Apropos S. Anand’s piece The Nandy Bully (Feb 11), does Ashis Nandy’s comment strengthen the politics of self-respect, dignity and social transformation? No, it does not. Nandy’s contribution to the country’s intellectual history cannot be moral justification for what he said.
Vikas Tripathi, New Delhi
Why denigrate an institution (CSDS) and question the integrity of academics supporting Nandy to counter the latter’s arguments? Is Anand trying to settle personal scores? While no empirical study proves Nandy’s assertions, there is also no empirical study that disproves it. How then do we know the truth? It can only be known first by theorising, making a conjecture, and then validating it with empirics. Is the author trying to say there’s no place for theory in today’s scientific world? Truth isn’t always politically correct (look at Galileo).
Conan Mukherjee, Calcutta
Disagreeing with Nandy does not mean I agree with whatever Anand spouts. Both are talking nonsense.
Sharat C., Kalpakkam
This is an angry, lopsided exercise in rejecting well-known ugly realities. Anand has perhaps never gone to plead or fight his case before any authority with discriminatory power, reeking with deals of reverse discrimination and corruption. If he had, he wouldn’t be writing this twisted piece of abject denial.
M. Singh, Nashik
I am disgusted by these purveyors of outrage. Of what good is a writer if he can’t speak his mind, eternally worrying about every idiot misconstruing what he says! As long as the well-oiled outrage machine of Anand & co keeps at it, India can forget about being a free and fair country.
Kiran, Grenoble, France
A bizarre self-righteousness, as was witnessed in the Ambedkar cartoon controversy.
Dheeraj Pandey, via Facebook
First his response to Aamir’s Satyamev Jayate, now this. Anand has a one-track mind.
Pramod Khulbe, Phoenix
Can’t agree more with Anand. To call for Nandy’s arrest trivialises the Dalit cause, portrays them as intolerant and projects upper-caste supremacists like our sociologist as victims.
Rajesh Chandra, Phoenix
Superb article! One of the best I’ve read in Outlook. And yes, I say this as a twice-born upper caste, whatever that means.
Amit, Tucson, US
Nandy’s statement is sinister only for one reason: because the people he accuses of corruption are its biggest victims.
Kishore Dasmunshi, Calcutta
Comparing ticketless travel and film ticket blackmarketing urchins with multi-crore defence scams...as the physicist Wolfgang Pauli would say, “This is not even wrong!”
H. Brahmbhatt, San Diego
You can’t make such sweeping, politically incorrect statements from a public platform, calling corruption “a social equaliser” and “a hope for the Republic”.
R.D. Singh, Ambala Cantt
“It would be a sick irony if the police, who routinely refuse to file atrocities FIRs on even the most grossly violent attacks on Dalits were to file one against this completely non-violent pontiff of unreason.” Perhaps Anand should explain how he understands ‘violence’ so that his characterisation of Nandy as “a completely non-violent pontiff” is easier to grasp.
Anil, New Delhi
Nandy’s is but an extension of the colonial mindset that created a list of criminal tribes.
Manish Banerjee, Calcutta
We need to grow up and see issues as they are instead of looking at them through hate-tinted eyeglasses. An eye for an eye is never the answer.
M. Turumella, via FB
After the vacuous mediocrity of Kancha Ilaiah, I was waiting for the uber hack to crawl out of the woodwork. S. Anand didn’t disappoint. There’s a good reason why Nandy hasn’t found time to write about the organisational ideals of evr—simply because there aren’t any!
D. Anjananeyulu, Chennai
Caste is a curse and should be looked squarely in the eye. I like the reasoning of Anand’s article. Arresting Nandy is not right. Exposing the hollowness of his ideas is.
Sheikh Pervez Hameed, Delhi, via FB
Corruption has no caste and is not confined to any majority or minority community. So let’s not blame anyone, and let’s punish the corrupt.
V.K. Kamath, via FB
