Can an "offensive speech" ever have an immaculate definition??

The predicament of being too blunt and presumptuous at some point, can prove to be a toppled over incident. The same thing happened in the not so long ago held Jaipur literature festival that was more in news and limelight because of its controversial multifarious discussions. The most prominent being of course of salman Rushdie's and than, other three budding writers joined the queue with him too. The whole notion of discarding salman Rushdie's entry in the festival rose from the excerpts of his book "The satanic verses" in which he purportedly vilified the Muslim community and denigrated their rites to some extent. The slander of Muslims was apparently taken very seriously and it made the things quite convoluted and enigmatic for salman Rushdie and ordinary people too. The specific excerpts from his book were rather insinuated to be libeling the Muslim communion on their traditions and rituals. But, there's never been a bonafide explanation for a hate speech. An offensive speech is nonetheless is reckoned to be the one that censures one's sentiments and abases a particular community advertently. Notwithstanding the fact that salman Rushdie did feel apologetic for his deed and humbly regretted the despair and scorn that he fostered in people or a group specifically, still he was not felicitated in the Jaipur literature festival. At one moment, there would be some news of his attending the festival and then the very next moment, there would be trepid and insipid headlines of his absence. Audience even thought in the beginning, that there would be some chimerical appearances of Rushdie's sporadically.    

The Government itself tried so hard to cease his entry in the festival by using circuitous itineraries and several conspiracies against him. There were also many headlines quoting that salman Rushdie's life may be in great turbulence if he attends the festival. So, the crux of all that pied drama was to stop Rushdie from getting in. Many lucubrated and think that it was an ostentatious pogrom to obfuscate Rushdie and his followers too. Then  there many others oft who wanted to mooch many things out of the spot light. Being filiopietistic is always welcome but being pompously reserved and defensive about one's traditions is just a lofty thing to digest. The dilettantes in the festival were not vituperating about a particular communion but they were just sharing their perspectives about the whole somber incidence. It was indeed not a strategized manner to calumanise any society. But then, since they are caught along the name "Rushdie", they are culprits without having committed any crime. If their effort was to appease the pain in many hearts, then it just seemed like an agony itself to the politicians.

The term hate speech has become an umbrella term. Being used by anyone and everyone, the apt articulation has lost its essence in abyss. If one doesn't want to hear anything in particular, then it's a hate speech by the other person which is reckoned a calumny. Officious advises and inferences are even taken as denigrating speeches. Thanks to the minute hearts of people embanked by corrupt practices of taking all the time and not giving at all.

it's the right time when the Government ought to articulate "whether a speech deserves to be hated or not...??"        

The interrogation is going to be perennial....."did i offend you??".....

Does Muslims' enmasse really exist??

The U.P elections have been indeed mysterious besides being less controversial. The vote bank very abruptly cited to insinuating the existence of Muslims' contingent in the whole scenario, seems to have lost its articulation.   There's been a lot of hype created at once owing to the vote bank rendered by the Muslims dwelling in the places of U.P. Election parties ex-cogitate over the fact of getting uplifted through the so called "power enmasse" of Muslims in the state. The lucubration over winning the hearts and thus the vote bank of the Muslim community in the elections doesn't appear to be that propitious. It's rather an impasse for many parties, because  Muslims in uttar pradesh have never projected their freedom of voting on the groundswell of their alliance and unity, owing to the fact that there is a great diversity and complexity in the Muslims' castes hierarchy. The system of caste and disparities in caste system never permit the entire Muslims' contingent to vote for a single party in the election with consensus.

If one Muslim sub caste would vote for one specific party than the other sub caste would advertently want to vote for some other party. So, in the interim of adjudging the winner, there doesn't arise a single doubt of unanimity. The aftermath is that the Muslim contingent never votes for the same political party, which lands the parties' beliefs of winning by Muslim vote bank in spurious consequence. The Muslim community is a pied one that is ubiquitous for various political parties in terms of votes and power but is indeed elasticated into many different sub groups. The multifarious nature of the Muslim community, rather obfuscates the repercussions produced after the elections. Notwithstanding, felicitating the whole Muslim alliance, no political party can be guaranteed success in elections, the reason being Muslims' complex and diverse enmasse.

The feign of global events marks a very eminent impression on the voting strategy of the Muslim group and their ally. If Muslims were to auspice one specific party, why would they go with Indira Gandhi then, notwithstanding, she was the prominent reason for the division of Pakistan. Muslims have never gone to be patrons of trends. They have rendered their patronage to the party that they've contemplated is not egregious for them. Nonetheless, doesn't really matter, how benignant and appealing a ruling political party may appear, but the Muslim community have been patrons of many over the time. No congress, no bjp and no rashtriya janata dal party can assimilate the auspice of Muslims' as it's unvanquishable with a lot of convolutions in it.

It's perhaps quite palpable to conclude that the Muslims' is not really an enmasse...but they surely deliver impetus in the U.P elections....