English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Why do people love to hate?

Published

on

Bengal Riots

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Ranjona Banerji

And once again, India is heading towards what journalists of old used to call a “communal tinderbox”. Sectarian hatred, which sadly simmers below the surface across pockets of India, has once again started to find violent expression. This expression is usually related to political patronage – some Hindus feel that majoritarian rule is the answer for India whenever the BJP is in power. And in Bengal, there are claims that Mamata Banerjee’s Muslim appeasement policy has given strength to Islamist feelings in some areas of Bengal. Kerala is also going through some churn between the CPM and the BJP and once again the accusation is that various Islamic groups have free rein there: Hatred growing on hatred to destroy us all.

It is convenient for us to get stuck in the politics of it. That as if, had politicians not existed or did not pit one cause against the other, we would have loved each other desperately. The politics of it allows us to escape from the reality: That there is hatred, there is fear, there is a sense of historical injustice and there is insecurity. Almost all of it is illogical and unreasonable, almost all of it stems from ignorance and bigotry and all of it makes a mockery of our humanity.

History will show us that there is no one answer, there is no easy answer. Anthropologists will point to ancient atavistic impulses. Archaeologists will find old bones with evidence of extreme violence. Sociologists and psychologists will examine chinks in our relationships with others and with ourselves. They will all be correct. There is hatred in us and it will continue.

Do upbringing and experience play a role? Yet there are people who have suffered after the Partition riots and have tried to build bridges and there are those who have suffered and become filled with thoughts of revenge. The way some soldiers who have seen fighting and death become pacifists and others become even more dogged about military solutions to a conflict over all other ones. Does education make a difference? Clearly it does not, when you consider the number of educated terrorists of all political hues. Does being religious make a difference? This is the most tragic of all human beliefs when you consider that most extremist behaviour is justified in the name of religion.

We can accept that this is how we are and move on. Let law and order take each individual case and let the human constructs of evidence and justice deal with the consequences of human iniquity. Small individual steps to offset our human flaws. But this does not work on any grand scale.

The only thing that will make a difference is if law is matched with societal determination. Look at how Germany has tackled its anti-Semitic past. It was not the only nation in Europe which has persecuted Jews. The word “pogrom”, used loosely today for rioting and ethnic cleansing, is a Russian word meaning to “wreak havoc, demolish violently”, was specifically used for attacks on Jews. Across Europe, Jews faced everything from social discrimination to outright violence. Every kind of justification and lie to persecute any minority group today was used then.

But what happened in Nazi Germany with the cruel genocide of 6 million Jews in concentration camps was so bad, so horrific, that it became too much for the collective conscience of the Germans and of much of the world. Germany more than any other nation follows a very strict policy when it comes to anti-Semitism because it is always aware of its past. No solution is perfect but this is the one solution which has stood out as a beacon of hope and so it must.

Racism has not found such an easy solution nor has gender equity. Here in India, apart from the anger with minority religions that some of the majority Hindus have, we have still not managed as a society to acknowledge the terrible damage done to our fellow humans by the strictures of caste. We still look for justifications for dehumanisation, against and above the law of the land.

There is no easy answer and as long as we don’t honestly search for some as a society, we shall continue to be victim to politicians, religious clerics and other vested interests, to those whose power flows from creating and fostering hatred amongst us. We have reached that crossroads yet again. The last time someone tried to appeal to our collective conscience, we killed him. There is no Mahatma Gandhi today. There is only us. And we don’t look pretty.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

India hits back at Shehbaz Sharif at UN, says terror will have consequences

India hit back at Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s UN speech, with New Delhi warning that terrorism will have consequences.

Published

on

India has responded to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s remarks at the United Nations, delivering a strong message on terrorism and warning that such actions will have consequences.

The response came after Mr Sharif addressed the UN and raised issues concerning India and Pakistan. New Delhi rejected the narrative presented by the Pakistani prime minister and highlighted the issue of terrorism.

India’s message was delivered by Petal Gehlot, who represented New Delhi in the response to Pakistan.

India warns Pakistan over terrorism

India’s response focused on Pakistan’s record and its approach towards terrorism. New Delhi made clear that terrorism cannot be separated from its consequences and that those responsible cannot expect such actions to go unanswered.

The Indian side also pushed back against the claims and allegations made by Mr Sharif during his UN speech.

The exchange comes amid continuing tensions between India and Pakistan, with terrorism remaining a major point of disagreement between the two countries.

Shehbaz Sharif’s UN remarks

In his address, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke about India-Pakistan relations and raised several issues concerning New Delhi.

India subsequently exercised its right of reply to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the United Nations.

New Delhi’s response underlined its position that terrorism remains a serious issue in the relationship and that there would be consequences for terrorist actions.

The latest exchange at the UN adds to the continuing diplomatic confrontation between the two neighbouring countries.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

India News

Women wrestlers challenge Brij Bhushan’s acquittal in sexual harassment case

Four women wrestlers have challenged the acquittal of former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and co-accused Vinod Tomar in a sexual harassment case.

Published

on

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

Four women wrestlers have approached a Delhi court challenging the acquittal of former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.

The wrestlers have also challenged the acquittal of co-accused Vinod Tomar. The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Special Judge at the Rouse Avenue Courts.

The appeal challenges the order passed by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on August 3, 2026, when Brij Bhushan and Tomar were acquitted in the case.

Wrestlers challenge court’s reasoning

In their appeal, the wrestlers have argued that the acquittal order is legally unsustainable and that the evidence was not assessed appropriately.

They have also alleged that the order relied on assumptions about how victims of sexual assault and harassment were expected to behave instead of assessing the evidence and circumstances of the complainants.

The challenge seeks judicial scrutiny of the findings that resulted in the acquittal of Brij Bhushan and Tomar.

Brij Bhushan was acquitted in August

The Rouse Avenue court acquitted Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on August 3 in the sexual harassment case involving women wrestlers. The court’s decision followed consideration of the evidence and statements presented during the proceedings.

The case had emerged after several women wrestlers accused the former WFI chief of sexual harassment. The allegations had led to a major protest by wrestlers in 2023.

The latest appeal means the acquittal is now being challenged before a higher court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com