Anupam Kher's public protest against a protest is awful neo-fascism
I have many questions for those engaged in the #AwardWapsi campaign. I listed some of them in my #NationalInterest column last week. But one cannot take away the right of any member or section of the intellectual and creative community to protest against the establishment or an atmosphere they deem intolerant. A public protest against a protest, and charging dissenters with defaming the nation, is outright stifling of dissent, symptomatic only of awful neo-fascism.
I am saddened that some of the most articulate and successful members of the creative community have led this campaign with a farcical #MarchForIndia, ending with a meeting with the prime minister.
When I articulated this reservation to @AnupamKher, he responded with a counter question: Why was I taking away his #FreedomOfExpression by doing so? Was it wrong to say that #IndiaIsTolerant? he asked.
But my question to him is: Can he not exercise his freedom of expression through engagement and effective intervention in a public debate, especially considering that he enjoys a powerful voice in our society, and the media, on all platforms, covets his time?
Home minister Rajnath Singh himself made an appeal to those who disagree to come, debate and voice their concerns. Should Kher not do the same?
On another note, the shameful and condemnable harassment of journalists in #MarchForIndia raised some serious questions about the tolerance of the well-heeled people claiming India's tolerance.
The essence of tolerance is tolerating the right of others to disagree even if they are in the smallest minority. It cannot be shoved down the throats of those who dare to dissent in the form of hashtag-tolerance.
(This post first appeared in Shekhar Gupta's Facebook post.)