Vajpayee compares himself to Parasuram and Advani & Mahajan as Ram and Lakshman. But, he probably got his sages mixed up. He probably meant (or should have meant Vishwamitra). Parasuram is regarded as 6th avtaar of Lord Vishnu (the protector of ‘mother earth’ in the trilogy of Hindu Gods - appearing at regular intervals to rid the earth of her oppressors, and restoring the path of righteousness, Dharma). Son of Jamadagni and Renuka - Parasuram kills his mother to prove his devotion to his father and asks for her life back as his boon gifted by his father. When Jamadigni is killed by the maurader Kartyavira Arjuna - Parasuram goes bananas and kills 10,000 generations of Kshatriyas. Genocide. He then retires to the hills to contemplate. When Ram breaks the Shiv Dhanush at Sita’s swayamwara, Parasuram challenges Ram to duel - and then realising that Ram and Lakshman represent Narayana and Adishesha - retreats from the world to do tapas. Afterall, he has to atone for those he killed! Vishwamitra on the other hand was born a king and aspired to be hailed as a Brahma Rishi by Vashishta. He attains his goal after many twists and turns and the creation of a new universe for King Trishanku. While in the midst of Yagya he is consistently troubled by Rakshashas. He goes to Ayodhya and demands the services of a 16 year old Rama and his even younger brother Lakshman, as protectors. He equips them with the bala atibala chant and unleashes them on the Rakshasas. He take them to Mithilla to Sita’s swayamwara. He is a friend, philosopher and guide to the young princes - and helps them on the road to righteousness. When Vajpayee refers to him as Parasuram, what does he mean? That he has gone off to atone for genocide, leaving the mantle to Advani and Lakshman. or is it that he has trained them in the path of governance and has ensured political succession? Maybe for a change Vajpayee is telling the truth! or as usual he has opened mouth and inserted foot!The Moral Brigade has been in rampant form this year. From dress codes in colleges, to angst about virginity (aside: why is there such an issue over such a minor tissue I can never ever fathom ?) From the restriction of employment opportunities of a certain class – bar dancers – to the restriction of business practice – censorship of television. From peeking into privacy - operation Manju in Meerut - to calling for women to stay at home and have more kids (Ashok Singhal and his Hindu women should have 17 kids).
From restrictions on freedom of speech to restrictions on freedom on action – the moral brigade has marched on. And each time around , in the name of ‘social good’, the moral brigade has slowly begun chipping away at hard won freedoms. Somehow this rise in this sort of restrictive morality is accompanied by a parallel rise in the subjugation of women. Just look at the Islamic states to see the impact of regimented and ritualistic morality on the role and status of women in society. 2006 will see the moral brigade take off where they left off in 2005. Attacking those things that are easy to attack - music videos, bar dancers, pre marital sex- all in the name of protecting culture and the status of women in society. All this is done under the full glare of the media - with issues presented in black and white - with no shades of grey. With (the same) instapundits trotted out to give pithy sound bites on anything from bar dancers to MMS clips. And sounding terribly reasonable and rational about the whole issue. At the same time we have the pro-freedom band that seemingly is represented by people who are one step away from frothing at the mouth. It promises to be a one sided fight, with the moral brigade making more inroads in curtailing more of our freedoms. Oh for some rational spokespeople!
Sphere: Related ContentTags: Gender Issues, India, Media, Media Bias, Media Ethics, Society
