Socialist ideals abandoned

THE self-proclaimed practitioners of Socialist ideological politics like Nitish Kumar of Bihar and Mulayam Singh Yadav of Uttar Pradesh cannot be expected to compromise with practitioners of the politics of Hindutva. The ideology of human equality, a foundational principle of Socialism, is antagonistic with the RSS-led Hindu Sangh Parivar. The latter practises the ideological politics of discrimination against human beings on the basis of religion, especially Hindus versus Muslims and Christians. 

Advertisement

Socialists, whether in modern advanced industrial societies of Europe or in non-European developing Third World countries like India, are the torch-bearers of the values of human equality. In history, Socialists have launched great struggles and made sacrifices to achieve the goal of social equality and justice for all citizens without discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender, language or nationality. The history of the idea of Socialism is essentially based on human equality. Therefore, it is essential to analyse the most unexpected responses of present-day Socialist leaders. They have made political adjustments with the practitioners of politics of social discriminations against religious minorities in India. 

Indian Socialists, beginning with 2014, are betraying the cause of social equality because the RSS-BJP controlled governments at the Centre and state levels are determined to pursue discriminatory policies. It's  Hindu majority versus religious minorities. The distinctive feature of the 2014 Lok Sabha election is that all the 282 elected MPs of the BJP are Hindus. Narendra Modi, India's chief political executive, is supported only by the Lok Sabha majority of Hindus members. That the BJP in the Lok Sabha consists of Hindus only is not an accident. The BJP did not nominate a single Muslim candidate for the 2017 Uttar Pradesh state Assembly elections. India has a central government led by the BJP consisting of Hindus only. Yogi Adityanath’s government in Uttar Pradesh is also supported by a majority which consists only of Hindu MLAs. 

An important implication of the BJP-in-governments is the disenfranchisement and disempowerment of the Muslims from the corridors of power. Muslim representatives have been denied a place in the Hindu party. This is a new situation in the history of parliamentary democracy in India because the Prime Minister or the BJP Chief Ministers are expected to make public statements for the whole country or for the whole state. In reality, they are only representing the Hindus of India. The story does not end here. The BJP with so-called allies has nominated a committed RSS-BJP individual for the office of the President of India to be elected in July 2017. India will have a committed RSS-BJP Chief Political Executive at the Centre as well as the  head of the nation as the President of India. It is immaterial that the BJP nominee for Presidentship happens to be a Dalit. The material fact is that he is committed to the idea of the Hindu Rashtra, that is — one nation, one language, one country. 

Should the committed secularists and Socialists not have joined hands to oppose the election as the Head of the Nation of one whose idea of India is fundamentally opposed to the essential cultural, religious, linguistic and regional diversity of the country? Socialists like Nitish Kumar and Mulayam Singh Yadav have extended support to a BJP nominee who is ideologically committed to the idea of homogenous Hindu India. Should Socialists not lead the struggle in defence of plural India against the RSS-BJP from the front? 

Is it not a grand betrayal by Socialists of the idea of equality so dear to their heart? Not only this. Indian Socialists in the past, like all European Socialists, have always launched militant and aggressive struggles against governments and political forces which have oppressed minorities and practised discriminatory policies against social groups on the basis of their identity by birth. The RSS-BJP agenda of cow protection has during the last three years led to the killing and murder of only Muslims at the hands of Hindu private vigilante groups. Should Socialists along with other democratic and secular forces not launch agitations against the BJP governments for inaction in defending the life of innocent Muslims? Muslims are the victims of allegations of cow slaughter by the Bajrang Dal and other Hindu vigilante groups. On June 29, Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Sabarmati Ashram spoke against the so-called gau rakshaks. The same day, Alimuddin Ansari, a dairy owner in Ranchi was killed by gau rakshaks. On June 30, Merriam Khatoon, Ansari’s widow alleged that the killers were rogues owing allegiance to the Bajrang Dal. The situation is deteriorating fast and an atmosphere of fear among the Muslims is being created by the RSS and its affiliates. Since their governments are in power, protection would be provided to Hindu groups who target innocent Muslims. Why is Mulayam or Nitish, claimants to the socialist heritage of India, failing in their responsibilities as Socialists? 

Instead of fighting against the BJP in Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh was busy in weakening his own party during the 2017 state Assembly elections. His role during the elections led to the victory of the BJP. Historically, India has had a galaxy of Socialist leaders during the freedom struggle and in post-Independence India. These  Socialist leaders launched anti-government struggles and satyagrahas for social justice for the poor and vulnerable strata. What has happened to the present-day Socialists who are compromising with Hindu communalists? Both Mulayam Singh and Nitish Kumar have been running state governments and have also been ministers at the Centre. It seems that the logic of power has extinguished the fire within these Socialists who do not want to stand up against the powerful BJP governments. Otherwise there is no reason for these Socialists to support Hindu communalists. The political agenda of Hindutva is fundamentally opposite to the Socialist doctrines of equality. It is a tragedy that the Socialists have either decided to join the communalists or passively watch the BJP governments' anti-minority activities. 

CEM Joad might have foreseen the drift among the Socialists when he wrote: “Socialism is like that hat which has lost its shape because everyone seems to be wearing it”. Secularism is considered an advanced form of social organisation only because it has integrated the idea of social equality with the idea of liberty and human rights. Unfortunately, Socialists of large states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh have failed to live with the ideals of Socialism or they would have been in the forefront of the struggle against Hindu communalists who reject the idea of religious equality in a multi-religious society.

The writer is  Professor Emeritus, Centre for Political Studies, JNU.