This is the second time I am finding both sides of an argument stupid.

First was Mayawati calling Mahatma Gandhi a nautankibaaz (fake) on the issue of Dalit sympathy. This I can understand, I do not expect better.

But this was quite amusing for people defending Gandhi :

Congress workers burnt Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati’s effigy today for allegedly making derogatory remarks against Mahatma Gandhi recently.

Then was this absurd piece :

He also said the Prevention of Insult to National Honour Act, 1971, “must be amended to make a suitable provision to protect the fair name of the Father of the Nation”.

The name of the Mahatma “deserves to be legally protected,” Mahmood, also a former chairman of the National Minorities Commission, added in a statement.

Apart from the proposed posthumous legal protection, doesn’t this blatantly violate freedom of speech ? But then again, there isn’t too much of that anyway.

It is funny that self-proclaimed guardians are often the ones with least knowledge of the protectee.

Advertisement