I
Satiricus must again succumb to the universal temptation of saying, ´I told you so´. For only a couple of short weeks ago he had expressed the fear that once Tavleen Singh descends to being a BJP journalist, it might not be long before she degenerates into an RSS journalist. This fell prophecy has, alas, come to pass. For her latest fifth column, in which she reveals she has an inner voice and discovers that ?this inner voice too needs hearing?, is nothing less than a crassly communal bouddhik varga straight from a Sangh shakha. This learned lady, who had been the very first to ridicule the RSS as the lunatic fringe of our sane, secular society, now hears her inner voice telling her that the word Hindu is being used not only ´pegoratively´ but actually as an ´abuse´. Satiricus is aghast. For is this not exactly what the RSS has been saying for long years? And is not abuse of Hindus and everything they stand for the holy core of our sacred secularism? Then how can the lady become such an abominable apostate as to write that the RSS was right? How can she surrender secularism and convert to communalism?
It seems to a shocked Satiricus that her apostasy is absolute enough for her to say that those things that have bothered the RSS for eighty years have now started bothering her too. He could hardly believe his eyes when he read what she wrote-?It bothers me that I studied in this country without any idea of the contribution of Hindu civilisation to the world.? The poor dear! Satiricus´s secular heart goes out to her. He would like to console her by pointing out that throughout her secular upbringing she was sedulously protected from the terrible toxin of Hindu civilisation-and by our great good fortune this precious protection is still in place. It was initiated by an Englishman named Macaulay, it was confirmed by a German named Max Muller, and it is continued by an Italian named Maino. What more than this triple therapy could we Indian secularists wish for?
Unfortunately, Tavleen´s triple botheration appears a virulent infection that defies the time-tested triple therapy. For, while her first botheration was that she did not know about Hindu civilisation, her second botheration is that ?the new HRD Minister, the venerable Arjun Singh, constantly talks of detoxifying text-books?. That this should bother her is really strange. For de-toxification of education, which means de-Hinduisation of Hindustan, was what Macaulay aimed at, and the venerable Arjun Singh is only following in Macaulay´s venerable footsteps in this respect.
He would like to console her by pointing out that throughout her secular upbringing she was sedulously protected from the terrible toxin of Hindu civilisation-and by our great good fortune this precious protection is still in place. It was initiated by as Englishman named Macaulay, it was confirmed by a German named Max Muller, and it is continued by an Italian named Maino. What more than this triple therapy could we Indian secularists wish for?
Apparently it stimulated the imagination so much that various commandments were suggested-like ?Thou shalt not dance like your Dad?, ?Thou shalt not hold loud conversations on thy mobile phone in a public place?, and the new commandment, ?Thou shalt not worship false pop idols?.
And the third thing that bothers Tavleen Singh is that ?one of our new ´secular´ ministers talks of making the Sindhu Darshan festival less communal?. But isn´t that the crying need of the (secular) hour? For ´Sindhu´ gave us ´Hindu´, and the ever-communalist Savarkar once exclaimed, ?Hindu without Sindhu? Impossible?? Which means Sindhu literally means the mainstream of Hinduism-cum-communalism. Then why not ban its very ´darshan´?
Christ taught Christianity in his sermon on the Mount, so says the Bible. The Bible also says that the Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God and handed to Moses on Mount Sinai. But, to the best of this Hindu ignoramus´s knowledge, nowhere does the Bible say that either Moses or Jesus wanted to restrict the number of Christian Commandments to ten or specify their venue as a mount. So Satiricus expects all pious Christians to rejoice at the glad tidings that in England, the land of an official defender of the Christian faith, an Eleventh Commandment has been democratically decided upon in a pub. This was done by the Methodist Church in Britain by holding a contest for a new commandment among young visitors to pubs all over the country. According to press reports, this contest ?was aimed at sparking an ethical debate among young people?. Well, now, what do you know? Satiricus never knew beer and Christian ethics could make such a stimulating mixture. Apparently it stimulated the imagination so much that various commandments were suggested-like ?Thou shalt not dance like your Dad?, ?Thou shalt not hold loud conversations on thy mobile phone in a public place?, and the new commandment, ?Thou shalt not worship false pop idols?. Wonderful! But how to identify the true pop idols that thou shalt worship? Here, fortunately, pious Americans have already provided the answer-it is Elvis the Pelvis.
It seems that even in this high-tech age you need an inborn talent to be good at something. Take journalism. Why is Satiricus such a dismal failure as a pen-pusher? Because he does not have the talent to plagiarise other people´s writings and pass them as his own. They say plagiarism is theft. But does not even a thief need the talent and the temerity to put that talent to profitable use? Take this news from Germany. A brand-new thief wanted to rob a bank. And how did he go about it? For starters, he waited for over three hours outside the bank he was planning to rob, trying to gather enough courage to enter the bank. When he finally decided to go ahead with the robbery, he walked in wearing a cap with eye-holes in it, which he pulled down to cover his face. But then he could not see, because he had cut the eye-holes in the wrong place. So he pulled off the cap and walked right in front of the security camera. He then went to the cashier lady´s counter and threatened her with a cigarette-lighter shaped like a pistol. Then what happened? The lady quietly told him to leave. And what did he do? He turned around and walked out-into the arms of the police. In the court the judge said, ´You have no talent for crime, so give it up.´ See? It´s all a matter of talent. Whether you want to be a good thief or a good journalist, you need the talent. Satiricus, alas, is not a talented journalist. It therefore follows that he cannot be a good thief.
Leave a Comment