Opposition can’t beat the BJP at its own game
THE results of the Assembly elections (barring Telangana) have given a nasty shock to the Congress. It has lost Rajasthan as well as Chhattisgarh and suffered a debacle in Mizoram. The outcome in Madhya Pradesh was on expected lines; the state seems to have become another Hindutva stronghold. The Congress should have learnt a lesson: no party can afford to re-enact the BJP’s agenda. When it comes to politicisation of Hinduism, no one can beat the Hindutva Parivar. Cadres of the RSS have a presence in virtually every neighbourhood in major parts of north India. They have understood the importance of the notion of biradari/community and inserted themselves into the lives of people.
History has shown us that the only way a right-wing divisive agenda can be countered is by an alternative agenda of social transformation. Eminent literary critic Terry Eagleton reminds us that we cannot foretell the future. We can only warn that unless we feed the hungry and welcome the immigrant, we might not have a future at all. He says Karl Marx believed that the best a revolutionary could do was to describe the conditions under which a different sort of future might be possible.
We must engage critically with what is around us to create conditions for a better future. The INDIA bloc has to counter the agenda of politicised religion, personalised ‘welfare’ schemes, intolerance towards dissenters, the might of the coercive arm of the state and denial of civil liberties. An alternative agenda has to think of redistributive justice based on employment generation and progressive taxation, not on a handout here or there. It has to relentlessly draw attention to the extent of poverty in the country.
If the Prime Minister has extended free ration to 81 crore Indians for another five years, imagine how much poverty and deprivation these citizens are mired in. This government is not statistic-friendly, and we do not know what the extent of poverty is, or even what poverty line the government subscribes to. But if India ranks 111th out of 125 countries on the Global Hunger Index, crores of our people live below the line of a decent standard of living. The Opposition alliance has to focus on systemic issues, not on attacking an industrialist. Poverty and ill-being are not due to one man’s riches; they are the outcome of a deeply inegalitarian society. They are the outcome of a society indifferent to equality or to the promise of a life worth living for all.
The alternative agenda must emphasise the need for a compassionate and responsive leadership, restoration of the prestige of damaged institutions and the significance of appropriate political language. The ‘welfare state’, social scientists have concluded, is debatable, because it is compatible with a high degree of inequality. The discourse has to shift to social democracy — redistribution, participation and ensuring rights to basic services, freedom, equality, justice and fraternity.
Above all, the Opposition must foreground the need to value the Constitution. We live in a deeply polarised society. Independent India inherited a fractured land and a divided people. History bore witness to the fact that the nation takes precedence over solidarity. At that time, the Constitution played an important role in forging a political community.
The Partition had split the political community and drowned India in a vortex of violence. The task the Constitution-makers had on their hands was an onerous one. Indians spoke different languages, practised distinctive rituals, possessed unique world views and had diverse expectations of politics. A newly independent India strained at the seams with diversity and difference, both of which can be troublesome categories. People were strangers to each other. And in many parts, democracy was a stranger to them. Social hierarchies were left intact, elites continued to hold themselves about the rest of the people and discrimination on the grounds of religion and caste was rife. Independence had come along with bloodshed.
The miracle is that a democratic Constitution was written amidst the debris of destroyed homes, workplaces and places of worship.
After the freedom struggle, progressive poets wrote inspiring lyrics that transcended religious boundaries to focus on commonalities. Barsaat ki Raat (1960), a film directed by PL Santoshi, featured a qawwali, ‘Yeh ishq ishq hai, ishq ishq…’, whose lyrics were written by Sahir Ludhianvi. Its high point was the line: ‘Ishq azaad hai, Hindu na Mussalman hai ishq/aap hi dharam hai and aap hi imaan hai ishq’ (Love is free, neither Hindu nor Muslim, it is in itself dharma and belief). For Dharmputra (1961), produced by BR Chopra, Sahir wrote the lyrics of another famous qawwali: ‘Kaabe mein raho ya Kashi mein, nisbat to usiki baat se hai, tum Ram kaho yah Rahim kaho, maqsad to usiki zaat se hai’ (Whether you live in Kaaba or Kashi, you are concerned with one God, whether you call him Ram or Rahim).
Without progressive poets, literary figures and filmmakers, the task of creating a political community through a democratic Constitution would have been abandoned. Indians have to be reminded of this task. Is INDIA capable of restoring the lost virtue of solidarity with the vulnerable people and changing the terms of engagement? Or will it lose its relevance amid political wrangling? We will find out in due course.
