
Why Free Speech Loses in India - ad93611
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/02/wendy-doniger-free-speech-india.html
======
sarfaraz
Irony abounds. An article that downplays the status of free speech rights in
India and mocks Dr. Subramanian Swamy to make its point conveniently sidesteps
the double standards of US institutions (for e.g., the same Dr. Swamy was
sacked from Harvard because of his free speech rights). Better explained in a
comment by Pradip4.

~~~
xmonkee
I agree with you on the hypocrisy of US media on this one. But I still don't
understand what Dr swamy finds so objectionable in the book. I've started
reading it, and it seems like a very scholarly treatment of the ignored
sections in the history of hinduism. Surely Dr swamy understands the
importance of protecting controversial academic works?

~~~
bruceb
@cubancigar11 "And ultimately it should Hindus who get to decide the meaning
of Hinduism."

Why? Cause I doubt they would agree. To say unless you are X then you can't
comment on X is foolish.

~~~
cubancigar11
If it is foolish to you, then so be it. To categorically ignore the power play
implied by defining a section without any input from it (and ignore rest of
the comment, I suppose, along with the book and its criticism) seems
intelligent to you then so be it. I am deeply aware of my inability to explain
what has already been explained by others, so I resign.

"Cause I doubt they would agree." That should tell the complexity of defining
Hinduism and the amateurish level western 'Indologists' have achieved which
they spread around, calling any criticism to their approach 'foolish'.

------
einhverfr
It's hard to know, really, what to make of the stuff in this article. On one
hand, functioning society, business, and government requires a relatively
uninhibited flow of information, and it is particularly dangerous when a
government, which monopolizes force, also decides to restrict dialog about
issues.

But on the other hand, the limits of free speech are ones that must be decided
close to those affected. Brandenburg got off with calling for (and stating he
wanted to be a part of!) genocide against African Americans at a KKK rally not
because this speech contributed anything to the public discourse worth saving
but because the US government had made a series of serious overreaches in
prosecuting Communists. Since one couldn't draw a principled line between
arguing for eventual genocide and arguing for eventual overthrow of the
government, Brandenburg had to be set free.

In the end, I think, that communities have a right to make mistakes, and since
free speech can't be unlimited (handing someone a gun and saying "I hope
someone shoots so-and-so" isn't protected speech anywhere in the world), the
peoples affected get to make this discussion.

One thing that bothers me though: there are a number of fields, like
historical linguistics which are malaigned by some in India as colonial (and
in fact historical Indo-European linguistics arose from the colonial
experience historically) but are argued against as straw men (thinking that
the Indo-European hypothesis means Europeans invading India, which it
doesn't). I do have a concern that by moving towards a more insular culture in
this regard, that it is harder and harder for Indian scholars to make their
voices and perspectives heard internationally. It would be tragic if in the
interest of protecting the Indian cultural experience, these sorts of things
lead to the denial of an Indian perspective in these sorts of disciplines.

------
primitivesuave
I've seen some crazy shit go down on CSPAN, but definitely nothing as crazy as
senators pepper spraying each other.

~~~
einhverfr
In many countries, fist fights in parliament are not unheard of.

~~~
DerpDerpDerp
There was at least one beating with a cane related to a speech about US
slavery that happened in the senate building, if not while the senate was in
session.

~~~
primitivesuave
Yes, the caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks. It was because there was
such a heated rift between the north and the south that representative Brooks
thought it would be more fitting to discipline his opponent with a cane used
to beat an unruly dog than to challenge him to a duel, as was the norm at that
time. He beat Sumner repeatedly with the cane, then calmly walked away like a
total gangsta - definitely one of the most memorable stories from my high
school history class.

It's worth noting that not too long after that incident, there was a civil
war...

------
bruceb
What you have to understand is India is in someways many little countries
pushed together. Different languages a religions. So politicians play this up
and do BS such as banning books.

------
ajju
It's a sad day when my country sacrifices freedom of speech, yet again, in
response to a mediocre* book from a largely ignored author which would have
faded into oblivion on its own.

* or worse - Read the Amazon reviews, specifically the ones by the author's fellow academics [http://www.amazon.com/The-Hindus-An-Alternative-History/dp/1...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Hindus-An-Alternative-History/dp/1594202052)

------
abraham_s
The news from India these days is rarely cheery.. This sentence pretty much
sums up my feeling about my country, these days..

~~~
kushti
Probably because your feeling is based on news?

------
fuhrer1996
IMHO, It is Penguin's fault. There are religious extremists in every country.
If you are going to release a book that does not agree to their view of the
religion, they will complain. This matter should have settled in court. It is
wrong to blame the country for Penguin taking of its book just because an
organization asked it to.

------
srajbr
Here is the report from New York Times
[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/world/asia/indian-
publishe...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/world/asia/indian-publisher-
withdraws-book-stoking-fears-of-nationalist-pressure.html)

