India's #1 idea person, Varun Gandhi, evil spawn of Sanjay "Imma cut your nads off" Gandhi and Maneka "Makes PETA look like pussies" Gandhi (gee, I wonder where Varun got his mean streak from?), is taking India into the 21st century by talking about issues relevant to people in this day and age:
Cow slaughter — topped Varun's agenda during his hour-and-half long address.
Urging Hindus to rise against the "heinous act which is a punishable offence and not only a social crime" the MP questioned the prevailing silence surrounding 'gau hatya'.
"Why hasn't a single case been registered so far for violation of anti-cow slaughter law," he asked.
Yes. Now that UP enjoys peace & prosperity due to there being a lack of actual real criminals (as they are busy trying to run the government!), why isn't the police pursuing more cow slaughterers? Besides stopping people from having sex, shouldn't this also be their other #1 priority? Which doesn't mean that they should forget their most important #1 priority, which is protecting Madam Maya's 'freedom' statues.
Varun also has another brilliant idea:
The Pilibhit MP asked his Hindu brethren to stand up for their "samman" (honour) and "swabhiman" (self-respect), and hoped to raise "an army of one lakh Varun Gandhi clones to fulfil his wish-list".
GREAT NEWS, EVERYONE! There are going to be Varun Gandhi's running around everywhere! Varun knows that he is one of the most awesomest human beings alive! So why not spread his awesomeness around? I'm pretty sure there is enough awesomenss to spare, for anyone who is interested! Isn't that simply awesome?
This is known as an 'Hands free' approach to governance! Since his cousin Rahul gets all the attention (due to the fact that he INVENTED politics and everybody anywhere is always 'pulling a Rahul Gandhi'), everything Varun does reeks of desperation. The poor guy is out in the wilderness and is continuously trying to draw attention to himself, as if trying to say "I'm a Gandhi, get me out of here!".
Tut, tut Varun. All you have to do to get noticed by the media is to get a twitter account, because if you don't have a twatter account or are not on "the bookface", you don't even exist anymore! Also, since the people on teevee have even lesser substantive things to talk about, they will put your twats on teevee everyday, because they are basically assholes.
In fact, through the magical powers of the hot tub time machine, one of our "reporters" from the "future" have sent in this "poem" which based on a very famous literary work, which speculates what life would be after a couple of decades under Prime Minister Varun Gandhi. It's never going to actually happen (because of education, which is a fundamental right now! Teehee, FUNDAMENTAL!), but let's just suppose it does, for shits & giggles:
When they came for the people who eat beef,
I said nothing because I prefer fried chicken.
When they came for the people who get their hair cut on a Tuesday,
I said nothing because I always have a standing appointment with my barber for every Friday evening.
When they came for people who drank alcohol on dry days,
I said nothing because those drunken bastards deserved it anyway!
When they came for the people who had sex outside of wedlock,
I said nothing because I was married and wasn't getting any sex so I didn't want anyone else to have it either!
When they came for all the gay people,
I said nothing because just like Chetan Bhagat, I am not "a gay".
When they came for all those women who wanted to be something other than a housewife,
I said nothing because they're women, what else are they going to do?
When they came to give me a vasectomy so that I couldn't reproduce,
They left me alone because they realized I lost my testicles when I didn't say anything the first time they tried to curtail my freedom!
22 comments:
good poem
Nice irony in the end of the poem. Did you try particularly hard to not rhyme?
Haha, totally hilarious.
particularly the one about women, what are they going to do anyway,
Wait for the moment they claim that Gandhi invented the internet.....Wait for it
When they came to clean out the whore houses
I was amused, how they'd have to arrest their own leaders.
When they came for me in their rickshaws I laughed,
Because I can outrun them.
That last stanza of your poem was real good.
Bit childish and silly , your whole rant.
It's easy to sit on the fence and ridicule a young man like Varun who's out there and standing up for what he believes in -- even if it's not the same as you do.
Instead of hiding behind clever words , why not get out there and do something yourself. Or have you lost your balls?
Warning: 'Serious' and long comment ahead
Maya,
Even though you'd addressed Overrated outcast, I am answering because probably to maintain consistecy with his usual online demeanor of frivolity, he will not answer such questions 'seriously'.
Except for if one is from a family as conducive to get into politics as Varun's, it's extremely difficult to do what you're suggesting.
Moreover, at least you must appreciate OO's honesty that he has never pretended to be gravely concerned of India's welfare [though secretly he somewhat seems to be :) which makes him dishonest in an entirely different manner ;) ].
Overrated Outcast,
In my previous comment, I had not put forth those points that I truly wanted to. Because I was myself not able to decide if I am being objective enough.
Part of my hesitation stems from the fact that Varun happens to be the second BJP leader (after Modi) who I am optimistic about.
It is not at all difficult for me to perfunctorily agree with you and mock at both the politicians to be in agreement & thus not look ridiculous. But you might have not realized this, I follow and comment regularly only on those people's blogs who I feel write with great degree of honesty (of course, that includes you, and you can take it as a compliment :) ).
So, I would find it improper to be dishonest in my comments on your blog posts. Honesty (in your writing blog posts) met with dishonesty (in my comments) is not something I can envisage.
That is the most important reason I did not end up mocking Varun in my comments. Of course, there's another small reason. Despite my trying to be all scientific (e.g., animals & plants are made of same atoms & molecules), I could never become a regular omnivore, despite my having tasted nonveg a few times. So though, I theoretically cannot claim a higher moral ground for not eating nonveg, there's something indeed I find cruel about nurturing an animal, butchering it as it cries in pain & all this as many times the animals mother looks on. If the said animal is a mammal (like cow), it would also feel depressed for a few days to come to terms with losing its calf, or the calf would feel so if its mother is killed. As far as we know plants do not feel pain or emotions....
...So though on ethical grounds I can't oppose eating nonveg, the fact is, at an emotional/instinctive level I am opposed to it. So how could've I supported your opposition to opposition of cow slaughter in my comments?
You might also point out that it's Varun's hypocrisy that he's concerned selectively only of cows as they're revered by Hindus (here, need to emphasize yet again, am an atheist), and I would agree with such criticism. If you criticize the element of coercion in his ideas (curtailing freedom), again I agree with you, that what people kill and eat (except for humans) should be their prerogative, except for if its our national animal(?) ;)
But what I am much more worried about is the caricaturization of certain people by manipulative media & much worse, common people indeed getting manipulated. Yes, here the case in point is Varun. Despite rightly mocking at media, did you consider the possibility that the article you linked had a single point-agenda of making Varun look bad? Everything written is bordering on PoV. Now, after 21st March SIT-Modi fiasco, I'm totally convinced Indian media is not shy of speaking blatant lies & putting words in mouth of people especially if direct verification is not possible. Please do go through the Wikipedia article on Varun. I admit, it's quite biased in his favor, but do read a few of his ideas related to education & health problems in India. I found them pretty sensible. Why am I writing you this long comment is 'cuz I'd be concerned if sensible people would end up thinking that making inflammatory speeches (which also was never established; just that media thrust that as 'fact' in their characteristic style; had voice testing not disproved it was him, his career would've ended by now) and opposing cow slaughter is all that's there to a politician I consider far better educated and sensible than his peers. We've to remember politicians say a lot of useless and unimportant things, but we should also try to make out if those things are their core policies or fringe enticements to voters. I guess, his support for ban on cow slaughter is one of those fringe enticements, and his core issues are the ones like healthcare and education (something the article you linked didn't touch upon).
If voters get polarized & vote based on these fringe enticements and we consider them fools, then we'd be equally foolish to fall for the grossly distorted images of people created by the media....
...This applies to every politician, but the only reason I emphasize this point in case of Modi and Varun is because media has worked overtime to spoil their images, and our assessing these people based on those impressions would be akin to completely believing Pachauri at face value! ;) And on the other hand, media's worked overtime to try to show our PM, Rahul & his mom in best light possible - both by highlighting only their 'good' works & cleverly not focusing on their misdeeds. :)
Sorry for the long rant. It was mostly because I feel both the above politicians have been treated extremely unfairly by the media, and your post seemed to reflect that they have succeeded in their attempts. :(
Please do read the following articles, and you'll better understand where I'm coming from. I understand you've criticized the media, but that's been more for their being silly or prioritizing issues wrongly, but not so much for the inherent unreliability of what they try to peddle as facts.
http://www.bspcn.com/2010/03/17/6-subtle-ways-the-news-media-disguises-as-fact/
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/columnists/19-nadeem-f-paracha-smug-thugs-830-hh-05
@Che: Thanks! So welcome back to the world of the living?!
@Ketan: No, actually. Not rhyming stuff comes to me very easily. It's the rhyming which is a problem!
@Alpha Ze: Hehe, thanks! I *missed* whore to add whore houses! Well, there is always next time.
@Shraddha: Haha, I think Govinda's nephew might have more to offer?! Mocking someone is not giving them importance. And really, my blog's reach is not wide enough for anyone to get mileage out of it!
@Abhishek: Heh! Thanks!! I had a 'ball' writing it!! Wait, that doesn't sound right?
@Maya: "Childish & Silly"? You must be new to the internets! Also, you think Varun is a "young man"! Haha, you must be old! Did they not change your 'adult' diaper today? Do people not "get off" your lawn when you tell them too? Did you miss your daily dose of prozac again?
@Ketan: Hey, thanks for the compliments!
You know, I'm not a big beef eater myself! Prefer poultry and lamb. But yeah, plants feel pain too, especially those in Sagarika Ghose's garden!
I know the article I linked too was more biased than news articles about BJP members usually are, but it was the first article I found and, well, I'm a lazy fellow.
Anyways, I don't agree when you say that politicians say a lot of frivolous things and we need to ignore them. The rhetoric employed by both Varun Gandhi and Narendra Modi is not 'frivolous'. Just because our politicians don't know any better, doesn't mean we shouldn't expect them not to. I have seen enough of NaMo's 'governance' and his politics to know what type of person he is.
Varun may have great policies, but his 'hate-speech' cannot be ignored. Frankly, I don't care what policies he pretends to perpetuate. I am absolutely sickened by his bigotry.
And if you say that it is the way to win elections, well, that is untrue as well.
For eg: Look at Vajpyee. He was a masterful politician, but he never needed to stoop to the level of cynicism that NaMo and Varun employ to win elections.
Yes, the media distorts the truth. But a lot of us are able to see through the haze, and a wolf in sheep's clothing cannot be hidden for long!
And, fyi, if you want to read about the manipulative influence of the media, I would recommend Naom Chomsky's Necessary Illusions, which is much better and more illuciatory than the articles you link too.
Now, please excuse me. I have an important appointment with my therapist, Dr. Jack Daniels.
First off the mandatory 'he he - hilarious' comment to OO coz. seriously, I'm too busy these days and when I come to your blog, it is so damn funny, my colleagues wonder what am I looking at the laptop and giggling about.
And it's not only funny, it's even 'patriotic' and in the interests of the nation :D like your reply to Madame Maya above! he he...
And now to KP's long and serious comment...
KP, seriously dude? It's all fine to the extent that you don't eat non-veg but don't put your highly analytical 'fit for some scientific discovery' brain to worthless tasks like defending Varun Gandhi. Please.
I really appreciate the fact that you do seem genuinely concerned about issues but please at times, I think even you're living in your own world where:
You believe that everything on tv is false;
You think everything on tv is not only false but the exact opposite is true;
You think Varun Gandhi is a great leader but only uses hate speech as his regular dose of masturbation to release excess heat (and that is acceptable as long as he doesn't spray on you).
I don't eat beef either, just coz. I've tried it once but found it not so tasty (and also I've read that it gives you cholestrol). But that doesn't mean I'd find common ground with Varun Gandhi when he opposes beef eaters!
This is like I don't know how to swim so I don't mind someone banning swimming. This is exactly the attitude that "First they came" talks about.
NaMo is slightly different in the sense that he is also an able administrator so there could be two views about him.
But Varun Gandhi? And seriously just his views on health care and education? Is that enough? His views - On some page on the internet. Are you sure he himself has written those? How can you be sure that those are the subjects that are close to his heart and not what he keeps speaking every now and then. You take his hate speech with a pinch of salt but you take his views on some internet page quite seriously - so seriously that it's giving you a hard on?
Sorry KP for a few rude remarks but please do not go all out to 'save the tigers'.
Just that the Media is bad, doesn't make Varun Gandhi good. This is really so weird coming from a logical person like you.
First off the mandatory 'he he - hilarious' comment to OO coz. seriously, I'm too busy these days and when I come to your blog, it is so damn funny, my colleagues wonder what am I looking at the laptop and giggling about.
And it's not only funny, it's even 'patriotic' and in the interests of the nation :D like your reply to Madame Maya above! he he...
And now to KP's long and serious comment...
KP, seriously dude? It's all fine to the extent that you don't eat non-veg but don't put your highly analytical 'fit for some scientific discovery' brain to worthless tasks like defending Varun Gandhi. Please.
I really appreciate the fact that you do seem genuinely concerned about issues but please at times, I think even you're living in your own world where:
You believe that everything on tv is false;
You think everything on tv is not only false but the exact opposite is true;
You think Varun Gandhi is a great leader but only uses hate speech as his regular dose of masturbation to release excess heat (and that is acceptable as long as he doesn't spray on you).
I don't eat beef either, just coz. I've tried it once but found it not so tasty (and also I've read that it gives you cholestrol). But that doesn't mean I'd find common ground with Varun Gandhi when he opposes beef eaters!
This is like I don't know how to swim so I don't mind someone banning swimming. This is exactly the attitude that "First they came" talks about.
NaMo is slightly different in the sense that he is also an able administrator so there could be two views about him.
But Varun Gandhi? And seriously just his views on health care and education? Is that enough? His views - On some page on the internet. Are you sure he himself has written those? How can you be sure that those are the subjects that are close to his heart and not what he keeps speaking every now and then. You take his hate speech with a pinch of salt but you take his views on some internet page quite seriously - so seriously that it's giving you a hard on?
Sorry KP for a few rude remarks but please do not go all out to 'save the tigers'.
Just that the Media is bad, doesn't make Varun Gandhi good. This is really so weird coming from a logical person like you.
OO,
Sorry, I was not inclined to respond back, as I wouldn't like to transform a lighthearted post into a serious one.
I really do not know what done/not done by Modi are you referring to as stooping? If you're referring to compulsory election thing, then I'd pointed out making voting compulsory was not in his jurisdiction so I don't know how that news floated around. Such a legislation would've to be brought about by two-third majority in parliament, with SC-approval and election commission's overseeing.
If you were referring to his role in Gujarat riots, again I wouldn't even know where to start with.
If you have your info, most obviously, you will use it only to draw your conclusions. If info I have is different, my conclusions would also be different is all I could say.
Rakesh,
In my comment I've very clearly that I'm opposed to coercion. I've also stated that Varun is hypocritical to be taking up a religiously polarizing issue of cow slaughter alone. For these things I've NOT defended Varun. I was only pointing out since I am usually opposed to eating nonveg I could not support OO in my first comment (I've also expressed my doubt at my own ability to be objective in this regard).
I've also stated that the Wikipedia article is heavily biased in his favor. So obviously, I don't trust it completely.
As to whether he actually made that speech or not - cases were filed against him. If the voice sample would've matched he'd have been behind bars. Remember, NSA had been used against him! That's the degree to which his political adversaries had to gain by hurting him. All this did not happen. What conclusion shall I draw about the authenticity of his pre-election speech?
I've never stated everything shown on TV is the opposite of truth. :) But selective reporting can very effectively create an impression which is opposite of the truth.
My issue was only with treating people unidimensionally, especially when the info on which our understanding of them would be from clearly motivated sources. But on second thoughts, if humor is the only intent, one should not break one's head. And for doing that and making you do that, am sorry. :)
TC, both of you.
And no I didn't find any of the things you pointed out rude. If I'd taken the liberty to write with an element of emotion, you too are free to exercise same liberty. :)
What a bunch of geniuses you attract, OO my man. They understand fully well that the first criterion to show empathy for a creature is the presence of a face and a propensity to noise when slaughtered. I suggest sea urchins as an alternative. Them fuckers are ugly, yo! And squid. I hate squid.
Also, the one called Ketan makes a point and a half. "As far as we know plants do not feel pain or emotions....". That's just plain ol' Hemingway under-speak on a plate. You should also have said something like, "Jagdish Chandra Bose was an amateur photographer at best" to add some vitriol into otherwise impeccable prose. Plants are just like stalactites anyway. Dumb lifeless thousand year old living bastards!
Also look at this literary gem, OO old pal, old chum, "Except for if one is from a family as conducive to get into politics as Varun's, it's extremely difficult to do what you're suggesting."
I rest my case. I vote Ketan for induction to the Varun Gandhi Academy of Intellectual Excellence.
Pravin Pillai,
If you might be interested in an extensive but informal debate covering other issues like animal experiments, etc., here (click) it is. And most of my arguments there were directed at proving why eating nonveg is not unethical in absolute terms. The arguments also contain the visceral reasons because of which I do not eat nonveg, & hence I consider those reasons rationally inadmissible to make a case for terming eating nonveg unethical.
Bose's experiment that you've alluded to only tells us of plants' responsiveness to stimuli.
Blood will ooze on chopping off someone's finger, and there would be ejaculation of semen on getting orgasm (owing to tactile stimulation, if you may). Both are responses to stimuli; only one of the two experiences is regarded as 'painful', except for if J. C. Bose had something to say in this regard too.
You also missed my acknowledgement of double standards of Varun in being selectively compassionate for cows.
My second comment to OO was only to explain to him why despite being opposed to coercion & double standards I could not support him wholeheartedly because of my personal emotional conflict in my first comment.
That's a lot of meaningful words strung together buddy. Let me explain. Unless you invent a metric to quantify life, I personally think each living creature is equal unless otherwise proven.
For instance, is a human life worth more than an anteater's? Is a serial killing human's life worth more than an anteater's? See the point?
So no can take the moral high ground for anything here. If you're killing something to eat it, plant or animal, its all objectively the same. "Stimuli" or "Mother watching its calf getting killed" or any other empathy-inducing statement is just an attempt to make yourself feel better. Does killing something painlessly make it a better murder? Is there even such a thing?
Pravin,
I've not taken a moral high ground. If my comments sounded sanctimonious, that was totally inadvertent.
Sample these:
1. "Because I was myself not able to decide if I am being objective enough."
2. "I theoretically cannot claim a higher moral ground for not eating nonveg". I understand that to consider something moral v/s immoral, commonly agreed upon standards are to be employed ("theoretical"), and somehow no consensus can be reached in case of current debate as to what value to accord to pain & lives of what organisms & to what degree. Moreover, I just cannot claim a higher moral ground because I have tasted nonveg, quite deliberately!
3. "there's something indeed I find cruel about..." and "so though on ethical grounds I can't oppose eating nonveg, the fact is, at an emotional/instinctive level I'm opposed to it". In both the instances the emphasis was on subjectivity. I know that rules and regulations can't be imposed on others on the basis of my personal instincts. That's why I also emphasized on freedom to choose to kill and eat whatever animals people prefer, except humans. It must have sounded sarcastic because it was! Because the government is according special status to the tiger! Here, another tricky issue is reached - right to survive belongs to individual animals or to entire species?
In my comment nowhere have I talked of value of life, because I know it is a very tricky issue.
I have only talked of cruelty involved. And cruelty is a subjective thing. I was not even trying to elicit sympathy. Because this is after all a personal choice of one eating/not eating nonveg. I was stating what I feel. It's, as I said before, visceral reaction. And quite honestly, I would've been happier had I not felt this visceral reaction as that would've opened lot many food options for me.
Ultimately, the important issue is whether to accord similar rights to mammals or not. It is tempting to believe that answer is simple - either "yes" or "no", but it is not. It might be hard to answer why should human lives be valued more. I'm a fence sitter. I consider human happiness of prime importance, but would inculcate 'harmlessness' in my attitude. I would be glad if others incorporate it, too, but I can't urge or impose others to do it.
As a simple mental experiment, would you feel some resentment for a person beating a quiet dog only 'cuz enjoy it?...
...It is not a rhetorical question. And I will not even judge you adversely if you do not feel resentment.
But I guess, majority of people would disapprove of such behavior, and if the said person happens to be their friend might even try to prevent him from doing so. If they do try to stop, what would be the most subconscious reasoning? Why to harm/cause pain unnecessarily?
If you agree with me till this point, it won't be difficult to appreciate that in case of eating nonveg the contention would be in defining 'unnecessary'. It is at this point our subjectivity creeps in. Some people find the enjoyable taste a justified reason for cruelty, some don't. Personally, I do not find it justified, but possibly had I eaten nonveg since childhood I would've been so used to it that threshold of justification would've been crossed and I wouldn't been opposed to eating nonveg. Each time I use the term "opposed" I mean it personally, and not as a state policy or moral criterion to judge people. But once this subjectivity starts reigning supreme it's not very difficult to justify poaching of animals for fur, ivory, etc.
To summarize, I consider coercion wrong. I am all for consistency of standards (if someone would like to cook and eat a tiger, government must not be opposed to it! ;) ). I have no qualms pointing out Varun was pandering to vote bank politics. And I do not like people eating nonveg, especially mammals for reasons I enlisted above, but I do not use this personal preference to judge people not do I think it appropriate grounds to impose a state policy. Hope this clarifies.
Jeez man, you do realise you could have finished off that entire line of thought in 5 lines instead of writing whole sonnets about it.
Anyway, I finally get what you're saying. Don't agree much with it, but I get it.
Pravin,
Were you afraid I would come up with more sonnets if not for your assurance of understanding my points? ;) I'd to resort to writing sonnets as you did not fall asleep reading the lullaby above.
Anyway, your and my mutual agreement is immaterial 'cuz no one's going to vote us to where in matters. Though, OO has been assured of votes by few random bloggers. I would vote for him even if he were to contest against Modi or Varun provided he promises to not discharge his regular administrative duties & instead continue to write blog posts with all the insiders' info. :)
Post a Comment