India has, for ages, been the refuge of the persecuted. From the Jews after the sack of their temple in Jerusalem, Arab merchants, Parsees from Persia, Syrian Christians, Armenians, Tibetans fleeing the Communist purge, Bangladeshis upon Pakistani genocide to the Sri Lankan Tamils escaping Sinhalese persecution.
Today when Taslima Nasreen has sought refuge in our land, it is in keeping with our tradition to offer her refuge. This would reflect the space we afford for everyone, no matter what their convictions. A space of inviolability produced by the Hindu culture of acceptance.
Hindus by and large welcome her whereas Muslims appear to be against offering her refuge as they have no space for contrarian religious opinion. The irony here is that when it comes to infiltrators, whether from Pakistan or Bangladesh, the Mullahs do not hesitate to provide logistical support to amalgamate them inconspicuously into the population at large while organizations like the Shiv Sena want the infiltrators to be sent back.
Is this difference of approach what it is that makes one a nationalistic and the other an anti-nationalist?
Today when Taslima Nasreen has sought refuge in our land, it is in keeping with our tradition to offer her refuge. This would reflect the space we afford for everyone, no matter what their convictions. A space of inviolability produced by the Hindu culture of acceptance.
Hindus by and large welcome her whereas Muslims appear to be against offering her refuge as they have no space for contrarian religious opinion. The irony here is that when it comes to infiltrators, whether from Pakistan or Bangladesh, the Mullahs do not hesitate to provide logistical support to amalgamate them inconspicuously into the population at large while organizations like the Shiv Sena want the infiltrators to be sent back.
Is this difference of approach what it is that makes one a nationalistic and the other an anti-nationalist?
