Representative image of LGBTQ
Credit: iStock Photo
Liberalism takes many generations to imbibe, especially if one comes from restrictive countries, holds strongly to religion, or has a narrow worldview. The transition from personally enjoying the benefits of liberalism to giving others the opportunity to do so is herculean.
American Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and other Muslims are staunch supporters of LGBTQIA rights; others are not. Recently, the Muslim-majority City Council, voted in by the liberal community of Hamtramck, US, banned Pride flags from being flown on council property. The liberal voters were shocked as they assumed the Council would follow a liberal outlook, which had got them elected.Christian conservatives and Republicans, who are Islamophobes, supported this ban. They found a common cause with the City Council.
LGBTQIA rights bring ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ to the fore.
Prominent liberals and avowed feminists, including JK Rowling, couch their opposition to trans rights with ‘protecting women’s rights’. They argue that women’s identity, rights, and safety are undermined if trans women are recognised as women. Simultaneously, she wants ‘trans women to be safe’. Conservative Christians and Muslims are anti Rowling and her Harry Potter books for their witchcraft storylines. These religious Orthodoxies don’t have a high opinion of women and women’s rights either.
Denying transgender rights is a common agenda between groups ideologically inimical to each other. This collusion of shared perceptions gives new nuance to the idea of tolerance. Consequently, marginalised groups are further excluded. The Conservative Senator James Langford, representing Oklahoma, blocked the Equality Act, quoting Rowling. The Act would have amended the civil rights bill to include sexual orientation and gender identity in its list of protected classes.
Parallelly, trans and trans rights activists hound, threaten, and ‘cancel’ those opposing them. They use the same exclusionary tactics and attitudes that they fight against.
Shouldn’t one re-examine one’s morals and conduct if they align with, mirror, or prop those whose fundamental ideology is antithetical to theirs?
As per a September 2020 survey conducted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace of 936 American Indians, ‘Seventy-two percent of registered Indian American voters plan to vote for Biden’. The survey found that ‘Indian Americans refrain from identifying with the Republican Party due, in part, to a perception that the party is intolerant of minorities and overly influenced by Christian evangelicalism.’
The organisation conducted another survey of 1200 Indians in the same period and found that ‘nearly half of all Indian Americans approve of Modi’s performance as prime minister.’ Further, ‘Indian Americans’ policy views are more liberal on issues affecting the US and more conservative on issues affecting India.’
Indian-Americans are minorities in the US who blossom under the shelter of progressive ideals. However, they are unconcerned with the plight of minorities under Modi and even encourage anti-minority sentiments in India.
My father, a retired Air Force officer, all of 93, is a worried man. To him, the rise of the right-wing in India is disastrous. However, he sees a beacon of hope—India’s women. He believes the freedom Indian women enjoy and aspire to will cause them to eventually stand up to the sectarianism of the Hindu Right, which demands women behave a certain way. However, some of the vilest bigoted vitriol comes from educated, erudite women Hindutva adherents. Like their male counterparts, they believe they are protecting and preserving their country and Hindu culture. To them, their intolerance is delivering comeuppance to those standing up to their idea of India. Importantly, they don’t believe they will become victims of other Hindutva adherents.
Many politicians and supporters of the BJP have now been trampled under its jackboot. Bollywood veteran Shatrughan Sinha, former cricketer Kirti Azad, Sudheendra Kulkarni, and Yashwant Sinha now denounce Modi and the Hindutva brigade. Tavleen Singh, a well-known journalist, was Modi’s staunch supporter. She now writes that her disillusionment with him began during the lynchings carried out by ‘gau-rakshaks’. But Singh’s harshest criticism of the Modi government was when his government cancelled her son, Aatish Taseer’s, Overseas Citizen of India status after his scathing article on them. Possibly, their changed tune is inspired by them being on the receiving end of the jackboot.
Then there are those who appreciate the richness that progressive life offers. They are liberal in their personal lives. However, when it comes to matters of identity, history, and religion, they are socio-politically orthodox.
Ultimately, most liberals have a little conservatism hiding in them. It pops up whenever they feel threatened. Interestingly, those moments are given the hue of protecting and fostering. Conservatives either have a set of rules for themselves and another for the rest, or change tack when it personally benefits them. If both self-actualise to recognise their hypocritic core would the world be a better place?
(The writer is a freelance journalist)