Ali Anwar — the author of Masawat ki Jung (2001), regarded as a pioneering work about Pasmanda Muslims — expressed concern about the crisis in Mandal politics. According to him, it is the result of “the internal division” of the leaders from the backward castes. As he boldly put it, “What has triggered the predicament (durgati) for the Mandal Movement? My honest reply to this is the internal division of back- ward caste leaders. It might have been caused by their ego clash or other factors. But the most unfortunate part is that these leaders have dragged and left the Mandal Movement into a dark cave (andheri gupha)”.

Almost 33 years ago, the Mandal Commission recommendations were implemented by the then V.P. Singh Government. Given the deep-rooted caste-based inequality in Indian society, making a law to address the social and educational backwardness of a large section of the population was not easy. “Even though I broke my leg, I was able to score a goal”. This is how V.P. Singh described the prevalent situation, much later during a meeting with Ali Anwar. Remember that when the Mandal Commission recommendation was implemented, the upper caste lobby rose against the V.P. Singh Government. The BJP withdrew support, triggering the downfall of the National Front Government.

No doubt the Mandal Movement is a watershed in modern Indian politics and the short-lived Government headed by V.P. Singh will always be remembered for its contribution. The social justice wave swept the country. The change was so radical that upper castes began to tremble. They expressed their anger by abusing and cursing Janata Dal leaders for empowering the lower castes. Lalu Prasad was their main tar- get. The erosion of their privileges made them furious. Conversely, there were celebrations in subaltern’s camp.

The most significant part of Mandal politics was its secular character. When OBC reservation was implemented, the backward castes of all religious groups were included. Perhaps for the first time at all India-level, the minority Muslim and Christian communities were brought into the ambit of reservation.

After Partition, in 1947, the Muslim minority was torn asunder and the post-In- dependence politics did not uplift their condition. The Muslim community was further silenced by calling them “the architect of Partition”. Muslim elites were so demoralized by the post-Independence regimes that they could not think beyond begging for cultural (patronage-based) rights. Mandal politics not only extended them reservation but also gave them a large share in political institutions. Contrary to the allegation by the upper caste scholars and journalists, it was both inclusive and secular.

The upper caste lobby is hesitant to accept that the Other Backward Classes (OBC) are the largest social group. The OBC is not the name of a caste but a group of over a thousand intermediary castes. The population of the OBCs is not exactly known as the caste census has not taken place since 1931. But it is estimated that the number of OBCs is above 50% and it is at least four times numerically bigger than that of privileged upper castes. Yet, the OBC castes remain marginalised till today and the upper castes monopolize all the resources.

The historic role of V. P. Singh’s Government lies in the fact that it, for the first time in Independent India, gave the backward castes 27% reservation in employment in central government offices and in public sector units. Much later, it was extended to educational sectors as well. However, the majority of the Mandal Commission recommendations related to economic, social and cultural equality, have not been fulfilled. This shows the weakening of the Mandal Movement.

Three decades after the recommendation of the Mandal Commission, it appears that political parties espousing social justice today face a huge crisis. This is what Ali Anwar referred to in his speech. The struggles for social justice have met several roadblocks.

Until today, even the 27% OBC reservation has not been fulfilled. Every day, the upper caste lobby puts a new hurdle in the path of OBC reservation, while the reservation for EWS for upper castes has been implemented within a few days. At class-one jobs and central universities, the backward castes are highly underrepresented. While the lack of authentic data is underscored as the reason to oppose OBC reservation, the union government, working under the influence of the upper-caste lobby, is unwilling to carry out a complete caste census. The caste census will demolish several myths and put an end to speculation and lies.

Most recent available figures show that the marginalised communities are yet to get their due share at educational centres. For example, while the OBC reservation is 27%, the proportion of OBC professors at 45 central universities is just 4%! At the associate professors and assistant professors levels, the bleak scenario does not change much as their share increases slightly to 6% and 14%, respectively. Apart from OBCs, Adivasis are highly under-represented. Among professors, the share of Adivasis is only 1.6%, while they are, on paper, given 7.5% reservation. Similarly, at associate and assistant professors levels, they are able to get a mere 2% and 4%representation, respectively. With 7% (professors level), 8% (assistant professors level), and 11% (associate professors level) share, Dalits are better off in the representatives stakes than Adivasis but these figures are far less than the 15% reservation available to them.

OBC reservations are religion-neutral. The provision paves the way for inter-religious solidarity. But the counter-modernity forces have employed all unfair means to sabotage the assertion from the below and tried to counter Mandal with Kamandal politics. The Ram Temple agitation was launched by L. K. Advani. But the worst part was the Sangh Parivar’s ability to nurture a large number of cadres who were OBC in social identity and Hindutva-wadi in their thinking and action. Kalyan Singh and Uma Bharti (both belonging to the Lodhi caste) were the firebrand Hindutva OBC leaders during the Mandal Movement. Slowly, OBC leaders got divided because of their interests and a large number of them went to uphold the saffron flag. It is this downward fall that Ali Anwar is concerned about.

Social justice, contrary to all these corrupt practices, envisions reconstructing a society where the most marginalised castes are given equal rights. A large number of social justice leaders do not want to listen to the bitter truth. They are surrounded by sycophants. These leaders are clueless about their ideologies. If they themselves were unaware of the ideas of Jyotiba Phule and Savitribai Phule, how would they be expected to bring their name to every household in north India?

Instead of mythical heroes and religious figures upholding caste, these leaders should follow the tradition of Buddha, Kabir, Phule, Periyar and Ambedkar. Another failure of Mandal politics is its inability to work outside political domains. The social, educational, cultural and religious domains are still controlled by the forces opposed to social and economic equality.

Who will tell these leaders that social justice is also not just the fact and issue of reservation and token representation? Rather, it encompasses struggles within economic, social, and cultural domains.

Let’s speak the truth to the power on Mandal Day.

(The article was first published in News Trail)

 (Dr Abhay Kumar is an independent journalist. He has also taught political science at NCWEB Centres of Delhi University.) 

The post Social Justice remains elusive 33 years after Mandal Movement appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

 
The quota bill providing 10% reservation for the upper caste poor has been passed by the Rajya Sabha with the support of opposition parties like Congress, Samajwadi Party, AAP and left parties. The AIDMK walked out of the Parliament with DMK also taking a stand as Tamil Nadu already has 69% quota. The question is whether this act will be challenged in the court of law and if it is, then will it be quashed or will it remain. Is the government sincere or is it just playing the gallery before the general elections?
 
According to newspaper reports, “The 124th Amendment Bill provides for 10% reservation to economically weaker sections in the general category, especially upper castes. “Weaker section beneficiaries” include people who earn less than ₹8 lakh annually, own less than five hectares of agricultural land, the residential property of less than 1,000 sq. ft and a residential plot that is less than 109 square yards in a notified municipality and 209 square yards in a non-notified municipality.”
 
Bill helps Savarna elite and betrays the poor
No one knows how the government came to the conclusion for 10% quota. The provisions and definitions of the bill clearly indicate that this bill is actually against the poor upper castes. There may be a substantial number of those categorized as upper castes who might be absolutely landless and might be living in BPL families. It is shocking to see the governments definition of the economically deprived, which might as well describe the pamper salaried class, many of who might be in plum secretarial positions, teachers in Universities living in government bungalows yet may not have any house or land in their name, for all technical purposes. The bill’s provisions are actually meant to help these Savarna elites and is a clear betrayal of the poor who will never be able to compete with the middle-class Savarna elite which defines India today.
 
If the government was really bothered about Savarnas, it should have appointed a commission in the same vein as Mandal Commission. We do believe there are many communities and people who live below the poverty who need economic support.
 
Government jobs are not an anti-poverty programme, reservations address the issue of representations in power structure and it is a well-known fact that right from academia, media, bureaucracy and other power structures, the Savarna castes from various states dominate. Among them, the Brahmins dominate in these services taking the fat share, followed by Kayasthas, Baidyas, Nayars, Reddy’s, Bhumihars, and Banias. It would have been better if a government formed commission gave a state-wise report of all castes and their share in power so that those who have not got it, are given due opportunities. The sheer generalization of quotas as upper castes, Scheduled Castes, OBCs, etc only helps the numerically, financially powerful who are well connected to grab the positions. The right thing would have been to do a survey of all the Indian govt jobs as well as state jobs and get the caste-wise status and then opt for representation of those communities who have lesser representation or no representation. Despite reservations in jobs, we don’t find Balmikis, Tharus, Boxas, Doms, Mushahars and other numerous communities in government jobs. It is the sweeping generalization of the bigger categories that allows powerful and dominant people to take advantage of the situation and the most marginalized remain on the margins. Who represents them and why should anyone else represent them? Why not the communities themselves?
 
General does not mean Savarna but unreserved
It is also important to understand that ‘general’ categories are not upper caste categories. General has been wrongly interpreted as upper caste for the last two decades after the Mandal commission hit the backbone of the Savarna politics of dominance. General clearly means non-reserved seats and hence anyone who is not applying through quota can apply here. If the government criteria for 10% is not challenged then I am sure 90% Indians can apply under that but at the end of it, the Brahmanical elite will manipulate.
 
Savarna bureaucracy at work
This quota was force-fed by the Savarna bureaucracy who are now feeling threatened everywhere with the dominance of the OBCs. The Savarna academia of all varieties manipulated the spaces in the Universities and other prestigious institutions through ‘historical’ connection to power structures and when the OBCs, SCs, STs presence was increasing inside these institutions challenging them, they struck to manage their supremacy. Actually, it started long back and Anna-Kejriwal’s anti-corruption movement was nothing but an assertion of the Savarnas to capture and control their lost background.
 
The movement was sponsored and supported by the sympathizers of the Sangh Parivar who built the ‘narrative’ of Savarna exploitation. The movement resulted in unprecedented help to RSS and BJP. After BJP came to power, the Savarna caste knew that it is their government and they went berserk. Right from the politics of culture to Ram Temple movement, Savarna were back in the lead. Everywhere, conflicts were created by the Sangh Parivar and its Savarna goons were out to destroy the growing strength of the Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims.
 
The background for the anti-reservationist agenda started from various phases. Anna’s movement began by creating lots of confusion and differences, followed by the clamour for it by Gujjars, Meenas, Jaats, Rajputs, Marathas and Patidars. All of these communities remain agrarian and politically powerful. Politicians too found it easier to speak about reservation even when they knew that there are no government jobs and this government has killed public sector and bigger institutions. Even railways do not have jobs to give to people.
 
Shouldn’t political parties be fighting with this government which has systematically destroyed the public sector and the jobs?
 
It is these people who instigated political parties to go against the issue of the reservation in promotions. Parties like Samajwadi Party, when in power in Uttar Pradesh, actually acted against it. Even the OBC students when demanding fair representation were disappointed to see the stand taken by Akhilesh Yadav that time. The courts have come to the rescue of the Savarna elite and all the issues of reservations for the SC-ST-OBCs now face a huge challenge in different forms. Now the universities have already got reservations in the higher level department wise and thus finishing it in one go.
 
While the Congress, BJP, AAP and left parties went on the expected lines criticizing the move as political and at the same time trying to not seem anti-Savarna, it was astounding to see the BSP and SP behave the same way even when they know that Savarna votes are not going to come their way. We must compliment the Dravidian parties as well as RJD for speaking up against this categorically.
 
Why Muslims and Christians are being denied reservation
Speaking in Rajya Sabha, Amit Shah pointed out that parties are ready to give protection to Muslims while opposing it for Savarnas. Amit Shah and his chelas always try to bring the Muslim issue to make it communal and then succeed in their divisive tactics. One of the most shocking thing in the entire quota ‘kahani’ is that everybody is promising things to their caste groups despite well-known fact that there are no opportunities.
 
The most shocking part of the entire quota debate is that the Hindutva gang has successfully put the entire political spectrum into defensive mode as far as Muslims are concerned as if they are not the citizens of India or one should not talk about their welfare. In the past four years, this government has systematically made Muslims look like a second-grade citizen and every issue is being converted into appeasement of Muslims so that the voters are polarized. But the issue here is whether political parties should succumb to it.
 
When reports after reports have acknowledged that there are backwards and Dalits among Muslims then why are they not being allowed to get that under the quota. A similar thing happened to Christians too. It is a known fact that majority of Indian Christians are actually Dalits and Tribals who are very low on the economic ladder yet outside the purview of reservation. Now, citizens are being discriminated against on the basis of their religion and our political parties have remained conspicuously quiet just for the fear of a so-called ‘savarna’ backlash. This is disgusting and shameful, to say the least. As a constitutional republic, we cannot violate our constitution and discriminate among citizens on the basis of their religion and castes.
 
Remembering Mandal days
On August 7, 1990, the then Prime Minister V P Singh announced the acceptance of the Mandal Commission recommendations in Parliament. Nothing happened then but slowly the country was engulfed in fire. The Savarnas, with a solid backing of all the parties and media, unleashed a reign of hatred and terror in the North Indian streets. The hatred was that reservation has been granted for the people know what would happen. Boys and girls would stand up with begging bowl in the street or sweep on the floor with a broom. Many of the boys and girls were seen shining shoes in public suggesting that they will not get a job and hence they will have to do jobs ‘reserved’ for Dalits. Girls were heard saying who would they marry if there were no jobs.
 
All efforts were made to scuttle the implementation of the Mandal Commission report. The twice-born or what we called Dwijas were completely exposed irrespective of their parties, all of them opposed Mandal. ‘Progressive, leftists, socialists, seculars, liberals all in their unison voices were opposed to Mandal report. The darling of seculars these days, Arun Shourie was shouting his lungs against this, bringing out different reports against the implementation and at the same point of time, refusing to publish the report in support of the Mandal.
 
But the one thing that Mandal did was change the complexion of India’s Parliament. That might not have been the original agenda of Mandal but the hatred against it resulted in an extraordinary alliance among the Dalits-OBCs and Adivasis. This alliance proved lethal for the Hindutva and Brahmanical forces which ensured that the alliance is broken well in advance. Uttar Pradesh faced the tyranny of feudal Savarnas because of this alliance break up.

Resettlement of land and respect for Adivasis customary rights
Though the political compulsions have compelled both the SP-BSP not to oppose the Savarna reservation in Parliament, it is time for the party leaders to discuss the future agenda in details. An alliance with a short term perspective will not work. It is important, therefore, for the Samajwadis to train their cadres in the Bahujan history and movement.
 
Long back, when Akhilesh Yadav, first became chief minister and took oath on March 15, I had written that he can fulfil the original agenda of BSP. When both the parties lost last year, I suggested that Mayawati should run for the Prime Ministerial candidacy through the alliance and Akhilesh Yadav should concentrate on Uttar Pradesh.
 
We are at the historic movement now. Through the Savarna reservation, the BJP and the Hindutva lobby has attempted to make reservations redundant. Be very careful of forces like Youth for Equality, who are said to be opposing it. There may be various reasons for them going to court. The Bahujan forces should form an alliance and demand a complete national census based on caste including upper castes and their economic status. Once the economic status of castes comes out in open state wise, there will be bigger chances of economic poor making alliance with the Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.
 
Of course, all these parties cannot just pay lip service to the Pasmanda question and the Dalit Christians issues. They will have to take a categorical stand on their question apart from strengthening the public sectors, redistribute and settle of the land question according to the Mandal recommendations. You cannot hide the land question and that of the forest and water resources with just ‘sarkari jobs’. India’s democracy will only be strengthened once the rural power equations change and that is impossible without a full commitment to land reforms, and respecting the autonomy and customary rights of the Adivasis on forests, fisherfolks on the rivers and pastoralists on the grazing lands.
 
Proportional representation the only solution
The fact is India will have to one day opt for proportionality in every sphere of its life including the electoral system, as without that we won’t reach anywhere. The current politics of reservation need to be converted into representation and we must talk about it in proportionality. Let the Savarnas get their proportional share in India’s nation-building and allow all the other communities to have that too. But will that happen when the elite Savarnas have full control over media, judiciary and academia? For proportionality to come into our system, we need strong voices of Ambedkarite, Periyarist and other ideologues who can take the Brahmanical system head on and oppose Brahmanism inside their own structure.
 
Baba Saheb Ambedkar never talked of reservations. In fact, the entire background of the reservations emerged from the Poona Pact where Baba Saheb Ambedkar was pushed for an agreement by Gandhi’s manipulative fasting. Baba Saheb wanted a communal award for a fair share of power for the untouchables in India’s power structure and Gandhi adamantly opposed it.
 
You cannot fight against the Brahmanical supremacy by creating your own hegemonies in your domain areas. The democratisation of our social structure will ultimately pave the way for proportionality everywhere and vice versa. Let us work for that to make India a better and humane society. For that to happen, parties too must adhere to that principle and start from their own structure otherwise we will always be at the receiving ends when parties give the poor a lollypop and once they are in power, the brokers take control and cadres are only supposed to just keep quiet in the greater ‘interest’ of the party.
 
A proportional system will ensure India’s diversity and the role to be played by each citizen irrespective of his caste, religion and other identities in nation-building. The country cannot be handed over to the Hindutva nationalists of ‘Hindi Hindu Hindustan’ variety as that will only impose north Indian Brahmanical hegemony on all of us, hence we need to resist all these attempts and expose them. Let the political parties adhering to social justice understand what Baba Saheb Ambedkar and Periyar had spoken of years ago and dedicate to their ideals of social change and not make a mockery of social justice. The time to democratise India’s socio-political structure has come in the greater interest of the country and proportionality at all levels will strengthen it.

The post Opinion: Shouldn’t a commission like Mandal ascertain the need for 10% upper caste poor quota? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image courtesy Global Thought Columbia University

This year, the tenth Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer memorial lecture was delivered by Professor Akeel Bilgrami on 8 December, 2017, in the wake of the twenty fifth anniversary of the planned demolition of Babri Masjid and the beginning of the devastating Bombay riots. There could not have been a better occasion and time to learn about the history of communalism in modern India because the event was organised to commemorate the life and work of Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer, who tirelessly worked for communal harmony during his lifetime and was also the founder of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai. Professor Bilgrami, who is Sidney Morgenbesser Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University, and has been deeply invested in the study of secularism all his life, was gracious enough to meet me before the lecture and talk to me about the rise of communal ideology in India in recent years, especially after the rise of BJP in India.

When I asked him rather naively what lies ahead for a generation wracked by communal violence — a generation that wants to fight the forces causing such violence – he responded by saying that we need to understand the specific nature of such violence, and in doing so, gauge exactly when such violence took its root. But he provided an important caveat – he suggested that we need to first understand the difference between antecedents and roots while looking at the recent history of communal violence in India before we consolidate a movement to fight it. Historians, especially those belonging to progressive circles, often hark back to the Hindu Mahasabha and its opposition to important nationalist movements, the role people like Savarkar, Mookherjee and others played in consolidating a monolithic Hindu identity that defines itself in opposition to Muslim identity. This is an important antecedent, that is, the birth of the Hindu Mahasabha certainly foreshadows later instances of communal violence in India in general, but the roots of the communal violence we see now lie elsewhere. They lie in the formation and the implementation of the Mandal Commission in 1990. The BJP’s dream of a singular, unified Hindu identity was about to be disintegrated and divided along caste and class lines. Both L.K Advani and Atal Behari Vajpayee nearly threatened to withdraw their support if the government did not review its stand. According to Professor Bilgrami, the rise of the BJP in its current avatar should be traced back to this important event. The eighties and the nineties, therefore, planted new roots of communal violence in India. This may also further help us understand how the hindutva side of the BJP government and its political economy, which is a neo-liberal economy, prop each other up. Their apathy for the deprived classes also comes from their failure to gauge the millennia-long violence against dalits and minorities in our country. The ban on beef, the mindless torture on minorities by self-styled gaurakshas, demonetisation are some of the symptoms of this apathy (stemming from their desire to consolidate a singular undivided Hindu identity) from recent times.

This brings us to his illuminating lecture on the relationship between populism or populist rhetoric and fascism which points to the limits of liberal discourse to address the rise of communal or rightwing ideology in India. Populism is defined as a political approach that aims to disrupt the existing social order by mobilising the common people against elites. But, populism has become a word of “opprobrium”, to borrow a word from Professor Bilgrami’s lecture, for both the rightwing and those who belong to progressive circles because of the blatant appropriation of the term and populist rhetoric by the former (we must not forget that Modi’s rise can be attributed to his populist rhetoric of being a common man – someone who garnered favour because of his humble background as a one-time chaiwalla, to say nothing about the election of Ram Nath Kovind — who is a dalit — as the president of India) and the unfortunate failure of the latter to capture the common man’s concerns. He expresses concern over a “movement vacuum” in our country, a gap filled by some important student movements in recent times, but a consolidated fight against rightwing forces cannot ignore the roots of the communal violence seen in recent times, and has to take into account the question of caste and thereby define a strong populist movement by reclaiming populism as an approach that is in favour of dalits and muslims in our country.

In order to explain the fascist tendencies of rightwing-communal ideology in India, I quote these memorable lines from his talk:

Apart from the feature of finding the external enemy within (the Jews then, Muslims now) and despising and subjugating it, there are several other details:  above all there is the sinister and powerful paramilitary organisation of the RSS shaping the ideological outlook of the government (no other right wing nationalism in the world, so far as I know has anything quite like this); then there is the menace of a vigilante youth group (the ABVP) mimicking the Balillas in Mussolini’s Italy, bullying students on campuses who raise deep questions about caste or about economic inequality or about Kashmir or…; then there is the calling critics of the government ‘treasonous’ and ‘anti-national’; then there is the constant talk of purity in caste which echoes racialist attitudes on blood and descent in European fascism, and finally there is the ‘fusion’ of the interests of the corporations and the state which was Mussolini’s explicit definition of fascism and which is exemplified in the strident neo-liberal aspirations of the Indian government with widespread support among a wide range of classes including of course, as I said, the middle classes. 

Perhaps now, the newly elected dalit leader Jignesh Mevani from the Vadgam constituency of Gujarat can guide the way and stand as a beacon in such dire times.
 

Akeel Bilgrami is an Indian-born philosopher of language and of mind, and the author of Belief and Meaning, Self-Knowledge and Resentment, and Politics and the Moral Psychology of Identity  as well as various articles in Philosophy of Mind as well as in Political and Moral Psychology. Bilgrami is currently the Sidney Morgenbesser Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University in New York.

Sneha Chowdhury is member of the editorial collective of the Indian Writers’ Forum.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum.
 

The post On the rise of communal ideology in India: In conversation with A. Bilgrami appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 

The all-out assault on secularism is not merely against tolerance; it is against democracy itself and the very basis of a pluralist India. As before, a two- nation theory will only lead to Partition, or as Yugoslavia and the USSR have shown, to Balkanisation

Independent India was born in the fires of communalism, through the genocidal carnage of the Partition. In the desperate contest between the secularists led by the Congress under the Mahatma and Nehru, and the communalists abetted by the British and led on the one side by the Muslim League and on the other by the Hindu Mahasabha–RSS, the latter won. The periodic and increasingly menacing communal violence that has occurred since then is symptomatic of the unfinished secular agenda.

Those who fondly imagined that the bloodletting that followed the Babri Masjid demolition, particularly in Bombay and Surat, would be checked by the moderate and statesman–like Vajpayee leading an NDA coalition that included secular parties, were in for a rude shock, especially after the genocide in Gujarat by the RSS–appointed Narendra Modi’s government in February–March 2002. The BJP’s current moves to vacate the Supreme Court stay on religious ceremonies near the Babri Masjid site, and the proposed bill to ban cow slaughter, starkly highlight that secularism is under assault as never before.

A major reason this assault has progressed so far has been because of the assiduously spread myths and falsehoods about what secularism, democracy, the Indian nation and culture are. The core and co-ordinating body behind this Hindutva attack, the RSS, has its own Western roots. The Italian researcher Marzia Casolari has exposed the RSS links, after it was set up in 1925 with the Italian fascist party led by Mussolini. RSS sarsanghchalak MS ‘Guru’ Golwalkar’s admiration for Hitler is well known. Many of the core concepts of Hindutva are Indianised versions of Italian and German fascism. Swadeshi versions some might say.

For example, the sangh brigade has argued that since India is very largely Hindu, it is a Hindu Rashtra or nation. This is similar to Hitler’s concept of the German ‘herrenvolk’ or pure Aryan community. The sanghis argue that the Aryans, contrary to all historical evidence, were indigenous people and the forebears of a Hindu race. All minorities, esp. the Muslims and Christians (but the Sikhs and Jains are not so stridently included as they are considered part of the Hindu family), are considered illegitimate converts by force and fraud by Muslim and British rulers.

The attack on the Babri Masjid (a misnomer as Babar never visited Ayodhya) was part of the sangh purification (sudhikaran) of history, and righting of mythical historical wrongs by the Muslims. Babar and ‘Babar ke aulad’ demolished Ramajanmabhoomi, and so the sangh brigade had to repay the Muslims in the same medieval coin. And today, Vajpayee talks of historical proof that the Rama temple existed there, despite the evidence given by renowned archaeologists like D. Mandal, and eminent historians like RS Sharma, Romila Thapar et al. Despite the fact that in Ayodhya there already exist several Rama temples, for the sangh brigade desperate to remain in the seat of power, Lord Rama also has an accommodation problem.

Many of us forget that India was the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, and that the very influential emperor Asoka was his disciple. The Asoka chakra is at the centre of the Indian national flag. What happened to all the Buddhists in the land of the Buddha? They were forcibly converted to Hinduism by the Brahmins and their followers. Buddhist shrines and monasteries were despoiled and turned into Hindu sites. Thus the Bodh Gaya temple today in Bihar is managed by both Buddhists and Hindus. The sacred Boddhisatva tree nearby, where Buddha attained enlightenment, was chopped down by a Hindu fanatic centuries ago.

No one, including the Buddhists, talk of this now. So forcible conversion and the demolition and co-optation of religious shrines are nothing new, and the Brahmin–led Hindus because they were the most powerful, were the biggest offenders. This was pre–eminently not a matter of religion, but of political power, as indeed Hindutva is.

At the core of this history of hate is the communal project that argues, as the fascists did, that the Hindus are a homogeneous community, with little difference, and no pluralism. Thus the term ‘majority community’. This community is seen as having objective contradictions and differences with the minorities, the ‘other.’ But aren’t Hindus divided by class, caste, gender, region, language, etc.? Aren’t the Tamils and Kannadigas feuding over the Cauvery river waters mostly Hindus? Is SM Krishna who tried to side-track Supreme Court orders on this issue less of a Hindu than Ms. Jayalalitha?

Are those for and against affirmative action including the Mandal Commission recommendations less Hindu than the others? There are also Hindus on both sides of the bitter dispute on the Women’s Reservation Bill. Such examples can be multiplied. Clearly Hindus never were and never can be homogenous. Similarly, Muslims and other minorities are also not homogenous. For example, Muslims who claim to have descended from upper castes or more lofty ancestors like the Sayyids, Ashrafs, Khans do not normally marry the comparatively lower caste Ansaris and Qureshis. In Kerala, the Syrian Orthodox Christians do not normally marry the Latin Christians or frequent the same church. Thus there is no homogenous ‘majority’ community or its counterpart ‘minority’ communities.

The assault on secularism is also based on a crucial misrepresentation of democracy. The sangh argument is that democracy means majority rule, and since Hindus are a majority, Indian democracy must be Hindu, and what for them is the same thing, Hindutva rule. But this is another distortion. Democracy is not simply majority rule. Liberal democratic theory holds that all majorities are temporary. Take elections. Yesterday a party/coalition e.g., the BJP–Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, was in power. Today another party/coalition, e.g. the Congress–NCP is in power. The leadership/membership of both is predominantly Hindu.

If one makes the trivial statistical point that in either case Hindus are in the ‘majority,’ the concomitant confession will have to be that Hindus are different: they vote and act differently. That further proves they are not a homogenous community. Further, in the ‘first past the post’ electoral system, Narendra Modi’s sweeping electoral victory in Gujarat, like Mrs. Indira Gandhi’s famous Lok Sabha victory in 1971, was based on a minority vote, less than 50 per cent. Very few Indian political formations have got more than 50 per cent votes, and they have never consecutively repeated the performance. Moreover, democracies must guarantee minority rights.

That leads us to the next anti-secular canard of minority appeasement. For example, the sanghis argue, that Article 30 of the Fundamental Rights, which allows minorities to run their own educational institutions, has resulted in the proliferation of madrassas that are spreading Muslim fanaticism if not terrorism. This they say is minorityism, against democratic majoritarianism (that we have already refuted). In the first place, there are enough criminal laws in place in the IPC and CrPC to counter this, apart from the extraordinary anti–terrorist laws like NSA, Armed Forces Special Powers Act and POTA. No minority institution is above the law. But the question that arises is what about the ‘majority’ RSS–controlled Saraswati Shishu Mandirs, Vanvasi Kalyan Kendras and the like? Don’t these spread Hindu fanaticism? And don’t these fuel genocidal terrorism as in Gujarat and elsewhere? Behind the rhetorical façade it appears that ‘majority’ fanaticism is seen as patriotism, but ‘minority’ conservatism as ‘jehadi terrorism.’

Similar is the argument that subsidies to the Haj pilgrimage are minority appeasement. If subsidies for the restoration/rebuilding of Hindu shrines and pilgrimages and the Kumbh Mela are acceptable, then why not this? But there is a more profound objection. If secularism is about the separation of religion and politics, why is the state subsidising religion? We must distinguish between the state being partisan between religions, funding religions per se, and subsidising a few religious activities. In such a stratified and largely poor society, where religion not only for the pious, but even for the atheistic, is an integral part of culture, limited state subsidies cannot be simply decried as anti–secular, as favouring either Hindu or Muslim. In any case, quite contrary to the Hindutva argument, Hindus have got more subsidies than the minorities.

Today, the latest furore is over cow slaughter instigated by the Congress CM of MP, Digvijay Singh. Facing an election later in the year, the two term CM sought to beat the BJP at its own game like other Congress leaders before him, and raised the issue of cow slaughter, accusing the BJP of being insincere in this objective. The local youth Congress even printed posters accusing Vajpayee of being a ‘beef eater.’ In the first place, eating habits have nothing to do with nationalism or democracy. Secondly, many lower caste Hindus as well as Hindus in eastern, north–eastern and southern India, apart from the minorities, eat beef. Thirdly, Article 48 of the Directive Principles, which unlike Fundamental Rights are not judicially enforceable, does not focus exclusively on the prohibition of cow slaughter. It concerns the scientific organisation of animal husbandry and enjoins on the state to preserve and improve on all existing indigenous breeds, and prohibits the slaughter not only of cows, but of all "draught and milch cattle." In other words, under this Directive Principle, all draught and milch cattle including cows, buffaloes, yaks, mithuns, should not be slaughtered.

So why this Brahminical insistence only on cows? The comprehensive prohibition in Article 48 is just not enforceable. Hindus, especially lower caste and poor, widely eat buffalo meat, and where they can get it, beef, as in Kerala, West Bengal and the north east. In any case there are other Directive Principles such as Article 41 which includes the right to work, Article 39 for an equitable distribution of wealth, etc. that no one talks of today. Is cow slaughter more important than all this?

It is clear that the current assault on secularism is motivated, aimed at establishing a pseudo–theocratic, authoritarian polity in which the BJP can secure its rule forever. Where progressively the sansad (Parliament) will be substituted by a dharma sansad of self–appointed ‘sants’ acceptable to the sangh brigade and the political opposition be booked under POTA.

The all–out assault on secularism is not merely against tolerance; it is against democracy itself and the very basis of a pluralist India. As before, a two–nation theory will only lead to Partition, or as Yugoslavia and the USSR have shown, to Balkanisation. 

Archived from Communalism Combat, February 2003 Year 9  No. 84, Cover Story 5

The post Secularism Under Siege appeared first on SabrangIndia.