Ram
Puniyani
Fascism, a phenomenon which emerged in Europe
in Post First World War period has haunted the humanity since then. Its
brutality, its crushing of democratic norms, its targeting of minorities, its megalomaniac
projection of power of the nation, its ultra nationalism, projection of its
leader as a ‘strong’ leader, the charisma built around such a leader are etched
on the memory of human race as a lesson as to what should not happen anywhere
in the world again. Since then two words, Fascism and Hitler have also become
part of the popular vocabulary, expressing the nature of the dictatorial regime
and a tyrannical dictator. At the same time these words many times get diluted
and used in a loose sense for any dictatorial regime, any authoritarian leader
or person. The socio political characteristics of the political phenomenon are
very specific and one has to keep them in mind while labeling some person or a
regime as fascist or a Hitler incarnate.
The debate around this got revived with Rahul
Gandhi hinting that Narendra Modi is like Hitler. Not to be left behind, BJP’s
Arun Jaitley went on to say that the only leader in post Independence India who
can be compared to Hitler, is Indira Gandhi, as she was the one who imposed
internal emergency, got her opponents arrested and abolished the democratic
freedoms during that period. It’s true, that she did impose the emergency on
the country, which is most condemnable act on her part. It is also true that
the coterie around her exercised her powers like a dictator. But was it a fascist
regime? Can she be compared to Hitler? No way. We must understand that there
are many types of dictatorships, authoritarian regimes, military dictators, the
few surviving Kingdoms even now. But fascism is a different cup of tea (?
poison) to be sure.
The major fascists in Europe have come to
power through democratic route and then abolished the democracy by and by to
assume the role of a dictator, who presents himself as the savior of the
nation, who also tries to expand the boundaries of the country claiming neighboring
countries to be as their own part at some time in history. The two other major
defining characteristics of fascism are the unstinted support by the big
Industrialists, who in turn get all the state facilities in a smooth fashion and
the second one the targeting of minorities, who through propaganda, by various
means are presented to be as anti nationals, threat to the nation due to whom,
all the problems of the country are there. Starting from here the mass pogroms
against them take off with the silent or vocal sanction of the large sections
of society. The massacre of innocent minorities is passé and there is a silent
or vocal sanction for this. The overarching ideology of this political
phenomenon is sectarian nationalism, which takes legitimacy from race or
religion. (in case of Hitler it was race to the fore).
In post colonial states the leftover of
ideologies emerging from feudal sections and picked up by some middle classes-upper
castes have such fascist potentials. The same characteristics can also
masquerade through political fundamentalism, where the particular narrow interpretation
of religion is imposed on the society and cruel treatment is meted out to the dissidents,
some groups are targeted. Many an Islamic countries are victims of these
Fundamentalisms. In India also the politics in the name of Islam has
fundamentalist-fascist potential; fundamentalism being a close cousin of
fascism. In India these tendencies have potentially been there in the politics
in the name of religion. Nehru very aptly understood this. A warning of
Nehru sounds particularly appropriate today. As per him Muslim communalism is
in its nature as bad as Hindu communalism, and may even be stronger among
Muslims than its counterpart within the majority community. "…but Muslim
communalism cannot dominate Indian society and introduce fascism. That only
Hindu communalism can" (quoted in Frontline, January 1, 1993)
In India the nascent seeds of fascism-fundamentalism begin
with the rise of Muslim and Hindu communal politics from the decade of 1880s.
The Muslim communal politics had its own trajectory and it tormented Pakistan’s
civil society to no end, in India it is having its own negative impact. The
Hindu communal politics beginning in parallel did assume the fascist potential.
M.S. Golwalkar, the major ideologue of RSS outlined it in his book, ‘We or our
Nationhood’. This book draws heavily from the German Nazi Fascism, appreciating
most of their concepts. It upholds
racial pride, brutal methods to deal with the ‘other’ (in this case
non-Hindus), calls for adoption of Hindu culture as national culture, exhorting
people to glorify Hindu race and nation, treating others as subordinates to
Hindus, curtailing ‘other’s’ privileges and citizens rights on the lines on which
German Fascism under the leadership of Hitler did to Jews in particular.
Appreciating this Golwalkar writes, “…To keep up the purity of nation and its
culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of Semitic
races-The Jews. National pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany
has also shown how neigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having
differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good
lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by. (We or Our nationhood
Defined P. 27, Nagpur 1938)
The major formative tool of fascism is constructed
around and followed by a ‘social common sense’ directed against ‘the other’
community. This is where anti Muslim and anti Christian violence is different
from the horrendous anti Sikh violence of 1984. Muslims and Christians have
been deliberately demonized and have been ‘constructed as the ‘other’ in the
popular imagination, and so there is a silent social sanction for regular
repeated violence against them,
The RSS ideology is the Indian incarnate of
Fascism. The ultra nationalism, the ‘construction of ‘other’ (Muslim and Christian),
the concept of Akhand Bharat (most of South Asia as India), the loyalty to
Hindu nationalism in contrast to Indian nationalism are the ideological
foundations of Indian fascism. Mahatam Gandhi could see some of the symptoms of
RSS even then when he called it a ‘communal body with totalitarian outlook’. Till
the rise of Modi one wondered how can RSS inspired movement be a fascist one as
there is no charismatic leader, as fascism does require one. Modi has emerged and
constructed as such a leader post 2002. As such the fascist persona of Modi was
not in doubt to serious scholars and social scientists even before his
emergence as a big leader, as he is projected today. Ashish Nandy wrote much
before Gujarat carnage, “ More than a decade ago, when Narendra Modi was a
nobody, a small-time RSS pracharak trying to make it as a small-time BJP
functionary, I had the privilege of interviewing…it left me in no doubt that
here was a classic, clinical case of a fascist. I never use the term ‘fascist’
as a term of abuse; to me it is a diagnostic
category comprising not only one’s ideological posture but also the
personality traits and motivational patterns contextualizing the ideology.
He (Modi) had the same mix of puritanical rigidity, narrowing of emotional life, massive use of the ego defense of projection, denial and fear of his own passions combined with fantasies of violence – all set within the matrix of clear paranoid and obsessive personality traits. I still remember the cool, measured tone in which he elaborated a theory of cosmic conspiracy against India that painted every Muslim as a suspected traitor and a potential terrorist. I came out of the interview shaken and told Yagnik that, for the first time, I had met a textbook case of a fascist and a prospective killer, perhaps even a future mass murderer. (http://such.forumotion.com/
He (Modi) had the same mix of puritanical rigidity, narrowing of emotional life, massive use of the ego defense of projection, denial and fear of his own passions combined with fantasies of violence – all set within the matrix of clear paranoid and obsessive personality traits. I still remember the cool, measured tone in which he elaborated a theory of cosmic conspiracy against India that painted every Muslim as a suspected traitor and a potential terrorist. I came out of the interview shaken and told Yagnik that, for the first time, I had met a textbook case of a fascist and a prospective killer, perhaps even a future mass murderer. (http://such.forumotion.com/
In a similar way when a
German delegation visited Gujarat (April 2010), one of the members of the
delegation pointed out that he
was shocked by parallels between Germany under Hitler and Gujarat under Modi.
Incidentally in Gujarat school books Hitler has been glorified as a great
nationalist. ( http://deshgujarat.com/2010/
Can we say that Fascism is specific to Europe only and it cannot a
phenomenon in India? Fascism is essentially a phenomenon which emerges from sections
of society which are opposed to democratic polity and are out to abolish the democratic
space by projecting imaginary fears and assert a need for a strong leader to
set the things right. It harps on ultra nationalism and has aggressive attitude
towards neighboring countries and targets minorities. In that sense it can come
in any country, where the social movements are either weak and fragmented or
not vigilant about the dangers of this phenomenon. Some say, India is a very
diverse country and so fascism cannot come here? It is a good thought, and
partly it has been a factor in holding back the fascist forces in India. With
time many factors become evened out and the similar tendencies grow all around.
So it is not ruled out, especially with the rise of the mass support for such a
phenomenon. Only a concerted struggle to nurture democratic ethos, values of
pluralism and correct diagnosis of fascist forces alone can save our democracy.
0 comments:
Post a Comment