Kiran Bedi, one of the ubiquitous supporters of the
current Anna Hazare Movement, in her overenthusiasm, said, ‘Anna is India.
India is Anna’. Little did she realize
the significance of that statement! Back
in the heydays when Indira Gandhi was riding absolute power, her supporters chanted,
‘Indira is India. India is Indira’. Now,
we reflect upon that period as a national ignominy when she took over the
country in an iron grip, imposed Emergency, stripped Indians of their rights, and
put hundreds of her political opponents in jail. To those who know history, such a chant from
Kiran Bedi that ‘Anna is India’ reeks of ignorance or arrogance - both of which
are quite dangerous given the popularity of the Anna Hazare Movement.
While discussing Arundhati Roy’s article
(that appeared in The Hindu), I
commented that it is a serious concern that the supporters of Janlokpal Bill do
not include Dalits and Muslims. If Anna
Hazare has to make this an all-encompassing movement to be deemed ‘Indian’, he
has to make sure these other groups support his cause, or be contended that he
represents only a certain section of Indians.
A lady responded to my comment:
In what way does the Jan lokpall
Bill not favor Dalits or Muslims? Do they not want a corruption-free govt?
The implicit assumption in the above question is: “If
you are not with us then you are against us”, which seems to be the moot point
of Arundhati Roy’s article against Anna Hazare Movement. Many editors of the print media have openly
disagreed with Janlokpal Bill. Aruna
Roy, a noted RTI activist, does not support Janlokpal Bill or the Anna Hazare
Movement. Can we conclude that these
people do not stand for anti-corruption?
When the Indian subcontinent was under British Rule,
many Muslims aligned themselves with Muslim League away from the most popular
Congress party. Does it mean that
Muslims of India did not seek freedom from the British? They too wanted freedom, but it was not the
same version of freedom which the Congress sought. When the members of Muslim League worked
closely with Congressmen after the elections of 1937 they started to form an opinion
that the Muslims in India will remain as second class citizens to the Congress
and the Hindus. The Congress did not take measures to embrace
Muslim League and instead left the rift to widen up. So, when the ministers of Congress resigned from
the Government in 1939 because Great Britain included India in World War II
without its consent, Muslim League members continued to serve the Government to
aid the British in their war efforts, paving the way for a future Partition of
India.
It was evident that Congress did not represent all
Indians though they included few members from various communities to make it
look like they represented everyone in India.
Dalits under Ambedkar, Muslims under Muslim League and Sikhs under their
own banner vied to represent their own groups, away from Congress, and they held
discussions with British as separate entities.
Many Muslims did not approve of the methods employed
by Congress which were distinctly Hindu.
Gandhi was a devout Hindu who mixed politics with religion. Most of his congregations were Hindu in
character, singing prayers and chanting devotional songs. Congress nationalists sang Vande Mataram in their fight against
British which the Muslims found anathematic on two fronts - one, that it was initially
used by Hindus to fight against Muslim rulers in Bengal, and two, it contained
Hindu religious icons and imagery which Muslims did not identify with. The current Anna Hazare Movement, by chanting
‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ and singing Vande
Mataram, where saffron is the dominant theme, naturally does not provide a
platform that Muslims can easily embrace.
Though Gandhi endeared Dalits calling them Harijans (the people of the God), Ambedkar
did not agree with the attitudes of Gandhi towards Dalits. Gandhi looked at Dalits the way Abraham
Lincoln looked at Blacks in United States.
He wanted them to be free but still considered them inferior to others. Ambedkar sought a radically different method
to emancipate lower castes in India, which did not find concurrence with
Gandhi. The current domination of Anna
Hazare Movement by the same groups which spearheaded anti-reservations
movement, and the incessant campaign by the Anna Hazare activists to impose
civil representative groups going by their credentials, degrees and awards reek
of elitism, thereby distancing the Dalits of India. Consequently, the current movement is seen solely
as a reaction of smug middle class Indians who mostly comprise the upper caste
or the elite of the backward castes. It has
not been able to include all Indians into its fold.
Not only do Dalits and Muslims feel out of place in
the current Anna Hazare Movement. Many
advocates and champions of constitutional democracy in this country do not
identify with the demands and diktats of the current movement. The demands of Anna Hazare Movement, imposing
their version of the bill as the legitimate wish of all Indians, do not find
champions amongst certain sections of the society who remain opposed to the Janlokpal
Bill, though they come out in the open to defend his right to protest.
The current Anna Hazare movement challenges the
Government of India in claiming to be the legitimate recipients of the mandate
of all Indians. Kiran Bedi shouts, ‘Anna
is India. India is Anna’, to reflect
that monopoly. In this respect, the
arrogance of Government of India is matched by the arrogance of Anna Hazare
Movement. While the battle between these
two entities takes the front stage, the saner elements of the debate are thrown
out of the door. There are some clauses
in Janlokpal Bill which are quite contentious.
The jingoism is not allowing the debate to happen.
Many do not realize this but the name ‘India’ says a
great deal about India. If it had been ‘Hindustan’ or ‘Bharat’ we would have
alienated many people living within.
Nehru did a masterstroke when he took the name ‘India’ instead of ‘Hindustan’
or ‘Bharat’. By taking the name ‘India’,
he achieved two things – first, he inherited the legacy of a rich history of a prominent
role in the world politics that comes attached to the name ‘India’, and second,
he ensured that no group in the country gets alienated.
The activists of the Janlokpal bill have been able to
garner support mostly from those who earlier participated in the anti-reservation
protests, and the Hindu nationalists who look at India as a Hindu goddess rather
than as a secular country. And through
this, it has alienated certain groups in this country. Anna at the most represents ‘Bharat’ or the
‘Hindustan’. And he has not embraced ‘India’
as yet.
The Best Idea for Center is to Follow YSR, launch Populist welfare measures, Double or treble the NREGA and other social welfare programs. And Discredit Anna Hazares movement as an Middle class chaste Hindu Drama.
ReplyDeleteBut that would be "difficult" for our UPA, Instead it will give in to Anna Hazare but wrangle with the details till 2014, so when the New Lokpal comes in to measure there will be already new elections.
Good article.
ReplyDeleteI am tempted to say "If you don't agree with the methods/means/teams of Anna Hazare and want to do it your way, with your ideas of a lokpal.....go ahead and form another movement".
ReplyDeleteI say this because in reponse to my post in another article of yours, you made the same statement. My statement then was that some of us did not believe in the T state concept in the way the current protagonists were propoogating and that we had our own ideas. Your response was that we should then not comment on the current movement but form our own movement.
Nothing is stopping an Aruna Roy or somebody from starting their own movement and having their own version of the bill. Just as KCR is not the only one who wants Telangana, Kiran Bedi and others are not the only one who want a lokpal bill. Anna just happened to be the anchor who originated the movement. It may be that his team has only hindu, upper caste people. but the fact remains that the result of their movement is going to benefit not only the upper caste but also all other castes. (assuming that there are benefits of the bill).
The lokpal bill has many objections. But let the bill come in this form , then we will solve the problems with it. (There are issues with a T state led by the upper castes, the lower castes may lose out, said some people on your blog. Your response was - let the state be formed we will solve such issues later).
Not everyone agrees with every point of the lokpal bill. I may think some are stupid. You may not. But if we take the first step with the overt or covert support of even the RSS what is wrong? The RSS is a legitimate organization of this country with a large numebr of followers. Their presence should not stop a good thing.
Sujai, one cannot draw conclusions based on perceptions. One needs facts. Can I conclude that you are a christian based on some of your articles? I may have such perception but that does not become the truth.
Mr. Sujith:
ReplyDeleteWhat you mean to say? If we are Bharath or Hindusthan, was it to mean alienation of certain sections? Come out of your so-called Intellectual Shell, as you mentioned in your blog's intro, the asshole.
Come out of your greener cocoon and look at the Anna's movement. All the sections of the society including Dalits and Muslims are aligned with the cause, not with the Anna. he is not an individual, he is a force to reckon with.
Don't try to align yourself with negative propagandists like Arundhati Roy. Anna need not visit door to door to garner support, people standing behind him like a wall. He is a fort now. Don't through slur on him and degrade yourself.
- Vishala Thanniva
Mr. Sujith:
ReplyDeleteWhat you mean to say? If we are Bharath or Hindusthan, was it to mean alienation of certain sections? Come out of your so-called Intellectual Shell, as you mentioned in your blog's intro, the asshole.
Come out of your greener cocoon and look at the Anna's movement. All the sections of the society including Dalits and Muslims are aligned with the cause, not with the Anna. he is not an individual, he is a force to reckon with.
Don't try to align yourself with negative propagandists like Arundhati Roy. Anna need not visit door to door to garner support, people standing behind him like a wall. He is a fort now. Don't through slur on him and degrade yourself.
- Vishala Thanniva
I must say an irresponsible and disappointing peace from your side.
ReplyDeleteKiran Bedi's words are immature-no doubt.So they deserve to be condemned.What I find amusing is comparison of Anna with Indira.Because though it may fit your argument; everyone knows latter was power-hungry creature,while Anna has discarded every possibility of getting the taste of legitimate power.But with due respect,I agree that doesn't qualify Bedi to use such words.
I have read some of your articles about muslims and dalits.While they delight me for your consent to understand their genuine problems,what nullifies the impression is your approach to always discard majority's concerns.
For eg.1. Your wisdom to understand that not singing vande mataram doesn't make a muslim anti-indian and at the same time discarding the possibility that singing vande mataram doesn't make a hindu anti-muslim.
2. Urging hindus to understand the fact that muslims consider their religion above country,and also blaming hindus for seeing india as goddess.Why can't you understand that hindus are as religious as muslims are?If there's to be a understanding;let it be mutual,let both the sides take calculated steps,why only majority?Because it will not solve the problem anyway.Communal forces will always be their to exploit these differences.
Secondly,as of Anna movement,I witnessed Anna himself chanting "hindu,muslim,sikh,isai....",muslims ending their roza with the hands Anna Hazare.Why is it not being taken as a ray of hope for the future?Some critics with communal interests have gone one step ahead and called them choreographed acts.Well,maybe.But one can't damn them for both doing as well as for not doing.
Sujai, one cannot draw conclusions based on perceptions. One needs facts. Can I conclude that you are a christian based on some of your articles? I may have such perception but that does not become the truth.
ReplyDeleteIn India one need not be Christian or Muslim or Buddhist etc to talk against Hinduism.
But you keep bashing Hinduism you will be a popular secular Intellectual.
Good one Sujai. I agree with this mostly.
ReplyDelete