generate TRPs while others don't matter as much.
We as individuals and as groups have to consciously think about every decision that we take, rather than following the hype. All lives matter - The death of 12 Charlie Hebdo journalists is not more important than the death of hundreds of Somalians. The killing of a left leaning journalist is not more important than the murder of an RSS worker.
If you wish to feel or display your outrage, do so equally... unless you truly believe that some animals are more equal than others
Comments