B. Raman and the Storm Troopers: My take

Today, I logged on to Twitter to see a post on B. Raman's blog. The points that I could pick up from that article are follows :-

1. The abuse hurled by fans of Namo on his critics as a whole and Mr.Raman in particular.
2. Allusion that BJP/RSS/Namo might be condoning or,even, encouraging the abuse.
3. A recent blog post which wrote disparaging things about Mr.Raman.

Mr.Raman had written another blog post a few months ago wherein he had dealt extensively with what he called the StormTrooper-like tactics used by Namo supporters. He even called them the "Namo Brigade" and used the words "Nazi" or "fascist" for them.

It would be absolutely naive or untruthful of me to deny that there is abuse on Twitter. And, trust me, there is a lot of it. It is, however, not limited to any one side. Also, there is no consensus as to what constitutes "abuse". I have noticed that some people have a very narrow and sensitive definition of the term "abuse". Many a time, people have claimed to have been abused, when in reality they have just been called things like "dumbo", "moron" or "idiot". It is debatable whether this should be counted as abuse and the topic of a post in itself. What is important are the inferences that Mr.Raman proceeds to draw from this abuse.

Mr.Raman claims that he was a suppporter of Namo/RSS/BJP before he was exposed to abuse on Twitter. He, apparently,wrote about it advising Namo about how he should react to the abuse. But, his advice fell on deaf ears. 

I sincerely believed NaMo was not aware of the obnoxious behaviour of his online followers. I wrote and tweeted a number of times suggesting that he should openly condemn their methods and dissociate himself from them. There was no response. I couldn’t help believing that his followers were indulging in such methods with his knowledge and approval.

It is not clear whether he wrote directly to Namo or just tweeted or blogged as usual, in which case it is rather inconceivable that his advice would reach the right person unless Namo is following his online activity. As far as I could see, Namo is not following Mr.Raman on Twitter. I cannot comment on whether he reads his blog. However, it would be prudent to give Mr.Raman the benefit of doubt as he may have used channels, which he didn't deem prudent to disclose, in which case the blame for not replying rests with Namo.

Furthermore, from the lack of a response, Mr.Raman draws an inference that Namo is fully aware of the activities of his followers and, since he didn't condemn them, actually approves of it. I remember a Marathi play that I once watched about Nathuram Godse. In that, the SP infers that since Godse's newspaper "Agrani" prints a photograph of Veer Savarkar on the front-page, the latter must have exhorted him to murder Gandhiji. Needless to say, this is a fallacious inference. It is tantamount to saying that, since it does not dissociate  itself from them, St.Stephens approves of the inane theories that people like Rahul Gandhi & Sagarika Ghose continue to propound. In fact, if we were to take that logic one step ahead, we could also infer that since Rahul Gandhi believes Gujarat is bigger than UK, St.Stephens actually teaches that. I am amazed that an eminent person like Mr.Raman should draw such an absurd conclusion.

I would also like to add a few more things. It was found, in the recent Guwahati incident, that the main accused Amar Jyoti Kalita was a member of Youth Congress. The Congress did not, as per my knowledge, dissociate itself from him. Neither did it dissociate itself from YC members who indulged in eve-teasing in China. Should we also draw an inference that since Congress knows about these acts and does not condemn them, it approves of them? This does not even include the recent attacks by YC members on Dr.Swamy & Baba Ramdev.

Having said that, I admit that the attacks that Mr.Raman has highlighted in the excerpt below are heinous and uncalled for, especially to a person of Mr.Raman's stature. Personal attacks should not be used as counter-arguments to any opinion held by anyone.

Further in the post, Mr.Raman points out cheap insults heaped on him in a blog post. The author alleges that Mr.Raman is infatuated with young women like Ms.Barkha Dutt and, now, Priyanka Gandhi. I think we have to agree that this kind of character assassination is unwarranted and the post seems more like a rant against Mr.Raman than an argument against his support of Priyanka Gandhi. 

However, whether such kind of slander can or should be stopped is another matter altogether. This is the kind of talk that goes on in living rooms about almost all celebrities. With the advent of social media, it is just that the celebs are getting aware about it and are able to see it. It is natural that it should affect them. 

However, can we be sure that lewd statements about actresses are not made among guys? Or journalists/politicians are not abused in real life? Whether it should be written on a blog is a debate on censorship, again. Personally, I feel it is better to deal with it than rant about it. People should realise that not all people will agree with them. Also not all among those, who don't agree, will adopt a decent way to say it. However, this should be the topic of another post.

The man who wrote the post in question is, apparently, an educated person and is currently, allegedly, coordinating the online campaign of Namo. Mr.Raman proceeds to evaluate Namo on the basis of this person that he has, allegedly, hired. His logic is that a person is only as good as the company he keeps.  By that logic, a company should be judged solely on the character of it's employees. Also, I think Rahul Gandhi should be a certified goon as his YC proteges go on the rampage at the drop of a hat.

However, I am not a big fan of the argument "Every man is known by the company he keeps". I feel it is prudent to judge each person individually. On this,  I would like to quote two lines from one of my favourite poems "If" by Rudyard Kipling.

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,

' Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch  

Before concluding, I would like to say that I meant no disrespect to Mr.Raman by writing what I did. He may have written the post in anger or frustration caused by such calumnious comments about his character, which is but natural. My answer is something I would have told him if I knew him personally.