Nehru is reportd to have asserted that he was a Hindu only by accident of birth. By culture he was a Muslim. It was lucky for Nehru that he was cremated as a Hindu and not buried as a Muslim. Otherwise he would have been required to turn over in his grave beause of the results of elections to the Karnataka Vidhan Sabha.
The Janata Dal (secular) has been decimated. Nehru's Congress has been very badly mauled, even when it has been making lots of noise about secularism and condemning the Bharatiya Janata Party as communal. However, the people of Karnataka have put faith in the BJP and that party has entered the `southern region' of the country where its entry was regarded as next to impossible by the `secular forces' in the country.
By a strange coincidence the Karnataka results have come on the eve of Nehru's 44th death anniversary. They have followed the Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh election results pattern and political pundits have already started believing that elections to the state assemblies in the near future to be followed by elections to Parliament will show almost the same trend.
What conclusion can we possibly draw? The only logical conclusion is that like Nehruvian pseudosocialism, Nehruvian pseudosecularism is also dead. These two were the main props on which the entire edifice of Nehru's policies, both internal and external was based. Nehru accepted both socialism and democracy knowing fully well the contradiction involved. Prof S Gopal has observed `he (Nehru) had no use for the argument that democracy and socialism are contradictory and that democratic socialism is only a façade to cloak a distinction to alter status quo'. Heras Memorial lectures, Dec 1977 (P185 `Nehru and his political ideology by SR Bakshi).
This ..inclination to alter the status quo was the result of a realization on Nehru's part that he did not have the political and administrative ability to bring about a basic change in the socio-political set-up of the country which India then needed as a newly independent country wanting social, political and economic changes to repair the damage done by the colonial rule. He had inherited power from the British. He also inherited a few tricks of the trade. His popularity with the masses encouraged him to have an apparent shows of democracy. But he was not very sure of popular support all the time. He therefore decided to continue with the British `divide and rule game'. To ensure victory in the battle of the ballot-box , he adopted the game in a new avatar, which has been rightly named as the vote bank game. As the Indian Constitution adopted adult franchise and joint electorates, Nehru posed as the sole protector of the Muslim minority left behind in India after partition, thus playing the same role which the British administration in India had been playing before independence.
It proved very useful for him and his party to remain in power for a long time. But, people learn with the passage of time. Hindus have started realizing that it would be politically disastrous for them if they do not assert their majority status on all vital issues of national importance.
The rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party with its plank of Hindu nationalism and the decline and fall of the Congress party is a very clear indication of this basic change that has come in the attitude of the average Hindu voter. While as a majority they have objection to being large-hearted and magnanimous, they refuse to accept that their majority status should be taken for granted. They have no quarrel with secularism which is an integral part of the Hindu ethos, but they simply do not accept being called `communal just because they now and then like to look after the majority interests.
It is high time the Congress appreciates this fact of the country's political life. Whatever its state of affairs at present it is still an all India party. Hence it is its political and moral duty to realize that the rise of the BJP as another all India party is in the interest of Indian democracy. The Congress and the BJP can certainly take the country to the two party system which is regarded as ideal for democracy all over the world.
An end must be put to the secular- communal debate. Secularism is not only enshrined in the Indian Constitution but it is an article of faith with the Hindu majority. There is absolutely no quarrel between Hindu nationalism and secularism. The Muslims who did not go to Pakistan after partition accepted inter-alia that while their religious identity as Muslims would be safe and secure in India that is BHARAT their cultural and national identity will be Hindu. They cannot have a Muslim political identity.
Once this is settled once for all, the secular- communal whirlpool in Indian politics will disappear and a new Indian polity which will think and act in terms of socio-economic issues only will definitely emerge. Hence the need of the hour is to give a decent burial to Nehruvian pseudo-secularism on this 44th anniversary of Nehru's death.
Prof YG Bhave
Print This Page
Terms
and Conditions