Archive for June, 2013

Friday, June 14th, 2013
The Separatist Book of Curses
Kethiry Srinivas Reddy
Core Committee Member
Visalandhra Mahasabha
Two things glaringly stand out in the latest outburst of Telangana fundamentalists against Visalandhra Mahasabha, brought out in a book form by Telangana Atma Gaurava Vedika.
They concede – rather shamelessly – that they utterly lack logical response to the points raised by Visalandhra Mahasabha. Second, they unwittingly admit that they have lost all their moral ground for their ‘cause’ by indulging in personal vilification.
When does one resort to personal vilification? When one doesn’t have substance in his arguments. This is evident from the very title of the book, sought to be projected as a rebuttal to Visalandhra Mahasabha’s “Refuting an Agitation- 101 Lies & Dubious Arguments of Telangana Separatists”.
The Telugu translation of the book “రుజువుల్లేని ఉద్యమం” has clearly rattled the separatists so much that they were forced to dish out this 116-page drivel by N Venugopal, a Maoist ideologue with dubious political links.
The clumsy title విద్వేషమే ధ్యేయంగా విశాలాంధ మహారభస with a tabloid tag పచ్చి అబద్ధాల పరకాలకు అసలు నిజాల జవాబు smacks of intellectual bankruptcy and pettiness of the worst kind for a book that ostensibly seeks to put facts on such a weighty issue in the right perspective.
As is the awkward title, so is the uncouth content. Page after page, the fidgety author of the book N Venugopal pours out his frustration and exasperation in ways that are not exactly scholarly. Most of the book is devoted to name-calling of Visalandhra Mahasabha general secretary and president, Parakala Prabhakar and Nalamothu Chakravarthy respectively.
By using such obnoxious expressions as విషాదాంధ మహాసభ, విశాలాంధ్ర మహారభసకులు, అంధ మహాసభ repeatedly, and by resorting to filthy adjectives and foul language against Prabhakar and Chakravarthy throughout, the writer unabashedly conveyed the message that the intention of the separatists was not to engage in any academic and scholarly debate but rather in bullying and slander.
The muck book is full of the writer’s opinions and views even when it pretends to refute the ‘lies’ pointed out by Visalandhra Mahasabha. Referring to the number of persons died in the 1969 agitation, Venugopal rejects (page 103) the fact that the then Assembly records cite the number as 57.  The evidence? The ‘fact’ that the Telangana activists –though by the writer’s own admission they could never provide individual details – have been reiterating all along that 369 persons lost lives in the agitation!
The writer of this smut is a rather smug soul. He thinks every being should be bound by his blinkered Maoist world view. He thinks it entitles him to dub anyone opposed to his separatist demand as being stooges of (Andhra) capitalist forces. Two examples:
While grudgingly admitting (page 109) that both Parakala and Nalamothu don’t ‘seem’ to have any personal profit motive in advocating the cause of integrated Andhra Pradesh, the writer seeks to justify his viciousness against them by labeling them as ‘agents’ of coastal Andhra rich classes.
Referring to Nalamothu’s blog where he described himself as opposed to ‘socialism’ and a defender of libertarian philosophy, the writer concludes (page 108) this fact automatically makes him anti-people and anti-poor!
On the issue of ‘self-rule’ (page 105), he refers to Visalandhra argument that ‘self-rule’ is achieved in a democracy like ours through elections, which has been happening in Telangana as in other regions since Independence. See how our Maoist friend refutes this:
ప్రజాస్వామిక ఎన్నికలే స్వయంపాలన అయినప్పుడు తెలంగాణవాదులు కోరే స్వయంపాలన ఏమిటని విశాలాంధ్ర మహారభసకారులు ఎద్దేవా చేస్తున్నారు. ఎన్నికలు ప్రజాస్వామికంగా జరుగుతున్నాయా? నిజంగా ప్రజల స్వయంపాలనా ఆకాంక్షలు మన ఎన్నికలలో వ్యక్తమవుతున్నాయా? అమలవుతున్నాయా?”
Elections are a farce in India is a viewpoint that some might share. But if it applies to Telangana region, it should apply to all other regions in the country. So what makes Venugopal and co to single out Telangana for self-rule? Most of the writing in the book does not qualify to be called as a rebuttal to Visalandhra arguments but more as knee-jerk reaction of a half-witted Maoist front man.
The book’s pathetic attempt to trivialise VMS’ arguments falls flat as it cannot pass even for black humour. Referring to the insistence of T champions on Telangana’s cultural exclusivity, VM pointed out that there are a great many variants even within the Telangana sub-culture and quoted Amartya Sen on the importance of culture and its limitations. It is in this context that VM said that ‘obviously, culture cannot be unitary, homogenous and all-encompassing. But the separatists have been seeking to foment “the illusion of singular identity” for too long now.’ Amartya Sen’s expression was used to expose the separatists’ assertion about Telangana culture being an identity differentiator. However, our factory writer feels ((page 74) )that this argument actually proves that Telangana has a stand-alone culture different from that of Andhra.
Even for a lay reader, it is evident after a cursory look that from the titles to the content, the two books – Refuting an Agitation and Vidveshame Dheyamga – are poles apart. One is the impotent outburst of a coloured, prejudiced, one-dimensional fundamentalist group; the other is an academic, scholarly and objective exercise in putting forth logical arguments without resorting to expletives on select individuals.
That this book-of-curses is short on basic facts and long on fake profundity and shallow punditry is evident from the writer’s false appeal to the people of coastal Andhra to support the fight of ‘four-crore’ people of Telangana. Such a simple cold fact that the population of Telangana region including Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy is only 3.48 crore according to the latest census is not particularly bothering to our fanatical pen-pusher.
The smallness of the people behind the book is manifest in the very invitation sent for the launch of the book. The invite justifies the attack against Prabhakar, Chakravarthy and others present during the launch of Telugu translation of ‘Refuting an Agitation’ as ‘deserving’ for their Andhra arrogance.
The ‘honour’ to launch the psychotic rant of Venugopal was given to none other than Kranti Kiran, the self-styled president of Telangana Electronic Media Association, who burnt Visalandhra Mahasabha book in full view of the civilized world. A fitting tribute to a book-burner or an exercise in penance for his barbaric act?
Finally, the half-baked booklet serves one purpose. The writer’s extensive quotes from రుజువుల్లేని ఉద్యమం, juxtaposed against his coarse comments actually helps readers appreciate the truth behind the separatist agitation.