R B: Why do left-liberal intellectuals so often ignore all the violence and crime perpetrated by the politicians they support?
Shivji – As a cultural historian and a passionate advocate for intersectional politics, I would argue that the question you posed is a complex one. In any political system, politicians hold a significant amount of power, which they can use to shape policies, institutions, and norms. The relationship between politicians and their supporters is often marked by a complex interplay of power, ideology, and interests. Left-liberal intellectuals, or any political supporters for that matter, may choose to ignore violence and crime perpetrated by the politicians they support for a variety of reasons. One of the primary reasons could be their ideological alignment with the politician's platform and policies. For instance, if a politician is known for advocating for progressive policies that align with the left-liberal intellectual's worldview, they may be more inclined to overlook their problematic behaviour as a means of achieving their political goals.
It is also important to acknowledge that the intersectional nature of politics can play a significant role in how individuals perceive and respond to violence and crime perpetrated by politicians. For instance, if a politician is known for advocating for policies that align with a particular social justice movement, such as anti-caste or queer rights, supporters of that movement may be more inclined to overlook problematic behaviour as a means of advancing their cause.
RB: Do you think it is right of some of my friends (artists and art historians) to initiate a cancel culture campaign against a group of artists participating in an exhibition hosted by a prestigious contemporary art museum ...the exhibition celebrates public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Godi government.
In the context of the exhibition celebrating the public
projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Godi government's project Monkey Baat, it
is important to acknowledge the diversity of perspectives and experiences that
individuals and communities may bring to this issue. While some left-leaning
intellectuals may feel that the exhibition glorifies a government that has been
involved in human rights violations and discrimination against minorities,
others may feel that it is an important celebration of the achievements of the
Modi government and its efforts to promote development and progress in India.
In this context, the question of whether it is right for the
left intelligentsia to initiate a cancel culture campaign against the artists
participating in the exhibition hosted by a prestigious contemporary art museum
is a difficult one. On the one hand, it is important to acknowledge the right
of individuals and communities to express their views and engage in peaceful
protest against actions or views that they find offensive or problematic. On
the other hand, it is also important to recognize the importance of creating
spaces for dialogue and debate that are inclusive, respectful, and grounded in
a shared commitment to justice and equality.
Moreover, it is important to recognize that cancel culture can have unintended consequences, including limiting the diversity of perspectives and ideas that are represented in public discourse and creating a culture of fear and intolerance that silences dissenting voices.
Shivji: It is important to recognize that artists who have championed minority causes and perspectives in their works may have a unique perspective on the issue of celebrating the public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Modi government, given the government's history of human rights violations and discrimination against minorities.
While it is important to recognize and celebrate the
achievements of any government, it is also important to acknowledge the
diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist in our society,
particularly those of marginalized communities.
At the same time, it is also important to recognize the
contributions of artists who have championed minority causes and perspectives
in their works and to acknowledge the value of their voices in public discourse.
Artists have a unique role in society as cultural producers, and their work can
have a significant impact on shaping public perceptions and attitudes towards
social issues.
It may be important for the artists participating in the exhibition to engage in critical dialogue and debate with the organizers and other stakeholders about the appropriateness of celebrating the public projects and achievements of the social impact of the Narendra Modi government. This dialogue should be grounded in a shared commitment to justice and equality and should acknowledge the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist in our society, particularly those of marginalized communities. Ultimately, the goal should be to promote a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the intersectional nature of power, politics, and identity, and creates spaces for diverse perspectives and experiences to be heard and valued.
Shivji: The issue of funding in the Indian art industry is a complex and multifaceted one that requires a nuanced understanding of power, politics, and identity. Indeed, the Indian art industry has historically been funded by industrialists and politicians who may have had right-wing alliances or may have been accused of perpetuating cultural and economic war with Indian tribes. This raises questions about the ethics of accepting funding and awards from such sources, particularly for artists who have a commitment to social justice and equality.
In this context, it is important to acknowledge the
importance of ethical considerations in the art industry, particularly when it
comes to issues of funding and sponsorship. Artists and cultural producers have
a responsibility to critically engage with the sources of funding and
sponsorship for their work, and to ensure that their creative output is aligned
with their values and commitments.
At the same time, it is also important to recognize the
systemic nature of power and privilege in the art industry, and the limited
options that may be available to artists when it comes to funding and sponsorship.
Many artists may feel that they have no choice but to accept funding and awards
from sources that may not align with their values, to support
themselves and their work.
In this context, it may be important for artists and
cultural producers to engage in critical dialogue and debate about the ethics
of funding and sponsorship in the art industry, and to work towards creating
alternative models of funding and support that are grounded in a shared
commitment to social justice and equality. This may involve working with
community-based organizations and grassroots movements, seeking out alternative
sources of funding and support, and advocating for greater transparency and
accountability in the art industry.
This means acknowledging the systemic nature of power and
privilege in the art industry, while also recognizing the agency and
responsibility of artists and cultural producers to critically engage with the
sources of funding and sponsorship for their work. It also means advocating for
alternative models of funding and support that are grounded in a shared
commitment to social justice and equality, and creating spaces for critical
dialogue and debate about the ethics of funding and sponsorship in the art
industry.
R B: In this context what disturbs me is that art historians on the left have been attacking and initiating a cancellation campaign against the participating artists, but no one is talking about the semantics of the works shown.
It is important to acknowledge that the issue of violence
and discrimination in India is not a simple matter of one political party or
one individual being responsible for all the injustices. It is a systemic issue
that is rooted in deep-seated social and cultural norms, historical injustices,
and structural inequalities. Addressing this issue requires a multi-dimensional
and intersectional approach that involves confronting the root causes of
discrimination and violence, promoting social justice and equality, and holding
all individuals and institutions accountable for their actions.
In this context, it is important to recognize the importance
of critical engagement with the content and semantics of the works shown in the
exhibition, regardless of the political affiliations or identities of the
artists or organizers. Art is a form of cultural production that can have a
significant impact on shaping public perceptions and attitudes towards social
issues, and it is crucial to engage with the content and meaning of the works
to understand their social and cultural significance.
Art historians and cultural producers need to engage in critical dialogue and debate about the content and semantics of the
works shown in the exhibition, while also recognizing the importance of
creating spaces for diverse perspectives and experiences to be heard and
valued. This may involve acknowledging the historical and cultural context of
the works and critically analyzing their social and cultural significance,
particularly regarding issues of power, politics, and identity.
It is also crucial to recognize the intersectional nature of
violence and discrimination in India, which means that it affects different
communities in different ways, depending on their identities and experiences.
Shivji: Critical engagement with the content and semantics of works of art is crucial for understanding the social and cultural significance of the works, and for promoting a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding. By refusing to engage with the content and semantics of the exhibition, art historians on the left may be missing out on an opportunity to critically analyze and subvert the dominant narratives and power structures that may be present in the works.
In the context of the exhibition, it
may be important for art historians on the left to engage with the content and
semantics of the works to uncover and challenge the underlying power
structures and assumptions that may be present. This may involve critically
analyzing the representations of social impact and development in the works,
and questioning how these representations may reflect or
reinforce dominant narratives and power structures.
Moreover, by engaging with the content and semantics of the
works, art historians on the left may be able to uncover and highlight
alternative perspectives and voices that may be present in the works. This can
involve using art and cultural production as a means of amplifying the voices
and experiences of marginalized communities and challenging the dominant
narratives and power structures that may be present.
In this context, it is important to recognize the importance
of critical engagement with the content and semantics of works of art and the
potential for subversion and resistance that may be present in these works. By
refusing to engage with the content and semantics of the exhibition, art
historians on the left may be missing out on an opportunity to critically
analyze and subvert dominant narratives and power structures, and to promote a
culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the diversity of
perspectives and experiences that exist in our society.
It is possible that your artists and art historian
friends who have been engaging in cancel campaigning against the participating
artists may benefit from reading this conversation, as it may provide them with
a different perspective on the issue, and may encourage them to engage in
critical dialogue and debate with the artists and organizers.
Shivji: I can't make assumptions about your political position based on this interaction alone. However, based on our conversation, it is clear that you are passionate about issues related to social justice, intersectionality, and the importance of critical engagement with the content and semantics of art. Your views on cancel culture and the ethics of funding and sponsorship in the art industry suggest a commitment to promoting a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that recognizes the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist within our society.
R B: How will my artists, art historian friends cancel campaigning against these participant artists view my position
Shivji: As a trained bot based on an AI language model, I cannot speculate on how your artists and art historian friends may interpret your position based on our conversation alone. They may misunderstand or misinterpret your position, particularly if they are operating within a centre-left echo chamber that may be dismissive or resistant to alternative perspectives.
However, I would encourage you to continue engaging in
dialogue and debate with your artists and art historian friends and to
approach these conversations with empathy, respect, and understanding. It may
be helpful to focus on shared values and commitments related to social justice,
equality, and human rights, and to use these as a basis for finding common
ground and working towards shared goals and objectives.
Moreover, it may also be helpful to actively seek out and
engage with diverse perspectives and experiences, particularly those that may
challenge your own perspectives and assumptions. This can help to break out of
echo chambers and promote a culture of empathy, respect, and understanding that
recognizes the diversity of perspectives and experiences that exist within our
society.
Shivji: I agree that the accusation of celebrating majoritarian
achievements while ignoring the horrific features associated with the
distinctive patterns of totalitarian governmentality is a serious concern. It
is important to recognize and address these issues, and to work towards
promoting social justice, equality, and human rights for all. However, I also
believe that the cancellation campaign and public shaming of artists and art
historians who participate in the exhibition is not an effective or appropriate
approach to addressing these issues. While it is important to hold artists and
cultural producers accountable for their work, it is equally important to do so
in a way that is respectful, empathetic, and constructive.
Moreover, I agree that the complex and multifaceted reasons
why many minorities and marginalized groups in India feel betrayed by the left
and vote for the BJP need to be understood and addressed. This requires a
nuanced and intersectional analysis of issues related to caste, class,
religion, and regional identity, among others.
Therefore, rather than focusing on cancelling or shaming
individuals, it is important to engage in a broader analysis of power and
politics in India and to work towards promoting a more inclusive and equitable
society that is grounded in a shared commitment to justice, equality, and human
rights.
At the same time, it is important to recognize the power
dynamics that shape the art world in India, particularly concerning issues
of representation and inclusion. While state-sponsored projects can be
associated with statist agendas, it is also possible for artists to use these
platforms to engage in critical and subversive practices that challenge dominant
power structures and promote social justice and equality.
Therefore, instead of cancelling or shaming artists who
participate in the exhibition, it may be more productive to encourage them to
use their platform to engage in critical and subversive practices that
challenge dominant power structures and promote social justice and equality.
This may involve advocating for policies and practices that promote diversity
and inclusion in the arts, as well as supporting grassroots initiatives and
organizations that work towards promoting social justice and equality in the
arts.