Skip to main content

Beef ban in India

“Hegemony is conceptualized as noncoercive relations of domination in which subordinated groups actively consent to and support belief systems and structures of power relations that do not necessarily serve—indeed, may work against—those groups' interest”- This powerful statement made by Mumby in "The problem of hegemony: Rereading Gramsci for organizational communication studies" aroused my interest to juxtapose it with the current upheaval in India with beef ban.

Hindutva, one of the hot topics of India, has brought India into the lime light globally. One of the recent disrupts was the ban on cow slaughter to bulls and oxen, and the sale of beef as punishable. This law has affected the livelihood of thousands of butchers, vendors, restaurants etc. This law has been implemented in several states like Mumbai, Madhya Pradesh.

Hindu fundamentalist groups are celebrating their victory. Their aspiration is to bring India back to its religious values. Cow is sacred. But it is sacred to whom? Only the upper caste Hindus! Beef is consumed not only by Indian Muslims and Christians, but also by many low-caste Hindus, the Dalit. Beef is affordable and an essential source of protein. For the poorer section of society who can’t afford to have the luxury of eating other expensive meats, beef suffice. This imposition of the  BJP-led Central government of our secular nation has not only hit the dietary plans of the poor but also the beef industry which employs a vast number of peopleIt has also affected the leather industry which employs a vast number of people. 

Drawing this to the culture centered approach, the hegemony of the BJP-led Central government has provided it with the power of reshaping the structures, and agency to redefine the culture of India, in broader sense to redefine Hindutva.

Popular posts from this blog

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit

Disinformation, Zionist propaganda, and free speech: Far right cancel culture

Thursday October 12, 2023. The settler colonial occupation had unleashed its infrastructure of violence over the Palestinian people over a period of five days. Gaza was being indiscriminately bombarded, with mass civilian casualties that Amnesty International noted " must be investigated as war crimes ." At 3:32 p.m., my office phone rang. I was occupied and the call went to the voicemail. "Dutta, you are a murderous, f***ing, racist c***. Go back to where you belong...I will see to your termination in New Zealand." A couple of hours before that, an email had gone out from the Zionist Dane Giraud to the email listserv of the Free Speech Union, performed as a supposed apology for attacking my academic freedom. In the email, Giraud referred to my earlier b log post on the interlinkages between far-right Zionism, attacks on academic freedom, and the free speech union, noting how he had been enraged by the following statement on my blog: "I was therefore not surpri