The Cup of esSENSE

Football fans all over the world are celebrating the most awaited world cup tournament hosted by Qatar this year. Along with the festivities, fans and activists all around the world are also calling out the human rights abuses of Qatar. These activists demanded FIFA take proper action, but FIFA instead pointed out the detractors’ "colonial intentions". Whether Qatar is right or wrong is not the question to be asked here. Instead, we should look at football and its effect over populations. The chances of world coming together over a Mega sporting event is a hopeful scenario but even football now seems to be a stage for the "clash of civilisations". This is nothing but a sign of our times. Again, this is where we should understand the game of big capital. FIFA’s silence is not so shocking because it has its own history of bribery and money laundering. Instead, here what we should focus is on the cultural clash that is getting essentialised in FIFA's reaction. The question remains whether football will unite humanity at this dawn of the "clash of civilisations" or will it lead to more barbarism. Here, no one should doubt the beauty of football and how it has a numbing effect on the masses. Do not forget the Argentinean player Messi — who also has a history of evading taxes — is considered as a messiah by his fans. Note how in Kerala, CPM party leaders support Argentina because it is the birth country of the revolutionary Che Guevara. One has to understand the political obscenity here. There’s no greater disrespect to Che than this stupid association of Messi with him.

In the November issue of the Pachakuthira monthly, the self-proclaimed rationalist, free thinker Ravichandran. C reacted to the many criticisms levelled against him. He wrote in large about the esSENSE Global, its activities and how it is trying to frame a progressive vision for the future of Kerala and India. The article mainly contended with the accusation that Ravichandran’s activities in the name of spreading atheism and rationalism is actually helping Hindutva or the Hindu right-wing forces in Kerala. Ravichandran writes that the accusations are baseless and that the last thing he expects is to be close with Hindutva; let alone propagate its ideals. In defending himself as a rationalist free thinker Ravichandran also explains what he believes to be the real forces that are obstructing Kerala’s path to prosperity and progress: Communism and Islam. According to him, Hindutva which is prevalent in its many cultural forms in Kerala society should not be considered as a bigger threat. He says that Hindutva’s impact couldn’t even be compared to the impact of Islam and Communism as the latter are the bigger threats. Here he is playing the political game of the very communists that he is opposing. The electoral outcome in Kerala society is not a marker that validates the ‘saffronisation’ of it. His opinions on Reservation policies (it is against equality), Farm Laws (it is for market freedom and healthy competition), K-Rail (it is a crucial part of industrialization and transport) are also controversial. So how should we understand Ravichandran? Is he the Hindutva proponent that the communists claim him to be? Well Ravichandran himself gives the answer to this. Among all his different opinions that he shares in the article, he says something that becomes the foundation for his arguments. By disregarding the dynamics around the minority politics in the country, he in turn writes that “the real minority is the individual.”

In other words, “where is the individual?” is a libertarian question that has been asked over the years. Adhering to the notions of individual freedom and reason, Ravichandran vehemently opposes political and religious collectives. He brands these groups to be part of the still prevalent tribalism of the society that limits the individual. This reductive capacity to bring everything down to the individual level is a resounding effect of postmodernism or rather the effect of the success of capitalism. His support for the Farm laws and K-Rail is further proof that he persists within the neoliberal tendencies of late capitalism. It’s obvious that Ravichandran is a neoconservative and what he feeds off of is the mass hysteria (regarding the growing “Islam menace”) that the Hindutva element has already planted in the society. Ravichandran says he does not consider Muslims as minorities in India and this he says is because of the fact that they ruled over India (in one of the greatest empires of the past - Mughal dynasty). This is like the popular claim associated with the New England women, who were accused of witchcraft, of being "burned at the stake". But this was not actually the case. The accused were hanged. Again, the historical inaccuracy (political relevance) is not on this particular detail but in understanding how black women were punished more severely than the white women along with other men. Here Feminism also fails to interpret this in a politically relevant way. But this "burning at the stake" has been widely deployed (mostly by feminists) as to garner the affective support.

As Zizek says, “Of course I disagree with Jordan Peterson but there is - as its always with efficient ideologists - a grain of truth in what he was saying.” This is true even in the case of Ravichandran. The one thing that Ravichandran gets right is his diagnosis of the communist parties in Kerala. He rightly compares the ideal principles of the left (Liberty, Equality, Rationality, Progressivism) with the current principles of CPM. Here the question “who is a communist?” is resoundingly brilliant. CPM’s shift in focus of redefining communism in Kerala politics is very relevant to what Ravichandran is saying. To understand how the party has radically changed its body of practice in order to continue in power comes with a greater price - Ideology. Although his arguments on how CPM plays appeasement tactics and how they are enemies of progressivism is well founded, the intention behind this criticism is questionable. Here, Ravichandran comes across as postmodern but the fact that the CPM is more postmodern — they do not truly believe in communism but only appears to create the impression that they believe (its axioms) — is a glaring problem. Therefore, the resistance here must happen in terms of redefining the left. As Zizek says to the supporters of Jordan Peterson, “Sorry, but we left-wingers can do this even better than you (here esSENSE Global)”

 

In other news from around the world: The left wing is making a comeback in Latin America - Lula’s win is a great relief for Brazil and humankind.

“Things are going to get better before they get worse.”