A few years ago, someone asked in contact with me if I agree to be a part of an interview series, where writers are interviewed by a person who has never read the live audience. BookI immediately agreed because I knew that this interviewer was interesting to accept that he did not read books. In this way I met Kunal Kamra for the first time, which has since emerged as one of the most endurance and resulting since then Comedian In this world. In a tribute to his most recent show, a Shiv Sena squad destroyed the site.
In all these years, I was sure that Kamra had to read a book till now. So I was surprised, when during his show, he placed a book in his hand. It was the Constitution of India. He said that he can say what he did, including lamps to the Deputy Chief Minister MaharashtraDue to the book.
Also read: X vs Sahyog: Free-Spitch Curb should have constitutional validity
And I thought he had not even read it. Because freedom of expression is not complete in the Indian Constitution. This is brief. For example, it can be denied in the interest of “public system”. The thing is that, freedom of expression has no meaning if it contains subjective cavets that can be widely interpreted. To say that you can say that whatever you want, until the public order is not disturbed, he is saying that you do not have the freedom to express many things that are worth expressing.
Since the Kamra controversy, there have been many things about the fact that there is no freedom of expression in behavior in India. People feel that there was a time when we had such freedom. There is some truth on that. But if not from the Constitution, where did the right of free speech come from? And where did it go? This is actually an esoteric freedom. Even though people in some countries provide it, it is not naturally natural for humans. For example, why would a powerful person tolerate a joke or insult?
Also read: World according to Groke: India should keep business issues separate from free speech
One of the most natural things that happens to people is committing crime. Once you commit a crime, what you do after getting angry, it is decided how much power you have. If you are a petty writer, you will harm the person who has humiliated you from behind the curtain. And if you are the leader of a political party with street clouts, you may want to send some mentioning people.
In 2015, Islamist terrorists set fire to the Paris office of satirical magazine Charlie HebdoKilling 12 people, Catholic Pope said, “If my good friend Dr. Gasteri,” referring to the person standing near him, “says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch. It is normal. It’s normal. You can’t insult others. You can’t make fun of others.”
His view is that most people are on this matter. The most interesting and important thing about free speech is that it has no really huge public support. Nevertheless, India first felt some kind of freedom of expression.
Also read: Both Musk and his Maga critics are wrong about free speech on Microblog Platform X.
It did not come from any great ideal of the Constitution. It originated from a very practical place – election democracy, where political campaigns were needed and politicians said that bad goods and media reported this about other politicians. From this roundness, a system of satire and comedy came, about which was largely self-regulated. Thus, our freedom of expression came from politicians in a rounded manner.
A public moral is usually not growing with the goodness of humans, but when powerful people collide. Democracy increased the need to curb the crown of the elite. To balance the atrocities of ‘independent institutes’ elections, the social aristocratic class increased. Privacy rights originated in an attack on free media, when a rich section of America went into war against its gossip press.
After awakening the Shiv Sena’s Iri, Kamra came from Uddhav Thackeray and his son Aditya Thackeray, who once dropped from a university course for a Rohinton Egyptian novel), who lost his party’s control for a Rohinton Egyptian novel, who once had lost his party’s control. This indicates us how a free speech was made by politicians.
In this way, like the freedom of expression, an esoteric idea has the ability to be almost right with more natural freedom, such as freedom of living, freedom of property and freedom to practice a religion. But it takes very smart politicians to use it against all obstacles. If I once had a joint Shiv Sena, or the Congress party, which was once with a joint Shiv Sena, I would organize an Open-Maik Comedy Festival on the streets, where people are invited to roast all politicians. The business of making fun of politicians in power is that you have to take some hits yourself.
Also read: SEBI dilemma: A good line exists between finfluening and free speech
This India is effectively losing its freedom of expression, which means that a wide spectrum of opposition parties is forgetting how to use it, or lose the will to use it. This may also mean that they do not believe their electoral prospects that they are enough to take the powerful opponent. In addition, this may mean that they are not ready to give people freedom as they are very thinner to bear it, even if it is a useful way to take their opponents in power.
Therefore, without comprehensive political support, it appears that freedom of expression is a niche nuisance, some only want comedians and artists. In fact, even most artists do not want it; They are like others who do not want to insult. Only a few finished criminals, it seems, want freedom. This shows the complete lack of political imagination.
The author is a journalist, novelist and producer of the Netflix series, ‘Decoud’.