Debate on Dissent: Are the Champions of FoE hypocrite ?

Freedom of expression is a new topic of debate across the world and being sold like a hot cake on different media platforms mainly instigated by so called liberal social justice warriors (LSJW). However, if one observers carefully, many hidden faces of those so called liberals are bound to emerge.

On this very note, I would like to publish this blog relating FoE debate to social media commotion ascribed to a specific recent controversy and its subsidiaries.

A few days back, social media was on a rampage following the incident of DU where some ABVP members allegedly bashed up students from communist inclined AISA who allegedly repeated the separatist chants of “Kashmir Mange Azadi”. The chants, may however be of utmost irk for the mass of apolitical people genuinely believing in the sovereignty of the nation and bereaving families of the martyred soldiers , is a perfect spice for sparking the “Nationalism” debate and as a counter-action it is instrumental in stirring up the obtuse debate surrounding dissent. Such debates, no matter how they end up adding value to our day to day life, surely work as a tantalising nutrient to both main stream and social media.

However, like all similar controversies this too left a trail of protrusion, in form of a vehement, belligerent display in Social Media when Gurmeher Kaur episode popped up. The liberal gang saw a “messiah” in her to pursue their agenda, and all hell broke loose for the Right wingers who either harshly criticised her , mocked and abused her. Allegedly, she even received rape threats, following which abuse and counter-abuses clogged SM space, turning this entire matter into an impudent display of sombre mood of the country.

The ugliness intensified when Virender Sehwag ,in his own words tried to be facetious by tweeting his own picture holding a banner which literally translates into a harsh criticism of Gurmeher’s slide “Pakistan Didn’t kill my father War did” , the matter didn’t remain waggish anymore. The revulsion from the liberal gang amplified when actor Randeep Hooda re-tweeted the same and openly justified Sehwag’s  tweet and also went on to criticise the controversial slide of Gurmehar.

My observation on hypocrisy of the so called liberals started right there. Although administration shouldn’t show impunity to any threat-mongering elements and abusers should equivocally be condemned, a question lingers that why all the dissenters to the agenda of these “Liberals” are called names? Surprisingly in such matters,these “Left-Liberals”, are self-contradictory and perilous to the entire debate because this attitude. Uncountable number of times I have heard of “Mockery” and “Sarcasm” being useful tools for these “Left-Liberals” turned comedians on TV debates, who justify the art of tweaking the word in use of their social justice war (read attention seeking) . It’s also emphasised that sarcasm is often the biggest form of FoE , and anybody getting offended or raged by their act is intolerant. Well, this narrative gives rise to the fundamental question. What sort of FoE do they believe in? As far as the common sense goes, FoE should be a both way transmission. If someone has a right to offend, the other party has the right to be offended and place a rebuttal. This argument and counter-argument could go on for eternity within the frame on peaceful FoE isn’ it? Then why the “Left-Liberals” turn their back to this simple rationale.

Moreover, coming back to the context, an act of mockery and criticism to one of Gurmeher’s slide created huge ruckus among this “Left-Liberal” gang. Even self-proclaimed eminent journalists started calling them misogynist , even though there was no mention in anybody’s statement about any gender. This horrible trend went on as one self-styled investigative journalist, a known terrorist apologetic,started stereotyping and defiling their state Haryana and their community .Internationally acclaimed athletes including the famous "Phogat Sisters" who jumped into the defence of their state,were ridiculed and harassed by an elite “Shayar” as “Illiterate”. 

Dear readers, isn’t this attitude preposterous? I often find it so. Question however remains valid, why the champions of FoE , advocating criticism and sarcasm every now and then suddenly become so “intolerant” when the wind starts blowing from the other direction . Another follow-up question rises, why suddenly they start playing “victim card” citing the age of the girl in the epitome of the debate on an open SM platform. Keenly if you observe, the other side, may be highly impulsive but hardly cries victim on realising that masses are not on their side.

Well, thinking from all sides, the reason I find is that the cry of “Left-Liberals” on the issue of FoE ,is an excuse to represent a one way FoE, the one suits their agenda , which in turn is nothing more than pettifogging for the ego of the champagne sipping elites’ establishment of New Delhi, who thought to have monopoly over truth for decades and are duly rattled by the rise of “stupid common man” on SM platform.

So, let the dissents and the debate on dissent both go on but the fact of the matter is, as long as the narrative of the “Left-Liberals” remains like their dissent is good dissent but others’ dissent is “intolerance” ,  the volition of the true dissenters will triumph.The self-righteousness of the armchair critics may rest in peace for a longer period of time.