ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

A Stupid, Senseless Ban

What was the most important thing that Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi stood for?

Freedom.

Freedom of thought, expression, ideas. Freedom to believe in what you think is right. That is why he fought for freedom so bravely, so relentlessly and ultimately died for it. Shot by an assassin who foolishly believed that Gandhi was shortselling India.

It is not, therefore, surprising that the assassin -- half a century later -- has become a hero for those who believe that Gandhi made some unforgivable errors of judgement at the time India was struggling to find her new destiny, as a free nation. It is not exactly a point of view I would agree with but, having grown up in free India, I will defend with my life their right to believe in it. Because it was Gandhi who taught us that there is no freedom greater than the right to voice one's own political opinion without fear.

That is the basis on which we have built our democracy over the past half a century. The fact that the Father of the Nation was convinced that in our dazzling differences lay our enormous strength as a nation. That is why he so openly advocated the fact that every section of Indian society, every caste, community, creed, religion had an inalienable right to hold its head high and live with dignity, pride and -- yes -- freedom. For, in his world, there was no place for intolerance and bigotry. For the sham and hypocrisy that has, since, become such an inescapable part of our normal political life.

Maybe that is why I find so entirely distasteful and stupid this business of censorship. Of banning this, banning that.

Barely a year and a half away from the millennium, all censorship appears stupid, anachronistic. We are not living in the Middle Ages. No one -- certainly not the corrupt and illiterate men who rule over our lives -- has the right to tell us, 51 years into Independence, what we should watch, read, experience and enjoy. We were born free. We have the right to celebrate that freedom. To live our lives as we choose to, not as we are expected to.

That is the first premise of democracy. A premise that Gandhi voiced again and again during our struggle for freedom. That is why it is so prominently enshrined in our Constitution. That is why we chose this complex but marvelously pluralistic route to build India, where every group (however small, however weak) has a space, an identity it can call its own. Yet, again and again, at the slightest provocation, we allow our irresponsible leaders to jump up and ask for bans. Ban this, ban that. Censor this, censor that. Why? Why must the government intervene in matters that are of no concern to it? Why should we give a politician or a government servant -- who are usually the most thick headed and corrupt amongst us -- the right to decide for us what is good for us and what is not? Surely we know better than them. Surely we are better judges of what is fit for us to watch, read, experience. Be it movies, plays, books, rock concerts.

The latest example is last week's ban in Bombay on the performance of Pradeep Dalvi's play, Mi Nathuram Godse Boltoy. Banning the play was a silly, senseless decision and everyone knows that. Including the Maharashtra government. But that has not held them back. Why? Because hypocrisy and sham have forced them to take a decision that they themselves are not committed to.

A decision that makes mockery out of everything Gandhi stood for. What is worse, those who have so raucously demanded the ban in Parliament have neither read the play nor watched it. Those who have (like Tughlak) dictated the ban from Delhi have not read it nor watched it. And (surprise surprise) those who have imposed the ban in Bombay have also not read it nor watched it. In fact, they have gone one step further and also banned the Gujarati version which has been running to packed houses for over sixty shows.

All of them are guilty. Guilty of playing out their dirty little political games in the hope of scoring a few brownie points off each other. Leaving your rights and mine in tatters. And destroying the very legacy of Gandhi that they claim to be upholding.

For government intervention in matters of art and literature is not just ugly, it is dangerous. It destroys the very spirit of democracy and free thinking and leaves the bloodiest stains on the polity. It brings crime, corruption, intolerance centrestage and exacerbates the very reasons for which it is introduced.

Remember the Emergency? Remember how it all started when Indira Gandhi, angry with the way the press had widely reported the Allahabad high court decision against her, decided to hit back? What was her first weapon? Censorship.

Censorship is wicked and dangerous. It must never be allowed to get away unchallenged. It must be fought tooth and nail in every forum.

The real villains, however, are not the fools in Delhi who have ordered the ban. Nor the dolts in Mantralaya who have announced it. It is the Mahatma's inheritors, who are desperately in search of headlines for the next assembly session. The old issues have been flogged to death. The Ramabai Nagar firing. The Srikrishna Commission report. The Ramesh Kini affair. They now need something new to keep the assembly preoccupied, Parliament in a flurry. They need to draw away attention from the fact that the party that once led India to freedom is now terminally sick.

The Mahatma, in whose name they have raised such a furore, would have been ashamed of the fact that the Congress is today a party that can only claim fame for its scandals, its corruption, its crimes. Its last prime minister is in court defending himself against a slew of bribery and corruption cases. Its present leader is embroiled in the biggest defence scandal to have rocked Independent India. Her advisers are a motley crew of discredited, self seeking politicians most of whom cannot even win an election on their own. For 45 years, they have ruled India and made a mockery of everything that Gandhi stood for. Today, they are on the streets to defend his honour.

Why? Because a playwright was brave enough to put forward his assassin's point of view? Or is it simply to perpetuate its own hypocrisies, its lies? We must remember the fact that Nathuram Godse was no ordinary murderer. He stood for a particular, specific point of view at a particular, specific point of history and, much as we may all admire the Mahatma for what he stood for, it is the inalienable right of every shade of political opinion in a democracy to be openly voiced. By trying to stifle the voice of Godse, we are actually desecrating the memory of Gandhi.

Gandhi does not need the Congress to defend him. He belongs to all of us. He belongs to India. His political legacy is strong enough to fight back even the most ardent propagandists for Godse. But far more dangerous than them are his hidden assassins, those who swear by the Mahatma and yet backstab all that he stood for.

Pritish Nandy is now a Shiv Sena member of the Rajya Sabha.

How Readers responded to Pritish Nandy's last column

Pritish Nandy