If you and I can say sorry when proven wrong, why on earth can’t Paresh Rawal?
I’ve been thinking about what the middle classes expect of our Members of Parliament. The answer is probably not very much. In fact, that’s probably true of many more people across both class and linguistic groups.
I don’t necessarily expect our MPs to be brilliant although some certainly are. I don’t expect them to rigorously speak the truth or stand by all the commitments they make because I know that’s not always possible in politics. And it would be foolish to expect them to always behave decorously when the rest of us often don’t. They are, after all, one of us. However, there is one thing that I do expect and that’s simple decency. What do I mean by decency? Well, basic honesty. Not ideologically but simply in your dealings with fellow human beings. And politeness. But above all, fairness. And that means you don’t vilify and target people for no good reason at all. It also means a capacity to accept an error and apologise for it.
An egregious tweet
I’m afraid Paresh Rawal, who once upon a time I greatly admired as an actor, has fallen short of this simple basic standard. The details of his unbecoming tweet about Arundhati Roy show why he is not fit to be an MP.
First, he allowed himself to be misled by fake news claiming Ms. Roy had criticised the Indian Army. If the offending item had appeared in an Indian newspaper or television channel, that might have been understandable. Instead, it was originally posted by a website called ‘The Times of Islamabad’. The source Mr. Rawal picked it up from clearly mentioned this Pakistani origin. Shouldn’t that have made him pause and think?
However, Mr. Rawal was not just willingly misled. This fake news item also prompted him to provocatively tweet: “Instead of tying stone pelter on the army jeep tie Arundhati Roy!” Not only was this unbecoming and loathsome, it was also an incitement to violence. In turn, that means it was both a breach of the law and, arguably, an immoral thing to do.
Now I assume Mr. Rawal can’t stand Arundhati Roy and, indeed, he has every right to dislike her if he does. Secondly, MPs have as much of a right to dislike people as you and I do. But you don’t expect MPs to provoke violence against people they can’t abide. If and when they do, it calls into question more than their judgment. It raises concerns about their fitness to be MPs. Maybe, just maybe, this was an honest though foolish mistake. In which case Mr. Rawal should have apologised when he realised how horribly he had erred. But he did not. Yet if you and I can say sorry when we are proven wrong, why on earth can’t he?
They say to err is human but to forgive divine, yet in between is the critical stage of apology. That’s particularly important for men who occupy positions of authority. Mr. Rawal’s mistake was particularly egregious, if not self-inflicted. Therefore, his apology should be made loudly, clearly and, I would add, abjectly.
