Fascism and the BJP

Subhendu Sarkar

It becomes obligatory, at times, to cite an old cliché. The present socio-political scenario in India compels one to remember that history repeats itself and in doing so serves the role of a teacher― it throws a welcome light on the contemporary events and helps negotiate and overcome an otherwise baffling crisis. Indeed, quite a few recent events in India do appear in an altogether new perspective when seen in the context of one of the darkest episodes of modern world history― Hitler’s rule in Germany. It is true, of course, that the BJP-led central government has to work within the framework of a democratic set-up and, therefore, the conditions in India and Nazi Germany cannot be identical. But there are certainly signs that are strikingly similar.

Nazism (or for that matter, fascism) resorted to a dual mechanism to consolidate itself. The repressive regime propagated lies and exerted brute force by an invidious exploitation of the state machinery, besides letting loose its rank-and-file cadres (under various organizations like SA, SS, etc.) on its political opponents. To make things clear and simple, I shall limit myself to refer to only one event that bears obvious resemblance to the present picture― the Reichstagfire (27 February 1933) and its direful consequences. The attack on the parliament building in Berlin was regarded by the Nazis as an act of incendiarism and communists were held responsible for plotting to revolt against the German government. This event was used as a pretext to strengthen Hitler’s power before the elections in March. He passed an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties (which were never reinstated during Nazi reign) and ordered mass arrests of communists, social democrats and other progressives. Nazi newspapers helped his cause by propagating the ‘news’ of insurrection and moulded public opinion which eventually isolated the communists from the masses. Five communists (including Georgi Dimitrov, a member of the Bulgarian Communist Party and head of all Comintern operations in western Europe) were arrested in connection with the Reichstag fire and were tried in the Supreme Court at Leipzig. At the end of the trial, however, only one (Marinus van der Lubbe, a half-wit and formerly a Dutch communist) was found guilty and beheaded by guillotine. The 2 rest were acquitted and sent to the then USSR (after a sustained effort of the anti-fascist forces of the world) where they were greeted as Soviet citizens with immense enthusiasm.

The communists had always believed that van der Lubbe was a part of the Nazi conspiracy ― a poor Faustus who stood before the court but the Mephistophilis behind him had disappeared. The proceedings of the trial can be regarded as a battleground of ideologies where Dimitrov had to defend himself (the Court rejected all the eight defence counsels of his choice) at all odds in a trial which was far from being fair. Dimitrov, in spite of being kept manacled in a prison known for torture, took the opportunity to expose the witnesses (including Goering and Goebbels) and the prosecutor and gave an impassioned call for a united front of all progressive forces against fascism.

However, since 1967 onwards the 1933 verdict has been overturned by several courts in Germany and van der Lubbe has been posthumously acquitted by the reason of insanity and under the general law passed in 1998 which states that whoever convicted under the Nazis is officially not guilty because the laws of Nazi Germany flouted the basic concept of justice. But all said and done the Nazis were successful at least for the moment― they had staged a drama and managed to justify their action to come down heavily on the political opponents by effective propaganda. It was an orchestrated effort to silence the voice of dissent in which agencies, both public and private took equal and active part.

Keeping in mind the Leipzig trial let us now turn, one after another, to three recent incidents that attracted much attention here in India.

Dadri Lynching

Mohammad Akhlaq

On 28 September 2015 two young men, using the local temple's public announcement system in Dadri, a small town in Uttar Pradesh, announced that the family of Mohammad Akhlaq had killed a cow and consumed beef on the occasion of Eid. This was the immediate cause why a violent Hindu mob broke into Akhlaq’s house in the middle of that night, dragged all the members of that family (including women, young and old) out into the open and assaulted 3 them. The police arrived an hour after Akhlaq had died on the spot and Danish, his son, critically injured. The family had been living in Dadri for almost seventy years but the neighbours did not even think twice before launching a brutal attack. The amicable feeling towards a neighbor was relegated to the background as the ugly head of communal hatred raised its head. The event aroused national attention and caused enormous debate. Soon it gained political overtones too when a man, the son of a local BJP leader, was arrested in connection to the case. Not only that, it was also confirmed later by the forensic experts that the meat found in the refrigerator in Akhlaq’s house was not beef but mutton. Dadri incident came to be seen as one of the many recent examples of the BJP-backed heinous design to use rumour to gain political advantage by dividing the nation along communal lines. It is part of their agenda that the Muslims (and other religious minority communities) will have to accept the diktat of the Hindutva brigade to stay in India. This goes against one of the cardinal points of the Indian ConsCtuCon ― secularism.

Rohith Vemula’s Suicide

Rohith Vemula, a Ph.D student at the central University of Hyderabad and a member of the Ambedkar Students Association (ASA), had to bear the brunt for participating in a demonstration against the death penalty for Yakub Memon (a convict in 1993 Bombay bombings) on 3 August 2015 at the campus. Following the complaint made by the students’ wing of the RSS, ABVP, to the Vice Chancellor, P. Appa Rao, that the students of the ASA were involved in “casteist” and “anti-national” activities, Rohith and four others were suspended and barred from their hostel. As a consequence of severe financial crisis Rohith (as his scholarship was also cancelled) committed suicide on 17 January 2016. The ABVP leader, Nandanam Susheel Kumar, who had taken an active role against ASA and who claimed that he was admitted to a hospital after he was roughed up by around 40 ASA members was later found to have been operated for an acute appendicitis. Besides, the role of the BJP MP from Secunderabad and the Union Minister Bandaru Dattatreya and the Union HRD Minister Smriti Irani behind the suspension of the students also came to light.

Rohit Vemula

26-year-old Rohith’s suicide sparked protests and outrage across India and gained widespread media attention as yet another case of discrimination against Dalits and low castes in India in the BJP regime. It was apprehended that the BJP was not only against the Muslims (and Christians) but also against the Dalits who fall under the general category of the Hindu community. But why is it so? One must understand that the right-wing political philosophy of the RSS-BJP strongly resembles Brahminism which gained and held supremacy only by oppressing the so-called lower castes of the Hindu population in a feudal set-up. In fact, intercaste tensions within the Hindu society were often the results of an unconscious class conflict that went on for ages. Therefore, the attempt to present a homogenized Hindu society is to ignore the dynamics of a society ruled by a powerful few. It was against such an unjust system that Bhimrao Ambedkar (and other activists both before and after him) had waged a life-long struggle. Ambedkar thought that the Hindu society was a conglomeration of castes without any binding ideological force. No wonder then that the RSS and the BJP would run an orchestrated campaign based on lies against the Ambedkarites like Rohith.

Kanhaiya and the JNU Raucous

Kanhaiya Kumar, the 29-year old President of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students' Union and a leader of the All India Students Federation (AISF), the student wing of the Communist Party of India (CPI), was arrested on the charge of sedition by the Delhi police on 12 February for raising anti-India slogans in a rally to protest the hanging of Mohammed Afzal Guru convicted for the Indian Parliament attack in 2001. The arrest was made following the complaints lodged by the National Secretary of the BJP and an MP, Maheish Girri and members of the ABVP. A nationwide hysteria was created when the BJP started branding a section of the JNU (that included both teachers and students) apologists for the independence of Kashmir (hence anti-Indians). Audio-visual clippings of the event were also played on television channels as clinching evidence for Kanhaiya and others’ anti-national ideologies. Emotions ran high as the nation was caught in a debate between the ‘nationalists’ and their opponents (who were singled out either as Muslims or communists). Demands for closing down the JNU were also raised citing it as a hotbed of sedition run on the taxpayers’ money. Kanhaiya was even beaten 5 up by some lawyers (read the BJP cadres) inside the courtroom where he was brought for trial. On 2 March 2016, however, he was granted interim bail for 6 months by the Delhi High Court on a 10,000 rupee bail bond and an undertaking that he would not "participate in any antinational activity” (though the judge had said that there were no recordings of Kumar raising anti-national slogans). Interestingly, out of the seven videos of the event sent to forensic laboratory, three crucial ones were found to be doctored including a clipping of a news channel.

This incident, in fact, has brought into focus many issues at the same time: chauvinism, suppression of dissenting voices, organized propaganda (where a section of the media joined hands with the ruling party) based on false and/or doctored reports, etc. Best efforts to commence an academic debate surrounding the topics of either nationalism in its totality or Kashmir issue and the hodgepodge trial of Afzal Guru got drowned in a momentary frenzy of blind nationalism. Of course, the BJP was behind all this. It wanted only to broaden its political base by staging this drama. And many apparently innocent Indians could not keep their cool and judge things properly.

Govind Pansare, Narendra Dabholkar, MM Kalburgi

These three incidents manifest an important characteristic of the RSS-BJP: their attitude towards the religious minorities, the Dalits and the Leftists. Add to this their treatment of the rationalists like Govind Pansare, Malleshappa Kalburgi and Narendra Dhabholkar or doctors like Saibal Jana. Depending on the state machinery and a fanatical band of cadres the Sangh brigade has launched a war on those who resist their right-wing campaign. What is equally important is their simultaneous attempt to use rumour and propaganda to mould public opinion in their favour. But it does not become a matter of discomfiture for them when a particular venture receives a jolt on account of its falsity. In fact, they will continue to make the most of the situation in order to broaden their political base among the middle-class population. And it will not be much difficult particularly when the mood of desperation is acute among the so-called educated Indians and the opposition (both ideological and political) is somewhat disarrayed.

What needs to be reiterated at the end is that this undemocratic contingent has a conscious plan to turn India into a monolithic structure decimating the diverse elements that make it so unique in the whole world. There are plenty of signs that suggest Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy or Spain may not always remain matters of distant past. And it will indeed be a living reality soon unless we stand guard and fight a relentless baOle raising the determined slogan ― “Fascism shall not pass”.

This article that was first published in Frontier [14 May, 2016, Vol 48, No. 44]

Read More

The Holy Cow

Subhendu Sarkar

The cow is now the most important politico-religious icon in India. The self-proclaimed custodians of Hinduism and their political representatives in power are desperate to impose ban on cow-slaughter and beef-eating. As a result, there have been incidents of violence not only in a relatively unknown town like Dadri but also on the floors of State Assembly. More-over, efforts are on to raise it to the status of national animal. For the right-wing Hindu nationalists, the cow is the new fulcrum of communal agenda (as it was Ram Janmabhoomi in the 1990s).

Of course, the fracas surrounding the cow has been in existence for ages. The Hindu traditionalists have considered the cow 'holy' and beef-eating a 'sin'. On the other hand, attempts have also been made to prove, on the basis of scriptural evidences, that the animal was, after all, not always sacred and beef-eating had been a regular habit among the Hindus in the past. Even men like Rammohun Roy and Swami Vivekananda came forward to argue that beef-eating and Hinduism were not always incompatible. But the issue continued to plague Hindu India as, since the nineteenth century onwards, beef-eating became a serious bone of contention between the liberals and the conservatives.

Modern scholars, however, have approached the problem in another way. They not only confined themselves to cite a plethora of literary and historical data to uncover the past but also provide logical explanations as to why the practice of beef-eating, after a certain time, became unacceptable to the Hindus. But despite such efforts not much seems to have changed as regards the issue of the 'holy cow'. The principal reason for this is, of course, a vested interest that seeks to help a few remain socially and politically powerful. In fact, it is this politics of 'identity' that has been at work since the time when the Brahmins discouraged eating beef. It is also known as communalism.

The early Aryans who came to India were semi-nomadic people with a dominantly pastoral economy. Cattle were the chief form of wealth for which they even fought inter-tribal wars. It is, therefore, natural that cattle (the most valued possession) would be sacrificed to propitiate supernatural powers. The Rigveda abounds in references to the flesh of animals (including the cow) being offered to various gods. This continued even during later Vedic centuries. Not only that, killing of the cow and eating its flesh on occasions like birth, upanayana (initiation ceremony), marriage, sraddha (rites for the ancestors) and entertaining guests (Panini uses the term yoghna for a guest) were quite regular in ancient times. The much-respected priests and sages (most notably Yajnavalkya) were also fond of beef. The Brahmanical lawgivers like Manu, Brihaspati and Parashara found killing of the cow and beef-eating a minor sin at the most, not major (upapataka, not mahapataka). Besides, the medical treatises of Caraka (first-second century) and Susruta (third-fourth century) unequivocally prescribe the flesh of the cow and other animals to cure various ailments. Epics like the Mahabharata and the Ramayana too bear testimony to the fact that eating beef was widespread among the Brahmins.

Dietary preferences of the later Vedic people, however, gradually changed with time. The growing importance of agriculture (agrarian economy gained predominance with the diffusion of iron technology in particular) necessitated protection of cattle. Therefore, recommendations against animal sacrifice were laid down in the later scriptures. Further, the new social order that thrived on the varna system created a class-divided society from which the Brahmins and the kshatriyas benefited at the cost of the vaisyas and the shudras. Again, deforestation and the subjugation of the indigenous tribes formed the basis of the early kingdoms. It is natural that opposition to such a system would become inevitable.

Jainism and Buddhism advocated an ideology which looked back to the days of tribal collectives when equality prevailed among the brethren and private property was non-existent. Therefore, the thrust on asceticism and non-injury (ahimsa) of all kinds. The new economic reality (plough agriculture and animal husbandry) which created surplus like never before and the growing popularity of an ideology that threatened the yajna-centric Vedic religion forced the Brahmins to think about a new strategy. In order to establish supremacy over Buddhism which had achieved state recognition by the time and regain their lost power and prestige both in royal court and among the masses, the Brahmins initiated image worship and building temples as an answer to building stupas and setting up images of the Buddha. Moreover, to score yet another point over Buddhism, Brahmanism began to discourage the yajna as a form of worship and the sacrifice of the cow and promote vegetarianism. Advocating the sacredness of the cow and its products (pancagavya) was also a part of this stratagem.

But the truth is that in spite of the Brahmanical ruling on the pardonable offense of cow-killing and beef-eating such practices continued till about the twelfth century. Buddhism, being more practical than Jainism, accommodated dietary practices of the regions to which it spread. The so-called Untouchables (Dalits) among the Hindus too carried on eating flesh of the dead cow (they were the worst victims of the class-divided Hindu society).

However, the need to establish 'Hindu identity' became all the more important with the advent and spread of Islam since the medieval times. But it was particularly during the British period that it consolidated as a socio-political force. Many Brahmanical dictums were re-introduced as a part of the Hindu revivalist programme. This, at the same time, created a sharp division among the conservatives and the liberals. Brought up on the foundations of Western liberalism and guided by rationalism, it was first the intelligentsia of Bengal who revolted against such senselessness that came to pass for Hinduism. The initial reaction of adopting Christianity gradually gave way to an approach towards social and religious reforms which later culminated into secular nationalist ideology. Of course, Hindu elements were initially exploited to rouse and spread nationalist ideology which somehow alienated the Muslims who, as a result, played into the hands of the British imperialists who were eager to divide and rule. It was indeed difficult for many patriots to anticipate, in the face of the need of the hour, the future course of Indian politics. The divisive forces of communal politics (both Hindu and Muslim) would remain a permanent bane of India, even after the Partition.

But why would there be any need to re-assert 'Hindu identity' now? What purpose would it serve to the ruling party and its stooges? It is a fact that they have secured power through a mathematical miracle by getting a little more than thirty percent of the total votes cast. For the Hindutva forces to stay secured in power and to bring the rest of the Hindu population under its sway they have no option but to unabashedly play the communal card.

And thanks to the ignorance of the Indian masses, the cow is certainly the icon they are clinging on to for smooth sailing. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) [or its earlier avatar Jan Sangh] had always banked on the communal ideology. And the post-1992 success has certainly strengthened their belief. The point is: shall these Hindutva people be given a free rein to make India a Hindu rashtra by radically altering the essence of the Constitution? Will the progressive forces that have fought for long against obscurantism and bigotry to help make India a unique country whose basis is plurality be cowed into silence? But, every fascist epoch had to end. The history has always favoured the progressives.

Works Cited

Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad. Religion and Society. Delhi: Aakar, 2013

Jha, D N, The Myth of the Holy Cow. New Delhi: Navayana, 2015

Early India. A Concise History (From the Beginning to the Twelfth Century). New Delhi: Manohar, 2014

Kosambi, Dharmananda, Bhagaban Buddha (in Bangla). New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 2001

Sharma, R S, Material Culture and Social Formations in Ancient India (in Bangla). Trans. Gautam Niyogi. Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 1998.

This essay was first published in Frontier [Vol. 48, No. 21, Nov 29 - Dec 5, 2015] and is reproduced here with the permission of the author.

Read More

Book Review: Carvaka Philosophy - A New Look

Subhendu Sarkar

The Carvaka/Lokayata has a special place in the history of Indian philosophy. Contending against the pro-Vedic Brahminical and the non-Vedic Buddhist and Jain schools, the Carvaka flouted the belief in after-life and afterworld and advocated an uncompromising materialist philosophy in ancient India. But as the most of the material relating to the Carvaka is lost, the reconstruction of the fundamental principles has been done on the basis of whatever little is found in the works of its opponents and the extracts quoted by them. The most recent addition to the list of systematic study on the Carvaka has been attempted by Ramkrishna Bhattacharya.*

Working on the various aspects of the Carvaka since 1995, Bhatta-charya has succeeded in improving on the findings of the earlier scholars. He has not only disproved certain popular notions about the Carvaka but also refuted some claims made by various scholars. Besides, Bhattacharya throws light on some entirely new areas.

The book is a collection of twenty three more or less self-complete articles dealing with different aspects of the Carvaka. Bhattacharya charts the history of pre-Carvaka materialist philosophy in India (in chapters II and III) by citing Ajit Kesakambalin, a senior contemporary of the Buddha and Mahavira, and other Buddhist, Jain and Brahminical sources. The five commentators (Aviddhar-karna, Bhavivikta Kambalasvatara, Purandara and Udbhatabhatta) of the Carvakasutra who flourished before the eighth century BCE and their works are discussed in some detail in chapter V. Moreover, Bhattacharya discards some of the Carvaka fragments offered by the earlier scholars and discovers some new aphorisms, verses and other fragments in chapter VI.

It has been a popular belief regarding the Carvaka-s that they considered sense-experience as the only means of right knowledge. Frauwallner thought that there had been a deviation from this ‘orthodoxy’ in the works of the later materialists like Purandara and others. Bhattacharya disagrees with Frauwallner on this point and shows in chapter IV that Purandara’s admittance of ‘inference as is well-known in the world’ is not a ‘revisionist’ approach but only an expiation on the original Carvaka view regarding the means of right knowledge. In fact, what is advocated is that the limited validity of inference is not doubted by the Carvaka-s. However, the Carvaka-s did not accept inferences that transgress the worldly way in order to prove the existence of the imperishable soul, its transmigration after the death of a person, God, heaven and hell, the omniscient being, etc.

As for the two common notions regarding the Carvaka-s that they preached sensual gratification as the summum bonum of life and that pleasure alone is the end of life, Bhattacharya shows that they are false charges leveled against the Carvaka-s by their opponents with an intention to make the doctrine appear morally reprehensible. In fact, this has been the most common practice against all materialists, past and present. Epicurus too had to suffer similar charges. The Carvaka-s did say that there is no pleasure beyond this world. But it does not necessarily mean that they were hedonists. Bhattacharya aptly demonstrates in chapter XIX how the verses were distorted and then attributed to the Carvaka-s. Bhattacharya does not only disprove certain verses ascribed to the Carvaka; he also examines, for the first time, several hitherto unexploited sources (for example, Perso-Arabic in chapter XXII) to study the references made to the Carvaka.

No doubt, Bhattacharya's book is an important contribution to the study of the relentless materialist philosophy of ancient India.

*Studies on the Carvaka/ Lokayata

Firenzie : Societa Editrice Fiorentina, 2009. pp. 251. 28 Pound. (Indian edition : New Delhi: Manohar Publishers and Distributors, 2010, Anthem Press India, 2012)

This review first appeared in Frontier, Vol.42, No.47, June 6-12, 2010, p.14-15

Read More