Lalu revive VPs Mandal legacy in Bihar to decimate Hindutva's juggernaut

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

The historical verdict of the Bihar 2015 has send shock waves in the Hindutva camp while gladdening the heart of every Indian who believed in inclusive secularism and protecting the idea of India as enshrined in our republican constitution and the hero of this verdict is Lalu Prasad Yadav, a man mocked by the urban elite, even of the ‘secular’ variety and news channels even today did not feel ashamed of commenting on him as ‘thug’, a word which they will never dare to describe those in power in Delhi. The nation remain thankful to this earthy man for what he has done in Bihar by repeating what he did on October 23rd 1990 at Samastipur where  Lal Krishna Advani was arrested during  his (w)rath yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya. Today, Advani’s charioteer is the prime minister of India and Lalu and his ‘Mahagathbandhan’ has given an unforgettable ‘gift’ to Lal Krishna Advani on his birthday. One does not know whether Advani is happy with the verdict in Bihar or remembering the happening of the things exactly 25 years ago. There are so many similarities here 25 years later and lesson learnt politically. Mulayam ditched the grand alliance exactly showing the same traits as he did betraying the forces of Mandal and allying with those who had no interest in protecting the political and social interest of the Dalits and marginalised. Lalu put a break to the great designs of Lal Krishna Advani and standing rock like with the then prime minister V P Singh whose government was voted out in Parliament for protecting India’s constitution and providing rights to India’s Bahujan masses. It is for the first time in political history that a government fell for fulfilling its constitution obligation to the nation that time when the entire nation faced the worst ever threat from the exclusivism of Hindutva which thrive for a theocratic state.

The importance of this victory of the secular alliance is enormous for the country and need replications. Lalu and Nitish showed greater statesmanship by coming together ignoring all their minor differences and egos. Adding Congress to their side was another important factor which gave them strength to widened their base and the grand old party of India also need to Mandalised if it want to strengthen its base. The message from Bihar is clear that forces of social justice will reject all kind of religious fanaticism and would want their share in power structure. Ironically, none remembered VP Singh during this campaign not even his old friends including Lalu and Nitish even when they lost know time in ‘claiming’ the ‘legacy’ of Jai Prakash Narayan. It was not shocking to hear because none wanted to antagonize the ‘upper caste’ votes and therefore V P Singh remained unwanted during the ‘campaign’.  The caste media would immediately tag all these people as Mandalites and casteists and therefore Jai Prakash became the most uttered word by not just Nitish and other Samajwadi leaders but by the BJP. Bihar’s result show that it is VP Singh whose Mandal legacy work and will remain more relevant than ever despite our aversion to the man. The forces of Social Justice must revive his legacy to make their presence felt everywhere and JP’s legacy would not work as it only strengthend the Sangh Parivar.

Bihar showed that secularism is essentially inclusive and has to include the most marginalized. It cannot be merely discussed philosophically but in pure terms of participation and representation of communities. These elections clearly showed that BJP can only fight with Congress using Communal-secular divide but can not really take on when the question of social justice and caste identities emerge. Everywhere BJP’s track record has been using the caste identities and then imposing a leadership of different community. Example of Chhattishgarh, Jharkhand and Haryana are well known and people feel deceived of it.

Bihar’s victory is the revival of Mandal forces who were definitely feeling isolated and outdated. During the elections Lalu Yadav raised issues of caste discrimination, reservation of the Dalits and OBCs, issue of beef and communalism. Narendra Modi and his team tried to polarize the elections in different way by unleashing lies everywhere. Never in the history of India, we had seen a prime minister stooping so low in debate when he said that Lalu and Nitish were trying to ‘steal’ quota of SC-OBCs and give it to Muslims. How can a Prime Minister speak such a language which has blatantly communal tone? It is not surprising for Narendra Modi as has used ‘Pakistan’ to polarize the voters and presenting him and his party as the sole champion of Hindus and Hindu India and any one voting others means celebration in Pakistan. And such shameless rhetoric did not stop as Amit Shah, the chief commander of Narendra Modi spoke same language suggesting that if BJP lost there will be celebrations in Pakistan.

There is no denial of fact that BJP used money, media and mafia power to influence the voters. The enormous finance it has in its disposal is threatening democracy and it has emboldened those forces who feel they can buy people and circumvent democracy.  During the last general elections we have seen the power of money, media and mafia as late Kanshiram would always warn his cadres to be vary off, as they are engaged in distorting and misinterpreting information. It is also true that people may be illiterate but know well as that ‘king’ can ‘do’ ‘wrong’ and therefore need to be punished severely. ‘Yeh public hai sab janati hai’. People know everything about their leaders.

The country is watching regularly how the Hindutva’s rabble-rousers abusing the ordinary citizens, dictating us how we should live, eat and behave. Everywhere we see their moral policing and worst kind of violent behavior. It was wonderful when Lalu countered them vociferously that Hindus too eat beef and that the Sangh Parivar was anti Dalit and anti poor. A number of cases have been filed against Lalu Yadav and we know it well how the Hindutva’s trolls have been threatening secular human rights activists everywhere from social media to public life. It is not just threat of physical intimidation but also ‘legal action’.

BJP tried to break the ‘Mahagathbandhan’ of Lalu with taking away Mulayam Singh Yadav. It is the defeat of Mulayam’s opportunistic politics which he always did and remained on the wrong side of history. In 1990, Mulayam sided with anti mandal forces led by Chandrashekhar and this time he tried to hobnob with the BJP even speaking openly that it was  BJP wave  everywhere. History has repeated itself. Modi and all the samajwadis spoke of Jai Prakash Naraian but none of them uttered a word in the name of VP Singh. Frankly speaking Nitish and Lalu are not the product of JP but of VP. They might have been there during JP’s movement but who cared for them? When did JP raise the issue of the most marginalized, Pasmandas and aadivasis? It is the Mandal revolution that brought leaders like Lalu Yadav, Nitish Kumar, Sharad Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan to the fore and their voices became heavier and powerful. Ofcourse, there was party like BSP and Ambedkarites who had been fighting this battle for long but not stronger that time to influence the parliamentary politics. So VP Singh’s Mandal decision is the most historical action of a political leader in independent India and it created a huge lot of talented leader from the hitherto unrepresented sections. VP Singh put his life to risk fighting against Hindutva forces and perhaps it is time for the leaders of Mandal movement to carry forward that legacy and spread it across the country.

The massive mandate to Lalu-Nitish show that Mandal will always remain more powerful than Kamandal if used properly and educatively. If the secular forces try to become B or A team of BJP they will be wiped out. This is a warning to Mualayam Singh to mend his ways and stop flirting with the Hindutva. There is a message for Mayawati too to make proper alliance in UP and any attempt to hobnob with the Hindutva will throw her permanently out of state.

For Congress it is time to revisit those events exactly 25 years ago when they brought down a government for fulfilling its constitutional mandate to protect a religious place in Ayodhya. Yes, on November 7^th, 1990, VP Singh government was brought down by the combine strength of BJP and Congress just because it stopped Advani’s hate yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya. Advani was requested to stop the yatra as it had unleashed a death train everywhere and Lalu Yadav, the then chief minister of Bihar stopped it and got Advani arrested in Samastipur on October 23^rd, 1990. Interestingly, the District Magistrate that time who arrested Advani was R.K Singh, who is now the Member of Parliament of the BJP. On 7^th November 1990 Congress played the dirtiest card in its history by allowing the fall of the VP Singh government as BJP has withdrawn the support. Congress betrayed not just Muslims but also the OBCs as it clandestinely supported anti Mandal forces. This time too Congress tried to dissociate with Lalu in the name of his being ‘tainted’ ignoring his full-fledged support to  Manmohan Singh government in Delhi.

Congress paid heavy price since 1990. It is not BJP but VP Singh who brought the congress to this level but the fact is Congress can not blame him for this unless it changes its party structure and current leadership of the caste Hindus and soft Hindutva people and create new young leaders of Dalits, OBCs, Muslims and AAdivasis. We acknowledge its wide base all over the country but it need strong ideological strength and dedication to social justice and secularism which unfortunately is questionable as it always played the brahmanical secularism or purely  ‘multiculturalism’ strengthening the soft Hindutva line and got decimated. They made right choices in Bihar and now looking for revival in the state now but if they still look for the same social space as earlier the party will remain on the periphery in both Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

Bihar has given a huge sigh of relief to all of us. It has also taught a lesson to those Dalit leaders who shifted their loyalties so easily. People like Jeetan Ram Manjhi have no future as they betrayed the cause. Sitting with corporate Hindutva these discredited people cant do justice to their own communities who are suffering because of the government politics. Ram Vilas Paswan will be used in Uttar Pradesh against Mayawati and so will be other leaders.

Lalu Yadav’s stoppage of rath yatra of Advani was responsible for the fall of VP Singh government but with this massive victory in Bihar he has avenged that defeat 25 years ago and given Lal Krishna Advani his ‘best’ ‘birthday’ gift as well as thrown a challenge to his ‘charioteer Narendra Modi who had benefitted that time.

There will be efforts by the corrupt casteist media to deviate from the real issues of Bihar but the fact is that Mandal has shown its strength now and it is time to unleash those forces all over the country. Secondly, need to challenge Hindutva at all level by exposing them thoroughly as Lalu could do quoting extensively from Golwalkar’s ‘Bunch of thoughts’ and ‘we and our nationhood’.

Frankly more than BJP, it is the Indian corporate thugs who got defeated today. If you had watched the elections analysis and prior to that the exit polls etc, you will realize how media played different games. In IBN-CNN exit polls actually JDU lead Mahagathbandhan was given over 175 seats but that poll was not broadcasted for the fear of antagonizing Amit Shah and other leaders of the party. Times Now’s C voter had predicted a massive victory for BJP. Arnab Goswami was actually behaving as lynchman in the studio on behalf of the Sangh Parivar.  NDTV did not lag behind in showing its ‘impartiality’ when Pranoy Roy, the guru of psephology in India declared at 9 am in the morning that BJP and the allies are going to get absolute majority.

One need to ask basic question as why all the TV channels create such ruckus during the counting of votes this time. Why was it that every channel was reporting differently and the gap was too high ? How can channel be so wrong on the actual thing was happening? These are important aspect and thought for others. Was it because paid media was trying to hide facts from people? Was it because it was creating ground for BJP to come to power and in case there is a coalition government, it could use division of perception and impose its own agenda?

Bihar has given its verdict and the nation remain thankful to people of Bihar that they have protected our constitution but the threat is not over yet. It will be foolish to think that Hindutva is over and hate propaganda does not work. Mujaffarnagar worked and paid heavy dividend.  Learning from Bihar, it is time all secular parties must learn that their time has come to Mandalise themselves and provide representations to all the Dalit, aadivasis, OBCs, Padmandas at all level. It is equally important to expose the corporate Hindutva nexus and that the Muslims are being made scapegoat but the real target of these regressive forces is to stop the rising assertion of the Bahujan Samaj.

The secular polity will only succeed if they include all the pasmanda communities in its network and provide them space and representation. If they fail, the Hindutva will rise again. VP Singh’s government fell for this purpose when Congress BJP joined hand but 25 years later Lalu-Nitish-Congress combine have defeated BJP in Bihar and they must confess that it is Mandal who brought them biggest mandate in Bihar. It is Mandal alone, which will defeat the Kamandal forces and bring social justice secularism in India. Mandal forces had bitten dust during the past 10 years because of the egos of politicians and division among them giving rise to Hindutva’s brahmanical forces hence it is time for celebration for the revival of Mandal which decimated Hindutva’s agenda in Bihar and has potential to do so in the entire country.

The communal war for secular space

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

There is a spurt in the ‘events’ of ‘blackening’ of faces of ‘dissenters’ of Hindutva thoughts in India. While the Hindutva protagonists are thumping their chest and becoming louder each passing day the Hindu ‘liberals’ have a difficult job to do at the moment protecting ‘Hinduism’ from the likes of violent and regressive brahmanical organisations and hence they term these ‘incidents’ as stray and not reflective of the ‘tolerant’ Hindu Dharma.

The war in religion between the ‘liberals’ and ‘radicals’ is growing everywhere in India and both attempt to ‘interpret’ religion and its ‘philosophies’ according to their convenience. However in their claim to ‘control’ religion, it is the ‘radicals’ who are actually ‘winning’ the battles particularly in multi-cultural societies and the result is the loss of the democratization of societies and usage of violent methods to curb freedom and dissent. But the ironies world over is that the religious rights too need to masquerade as ‘secular’ to get their viewpoint legitimized. Hindutva protagonists despite their avowed disinterest in secular discourse are using the ‘democratic differences’ for their own purposes. It is like General Zia-ul-Haq suggesting that everything in Pakistan was ‘unanimous’ unlike India where government has to ‘respect’ political opposition or the opposition voices are getting space at the Parliament or in public places.

India is passing through a very dangerous phase when the Hindutva chest-thumpers under protection from the state powers have taken it on themselves to crush the dissent and violently oppose those who are creating ‘obstacles’ in their attempt to attain the Hindu Rastra. The problem is multifaceted because of diverse ranges of prejudices that have kept people away from coming together much to the glee of these forces who want to demolish India’s republican democratic constitution. In the battle cry of secularism, it needs to be seen how various communities perceive the issue from their own angles. The ‘Hindu’ liberals who have been wrongly portrayed as ‘secular’ liberals because of their ‘concern’ for Muslims are the biggest target of one and all. It is this segments which actually dominate the ‘secular’ discourse and it is clear that its fight with Hindu radical and hardliner is purely the ‘power’ battle and not really an ‘ideological’ one.

For years, the Congress’s brahmanical establishment pampered this ‘Hindu liberal’ seculars who were predominantly upper castes led by Brahmins through various positions in all the ‘institutions’. They are the crop who claims that ‘Hindutva’ and Sangh Parivar do not represent Hindus and that Hindu dharma was never violent and it is a unique and tolerant religion of the world. This stream of ‘writers’ are ‘influenced’ through Gandhian philosophy who feel we have suddenly become ‘intolerant’ and that India or Hindus had a ‘golden’ past of ‘respecting’ ‘dissent’ and acknowledging ‘diversity’.

The Sangh Parivar and its ‘writers’ who are not in ‘large’ number feel that this ‘darbari’ literati do not speak on the violence against Hindus by the Muslim fanatics in Kashmir as well as in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The Sanghis charge this ‘secular’ brigade is pro Muslim and is offended immediately when we speak of Beef but keep quiet when Muslims eat it. Shouldn’t the Muslims ‘respect’ the ‘sentiments’ of Hindus, they ask and add that Pakistan is continuously killing our soldiers and innocent people and these writers have no time to condemn the Pakistan sponsored terrorism. Loudspeaker Giriraj Kishore says that can Lalu tell Muslims to eat pork. There are hundreds of other example where the expert ‘distortionists’ working overtime to polarize the society.  One wonders as who is asking any one including Hindus or Muslims or for that matter any one to eat a particular kind of food. We stand for the rights of Hindus to eat Pork as we are against banning of beef. The problem is how they are trying to create stories to befool the masses. Unfortunately, the Sangh is not alone in its assault on ‘sickulars’ as many ‘corporate Muslim seculars’ have jumped the Sangh Bandwagon to demonise all those who disagree with the culture of banning. They accuse that we do not speak when Muslims commit mistakes or do wrongs.

This breed of corporate Muslim ‘intellectuals’ who are ‘journalists’, ‘opinion makers’ and members of American sponsored Muslim ‘think-tanks’ who have blamed the ‘sickulars’ as pampering Muslims in India. Their articles and opinions are being portrayed in all the ‘Sanghified’ papers where they justify even killings in Gujarat in 2002. Taslima Nasrin said that none of the ‘secularists’ came in her defense when the West Bengal government banned her book.  The ‘Muslim’ ‘intellectuals’ even questioned why a paper like ‘The Indian Express’ gave a ‘communal’ headline ‘And they hanged Yaqub’. One commentator questioned this blaming the Express which remain one of the finest newspapers today in India just for its reporting and taking on the Hindu fascists. The other ‘intellectual’ sitting in Canada regularly abuse Muslims for their faith suggested to remove the name of all the Mughal kings from the Delhi roads and rename these roads for some ‘better’ people. On their ‘advice’ the government of India agreed and renamed Aurangzeb road as APJ Abdul Kalam Road.

As a person devoted to secular thoughts and rationalism, it is well known to me the growing Islamophobia in United States, Canada and Europe. I am well acquaint with the ‘intellectual dishonesty’ that the ‘mainstream’ Hindu ‘seculars’ in India have and their patronage by the Congress Party and various left parties. There is no denial of fact that these caste seculars have rarely raised the issue of the violence on Dalits and shudras in India. Even if some of them spoke most of them kept themselves out of the whole discourse.  Hindu Seculars excluded the most marginalized from their discourse and deliberations and therefore Gandhi remained the icons of secularism in India and the Hindu seculars refused to take notes from Ambedkar, Periyar, Phule, Bhagat Singh and Rahul Sankrityayan.

The ‘corporate Muslim seculars’ have become the biggest ‘support’ of the Sangh Parivar at the moment when they target the whole concept of ‘secularism’ in India. The problem with these Muslim seculars is that their ‘world’ begin and ends with theocratic Islamic countries and Pakistan, a complete replica of the Sangh Parivar’s thoughts. These ‘seculars’ actually blame Indian state for being too soft on Muslims and engaged in appeasing them. One does not know what exactly is appeasement but for them Hindu seculars have not condemned the Bombay blast, don’t ask for hanging of the ‘terrorists’, never support the Uniform Civil Code and never questions as why government provide ‘subsidy’ for the Haj-Yatris as being accused by these ‘Corporate Muslim seculars’. I can say with firm conviction that as a humanist and rationalist we have questioned all kind of fundamentalism including Muslim as well as Christian fundamentalism yet there is a difference between majoritarian communalism and minority communalism. Most of these corporatized seculars blame Muslims for their conditions ignoring the important factor why Muslim Dalits and Pasmanda face constitutional discrimination to get a government job. None of them ever bothered to speak for them or write about the issues that Halalkhors, Nuts, Kalandars, Helas and many others like them face because of their caste despite being Muslims. The problem with these high society secularists is that they too consider Muslims a monolith block like the Sangh Parivar and hence easy to lecture and demonise.

These are interesting points. Some more complaints are that Madrasas breed terrorists, Hinduism is ‘tolerant’, why India should be secular when none of the ‘Islamic’ countries are ‘seculars’, that Muslim refuses to mix up with the secular society and never believe in ‘democratic’ values. My problem with the Hindu secular is that they get their ‘ideological’ strength with the same school and religious scriptures which the Hindutva-wallahs are getting and both interpreting it according to their own convenience very much such as late Asghar Ali Engineer did but found little support from the Muslim intelligentsia.  How on earth can any one claim that Hinduism or Brahmanism is a ‘tolerant’ religion when a majority of India suffers under their discriminatory laws and social practices such as caste system and untouchability. With such a criminal and barbaric culture terming it as tolerant is gross intellectual dishonesty. As far as Madarsas are concern, I can only say they do not create any radical Muslims but deeply religious person unable to fight a political battle for their community.

Interestingly our corporate Muslim seculars friends are very similar to Hindu seculars who have never raised caste class issues with in their own societies. When did these corporate Muslim seculars turn RSS sympathizers ever-raise the issue of Pasmanda Muslims in their articles and opinions? How has it never come to their minds that RSS is purely a brahmanical organization representing the interest of the caste Hindus and not Hindu society as a whole?  These ‘corporate Muslim seculars’ never sided with the issue of marginalized in India similarly like the Hindu seculars for not feeling the pains of dalits and aadivasis who face not just physical violence but spiritual violence for years. So secularism becomes a brahmanical dummy wrestling like BJP and the Congress Party. Perhaps the war between these ‘self-styled’ ‘liberals’ among Muslims and Hindus reflect the same mindset.

But then one will have to decide which side of the battle you are. Blaming Hindu seculars will do no justice to these corporate Muslim seculars. Their siding with Sangh Parivar cannot justify their positions how much they wish to abuse Pakistan or Islam. To be candid, I knew some of them who happen to be leading the campaign. Once in London there was an accidental meeting with two of them who actually were upset with us for our support to campaign against war on Iraq and Afghanistan. What disturbed me most was their open support to the brutal killings of Muslims in 2002 Gujarat pogrom. ‘These Mullah need to be taught a lesson’, they said. Now, it is pitiable and painful to see blindfolded ‘seculars’ sitting in London, Ottawa and Washington decrying the whole western protest against invasion on Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of ‘War on terror’ ? I witnessed some of these protests there which suggest how people went out against their own regimes and supported human rights of the people. Today, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is trying to ‘apologize’ anticipating that a parliamentary committee could castigate him for his role on the issue. How do you think that ‘War on Iraq” has tamed ‘Islam’ as these people would have thoughts? In fact, the American and British regimes are responsible for the growth of hard core Islamic zealots who are a threat to democracy and freedom in Middle East. These fanatics are not a threat to United States or Europe but to their own societies and people. Who can ignore the dark reality that both the IS and Taliban are a product of war on terror and prior to that their war on communism. In their zeal to eliminate communism from middle-east the Americans and Europeans actually flirted with Islamic Jehadis and the outcome is the balkanization of the entire region.

Islamophobia in Europe has helped many of the corporate Muslim secularists to adjust to the power elite in condemning Islam out rightly. While we are well aware of the fact that Islamic zealots and fanatics being supported by the Wahabi groups in Saudi Arabia have definitely created a very disturbing situation for Muslims in societies where they are a minority as they face all kind of discriminations and isolation. Same kind of hysteria related to Muslims is being created here in India by these ‘secularist Muslims’ who are now openly siding with the Hindutva fanatics. Muslims are victim of theocratic ideas and putting Islam in everything but it is not that they are not changing and voices are not there challenging the dominance of Mullah and religious leadership. My problem with these Muslim secularists is how come they appreciate the Sangh Parivar and its brahmanical dominance over the vast non Brahmin Hindus?  If you reject priestly classes everywhere, you must stick to that ideological ground. We condemn all kind of priestly classes and their control over masses in each sects and religion and call people not to surrender before them.

In their zeal to look more modern they dangerously make ‘secularism’ and Congress party easily exchangeable terms much to the pleasure of their friends in the Sangh Parivar  as well as of the Congress Party. We have not forgotten when Francois Gautier, a French writer based in Delhi in his regular fulminations against Islam and seculars in India got huge publicity in the newspapers. All the crap that he produced got big space in the edit pages of the corporate communalized media which gladden the heart of the Sangh Parivar to use those ‘fulminations’ as quotable quotes to denigrate the activists fighting against them. Gautier once blamed Buddhism for the decline of India and wanted Hindus to militarise as envisioned by the Sangh parivar. The corporate secular Muslims stand together with the corporate communal Hindus in asking for ‘strong’ action against ‘Mullah’ Pakistan and ‘Islamic’ zealots.

The corporate secular Muslims got irritated When Prof Irfan Habib suggested the ‘ideological’ ‘similarities’ between the RSS and IS. They laughed and termed him old jholawallah communists who used to seek vote for communists.  What is wrong if Prof Habib questioned the motive of the changing names of the roads named after Mughals? Why is there a road named after Raja Man Singh who actually betrayed Maharana Pratap and joined hand with Akbar, he asked. If Akbar is wrong then how come Man Singh is an honorary person said Prof Habib but then in these times of deep communalization everything is good provided you are a caste Hindu.

Irfan Habib is not being trolled by the Sangh promoted element but decried by these corporate secular Muslims who preach about ‘western liberalism’ but wont question their misdeeds and imperialism. For them everybody who question west have no right to put his feet in these countries and that we all were just primitive people unless the west came and gave us great ideas. I accept many of the ideas and enlightenment. We definitely got philosophy, freedom, liberalism and socialism from the west but to be very frank not from the Americans and Canadians. We refuse to accept them as models as Americans represent the most obscene corporate culture and a majority of them have their mindset very much similar to India’s upper castes.  Imperialism and exploitation of people was a reality and that west gained from it can’t be ignored.

Many of our friends wrote that Hindu seculars are not really seculars. Yes our problem is that we have actually made liberalism and secularism as synonymous term. The Hindu liberals are worried about Hinduism and hence they have every right to speak against the Sangh Parivar and its nefarious agenda of converting India into a Hindu Talibanised state. The Muslim liberals are unhappy and blame on Hindu seculars that ‘seculars’ don’t speak against Islam. This is the dangerous game to get adjusted in the power circle and edit pages of the Brahmin-Bania media. We have no issues with those who make such compromises with their identity as it sales better and useful in the globalized world. Identity is a burden for the rural poor but a great institution of marketing yourself once you have entered into the drawing rooms of the power elite. Hindu liberalism wants to maintain the status quo and worried about the Sangh parivar’s control over Hindus but where have these corporate secular Muslims spoken for the Dalits, Aadivasis and Pasmandas ?  Where have they shown their concern that our natural resources are under the attack from the western corporate and our people are suffering? Tony Blair want to apologise as his lies are now got exposed but our ‘liberals’ want to support it simply because they feel it will teach ‘Islamists’ a lesson. Yes, these corporate Muslim seculars were the allies of George Bush who termed the word Islamic Fascism. We want to add that religious thugs will bring catastrophe, death and darkness, which ultimately will lead to fascism everywhere. Pakistan and Islamic societies have destroyed the common men and suppressed their voices for freedom because they allowed the extra constitutional religious thugs masquerading as political leaders who used blasphemy laws to control people. Since in India whatever was the reason, Hindu fundamentalism did not have the fullest support in the past of the masses hence it was difficult for them. For the first time in independent India’s history they have a field day and therefore they are coming to their ‘normal’ self. During the other regime they remain as fringe but today they are roaming free and can target any one.

I am disappointed many of the ‘corporate secular Muslims’ who feel like any RSS sympathizer as nothing happened in India. Their problem is that they don’t feel anything is happening in India unless we turn like the Talibanis or IS. It is our duty to save India from those who were once ‘fringe’ but today trying to become ‘mainstream’. Pakistan and theocratic Islamic nations cannot be our role model and therefore we will have to fight back to protect our constitution and rights of all. It would have been good if these ‘secular Muslims’ had the strength to condemn the polarization happening in India and siding with secular groups in India. If they hate brahmanical secular, I would ask them to raise the issue of Pasmanda Muslims or all those like us who do not support that religion has to be led by the priestly classes. I would have supported them and their efforts to liberate Islam but that cannot be done through sitting in the West and gladdening the hearts of chitpawan Brahmins of the Sangh Parivar. A fight for secular ideals will need secular alliances and need secularization of society. To convert Muslims into secularism you need to work among the community and not abuse it sitting with those who have no faith either in constitution or secularism. Long back I wrote that unity of poor people is possible if Mandalisation of Muslims, Christians societies and the leadership comes in the hands of common political people. Politicisation of communities is important to fight battle for dignity and rights. We must understand that Sangh Parivar is not a religious organization but purely political one guiding the current regime at the centre.. Those who feel that Sangh is a Hindu organization are actually denying voice to India’s majority Dalit Bahujans who feel the only agenda of the Sangh Parivar is to maintain the status quo strengthening brahmanical system in India and Muslims are just the target but the real agenda is to keep vast Bahujan masses subjugated. Anyone who is supporting one kind of fanaticism to get rid of his brand of fanaticism is only strengthening the regressive forces and we must be careful of it. In the coming days we will have more writings by these ‘seculars,  who will call all those who want India to remain safe for all and our fight for rule of law and constitutionalism as ‘sickulars’ but then we can not keep quiet when our rights are trampled with and ideas from Manusmriti are being imposed on us in the name of ‘sanskriti’ and ‘parampara’  violating the ethics of our democratic secular republican constitution.

A Tribute to Dr R.M.Pal

The Humanist who fought for the human rights of most marginalized

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

It was Prof Y.P.Chibbar, the PUCL General Secretary for years, who introduced me to Dr R.M.Pal when I visited him at ARSD College where he was teaching.  ‘Dr Pal is the right person for you. He is the editor of PUCL Bulletin and lives in Greater Kailash. You must meet him,’ suggested Prof Chibbar. And after that it was a relationship that grew up every passing day. As a young aspiring boy from a nondescript town of Uttarakhand, I had come to Delhi ‘incidentally’, during the tumultuous years of anti Mandal agitation where most of our ‘intellectuals’ had been exposed. Staying with Dr Mulk Raj Anand, pioneer of English writing in India, there was a period of great personal churning for me and Dr Pal made it clear to me to earn to learn. ‘What are you doing there’, he asked. Jee, I am looking after his work, typing his scripts and accompany him to various places where he moves, I said. My aim is to do social work and it is a great honor to be with a man who calls himself a ‘Gandhian’. For a young person like me who had so many fantasies about Gandhism as perhaps we did not have the opportunity to know and understand ‘others’ and it seemed the only way to fight against oppression particularly untouchability which Gandhi had claimed to be the biggest ‘sin’ of Hinduism. So for me any one who had seen Gandhi or worked with him became a hero and ‘Lokayat’ where Dr Mulk Raj Anand stayed became my ‘sabarmati’. Dr Pal was a no nonsense person who could speak fearlessly without being hypocritical in front of you and he remained unimpressed. ‘Well, I can tell you Mulk Raj Anand will not help you’, he said. ‘ Don’t live under the romance of ‘Gandhian’ fame as it is good to do ‘social work’ but you need to be independent and earn to do things, he suggested. I know you came from Dehradun and may face prejudices here because of your village background. Better you do some evening courses as you plan and earn for your living and hopefully you will be able to contribute to society as you wish. And I can say with firm conviction that after coming to Delhi and staying here as meek and submissive person for over two and half years, Dr Pal gave me the confidence in myself and helped me become independent and rebuild my self respect and confidence.

Over the years our interaction grew and he became fond of me. He would guide me and ask me write in particular way. He suggested diverse topics to me and so much was the trust that many time he would send me to go on fact finding on particular issues and get direct information for him.  It was not just he would ask to write but he would call me and discuss with me the issue in detail and point out those particular references which he would wish me to focus. I was fortunate to have met and acquaint with a number of eminent, Human Rights activists, Ambedkarite scholars and writers at young age and all of them respected me and appreciated my courage and enthusiasm but Dr Pal remain the one who mentored me and guided me. He would appreciate a number of my elderly friends but unlike them he would guide me and even point to me the grammatical mistakes in my writings. I knew them very well and the fact was that being a teacher, it was like a student sitting in his class as if he is dictating and then checking our assignment. Many times, he warned me of being neutral in my criticism and asked me to be as ruthless to Muslim fanatics too who try to defame the community but one thing was clear that he made a distinction between minority communalism and majoritarian communalism and cautioned India of the dangers of the Hindu communalism. He was afraid of the fact that India might become victim of the majoritarian communalism and for that all the like-minded parties and people have to join hand. He would often quote that no movement will succeed unless it is preceded by a political philosophy.

I still remember how he guided me to write a paper for a seminar being organized by Indian Social Institute, Delhi,  in collaboration with UGC, on Ambedkar and M N Roy’s relationship and Roy’s thought on rationalism and Buddhism. He was determined despite my own feeling that it was a misfit for a seminar on Human Rights education issue yet he felt only I could have done justice to this and he guided me. Yes, that paper took me to various files including that information where Dr Ambedkar had, as a minister in Viceroy’s Council, sanctioned an amount of Rs 13,000 for anti war efforts of M N Roy and on the basis of this information ‘inspired’ Arun Shourie to write  ‘Worshipping the False God’, a book based on hard prejudices and lies. I met Justice Tarkunde several time and got those letters where he mentioned that it was he who took the money many time on behalf of the Party and that Roy never took the money himself. Ambedkar was in deep appreciation of MN Roy and his intellectual honesty and that is why there are lots of similarities on their thoughts and philosophy, which need further elaborations. I can say with conviction that if Dr Pal had not guided me in this regard, I would have missed the great opportunity and work of M N Roy related to caste, religion and fascism.

As the editor of PUCL Bulletin he was able to focus a lot on atrocities against Dalits and issue of communalism in India. Both the issue of caste violence against Dalits and communalism were matter of great concern for him and he remained uncompromising in his condemnation of them. At the various national and international forums he always focused on the issue that Human Rights are not just state laws and their steady implementation which of course are important, but what he spoke and emphasized was ‘societal violation of human rights’ which he always felt, got out of the scrutiny of the human rights defenders and the organsations working for the human rights. It was his conviction that Dalits, Muslims and other marginalized people should join Radical Humanist and Human Rights Movement to raise their issues. As he became president of Delhi PUCL, he ensured that these segments are fairly represented and we know personally many of the radical humanists and PUCL ‘leaders’ were not very happy with his ‘casteist’ approach.

For long he listened to many youngsters claiming that ‘human rights’ organisations in India have no space for the Dalits. He always mentioned to me this point that PUCL is a membership based organisations and if the Dalits, Muslims wanted to lead it, they need to become member and increase their numbers. He introduced many eminent persons in the human rights and said that there is no point complaining if you are unable to be member of it. People’s organisations are led by people and need further understanding and working of the organisations and its structures. Merely blaming the organisations for being representative of ‘upper castes’ was not correct according to him though we knew that many activists became members but frankly speaking the functioning of the organisations like PUCL did not change. The dark fact is that he was not liked inside the PUCL as well as in the Radical Humanists circle for his ‘overemphasis on caste and communalism. His unambiguity and openness made many people his enemy who would be jealous of his forthrightness. The man always enjoyed being with young activists, guiding them and providing ideas to write on particular issues. I can vouch with my own experience having met numerous people of eminence how they just use you. The dirty secret of the ‘intellectual’ world is that it does not want to engage in dialogue with people but work on ‘networking’.

We had lots of disagreement particularly on the issue of Gandhi and Ambedkar. He knew it well that I have no liking for Gandhian philosophy, which I called humbug and absolutely patronizing as far as Dalits are concern. He would always say that though Gandhi made eradication of untouchability and fight against communalism pivot of his philosophy, he failed in both count yet he felt that Gandhi’s intention were not wrong but lots of discussions and debate on the issue actually saw his opinion changing. He said any one who read ‘annihilation of caste’, will only find Gandhi on the wrong side and Ambedkar fighting for the rights of the people. He felt Ambedkar was wronged.

His personal association with M N Roy and later working on the human rights issues had broadened his horizon much bigger than many of his contemporaries who remained very narrow in their personal lives. There are very few who would spare time for you and guide you whatever possible ways and feel good at your achievements. He loved speaking Bangla and always followed the incidents happening in East Bengal or what we call today Bangladesh. The pain of division and migration was always with him and that is why he was always warm to people like me who left home in search of a new identity and to fulfill their commitments. He would always warn me like a teacher of what to do and what not to do. There are so many things to remember where he asked me to write on and suggested me to attend particular programmes.

The last togetherness of mine with him was at a seminar that he has been trying to organize for years in Mumbai on Dr Ram Manohar Lohia but always felt lacking supporting hands there as he would have them in Delhi as it was the city he always missed and left after he had paralytic stroke that confined him on wheelchair and external help. Many of my friends actually spoke to me after visiting him and felt pained to see a vibrant man depended on people for help, a man who was always active doing things at his own. But it was his strong willpower that despite being confined to bed he could do a lot of work, which is highly impossible for many of us to do. I never saw him complaining about himself whenever I spoke to him on phone as it was work work and work. He would ask for certain book or speak to certain person or provide the phone numbers of some friends. He complained that being in Mumbai has curtailed his freedom as he always enjoyed his friendship circle in Delhi and felt that he has got isolated in Mumbai.

The seminar on Ram Manohar Lohia in Mumbai reflected how he wanted to do things so fast. Academics saw him speaking passionately on Lohia-Ambedkar relationship where he quoted Lohia saying that he wanted Dr Ambedkar to lead the entire Indians and not confined to the leadership of the Dalits even when people like me questioned Lohia suggesting his vision ended at Gandhsim, Dr Pal remain open to new ideas which supported freethinking and secular democratic traditions in India.

There are so many memories. I can only say that he was the one on whom I could count for guidance and support. He never failed and once promised would go to any extent to finish the task. I grew up admiring him for his courage and forthrightness as whenever he spoke he was to the point and blunt. At a seminar, a leading human right academic, who happened to be a Muslim, actually supported practice of Sati as cultural practice and therefore outside the purview of human rights laws in the name of ‘personal laws’ of Hindus. I got up and objected saying whether he feel that veil and Burqa should be put beyond the limit of human rights laws. It became heated and Dr Pal came for my rescue saying that he always wanted human rights defenders and organisations to speak against societal violation of human rights as human rights in South Asia are not just violated by the state but majority of violation happen because of cultural practices and we need to come out in open against such rigid and inhuman practices such as caste system and untouchability.

The demise of Dr R M Pal at this crucial moment is a great blow to all the right thinking secular forces as we would often go to him and seek his advice on many issues confronting us. He was the man who always believed in the idea of a secular inclusive India and spoke regularly against the Hindutva’s communalism. Though he is no longer with us, his writings will always inspire us to work for a secular democratic India. We promise to carry on his legacy for our better future.