Tuesday 27 November 2018
कितनी खतरनाक हो सकती है BSP के बाद की दलित राजनीति
दलित राजनीति पर लल्नटॉप में प्रकाशित मेरा लेख.
उत्तर प्रदेश विधानसभा चुनाव परिणाम इतने
अप्रत्याशित होंगे, किसी ने सोचा नहीं था. हालांकि, ज्यादातर
लोगों को ये समझ आ रहा था कि इस चुनाव में मायावती की बहुजन समाज पार्टी (बसपा)
बहुमत की सरकार बनाने नहीं जा रही है. साथ ही, अब ये भी साफ
होता नजर आ रहा है कि बसपा एक हाशिए पर जाती हुई पार्टी है. इसके कई कारण हैं. हम
इन कारणों की चर्चा तो करेंगे ही, साथ ही ये जानने की कोशिश भी करेंगे कि
अगर बसपा हाशिए पर गई, तो किस तरह की दलित राजनीति उभर कर आएगी और
उसका भारतीय राजनीति पर क्या असर पड़ेगा.
20वीं सदी के दूसरे दशक में डॉ. अंबेडकर ने
कांग्रेस के अभिजनवादी नेतृत्व के खिलाफ हाशिए के लोगों को संगठित किया और उन्हें
राष्ट्रीय आंदोलन से जोड़ा. ये दलित चेतना और सैकड़ों सालों की बंदिश से मुक्ति के
लिए एक अच्छी शुरुआत थी. डॉ. अंबेडकर ने पार्टी निर्माण की बात कही, लेकिन
उसे संगठित स्वरूप देने से पहले चले गए.
रिपब्लिकन पार्टी ऑफ इंडिया का गठन हुआ,
लेकिन
वो कुछ बेहतर नहीं कर पाई. महाराष्ट्र और यूपी की कुछ पॉकेट्स के अलावा वो कहीं
परिणाम नहीं ला पाई. दलित वोट कांग्रेस को ही पड़ते रहे. लेकिन, यहां
दलित पैट्रन (मालिक) नहीं थे, बल्कि क्लाइंट मात्र थे, जहां
वो खुद के लिए कुछ नहीं कर सकते थे, बल्कि कांग्रेसी नेतृत्व के मोहताज़ भर
थे. इस 50 साल के कांग्रेसी पैट्रन-क्लाइंट संबंध में मात्र एक नेता दिखाई दिए,
जो
ऊपर तक आए. वो थे बाबू जगजीवन राम.
1960 के दशक के प्रथम लोकतांत्रिक उभार का लाभ
पिछड़ी जातियों को मिला और कई नेता उभरकर सामने आए. ये नेता राज्यों के
मुख्यमंत्री बने, राष्ट्रीय फलक पर चमके और सबसे बड़ी बात,
उत्तर
भारत की विधानसभाओं में इनकी संख्या एकदम से बढ़ गई. हरित क्रांति, कांग्रेस
से निराशा और गांधी-नेहरू की विरासत का कमजोर होना इसके बड़े कारण थे. ये अलग
राजनीतिक संस्कृति से निकले लोग थे, जिन्होंने कभी कांग्रेसी राजनीति नहीं
की थी. इसीलिए इन्हें इंदिरा गांधी का जबरदस्त विरोध करने में कोई दिक्कत नहीं हुई.
ये महज कोई संयोग नहीं था कि गुजरात के छात्र आंदोलन ने बिहार में आकर अपना स्वरूप
प्राप्त किया.
इन सबके बीच दलित राजनीति का कोई नामलेवा नहीं
था, जबकि उनके बीच सामाजिक सुधार आंदोलन की एक पूरी परंपरा काम कर रही थी,
जो
जातीय या राष्ट्रीय चेतना के लिए बहुत जरूरी होती है. ठक्कर बापा, महात्मा
ज्योतिबा फुले और डॉ अंबेडकर ने जिस तरह दलित और वंचित समाज की वकालत की, वैसी
पिछले 200 साल में किसी भी राष्ट्रीय नेता ने किसी भी समाज के लिए नहीं की.
रिपब्लिकन प्रयोग फेल हो चुका था, लेकिन
जातीय चेतना, शिक्षा के प्रसार और आरक्षण के लाभ के कारण
दलित समाज में एक बड़ा वर्ग खड़ा हुआ, जो अपनी पहचान तलाश कर रहा था. जिसे
आजादी के बाद से ही कसमसाहट थी, जो अब बड़ा रूप ले रही थी. इतने लंबे
समय तक दबी रही ये दलित जातीय चेतना 1970 और 1980 के दशक में दो
रूपों में बाहर आती दिखी.
एक था दलित पैंथर और दूसरा कांशीराम के नेतृत्व
वाला बहुजन प्रयोग. दोनों के ही तेवर आक्रामक थे, जो लाजिमी भी
था. इतने लंबे समय से दबी चेतना दरअसल ऐसे ही बाहर आती है. अमेरिका के ब्लैक पैंथर
आंदोलन से प्रभावित दलित पैंथर कर्नाटक और महाराष्ट्र में सक्रिय हुआ, जिसकी
आक्रामकता हिंसक भी हो जाती थी और कई बार लोकतांत्रिक मूल्यों की सीमाएं लांघ जाती
थी. नामदेव धसाल और अर्जुन डांगले जैसे कई नेता और लेखक इसी आंदोलन की उपज थे,
जिनके
शब्द अगड़ी जातियों को नश्तर की तरह चुभते थे, लेकिन दलित
जातियों के लिए मरहम का काम करते थे.
दूसरी तरफ कांशीराम ने दलित कर्मचारियों को
संगठित करने का बड़ा काम किया और 1978 में बामसेफ का गठन किया, जो
दलितों, बहुजनों और वंचित समाज के मुद्दों को उठाने वाला ट्रेड यूनियन था. 1982
में कांशीराम ने डीएस4 (दलित, शोषित संघर्ष समाज समिति) और 1984
में बसपा का गठन किया. बसपा ने 1980 के दशक से चुनाव लड़ना शुरू किया और 1993
में सबसे बड़े प्रदेश में सत्ताधारी गठबंधन का हिस्सा बनी.
1995 में बसपा महासचिव मायावती, जो
खुद दलित समाज से आती हैं, उत्तर प्रदेश की मुख्यमंत्री बनीं.
बसपा ने यूपी के साथ-साथ बिहार, मध्य प्रदेश और राजस्थान की कुछ सीटों
पर भी जीत हासिल की. पिछले बीस सालों में लोकसभा चुनावों में सभी सीटों पर चुनाव
लड़कर करीब 5% मत हासिल किया. कांशीराम के लिए चुनाव लड़ना
राजनीतिक-सांस्कृतिकरण का एक बड़ा माध्यम था, जिससे दलित जनता
पब्लिक स्फियर का हिस्सा बनती थी.
Monday 26 November 2018
पाकिस्तान का सच सामने लाने की रणनीति बनाए भारत
कुलभूषण जाधव के मामले में पाकिस्तान ने एक और
विडियो जारी किया है, जिसमें जाधव पाकिस्तान के प्रशासन का धन्यवाद
कर रहे हैं और भारतीय राजनयिक की आलोचना कर रहे हैं। ऐसा कैसे संभव है कि कुलभूषण
जाधव जैसे व्यापारी जिसे पाकिस्तान ने मौत की सजा सुना दी हो वह उनकी आवभगत की
तारीफ करे। ऐसा ही विडियो पाकिस्तान पहले भी जारी कर चुका है, जिसमें
कुलभूषण अपने को भारतीय नौसेना का कमांडर बता रहे हैं। भारतीय विदेश मंत्रालय ने
विडियो जारी किये जाने की इस घटना को सामान्य बात बताया है। उनके अनुसार पाकिस्तान
से इससे ज्यादा की उम्मीद नहीं की जा सकती। उसने दबाव बनाकर कुलभूषण से ऐसा करवाया
होगा।
भारत में आतंकी गतिविधियों को अंजाम देने के
लिए पाकिस्तान लंबे समय से अपने यहां आतंकियों को पनाह और ट्रेनिंग देता आ रहा है।
आतंकवाद का जो बीज पाकिस्तान ने सालों पहले बोया अब वह उसी पर भारी पड़ रहा है।
आतंकवाद की इस दोधारी तलवार ने पाकिस्तान को बुरी तरह से खोखला करना शुरू कर दिया
है। पाकिस्तान अब अपने देश में फैल रहे आतंकवाद के लिए भारत को जिम्मेदार ठहराने
की कोशिश कर रहा है। यह अपने आप में एक बेबुनियाद बात है। कुलभूषण जाधव का मामला
भी इसी कोशिश का एक हिस्सा है, जिसमें पाकिस्तान अपनी गलतियों को
छुपाने के लिए भारत पर पाकिस्तान को अस्थिर करने का आरोप लगा रहा है।
ऐसा लंबे समय से कहा जाता है कि पाकिस्तान को
वहां की लोकतांत्रिक सरकार नहीं बल्कि अल्लाह, आर्मी और
अमेरिका चलाते हैं। अपने आपको लगातार प्रांसगिक बनाए रखने के लिए आर्मी और वहां की
खुफिया एजेंसी आईएसआई ने एक स्थायी दुश्मन खोज रखा है जिसका नाम है: भारत। आर्मी
और आईएसआई देश की कट्टरपंथी ताकतों को इस्लाम के नाम पर अपने साथ लाते हैं और उनके
द्वारा आतंकी संगठन बनाकर भारत को अस्थिर करने की साजिश रचते हैं लेकिन पिछले कुछ
सालों में इन इस्लामिक संगठनों को अरब देशों से भी एक खास तरह का इस्लाम फैलाने के
नाम पर पैसा मिला और ये काफी ताककवर हो गए। अब हालत यह हो गई है कि इन्होंने भी
पाकिस्तान पर राज करने के मंसूबे पाल लिए हैं। इन्होंने अब अपने राजनीतिक संगठन भी
बना लिए हैं और आने वाले समय में चुनाव में हिस्सा लेने का ऐलान कर दिया है। कुछ
दिन पहले ही जमात-उत-दावा आतंकी संगठन के मुखिया हाफिज सईद ने भी अपनी पार्टी के
चुनाव लड़ने की घोषणा की है। ये आतंकी संगठन अपने आप में इतने ताकतवर हो गए हैं कि
जब-तब अपनी ताकत का एहसास पाकिस्तान की सेना, आईएसआई और सरकार
को कराते रहते हैं। कट्टरपंथी इस्लाम की जड़ें पाकिस्तान में काफी नीचे तक पहुंच
गईं हैं, जिसकी वजह से इन संगठनों को काफी जन-समर्थन भी मिल जाता है। अब इन
सभी समस्याओं के लिए पाकिस्तान कुलभूषण जाधव जैसे सामान्य लोगों को गिरफ्तार करके
भारत को जिम्मेदार ठहराने का प्रयास करता है।
यह सिर्फ कुलभूषण जाधव मामले की बात नहीं है,
इससे
पहले सरबजीत सिंह के मामले में हमने देखा कि कैसे उन्हें पाकिस्तान ने पहले
प्रताड़ित किया और फिर मार दिया। इसी तरह के मामलों में कई भारतीयों को
अफगानिस्तान, ईरान और भारत की सीमा से अगवा किया गया है और
उन्हें भारतीय खुफिया एजेंसी का एजेंट करार दे दिया गया और उन पर आतंकी गतिविधियों
में शामिल होने का आरोप लगाकर मौत की सजा सुना दी गई है। इनमें से किसी भी मामले
की चार्जशीट पेश नहीं हुई और सारी कार्यवाही सैन्य अदालत में होती है जबकि इन
लोगों के भारतीय सेना में होने के कोई प्रमाण पाकिस्तान के पास नहीं होते। हालांकि
यह अतंरराष्ट्रीय समझौते का उल्लंघन है, जिसके तहत किसी आम नागरिक पर सैन्य
अदालत में केस नहीं चला सकते। यहां पर बताते चलें कि कुलभूषण जाधव भी अब भारतीय
नौसेना में काम नहीं करते और अपने व्यापार के सिलसिले में ईरान गये थे, जहां
ईरान सीमा पर उनको पकड़ा गया लेकिन उनपर भी पाकिस्तान की सैन्य अदालत में मामला
चला और उन्हें मौत की सजा सुना दी गई। भारतीय नागरिक पर इस तरह मुकदमा चलने पर
पाकिस्तान में भारत के उच्चायोग ने 13 बार चार्जशीट मांगी लेकिन अभी तक
उन्हें चार्जशीट की कॉपी उपलब्ध नहीं कराई गई है।
कोविंद अगर गुमनाम हैं, तो जिम्मेदार कौन है?
राष्ट्रपति चुनाव पर नवभारत टाइम्स में प्रकाशित मेरा लेख.
राष्ट्रपति चुनाव की तस्वीर साफ हो चुकी है। एक
तरफ बीजेपी और एनडीए ने बिहार के राज्यपाल और पूर्व राज्यसभा सांसद रामनाथ कोविंद
को अपना उम्मीदवार घोषित किया है तो दूसरी तरफ कांग्रेस ने 17
राजनीतिक दलों का साथ लेते हुए पूर्व लोकसभा अध्यक्ष मीरा कुमार को आगे किया है।
जब मीरा कुमार प्रत्याशी घोषित हुईं तो किसी को पूछना नहीं पड़ा कि दरअसल मीरा
कुमार कौन हैं, क्योंकि इनके पिता इस देश के उपप्रधानमंत्री रह
चुके हैं। वह खुद आईएफएस अधिकारी रही हैं, लोकसभा सांसद रही हैं, केंद्र
में मंत्री रहीं और पिछली सरकार के कार्यकाल के दौरान लोकसभा में स्पीकर थीं। जीवन
में बहुत कुछ उन्हें विरासत में ही मिला। उन तमाम चीजों के लिए उन्हें कोई संघर्ष
नहीं करना पड़ा, जिसके लिए उस समुदाय को जान की बाजी तक लगा
देनी पड़ती है, जिसका वह प्रतिनिधित्व करती हैं।
यह कहना अतिशयोक्ति नहीं होगी कि मीरा कुमार
कांग्रेस की सामंतवादी राजनीति का ही हिस्सा हैं और वह देश की पहली इलीट दलित
राजनीतिज्ञ हैं। हमें सोचना होगा कि क्या ऐसे अभिजनवादी को देश का राष्ट्रपति होना
चाहिए।
जब रामनाथ कोविंद प्रत्याशी घोषित हुए तो बंगाल
की मुख्यमंत्री ममता बनर्जी ने सवाल उठाए कि आखिर ये कौन हैं? ऐसा
करने वाली वह अकेली नहीं थीं। सोशल मीडिया पर कई लोगों ने कहा कि वह (कोविंद)
राजनीतिक रूप से कमतर हैं, सामाजिक पहचान ज्यादा नहीं हैं। कई ने
उनके बारे में सुना नहीं था। कई लोगों ने कहा कि बीजेपी ने कोविंद पर दांव लगाकर
बस दलित कार्ड भर खेला है।
अब हम सब जान चुके हैं कि रामनाथ कोविंद बिहार
के राज्यपाल हैं। दो बार के राज्यसभा सांसद रह चुके कोविंद पहले उच्चतम न्यायालय
में वकालत करते थे और पूर्व प्रधानमंत्री मोरारजी देसाई के सहयोगी रह चुके हैं। वह
पहले आईआईएम कोलकाता के बोर्ड के सदस्य रह चुके हैं और संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ में
भारत का प्रतिनिधित्व कर चुके हैं। आजकल वो अखिल भारतीय कोली समाज के अध्यक्ष भी
हैं, जिसके अपने सरोकार होते हैं जो मीडिया-सोशल मीडिया के लोगों को
ज्यादातर नहीं दिखते या वो देखना नहीं चाहते। यहां सवाल यह उठता है कि इतना सक्रिय
राजनीतिक और सामाजिक जीवन होने के बावजूद वो हमें दिखाई क्यों नहीं दिए या ऐसे
कहें कि हमारी मीडिया ने उन्हें क्यों नहीं दिखाया?
अब जब कोविंद राष्ट्रपति पद के उम्मीदवार बन गए
हैं तो कई सामाजिक-राजनीतिक चिंतकों और पत्रकारों ने यह सवाल उठाया है। वरिष्ठ
पत्रकार और राज्यसभा सांसद स्वपन दासगुप्ता ने अपने ट्विटर हैंडल पर लिखा कि
कोविंद के बारे मे सवाल पूछना हमारी राजनीतिक पत्रकारिता की हालत बयां करता है जो
बाबा लोग और सूत्रों पर पूरी तरह आधारित है। मैंने पहले नहीं बताया कि रामनाथ
कोविंद 2010 में बीजेपी के प्रवक्ता भी रह चुके हैं,
जहां
वो बीजेपी के मीडिया रूम में अपनी टिप्पणी, साक्षात्कार और
बाइट देने के लिए उपस्थित रहते थे। लेकिन एक प्रवक्ता के रूप में हमने उनके बारे
में बहुत कम सुना और देखा। वह पार्टी की आवाज के रूम में मौजूद थे लेकिन उनकी आवाज
बहुतों के लिए मायने नहीं रखती थी।
शायद उस दौर के बीजेपी कवर करने वाले बहुत से
पत्रकार उनकी बाइट लेना उचित नहीं समझते थे। वरिष्ठ पत्रकार नितिन गोखले ने ट्विटर
पर लिखा कि हमारे न्यूज चैनल के व्यवसाय में पैनलिस्टों के लिए एक अलिखित
पदानुक्रम निर्धारित है, जिसे आप नस्लीय या जातीय भेद कह सकते
हैं लेकिन यही सच्चाई है। उस समय में मीडिया में कोविंद बिल्कुल ही कम दिखे जब
उन्हें दिखना चाहिए था। शायद मीडियाकर्मियों को वह अपमार्केट और दूसरे प्रवक्ताओं
जैसे नहीं लगते थे। पत्रकार शायद खुद ही राय बना लेते थे कि टीवी की जनता इन्हें
देखने और सुनने में रुचि नहीं लेगी। उस समय रिपोर्टिंग कर चुके एक पत्रकार ने बहुत
ही सटीक ढंग से लिखा कि अपने शक्तिशाली माइकों के साथ पत्रकार सारा दिन राजीव
प्रताप रूडी, प्रकाश जावड़ेकर और रविशंकर प्रसाद का इंतजार
करते रहते थे लेकिन कोविंद की बाइट नहीं लेते थे। वह आगे लिखते हैं कि ऐसा नहीं कि
सारी गलती पत्रकारों की ही थी। मीडिया दफ्तरों में बैठे आका तय करते थे कि किसकी
बाइट लेनी है और किसे स्टूडियो में बैठाना है। ऐसे समय में जब जब कोई भी उपलब्ध
नहीं होता था तब भी कोविंद की बाइट लेने से इनकार कर दिया जाता था।
मोदी के दौर की फिल्म है बाहुबली
फिल्म बाहुबली पर नवभारत टाइम्स में प्रकाशित
मेरा लेख.
आंकड़े बता रहे हैं कि बाहुबली भारतीय फिल्म
इतिहास की सबसे बड़ी फिल्म बन चुकी है। फिल्म को रिलीज हुए दस दिन नहीं हुए और 1000
करोड़ रुपए का कोरबार कर अब तक के सारे रेकॉर्ड तोड़ चुकी है और आने वाले दिनों
में नए प्रतिमान गढ़ेगी। ऐसे समय में सोचना चाहिए कि इस फिल्म ने ऐसा क्या बताने,
दिखाने
की कोशिश की गई जो अब तक की फिल्में नहीं कर पा रही थीं।
बाहुबली एक वैभवशाली, गौरवशाली अतीत
के भारतीय राज्य और समाज का चित्रण करती है जो किसी कल्पना से कम नहीं लगता। ऐसा
कहा जाता है कि जिसकी कल्पना की जा सकती है, उसे पाया भी जा
सकता है। यह फिल्म हमारे सामने एक ऐसी आदर्श व्यवस्था प्रस्तुत करती है और साथ ही
यह भी बताने की कोशिश करती है कि ऐसा आदर्श समाज, राज्य, नायक
और प्रजा इस धरती पर पहले भी हुए हैं। लोगों में एक विश्वास भरती है कि हम भी कुछ
कर सकते हैं। आम लोगों के बीच में पला बढ़ा नायक धर्म की स्थापना करता है और सत्य
के लिए संघर्ष करता है।
वैसे तो हर समाज को एक नायक की तलाश रहती है
लेकिन एक ऐसा समाज जिसके पास बताने के लिए 5000 साल के गौरव की
कहानी हो, उसे हमेशा यह जानने की उत्सुकता रहती है कि उसके अलग-अलग दौर का नायक
कैसा था और उसका आज का नायक कैसा होगा।
वैसे कई फिल्म रिव्यू पढ़कर ऐसा लगा कि कुछ
लोगों को बाहुबली फिल्म अजीब लगी। यह हमारी माया नगरी में होना स्वाभाविक भी है
क्योंकि यहां सीरियल किसर और पॉर्न स्टार को हमारे ऊपर नायक और नायिका के रूप में
थोपा जाता है जिनकी कहानियों का कथानक उस काली कोठरी से गुजरने जैसा होता है
जिसमें आपका जिस्म और मन दोनों के काले होने के निकलने की संभावना बहुत बढ़ जाती
है लेकिन डार्क और रियलिस्टिक सिनेमा के नाम पर आपके सामने फूहड़ता परोस दी जाती
है।
‘दिए हुए वचन के लिए…सत्य और न्याय
के लिए…धर्म स्थापना के लिए…किसी के भी विरुद्ध जाना पड़े, वो
चाहे परमात्मा ही क्यों न हो…तो भयभीत ना हो…यही धर्म है’-
आज
के दौर में जब संप्रेषण के सबसे प्रभावी माध्यम से यह संवाद डॉल्बी डिजिटल में
गूंजता है तो हर भारतीय के सामने एक आदर्श प्रस्तुत होता है। समाज के बीच से निकला
नायक अपनी मां, प्रेमिका, जनता और राज्य
के लिए कैसे न्यायोचित, तर्कसंगत और धर्मनिष्ठ भूमिका निभाता है ये
हमें इस फिल्म से पता चलता है।
क्या आंबेडकर राष्ट्रवाद के खिलाफ थे?
डॉ भीमराव अंबेडकर और राष्ट्रवाद पर नवभारत टाइम्स में प्रकाशित मेरा लेख.
भारत रत्न डॉ. भीम राव आंबेडकर आज के दौर में
भारत के सबसे महान नेता, विचार और सामाजिक दार्शनिक के रूप में
उभर कर आए हैं। उनके जन्मदिवस की 125 वर्षगांठ उनके जन्मशताब्दी वर्ष से अधिक
हर्षोल्लास के साथ मनाई गई। एक बड़ी पत्रिका ने उन्हें आधुनिक भारत का महानतम नेता
बताया। इस तरह से कहा जा सकता है कि आंबेडकर के विचार वर्तमान दौर के विमर्श में
और अधिक प्रासंगिक होते जा रहे हैं।
1947 से पहले स्वतंत्रता ही देश का मुख्य स्वर
था और साथ में कई अलग-अलग स्वर भी थे। सबसे प्रभावशाली स्वर कांग्रेस का था जो
अंग्रेज उपनिवेशवादियों से देश को आजाद कराना चाहते थे। एक स्वर राष्ट्रीय
स्वयंसेवक संघ का भी था जो तब तक बहुत कमजोर था और भारत के पुनर्निमाण की बात कर
रहा था। उनका मानना था कि भारत के सामाजिक और सांस्कृतिक संस्थाओं को मजबूत करके
ही देश का पुनरुद्धार किया जा सकता है।
इसी दौर में आंबेडकर भी एक मजबूत स्वर के रूप
में उभरे। उन्होंने सामाजिक असमानता और छुआछुत से आजादी की बात कही। इसे
राष्ट्रवाद का सबाल्टर्न रूप कह सकते हैं जिसमें नीचे से आवाजें उठती हैं और जो
समाज के सबसे कमजोर, वंचित और शोषित वर्ग की बात करता है जो
औपनिवेशक भारत के सामाजिक जीवन में कहीं हिस्सा नहीं ले रहा था। बाबा साहब आंबेडकर
इन 6 करोड़ लोगों के प्रतिनिधि बन गए। समाज के इस वर्ग की मुक्ति के बिना भारत का
स्वतंत्रता आंदोलन पूर्ण नहीं था। 20वीं सदी के भारत की आजादी का आंदोलन सिर्फ
अंग्रेजों से राजनीतिक शक्ति हासिल करना नहीं था बल्कि भारत को रूढ़िवादी परंपराओं
और संस्थाओं से मुक्ति दिलाकर एक आधुनिक राष्ट्र बनाना भी था।
आंबेडकर के प्रयासों के कारण ही ये विचार
विकसित हुआ कि हमें आंतरिक और बाहरी गुलामी से स्वतंत्रता पानी है। इसके
परिणामस्वरूप हमारे राष्ट्रवादी आंदोलन को आंतरिक मजबूत से किया और उसका सामाजिक
आधार फैलाया।
आंबेडकर राष्टवाद के खिलाफ नहीं थे लेकिन
कांग्रेस के राष्ट्रवाद के खिलाफ थे जो भारत को अंग्रजों से आजाद करने की बात तो
करता था लेकिन ब्राह्मणवादी शोषण पर चुप था जिसके कारण करोड़ों लोग सैकड़ों सालों
से शोषण का शिकार थे। आंबेडकर के दबाव में ही कांग्रेस ने वंचित वर्ग की समस्याओं
का राजनीतिक स्तर पर संज्ञान लिया जिससे अधिक से अधिक लोग आजादी के आंदोलन से
जुड़ने लगे।
शुरुआत से ही आधुनिक भारतीय राष्ट्रवाद की
प्रवृत्ति उच्चवर्ग (ऊंची जाति) से प्रभावित थी जिसमें उसी वर्ग के लोगों के हित
की बात की जाती थी। इसलिए जब इन ‘राष्ट्रवादी’ नेताओं ने
राष्ट्रीय हितों की बात कही तो बस अपने वर्गीय हितों की बात कही। इस प्रवृत्ति को
पंडित नेहरू ने अपनी किताब डिस्कवरी ऑफ इंडिया में इन शब्दों में देखा जा सकता है,
दर्शन
और धर्म, इतिहास और परंपरा, सामाजिक तानेबाने और रीतिरिवाज के
मिश्रण से ही भारतीय जनजीवन लगभग सभी हिस्से बनकर तैयार होते हैं जिसे ब्राह्मणवाद
या हिंदू कहा जा सकता है और यही भारतीय राष्ट्रवाद का प्रतीक बन गया है।
Sunday 25 November 2018
Atal Bihari Vajpayee's 93rd birthday: The man who brought governance and development into political agenda
I wrote this article on the 93 birth anniversary of Vajpayee for Firstpost.
You can read a version of the article below:
You can read a version of the article below:
Governments come and go and parties are born and disappear.
Above it all, the country must stay shining, its democracy immortal. Former
prime minster Atal Bihari Vajpayee said this while speaking at the Confidence
Motion in Parliament on 28 May, 1996. The government that was formed that day
ran for only thirteen days as he was not ready for horse-trading of MPs.
In the course of his long political journey, Vajpayee's
personal integrity did not receive a single stain and his political chastity
and credibility remained impeccable. Better known as Atalji, he could easily
make space among people through his mild manners, gentle humour and poetic
lilt. After Jawaharlal Nehru, he is the only Indian political leader under
whose direction a party won three general elections in a row.
Vajpayee was conferred the Padma Vibhushan in 1992 and in
1994 he was named the best parliamentarian. At the BJP convention in November,
1995, he was declared the prime ministerial candidate for the upcoming Lok
Sabha polls. In 1996, BJP emerged as the single largest party and Vajpayee took
oath as the prime minister. This government , however, did not last long. In
his historical speech in Parliament during the floor test he said that he will
not touch corruption even with a kitchen tong (chimta). The government fell one
by one.
Politics of Governance
The six years during which Vajpayee led the country,
redefined Indian politics. BJP contested the elections with the slogan of ‘Able
leadership, Stable Government’ and Vajpayee gave the country a much-needed
stable government.
During his term as the prime minster, Vajpayee took several
new initiatives. In 1998, showing great political dynamism and gusto, he
green-signalled the nuclear tests that made India a full nuclear power. The USA
and other countries put India under sanctions which failed to have an impact.
Within one-and-a-half year, first President Bill Clinton and then other world
leaders visited India and signed partnership agreements. For the first time
India was beginning to make its foray as an emerging world power.
The reforms pushed by the Vajpayee government, improved the
country's economic growth rate which reached 6-7 percent and the benefits of
this percolated to the grassroots. Employment was generated, record foreign
investment was registered and infrastructure improved like never before. India
emerged as an IT super power in the world. People felt development work around
them.
Vajpayee started an ambitious project to connect four ends
of India with a four-lane road. It was a herculean task given the sheer volume
of the project. The Golden Quadrilateral project started to became a reality
with an average of 15-km road being laid each day. This project helped in
putting economy on growth track. Another related project was the Prime Minster
Gram Sadak Yojana whose target was to connect all the villages with the city
roads.
At a BJP national executive held on 15th April, 2000, he
wondered 'What after political success'. He also answered his own question
saying now that the party had governments in centre and many states, its
leaders should make efforts to improve the quality of governance. National
interest and people ’s service should be our top priority while doing politics
of governance, he said.
Vajpayee declared his long-time associate and Union Home
Minster LK advani as the Deputy Prime Minster. The then BJP president Venkaiah
Naidu termed Vajpayee as Vikas Purursh (Man of Development) and Advani as Lauh
Purursh (Iron Man) in 2002.
On 12 January, 2004 at the Hyderabad BJP national executive,
Vajpayee announced the decision to go in for elections. He said, the BJP is not
just a political party but a movement of social transformation. "Different
sections of the society are coming to our fold. We should again take verdict of
the people and try to fulfil their aspiration. We should make all our efforts
to make India a develop country by 2020," he said.
BJP lost 2004 general elections by a few seats. Atalji said
after the results, "We have lost the government but we have not lost sight
of our commitment to national service. We have lost elections not the
determination. Victory or loss are integral parts of life, we accept them with
equanimity." Atalji gave up political life in 2005. In 2015, President
Pranab Mukherjee visited Vajpayee at his house in a special gesture and
conferred the highest civilian honour - the Bharat Ratna - to him.
Observing his commitment to governance and development, the
central government has decided to celebrate his birthday as Good Governance
Day. Besides being a man of masses, an author, journalist and thinker, Atalji
also was a great administrator and statesman. He set the new standard of
politics - one of governance and development - inspiring millions who
contribute to the country's social and political life.
Dattopant Thengadi: Man Who Brought Workers And Peasants Under The Saffron Flag
I wrote this article on Dattopant Thengadi for Swarajya. You can read a version of the article below:
In the 1950s, one-third of the world was besotted with
communist ideology. The famous slogan in India then was Lal kile pe lal nishan,
maang raha hai Hindustan (India wants to see the red sign at Red Fort). The
Left ideology dominated the labour movement in India at that time. It was at
this juncture that Dattopant Thengadi successfully made inroads into worker and
peasant movements in India and established the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) in
1955. Today, BMS is a leading workers' organisation in the world and represents
the country at bodies like the International Labour Organization.
Rise In Public Life
Dattopant Thengadi was born on 10 November 1920 in Vardha,
Maharashtra. After completing BA and LLB, he became a Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh (RSS) pracharak in 1942. At the age of 15, he joined Vanar Sena in Vardha
to fight for the freedom of the country. As an RSS pracharak, he was sent to
Kerala where he stayed for two years and was later transferred to Bengal. In 1949,
he was assigned the task of organising workers and labourers. Six years later,
he established the BMS which later became the largest labour organisation in
India.
Thengadi entered Bharatiya Jan Sangh (BJS) under the
directive of the RSS and worked as an organising secretary in Madhya Pradesh
and in the south India. He was a member of Rajya Sabha from 1964 to 1976, where
he raised demands of workers and peasants. When Nanaji Deshmukh and Ravindra
Verma, the secretaries of Struggle Committee against Emergency were arrested,
Thengadi took up the mantle and directed all his efforts towards the foundation
of the Janata Party. But, he did not like politics and returned to his first
love - workers and peasant movement.
He was the founder of many other organisations like the
Swadesh Jagran Manch, Samajik Samrasta Manch and others.
As an author, he wrote more than 80 books and booklets, most
of which dealt with the hardships of workers and the downtrodden. His books
include Labor Policy, Karykarta, Destination, Focus, The Hindu View of Arts,
The Perspective, Our National Renaissance, Third Way, Ambedkar and Social
Revolution.
Saurashtra University, Gujarat, conferred a doctorate on him
for his contribution to the labour and peasant movement in India.
Workers, Unite The World
With the consent of Guru Golwalkar, Thengadi had been
organising workers since 1949. He applied Deendayal Upadhyay’s philosophy of
integral humanism to the cause of workers and peasants and replaced the idea of
class struggle with class coordination and cooperation. He was the first person
in Indian history who established a worker's movement that was not inspired by
Marxist ideology or any other political party and factored in the Indian value
system. He was of the view that with time and space, ideas and their relevance
changes. At the first all-India workshop of BMS on 27 October 1968 in
Maharashtra, he said, “If there exist different societies in different
conditions in same time period, then there could be no one 'ism' for them.
Similarly one idea cannot be considered appropriate for one society over
different time periods. Nor a single 'ism' can be a panacea of all ills because
time and conditions change and any ideology or 'ism' takes shape out of the
knowledge pool of that time.'
Thengadi was clear that the fight had to be against
injustice and not against any class. He gave the call, ‘workers, unite the
world’ in place of ‘workers of the world, unite’.
Earlier, chanting Bharat Mata ki Jai and Vande Matram at
rallies and programmes of workers was unheard of. BMS broke this silent taboo
and started hoisting a saffron flag and chanting nationalist slogans.
Thengadi wanted to free the labour movement from the
clutches of the Left that looked to the then USSR and China for inspiration. So
he gave the slogan - Lal gulami chhod ker, bolo Vandematram. (Leave Red
slavery, chant Vande Matram).
The movement from red flag to saffron had a deep impact and
even today the indigenous labour movement, BMS, use a saffron flag.
The core philosophy of BMS entails nationalisation of
workers, industrialisation of nation and labourisation of industries (Shramikon
ka Rashtriyakaran, Rashtra ka Audyogikikaran aur Udyogon ka Shramikikaran).
In Moscow, Thengadi floated the idea of an apolitical labour
confederation at an international meeting of World Federation of Trade Unions.
This forum was supported by Leftists and his resolution was rejected. He, along
with others, floated a new labour federation at the intentional level and named
it 'General Confederation of World Trade Unions' and provided it with a white
coloured flag in the place of the trademark red one.
In 1985, for the first time, a nationalist labour
organisation was invited by the Communist Party of China and a BMS delegation
participated under the leadership of Thengadi. Every year now, a BMS delegation
takes part in the labour conference in China.
After membership verification in 1989, the Labour Ministry
of the government of India declared BMS as the largest labour organisation in
the country.
A great scholar, organiser and a greater leader and
activist, Thengadi walked the path that none before him had taken. Over the
years he became a huge source of inspiration for millions of activists striving
for the welfare of workers and peasants.
Search For The ‘Third Way’
Thengadi worked under the ideological guidance of Dr
Hedgewar and Guru Golwalkar. He himself became margdarshak (patron) of many
organisations and asked juniors to lead these. He believed that a senior should
assume the role of a patron and a junior should lead the movement.
He studied both the dominating ideologies of the world and
also visited capitalist and socialist countries, and reached a conclusion that
there is a need for a third way. He was of the firm belief that the third way
could emerge only from the Indian soil.
In one of his lectures at Bengaluru, he claimed that we
should not imitate the West blindly. He declared that Westernisation is not
modernisation. “We do not think that modernisation is westernisation: Due to
over a century of brain washing through Macaulay system of English education,
majority of Indians are habituated to believe that anything west is always
best. To be modern our lifestyle and thought style should necessarily be
western. However this is only a mental blockade. We must come out of it at the
earliest and be prepared to think free of western biases. We must accept that
modernisation is not westernisation and westernisation is not modernisation.’
He described swadeshi economy through four features - one
with free competition without manipulated market, where movement is towards
equitability and equality, where nature is milked but not ravaged, and where
there is self-employment and not wage employment.
He always fought against economic inequality and opposed
social inequality at every level. He worked with Dr B R Ambedkar during the Lok
Sabha election in Bhandara, Maharashtra and understood his feelings both
towards the marginalised sections of society and nationalism. On 14 April 1983,
he established the Samajik Samrasta Manch (Social Harmony Forum) on the birth
anniversary of Dr Ambedkar. Ambedkar Aur Samajik Kranti (Ambedkar and Social
Revolution) was his last book where he elaborated the idea of social justice
and nationalism propounded by Babasaheb.
He was of the firm view that national rejuvenation is
possible only through people who strongly believe in the traditional knowledge
system of India.
Dattopant Thengadi worked with labour movements but never
compromised on the idea of cultural nationalism and national reconstruction. In
2011, workers of the Communist, Centre Of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) joined BMS
in chanting Bharat Mata ki Jai and Vande Matram at a workers' rally. The ideas
that Thengadi had sown, had come to fruition five decades later.
In Quest of an ‘Indian Right’
I wrote this article on the 'Right' discourse in India for India Foundation Journal.
You can read a version of the article below:
Bharat is not a defeated but a wounded civilisation.
Defeated civilisations cannot write their own history but ones those are
wounded have the stamina and zeal for it. The question is what path must a
wounded civilisation choose in its search of herself? How must it approach and
read history so as to find out herself? What should this approach be called?
And how do we reach such an approach?
Indian civilisational story is one of continuous evolution.
Even after facing many attacks in the last 2,500 years, India has stayed alive
simply because of its ability to survive and revive. At the precipice of
darkness, the country has always managed to rediscover itself. Those who have
faith in this past are billed as the Rightists. They are considered
conservative, status-quoist, fundamentalist, rigid etc. These terms have been
slapped on them by the Left-intelligentsia who dominate the social science
discourse of this country. To begin with, this group of ‘Rightists’ needs to be
identified and redefined, not in terms of its detractors but in terms of its
own salient features. The quest for a new term may seem like a cosmetic
exercise but it actually reflects the true spirit of those who want to build
the future with an approach of ‘India First’, keeping in mind the agony of the
present and the glory of the past.
Often dismissed for being outside the existing academic
discourse, the vantage point of this intellectual-cultural tradition is largely
unexplored. To take this forward, we need to arrive at a set of ideas that are
not static in nature and which provide theoretical and scientific solutions to
the problems of the existing world. There is also a need to identify factors
that define or come close to defining the quintessential ‘spirit' of this
civilisation.
We must also relook at thinking within the framework of
Right and Left. Dattopant Thengdi (RSS Ideologue and Trade Union Leader) talks
about the ‘Third Way’ which is neither Right nor Left but talks about
indigenous knowledge system and national interest. Conversely, going by popular
intellectual discourse, we can say that in the 1990s, RSS-BJP were culturally
Right but economically Left. It was a time when RSS-BJP were raising issue of
Ram temple on one side and advocating Swadeshi and opposing GATT and WTO, on
the other. Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh and Bharitya Kisan Sangh (Trade Union and
Farmers Union associated with RSS) had almost same views as Leftist Trade
Unions. Even today, many policies of Modi government cannot be classified under
the ‘Economic Right’. C. Rajgopalachari was the guiding light of the ‘Economic
Right’ in independent India and advocated free economy. He left Congress when
Pandit Nehru declared in 1955 that Socialistic pattern of the society will be
the official policy of the Congress in Avadi Session. Rajgoapalchari founded
Swatantra Party which along with Bharitya Jan Sangh (BJS) and Lok Dal was
instrumental in the defeat of Congress party in nine states in 1967 elections.
Four Points of Reference
In my understanding, there might be four points of reference
which should be kept in mind for better understanding and reformulation of
ideas what is known as Indian Right. First, India i.e. Bharat has to be studied
and understood as a civilizational-state and not just a constitutional-state or
nation-state. The idea of nation-state evolved only in the last 350 years after
the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 when the Papacy of medieval age was questioned
by the newly formed ‘sovereign’ states which were supported by the capitalist
merchants. On the other hand, India has existed as a civilizational unit since
several millennia. After the Independence, the idea of constitutional
nation-state came into being. The current history of modern Indian nationalism
also does not go back to more than 150 years which is said to be evolved after
the so called Indian renaissance during the time of Ram Mohan Roy and others
followed by the evolution of the Congress party. For India to be studied as
civilizational-state, we need to resuscitate the history of India of thousands
years.
Second, the study of India as a civilizational-state will
take back our civilisational march from Indus Valley to Saraswati Valley.
Traces of the existence of the civilisation will have to be rediscovered where
there have been no or negligible efforts since Independence. Recently, there
was a small report that Bhirrana in Haryana was claimed to be much older than
sites of Harappa and Mohanjodaro. Many more such discoveries need to be made to
fill in the existing gaps in India’s historical map.
Third, the history of last 1,300 years needs to become the
reference point to know about our freedom struggle instead of just 130 years.
While it is acceptable to study the history of Modern India from where modern
nationalism begins, but without the reference point of 1,300 years, our
understanding of Modern India can never be complete. We cannot brush aside the
critical context of King Dahir, who ruled over Sindh and whose defeat at the
hands of Mohammed Bin Quasim heralded a long phase of stagnation in knowledge,
culture and tradition. Instead of spiritual and mental battle, the country was
now fighting for its existence. Hereon, the caste system became rigid, women
were confined indoors and ill-practices proliferated. The chain of
philosophical tradition' set by the Upanishads was broken. One cannot
understand India just by studying history of last 130 years, for that we need
to take into account 1,300 years. While the history of the freedom movement of
modern India is a great educator, we also need to study the freedom struggle of
medieval India for a more comprehensive view. Moreover, our study of history
has to be both dispassionate and unapologetic.
Fourth, spiritualism is the mainstay of this
civilisational-state. This civilisation is not intolerant simply because its
essential nature is of assimilation and evolution. From Peshawar to Ganga Sagar
the plains between Indus and Ganges are as fertile as its culture and
tradition. Suitable climatic conditions and fertile land made life simple and
easy and this provided scope for inner quest i.e. 'chintan'. As a result, for
many millennia, spiritualism became the basic foundation of Indian
civilisation. Each time the civilisation stepped into decadence – Buddha,
Shankar, Mahavir, Tulsi, Soor, Kabir, Gynaeswar, Ramanand, Vivekanand, Gandhi,
Golwalkar and Ambedkar showed up and reignited the light of knowledge, making
India a ‘Sanatan' civilisation.
India is a spiritual entity which evolved in thousands of
years. The spiritual power of India is so immense that it accommodates everyone
and evolves without struggle and also without compromising with its core
values. The history is replete with instances of rulers (Kanishk and Milind)
who won in the battle field but were defeated by the spiritual power of this land.
India Today
Having set a foot firmly in the past we must now turn our
eye to the future. What we need is a new set of ideas, tools, symbols,
terminologies and methods to re-establish our civilisational march. So far we
have been working with those provided by our detractors. We might win a debate
or two with this borrowed armoury but we can never make a lasting contribution.
As we build our own bank of ideas, we also need to answer
some critical questions. What should be our vantage point - Harappa Valley
Civilisation, Chandra Gupta Maurya or 1947 or Ramayan and Mahabharata period?
Far from the line-up of Ashok ‘the Great’ and Akbar ‘the Great’, what about
Chandra Gupta Maurya, Rajendra Chola, Lalitaditya, Samudra Gupta, Rahtrakoot,
Pratihar, Marathas, Kanishka, Harsh and others. On the other hand, what about
the origin of caste based biases and women subjugation? Similarly, we need to
find the answers to the question ranging from territorial integrity, economic
policies to gay rights and other issues. By doing this we will be making
contemporary derivatives and linking our past to the present. Without this
connection we cannot claim our rightful place in the ideological streams of
India.
Three Ideological Streams
Three ideological streams have been in existence in India
for the last 100 years. First is of Congress inspired by the ideas of
Jawaharlal Nehru which says that India is a 'nation in making' started with
independence of India. The second is of Communists which say that India is not
a nation at all and there are many nationalities and they support all the
secessionist movement as a matter of principle in the name of
self-determination. Third ideological stream is of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh
(RSS) which talks about national reconstruction. It believes that India was a
glorious nation for a long time. It's glory, lost in the last 1000 years, needs
to be restored; hence there is a need to reconstruct our nation and society.
We currently study a distorted face of history where we are
taught that Aryans came from Iran and ruled India first. Later, it was Turks
and Mughals and then the British. The broad idea here was to establish the
civilisational superiority of the West and justify their invasion of this land
with narrative of ‘White Men’s Burden’; and to prove that caste and woman
subjugation has been an integral part of Indian society and philosophy. Two
hymns of Manu Smriti and Ram Charit Manas were used to build up an entire
discourse against this civilisation.
After the formation of the Modi government it was believed
that an ecosystem will emerge that will assist the creation of a new narrative
to understand the civilisational march of India. However, the idea that India should remember
and develop her own narrative is not is everyone’s interest. Hence, all efforts
are being made to block the growth of any such narrative. Since the Modi
government came to power, several attempts have been made to malign the image
of the government and raise issues like intolerance, fundamentalism and fear of
minority communities. Terms like "Hindu Pakistan", "forces of
intolerance", and the "situation worse than Emergency” have been
coined in the last 45 months. People campaigning on these lines are decidedly
anti-Modi and propounded these theories when the formation of a Narendra
Modi-led government at the Centre started looking imminent. Many of them had
even claimed at that time that they will leave the country if Modi became the
Prime Minister. Like true followers of Karl Marx, 'secular-liberal'
intellectual elites started with a conclusion and all their arguments now are
directed at proving it. Having lost the battle of ballots, they want to now
take the fight to academic institutions using universities as semi-liberated
zones.
Academia: The New Warfront
A world-renown artist like Anish Kapoor wrote that India is
ruled by "Hindu-Taliban" and an academic like Irfan Habib thinks RSS
is comparable to ISIS. The factiousness and monotone of these remarks makes one
question the sincerity of our present
intellectual scenario. The most obvious yet inconspicuous truth about the
academic and intellectual environment in India is that it has for years
remained overshadowed by Western and Leftist thinking while maintaining the façade
of ‘independent’ thought. Having accepted another's thought tradition as the
benchmark we forgot that each country has its own unique knowledge and
experience, in our case it was the Indic tradition.
Anish Kapoor and Irfan Habib are the products of an
intellectual sphere with strong imprints of the British and Marxist legacy.
British bureaucrat Lord Macaulay designed a strategy to make it easy for the
British to rule India. He advocated an education system which would produce
Brown British to work as loyal clerks under the regime. The key to this was to
make the "natives" disown everything Indian and covet everything that
was British. We were made to see how flawed and redundant our traditions were
and we were so grateful to learn the spelling of 'renaissance'.
The post-Independence India could not rid itself of this
mindset. Nehru-Indira governments gave ample space to Leftist-Marxist discourse
and institutions like Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) churned out thousands
of bureaucrats, academics, journalists and activists with ‘Leftist' leaning.
Over a period of time, the Left discourse elbowed out the Indic intellectual
ecosystem which was shunned as regressive and backward.
Even today the course on Indian philosophy is not taught in
JNU and the proposal for a centre on Sanskrit and Yoga studies is met with
stern resistance by Leftists including teachers and students. It is this
intellectual tradition that convinces people like Anish Kapoor and Irfan Habib
that the Indian civilisation has forever been exploitative and hence the need
is to stitch up a new system with no Indic traces.
According to ‘Left-Liberal’ line of thought Sanskrit is the
road to Conservatism and Brahmanical dominance. The theory of a terrible
Brahmanical regime thus comes to be accepted as a fact and often dangled as a
fearsome consequence of faith in the Indic system. No one, however, cares to
question that if the theory holds water, how was it that the two greatest
Indian epics were penned by Valmiki and Ved Vyas, both non-Brahmins. Does no
one wonder if it is possible for an exploitative civilisation to organically
survive for more than 5,000 years?
Liberal and Popular Discourse
There is no liberal discourse in our country but there are
only predominantly Left-liberals working in the field of media, academics and
development. When the intellectual class should have worked on developing an
‘Indian Left’ idea, they found it convenient to accept super-structures
dominated by Classical Marxism. The essential Indianisation of Marxism or Left
never happened and we created a false paradigm for our debates and discussions.
In the field of popular cultural discourse, Indian cinema is
one of the important media. India cinema has played a significant role in
developing understanding of our myths and history in the last half century.
There are more voices from the world of cinema that influence different issues
of national importance. There is a need of group of cinema and literary
personalities which can speak on issues of national importance but with a
different perspective and represent the counter-cultural narrative of the
current times which is now shared by millions of youth of this country and
which the outdated intellectual class want to brand as 'intolerant' and crass.
A peek into the time of Partition provides us valuable
insight into the Left leanings of the Indian film industry. That was the time
when actors like Dilip Kumar and the Lahore Writers' Group became a dominating
force of the "Bombay" film industry. Many from the Progressive
Writers' Forum (read Communists) also joined the film industry from time to
time like KA Abbas, Bhim Sahani, MS Satthu and others. Like the rest of the
country, the film industry too was deeply influenced by the wave of
Nehruvian-Socialism. The film circuit, as a result, was dominated by
Left-liberals and Congress-supporters like Nargis, Sunil Dutta, Amitabh
Bachchan, Rajesh Khanna and Shah Rukh Khan. During the Emergency the cinema
fraternity was asked by "Yuvraj" Sanjay Gandhi to organise musical nights
and create an environment in support of Emergency. The only dissenting voice of
that time was of Manoj Kumar who made patriotic films like Upkaar and Purab Aur
Paschim. Today, there are few cine stars like Anupam Kher who have broken away
from the old guards and taken a nuanced ideological position. We need more
Anupam Khers which can represent a parallel narrative which has the potential
to give birth to a new paradigm of intellectual-cultural tradition free from
old ideological shackles and representative of a de-colonised Indian mind.
In Search of Indic Tradition
Collective efforts are needed to search and work for an
Indic tradition. For Left-liberals, Indic is equivalent to Right-wing,
Hindu-centric, nationalist or Hindu-nationalist but actually it is more than
that. Indic comprises anything that originates from this land, blossoms in this
atmosphere and prospers in this geo-cultural territory. An Indic tradition can
lead to assimilative points of view, nuanced solutions and the creation of truly
‘new’.
Such an Indic ecosystem based on our civilisational values
can provide the adequate environment to discuss our civilisation background,
its legacy and relevance as well as its lessons. Today, when religion is a
major area of conflict, very few academic institutions conduct a comparative
study of religions. This is because of an academic-intellectual environment
that alienates and distances religions from each other. An Indic intellectual
environment will provide the necessary insight and compassionate approach
needed for such a study. Our ancient texts and writings of intellectuals like
Coomaraswamy, Yadunath Sarkar, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay and Vasudev Agrawal
can provide the ammo to start this intellectual spark.
Respect for local heroes, beliefs and modernisation of
Indian traditions would be the basic foundation of an Indic intellectual
ecosystem. It would take inspiration from the past, think about the present and
envision a prosperous future for all Indians. We can not prosper and develop
with a borrowed narrative. We need to have our own story, conceptualised and
narrated by our own people.
The creation of an ‘Indic' intellectual ecosystem does not
entail wipe out the Left-Marxist system, but simply balancing it out. It is the
responsibility of the academic and intellectual community to create a new
narrative that springs from their own intellectual rigour.
Conclusion
Mughals and Turks destroyed Indian temples and knowledge
centres but the British developed an education system that was meant to kill
India's faith in itself. As a legacy of that education system, the colonial
mentality still works in our mind obstructing our journey inventing or
discovering anything new or original. There is a dire need to rejuvenate our
civilisational discourse and develop an Indic knowledge tradition that will
help us and also benefit people all over the world.
We need to develop a theoretical foundation for Bhartiya
Drishti - an 'Indian Way' or Indic tradition to look at all the perpetuating
problems of India and the world. Before that we need to understand ourselves -
develop a vantage point of our knowledge tradition, study when and how it got
weak and how it could be revived. We can reform only when we know the form.
A Case for Simultaneous Elections
I wrote this research article on simultaneous elections with
my colleague Sushant for India Foundation Journal. You can read a version of
the article below:
Introduction
The kind of electoral exercise that we witness in India is
unparalleled in the world. Due to the sheer size of electorate and the expanse
of our democracy, this electoral exercise doesn’t only assume gigantic
proportions, it also leads to huge electoral expenditure. To add to the
existing woes, our general and state elections are not held simultaneously and
thereby one part or the other of our country is always electorally alert. The
Election Commission of India is on its foot throughout the year because of
this. This is the situation when we are not taking account of local elections
for panchayat and urban municipalities. The ever-rising electoral expenditure
on the country because of this can prove detrimental to our governance and
developmental goals.
One of the pillars of Indian democracy is the periodic
organisation of free and fair elections. Thenature of our elections to be free
and fair is threatened by the rising cost of elections as political parties and
candidates who contest look out for other sources to cover these costs. It is
an open secret that this contributes to political corruption as pointed out by
many studies. The frequent elections are also an ever increasing administrative
burden for the Election Commission of India (ECI).
Simultaneous elections at the Parliament and state
assemblies’ level have been mooted out by many as a remedy to this problem of
Indian democracy.
History of Indian Elections
The first election after Independence was held
simultaneously for the Parliament and State Assemblies in 1952. The practice
was followed without any hitch in three subsequent elections held in 1957,
1962, and 1967. This was mainly because non-Congress regional parties (except
Communists in some places) were not as powerful and influential as Congress and
thereby were not in a position to dislodge it in the legislatures or in general
elections. Things after 1967 changed. It was on account of both state and national
politics due to which elections to parliament and state assemblies were
delinked. The Fifth General Elections were due in 1972. But in early 1971,
Indira Gandhi dissolved the LokSabha, and held the Fifth LokSabha elections in
March 1971. The Assembly elections took place as scheduled in 1972. This is how
the initial delinking of LokSabha and Assembly elections took place. Due to
irresponsible and politically motivated use of article 356, many state
assemblies were dissolved in between leading to finalisation of this delinking
process.
Simultaneous elections have become exceptions rather than
rule. As a result, the Election Commission is busy throughout the year
conducting polls in some part of the country or the other. Apart from general
elections in 2014, we had legislative assembly elections for eight states:
Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand,
Maharashtra, Odisha and Sikkim. In 2015, we witnessed elections in Delhi and
Bihar. In 2016, five state legislative assembly elections took place: Tamil
Nadu, West Bengal, Kerala, Puducherry and Assam. That is, in a span of three
years (2014-2016) we have conducted one general and 15 state assembly
elections.
Countries conducting simultaneous elections
England has chosen to hold general elections and local
government elections on the same day since 1997. But, in practice, local
elections are delayed if polls to European Parliament have to be held.
Italy, Belgium, and Sweden are some countries that conduct
general and local elections together.
In Canada, municipal elections are on fixed dates while
provincial and federal elections take place at any time. The Canadian Prime
Minister and provincial Premiers have a right to call elections at any time
during their tenure of five years. This right could be used by them to prolong
their stay in power by going to polls when their popularity is rated high. This
led to the rise of “fixed election date” movement a decade ago. It succeeded in
introducing set election dates in eight out of 10 provinces. At the centre, the
Fixed Election Date Act was adopted in 2007.
In South Africa, national and provincial elections are held
simultaneously. Municipal elections are not linked with these.
In India, the question of a fixed tenure has been discussed
several times without arriving at any consensus. In 1999, the Law Commission
recommended that the cycle of elections every year should be put an end to.
Now we will discuss the issues that arise due to delinking
of national and state elections.
Rising Electoral Expenditure for the Government
The expenses incurred by the Government in preparation of
electoral rolls, I-cards, election booths & officers etc is significant.
The table below indicates expenditure incurred on LokSabha Elections in various
years as available on the website of Election Commission.
Year Expenditure
Incurred (Provisional) (Cr Rs)
1952 10.45
1957 5.9
1962 7.32
1967 10.8
1971 11.61
1977 23.04
1980 54.77
1984 81.51
1989 154.22
1991 359.1
1996 597.34
1998 666.22
1999 880
2004 1300
2009 1483
2014 3426
Source: Election Commission of India
2014 elections were the most expensive LokSabha elections
ever, entailing a cost of Rs.3,426crore to the national exchequer, a
substantial jump of 131% over the Rs.1,483 crore incurred in the 2009 polls. In
1952, the cost of elections per elector was 60 paise which increased to Rs 12
per elector in 2009, a 20-fold hike.
Rising Electoral Expenditure for the Political Parties
Electoral expenditure of political parties as per details
given to ECI for 2014 elections.
Political Party Expenditure
incurred (in Rs)
BJP 7,14,28,57,813
INC 5,16,02,36,785
NCP 51,34,44,854
BSP 30,05,84,822
Source: Election Commission of India
The funds collected by the political parties also show a
significant rise. The EC report indicates that funds collected by national
political parties increased by a whopping 418 per cent in the past 10 years. It
is an open secret as to what form of political corruption takes place in fund
collection by various parties.
This situation was no different in 2009 when cash accounted
for 75% of the money raised by the Congress and half of that of the BJP. In
2009, BJP spent Rs 448.66 crore in the 2009 LokSabha elections, while the
Congress spent Rs 380.04 crore. Data analysis shows that only 24 per cent of
the total election funding the Congress received was made through cheques and
demand drafts, the remaining being in cash. The BJP, however, received close to
half (49 per cent) through cheques and demand drafts.
The funding of political parties increased by 35.53 per cent
from Rs 854.89 crore in 2009 to Rs 1,158.59 crore in 2014 general elections.
The poll expenditure jumped in recent years as over a period of 10 years, as
the spending by national political parties during the LokSabha elections went
up 386 per cent.
Altogether, the political parties exhausted Rs 858.97 crore
on publicity, Rs 311.8 crore on travel, Rs 104.28 crore on other expenses and
Rs 311.47 crore on expenditure towards candidates.
According to a projected expenditure estimate of Centre for
Media Studies (CMS), Rs 30,000 crores would be spent by government, political
parties and candidates in 2014 elections. A study carried out by CMS on poll
spending says “unaccounted for” money pumped in by "crorepati"
candidates, corporates and contractors has pushed up the expenditure to elect
543 MPs.Out of the estimated Rs 30,000 crore, the exchequer will spend Rs 7000
to Rs 8000 crore to hold the electoral exercise for the 16th LokSabha. While the
Election Commission is likely to spend around Rs 3,500 crore, the Union Home
Ministry, Indian Railways, various other government agencies and state
governments will spend a similar amount to put in place means to ensure free
and fair polls.
In India while we have ceilings for the expenses to be
incurred by a candidate in their constituencies, there is no such ceiling on
the use of money by political parties. The money spent by political parties is
not added to the candidate’s expense statement. Another data (published by
Association for Democratic Reforms) which gives a good idea about the
increasing expenses of the political parties and candidates is the amount
received by candidates from their respective political parties. To make matters
worse, election expenditure statements have to be submitted only by national
and recognized regional parties and rest are exempted from it.
Table: MPs’ declaration of aid for election expenses from
the party
Party Total MPs who have Total MPs to whom Total sum declared LS MPs declared getting (in lakhs) aid was given by party as given
aid from party by party to MPs (in lakhs)
BJP 282 229 Rs 6,589.22L 159 Rs 4,875.03L
INC 44 18 Rs 403.60L 7 Rs
270L
NCP 6 6 Rs 279.70L 5 Rs
250L
CPI 1 1 Rs 21.83L 0 Rs
0
CPM 9 9 Rs 265.46L 4 Rs
128.50L
Total 342 263 Rs
7,559.82L 175 Rs 5,523.53L
Source:
http://adrindia.org/content/lok-sabha-2014-election-expenditure-analysis-declaration-lumpsum-amounts-political-parties
This data is still limited to national elections. One can
imagine the scale of problem if we add up the electoral expenses incurred
during various state elections happening almost every year.
From the above data presented in this section, one can
imagine and make a fair estimate of the gigantic proportions our electoral
expenses have assumed. It’s a burden for the government, taxpayers, political
parties and the candidates.
Policy Paralysis due to Code of Conduct
The model code of conduct (MCC) is a set of norms which has
been evolved with the consensus of political parties who have consented to
abide by the principles embodied in the said code in its letter and spirit. It
comes into effect the moment Election Commission of India announces an election
schedule for polls and stays in force till the end of the electoral process.
Under the code, governments cannot do anything which may have the effect of
influencing voters in favour of the party in power. Grants, new schemes /
projects cannot be announced. Even the schemes that may have been announced
before the MCC came into force, but that has not actually taken off in terms of
implementation on field are also required to be put on hold.
Due to these stringent guidelines, which comes into effect
for 45 days after the schedule for elections are announced by the EC, the whole
country (during the times of general elections) and states (during elections to
state assemblies) come to a virtual standstill. The normal functioning of the
government is hampered. It leads a situation of policy paralysis. It has become
a model for inaction. Designed to prevent pre-poll populism by governments and
political parties, the frequency of its application has turned the Election
Commission's model code of conduct into a charter for non-governance. There are
many examples as to how application of Model Code of Conduct for elections
causes policy paralysis, however, we have listed a few prominent ones.
Even if status quo is maintained on the code of conduct,
there are ways to ensure continuance in decision-making. One solution stems
from the way the Delhi High Court decided the dispute over the new telecom
policy - by making its continuity conditional on its clearance by the next
LokSabha.
Instability
Connected to the above issue, the delinking of elections
also leads to a situation where we witness instability at the national level.
When elections happen, it involves the whole machinery of government. The party
in power cannot afford to look away and even the ministers of highest ranks get
involved in the campaign process. In the Bihar elections we saw that even the
PM was not spared and was actively engaged in the hectic campaign process. This
leads to hampering of normal functioning of the government and negatively
affects the governance of the country. Among the parties, the BJP organized the
highest number of election rallies — 850 — which were addressed by the party
chief Amit Shah, several union ministers, Chief Ministers, party’s MPs and
other star campaigners.
Lack of bold decision-making
If a party which is in power at centre loses election in a
state, it is projected by the opposition as the results have made severe dent
on its mandate to rule. This also leads to loss of confidence in the ruling
regime. A negative atmosphere is created which contributes in affecting the
governance of the country in an adverse way. A loss in a state election in the
middle of the tenure of a government at national level is rapidly projected as
a loss of credibility and hence all efforts are made by the strengthened
opposition to stall any new reform measures.
Security issues
Fearing outbreaks of attacks by Maoist rebels, terrorist
violence and communal clashes between communities, the Ministry of Home Affairs
in 2014 mobilised some 200,000 security personnel – comprising 175,000
paramilitary forces and 25,000 state police officers - across the country to
protect polling stations and safeguard election results. In the last general
election in 2009, the central government-provided security deployment consisted
of 120,000 personnel. These figures do not include the hundreds of thousands of
other provincial police and local security forces that were deployed to polling
stations across the country. This added feature makes our elections more
expensive and the fierce competition in elections may also lead to loss of
lives at many places. With the elections happening so often, these features
have become a recurrent theme of our democratic process.
Recommendations made in this regard
In the first annual report of the Election Commission
submitted in 1983, the then chief election commissioner R.K. Trivedi had
observed: “The commission is of the view that a stage has come for evolving a
system by convention, if it is not possible or feasible to bring about a
legislation, under which the general elections to the House of the People and
legislative assemblies of the states are held simultaneously.”
170th report of Law Commission of India on ‘Reform of the
Electoral Laws’, 1999 mentioned in this regard the following:
This cycle of elections every year, and in the out of
season, should be put an end to. We must
go back to the situation where the elections to LokSabha and all the
Legislative Assemblies are held at once.
One of the reform proposals mentioned in National Commission
to Review the Working of Constitution is: “Hold State level and parliamentary
level elections at the same time. This would reduce election expenditure.”
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public
Grievances, Law and Justice headed by EMS Natchiappan submitted its report on
the Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections LokSabha and State
Legislative Assemblies. The Committee noted that the holding of simultaneous
elections to LokSabha and state assemblies would reduce: (i) the massive
expenditure that is currently incurred for the conduct of separate elections;
(ii) the policy paralysis that results from the imposition of the Model Code of
Conduct during election time; and (iii) impact on delivery of essential
services and (iv) burden on crucial manpower that is deployed during election
time.
There have been demands to hold the two elections together
as it can save money, time and resources and ex-Chief Election Commissioner HS
Brahma recently said that he is not averse to exploring the possibility.
President Pranab Mukherjee, during his lecture to school
students on the Teachers’ Day (5 September) had endorsed the idea of holding
simultaneous LokSabha and state legislative assemblies’ elections. President
Mukherjee had said that with some election or the other throughout the year,
normal activities of the government come to a standstill because of model code
of conduct. “This is an idea the political leadership should think of. If
political parties collectively think, we can change it”, he had said.
The Election Commission has supported the idea of holding
simultaneous elections to Parliament and State Assemblies, in a letter sent to
the Law Ministry in May, 2016. This is the first time the poll watchdog has
officially expressed its willingness to conduct LokSabha and state polls
together. The ECI wrote, “In so far as the Election Commission is concerned,
the issues involved in holding simultaneous elections are not insurmountable
for it. If there is political consensus and will across the board, needless to
say, the Commission supports the idea of considering simultaneous elections”.
The NitiAayog’s discussion paper, ‘Analysis of Simultaneous
Elections: The What, Why and How’, bats for simultaneous elections stating that
frequent polls change the focus of policy making because “short-sighted
populist” and “politically safe” measures are accorded higher priority over
difficult structural reforms.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself has floated a very
pertinent idea of having simultaneous elections for the LokSabha and state
assemblies.
Conclusion
Despite all the difficulties and occasional setbacks that we
face, one of the admirable features of Indian democracy is the consistent and
fairly high voter participation in elections. This undoubtedly reflects the
deep entrenched belief of Indian people in the democratic traditions of this
country. We should not return this favour by burdening our citizens with
sky-rocketing electoral expenditure and the ill-effects that comes with it.
India, being a developing country, cannot ill afford to bear the huge
expenditure involved in electoral exercise. From the above discussion it is
evident that the issues that we are facing now in terms of spiraling costs of
elections, administrative burden on government and Election Commission and
governance deficit resulting from these can be better resolved if we revert
back to our earlier electoral system whereby we had simultaneous elections for
both parliament and state assemblies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)