Ram Puniyani
The debate around Hindu
Nationalism and Indian Nationalism is not a new one. During colonial period,
when the rising freedom movement was articulating the concept and values of
Indian nationalism, the section of Hindus, keeping aloof from freedom movement asserted
the concept of Hindu Nationalism. The debate has resurfaced again due to the
one who is trying to project himself as the Prime-Ministerial candidate of
BJP-NDA, Narendra Modi. In an interview recently (July 2013) said very ‘simply’
that he was born a Hindu, he is a nationalist, so he is a Hindu Nationalist!
His Party President Rajnath Singh also buttressed the point and took it further
to say that Muslims are Muslim nationalists, Christians are Christian
Nationalists. So one has a variety of nationalisms to choose from!
Modi’s putting 2+2 together and
claiming to be a Nationalist and a Hindu and so a Hindu nationalist is like
putting the wool in others eyes. Hindu nationalism is a politics and a category
with a specific meaning and agenda. This is the part of the ideology and
practice of Modi’s parent organizations, BJP-RSS. During colonial period the
rising classes of industrialists, businessmen, workers and educated classes
came together and formed different organizations, Madras Mahajan Sabha, Pune
Sarvajanik Sabha, Bombay Association etc.. These organizations felt for the
need for an over arching political organization so went in to form Indian
National Congress in 1885. The declining sections of society, Muslim and Hindu
landlords and kings also decided to came together to oppose the all inclusive
politics of Congress, which in due course became the major vehicle of the
values of freedom movement. These declining sections were feeling threatened
due to the social changes. To hide their social decline they projected as if
their religion is in danger. They also did not like the standing up to the
colonial masters by Congress, which had started putting forward the demands for
different rising social groups and thereby for India . Congress saw this country as
‘India
is a Nation in the making’.
As per declining sections of
landlords and kings; standing up to, not bowing in front of the ruler is
against the teachings of ‘our’ religion so what is needed according to them is
to promote the loyalty to the British. They, Hindu and Muslim feudal elements,
came together and formed United India Patriotic Association in 1888. The lead
was taken by Nawab of Dhaka and Raja of Kashi. Later due to British
machinations the Muslim elite from this association separated and formed Muslim
league in 1906, while in parallel to this the Hindu elite first formed Punjab
Hindu Sabha in 1909 and then Hindu Mahasabha in 1915. These communal formations
argued for Muslim Nationalism and Hindu nationalism. Hindu nationalists also developed
the political ideology of Hindutva, articulated particularly by Savarkar in
1923 in his book ‘Hindutva or Who is a Hindu?’ This was an enviable situation
for British as such groups would weaken the rising national movement. On one
side they quietly supported the Muslim League and parallel to this they handled
Hindu Mahasabha with velvet gloves.
Taking a cue from the ideology of
Hindutva, RSS came up in 1925, with the path of Hindu Nationalism and goal of
Hindu Nation. The values of rising classes embodied in the persona of Bhagat
Singh, Ambedkar, Gandhi, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and many others mainly
revolved around Indian Nationalism, built around the principles of Liberty,
Equality and Fraternity. The ideology of Muslim League selectively drew from
some Muslim traditions to assert the caste and gender hierarchy of feudal
society. While Hindu Mahasabha and RSS had tomes like Manusmriti to talk about
similar graded hierarchies of caste and gender. Muslim and Hindu communalists
were not part of freedom movement as freedom movement was all inclusive and
aimed at secular democratic values. Muslim and Hindu communalists drew from
glories of respective Kings of the past and kept aloof from anti British
struggle, some exceptions are always there to show the evidence of their
participation in the freedom struggle.
Gandhi’s attempt to draw the
masses in to anti British struggle was the major point due to which the
Constitutionalists like Jinnah; traditionalists of Muslim League and Hindu
Mahasabha further drifted away and consolidated themselves after 1920s. The
trajectory of Hindu Nationalism from the decade of 1920 becomes very clear, to
be on the side of British to oppose the Muslim Nationalists. Same applies to
Muslim League, as it regarded Congress as a Hindu party. The Freedom of the
country and tragic partition led to Muslim Leaguers going to Pakistan while
leaving sufficient backlog to sustain Muslim communalism here. Hindu
Nationalists in the form of Hindu Mahasabha and RSS gradually started asserting
themselves, beginning with murder of Mahatma Gandhi, who surely was amongst the
best of the Hindus of that century and probably of many a centuries put
together. Hindu Nationalists formed first Jan Sangh and later present BJP. The
major issue taken up by these nationalists was opposition to cooperative
farming, public sector and undertook a program called ‘Indianization of
Muslims’.
The identity related issues have
been the staple diet for religious nationalist tendencies. ‘Cow as our mother’,
Ram Temple Ram Setu, Abolition of article 370 and Uniform civil code has been
the foundation around which emotive hysterical movements have been built. While
they keep bringing to our notice as to under whose rule more riots have taken
place, one forgets that the root of communal violence lies in ‘Hate other’
ideology spread by communal streams. And most of the communal violence led to
coming to power of communal party. Its major offshoot is polarization of
communities along religious lines. Modi’s claim the democracy leads to
polarization is misplaced wrong as in democratic politics the polarization is
along social issues, like Republican-Democrat in America . Polarization around social
policies-political issues is part of the process of democracy. The polarization
brought about by the politics of Hindu nationalism or Muslim nationalism is
around identity of religions. This is not comparable to the processes in US or UK . The
polarization along religious lines is against the spirit of democracy, against
Indian Constitutions’. Major pillar of democracy is Fraternity, cutting across
identities of religion caste and region.
Modi himself, a dedicated
RSS swayamsevak has been steeped in the ideology of Hindu nationalism. He
glosses over the fact that the large masses of Indian people, Hindus never
called and do not call themselves Hindu nationalists. Gandhi was not a Hindu
nationalist despite being a Hindu in the moral and social sense. Maulana Abul
Kalam Azad was not a Muslim nationalist, despite being a devout Muslim, being a
Muslim scholar of highest caliber. During freedom movement also most of the
people of all religions’ identified with Indian Nationalism and not with
religious nationalism as being projected by Modi and company. Even today people
of different religions identify with Indian nationalism and not with religious
Nationalism on the lines of Modi and his ilk.
Hindu nationalism will require a Ram Temple India ,
Buddhist Nationalism in Myanmar
and Sri Lanka and is a major
threat to the process of democratization in those countries, Muslim
Nationalism has wrecked havoc in Pakistan , and many other places.
This is the dark tunnel of
History, where such invocations of religion in the arena of politics take a
semi respectful place, as being witnessed in many parts of the World and more so
over in India .
One hopes the distinction between religious nationalism and Indian nationalism
will not be lost focus of!
Hindu nationalism, does not
subscribe to the affirmative action, so the term appeasement of minorities has
been floated. For Hindu nationalists, the proactive supportive action for
vulnerable religious minorities is a strict no, while for democratic
nationalism, this is the norm. One has to see the clever ploy of the Prime
Minister aspirant, to call himself a Hindu nationalist. This is one more
attempt to indulge in dividing the Indian society along religious lines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment