[sacw] Workshop on Saffron Threat in India

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Mailer - June 7, 1999
----------------------------------------------------------

Workshop on Saffron Threat and Tasks Ahead
From: P.R. Ram (Bombay)

The workshop took place on 5th June [1999] sat, with around 25 activists
from different organisation participating. The discussion revolved
around the increasing menace posed by the Sangh Parivar Politics
posing bigger dangers to the survival of civic liberties and the
rights of oppressed sections of society.Special emphasis was made on
the economic policies in the wake of globalisation and its impact on
the weaker sections of society.It was decided that we should try to
do as much as possible to combat these threats in the long term
through:propaganda ,cadre training for secular democratic values,
building bridges with other social groups struggling for the rights of
oppressed and Human rights- a sort of loose platform of secular
democracy and social justice can be contemplated. In the short term
the following measures will be undertaken 1.A campaign in different
localites : meetings film shows street plays etc. to make the people
aware of the threats posed by communal politcs/ Sangh Parivar
2.Preperation of posters leaflets etc. 3. Intervention through media
These are tentative measures and more will be discussed and action
begun through 3 subcommittees formed for this purpose. I am also
attaching one paper written by me on this theme. (P.R.Ram)

Looming Saffron Threat and Electoral Choices
P.R.Ram

The electoral arena in the decade of 90s has taken a qualitative
turn for the worse. The earlier electoral equation Congress vis-a-vis
the Janata Dal / Janata Party and its allies has been replaced by a
triangle with BJP and later BJP and its allies as the base of the
triangle. Of the two other arms of the triangle one is the Congress
and other is constituted by now declining third front. The progressive
groups and individuals, are faced with a serious dilemma, a Hobson's
choice, as far as casting the vote in various constituencies and
campaigning is concerned. Barring the left parties, whose secular and
democratic credentials are strong, and the other earlier constituents
of Third front who mostly stood by secular and democratic ground
(though many of whom have shown cracks in this lately ), both the
major constituents of the electoral battle field are tainted with
communalism of different varieties. It is in this context that the
role of left in singling out BJP as THE communal force, to be isolated
and dumped on priority basis has come for criticism amongst different
friends and groups on the liberal, progressive and left spectrum.
These radical elements, bringing to our attention the gory deeds of
congress in subtly tolerating communalism, have been advocating
equidistance from BJP and congress. We will like to examine the
pitfalls of this equidistance thesis in this contribution

Congress and Communalism: Right since its inception the main thrust of
Indian National Congress has been to struggle for Democratic secular
India. At formal level this central concern of congress stood on this
ground with innumerable compromises and weaknesses. Though there have
been major changes in the trajectory of congress during last eleven
decades of its existence, this single principle has been kept at the
core of the policies, though at formal level. The same got enshrined
also in the Indian constitution, which accepted the principles of
Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, and also brought into constitution
the concept of secular state right from the beginning, though this
word was added into the constitution much later.

Despite this main current, there has always been a weakness to
accommodate and tolerate the communal elements more so the Hindu
communal elements. Some of the major leader of congress had strong
streaks of Hindu Nationalism. The important ones in this category
being Lala Lajapat Rai, Madan Mohan Malaviya, and Dr. Munje (who was
one of the founders of RSS also)! Many a leaders of Hindu Mahasabha
were also the members of congress. The first Sarsangh chalak (Supreme
dictator) of RSS Dr. K. B. Hedgewar was formally in congress till
1934 when he stopped being a part of congress and concentrated
exclusively on building the fountain head of Hindu communalism, the
RSS. Congress in pre-independence time acted as a platform. The
dominant part of the platform was secular & democratic as represented
in the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Nehru. But undoubtedly
the Hindu communal elements remaining even within congress put
pressure on it from inside to supplement the agenda of Hindu
Mahasabha and RSS, to act as the opposite and parallel of Muslim
communalism which was represented predominantly by Muslim League.
With partition, formation of Pakistan and leaving of the Muslim elite
from different parts of the country to Pakistan, Muslim communalism
in a way got deflated. But it did continue to survive in the Indian
polity, assuming stronger postures at crucial times like Shah Bano
case etc, to provide the much needed provocation to the Hindu
communalism.

After Independence the congress underwent major transformation in the
mid-sixties. Though it continued to pay strong lip service to the
secular rhetoric, apart from appeasing the fundamentalist sections of
Muslim community, it did not do much to ameliorate the conditions of
minorities. Also by this time the state apparatus started getting
infiltrated by the Hindu communal elements, the RSS trainees, who
started giving a Hindu slant to the secular state policies at the
grass root level. It is due to these factors that Muslims started
getting discriminated against in jobs and social opportunities. They
also became victims of anti-Muslim violence led by Hindu communal
organisations and supported and abetted by the state infected by
communal virus and exonerated by the congress which was not
principled enough to oppose and curtail this due to section of its
leadership being 'soft communal'. These elements were simultaneously
well entrenched in the congress to reap the benefits of power. A
large section of congress leadership was not serious as far as
secular ethos were concerned and did not have any qualms in
compromising with and promoting Hindu communalism. During these
years the principal project of congress was to build the Indian State
as per the Indian constitution. During this process it started
subjugating the ethnic & regional aspiration and imposed the Indian
identity and laws on many ethnic groups and regions by force.
Congress on one hand pursued the policy of relentless centralisation
and intervened in state affairs at every minor pretext. This led to
situations of insurgency in Northeast, Kashmir and Punjab. The
anti-Sikh pogroms conducted by congress in1984 can be charactersised
to belong to this category of repression of ethnic aspirations of
Sikhs. They have to be contrasted with the anti Muslim violence whose
ideological roots lie in the concept of Hindu Rashtra. With intense
repression in these states, the situation got worsened and later in
Kashmir and Punjab the situation was comunalised with the
Hindu-Muslim, Hindu-Sikh being the two poles of this move of the
congress govt. It is during perusal of this policy that massive anti
Sikh pogroms took place after the murder of Indira Gandhi. Congress
communalism is pragmatic (Aijaz Ahmed) and has been used by it times
and over again to 'solve' some other problem, like suppressing the
ethno-regional aspirations

Hindu Communal Politics: Bharatiya Janata Party is the political arm
of Sangh Parivar. By implication it is an offshoot of RSS. The
internal dynamics of operation of Sangh Parivar is fairly uniform for
all its organisations. The basic premiss of RSS is to work towards
the goal of Hindu Rashtra. This just does not mean that since
majority of people living in this country are Hindus so, it should be
or is a Hindu Rashtra. This concept emerged as the political project
of declining classes ( Jamindars, Rajas of Riyasats etc. and the
Brahmins). This concept was parallel and opposed to the concept of
Muslim state, which represented the political aspirations of Muslim
Jagirdars and elite. Hindu Rashtra was defined as a political concept
whose politics is Hindutva, first by Savarkar (Hindu Mahasabha) and
later on refined by MS Golwalkar the second Sarsangh chalak (Supremo)
of RSS. This is a type of Nationalism, which gives the illusion of
being based on religion, but is based on the hatred of others'
religions. This is akin to race based nationalism of Nazis (Hitler),
fascists (Mussolini, Italy) or the fundamentalist states like
Ayatollah Khoemeni's Iran or Afghanistan under the Taliban. These
nationalism's are opposed to the principles of Liberty, Equality,
Fraternity, concept of Liberalism, and on the contrary are supporters
of status quo and favor the unequal hierarchies which are prevalent in
the society. In addition the concept of this nationalism aims to
impose the uniform elite culture on the whole society.

As per the core ideology of RSS, this is a Hindu Rashtra since the
time Aryans stepped into this land and the 'aliens' who came here,
the Muslim and Christian British have brought ignominy to the Hindu
Society. Now under leadership of RSS / Sangh Parivar(SP), the whole
of Hindu Nation has to get organised to restore the past glory. RSS
trains young boys into these doctrines and these indoctrinated cadres
are then sent to work in different SP affiliates. The majority of
its affiliates are controlled by RSS trained pracharaks who are in
the core of the organisations and are the real managers of those
organisations implementing the agenda pre-determined by RSS / SP.

Bharatiya Jana Sangh: This previous avatar of BJP was founded by Dr.
Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, a leader of Hindu Mahasabha, and was totally
taken over by the RSS trained volunteers. Its major agenda (1951) was
induction of Nuclear weapons, opposition to public sector and
cooperative farming. The major campaigns it under took were 'ban
cow-slaughter' and 'Indianisation of Muslims'. Meanwhile RSS was
actively communalising the social space leading to communal violence
beginning from Jabalpur (1962) communal riot. These riots went of
becoming more and more ghastly. In addition to intimidating and
ghettoising the Muslim Community they started consolidating the elite
Hindus behind RSS / BJS.

Bharatiya Janata Party: After joining the JP led movement (1974) RSS /
BJP gained social respectability and BJS emerged as the major
component of Janata Party formed in the wake of lifting of emergency.
The BJS members refused to withdraw their membership of RSS leading to
collapse of Janata Party. BJS reemerged as BJP in 1980. From 1986 it
took over the aggressive agenda of Hindu Rashtra through the
Ramjanambhoomi campaign leading to the demolition of Babri Mosque,
post-demolition communal violence etc. Most of the inquiry commission
reports on communal violence ( Jagmohan Reddy, Justice Madon,
Vithayathil, Shrikrishna & Venugopal ) have proved without any shadow
of doubt that RSS/SP have been the major actors in anti Muslim
communal violence. Similarly National Human Rights Commission,
National Minorities Commission and the Human Rights Groups have
highlighted the role of most of the progenies of RSS in anti Christian
violence.

Lately, after realising that it cannot grab the power at the center
on its own, (on the plank of communal issues), BJP has 'cleverly'
been talking of National Agenda of Governance and National Democratic
Alliance to woo over the regional parties, whose narrow regional
interests and tubular vision does not permit them to see the core
communal project of BJP. This temporary democratic posture of BJP is
merely for the sake of gradually increasing its vote bank / social
base to be able to come to power at center on its own and that's when
the agenda of Hindu Rashtra 'in toto' will be unleashed on the
society. Till then the decent looking agenda will keep getting
sprinkled with the hidden agendas. In long term this elite, middle
class party will freeze the society in the existent social dynamics,
taking away the rights of exploited, oppressed and those on lower
rungs of hierarchy to struggle for social, economic and gender
justice. The communalism of BJP is a cover for the slow growing
Fascism, with the aim to foist Brahminical Hinduism based politics on
the country. In words of Aijaz Ahmed its is a programmatic
communalism. A programme to bring in a different notion of state, in
order to do away with the democracy and liberalism.

Equidistance & Comparisons: Seen in this light amongst all the
electoral parties BJP is the only party, which is a political wing of
some other organisation (RSS). As seen in the past and as evident in
its inner structure the RSS control over the party is complete due to
the RSS trained cadres being the main human agency of BJP. Despite
contradictions the basic goal of Hindu Rashtra is not negotiable as
for as SP is concerned. And that's what sets it apart from every
other electoral outfit. It is not to say the other parties are
desirable, ideal and capable of sustaining the secular democratic
programme. We have seen that congress, with ease, could impose
Emergency and various anti-democratic legislation's time and over
again. It has compromised and aided SP communalism number of times
the other parties have also shown manifest inadequacies as far as
perusal of democratic principles are concerned. But all said and done
none of them is driven by the engine of RSS, a fascist organisation
wedded to the concept of Hindu Rashtra- a Brahminical Hinduism based
Nationalism akin to race based Nationalism or Muslim Religion based
Nationalism. This is what makes BJP as different cup of tea (nay
poison) setting it apart from other electoral outfits.

Historical Precedents: As we have demonstrated in other contribution
(Fascism of Sangh Parivar -EKTA- Mumbai, 1999), SP movement is a
fascist variant with number of similarities to the European Fascism,
which got strengthened after fearing Dalit OBC assertion in
1990s(Post-Mandal). It projects national interest over the interest of
the people, has seeds of expansionism (Akhand Bharat), targets
minorities to strengthen its social base (first Muslims then the
Christians), glorifies past as the sustaining force, is aggressive to
the weaker sections of society and has base mainly amongst urban
middle class, upper caste and section of socially ascendant OBC's. It
differs from the European variety of fascist parties in having a long
gestation period, and having an ideologically self-sustaining
organisation, the RSS as the controlling engine.

In Germany, Hitler increased his social and electoral base in a
quick fashion projecting the fear of strong workers movement. The
triangle there was: communists, Hitler's National socialists
(fascists) and the centrists, a kin to the congress here, the Social
Democrats. In spite of seeing the methods and dangerous potential of
Hitler, Communists who were a substantial force, in a way followed the
electoral policy of equidistance from Social Democrats (whom they
called social fascists) and the National socialists (Hitler's party).
They virtually ignored Nazis and thought this is a farcical force,
which can be easily tackled even if they came to power. Hitler had his
own version of VHP and Bajarang Dal(the storm-troopers) whom
communists thought; Hitler will be properly controlling once he is in
power. Though Hitler did not have majority he was able to come to
power through negotiations as the opponents had shifting and divided
aims and were unable to focus on the real essentials of power while
Nazis had unwavering aims and had a firm grasp on 'real politics'.

Apparent similarities between congress and BJP: We will not go into
the economic policies where there is a lot of overlap in the congress
and BJP policies barring two major differences. One, as witnessed
during the 13 month rule of BJP led coalition, is that BJP is more
influenced by the traders who are its major support base. Second,
BJP's version of Swadeshi supports the petty industrialist through and
through, with their much more backward labor relations and advocacy of
firmer repression of workers. This is at one level relative and even
other electoral parties may not have anything much better to offer.
As we have seen congress has appeased Muslim fundamentalist
leadership ignoring the interests of large mass of minorities. It has
communalised the Kashmir and Punjab issues to 'build' the bourgeois
nation state in its own way. Indira was particularly shrewd to begin
the use of communal card from 1980s, Rajiv did the same in Shah Bano
case and opening the locks of Babri Mosque, Narsimha Rao was merrily
fiddling when Ayodhya was getting decimated and most of the congress
govts. have been the mute spectators of the anti Muslim pogroms.
These are grave 'lapses' which show that secular policies are the
first victim when it comes to keep its power intact. But in contrast
BJP and SP are communalism personified, as Aijaz Ahmed points out (EPW
June 1, 96, Pg. 1329) communalism is not an opportunism for them, it
is their very raison detre, their core programme. Its manifestation
will keep changing as per the situation. It is political wing of RSS,
which is pursuing the goal of Hindu Rashtra in pursuance of which
violence has been used like 'surgeons knife' (M S Gowalkar) and the
concept is the mix of Fascist and Fundamentalist state as demonstrated
above. So despite the apparent similarities at core, congress
communalism is opportunist, BJP communalism is programmatic. Congress
communalism at times has been employed at the service of building
'bourgeoisie Nation state', BJP communalism has been / and will be
'dedicated' to the building of Hindu Rashtra.

The Imminent Dangers: Taking advantage of the fragmentation of polity
and rise of regional parties BJP is doing its best to ally with the
short sighted regional parties who, to preserve their regional power
equations are overlooking the fascist / communal core of the BJP which
is there for real. The rise of BJP in the center has dangerous
portents, as with every rise, its hidden agenda becomes the part of
govt. programme. The slogan 'Defeat BJP' apart from being negative in
itself also gives an indirect message that the only other electoral
outfit, which may benefit from this, is congress, whose 'compromised
secularism' is there for every body to see. So the policy of
equidistance from congress & BJP is a better one, argue some friends.

As we haven seen above BJP is the political wing of SP / RSS, its
long-term goal is Hindu Rashtra, which is the decent looking name for
a fascist -Fundamentalist variant. So this BJP should totally be out
of reckoning as far as electoral choice is concerned. Just because
there is a vacuum of parties with better secular & democratic
credentials does not mean that one lands up supporting a party, whose
fascist potential is there without any shadow of doubt? What if
congress which time and over again has used the communalism to fulfil
its ambitious of power, benefits from it? Surely it is an evil whose
magnitude is 'n' times lower than the dangers of BJP being in power.

Alternatives: Thus though the equidistance stance holds no water and
BJP cannot be equated with any other party, it has to be an
'untouchable' for us. (Historical revenge of the untouchables!) From
amongst the other parties one can equate, pick and choose the least
evil, including the congress.But this short term warding off the
fascist danger can just be regarded as a small step in the longer
battle against fascism, longer struggle for building democratic
secular polity on the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.
In today's parlance the centrist parties, most of them can be labeled
like that, respond to the ground realities and absence of radical
progressive movements makes them compromise with their secular -
democratic principles with ease.

The way to build egalitarian, just society is through the painful
path of struggles of the oppressed sections. In a way, the whole
rightward shift of the political language is due to the weakness and
apparent absence of strong social movements. These movements of
workers, dalits, adivasis, women and minorities being scattered as
they are, are not able to reinforce each other and in turn are unable
to influence the direction of the centrist political formations. One
of the by-products of platform for secular democracy will be warding
off the threat of fascist danger, in whatever guise it comes, while
pursuing its goal of social secular democracy in a relentless way.
This building of the platform of Secular democracy and social justice
is the long-term goal towards which the efforts have to begin right
away. Most of the electoral parties cannot properly hold on to the
secular and democratic principles. Its only such a platform based on
the struggles of exploited-weaker sections of society, which not only
can build the egalitarian society with social justice but also during
the course of its struggle can ensure that the centrist formations are
forced to adopt secular and democratic principles on firmer grounds.
Thus 'Defeat BJP' slogan is like a fire fighting measure, a first aid
measure. The real efforts have to be focussed towards much neglected
social movements, towards building the bridges of these with each
other. These bridges are the boosters, which can and will enhance the
total strength not in an additive fashion but by qualitatively
transforming the very nature and social role of these groups.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/act
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications