mmm
but
them
into this ambiguity that you talked about on
you mentioned in your memoir about a some very critical words for cultural
relativism
well the question is whether there are universal values when I think that's
that's the question you know
and whether there are such things as
universal rights with whether there are things which are absolutely right
absolutely wrong
you know it at the time that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
was drawn up
um people believe you know that that's what that declaration is it says that
that we have so rights what's happened in our time in the last twenty
twenty-five years
is a attack on that idea the idea of the universality of Rights
a up from usually from parts of the world where they want people not to have
many roads at all
a and the idea that that the idea of human rights is a
is a western idea and a different cultures
have different priorities and freedom
is not one of them feel great though and so that
so that if you look at you card judge the argument is
the way in which things happen in that say the Islamic world or trailer
because their cultural parameters a different no
rate that side that's the slippery slope seeking
because I think if you look at the Society's when the
when their citizens are given any kind of a chance 10
such as the green movement in Iran such as the
thus decidedly unsuccessful its movements in the Arab Spring
or try to all these people say the same thing
no they all want the freedoms that they are deprived of
so that's what I've been talking about we have to
really higher on to this idea in of universal human rights
no because to abandon that is a dangerous thing
I remember back during the apartheid era in South Africa
nadine gordimer read the piece I think it was for the New York Review of Books
where she was saying that they were some writer is
who saw this distinction between right
or fight but then by an Act love
the government their writing became fight you know that
the politics was kinda imposed on it know that happen to you
as well in a sense you you've said that the Satanic Verses was in fact
the least political editor three books at the time but yet
right but but yet maybe I was wrong
great well obviously some people thought you were
so you know who decide who gets to decide when something is
political and when the artist has to engage that well unfortunately as you
say it's often imposed on the work
you know I want this is great the great famous line have no I'm gonna from
from the book laughter and forgetting were where he says
the struggle man against power is the struggle with memory against forgetting
that often happens to artists were simply the active remembering
saying this is how it was a
runs up against official truth people who don't wish it to be known that
that's how it works
a and so the the artist simply by
committee by expressing an active memory you know
finds himself politicized because there are other versions of the truth that
wish to impose themselves from
and I found that from your long before the Satanic Verses you know when when I
when I was writing midnight's children knows what what are the passages in the
book deals with
atrocities committed by the Pakistan Army
during the 1971 war for the independence among other ish
where they were syriza what we would clearly now understands the genocidal
acts
but who carried out in in in in Dakar the capital public
and this was very well attested
the time you know though they were there was photographic evidence that was my
witness evidence there was
the there was every kind of evidence and yet the official truth about
son was at that never happened and that anybody who said so
was simply anti-pakistan one a
and so the game they're just simply the active saying here's how it was
became politicized because the official truth was it at odds with her
so oh there's been a lot of focus ever since
whether it's in China or the Arab Spring about the role love
a the internet and social media in terms of
on its its role in you know freedom
or demonstrations but is there just
is Aaron equal possibility for the enemies of freedom to use it as
effectively
as a propaganda tool I'm not sure not sure it equally but I think it's I think
it's there is a possibility yes I would I think
the we have to c the Internet has been morally neutral
with your internet as a tool know you can
you you can use the tax to cut down a tree or two
you know put someone's head off from a
its it's a I think it's on the whole
the beneficial but I think there's no question that
it makes it the makes it much harder for ideas to be suppressed
room arm and I was quoting this morning in the meeting we had about this
this weather unusually eloquent remark made by
Iranian Ayatollah a few years ago which was he was the
man given the task of censoring the internet
in Iran and he kept trying to close down web sites
and did not 20 war with sprig operator and
eventually he said it's like removing a ladder to stop birds from sitting on the
roof
her which which I thought was a good will
unusually precise very poetic yes exactly and I think that's true but the
internet that you couldn't
it you can find it if you want though it's out there somewhere
and I think even in China now where there's
really you this fifty thousand people
given the task of censoring the internet I know its mind about its astonishing
you can't get facebook in China a twitter is very difficult to get access
to
on and you know their own social
network is very heavily monitored and censored but
yet the people in China Sea we finding more and more ways of getting around
that
even had the so-called Great Firewall you know way exactly that China has bill
people get rounded round because you were france is one of the methods by
which
the firewall is activated is if you use certain kinds of names if you use the
names a well-known dissident so whatever
immediately that triggers you know a thing which bans that particular
Communication Server people use things like
deliberate misspelling right exactly so that the algorithm doesn't work
movement people do manage to get through that so I think on the whole
it's beneficial when 18 E
connect something that you talk about a
again in your memoir in terms i love crew controls
the story of China a you know china has been
critical and Japan for not being truthful about the history of the war
and yet
they are too from the kindergarten is he was saying
a people they are denied their own history and you talk about
in your book about um you know cool
these we have these grand narratives nation a religion in a family
and who controls I think that's what the whole argument is about this whole
subject
of Liberty the whole subject to free expression
it boils down to that hookah who has the right to tell the story
you know and and in a free society or what what are the definitions if you
like bob a free society
is that we all have the right you know we can tell the story of our
our family OVR national history
about culture of faith in any way we choose
week we could tell that reverential E or satiric Lee
week we can we could be tell it well or badly you know
we're not punished for for doing either of those things
we all tell ourselves the stories about some you know and
and there's no argument about the story you in any society including this one we
see how divided the slightly this is
mmm you know there's a there's a very serious arguments
about the nature of America what's going on in america
but the ability to have the argument is something which you could call freedom
right and the moment you get two societies like tryna
a in which authoritarian regimes
wish to impose themselves the first thing they do
is to shut down the ability to dispute the narrative
you know and that's why there so unusually
interested in artists and writers
because those are the people who dispute the narrative from
and writers and artists have no armies got no weapons
mmm um but they have this they have the ability to challenge the official
narrative
that's where the conflict of interest
from them
it