Communal politics in India is primarily due to absence of land reforms; absence of process of secularization and failure to reduce the hold of clergy: Dr Ram Puniyani

Dr Ram Puniyani has been one of the foremost voices against communalism and has been active in promoting communal amity and national integration through various engagements at the grassroots. A regular commentator on the important socio-political issues, Dr Ram Puniyani has written as well as edited many books on communalism and for secular polity in India. In this detailed conversations with activist-writer Vidya Bhushan Rawat, he explains various issues confronting the nation.

VB:  India is passing through one of the toughest period since independence. You have seen the emergency time too. What difference do you find today and during emergency in 1975?

RP: Emergency period and today’s political scenario cannot be compared. Emergency was the authoritarian imposition of the dictatorial norms by a small coterie around Indira Gandhi through the existing mechanisms of state. There was a censorship on the press. Snajay Gandhi’s over enthusiastic family planning drive led to the Turkmen gate incident.  The state was operating arbitrarily though its own will.

Today’s situation is like a semi fascist rule. The power is exercised by the political party through its different allied organizations. While BJP is in power, the dictates of RSS are at the core of the situation. Whole RSS combine (The allied organizations of RSS like VHP, ABVP, Bajrang Dal to name the few) is on the run, and repression is applied through these organizations. These organizations have created a base among a society. This section of people stands with the state in repressing the minorities and the poorer sections of society. Cow vigilantes and Hindu Yuva Vahini are an example of that. The hate other ideology, which has been spread through RSS shakhas is now part of ‘social common sense’, and this forms the basis of Hatred and violence in the society. Emotive issues are dominating the social space and an atmosphere of intolerance is the order of the day.

VB:  What are the reasons of the growth of the Hindu communal politics in India? Definitely, it would not have been possible without the 'liberal' upper caste Hindu interests of the Sangh variety inside the Congress Party and their failure in tackling the communal politics in India.

RP: Communal politics in India is primarily due to absence of land reforms; absence of process of secularization, failure to reduce the hold of clergy, which are missing in Indian society. While Muslim communal elements were primarily in Muslim League, the Hindu communal elements were spread in Hindu Mahasabha, RSS and Congress as well. Their influence of these elements within Congress party was marginal till Nehru was there. These communal elements in the party did keep communalism alive within Congress as well. After Nehru’s death they started getting more hold and their influence led to opportunist communal politics of Congress coming to the fore. Nehru did warn that communal elements are within the party as well, but they could not be rooted out from the party.

VB: You have recently mentioned that Nehru's letters to the chief ministers must be published for wider dissemination to understand how he used to interact with his chief ministers. In fact his letter to Uttar Pradesh chief minister Govind Ballabh Pant with regard to Ayodhya issue is eye opener. There may be other similar letters. At the time when Nehru is being blamed for every evil that we have, how important will these letters be?

RP: Nehru was a thorough democrat. At the same time he was trying to root secularism in a society gripped by religiosity. In order to keep the state chief ministers in the loop for secular democratic values and things related to education, industrialization etc., he was writing regularly to them. The letter he wrote to Govind Vallabh Pant was for removing the Ram lalla idols which were forcibly installed in the Babri Mosque in 1949. Similarly on all crucial issues, he was corresponding with the CMs. These letters contain the wisdom of state craft along with the values of liberal democratic state.

VB: BJP tried to co-opt every icon. They started with Sardar Patel then came to Subhash Chandra Bose and now to Ambedkar. In between they have used Gandhi, Vivekananda as well as Bhagat Singh. At the moment, the focus seems to be totally on Dr Ambedkar. Some people wrote that RSS do not its own icon and hence it needs someone else. All of these icons might have differences with Nehru as well as Gandhi but all of them stood for idea of inclusive secular socialist India. Why do you think Nehru has become so important for the Sangh parivar and current dispensation that they want to discredit him through using the differences that he might have with contemporary leaders which was natural?

RP: There are multiple reasons for co-opting these icons of freedom movement, those who contributed to the process of India is a Nation in the making. As RSS kept aloof from freedom movement, due to its agenda of Hindu nation (In contrast the Indian nation agenda of these icons), which was the goal of freedom movement. It discouraged its volunteers to participate in freedom movement.  In addition the attempt to co-opt Ambedkar is for electoral purposes, to win over sections of dalits in particular.

Nehru apart from being a very popular mass leader standing for secular values was also a person who had vision of modern India with Industrialization and modern education. He is the total anti thesis of what RSS wants to bring in. Nehru’s domestic policies for a democratic state are anathema to RSS. Nehru’s policy of global peace, peace with neighbors and alliance with neighbors is totally opposed to expansionist ideology of RSS. Nehru’s impact on the masses, mass consciousness has been too strong and respectable all around, so to establish the hegemonic Hindu Nation, they need to undermine what Nehru stood for.

VB: Why has Congress party become so weak that it is unable to respond the current political crisis? It has the legacy of political leaders and yet it failed to challenge the distorted narratives that were being built around its top leaders. 

RP: Congress was a movement in pre Independence period. The national movement was educating the masses through the anti colonial movement. After Independence Congress became the party in power and later party for power. The elements of mass education for a democratic society was totally missing in its programs, while it was best suited to counter the narratives being developed in RSS shakhas and later through RSS led campaigns like Ram Temple and Holy cow. The writing of its leaders like Gandhi and Nehru has dealt with some of the issues which are dominating social scene. Like Gandhi’s writing of Indian History, his understanding of Cow as mother are totally opposed to what RSS is exploiting for its political goals. The main strength of Congress came from the downtrodden sections of society; it failed to speak for them effectively, paid mere lip service to the issues of dalits and religious minorities for example. Similarly in case of these icons, Congress has all the material from its history to keep them away from the grip of RSS, but somehow the will power for this is missing. Most of the top Congress leaders are office holders and none of the tall leader is devoted for promoting and protecting the legacy of freedom movement

VB: While it is easier to blame to Rahul Gandhi for so-called inexperience or whatever fault line but the fact is that he has a legacy and the carrying the burden of it is too difficult at the moment when things are against the family but what are the reasons of dismal state of affairs in the left parties. Is it because they become the biggest bastion of upper caste politics and failed to carry the SC-ST-OBC-Minorities along with it?

RP: Rajiv Gandhi’s mistakes cost the nation very heavily. In addition the left parties failed to grasp the issue of caste in Indian society. They failed to intervene against the rising tide of communal politics. The RSS agenda has twin tracks. On one hand it targets minorities and on the other the dalit-ObC. On both these counts left failed to come up to take the challenge thrown by the Hindutva politics. Rahul Gandhi has been targeted by Hindutva leaders, though his intentions seem to be serious, the backup from the supporters is lacking in intensity. Things have by now become too complex to achieve the goals of dalit-Bahujan upliftment without alliances, which are not easy to forge. Left parties have not addressed the caste-minorities issue in any seriousness. Their pivot of understanding is mainly around class analysis of society.

VB: Uttar Pradesh results have not just disappointed many but it has also given strong sense of approval to the ruling party on the issues such as Demonetization and the communal rhetoric. What in your opinion has failed the non BJP opposition in Uttar Pradesh particularly SP-BSP who were the main players there. 

RP: UP strategy of BJP was strongly communal. Most of the issues were presented in the communal angle. Even demonetization was sold as a move to curb Muslims’ clout, as Muslims generally are part of cash economy. In addition most of the issues were presented as if BSP, SP and Congress are appeasing Muslims, while BJP is the only party for Hindus. This line led to consolidation of non Yadav Hindus and non chamar SCs around BJP. The failure of SP-BSP in coming together helped the BJP plan very well. The national line taken by RSS-BJP that demonetization will harm the rich and help the poor in ling term also helped the matters for BJP.]

VB: Attempt is being made to convert India into a US module of Presidential form of democracy which is thoroughly dominated by corporate funding. The tragedy in the United States is that despite the country of such a huge size and variety the corporate democracy has only allowed the two party systems. The power elite in India want the same thing. How dangerous is it to attempt India into and a model.

RP: RSS seems to have realized that it may not be possible to replace Indian Constitution. They have been arguing for Presidential system from last quite some time. The main point is that RSS wants to do away with the diversity of the country, also Corporate World, which has a strong alliance with BJP also is more comfortable with the Presidential system.. With that system the voice of the marginalized will not have much place in influencing the policies of the country. The concerns of deprived, marginalized will have no place in the political-economic policies]

VB: In the past three years the Hindutva forces are fixing their agenda on the country. They are raising such issues which are difficult to counter by the political parties for the fear of losing the 'Hindu' votes. Whether it is 'terrorism', beef, cow or nationalism debate, it is aimed at occupying the sole moral high ground for being the 'sole' authority on the issue on behalf of India. Everyone else except them and their allies therefore becomes villain. How can such agendas are countered politically.

RP: The identity based politics; the emotive issues are difficult to combat on the grounds of reason. A concerted campaign where all non communal political and social forces come together to struggle for real issues of society is the only way out. During UPA I and II, the major issues being discussed on regular basis were related to issues of basic rights as Indian citizens, the rights to employment, food, health, education, information and what have you. The social discourse has been shifted away from real issues to emotive issues. The only way is a concerted attempt by all those standing for secular democracy to come together and strengthen the social movements and political campaigns for these issues, issues related to survival and dignity.]

VB:  After the Uttar Pradesh government's order of closing slaughter houses the meat business in the state has come to virtual standstill. The industry has huge number of non Muslims too. There is a dark side of the story too. That India's 'pink revolution' which Prime Minister Modi talked during his electoral campaign in 2014 grew further during his tenure. Now, he seems to have forgotten that. Shouldn't the government release a white paper on beef Industry and who is the owner of it and how much revenue it is bringing to India? 

RP: The idea of white paper on the issue of Cow slaughter, beef trade, cattle fares, the importance of Cow /buffalo in agrarian economy is a good one. There is immense lack of information, gaps in popular knowledge about these issues. The knowledge of these will ensure that people don’t then blindly support or ignore the Cow vigilantes. But the point is why this government should do this. Such a move will harm their political agenda. Probably a Peoples’ white Paper on the issues may be a more realistic idea.

VB: What do you think the idea behind ' anti Romeo Squad' by the Uttar Pradesh government? Government failed to protect individuals against the Khap dictates and yet it encouraged people to adopt anti constitutional provisions in denying youths to enjoy right to choice. Why, in your opinion, the Uttar Pradesh government adopted such tactics.

RP: There are multiple goals behind this move. First it generally such squads promote vigilantism, which the ruling party can use in its own favor. Secondly it is a sort of continuation of their Love Jihad campaign to demonize Muslim youth in particular. And thirdly as you correctly say it is an assault on the freedom of Right to choose.’ It also strengthens the patriarchal values of controlling the lives of girls.   Demonetization failed but government wants to use the election results as an approval to it. What is your opinion it. Has the opposition failed in to raise this issue?

Demonetization is the case of learning how you can sell a bad idea in a successful way. One kept hoping that this move will boomerang on the Government. Their word of mouth propaganda mechanism is so strong and well lubricated that they could spread that this is a small sacrifice for the sake of the nation that the rich will suffer etc. Still there are large numbers of people who have suffered. The opposition did try to raise it but their efforts were too small compared to the propaganda might of BJP-RSS combine.

VB:  The recent incidents at Sukma and then in Kashmir are being used as a tool against the human rights defenders. The government is promoting the idea that all those who speak against human rights violations are anti national. What is your view on the same?

RP: This Government is very uncomfortable with the human rights defenders and those leading the movements for the rights of deprived and vulnerable sections of society. Right at the start they muzzled the funding of NGOs. They also want to assume hard muscular policies which are worsening the situation in these areas. It is their well programmed work due to which anybody disagreeing with them is labeled anti National. This also shows their faith in democratic dissidence is skin-deep; essentially they are having intolerant ideology of Hindu nationalism.

VB:  How do you respond to government initiative to deny JNU to provide opportunity to students in the PhD and M.Phil courses? Is not it a step against the Dalit backward students? How do they respond to it?

RP: JNU has been special target for this Government as JNU is the bastion of liberal progressive voices where dissent is handled in a democratic way. These ethos have strong roots in the principles of Indian nationalism. In JNU again apart from other aspects, the percentage of women, dalits, OBCs as students has been very good. This move of Government in reducing the seats for research has twin objects. On one hand they want to stifle the progressive nature of JNU, and on the other to reduce the opportunities for the marginalized sections. The movements which began from JNU and HCU need to take note of this and create a larger protest/campaign on this issue.

VB: The issue of nationalism has put the other parties including Congress into a very defensive mode despite the facts the track record of the Hindu right wing is well known to us. Why are the parties on defensive and not able to carry the historic legacy of our freedom fighters who talked about an inclusive India?

RP: India Nationalism has been the foundation of Congress in particular. This party has not much focused on the intellectual front to educate the people. The all round rise of Hindu nationalist ideology, from bottom to top, has lead to a situation where other parties seem to have been taken aback and they don’t seem to be prepared to counter it ideologically. There are hoards of material which can come handy for these parties to counter the sectarian nationalist surge. The issue is that of ideological and political preparedness, which seems to be missing.]

VB: In the normal Hindu discourse, Muslims are brutal and too conservative. How do you counter this particularly when Europe and America too suffer from Islamophobic tendencies? 

RP: This discourse is a construct, which has come up in two major ways. One, the British introduced communal historiography was picked up by Hindu Mahasabha and RSS. RSS shakhas started propagating it in a systematic way. Later other mechanisms were added to spread this propaganda far and wide. This is based on selective incidents. The large presentation of interaction of social life of Hindus and Muslims is missing in this discourse. The narrative of alliances of Muslim and Hindu kings has been erased in this version. What remain dominant in this, is, the aggressive ‘foreign’ Muslims versus noble native Hindus. With Ram Temple movement, this discourse found a strong vehicle for its propagation.

The second component of this comes from the imperialist lust for oil resources. The promotion of Al Qaeda in some Madrassa in Pakistan, funded hugely by US created the monster of terrorism. To cap this retrograde step, the coining of phrase ‘Islamic terrorism’ by US media added further venom to this issue. In last couple of decades the migration of Muslims from ex colonies of European colonial powers, and then the migration from war torn countries have been worsening the situation. Islam as a religion has strong ethical component, while the present propaganda is based on some social practices and some versions of Islam which oppressive rulers have encouraged, like the Salafi version by Saudi Arabia. The consequent events, which are the product of this cancer of terrorism, have been adding on to the negative image of Islam and Muslims.

These two major components of demonization of Islam and Muslims have been topped up by issues like triple talaq, polygamy and higher (poverty related) fertility among Muslims]

VB:  The powerful Hindu upper caste and powerful backward communities seems to join hand against Dalits and Muslims. The Hindutva is using the dominant communities in each region. How can the Dalits, Muslims, OBCs and adivasis get along against this onslaught?

RP: Hindutva politics has used all means to ally with the upper castes and to co-opt other castes. The social engineering put into operation by RSS has confused the communities and has also shown them carrots. Some of the opportunist leaders from the dalit, Adivasis have been given lucrative positions to woo them to Hindutva politics. It is a dangerous situation, where Hinutva is emerging as the central, dominant force.

Last three decades have also seen a decline in the social movements at all the levels. The social alliances to protect the interests of Dalits-Muslim are long overdue. This needs to be supplemented by political alliances at electoral level which can overthrow the march of Hindutva politics.

VB: The secular political discourse failed to take caste issues into account and therefore Dalits, OBCs, and adivasis were out of its agenda. Now many of them are realizing it but the gap in the narrative and discourse is quite big. How can we strengthen secular alliance if there is no participation of Dalits, OBCs and other marginalized sections in it?

RP: There is an urgent need to reach out to these sections of society. The impact of globalization on their lives has been tremendous. In this worsening scenario, there is a need for taking up their real issues in a substantive way and to connect them up. We need to learn from the new movements which have come on the social scene. The one’s like that of Una has been very innovative in using the strength of dalits for their agitation, at the same time it went on for the demands like land for dalits. It is movements like these which should be the fulcrum for future campaigns and agitations.

VB: The secular parties or alliances have failed to take the student unrest along with them. The incidents at JNU, then Hyderabad University and other universities failed to attract attention of secular organizations. Why?

RP: The student’s wings of many of these organizations have been dormant for quite some time. These parties need to realize that it is movements like this which hold the hope for future. There have been some marginal attempts to relate with these promising movements and other movements built around the needs of students and their future aspirations have been there, but they have remained notional only.

VB:  The government has been targeting civil society organizations. It is targeting students. It is targeting trade unions and all those who speak against the dominant Hindutva practices. Despite all this, we still have not been able to forge a common alliance against Hindutva. What may be the reason and how can we come together. Do you think anti congressism is now a thing of past and we need to look beyond it and forget new alliances based on Common Minimum Programmes.

RP: I totally agree. Anti Congressism has been playing a very negative role during last many decades. Also there have been special efforts to defame Congress on purpose. The whole Anna-Ramdev-Kejrival movement was primarly brought up to defame Congress as that can be the real kernel around which secular movement can crystallize. With consequent defeats like that in UP, many parties will realize the need for all democrats to hang together. The failure is subjective and well as rooted in material conditions.

“Gandhi and Ambedkar were both liberation theologists” : Anand Patwardhan

For over 40 years Anand Patwardhan’s documentary films have stood for freedom of expression. He faced censorship on numerous occasions, took the government to court, and won each time. Anand is not just a filmmaker but an activist in the cause of Indian democracy, clearly under threat today. In this candid conversation with Vidya Bhushan Rawat, Anand discusses his views on the challenges before us, and most importantly, how he perceives both Gandhi and Ambedkar as liberation theologists whose ideas are in danger of being revised by their enemies.

VB: As a freedom lover secularist what is the difference between today’s media and that which existed during the official Emergency in 1975.

AP: The Emergency of 1975 was visible to all. The world condemned it and in India some brave newspapers like the Indian Express protested with blank editorials. Within a fairly short time a strong resistance movement grew. Today’s Emergency is largely invisible to the masses because Indian media houses have been corporatized and these corporates, both Indian and foreign, are direct beneficiaries of an economic system that has been surreptitiously imposed on the country not just by the present regime but by forces that were already moving in the same direction but at a slower pace. We have sold our sovereignty to USA and the global corporates and people have been told that this is for our own good. The invisible Emergency of today depends on what Chomsky called “manufactured consent”.

VB: Today we face the biggest challenge to Indian democracy since independence when our civil liberties are under the attack, when freedom of expression is under threat and when media is constructing the 'news'. Is 'free media' now the biggest threat to democracy?

AP: The media is free in the sense that it now has the freedom to tell lies about both, the domestic economy and about national security - lies that parrot an American-Israeli-Saudi axis which created, nurtured and unleashed Al Qaeda and ISIS on the one hand and pretended to “fight terror” on the other.

VB: You have documented major events not only of communal violence but also of violence against Dalits in Maharashtra. After the death of Rohit Vemula, in HCU, JNU and other campuses, students of all ideological frames – from the Left, to Ambedkarites and other Bahujan groups, joined in a common struggle against the ABVP and its attempt to vitiate the climate in the universities. Today that unity appears to be crumbling and we are again at the cross roads. Why ?

AP: The fault lies as much with the Left (of all shades) which is still unclear about how to destroy the caste system within, as with Dalit groups that fall prey to red-baiting and exclusivist identity politics. On one side are traditional Marxists who were brought up to think that caste is part of a superstructure that will automatically wither away when the economic base becomes socialist. On the other side are those who think that the caste of your birth alone forever determines how you think and how you act. Not only is such thinking contrary to the teachings of Dr. Ambedkar, it mirrors the mindset of the worst Manuvadis who believe that caste determines everything.

Luckily reality is proving both positions wrong. I believe that the Left and Dalits are natural allies so it is a matter of time before a genuine, long-lasting unity is forged. People like Comrade Govind Pansare, Kanhaiya Kumar and Jignesh Mevani have shown us that this unity is possible. At HCU and JNU and across Indian campuses we saw the amazing potential of unity.  Into this mix I would add progressive Gandhians - people like Narendra Dabholkar and Medha Patkar. Together these forces represent the politics of Reason that this country so desperately needs.

VB: Your film Jai Bhim Comrade was an extraordinary work which brought us back the memories of the struggle for justice of the people of Ramabai Nagar in Mumbai. You screened the film in various places. What were the reactions?

AP: The film as you know took 14 years to make. In the winter of 2011 we screened it in the open air in Dalit bastis across urban Maharashtra. We bought a powerful video projector, made a huge foldable cloth screen, and in each basti erected bamboo scaffolding to mount it on. As the screen was being erected, we played progressive film songs and Dalit movement songs to alert and attract the audience. Often the crowd would swell to well over a 1000 people. As we could not afford so many chairs, people sat on the ground or stood at the back and on the sides for the three hour duration of the film. At the end of the screening we tried to organize a discussion but often instead of a back and forth question and answer session, people just grabbed the mike and poured their hearts out about what the film had meant to them. It was an overwhelming experience for me. Later I began to understand the reasons for this amazing response. Although in the bastis, little of the hardship shown in the film was unknown to people, the fact that the film presented its protagonists not as victims but as resisters, was a morale booster. The genre of music heard in the film was in danger of either dying out or getting commercialized, so the film, so full of these songs captured over decades, served as a valuable archive. Lastly the politics of the film was appreciated, as it did not pull punches. It called to task not only sections of the Left for not recognizing the primacy of caste, but also Dalit leaders who were being lured by Manuvadi Hindutva to betray the legacy of Dr. Ambedkar.

Much later I began to show the film in colleges and schools and other middle class and elite circles. Here the response was enthusiastic but very different from that in the bastis. Even though people generally appreciated the film, almost invariably someone would ask about the evils of “reservations”. It was as if the audience had been blind and deaf to what they had just seen. After 3000 years where manual scavenging has been reserved for one caste alone and education has been forbidden, was it not time to reserve education seats for the dispossessed? In the end after long discussions, we agreed that reservations could be done away with only when the children of the rich and the children of the poor start going to the same schools - from the primary to the college level. Such prolonged inter-caste, inter-class contact could also open the door for inter-caste marriages. Many generations of such mixed marriages could finally end the caste system. This sounds idealistic but in my view this is the only way to finally end caste - when bloodlines become so mixed that no one can clearly say what caste they come from.

VB: Do you think that as secular activists we have not been able to communicate to common people in the language they understand or have failed to use the great secular legacy of India which was radical and rational as well?

AP: In general this is true but in particular some people are genuinely trying to address this. Of course the task is huge and we are up against a fascist force in the Brahminist RSS that has created a hydra-headed, cadre based organization that indoctrinates people in the name of cultural and religious pride, as well as today, of fake nationalism. In the early days they attracted mainly Brahmins. Today they are drawing in all castes and tribes that can be mobilized against their stated three enemies - Muslims, Christians and Communists. Religious culture and right wing politics is a potent combination and we rationalists have so far failed to match the organizational genius that runs this fascist machine.

VB: This government has been in hyper-active mode to keep people busy but if we analyse their actions we find clear attempts to divide people and polarize the debate. It started with their favorite topics like 'Gaay', Ganga, Rastrawaad, beef, Jana Gana Mana and then to Kashmir. Things went horribly wrong in Kashmir and the last part was a surgical strike but that too was questioned. Then came demonetization which hurt the poorest of the poor but was dressed up to look like an attack on “black money” and the rich. Each act is commonly linked, in my opinion, to privatizing our national resources and creating business for crony capital.

AP: Yes there is a clear strategy. Nothing in the Hindutva Parivar happens ad hoc or without central planning. At the same time perhaps Modi and Amit Shah have surprised even their own cadre by their willingness to be brutal and dishonest. Demonetization is an example. Even the direct beneficiaries, like the crony capitalists who emptied the banks and refused to pay back their loans must have been surprised at how the poor were squeezed to fill the bank coffers up again and then sold the idea that this was a strike on the unscrupulous rich. Even when all the “black money” came back into the banks and became white money, no question was raised while thousands of jobs were lost across the nation. It may be the undoing of Modi in the long run but in the short term he is still fooling most of the people most of the time.

VB: Communalism or I would call it Brahminism has joined hands with capitalism here but the resistance too is stronger. Unfortunately, political parties are unable to join hands with their egos and brinkmanship for votes. Will people's pressure bring them together?

AP: At the moment there is no visible peoples’ pressure. There is visible suffering but the anger is not yet visible. Let us see if it manifests later.

VB: Do you feel that the Indian way of secularism i.e. equal respect to all religions, or what we call Sarva Dharma Samabhava is damaging the cause of social change as it allows religious dogmatics to hijack the leadership of different communities? There is a virtual competition between the religious right taking place in the polity thereby denying common persons of all communities the means to counter them. How do we respond to it?

AP: All over the world rationalists have found that religion that has existed for centuries is hard to stamp out and some form of co-existence is the norm in most secular countries. After the Soviet Revolution, St. Petersburgh became Leningrad but in 1991 it became St. Petersburgh again.

In India, both Gandhi and Ambedkar recognized that this country was so steeped in the idiom of religion that atheism or pure rationality would not be easily accepted by the masses. I consider Gandhi and Ambedkar, each in their own right, to be liberation theologists. Of course, Gandhi unlike Ambedkar, did not choose his own religion, he inherited it. But to whatever he inherited, he applied post-Enlightenment ethical values that were essentially modern. When he began to do manual scavenging and began to advocate this (even force it) on to his followers, he actually destroyed the very basis of the Pollution/Purity dichotomy that is at the heart of the caste system. Theoretically he for a long time infamously clung to the concept of Varnashram Dharma, but in actual deed he destroyed it the day he took up manual scavenging, a job that had been hitherto reserved for the so-called ‘untouchables’. As time went on Gandhi became ever more radical. He clearly learned from Dr. Ambedkar as well as from his own intuitive understanding of the world he was witnessing. For instance, towards the latter stages of his life, Gandhi refused to attend any marriage that was not an inter-caste marriage. By the end of his life he had fashioned out of his inherited Hinduism, something entirely new. Only the idiom remained, and not the original hierarchical Sanatan dharma. Whether his reluctance to discard the idiom was a practical decision that stemmed from a desire to remain in touch with the vast Indian masses in a language they could easily follow, or from his own inner belief system, is something that can be debated, but is of no great interest to me. What is unmistakable is that Gandhi’s ethical code bears little resemblance to the hierarchical and vengeful structure of traditional Hinduism.

Dr. Ambedkar in some ways was more fortunate than Gandhi in that he clearly saw how oppressive the religion of his birth was, being as he was, a direct victim of it. So he discarded it and searched for the best alternative to it. After examining many religions he finally chose the religion that was closest to Reason. Buddhism is the one world religion that does not posit an external, all-knowing God. However it has a very strong ethical core that Dr. Ambedkar highlighted. At the same time he discarded irrational and unproveable Buddhist tenets like Reincarnation that many traditional Buddhists ardently follow. This is why I see both Ambedkar and Gandhi as liberation theologists. In the same way that Left wing priests like Ernesto Cardenal in Latin America, a minister in Nicaragua’s revolutionary Sandinista government, re-interpreted Jesus Christ as a revolutionary who fought and died for justice to the poor and powerless, Gandhi and Ambedkar gave new ethical meaning to the religions they adopted and adapted.

Make no mistake that I am equating the two. Their differences are obvious. One came from a privileged caste, the other from the most oppressed. One was educated in a limited sense and steeped in traditional religion in his formative years while the other came from a caste denied the right to education and rose to become the best-read and easily the greatest intellectual of modern India.

I am not at all blind to the things about Gandhi that are paradoxical and irrational like his life-long demonization of sexuality.  Gandhi’s insistence on chastity puts him in the same irrational, patriarchal boat as the priests and monks and nuns of many world religions. To examine this aspect in depth would take a whole chapter. And yet this same sex-denying man, by introducing the Charkha as a weapon of non-violent resistance, brought thousands of women into the mainstream of the Indian freedom movement.   

I realize that I have let my stream of consciousness diverge from your original question. To get back to the issue about whether Sarva Dharma Samabhava can take the place of constitutionally guaranteed secular democratic rights, I think it cannot.  We need Dr. Ambedkar’s Constitution much more than we need holy books. And yet as many in our country are still hooked to holy books and unholy pretenders, we need liberation theologists who can help people to culturally discard the worst features of their inherited religious culture and replace these with ethical, just and non-exclusivist interpretations.

Waiting for everyone to become atheist or rationalist may take centuries. Ethics is the answer. Small wonder that Ambedkar and Gandhi, each in their own way, arrived at individual definitions of Ahimsa.

VB: In post-Mandal India communities are seeking their space in the polity. In the earlier phase of secularism the Indian elite always kept the marginalised communities like Dalits, OBCs, Muslims outside the gates of their decision making bodies and public platforms but things are changing now. Very unfortunately more than the seculars it is the communalists who are jumping into identity politics and social engineering. Meanwhile communist parties still retain their upper caste leadership. Will we be able to face the challenge in such a way?

AP: Actually identity politics is a double-edged weapon. As long as oppression of identifiable groups exists, it is perfectly legitimate for oppressed groups to unite according to their identity. “Black is beautiful’ was a necessary movement for Afro-Americans in the USA, just as pride in Dalit or Buddhist identity is necessary in India. The trouble begins when this turns into an exclusivist or separatist movement. Malcolm X went through a Black Muslim phase when he described all white people as “devils”. But in the latter stages of his life he completely rejected this theory for a much more inclusive critique of injustice and inequality. That is when the American deep State killed him. Similarly while a broad section of Dalits are inclusive and fully understand the distinction Dr. Ambedkar made between the ideology of Brahminism and individuals who happen to be born into one or the other “upper” castes, there is a tiny section of separatist Dalits today who see birth as the sole determining factor. The fact that Western post-modern academia encourages such identity politics in preference to class analysis has given this form of separatist politics international acceptance. Meanwhile in India Manuvadi forces feel obvious glee when Dalits attack the Left or Gandhi, as both have long been the enemies of Hindutva.

VB: Hindutva people are expert in appropriating icons who are secular. They used Ambedkar, Bhagat Singh, Vivekananda, Subhash Chandra Bose, Sri Narayan Guru etc for their purposes. Is this because an overdose of Gandhi and Nehru's role in our freedom struggle minimized all other icons that a kind of resentment began against Nehru and Gandhi?

AP: Frankly I am not a fan of Subhash Chandra Bose. I cannot swallow his alliance with Hitler and Hirohito. Freedom could not be wrested at such a cost. Vivekanand is also very troubling because he advocated a kind of machismo that I think is deeply problematic. Also what is little known about him is that he was deeply casteist. In fact he seems perfectly suited as a BJP icon. The resentment against Gandhi lies at the heart of the project of Hindutva which is why they killed him first and then attempted to appropriate his glasses and broomstick later. Nehru is hated because his development paradigm goes against the grain of privatization. Ambedkar they do not dare criticize openly these days so the only option is to use his image, minus any content.

VB: Your uncle Achyut Patwardhan was an icon of the socialist movement in India. We heard a lot about his relationship with Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar. Was there any influence of him on your socio-political thoughts?

AP: Achyutkaka and Aruna Asaf Ali, according to British records, were amongst the most wanted underground leaders of 1942. He ran the underground radio and was a master of disguise amongst other things but in later years he ensured that history erased him. You hardly hear or read about him anywhere because soon after Independence he became disillusioned with mainstream politics. He did educational and social work but he would never discuss the past, even with me. He felt it had all been mostly an illusion. His elder brother, Purshottam (Raokaka to me) was also a freedom fighter and spent over 10 years in British jails. In the 1930’s while he was making an anti-communal speech, Madanlal Pahwa tried to assassinate him but was caught. Raokaka who was a Gandhian socialist, refused to file charges and Pahwa was let off. Later this same Pahwa threw a bomb at Gandhi and was part of the conspiracy that finally killed him.

To answer your next question, it is true that in the decade of the 1930’s Dr. Ambedkar spent several months living, writing and studying at our family farm home in Ahmednagar, but this again is a chapter of history that has been irretrievably lost. Raokaka like Achyut left active politics after Independence and both, by their own choice, were written out of history. I have heard that Dr. Ambedkar and Achyutkaka were friends and met when Achyutkaka was underground, but I have no documents about this. What I do know is that my family opposed the caste system and many married outside their own caste, including my parents.

VB: You have always tried to bring together not only left and Ambedkarites but also what you call 'Progressive Gandhians'. Why are you using this term ? You have been critical of people who as you say 'blow out of proportion' the differences between Gandhi and Ambedkar. Many of the Ambedkarites feel it quite disturbing?

AP: I must speak the truth as I see it. I have always felt that the affinities between Gandhi and Ambedkar are greater than their differences. They were both egalitarian humanists at heart. It may not win me any popularity contest today but I think those who are ready to set prejudice aside and undertake a proper historical study will come around to this point of view. Take the act of “Satyagraha”, a term coined by Gandhi. Ambedkar used this very term and form of struggle to launch his Mahad Satyagraha to claim drinking water rights. There are many other examples of common ideas and action. I was pleasantly shocked to read what Dr. Ambedkar had to say in 1932 immediately after concluding the now infamous Poona Pact (where the idea of separate electorates for Dalits was abandoned in favour of reserved seats for Dalits). Popular theory is that Ambedkar was blackmailed by Gandhi’s fast-unto-death into accepting a bitter compromise. But Ambedkar’s statement in 1932 after signing the pact was totally different in tone. He had high praise for Gandhi and stated that the “Mahatma” (yes, contrary to popular belief, Ambedkar referred to Gandhi as “Mahatma” at this point in time) offered a much better deal for Dalits in terms of reserved seats than Ambedkar himself had asked or hoped for. There is no denying however that Ambedkar did get disgusted with the Congress in later years. How much of the blame for the failures of Congress are attributable to Gandhi is a matter of discussion and debate. We know that Gandhi’s writ did not work in preventing Partition or the bloodshed that preceded and followed it and that Gandhi did not attend the Independence Day flag hoisting at the Red Fort in Delhi. He was busy fighting the communal inferno in the countryside.

Gandhi had a lot of obscurantist ideas to start with but as time went on he was honest enough to keep evolving. In the end I see him as a great humanist who died for his belief in non-violence and religious universality. He was also an inventive anti-Imperialist (though in his earlier days he had supported the British Empire) and an organic naturalist that today’s madly consumerist, globally warmed world desperately needs. Are most of today’s Gandhians like that?  Of course not. That is why I used the term ‘progressive Gandhians’. It describes dedicated non-violent fighters like Medha Patkar, Narendra Dabholkar, the whole Baba Amte family, Asghar Ali Engineer, Sandeep Pande, S.P Udaykumar, Teesta Setalvad, Aruna Roy, Admiral Ramdas, and so many others. It certainly does not include government-fed Gandhians and those Gandhians who jump onto the Hindutva bandwagon as soon as it gathers steam. 

Throughout his life Dr. Ambedkar fought for reason and justice without resorting to violence. Today his followers, like the Ambedkar Students Association and Dr. Prakash Ambedkar are leading the resistance against religious and caste hatred. Against all odds Radhika and Raja Vemula (Rohith Vemula’s mother and brother) are continuing the fight for justice. With the rising spectre of intolerant authoritarianism, the time has come for all humanists, rationalists and fighters for social and economic justice to unite against the usurpers of our democracy and our history.

Demystifying Varanasi

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Varanasi  is rising on the high voltage publicity after Hindutva’s mascot Narendra Modi decided to contest from this place. The supporters of the party and the caste based Indian middle classes all jumped with joy after hearing this decision. People are thinking as if Varanasi would now be converted into Rome or Athens which are historical and of immense religious value. Thousands of pilgrims from different parts of the world actually visit Varanasi every year to the ‘beauty’ of Kashi.  The city remains one of the dirtiest in the country to say the least. The ghats and the gullies are enough to give you food poisoning like any other religious places of India, full of dirt and filth. The only good thing is ‘’invisible’ is the spirited people and their abundant faith on the ‘power’. Despite dirt and filth, they are ready to jump into the river to wash their sins.

Varanasi is the den of the brahmanical elite in India and that is why it has been glamorized. The caste vampire of Brahmanical India is run through the famous Kashi Hindu Vishwidyalaya simply Banaras Hindu University, where the Dalit students still face discriminations at the hands of Dronacharyas in the university.  Mr Modi, Mr Kejriwal and Mr Ajay Rai will only be able to know that and understand the real feeling of ‘neech jaat’ once they have time to visit those students and meet them.

The Ganga of Varanasi is brahmanical in nature. They have hijacked the whole concept of nature worshipping and converted it into a ritualistic money minting machine which is exclusive. It exploits people further particularly to those who have surrendered here meekly to the discriminatory brahmanical divinity. Varanasi typifies what caste mean. You need to see it, research it and must have intellectual honesty which is rarely available in India.  Just board the boat at the Ghats and ask who are the boatmen and you will find the Nishads and Mallahas doing the service. If you go to the Ghat and see who are the people burning the funeral pyre and you will see the Doms, the most untouchable among untouchable communities. If you roam around the streets of Varanasi, you will find hundreds of people from Mehtar or Valmiki community cleaning night-soil, entering into the manhole and cleaning the streets. Such is the power of caste system that the ghats, the pujaris, the temples are the den of Brahmins and Brahmins alone. They arrogate themselves knowing everything about you past, present and future. The ‘Mahaarati’ at the Ganges look very beautiful at night but reflect the dark reality of the caste system. It is an exclusive domain of the Brahmin Pandas and that too the Brahmin men only. You will not find a single woman leading it.

Brahmanical revivalism in India comes through different forms and the biggest it the cultural manifestations which look too good yet are very dangerous. This cultural revivalism in Varanasi happened despite the fact one of the holiest shrines of Buddhists is located in Sarnath, just five kilometer from the main city. None of our mainstream media and political pundits decided to inform the world that Varanasi is famous not just for the polluted Ganges but because Buddha’s historic shrine is located here. Buddha revolted against brahmanical rituals and dominance of a particular caste.

The caste dominance of the Brahmins was established long back. The idea of a particular community could obtain ‘knowledge’ and ‘guide’ the destiny of the community was challenged not just Buddha but thousands years later in the same land by great saints like Kabir and Ravidas. Both refused to accept the brahmanical wisdom and finality of the religious texts. Kabir also followed the Eklavya traits to get the ‘wisdom’ from Ramananda, who refused to be his teacher since he was not ‘twice born’. This was the ‘greatness’ of brahmanical Varansi that people were discriminated on the basis of their castes and that still persists, education was out of bound for shudras and dalits.

Kabir challenged the supremacy of the Brahmins who had propagandized that anyone who died in Varanasi would go to ‘heaven’. Kabir went to die in Magahar, a place now developed as Sant Kabir Nagar by Ms Mayawati during her tenure. In fact, it is under her tenure that the Buddhists places and all those spaces were developed and revived which challenged the brahmanical supremacy. Unfortunately, Samajwadi party did not have anything to do with such cultural projects which could have challenged brahmanical revivalism. The real threat to brahmanical supremacy came from Buddha and at later stage by Kabir, Nanaka, Ravidas and others. If you die at Magahar, the Brahmins ‘disclosed’, you will go to hell. Why such a thought was developed? Who are the people who want us to believe that dying in a dirty Ganga send you to ‘heaven’ and at Magahar to ‘hell’.  According to many Buddhist scholars, it was because both Kabir and Ravidas were actually saints of Buddhist traditions and revolted against brahmanical hierarchy and superstition that it brought. Moreover, Magahar was also a place attributed as a Buddhist one and biggest aim of the Brahmins that time was to denigrate Buddhism and all those places related to it.

It is deplorable how a superstition is being ‘commercialized’ and defended in the name of ‘culture’. ‘Maa’ ‘Ganga’ I apologise from you’, said Modi. Yes, Modi did not have a big heart to apologize to human beings who were killed in Gujarat in 2002. He has no word of apology for anything wrong that he speak but he apologize to Ganga for his ‘inability’ to ‘wash’ his ‘sins’. Obviously both Kejriwal and Ajai Rai too are the same people who will wash their ‘sins’ strengthening the same brahmanical tradition which was challenged by none other than revolutionary Saint Ravi Das who said ,’ Man Changa to Katauti me Ganga’ which means If your heart is pure, Ganga reside there, you do not need to take a dip to ‘cleanse’ yourself. You need purity of heart and mind Mr Modi. Maybe a few lines of Ravidas and Kabir will give them some knowledge about the importance of these places which are not just brahmanical status quoists but the biggest revolt against them also emerged from here.

That is why it is important to remember Kabir who rejected the advice of the Brahmin to remain in Varanasi to die. He decided to go to Magahar, a place about 150 kilometer away, where he ultimately died. Both Varanasi and Magahar have a huge number of ‘bunkar’ community people, the Ansaris. Unfortunately, with religious rituals dominated among them, Kabir became irrelevant for most of them since he challenged the religious orthodoxy and was equally vociferous against the bad practices among Muslims and caste practices among them. He revolted both against the Mullahas and Brahmins and believed in humanist values of equality and fraternity. That is why a person like Kabir is not wanted to Muslims and Hindus both because he had the courage to speak against their wrong practices. In the Sarva dhrama business of Gandhi, we all have become habitual of ‘great’ religious and ‘cultural’ practices, the ‘Ganga- Jamuni tehjeeb’. Yes, the same Ganga Jamuni Tehjib that unites Hindus and Muslims, actually make them arrogant followers of their caste identities and practice hierarchical system in their societies.

It is so sad that when we are invoking the spirit of Varanasi, it is the spirit of division based on your birth that we are portraying. We are portraying superstition as culture in the name of tradition linking to Varanasi. Shockingly, Indian elite class will go to Hindu Mahant, Babas to talk about unity and equality. Whether they oppose Modi or not, a Shankarcharya will never agree to sit with a Dalit or accept a Dalit or Shudra woman equal to him.  It is not amusing therefore that the legacy of Buddha, Kabir and Nanaka has been fraudulently ignored by the brahmanical media.

Narendra Modi has been emphasizing a lot on being a chaiwallah, a tea seller. Indian media jumped on his rhetoric terming them ‘great’ speeches. Now, he is addressing ‘Ganga ma’ purely to ‘targeted’ audiences to polarize the voters. He is claiming to be a ‘neech’ ‘jaati’ who has been wronged. It is not unusual for Modi to make such speeches which after some days, if we analyse, will find shockingly distasteful. When he was invited to speak at a programme organized by the Balmikis in Gujarat, Modi wanted to show how closely he is associated with Balmikis and he wrote a book and said,’ the manual scavenging work gives a lot of spiritual feeling’. I do not know why he need to come to Varanasi to get that spiritual feeling by dipping in Ganga, better do an ‘spiritual experience’ in Ahmedabad itself.

Finally, let us be clear that no tea seller in India belong to a ‘neech’ ‘jaati’ or lower caste. Most of them are upper backward communities who were never treated as untouchables. I would just like him to show us a single tea shop or a dhaba, run by a Balmiki or Mehtar both in Gujarat and his new constituency of spiritualism named as Varanasi. It is not possible in the model of Varanasi and Gujarat which are being projected to us by the media as well as those devotees of ‘Modi’ as well as ‘secularism’. Question is such great places with purely caste hierarchical system operating wonderfully, even if you get a dhaba being operated by a Dalit, you will not find customers for them. It is not without reason that most of the Dhabas in Varanasi do offer you ‘chai’ in ‘kulhars’ or plastic cups so that the dhaba owners is saved from washing the cups of ‘every one’ including ‘neech-jaat’ people too. Brahmanical Varanasi is growing because of ‘democracy’ of the dominants that  romanticize the religious rituals which were challenged by great revolutionaries like Kabir and Ravidas, whose ideas are the biggest obstacles along with one Rahul Sankrityayan from Azamgarh, for the Hindutva’s unfinished agenda of Hindu Rastra based on caste hierarchy. It is this tradition of revolt against the ‘varnashram dharma’ that we need to provoke and invoke for a strong democratic secular India.