View From The Right: Bengal violence

View From The Right: Bengal violence

The editorial in Organiser, ‘In Whose Name Is This’, comments on the recent violence in Basirhat tehsil of West Bengal.

Bengal riots, organiser, RSS
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee

The editorial in Organiser, ‘In Whose Name Is This’, comments on the recent violence in Basirhat tehsil of West Bengal. Terming it a “very dangerous sign”, it says that “this is not the first time Islamic fundamentalists in Bengal have made the mockery of the law and order situation”. “What is happening in Bengal,” it says, “is not by accident but by design”. It contends that “Islamic radicals of Bangladesh always found it convenient to establish their networks in bordering districts of Bengal, thanks to the appeasement politics of earlier Left Front government and now the Mamata Banerjee-led TMC government”.

These fundamentalists are “flaming these jihadist tendencies” in West Bengal. It then argues that “the devious designs of power politics and pseudo intellectualism have unfortunately categorised the violence and lynchings also on secular and communal lines”.

Intellectuals, who raised the “protest banners of #NotInMyName barely a week ago”, have “surprisingly gone silent on this brazen mobocracy”. “One can understand that the electoral compulsions of ‘secular’ parties, but when it comes to media and intellectuals it is very difficult to understand in whose name they are promoting this lynching of our nation,” it concludes.

Jittery China

The cover story of Organiser, ‘Jittery China Locks Horns’, says the “Chinese incursion in Doklam plateau in Bhutan is a calculated move which came to spotlight when Prime Minister Narendra Modi was away on a foreign visit”. “The move is apparently aimed at dissuading India from working shoulder-to-shoulder with America,” it says.


It notes that the agreement between Modi and US President Donald Trump “on countering the North Korean weapons of mass destruction programme” has made “China livid which morally supports the ruthless dictatorship of Kim Jong-un”. “Moreover”, it says, “India snubbed the Chinese after it skipped the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) meeting in Beijing which has further alienated China”.

Countering the recent Chinese reminder about the 1962 war, it says that “if history is so sacred then China should also remember how its attack on the Nathu La and Cho La in 1967 was repulsed by the Indian Army”.

Fake news

An article in Panchjanya reacts to a recent media report that Ahmedabad’s Jama Masjid, which consists of “152 pillars of Hindu style”, is a “picture of harmony”. Describing the report “an obscene joke with Hindus”, it says “everybody knows that this Masjid is built on the remains of ancient Hindu and Jain temples”. “This mosque was built after demolishing a Bhadrakali temple,” it contends, adding that when Ahmad Shah captured Gujarat province in 1411, there was a fort along the Sabarmati, “which had a beautiful temple of Goddess Bhadrakali”. Shah destroyed the temple in 1423 and converted it into Jama Masjid. There are several such temples that were converted into mosques by Muslim aggressors. Slamming the news report, it says: “Unfortunately, (the) secular media is constantly attacking the Hindu faith.”

Church’s intolerance

Organiser has an interview with rationalist Sanal Edamaruku, who had to flee India in 2012, “thanks to the intolerant and powerful Catholic Church”. His “crime” was he “exposed” the fraud of a church. “In early March 2012, a Catholic church in Mumbai claimed that the steady drips from the toe of a statue of Christ at their premises were holy water and it was a miracle,” he says in the interview. However, he proved it was “the trapped toilet water” that “raised through the small pores on the wall”, then “climbed up through the cement base of the Christ statue, leaked through the nail hole on the statue of the crucified Christ”. As he exposed the “miracle”, the church filed criminal cases against him.

He also claims that “the Left politicians have not taken interest in my case”. They “do not touch extremism, intolerance or fundamentalism of the Catholic church or Muslim organisations as they consider them their potential vote bank,” he says.