Freedom of Expression vs Fahrenheit 451

How the book-burning, woke, cancel-culture types want to have the cake and eat it too

There was an interesting incident on Twitter, an example of how fluid the definition of free speech is. In the context of the Charlie Hebdo anniversary, and the cancellation of Monika Arora’s Delhi riot book by the publisher, this takes on sinister overtones. 

Some Iranian-Canadian man named Armin posted a lascivious picture of Kali, and commented:

In further discussion, he allowed as to how he was an atheist and therefore, by implication, he is a superior person. And entitled to mock the beliefs of others.

Some enraged Hindus excoriated him for hurting their feelings; but the usual atheist rationale was trotted out: it was merely Armin’s Freedom of Expression. Nobody should be outraged.

Well, it turns out that Armin is rather fond of his mother. His pinned tweet is this:

Perhaps taking a cue from this, a user named Ronak then posted a photo of a woman lying in a bed with four men around her, with the caption, “Grouping for Gang Bang :-)”. It’s definitely rude, so I will not post that tweet.

Armin was most pained, and tweeted:

It’s not hard to understand Armin’s distress. Some years ago the Israelis figured out that the only person in the world that a Palestinian terrorist cared for was his mother.

Therefore they let it be known that the homes of terrorists would be leveled, and their mothers would freeze to death on the street. This apparently had a deterrent effect. 

Perhaps Armin comes from the same Middle Eastern mentality.

The respected historian @TIinexile responded to Arman with a simple explanation:

Armin’s counter-response was predictably classy:

Thus, the definition of Freedom of Expression: you may hold any opinion you like, so long as I approve. Sounds a bit like Henry Ford (“You may buy a Model T in any color, so long as it’s black”).

This is typical of leftists and others who believe they are entitled. In particular, in India, we have long been subject to the belief that only some ideas are acceptable.

It doesn’t quite work that way. If certain ideas are beyond the pale out of respect to certain people’s beliefs then the beliefs of others must also be respected.

Respect, as @TrueIndology said, is the key, and it cannot be unilateral.

Atheists often consider themselves more ‘rational’ or ‘scientific’ than theists. This is debatable, because of ideological/cultural blinkers that lead to blind faith and dogma.

Furthermore, scientists are as prone to blind faith as anybody else. Even the cornerstone of Western science, Cartesianism, has major holes in it. Scientific fraud is also rife, as I wrote recently: Pious Frauds.

Of several famous Western atheists, I found Christopher Hitchens to be the most sensible, because he only criticized—harshly, it is true, in the case of MTeresa—that which he knew, the Catholic Church.

I was startled to find that another famous atheist, Richard Dawkins, admitting that he was culturally Judeo-Christian, for example in this tweet.

Nothing wrong in being immersed in his own culture, but perhaps it makes him ignorant/intolerant about others in general, and non-Abrahamics in particular. Dawkins has demonstrated complete ignorance elsewhere about the Old Religions.

Dawkins also showed that he could easily be manipulated. This is a hilarious award, given that Javed Akthar and his wife are not exactly… secular neutrals.

There is another quasi-famous atheist whose story would be hilarious if it weren’t tragic. That is Sanal Edamaruku, self-styled President of Rationalist International.

Sanal used to go around debunking Hindu swamis, to much applause from the usual suspects, and, significantly for our story, no harm to self.

But then he made a fatal mistake: he debunked a ‘weeping Jesus statue’ ‘miracle’ in a Mumbai church.

Sanal pointed out the ‘tears’ were due to capillary action from a nearby cistern. For this he was hounded by the church, death threats were issued, and he ran away and has been hiding in Finland for the last six years!

It turns out that it is not good for your health to challenge certain ideas, atheist or not.

Besides, Freedom of Expression is not absolute. For instance, you have the right to shout, “Fire!” in a crowded theater, but you don’t do it, because it has… consequences.

I wrote in 1999 about the Deepa Mehta movie “Fire” which I thought was intellectually dishonest, and so were the principals: The problem with Fire.

Things have gotten progressively worse. I have personally been affected. I used to write occasional columns for the Indian Express. One day, my contact told me that I was no longer welcome.

Because the op-ed editor didn’t like my perspectives. Not because my content was not good.

I had a college classmate who became a journalist at Frontline. He went to a conference where he found the bookseller displaying a book on Godhra which had a chapter by me, and he asked the bookseller to stop selling that book!

Somebody set up a Wikipedia page for me and it was there for several years. One fine day, an editor (whose name I later recognized as a notoriously biased Breaking-India type) simply deleted my page. I was un-personed on a whim.

On Twitter, I have been shadow-banned, and mass-blocked by the entire Khan Market gang. Random people I’ve never heard of have blocked me: I must be on some list.

In other words, some of us are less equal that others. Orwell would approve.

Leftists naturally gravitate towards Fahrenheit 451, the classic novel by Ray Bradbury about a society that censors things simply because Big Brother doesn’t like them. By the way, that’s the temperature at which paper spontaneously catches fire.

In passing, I am reminded of the spontaneous-combustion theory that one Judge Banerjee came up with regarding the torching of the Sabarmati Express in Godhra.

The left indulged in much sophomoric mirth after the publisher Bloomsbury canceled the release of Delhi Riots 2020 at the very last minute, and pulped the printed copies.

It is rumored that a British writer and an Afghan-American writer put pressure on the publisher forcing them to withdraw the book.

Fortunately, Garuda Prakashan stepped in, and they had 20,000 pre-print orders on the very first day, in a country where 5,000 copies makes for a best-seller!

The point, though, is that Thought Control is a reality in India. Those who toe the line get the goodies, such as column space in famous Western newspapers. Those who do not toe the line are un-personed.

Not much of a choice, is it? Fame and fortune, and 52-crore farmhouses beckon on one side, and obscurity on the other.

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine
What did you dream?
It's alright we told you what to dream. — Pink Floyd, Wish You Were Here

Maybe, just maybe, a tiny dent is being made in this fascism. That makes the perfumed elites, the PLUs go ballistic.

7 Sept 2020