Leftist propaganda outlet recently published an article about the Pulwama attack, by ‘Eminent Intellectual’ M.K. Venu which defies common sense and basic knowledge. The article, which is an atrocious assault on our intellect, makes the argument that the BJP will politicize the Pulwama Terror Attack and that Pakistan will welcome the fact that Kashmir will play such a pivotal role in the outcome of the General Elections.
Quite undoubtedly, the most erroneous claim in the article was when Venu argued that Kashmiri Separatism was never about Islamic Jihad. He writes, “A perceptive political analyst pointed out that the Pulwama suicide bomber’s video message, most likely formulated by Jaish-e-Muhammed ideologues, talks mostly about Hindutva majoritarian oppression with references to BJP’s cow politics.”
The whitewashing of the terrorist’s actual words by Venu is quite astonishing. The terrorist did not merely refer to ‘Hindutva majoritarian oppression’ or ‘cow politics’. The Jihadist openly advocated hatred towards Hindus by labelling them cow-piss drinkers. That is not cow politics, that is Islamic hatred for Hindus. It’s quite deplorable that Venu brushes it under the carpet by terming it as an attack on BJP’s brand of politics.
And exactly is he referring to when he speaks of ‘Hindutva majoritarian oppression’? In West Bengal, Muslim mobs are permitted to go on a rampage against Hindus while the Police do absolutely nothing. Cattle smugglers are involved in numerous criminal activities where they even violently attack law enforcement authorities when confronted, even killing them at times.
Elected Democratic representatives boast about the number of Mosques they have constructed, the minority have special rights granted to them by the discriminatory Indian Constitution itself. What on Earth does he mean by ‘majoritarian oppression’? Of course, in the liberal world, ‘feelings’ matter more facts and the feelings of minorities and liberals matter a lot more than facts and certainly a lot more than the sentiments of Hindus.
Venu then adds, “This is interesting because for decades the Kashmiri Muslim majority was only obsessed with the question of maximum autonomy or Azadi, and they did not really connect or empathise with the questions which constantly agitated the Muslim minority in the rest of the country, whether UP, Bihar or Gujarat.”
It appears that the author has been living under a rock for decades. It has always been amply clear, even Kashmiri separatists say it, that the terrorism against India has always been about establishing an Islamic caliphate in the region. Liberals have a poor memory, it seems, considering the fact that it hasn’t been long since Barkha Dutt tried to coax a separatist into saying that Kashmiri Separatism was about Azadi even when the latter maintained that it was about his religion. But it doesn’t matter what Kashmiri terrorists themselves say. If liberals are in disagreement with observable facts, then they will declare reality itself to be a mistake.
Moving forward with his argument which is based on a horribly false premise, Venu writes at one point, “So why is Muslim-majority Kashmir, which was largely preoccupied with the notion of full autonomy or Azadi for all these decades, now entering the debate linked to Hindutva and the overtly majoritarian politics of the rest of India, especially the Hindi heartland?”
The answer to his question is fairly obvious. For the same reason that some Muslims in India indulged in rabid violence for the plight of Rohingyas in Myanmar, for the same reason that Indian Muslims hate Israel for its war against Palestinians, for the same reason that Islamic fanatics across the country have been celebrating the Pulwama Terror Attack and attacking those who express solidarity with the martyrs, loyalty to the Global Ummah transcends all else. Venu’s words only serve to confirm the notion that Liberalism is a mental disorder which blinds a person to obvious realities.
In his article, Venu insinuates that Narendra Modi himself is indulging in the politicization of the act of terrorism. He wrote, “Narendra Modi himself is making speeches in Patna, Varanasi, etc., speaking in very coded language about revenge. “The fire raging in your hearts is raging in my heart too,” he told an angry crowd in Patna.”
The thick veil of liberalism cloaking his eyes prevents Venu from seeing that the Prime Minister is merely echoing the sentiments of the Indian populace. And it’s not just Narendra Modi who is speaking in such terms. The Chief Minister of Punjab, who belongs to the Congress party, has called for vengeance as well. Senior Congress leader Digvijay Singh spoke out against Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan and his fanboy, Navjot Singh Sidhu.
By singling out Narendra Modi for his rhetoric against Pakistan which is being echoed the rest of the India polity as well, Venu commits the crime that he is accusing the BJP of. It is he who’s politicizing the matter, not the Bharatiya Janata Party or the Indian Prime Minister. In doing so, he has once again affirmed his liberal credentials. It is the hallmark of liberalism, after all, that its adherents accuse others of what they themselves are most guilty of.
