(Replying to a letter from reader asking for Jeyamohan’s opinion on Maoist weaponised revolution in India).
To read in Tamil – http://www.jeyamohan.in/?p=10748
It is not easy to give an overall opinion about this issue which is a mesh of many social issues and social psychology. However one says, with a sense of reality, the opinion would seem to rise from several compromises. It is a big task to cover all aspects of it.
Moreover I fear there is a sect of people in the Internet who would not delve deep into anything but wait to catch onto a single line and start their aspersions. That was the main reason why I hesitated to talk about this. Even now I have my doubts. Still I will try.
My opinions are not from any role as a political observer. It is not my practice to analyze and research politics that way, neither my job. Usually those who do this are only political groups (in themselves). Only they have the time and resources. At the same time I am not writing these as one of those many people who ordinarily read news papers and offer opinions.
I will make an effort in my capacity as a writer, a writer understands the hearts of people. As a person who sees life wholesomely, next as someone who is learning Indian history continuously and thirdly as someone who has casually roamed this land as a traveler and seen its reality in person.
Beer mug revolution.
When we look at the discussions about Maoist revolution there is a psychological aspect in it. India today is split into two. There are those people who struggle for their basic needs. The other is the middleclass India, those who are riding the success of the new open economic policies. On the one side people living with Rs. 2000 a month on the other side those getting Rs. 50,000 a month.
A few of the latter know this split reality of India. They have guilt about it. But they have no intension to change this state. They do not accept any change that causes even a minor discomfort to them.
They overcome their split conscience through an intellectual jugglery. We can call it ‘Beer mug revolution’. It is the politics of ferociously affirming, at evenings in clubs with beer jugs overflowing, the need for the downtrodden to raise up and become violent. The illusion of getting through the blandness of (their) lives by taking an extreme position.
By continuous such discussions they create an alternative personality for themselves. That in no way reflects their self. Their politics is to build that false image(personality) like painting a picture stroke by stroke. Each and every one of their opinions is based on how it would help build that false personality.
The Internet is a great medium for them, to hide their real personality and skillfully assert their false image. This is the reason for the (revolutionary) upsurge in the Internet contrary to the reality in Tamilnadu.
I personally know media people who are ‘revolutionaries’ today. The money they spend for a day’s drinks is my monthly income. But they are revolutionaries and I am a petty bourgeois. They condone the weaponised violent revolution of the poor. I oppose it. Being in this strange status we are discussing.
A few years back in this same website (http://jeyamohan.in) I raised doubts about the personal integrity of several media personalities who we read daily. I received a lot of angry letters then. Today when Spectrum related conversations are leaked those stripped of their masks are only our media. Even some senior journalists have pointed out the silence about that aspect (of Spectrum fiasco) alone in the media.
There are two types of media personalities. One section lives within their income within boundaries of work ethics demanded by their job. The other, important, section does journalism as political business, making money by being agents for political malmaneuvers. If you talk to Delhi journalists they identify each other as members of Chinese lobby, American lobby and the like.
Only those who do journalism above journalism, this way, shine in the media most. The reason is that those lobbies put them in the fore of the media. They spread their agenda. They get to travel abroad, and foreign awards.
All their opinions depend on where their footing is. There are two ways in this. There are those who wear a revolutionary hat to hide their own wrong doings. There is strong political agenting behind most of the revolutionary voices. There are the others who craftily work for the agenda of their lobbies. In general Delhi-Mumbai based journalist voice opinions against India. There is money in that.
There are those middle upper-middle class people in India who digest these opinions literally and share the same mindset. They attain fulfillment as revolutionaries just by agreeing with a pro-maoist article in The Hindu or Times of India or Outlook.
Those who write with a revolutionary flavor in literary magazines and in the internet are also the readers of these magazines. Anything published in English magazines will be circulated in our lit magazines. Our opinions (even if) based on our direct observations are met by their guilty psyche. It is tough to converse with that.
Truth mostly is void of imaginative beauty, unexciting. A lot of times it creates faithlessness. And mostly it drives us to self hate. Thus to oppose truth is comfortable to many. But truth alone has practical worth.