Can’t take it anymore

    01-Sep-2020   
Total Views |
 
De-platforming of the book, Delhi Riots 2020 betrays the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of liberals who are scared to engage with other points of view
 
a_1  H x W: 0 x
 
 
The controversy over the de-platforming of the book, Delhi Riots 2020: The Untold Story, by Bloomsbury India, shows that Left-Liberal cabal continues to wield its stranglehold on Indian publishing. The book by Smt Monika Arora, Smt Sonali Chitalkar and Smt Prerna Malhotra is the result of an independent study on the Delhi riots mounted by Left-Jihadi gangs.
 
Till recently, it was almost impossible for an author to get his/her book published unless the person toes a particular ideological line. Even books of fiction are not spared of ideological scrutiny. An author of mythological fiction had to cancel her contract with a literary agent after she found that his editorial intervention in her work had turned the narrative upside down. He had weaved profanities into the story to make it palatable to the anti-Hindu crowd.
 
Recounting her experiences with publishers, noted historian Smt Meenakshi Jain says, “…I never tried because getting my books published was such a headache. Every book of mine, I think, I have made a notable contribution to the subjects on which I have written but every book of mine was rejected by every publisher because the manuscript would go to Left scholars… And, for example, one book that was as very detailed study on Hindu-Muslim relations in the Medieval period, that was sent to a reviewer and the reviewer said this s a very serious work and it takes note of everything that has been written on the subject but I would advise the publisher to write: ‘It is a Hindu view of Hindu-Muslim relations.’ So naturally the publisher got frightened and he said: ‘I’m very sorry, but I cannot publish it because it says Hindu view.’ I tried four publishers for four books and every person the manuscript was sent to said it’s a very serious work but it portrays just one point of view. So it was rejected. In fact on Ayodhya my manuscript was rejected by four publishing houses and it was only the intervention of Indian Archeologists who have been so actively involved in excavating that site, they actually saw it through.”
 
Interestingly, those who indulge in repression of speech call themselves liberals and carry out nefarious operations in the interests of freedom of speech and secularism. This betrays the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the liberals who are scared to engage with other points of view. Moreover, it is a very dangerous trend which has been going on for decades unchallenged – and should not be allowed to continue. This has been done in the name of secularism.
 
It is said that secularism is one of the major impediments to the full integration of Muslims into the national mainstream. K M Munshi’s critique on secularism rings true even today. He states: “…while (secularism) condones susceptibilities, religious and social, of the minority communities, is too ready to brand similar susceptibilities in the majority community as communalistic and reactionary. How secularism sometimes becomes allergic to Hinduism will be apparent from certain episodes relating to the reconstruction of Somnath Temple. These unfortunate postures have been creating a sense of frustration in the majority community.”
 
It is heartening to note that Garuda Publications has decided to publish it and the move received overwhelming reader response. The book received a cult status much to the chagrin of forces who wanted to suppress an alternative view. The publication’s servers crashed several times after readers swarmed its site for placing pre-launch orders of the book.