1. So looks like this deleted tweet of mine is being used to further certain agendas. So I might as well respond lest it is assumed that I was being insensitive to attack on a Hindu (regardless of his organisational affiliation) for being a Hindu.
https://twitter.com/rajivtuli69/status/1419470150336540673
2.Anyone wid an iota of common sense shud be able to understand that my tweet was directed at d fact that d alleged commonality of DNA doesn't make an iota of difference to those who attack Hindus for being Hindus. My disagreement with d DNA argument stands no matter who says it.
3. To those who wish to create the impression that I was being insensitive to the attack on a Hindu, kindly refresh ur selective memory to the month of May when Hindus were being attacked in Bengal. We were among the first to knock the doors of the Court to seek justice.
4. It certainly appears that well-meaning criticism from those who come frm d same broader spectrum is not acceptable to a few.Importantly,while those who are being critiqued are taking it in d right spirit,"supporters" are eager to prove their loyalties by taking offense.
5. Healthy criticism from within the broader ideological spectrum must be welcomed, instead of putting organisational loyalties over and above civilisational interests and priorities. As long as this line is constantly blurred, it is the community that will pay the price for it.
6. I am not affiliated to any organisation precisely for the reason that I don't wish to be bogged down by obligations of organisational loyalty. My allegiance is to the civilisational cause because that's my priority and I cannot be convinced otherwise on this subject.
7. If there are those who wish to use my deleted tweet to further their agendas against certain organisations, that is not something I have any control over and I can't be held responsible for it.
8. My deleted tweet spoke for itself.I deleted it only bcoz I felt it was being deliberately misrepresented as insensitivity towards d attack on a Hindu.However,I stand by d essence of my tweet: religious consciousness invariably prevails over alleged commonality of DNA.Period.
9.I have no interest in responding to ad hominem comments.Those who wish to continue making an issue out of d tweet instead of understanding its spirit that we cannot wallow in the one-sided assumption of common ancestry,are missing d forest for d trees,or have other interests.
10. I don't wish to give every statement the benefit of the doubt that "kuch sochke hi kaha hoga". Some statements can be and some can't. But to assume that everything must be accepted because there is some hidden chanakya neeti in it, reflects a deep-seated and grave problem.
11. In any case, I have said what I wanted to on the subject. Those who genuinely wish to understand the essence of the tweet will, and those who don't will do what they do best - rumour mongering and slander. Continue. Neither will change either my commitment to the cause.
12. The tragedy of contemporary Hindu society is the monopolisation of its psyche, causes and priorities by a few, whether intentionally or otherwise. Given the challenges this society faces, it needs a million voices, to borrow and rephrase Naipaul’s million Mutinies.
13.Those who r happy to surrender their ability to think to burnish their badges of organisational loyalty will always have an issue wid even genuine criticism,when d organisation itself is open to genuine criticism.They bring disrepute to d organisation wid their own stupidity.
14. It is for the larger Hindu society to ask itself if this vaguely defined "unity" is best achieved through monopolisation of its causes, interests and priorities. Electoral unity must not be equated and confused with absence of diversity and plurality in societal options.
15. After all,no single organisation,let alone an individual,can address & tackle d sheer scale & intensity of issues that threaten d existence of d civilisation. Unfortunately, "supporters" wish to make this claim on behalf of d organisation when d organisation itself doesn't.
16. To end this thread,the support to any organisation must be contingent on its intent to further Civilisational interests which must be reflected both in what it says and does.Any other approach will result in a successful surgery and a dead patient.Vande Mataram.Over and out.
17. P. S. : I see a Hindu in the gentleman who was attacked by a mob, and some see only an RSS worker. To me, the former identity is more important because that is the fount, the origin, the cause, the Gangotri. That's the difference in the approach.
18. Now I leave to d fair mindedness & reasonableness of d people to judge d deleted tweet.I have nothing more to say on the subject.I have other things to attend to.Those who wish to wallow and indulge in pettiness, are welcome to do so. After all, our priorities are different.
*leave it to the
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
