83.Essay Writing Format, structure and Examples.’ CHALLENGES TO SECULARISM IN INDIA’

CHALLENGES TO SECULARISM IN INDIA

OR

THE GROWING COMMUNALIZATION OF THE INDIAN POLITY

INTRODUCTION: The expression ‘secular’ has special significance in the context of the historical development of Indian polity. Indeed, it is of pivotal importance particularly in the context of political realities on the ground as they exist now. In a plural society like ours, with a multiplicity of religious creeds and cultures, democracy cannot survive and flourish unless it is based on the principle of secularism.

DEVELOPMENT OF THOUGHT: Secular means non-religious but in the Indian context, it is interpreted to mean the equality and co-existence of all religions. While the Constitution guarantees a secular polity and provides safeguards for the minorities, the actual implementation is not easy in the face of cultural assertion by the majority Hindus and the feeling of isolation by the Muslims especially in the aftermath of the traumatic incidents of partition, Ayodhya and Godhara. The political parties of all hues have been responsible for exploiting communal passions for political gains; no less responsible are the religious heads who instead of striving for reforms have sought to keep their followers in the claim, of superstition. obscurantism and fanaticism. All these factors have contributed to the growing communalisation of the Indian polity. The destruction of the Babri Masjid has dealt a severe blow to the avowed secularism of the country. Unless an attempt is made to contain these forces of communalism, the very unity or India is in danger. India can survive only if secularism does.

CONCLUSION: Secularism has to play a decisive role at the present stage of Indian democracy. Communal disturbances which have disfigured the public life in the recent past, as well as the birth and growth of narrow and divisive trends and also the growth of obscurantist theories-are mainly the result of ignorance, and ignorance can be fought not by legislation alone, nor by a negative fiat alone, but by education, and in the process of educating the traditional Indian mind, secularism and all that it stands for have to play a major role.

 The English word ‘secular means `non-ecclesiastical’ and secularism is more a negative concept than a positive one. However, in the Indian context, the term ‘secular’ has been interpreted to mean maintenance of equality and co-existence of all the religions.

The Government of free India adopted an approach which was not opposition to religion but the removal of religion from public affairs, the separation of State from all faiths, the insistence on religion as a private matter for the individual with no bearing on civil rights and duties. This approach was not only a part of the “modern outlook” but also “the most practical approach.” In fact, the State-sponsored project of secular pedagogy of the nation was to be elaborated systematically in the domain of education and mass  media involving the intelligentsia.

If not completely eradicated, at least, the tide of `comfritinalism’ was expected to recede and be marginalized with the forging ahead of the combined onslaught of secular ideological indoctrination and industrialization. But it was easy to proclaim a theory in which there was a prior separation between ‘religion’ and ‘state politics’ than to effect it.

The kind of cultural issues that emerged and coincided with the establishment of the independent nation-state clearly showed that the relationship between Hindu cultural nationalism, political nationalism and the sphere of state politics was a complex one. Some of these issues were: the construction of the temple at Somnath, abolition of cow slaughter, Hindi as the national language and the Hindu Code Bill which, inadvertently, further underlined the idea of Hindus being a separate community despite their internal differentiation.

Secular historiography has failed to note the important fact that for considerable sections of Indians and the Indian National Congress, 1947 meant not only a moment of political independence but also, to put it in the words of a scholar, the foremost cultural ideologue of Hindu Nationalism, and the end of “a thousand years of slavery”.

For them, it was also a moment of celebrating the cultural pride and glory, of the Hindus. But there were others in the Congress, especially Jawaharlal Nehru and his followers, who were in serious disagreement with such attitudes, and considered it a manifestation of ‘medievalism’ and ‘communalism.’

A cursory survey of the contentious cultural issues raised immediately after August 1947 leads us to the conclusion that when it came to the crunch, the Government could not implement the theoretical principles and there was a retreat from what was considered to be desirable action on the part of the State. Between theory and practice, fell the shadow of “hesitancy”. The principles of secularism retreated into ideals, and the last decade has seen the virtual collapse of secularism in the face of growing communalism.

 At the time of the independence struggle, many people were committed to the task of modernizing and reforming religious practices in this country. But what do we see now? Instead of reform, we see conscious effort to bring back the old rituals and wild ideas in all the religions.

The socio-economic backwardness of the vast sections of our people, both Hindus and Muslims, has always been a fertile ground for superstition, obscurantism, fanaticism and communal hatred. The obscurantist and conservative leaders on both sides do not want any progress and uplift of the masses so that they may continue to exploit them in all possible ways. This phenomenon has also contributed to a very great extent towards the growth and development of communalism in India.

The worst culprit in this regard is perhaps what is known as fundamentalism. The fundamentalists want to restrict the thoughts and practices of the whole community to what they consider to be the basic or original tenets of their religion. This leads to dogmas and superstitions. They refuse to move with the times and see new truth in a new light. They are against science and scientific temper. They are wholly irrational in their approach and revivalist in their outlook. In short, the fundamentalists believe in maintaining the existing social order, if not in going back to the dark ages of the past, in perpetuating the backwardness of the masses, in the suppression of women in general — and all these in the name of saving the religion. The fundamentalists make religion a prisoner of dogmas, superstitions and obscurantism and do not allow religion to find full expression as a force of liberation of the human mind and spirit.

The fundamentalists with their obscurantist attitude do not allow the Muslims, especially those at the bottom rungs, to come up in life. In the post-independence period, Indian Muslims have been over-zealously safeguarding their separate identity, rights and privileges as Muslims and are reluctant to join the national mainstream. Many Muslims still harbour fear in their minds about Hindus domination and threat to their community and are afraid of coming out of their isolation.

In the meantime, Hindu fundamentalists are inciting the gullible amongst the Hindus to rise against the establishment by making them believe that in a country where the Hindus are in a majority, they are being treated as class citizens. While the Central government has divided the Hindus as those belonging to the upper and lower castes — in the South, particularly in Tamil Nadu, the Dravidian parties have been dividing the people as Dravidians and Aryans — and successfully created a rift between the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins.

 There has been an appreciable rise in communal temperature during the last few years. And it culminated in the demolition of the historic Babri Masjid —to which no Muslim anywhere in the world would be really reconciled, followed by large-scale rioting, where again the main sufferers have been Muslims. On top, in certain quarters threats are being muttered against similar mosques in Varanasi and Mathura.

The BJP, VHP, RSS and the Bajrang Dal may have their good reasons for reviving the glories of Hinduism or making India a Hindu state. But the harsh fact is that their activities are exacerbating communal tensions. If one community strives for a more aggrandized identity it cannot but provoke the others to do the same —more so when resorted to by organizations of the majority community. Hindus enjoy such overwhelming majority in numbers that they run absolutely no risk of being threatened. As Nehru aptly said, “The responsibility for communal peace rests primarily on Hindus”. Happenings like the demolition of Babri Masjid can become terribly counter-productive though their perpetrators may gloat over the performance.

After independence, all the political parties have exploited religion and caste in order to win elections. Some have done this overtly, some covertly. If we analyse the choice of candidates by different parties and the propaganda methods and tactics used in the different elections, we can clearly see the major role played by religious calculations.

Unfortunately, the spectrum of Indian politics which shunned communalism in it has been gradually disappearing. It is not only in corruption and the growing nexus between politicians, bureaucracy and goonda mafia elements that the general degeneration of Indian politics has been finding expression. It also expressed Itself in a soft approach towards Hindu, Muslim or Sikh communalism.

Communalism is properly described as politics structured around communal ideology. Communal parties, such as the Muslim League, the Akali parties and the BJP have been extending their sphere of influence.

On the other hand, the Congress (I) and the Janata Dal, as also the Telugu Desam, Assam Gana Parishad, DMK and AIADMK appear to have followed an opportunist policy towards communalism in recent years and, have not, in any case, adopted an uncompromising stance towards it. Communal parties and groups are interested in whipping up communal passions while the secular-opportunist parties tend to vacillate and retreat in the face of the communal onslaught. This retreat assumes abject proportions when faced with electoral loss or communal violence. Both vacillations and retreat were clearly visible in Punjab during 1981-1986 in the face of virulent communalism and terrorism and regarding the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on Dec. 6, 1992. Moreover, most of India’s secular intelligentsia also joined this retreat.

 Even the press is guilty of fanning communal sentiments. With an eye to increasing their circulation, many newspapers tried to out-do their rivals by taking a fundamentalist stand and thereby stoking communal tension.

Similarly, competition among big officials, industrialists, entrepreneurs .1 smugglers, rich men, vested interests, religious fundamentalists is an important 1 factor in provoking communal clashes. This is a dangerous situation.

If secularism fails there will be no India. Can anybody assert that Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Sikkim, Nagaland, and Mizoram will continue to exist in a non-secular India? And, who can say that without secularism the extremist activities prevailing in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir would not spread throughout the country? If secularism were\ buried, India, as we know it today, would cease to exist.

Therefore, it is essential that secularism should be maintained at any cost.

Besides banning all communal organizations, the present situation demands, the launching of a social and cultural movement, which would effectively counter the growing threat from communal forces. Among other things, education curricula at the different levels must be completely freed from religious influence so as to inculcate among students the scientific outlook and temper.

 The process of change has to start from the top and if need be the Constitution should be amended to provide for the needful. State machinery should be freed from religious rituals. Official visits to places of worship of any religion, by VIPs, the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, other Ministers, MPs and MLAs, and public servants should be prohibited. They can visit as a citizen of the country without any official sanction.

 Political propaganda against the BJP alone is not sufficient to keep the majority of the Hindus secular. Just as we say that the minorities should be protected by the majority community, the minority leaders should also ready to make some changes in their style of functioning and approach in order to keep the Hindu majority as their protectors and friends. All the just rights of minorities should be protected.

 At the same time, the belief, that one would be a good friend of the minorities only if one blindly believes all that is being said in the name of the minorities should be corrected. Just as we oppose the Hindu communalism we should stiffly oppose the demands and actions in the name of the minorities that may adversely affect national sentiment, unity and religious amity.

 Political parties alone cannot maintain secularism to India. Religious leaders should also work to do so. At the time of independence struggle, fresh attempts should be made to bring about social reform within all the religious groups, will survive only if religious friendship and religious tolerance are allowed to grow. We should think about ways and means of developing a religious friendship movement beyond political and caste and creed consideration.

Along with the religious friendship movement, an elaborate socio-cultural reawakening movement is also essential in this country.

 If the country is to survive, secularism must be reasserted. Our political parties should be ready to stall, at least temporarily, their attempts to defeat each other in elections by all means. India can survive as a country only if we launch a movement, on a war footing, to bolster unity and uphold secular values.

Download the above Essay in PDF (Printable)

Need our help or have some question