In March when I was campaigning for the BJP, I went to my aunt’s place in Delhi for dinner. In the course of our conversation, my cousin, a bright economics student, suddenly said, “Anna, why do you campaign for the BJP, of all parties? They are stuck with the Mandir and don’t allow the country to move forward”. I responded with the age old refutes of any pro-BJP person and the conversation meandered towards more ‘useful’ topics.
In April, I was still with Advani when I met an old friend from my UNDP days. He was downright churlish and called BJP a bunch of ‘right wing loonies’ and the country would be better of without it.
Recently, my cousin liked the link I posted on facebook titled, ‘Bharatanatyam in the time of the Taliban’, a wonderful article from ‘The Hindu’ about a Hindu dance teacher in Islamabad who has been teaching Bharatanatyam to kids there from the days to Zia to the present Talibanic days.
My friend took the arduous trek to Amarnath.
The appreciation of these anti-BJP types on two manifestations of ‘Hindutva’ left me wondering. Is Hindutva something that is can be tapped for the sake of electoral contests? Should be tapped in the first place? If it is ‘tappable’ and should be tapped, why hasn’t it been done well?
There is a prevalent feeling in large sections of the Indian society that divisive politics of minority appeasement, which is un-Inidian, is practiced by the Congress. So there is a tappable bunch of Hindutva believers. Though Hindutva is in more in the socio-cultural space representing the ‘civilization ethos of our country’, the presence of threat to the ‘way of life’ through a political entity, necessitates tapping of Hindutva for political purposes. There is a need for an entity in the political arena to stand for the ‘Indian way’ and the BJP fills that space.
Answer to the last question quite ironically can be found in the expostulation of ‘Hindutva’ itself. While the need it to stand against the divisive politics of the Congress, some sections of the BJP took sides in the communal confrontation and deepened the divide. This was done for crass votes-power reasons. This was unacceptable to the moderate populace that believed in ‘Hindutva’ as unifying force.
So the party which espouses Hindutva, in the real sense of the word, has legitimate role in the Indian politics and society. With honest actions and clear explanation of the elegant theory of ‘Integral Humanism’ which was the mother of ‘Hindutva’, folks like my cousin and friend can be put in a position where they can make more educated choices.
In all BJP offices you will invariably find pictures of two gentlemen who are unfamiliar to first timers. They belonged mostly to the middle of the last century and did not become ministers at any level, leave alone prime ministers. What was in Dr. Syama Prasad Mookherjee and Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya that stirred men for generations and held a political party that came to power in the fag end of the 20th Century in such awe and respect? Did they promise economic freedom and material prosperity alone that would provide succor to the young nation? They had something more that appealed to the emotions that inspired people to keep ‘the flame’ alive for more than half a century. Ideology is not just that appeals to rational mind, it touches the heart and that arouses strong sense of pride.
Pandit Deen Dayal Upadhyay laid out the brilliant treatise of ‘Integral Humanism’ which provided customized guidance to the Indian society. It was accepted as the BJP’s guiding ideology – the one that was truly Indian. ‘Hindutva’ was a child of ‘Integral Humanism’ and the creator himself referred to it as ‘Bharatiyata’ or ‘Indianness.’ Terming ‘Hindutva’ to mean ‘Hindus only’ is as childish as saying that the venerable newspaper ‘The Hindu’ is pro- Hindu.
In the raging battle in BJP intelligentsia on whether to abandon ‘Hindutva’ or firm up ‘Hindutva’, no one has professed the real solution, which would be clarify the oft maligned word and give it the original intended meaning. In fact all the party leaders and thinkers should either individually or collectively come out with a paper, clearly expostulating the ideology. This would not only solidify the binding glue that is force majeure of the party, it would give clarity of thought to the party’s new leaders and also let the public know about what they mean when they say that.
As one of the political journalists put it, BJP suffers from ‘etymological obstacle’ with Hindutva. It is not just because people are narrowly interpreting it, but the leaders find it convenient to use the word to refer to theocratic nationalism to gain cheap votes. What Varun Gandhi practices is not Hindutva. It is communalism, thuggery and divisive politics which have no place in Pandit Updhyaya’s theory or the Hindu hearts.For the ‘Hindus only’ interpretation to dissolve, the leaders would do well to use ‘Hindutva’ and ‘Bharatiyata’ concurrently to explicate the actual meaning in public debates in the media.
As India gains economic prowess and stature, being Indian has become a matter of pride. Especially to the young generation that is unfettered with socialism or history, preaching ‘Indianness’ will be a saleable strategy. People will be able to subtly appreciate the nuances of ‘Hindutva’ that way which will be doing the greatest service to the ideology and the founder. ‘Indianness’ will not only woo Hindus, but all Indians – Muslims, Christians, OBCs included as the theory in itself is timeless.
Having rediscovered the essence of Hindutva, the party should improve up on it to suit the times we live in. It should integrate economic welfare, national prosperity and security in to Indianness. By amalgamating economic thought to the political and societal ideology BJP will have a 21st Century theory to influence public debate.
The party should enter propaganda stage as soon as possible. It should clarify through media constantly and consistently on what they are and why people should support them. Politicians know well that societal changes are slow to come and people take time to assimilate new ideas. So BJP should not wait for the next elections to come out with the proposition and make it look like election time gimmickry.
For such rationalizing, the party needs to be open to critical enquiry. Just shunning uncomfortable arguments, even from people who have worked very hard and given it all, is pitiful. It should rid itself of the high school attitude and address issues strongly and confidently. At the same time impulsive supporters should empathize with the situation and get set in problem solving mode than going public with what is wrong. At the time of defeat more than the content of articles, the attitude of finger pointing is not helping anybody. The leaders should stand united and deliberate things on the way forward with true courage and team spirit.
Some analysts that refer to the right of centre position being open for the BJP to occupy do not appreciate the unique Indian position. Economically, India is in such a stage in its growth trajectory where pure right wing, pro-business policies will not make much political sense (case study – NREGA). In the religious sense given India’s diversity any pro-religion strategy is doomed to fail (case study – Election 2009). BJP can clearly position itself as a nationalist party.
When ideology merges with a strong organization and sleek execution the BJP can be rebuilt to suit modern India.The raw materials are there. It just takes sweat and guts to build it from here. When the strong organization is built fighting elections becomes easier and more efficient.When you are process oriented the results are bound to come.
We live in times of ‘India Rising’ and we need a party that does profess doing things the Indian way. Atalji’s immortal words, “Andhera chhatega, Suraj nikhalega, Kamal khilega” can definitely become a reality yet again.
The voter turnout was disgusting in Mumbai. For obvious reasons, I expected it to be at least 65%. The apathetic 42% exposed the phony of the candle-light wavers’ emotional upheavals during post 26/11 TV drama. Cities have always been in the fore front of arousing national consciousness and are supposed to show leadership during crucial times, like it happened during the freedom movement. But the Mumbaikars chose the long weekend over the long road to revolution. When fellow countrymen braved bullets to caste their vote the bums of Bombay chose to warm their backsides.
This has stirred debates among the ‘conscious’ folks on making voting compulsory. Though I feel appalled when people choose not to vote, I feel the forcible voting through legal measures are not right. The role of the state is not to control people’s liberties. It has to provide a legal framework under which people go about doing their lives.It has no business asking the people of the state to behave in a particular way.The voters are the masters and they have to be ‘persuaded’ to vote. The state cannot force them to vote. Even having the ‘none of the above’ option and making voting compulsory is against the grain of liberalism. That will be a bully state then and not a liberal state.
So what is the solution? There is no way we are going to get 100% turnouts. Even if you have 25% people suffering from apathy or ideological aversion to democracy and voting, it should be made sure the rest are incentivized to vote. Good governance, intra party democracy, provision of decent candidates to choose from, governance structure reforms (will blog later about it), better amenities to voting public, making sure every voter has a voter card (I think legitimate voters not featuring in the list is a tragedy that shaves 5-10% points from the voting percentage), other simple logistical planning such as keeping elections is a more reasonable month of March or April, not having it close to a long weekend etc. are a few to name.
The whole paradigm shift from ‘giving the rags an opportunity to ink fingers’ to ‘servicing the voter’ is the key. Good governance is damn essential to keep democracy alive. The stage next to voter apathy is anti-national activity.
Will the current global recession make people look at globalisation from a different perspective?
Capitalism will undergo a lot of changes because today's capitalism is not what Adam Smith conceived or Karl Marx opposed. Today, capitalists are not the people who handle capital; it's the professionals. It's somebody else's money that the professionals are handling. So, it is not capitalist's capitalism; it's professionals' capitalism.
Now, a further change that has taken place is, it is not actual money, but virtual money that is being used. Imaginary money has been created by brain power and that is put to use as real power. That is the crisis today.
This kind of capitalism will be gone and the original capitalism where 'I look after my wealth' will come back again. That is good for the world. This other man's money I handle which has promoted the expenditure-driven market mechanism is a product of neo-capitalism.
Banking secrecy was considered one of the virtues of capitalism. Now, they call it an evil! This is the U-turn in one year!
In one of your earlier interviews, you told rediff.com that globalisation was not sustainable.
Who is talking about globalisation today? Today, it's just not environmentally, ecologically and culturally sustainable. I have always maintained that it was not economically sustainable, because it is contrary to the very meaning and definition of economics which is associated with frugality.
It is an executive class economics different from the economy class which brings out the difference between economics and excessiveness.
Moreover, globalisation disregards the existence of countries; they talk about a global society, global rule, global citizens, global villages, etc. It was an absolutely idealistic idiosyncrasy. That is gone.
Who is talking about the WTO? I told you long ago that the WTO will not last. If you create an artificial structure, it will not stand. People in different parts of the world have their own models of living; you cannot homogenise them, make them wear the same dress, eat the same food, or see the same cinema or have the same goals. This is what West-centric globalisation attempted, and got the first taste of it in the last four, five years.
Will people start thinking in terms of swadeshi?
People will be more conscious of their surroundings, their people, their family and their society first, and not the distant world.
As a first hand witness and participant in political parties wooing apathetic urban voters through SMS/Emails/Online Forums, the two pictures that appeared in 'The Hindu' came out as a slap on the face RISKY VENTURE: Officials taking electronic voting machines to Killomkota, an interior area about 150 km from Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh, on Wednesday. The area is a Maoist stronghold and to cover a distance of 10 km from Kodimamidi to Killomkota, it takes an hour and half due to the rough terrain and crossing of two streams. Maoists have called for poll boycott.
Flag March: Indo-Tibetan Border Police personnel taking out a flag march on the eve of the first phase of Lok Sabha elections in naxal-affected areas of Jehanabad constituency in Bihar on Thursday.
