A Question of Labels

In her latest column, veteran journalist Tavleen Singh poses a provocative question: 'Am I a Naxal?' The piece, which appeared in The Indian Express and The Financial Express, reflects on her long career and her current political stance.

Singh begins by establishing her credentials. She writes, 'On this, my credentials are impeccable. I openly opposed the late Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale at a time when you could be killed for doing so. And, never at any stage of my long career in journalism have I had the smallest sympathy for the naxalites—not even in the seventies when many young people of my acquaintance were not just in sympathy with this movement but had given up college to march with the comrades in the jungles.'

She recalls that in the 1970s, 'it was fashionable to be extremely leftist and unfashionable to be mildly rightist, either politically or economically.' She describes conversations in dingy, smoke-filled 'barsatis' over cheap rum and cigarettes, where she talked with others about how only a revolution could save India. Yet, she writes, she was never persuaded.

Economics and Ideology

Singh says she became convinced that 'it was decades of 'socialism' that kept millions of Indians mired in poverty.' She argues, 'It is simply not possible to distribute wealth without first creating it.' In the column, she reiterates a view she says she has expressed before: that India 'would have been among the richest countries of the world if we had adopted the principles of free markets and liberal democracy.'

Instead, she contends, India chose to emulate the Soviet Union, leading to millions living 'on government handouts and the dream of a government job.' She adds that those aged leftists who still view Mao and Stalin as heroes 'pretend that they have not noticed' that Russia and China only began to prosper after adopting free market policies.

Why the Fear?

Given her openly anti-left views, Singh wonders aloud why she fears being placed in the 'dimagi Naxal' (intellectual Naxal) category. Her answer is that she opposes 'many of the policies that the Modi government has chosen to follow.'

She adopts the cause of the Cockroach Janta Party, a group she says campaigns to improve village schools. She agrees with Abhishek Dipke's point that government schools will only improve dramatically when political leaders and high officials are forced to send their children to them. When she sees 'cockroaches' spreading across villages to create reels showing poor conditions in government schools, she views them as 'nationalists and patriots', not subversives.

Suppression of Dissent

Tavleen Singh also addresses the climate for dissent in India. She observes that since Prime Minister Narendra Modi took office, dissent has been suppressed. She cites methods including the use of investigative agencies against critics and the labeling of journalists speaking out as 'anti-nationals.' During Jantar Mantar protests, she reports, some devotees demanded passports of the 'cockroaches' be confiscated.

She writes that a democracy needs dissent as 'oxygen' to breathe and remain healthy. Singh maintains India is 'no longer the liberal democracy it once was.' Drawing a historical comparison, she says that while Indira Gandhi's Emergency was overt repression, the last twelve years have been 'more insidious and more dangerous'.

A Cardboard Deity and a Final Question

Singh shares that she first witnessed the lifting of a pall of fear by the mocking of Modi in reels and speeches by the Cockroach Janta Party. She also describes a makeshift temple where a cardboard cutout of Modi is placed as Lord Rama and devotees recited a 'Modi chalisa.'

She asks, given her opposition, 'Could this put me in the 'dimagi Naxal' category?' The column ends with her reflection on her own label.