Today, February 12, marks the 3rd Anniversary of MediaCrooks. From about the 8 or 9 lines I first wrote under “Time to rein in the Indian media” in 2010, I’m happy to be still here and writing. This is as good a time as any to take another look at our Fiberals.
I came across this unusual article by one TCA Srinivasaraghavan in the Hindu Businessline titled “Narendra Modi — India’s Nixon”? This appearing in a commie newspaper like The Hindu must have been an accident. TCA’s article is a well-directed missile against the so called liberals but he gets it a bit wrong when he equates Modi with Nixon and about India’s so called liberals. Let’s read a bit before we go further (edited excerpts in blue).
Few Indians today remember Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the US. He broke US law by obstructing justice and was forced to resign in 1974, halfway through his second term. Probably true but I have studied the Nixon story very closely and both Watergate and Nixon have frequently found mention on this blog, so I can claim not to have forgotten. Richard Nixon spent his last days in office 'covering-up'. Modi has been voted four times to office and is not busy with any cover-up.
Indeed, the utter illiberality of the liberals is one of the greatest paradoxes of our time. Academics have pondered long and deep over it and failed to come up with a solution. They seem as helpless as when trying to explain the depravities of the deeply devout… What happened to Nixon is very similar to what has been happening to Narendra Modi since 2002. In a nutshell, the American liberals had decided that Nixon was unfit to govern the US and went after him… In exactly the same way, the urban Indian liberals have decided that Modi is unfit to govern India. And they have been going after him, prepared like the Americans in the 1970s, to accept incompetents instead… This illiberal face of the liberals is seldom commented upon in India because if you do, the pack labels you as illiberal. That is their power… So who is a liberal, then? A liberal, by my reckoning, is a person designated as a liberal by other liberals, usually on a single communal sub-criterion. As a result, the most liberal person can be labelled illiberal by liberals and the most illiberal as liberal.
When Richard Nixon, a Republican, lost to John F. Kennedy in 1960 there were suspicions of ballot bungling in Chicago but he chose not to make an issue of it. (Oh incidentally, who do we relate ballot or EVM bungling with in India?) Then, remember, despite the liberals hounding Nixon (as TCA suggests) he won two elections and came to office in 1969 and 1973. It’s what he did towards the end of his first term that is known as the Watergate scandal. The Watergate burglary itself was just a cover. Even the reason for the burglary has many theories. While commonly accepted theory is that the burglars wanted to bug the Democratic HQ at the Watergate building, no bugs were found. So the other theory is that the burglars may have wanted to recover a damning tape, of a sex racket, that involved a top official of the Nixon administration who was also sentenced in the scandal. Nixon himself wasn't known to have anything to do with the Watergate burglary.
What the Watergate scandal did expose was the massive operation to re-elect Nixon through misuse of campaign funds and defaming opponents. The well-organised campaign to plant fake stories about opponents, tarnish their reputations, manufacture lies and scandals was internally referred to as ‘Rat-F*****g’ (RF). Now, it’s members connected to the ‘CREEP’ (Committee to re-elect the president) who were involved in these covert operations and not liberals. Our commies are carrying out exactly the same RF operation for over a decade against Modi, aren’t they? They’re not really the liberals as TCA suggests.
The covert operations included marginalising various govt bodies including FBI and various other institutions of the govt. In India, with whom do you associate the marginalisation and misuse of CBI, IT Dept, ED, Judiciary and other govt institutions? That wasn’t the liberals in America doing that operation, was it? In contrast who is doing the RF operation against Narendra Modi and other opponents of Congress in India? Not too hard to guess eh? In the end Nixon was damned by his own tapes that he secretly maintained at the White House. The other erroneous mistake that TCA (and many others) make is that they equate “liberals” everywhere. The liberals or liberalism in the US has nothing in common with those calling themselves liberals in India. The first and biggest difference is freedom of speech. The US First Amendment provides for complete freedom of speech, the Indian liberals will never subscribe to such a freedom for anyone but themselves. When Obama won the recent elections our commie idiots celebrated as if the “liberal” win in the US is equivalent of a Congress win in India. In reality, neither the Congress party nor our so called liberals have anything in common with American liberalism.
What passes off as the liberal view in India is essentially the Communist view. Whether it’s text books, history books or the mainstream media it’s the communists and not liberals who have populated these areas. The commies suffer from a severe disease of intolerance of any view that does not match with their ideology. The Congress is pretty much a communist party which is why it gets on better with the CPM/CPI than with any truly democratic, liberal party. Given years of oppression and suffering of masses, most Indian political parties have a communist and socialist ideology. Consequently, the word “Socialist” was inserted into to our constitution.
One of the fundamental principles of a liberal is that s/he is strongly in opposition to monarchy and dynasty. Are our liberals anything like that? Those who call themselves liberals are mostly slaves of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty and other political dynasties. So TCA is wrong to even tag them as liberals. I call them Fiberals, which is far more appropriate. They pretend to be liberal and fib all their lives because they possess the lie-sense. So it’s not true liberals but commie Fiberals who are hounding Modi. Just look at the campaign by the likes of Aakar Patel and Ram Guha. Theirs would qualify to be categorised under the ‘RF’ operation during Nixon’s re-election campaign.
I had mentioned to Newslaundry that if I were to criticise Modi and Gujarat I would have been a panellist on many channels. It will surprise many that this blog doesn’t criticise any CM or any state. Isn’t that how Aakar built his career? From ranting against Modi in some ordinary rag he is now a regular TV panellist and to add to his Modi-hating resume he now runs a dedicated series on Modi in DNA newspaper. If that is not RF, what is? Look at the headline from NDTV. A separatist is a “moderate”? By what liberal measure is any separatist a moderate? It’s pretty much a communist idea that Arundhati Roy, friend of Yaseen Malik and Maoists, will agree to. In the US you may not be prosecuted with speeches that Yaseen gives but if he were to act and invoke people to secede he would be prosecuted for treason and sentenced to death. But for NDTV this guy who hangs out with Hafeez Saeed, a terrorist and enemy of India, is a moderate. And why is Malik with Saeed? To protest the hanging of another terrorist, Afzal Guru!
Who’s the likely beneficiary of the hate campaign against Modi? It is obviously a party that runs more like a monarchy which should have been the natural enemy of liberals. In India, the liberals are in love with this monarchy which is why the term “liberals” is a fake tag. Fiberals is the right tag. Let’s have some fun. Let’s see the definition of liberals by the Fiberals. There’s Rajdeep’s tweet about Salman Taseer, the Pak politician who was killed. Isn’t that a perfect definition of Rajdeep’s liberals? Sure I’m picking funny tweets but Rajdeep isn’t really joking. Umm… that’s the general definition of a liberal by our media standards. Wine, women and…RF?
Next, the other thing that a liberal believes in is absolute freedom of speech. S/he either responds to such speech or ignores or switches off speakers that don’t suit the liking. But no, our liberals want others to simply shut up so that they can have their monopoly on crap everywhere – On TV, in print, on Facebook, on Twitter; everywhere. And when they don’t like it they go to the extent of calling them trolls, uncouth, violent (on Twitter?). They want these trolls to shut up when they can very well use the block button as suggested. And, of course, these TV morons will complain about anonymous accounts on Twitter or FB but will gladly follow many anonymous accounts themselves. They wallow in this nonsense. Hardly liberal!
The biggest sign and identification of these liberals in India is their badge of hatred for anything Hindu or connected to Hindu culture. Hindus, Hindu icons, Hindu rituals and practices are all fair game for hatred for these Fiberals. But hey, mention the Religion of Peace or Christianity and they will all crawl under some stone. Their mouths and pens get zipped. The sword scares their pens! So TCA in The Hindu got it a bit wrong although his article was well-intentioned and technically correct. Those hounding Modi are NOT liberals. They are commie slaves to a monarchy. That’s what they are flanking and protecting. And they do so using the RF technique which involves heavy-duty lying. That’s the reason I call them Fiberals with a lie-sense. Some of them are paid, and showered honours too, for their services.