For all the vile remarks and obnoxious debates with respect
to appointment of Mahant Yogi Adityanath as the 21st Chief Minister
of Uttar Pradesh, calling it an assault on secularism, did media ever
introspect why secularism wasn’t included in preamble in the first place? The
description of India was changed in 1975 when former Prime Minister Indira
Gandhi through 42nd amendment brought in massive changes in the
Indian constitution by adding the words “Secular and Socialist” to the
preamble. The amendment, notoriously referred as the “mini constitution” or
“Constitution of Indira”, besides redefining India, reduced the powers of the
Supreme Court, High Courts and laid down the fundamental duties. Koenraad Elst, in his insightful commentary
offers a profound explanation as why the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly,
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar refused to include the word secular in the preamble. Like
Mahatma Gandhi, he too firmly believed that religious pluralism has been an
integral part of the Hindu society and hence the need for separate doctrine
calling for “equal respect for all religions” seemed trivial. This simple
understanding really sums it all. India has been a cradle for various beliefs,
religions, customs. For centuries people of different faiths lived in harmony
and co-existence. Hence the issue of being guided by the doctrines of
Secularism laid out and borrowed from Europe civilization was thought to be a
misfit in a nation with entrenched culture of religious pluralism. But with
time, the founding principles, and the basic character of the Hindu
Civilization, began to lose significance. The vital ideology began to erode.
From the late 19th century, leaders for various
reasons began to appease certain communities for larger political gains prior
to the independence movement. Simultaneously the developments in Europe and
their ideological frame work of secularism found consonance with India leaders
educated in the West. A sudden surge in Pan-Islamic identity was witnessed in
India after British victory defeated Ottoman Empire. To win the confidence of
the Muslim League, to strengthen the Indian protests during the Independence
Struggle, Indian National Congress and Gandhi supported the All India Khilafat
Movement. After Independence to respect the sensibilities of Muslims, Indian
leaders have conceded to their wishes. Nonetheless, this perspective guided even
India’s foreign affairs so to say- being sympathetic to Arabs, equating racism
to Zionism, support to Palestine etc. The practice of catering to a community
gradually began to make strong in roots in the Indian Polity. This eventual
appeasement, in turn became the core of the Indian secularism. Further by
making secularism a basic tenet of the Constitution, it has emerged as the
guiding doctrine for Indian leadership.
Religious plurality is ingrained in Indian civilization. But
the motley group of intellectuals indoctrinated by Indianized version of
secularism started infamously contesting the basic precincts of the land by
labelling it as “Hindutva”. Institutions, organizations, individuals
championing this religious plurality are looked down and any effort to uphold pluralism
is deemed communal. Alas !!! these self-proclaimed secularist tribe fail to
understand that unlike the Abrahamic religions of the West, the definition of
religion in India is comprehensive. Religion in India is a way of life. Consequently, the narrow, biased definition of
Secularism included in Constitution through amendment became the bulwark. The
Congress party and its ilk over the decades institutionalized this definition.
In the past seven decades, this dictum ruled the roost. With the appointment of
Yogi Adityanath who was branded as Hindu fundamentalist, BJP has turned the
tide. BJP strongly believed in secularism rooted in religious pluralism, a
concept which was widely misconstrued. It had few takers but continued to exist
at the fringes. Labelled as communal, all its initiatives and activities were viewed
through tinted glass.
In the meanwhile, minority appeasement began more rampant.
Even initiatives like RTE weren’t sparred of this bigotry. The secular
narrative practiced by the political establishments began to touch the lives of
common man. While the media dominated by branded secular tribe never brooked on
this issue, the skewed religious demographics, concessions to minorities and
their religious heads, political parties pledging for reservation based on
religion became more intense. Perhaps, the Hindu community in the largest state
of UP with 19% of minority population began to silently bear the brunt of this
blatant appeasement. Though MSM haven’t ever delved on this issue the record
number of 450 riots in the Western UP and the inept political handling had undoubtedly
left an indelible impression on the majority community. The article may sound condescending.
But in fact, Prime Minister’s remarks on “Kabristan” which was out rightly
condemned by the secular brigade as fomenting polarization, perhaps reflected ground
realities. The victimized voices found a ray of hope in BJP paving way for
Hindu vote consolidation.
Despite its poor appeal for several decades BJP’s idea of
pluralism had thrived. Though BJP was in power earlier it obtained an
overwhelming majority only in 2014. Ever since, the party has been making
attempts to push forward it ideological perspective. This conservative (so to
say) perspectives began to gain ground and challenge westernized narratives
that dominated the academic and intellectual domains for past seven decades.
The colossal electoral mandate in UP provided needed impetus
for BJP to push forward the ideology it envisioned for India. Losing no
opportunity, Modi-Shah duo rose to the occasion and made a bold decision that
embattled the secular brigade. The brutish majority and immense popularity of
Yogi Adityanath together heralded his ascent to post of Chief Minister. Expectations
are exceptionally high from Yogi Adityanath so is the scrutiny. The hawkish
media will now closely follow the UP story. Risks are high and any misadventure
in administration might cost BJP electorally. Interestingly, there is a
resounding resonance to the BJP’s idea of secularism on the ground now. Stakes
are high and UP administration must prove that development and Hindutva can go
hand in hand. After winning his straight fifth term in 2014, Yogi Adityanath
said that “my agenda is Hindutva and development and they complement each
other.” It is time for swift action. Good governance can augur BJP’s electoral
triumph and political ambitions. Enthusiastic columns endorsing and hailing the
BJP’s decision at Myindmakers and elsewhere testimonies the same.
Rajeev Bhargav once stated that, “India’s secularism is no
copy of Western secularism, based on keeping or creating a distance in the
relation between religion and the state. Instead it embraces religion, but
tries to keep neutrality between the different religions. Except that it makes
a distinction between the majority and minorities, which get privilege in the
constitution, the laws and political practice, in order to protect them from
the majority. Thus, a parliamentary majority involving non-Hindus imposed
reforms on Hinduism but doesn’t touch Muslim law. India discriminates against
the majority”. At present, the designation of majority and minority are slowly
losing relevance. The narrow demarcating line is rather smudged now. In states
like Jammu and Kashmir, North Eastern States and Punjab Hindus are a minority.
In Kerala, there is no distinct majority community, Hindus have shrunk from the
50% mark. In terms of demographic statistics, a minority community can at times
be a majority in a particular state. So, on what basis are communities
designated as majority or a minority?
Discrimination and pandering are the outcomes of this skewed
doctrine of secularism advocated by Indian establishment. The basic minimum
condition of a secular state is that all citizens should abide by same laws. In
India, every religion has a separate law. Hence India is not a secular state. The
paradigm of Hindutva, which cherishes religious pluralism, often ridiculed as
anti-secular is a true exponent of secularism. The only political party that
promises real secularism is BJP which promises to bring about Uniform Civil
Code. Paradoxically, BJP is labelled communal.
Regarding anointing Yogi Adityanath, the newly elected MLAs
chose him as their leader in a democratic way. Honoring the decision of
democratically elected peoples’ representatives, BJP has reinstated him as the
Chief Minister. He has established his political credentials by getting elected
five times in a row. Every time the margin of victory is higher than previous
elections. Indian media is known for branding any vocal Hindu leader adorning
saffron robes as a Hindu Fundamentalist. (Indian Secularists strictly adhere to
the gospel: questioning Christian or Muslim faiths and their clergy is
blasphemous, but demonizing Hindu Priests is upholding secularism). Enough of this meaningless rant….
@ Copyrights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment