Baul statues
I commend Syed Bayazid for his rational, unbiased views about the Baul statues issue published in a letter on 31 October. Ever since the statues were knocked down for whatever reasons, I have been reading comments, opinions of contributors, readers as well as reports of continuous protests by the cultural activists almost on a daily basis. The reason I appreciate Mr. Bayazid's views is that unlike most of those contributors, readers, protestors who have no hesitation whatsoever to term these 'mullahs' bigots, he has presented an acceptable, accurate account of the issue consistent with our democratic values.
It is noticeable that the word 'bigot' is frequently used to refer to the mullahs. Before we examine the validity of using such an unsavoury word, let me look up the meaning " a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own (WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University)". In the light of this definition, we can conveniently and logically claim that the mullahs who are vehemently opposing the erection of statues are 'bigots'. These mullahs are principally driven by their own core set of values that do not sanction erecting statues, while those opponents of these mullahs, better known as cultural luminaries, are also influenced by some core beliefs that promote art, culture and freedom among other things.
Therefore, a conflict of ideology is inevitable and it has been as such. In a democratic society, to resolve such a conflict will be simply arranging a referendum, any proposal wins, it is resolved fully. However, it is unacceptable, undemocratic, illogical for the so called progressive writers/readers to use the word 'bigots' indiscriminately against the mullahs as, under the definition cited above, the former will also fall under the same category, simply because they are intolerant of the opinions of the mullahs! To conclude, we can comfortably accuse both the mullahs and their opponents as being intolerant, and it is surprising that whenever I see the word 'bigot' in your newspaper the writer almost always alludes to particularly one of the two opposing groups, why not the other one?
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments