Arms response to political issues a threat to secular democratic forces in India

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

The top leadership of Congress party in Chhattishgarh came under a well-coordinated attack from the Maoists in Darba Ghati in Sukma in the southern part of Bastar region. The Congress leadership had been campaigning in the state as part of their ‘Parivartan Yatra’ as Chhattishgarh goes for polls during the year end with many other states. Those who were killed are leader of opposition and a well-known Aadivasi leader Mahendra Karma, president of Chhattishgarh Congress Committee Mr Nand Kumar Patel as well as his son, some other senior leaders of the party. Former Union Minister Mr Vidya Charan Shukla suffered from four bullets and is battling for life in a hospital in Delhi while Ajit Jogi too survived as he flew from Sukma to Raipur. The leaders after finishing their rally at Sukma were going to Jagdalpur when the Maoists ambushed their caravan resulting in killing of over 29 party workers including senior leaders of Congress Party. Let me explain here that when we condemn the attack on the political workers does not mean we condone all their acts of using the state administration to intimidate people. Many of these leaders were highly unpopular because of their action but they had their huge followers too.

The audacity of this attack has rightfully shocked the nation. The enormity of the assault on the political structure was so high that the top leadership of the Congress Party had to discuss the issue in an emergency meeting at the Prime Minister’s residence and their Vice President Rahul Gandhi reached Raipur in the late night and met those injured. The Prime Minister and Congress President has just visited the state capital and expressed solidarity with their party workers.

Now, there are two important aspects in the entire incident. One that those who were targeted were political people and not the paramilitary forces or the local police and hence it is an important issue of deliberation and must be discussed with candid way as why the Maoist did so and whether they want the same reaction from the security agencies to eliminate their top leadership? What Chhattishgarh and Baster in particular lacked was the politicization process in which aadivasis must be made part of the democratic structure. The state apparatus remained contemptuous towards the aadivasis and hence they went to Naxal for basic support like getting their issues resolved through the ‘Jan Adalaits’ which are Kangaroo courts and do not place in any civilized society but because of ‘instant justice’ they instill fear in the small population who then have no option other than following the ‘sarkar’. The government of Chhattishgarh remained in Raipur with read beacons and politicians using mining to strengthen their pockets and here Maoists were engaged in their propaganda of ‘state’ as people’s ‘enemy’. Corruption, exploitation all those things which we are romantic of explaining could be best used by the ‘revolutionaries’ after all we get frustrated with a system only when we face corruptions and delays and this gives rise to ‘victimised’ mindset. One victimized mindset is completely developed then the radicalization process start and it is also true that we start believing that our ‘world’ is just around us. We stop to see the world in bigger sense. The propagandists will always speak in terms of ‘speaking’ for ‘people’. They will always claim a bigger representation from people. The fact is that Maoists have people’s support in those regions but whether this support is due to fear or without it does not matter. It only reflects that our governance structure is completely collapsed in Chhattishgarh and it needs special treatment. It need serious thought while violence must be handled with great caution, it is important that innocent people do not become victim of this ‘collateral damage’ as military ‘experts’ always claim.

It need to be understood that Chhattishgarh still has high number of investment and companies and other mining giants are still functioning in the state in spite of the so-called Naxals. Then we have religious gurus who have big ashrams in Chhattishgarh and no attempt have been made to respect the aadivasi identity. In fact the whole project of Hindutva is to ensure that Aadivasis remain as part of the Hindu system and there has been no effort by the so-called Maoists or Naxals to ensure that resulting in the continuous oppression of aadivasis by both the religious thugs as well as economically powerful people. Chhattishgarh and Jharkhand today are dominated by the outsiders. They have procured land and there is no stoppage to it. All the government schemes cannot function without those who are ‘dominating’ the area hence a basic question how are these outsiders able to work so independently who are fighting against ‘foreign domination’.

It is also a well-known fact that aadivasi areas have been without any road links, hospitals, schools and other basic facilities. Our system has not reached them and there is no participation in administration and political structure. Bastar’s issues cannot be resolved from Raipur and it is important that an independent Bastar Zone should be created with assurance of aadivasi control over mining and other natural resources. If the government had taken proper care and helped aadivasis to acquire space and not to strengthen aadivasi middlemen in the region, they would have not faced this scenario. Today, there is so must of mistrust that any action of the government is taken as an attempt to intrude in aadivasi zone.  In the crisis of mutual trust, it is the Maoists who dominate and their propaganda work hence to maintain their hegemony they bring threat, intimidation and different stories of government efforts to control the natural resources. It was time for sincere thinking where government could have sought to talk with aadivasi leadership in the region. Who are the aadivasi leaders who government can speak? Did the government ever call for a meeting of Aadivasi social activists, academics, leaders, panchayat leaders from different part of the country including Chhattishgarh to discuss their issues? You do not do and the result is today aadivasi leadership in all these ‘revolutionary’ Zones is in the hands of non aadivasis and if we see their track record they have systematically eliminated all those leaders who differ with them and were a challenge to them.

To say that Naxals or Maoist ‘revolutionaries’ are isolated bunch is ridiculous and therefore we need to look into the political aspect of these killings. Simply because the killings are done by Naxals or Maoist does not make it beyond political conspiracy. There are chances of these killings are political as Naxals or Maoists are too smart and take part in the political activities. They know well who to eliminate and who to protect and politicians across spectrum need them and that is the only reason why they are surviving.  The failure of political leadership and the criminalization of our political structure actually help the Naxals very well. It is true that the aadivasis seek their help to get justice and protection but what is the alternative they are providing? Is the ‘Jan Adalat’ not like Khap Panchayat which provides instance justice to the people through various torturous ways in which people are killed.

Our crisis is bigger as those who are voices of reasoning are not liked. These are times of pamphleteers and mouthpieces and those writers and academics who live in their one particular worldview and anyone who differ is anti-people or anti national. Indians are experts in tagging people whenever they differ. Human Rights defenders have to face the worst.  This is also a fact that today human rights have also become instrumental or frontal organizations for those who have no faiths in rights at all. Whenever we condemn the violence by extra state actors, we are told that you are a ‘state’ agent. Whenever a poor aadivasi is killed, he is termed as a ‘state’ agent. My question has been how come a poor aadivasi who want his right and protection from people become a state agent if he participate in NREGA or speak to a political leader. Why the Maoists want to stop my choice to vote to politicians of our choice. If they were true to their beliefs, we should have seen the best politicians in Telangana, Andhra, Odisha, and Chhattishgarh but some of the most corrupted politicians who are hand in glove with business and corporates, who exploit poor, who amassed huge land and other natural resources, still hail from these regions. Why these regions most of the people remain highly apolitical and no independent Dalit aadivasi leadership is allowed to develop so that it could contest elections. So, terming anyone who differ with you, stand in front of you become a state agent. And I have a simple question that in India extra state actors are more powerful. India is run through the constitution of Manu in reality. 

Here we see how the right wing Hindutva brigade targets the Dalits, Aadivasis and Muslims through administration, media images and social oppression. In 2002 Gujarat massacre happened and the murderers came to power and became ruthless in isolating the minorities particularly the Muslims. They got the benefit of communalization and nationalization through the Ayodhya movement too. Today the same leaders are having free time in Chhattishgarh, Maharastra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh. It became their laboratory and we could not stop them. Big companies have come there and exploited people and we are witnessing the lethal cocktail of capitalism and brahmanism. Where are the revolutionaries? How many times they took on the right wing Hindutva nationalism which is a big threat to the country and today our corporate and business are ready to thrust those forces on us and such incidents only strengthen them.

No, they won’t speak against communalism as it is not their issue. They will call for poll boycott and what is the result of these poll boycotts. Jharkhand, Chhattishgarh are gone to non aadivasis and Hindutva forces? What have they done for stopping this? How can the top leadership of the Maoist speak against migrants’ leadership when their top leadership itself is exported from Andhra Pradesh? Speaking against Indian state is easier than challenging the brahmanical system which is the ‘extra state actor’ in India and root cause of our evils but then when the top echelon of the Maoist leadership hail from the brahmanical customs then what to expect from them.

If over 200 districts of India are under Maoist influence then who stops them to form a political party and contest elections. If they think they have the people’s support without the intimidation of their AK 47 then why not influence the political process. But once you pick up guns don’t expect the state to respond to you with roses. And this is the most troublesome part. In that they have killed a generation of tribal who should have grown to participate. Yes, the government is responsible, our political parties are responsible and like the tribal of Bastar we all are victim of this system and need to clean it. We need to do so but what way?

I have no sympathy with those in power. They have failed us. They have used the bogey and used the Naxals. The doublespeak of Hindutva gangs and their sympathizers in media is visible. Everybody is busy with the Indian Paisa league and the amount of corruption in it. Why has the loudmouth in the TV chat room kept quiet on the issue? Will he ask question to Chhattishgarh government and its abject failure to protect the political opponents? The ‘future’ of India tweeted that ‘we must fight this battle together’. The Ayodhya Sarathi said he is pained and we have to fight together. Everybody wants to fight against it. All of them will enjoy this in the forest but it is the common secularist who faces the intimidation from state. It is they who are victimized in their daily lives and human rights become dirty word.

Why are we silent? A few years back, I happened to meet a general in a conference who said that the Maoists are ‘our own people’. And that explain the things and mindset. What do you mean by ‘our own people’? Why are the Kashmiris not our ‘own people’. Yes, if this big operation was done by some Hizbul or any XYZ organization in the name of Islam, do you think, we should be watching or debating IPL or satta bazar on our TV? Do you think that we would have been these subdued responses? The entire country would have been tense and every Muslims would have been asked to show ‘Vandemataram’ on his chest. This is a reality. Since a majority of the leadership from Naxals are ‘well educated’ and hail from ‘good’ upper caste families hence they are our own. Their biggest certificate is that they are not ‘Muslims’ and their name is not ‘Khan’ hence the state apparatus in India protect them. It protects them for political purposes. Political leaders settle scores through them and therefore tribal or aadivasis are just a tool, they are sandwiched between the brahmanical Indian state and brahmanical Moists, both don’t want solution. Indian state want to handover tribal land to big industries and the Maoists want to continue with it.

If both are true to resolve the issue then the Indian state must begin with a complete moratorium on the land dealing or forest resources from Chhattishgarh first. Let the Maoist surrender with their arms and let the government promise to rehabilitate them and later let the government withdraw paramilitary forces from the region in the name of operation green hunt. Let all the tribal who are arrested in the name of being Maoists be released. Let Indian state show its sign of magnanimity by announcing some non-military measures in specific term and time bound programme.  We have no issue with the issues raised by Maoists and there are people who are fighting for their rights, land and water all over the country and they still have faith in Indian constitution and its apparatus despite all our disappointments. The Muslims in India despite all victimization still believe in the constitution and fighting their battle politically. The Dalits who were the worst suffers of the brahmanical system are fighting for their rights and have got their space too. Our difference with them is purely on their methodology. The left movement is weakening in this country because they failed to win over the heart of dalits, aadvasis, muslims and others. They did not allow the leadership from these sections of society and hence the space was occupied by the rightwing forces. It is a great challenge. India cannot be handed over to rightwing nationalist. It is battle for all of us to unite and organise politically. The secular space is under severe threat. The Maoist threat and violence will only strengthen the militarized minds in the bureaucracy who will make a war cry. It will strengthen the right wing agenda of political parties and the end result would be that situation would turn more difficult for all those whose rights are violated particularly the most marginalized sections of our society whether it is Dalits or Aadivasis or Muslims and other backward communities. The challenge is bigger and it need a comprehensive political response as the arms response will only give state a right to enter in those zones and kill people in the name of these ideologies. It has happened till date and it will further marginalize the people in these zones.

Working towards Ambedkar’s vision of ‘Prabuddha Bharat’

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

“I am prepared to pick and choose from everyone, socialists, Communists or other. I do not  claim infallibility and as Buddha says there is nothing infallible, there is nothing final and everything is liable to examination’ : Dr Ambedkar speaking in Rajya Sabha on 19^th march, 1955 on Article 31 or Right to Property.

A vicious debate started by some fringe groups about a month back that Ambedkar has not worked for the cause of Dalits and all his actions failed in its mission. Some said, he was influenced by American Economist in Columbia University and has depended too much on the state while other felt that it is time to call Ambedkar bluff as it has not done anything for the Dalits and time has come to ‘ideologically’ fight against it. It is not new for the ideologues of left, right and centre to denigrate Ambedkar as he is a challenge to their ‘intellectualism’.

There are many intellectuals who were shocked to see whether Ambedkar was anti-communist while the so-called communist leadership just blamed him as ‘agent’ of capitalism which emerge from his forthright debate on the issue of right to property and on the issue of Ceiling Surplus Land. Anyone who understands and if he or she is honest on the village system in India, would subscribe to what Dr Ambedkar said and suggested on the issue in the Constituent Assembly debates. We all know that Baba Saheb Ambedkar wanted nationalization of land and was against individual farming. In fact, he stated that though he was not a communist, he support the Russian model of state farming. A right winger author once write a book on him claiming he was a ‘British’ stooge while Gandhians have their own problem as Ambedkar rarely called Gandhi a Mahatma and trashed his formulations of India’s great culture and village republics.

‘Although, I am not a communist-the Russian system of collective farming is the only way by which we can solve our agricultural problem. To create peasant proprietorship and to handover land to peasant who have not got any means of production in my judgment would bring a complete ruination.’

In the backdrop of this, I wish to say that it is not necessary for Ambedkar to be a communist or a Gandhian or a socialist for being right or wrong. The attempt to fix Ambedkar in this fixed mode is nothing but belittling his contribution to the society. Countries and societies do not depend on ideological framework but work on pragmatism and local needs of the people. The intellectuals frame those positions to the benefit of their masses but if they become enslaved to a dogma then that perception is bound to fail. Today, one has to see who has won in India. Those who wanted revolution for the proletariat actually ensured that their caste brethren’s remain in safe heavens and rather than launching an anti-caste movement they started questioning others who fought against it and brought radical changes in society. The successful anti caste movement in India were never lead by the so-called champions of the proletariat. Rather people like Ambedkar, Periyar, Phule, Sri Narayan Guru, Birsa Munda , Sahuji Maharaj, Ayyan Kali and many others were never actually proclaimed communists though they were influenced by some of the traits of the communism and socialism as Ambedkar had mentioned many time, the issue of Dalits and other oppressed masses.

It was strange that the meeting did not discuss what failed communism in India and rather it focused more on Ambedkar’s failed mission and his ideology. It is normal practice for any group to discuss the issues related to their ideology and introspect about it as how much it has succeeded. It is therefore legitimate for the Ambedkarites to discuss how much they have succeeded and where they failed. Introspection of any ideology is an occasion for all kind of discussion without any hero worshipping and with an agenda on future of the ideology. One does not know as how many times our friends who initiated discussion in Chandigarh did that about Marxism. Why is Marxism failing world over and how can them make the labour movement a truly inclusive movement and not just event management on a certain date? How many times did we discuss as why Maoism could not go beyond China and why the Chinese governments have itself abandoned Maoism and its basic principles and why is china today focusing on the liberal principles of global economy ignoring the Maoist principles. Can they tell us as why Europe has adopted the name democratic socialism and not communism as most of the communist governments in Eastern European nation were deeply fascist in nature who denied freedom of expression and freedom to organize political dissent. It would be good for our Marxist friends to discuss the failure of Marx, Mao, Lenin and Stalin and think beyond them as why these legends are persona non grata in even in Russia today and no other Eastern European country want to listen about them?

Hence, it is unusual for the ‘revolutionaries’ to discuss on the issue which is not their own. They never considered Ambedkar their own so why is the problem? The brahmanical communists who love their ‘Janeus’ more than their ideology can never ever do justice to the issue of marginalized. Most of the communist leaders not only hailed from the upper castes but also upper classes. A number of times, we are asked question that Ambedkar always used caste as the main identity and we were told that communists believed in class system. I want to ask how many of the top leaders of the all the major communists parties hail from the so-called ‘proletariat’ classes. Despite my high respect for many of them, in terms of both class and caste, they hail from upper echelon of our society and betray the facts about classes which they claim. For years, we know that major communists’ parties in Uttar-Pradesh and Bihar were dominated by the powerful Bhumihar group which owned the maximum number of land. Similarly in Andhra Pradesh, they were led by powerful Reddy’s who were the biggest land owning community in their region and even today hold Andhra Pradesh to virtual ransom.  Why didn’t’ the issues of caste identities never came in the minds of our comrades when taking a political decision. Was not that an identity politics when power elite joined the parties? Where are proletariats in the leadership of the communist parties? All those who claim to work in the name of proletariat in these parties are either the too rich landed peasantry or the middle class bhadraloks of brahmanical variety who are expert in ‘articulations’ but their relationship with the Dalits and Shudras remain the same. Hence, ‘who failed whom’, is a question they should ponder over as how much they succeeded.

Ambedkar was clear about his mission. He knew every well what his people needed. It is not that he was not aware of Marxism but he knew that danger also in India. He did not want to talk in jargons and rhetoric as he wanted pragmatic and immediate solutions for his people. And he knew very well the hypocrisies of those who were talking about ‘international politics’ yet unable to focus on the hidden apartheid in the country. Is not it treacherous for the historians who never focused on the wide ranging discrimination based on caste and issue of untouchability in India?  Gandhi was speaking about foreign power but Ambedkar knew well that the transfer of power from British to Indian hands would be more dangerous if the interest of dalits were not negotiated. He had this fear of a Hindu Raj which he said would be a calamity if it comes to India and hence he was not much keen on buying Gandhi’s Swaraj which was being projected as end of ‘all kind of discrimination’ in India. Ambedkar said that ‘this view would be correct if it could be proved that with the disappearance of Imperialism all vestige of capitalism will also disappear from India.  But it does not require much intelligence to realize that even if the British depart from India, the landlords, the mill owners, and the moneylenders will remain in India and will continue to bleed the people and that even after Imperialism has gone labour will have to fight these interests just as much.’

Ambedkar was an iconoclast who never believed in hero worshipping. He exposed the holy text written in our religious books. He challenged them with greater articulations. He knew how Gandhi was being worshipped by the people and how any question to Gandhi was considered as a ‘challenge’ to loyalty to the nation. He cautioned India against hero worshipping. ‘For in India, ‘Bhakti’ or what may be called the path of devotion or hero-worship, plays a part of its politics unequalled in magnitude by the part it plays in the politics of any other part in the world’. Bhakti in religion may be a road to the salvation of the soul. But in politics, Bhakti, or hero worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship’, warned Ambedkar.

Yes, some of our friends may be unhappy with Ambedkar’s constitutional-ism but one must understand what he meant for that and why.  He knew that now we have a constitution where negotiations are part of political process hence it was important to fight a political battle and not use the extra constitutional methods to get your thing done. Today, we have seen mass protests in India which actually are aimed at undermining its democratic process and bring the American model of corporate version totally in the hands of the caste Hindus. Today, with more and more participation of Dalits and OBCs in our power structure, we are realizing that democracy is being undermined by the same political class who sings ‘songs’ of ‘greatness’ of Indian democracy and who are afraid of such wide scale participation from India’s diverse marginalized communities.

‘We must abandon the bloody methods of revolution. It means that we must abandon the methods of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha. When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was some justification for unconstitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives. These methods are nothing but Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned the better for us.’

I would again emphasise that we have to see Ambedkar in his true perspective who admitted in the Constituent Assembly debate that there was nothing final and things have to be decided based on situations according to time. That is why the constitution provides opportunity to amend our laws according to the needs of the time which changes with the passage of time. It is not that Ambedkar is saying that we must not engage in political protest. His warning was clear that there will be many forces who are afraid of democracy and they can always bring such huge crowd to the ground. We know the dangers of Anna and Kejriwal movements which threatened the very basic of our constitution. We need to understand as why such movement became popular with our middle classes as well as media because there was a feeling of disgust with participation of India’s Dalits and Shudras and Anna and Arvind, they thought, would undo all the ‘provisions’ meant for the Dalits and OBCs. All the right wingers in India hate our constitution. They want to continue shout that it has failed but they don’t know what they are going to give us. What kind of governance model the RSS or Hindu Mahasabha would like to give us? What is the structure that a Maoist can provide us?  Will that be like the ‘democracy’ in China? So, it is important to understand who the forces are talking about all these ‘changes’. In the name of change, we must not succumb to brahmanical lies, all those jargon of internationalism, imperialism and what not, that ignore the Hindu imperialism of India, its hidden apartheid, its caste structure.

Yes, Ambedkar never said that this constitution is the greatest. He felt that it was the responsibility of the constituent assembly to make it and there were lots of issues. He also said that if the constitution would not work well he would be the first to burn it but he always felt that it is not the constitution which will fail us but if the constitution goes in the hands of those people who do not respect democracy, it is bound to fail. For that he said that India’s political democracy will never succeed unless we have social democracy. And today, if we see India and its abject failure, we have to salute Ambedkar for his forthright thoughts as why India is unable to stand up as a society because religious thugs have made hell of this nation. Caste system, untouchability and discrimination is still order of the day. Ambedkar did what he could do and much bigger than his strength. He was all alone in his struggle and yet could change so much. If the constitution is failing, it is not the fault of Ambedkar. If the Dalit movement is not growing, it is not the fault of Ambedkar. It is not the time to find fault with Ambedkar. It is time to understand him well. Ambedkar is not just father of India’s constitution but father of modern India after renaissance which could be called as humanist India. Actually, we need all social churning so that the real leaders emerges who have vision to carry forward that legacy of Dr Ambedkar which he espoused for sure, without a social revolution, India’s political democracy will be at peril. All those ‘champions’ of ‘democracy’ are failing India who are feudal in their personal lives and using democracy a tool to push forward their retrogressive dubious religious agenda on the country.

Gandhi’s India is the nation that glorifies caste hierarchies and village communes. It is an India that believes in the finality of religious text and hence suitable to all kinds of religious thugs who promote Gandhism to fulfill their own religious agenda. Ambedkar’s India will be an enlightened India which does believe in freethinking traditions, where you can challenge the religious books and restore the freedom to individual to decide about his life and choices. Ambedkar’s India does not believe in the ‘sanctity’ of ‘dogmas’ whether political or religious. The centrality of Ambedkar’s India would be the restoration human dignity and human rights for all and without that all ideals and political philosophies would be clear humbug.  Clearly, Ambedkar’s India want to restore us to the values of democracy, social justice and equality for all and hopefully once we achieve that, India would find its place in the comity of nations which can claim proudly to be civilized countries. In the absence of that, we will head for anarchy and chaos and the forces of religious nationalism will take over and the only state then we will have the Hindu Rashtra, which would be the greatest calamity that India can have as Ambedkar said. It is time we heed his warning. It is time we work hard to achieve Ambedkar’s vision of Humanist India or what he termed as Prabuddha Bharat.

Relationship vs Ideology

Patriarchy verses Pragmatism

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Women’s struggle against unjust social order is hampered by the customs and traditions as they are deeply rooted in our psyche. We feel a sense of commitment to fulfil them. Exactly a month ago my mother passed away and memories that haunted me many times revisited again. My aim of giving a glimpse of a bit of my life is because these stories form part of a majority of families and yet we continue to keep them under wrap. It is time we stand up and speak against such evils. I am sharing this article in hope that it will clear dilemmas of many others who pass through the similar situations.

Listening to Women’s right without mention of patriarchy is impossible in India yet the latter continue to be dominating our socio-cultural lives and therefore need a scrutiny of our system as why patriarchy is still dominate despite so much of ‘abhorrence’. Many times we ignore the vast reality that women too live in their class, caste, cultural, society and religious confines apart from being secular and non-believers. Even being secular and non-believer happens according to our family relations and we are loved not because of our high idealism but because of our blood relations. The fact of the matter is that it is due to the blood relations the war against injustice cannot be fought and women to fall in the relations as men and therefore most of the time violence against women become victim of those relationships where your biological things matter more than your ideological moorings. India’s denigration into an anarchy and chaos is because of this blood relationship as it is such relationships that decide right and wrong and there would be very few people who challenged these traditions and came out of it. Nobody goes out of them as they are very useful and powerful tool to save yourself whenever you are in trouble. Those who challenge these notions face isolation and are further ostracized in society.

My mother passed away exactly a month back at the home of my sister who took care of her for nearly 20 years. I had left home in 1987 and was wandering like a nomad for all these years from one place to another in the hope that someone would fulfill my need for education. The survival was difficult as when I lost my father, I was just 7 years of age and from that day it was a difficult journey. Anyway, that is another subject on a different occasion as at the moment I want to discuss about a different thing which concern women. Even when the life was very tough for us as we neither had agricultural land nor any house of our own and my mother was a simple housewife who has only primary qualification in the name of education. So working or job was out of question for her and yet she ensured that each one of us get better education. Despite believing in girls’ education, she remained traditional all her life and always felt that her elder son has not taken care of her. I was her younger son and she had stayed with me in Delhi for some time but never liked the place. It was difficult for her to digest that she was living with my sister which is not consider great. Even when my sister was taking proper care somewhere in the heart of my mother it remained that she is not at her home.

When she was counting her last moments a number of visitors continued to visit her. My brother who was living just 500 meter away from my sister’s home never bothered and we had to request friends to bring him to see her at the last moment. He had all excuses of not coming there. My sister-in- law never bothered about her and did not even think it proper to visit my sister even after the death. People could be so sick and low even in death reflect the hollowness of our society. I informed my sisters much in advance that my elder brother would never ever come to see my mother but would always be there once she is no more. You never care for the person when one is alive but once she is dead you are there to capture the space, show your ‘love’ and ‘respect’ for the departed soul. And that happened. He was not there when the end came. We were all sitting together, two of my sisters, me, my brother in law and two of my cousins from village when my mother breathed her last. As a courtesy, I called to my brother within five minutes which he informed me that he would be here in next two hours. He wanted to check where will cremation take place etc. and he arrived on his given time. As we were preparing to take the body for cremation, he sat with me and suggested that the last rite would be performed by him and the ‘puja’ should take place at his home as he is the ‘eldest’ son. He was off the view that people should not say anything which affects our ‘reputation’. It was shocking to see the hypocrisy but I was clear in this even when we have a 10 year gap between us. ‘What is wrong is the ‘puja’ is performed here at my sisters’ residence, I said. After all, it was my sister who looked after my mother and there is nothing wrong. In fact, it would be highly wrong if she is denied in doing so. Though my sisters have remained patriarchical despite their strength, here they remained adamant that they will not allow my brother to do the take Centre stage as ‘ideal son’. He never cared for her when she needed and was desperate to see her grandchildren but now he want to show the world how obedient he is? I was wondering the level of hypocrisy in our society that you never do anything for the sake of the individual but worried about your ‘reputation’ and hence more interested in symbols and not in substance.

For me it was a very difficult situation as an absolutely non believer I have no faith in whatever was being performed. I used to joke with my mother that she should not expect me doing her last right as per brahmanical traditions as I have no faith in them and there is no point in doing things which you do not believe. I do not do things for the sake of symbols or society. By the age of 23, I was in Delhi and radical thoughts have changed me. Baba Saheb Ambedkar’s life and writing became my guiding source and therefore all the rituals and religious values evaporated from my heart. I never participated in anything which was done in the name of religion and in fact boycotted all the festivals and traditional activities at home. And when the issue of marriage came, that was contentious but I decided that would also happen without a priest and any rituals. So, all these decisions made by me were tough and many of them were not liked by my mother but she respected my sentiments and values and was solidly with me. Therefore, it became important for me to understand the sentiments that my sisters wanted to follow and which is absolutely patriarchical in nature but they were adamant for me to shave my head and perform everything for the ‘peace’ of my mother as they don’t want my elder brother to do so. I wished if they could take the lead and do it. I asked them why don’t they come but they did not. Who will take care of people if they come to our place, said my sister. But it is clear women are pragmatic too many things. They said, if I were not here and it was a great relief for them that I stood with them for nearly 7 days, they would have done it themselves. I found it interesting as these are stories everywhere. Even women perform rituals at many places but that does not challenge patriarchy but it give them a window as most of our rituals are male dominated. Our mindset are developed that way only that even when women perform everything they would want men get the lead. May be, it has a lot to do with division of work where women feel they do take care of other cores and religious rituals are left to men. I disagree but I know women know that they too have to live in society and they look for security and safety, family and tradition and hence use these windows only rather than breaking the big iron gate of patriarchy which has locked them up. For that, parents will have to take a lead and sanctity of such performances will have to be questioned. It is difficult in the rural India where death ceremonies are ‘all boys club’ while women’s role is confined to showing ‘helplessness’.

 When I came to Delhi in the 1990s with lot of rough ideas and do ‘something’ the radical thoughts had taken deep roots. May be because of my sufferings at the very personal level, I developed a hatred and I repeat hatred towards the brahmanical ritualistic traditions. There are various facts and I can claim I saw the dirty middle classes of Delhi, their hypocrisies and felt it is the values that they live in. I was compelled in my thought to convert. I felt everything is better than these brahmanical values. I attended theological classes, also got influenced with Islamic beliefs later. Many thoughts used to come in my heart but when I went deep inside no religion could attract me as free minds like me would find it difficult to adjust in those fixed atmosphere and realize that I could better serve humanity with my secular values. That way, the influence of Ambedkar in my life was tremendous and I owe to his writings and life which changed me.

Today, I feel that my secular values allow me to do what would have been impossible in any other way if I were a convert to any other faith. I decided to carry out what my mother wished. I did attempt to complete her wish by following all dictates of those in family. I felt and rightly so, I am a non-believer, a humanist but she was not and I cannot deny that relationship between us was that of a mother and son which is not based on much ‘ideologies’ but on relations. A mother would always defend her children come what they and will pray to protect them from evil eyes. Should our ideologies be that rigid which do not even allow us to perform the last rites of our parents? I have always opposed rituals and traditional practices but we know we cannot change our parents as they came from a certain sets of principles but we can always guide our children.

It is a coincident that a friend of mine in Delhi lost her father in the same week of March. He was a scientist and had already donated his body to the medical college. The daughter and mother fulfilled the last wish of the father and with heavy heart donated it but the relatives were not happy. Even when this friend of mine is a ‘God fearing’, she followed what her father wished and that is an excellent example of respecting the wishes of parents.

There were lots of issues which came in my mind when I performed those rituals for my mother which I never believed yet in ultimate analysis I felt I owe to her a lot. She gave me birth, suffered for me and at least for her sake and for my own sake, I felt it obliged to fulfil her last wish and I have no regret in performing those things against my own conviction. There is no bigger ideology or conviction than to fulfil the wishes of parents when they are no more.

There is also an appeal to all those who believe change should begin. Despite various changes, the marriage and death ceremonies in our society are pathetically patriarchical. It must go. Parents should encourage even daughters to take responsibility and the women should not shy away from taking up those jobs. One of the major reasons for crave for sons is the fear of last rites and its linkages to ‘punarjanm’. Let us build up a structure where girls get the same opportunity and not become show pieces perform the  task of ‘weeping’ and ‘crying’ on the dead bodies like helpless creatures. But it is not the rural folks where these patriarchical values dominate but also in our elite institutions. If you happen to be a girl and have to look after your parents or husband or any male ward at the hospital and if he is serious, the first thing doctors ask for is who is your Guardian? I mean a friend of mine faced this in Delhi when her father was admitted in AIIMS and she was the elder daughter and no brother. She was looking after her father but when he became serious they were all the time asking for the male member as they wanted to talk about the condition of the patient. It is story everywhere but then we will have to break these cycles through social renaissance as well as institutional reforms.

We must promote the idea of equality between genders from the very beginning. These rituals are absolutely paternal and big jokes and we must inculcate the spirit of humanism so that people look for alternative other than performing these rituals and investing huge amount of money afterwards. It is shame that many times we do not spend a single paisa on the person who need it and then give huge amount of money to Brahmins in his/her name when the person is no more. We must get rid of such hypocrisies. They are emotional blackmail of a system which continues to exploit us even today. It is time for us to get out of them and prepare our children to respect human being particularly their elders show your differences with them but at the same point of time do not develop a hatred towards your parents for ‘not doing’ enough for you. The question is why we should depend on them for everything. It is time the social structure change and for that we will have to start the process from our homes with humanist values and scientific temperament. It is also important for women to understand that being pragmatic is great but accepting illogical values and sticking to patriarchy out of compulsions or in the name of traditions would be dangerous and has harmed the cause of women and human rights world over. It might be possible that the ‘patriarchical’ society ‘respect’ you and acknowledge and appreciate those ‘work’ yet the larger cause of women is defeated. Let us not make values out of things which hurt women and make them suffer further in the name of traditions. My mother suffered all her life for those values and having seen them, I would only say that I would not adopt pragmatism as my way of life, instead even if I am out of that social system, boycotted, ostracised  I still feel, I am far better in my humanist and freethinking world free from those prejudices.

Abolish Blasphemy law & Protect Dalits in Pakistan

Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Christian minorities in Pakistan are receiving end as anti-blasphemy law is easily used against them but a close scrutiny of it reveals that basically it is the Sweepers or Bhangi community who are being targeted in Pakistan for their faith. They face regular caste discrimination and untouchability and yet there is no mechanism to protect their interest. Pakistan must enact laws to protect its Dalits.

The notorious blasphemy law in Pakistan has hit again at the ‘Christian’ minority when a Christian man was charged with blasphemy by a Muslim mob which tried to find him went to Badami Bagh colony of Christians and burnt over 125 houses when could not find the man. It was alleged that there was an altercation between two friends on drinks who happened to be a Muslim and a Christian ultimately resulted in ransacking and dismantling of the property of the tiny Christian minority in Pakistan.

Because of the international repercussion the Pakistan government and the state government of Punjab acted fast, arrested over 130 people and distributed immediate relief to the people yet the fear of the people will not disappear with these dole out as Pakistan need to change its law on Blasphemy which is being used by fanatic Muslims against minorities particularly the Christians and Hindus. Most of the properties belonging to these communities are under the grab by the land mafia in Pakistan who are using such laws for their own benefits. In fact the Lahore incident is also being blamed on the land mafias who wanted to the Christian community to be out from the Badami Bagh area so that they can use the area for commercial purposes.

According to news reports that a mob of over 3000 people by Shafiq Ahmed, looked for the accused Savan, alias Bubby but due to their inability to find him the mob attacked his house, and also burnt the houses of 150 Christian families.  Many residents, including women and children, hastily fled to save themselves. The police registered an FIR under section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code (death sentence) against Savan and ensuring that he would be given into their custody to decide his fate. They also took Chaman Masih into custody.

World-over there is a growing concern over the misuse of anti-blasphemy law which has put minorities under deep stress and forced them to convert to Islam. Muslim fanatics have used it to grab land of the poor particularly of the Dalits in Pakistan.

Even the UN Human Rights Council is persistently worried about anti blasphemy laws in various countries which result in capital punishment to the accused. In most of the cases these laws are misused. In a report submitted to the Human Rights Council, Heiner Bielefeld said that Countries should repeal all laws punishing blasphemy and people who leave a faith, the United Nations’ top expert on freedom of religion said on Wednesday, thrusting himself into a debate between many in the Muslim world and the West. Legislation outlawing apostasy - the act of changing religious affiliation - and insults against religious figures could be used to violate the rights of minorities, said in a report to the UN Human Rights Council. He further said,’   “States should repeal any criminal law provisions that penalise apostasy, blasphemy and proselytism, as they may prevent persons belonging to religious or belief minorities from fully enjoying their freedom of religion or belief,” he said in the report. Rights campaigners say the blasphemy law in Pakistan is widely used against religious minorities including Christians.’

In Pakistan and many other Islamic countries a non- Muslim can easily be charged with ‘hurting’ the religious sentiments of Muslims or using abusing language against Prophet Mohammad and Pakistan constitution provide death penalty for such charges. People are arrested on frivolous grounds as a bare FIR would result in arrest of the persons and sending him to the gallows.

It has to be understood that in Pakistan a majority of Christians are actually Dalits in general and predominantly the communities of Sweepers which is contemptuously called as ‘Bhangi’. And the Masihs who were attacked were basically sweepers who face untouchability and caste discrimination. They do not get jobs other than sweeping and people do not come near to them. They are completely outcastes and are considered as ‘charsis’ and ‘Bhangedis’ which gives the impression that all the people from the sweeper community are drunkard and chain smokers.

In fact ‘bhangi’ as contemptuous term is the most famous political contempt in Pakistan. Several years back a regional politician called Rehman Malik a ‘bhangi’ of Benzir Bhutto.  A protest of traders yesterday at the Karachi Press Club actually termed the chief minister as ‘Bhangi’. India had similar usage of phrase but if any one use such terminology to denigrate a community in public, he or she would face criminal charges but shockingly in Pakistan it is frequently used in daily rhetoric by politicians, activists and even creative people in their songs and soap operas.

Discrimination against the community is rampant and unattended as the interview with Asif Ghani Masih suggests which he gave to a Pakistani newspaper. ‘Asif Ghani Masih starts his day by sweeping the dusty corridors of the Sindh Secretariat. As the day progresses, he scrubs dirty toilets and empties dustbins, tasks that are part of his day job as a sanitation worker.

 
In the evening, however, the 27-year-old becomes a neatly dressed student, who attends classes for a Bachelor’s degree; the tasks of the day shelved away as he scribbles notes. At school, he had often dreamt of being an engineer.

“I was hoping that my education would be enough to land me a decent desk job,” says Masih, as he sits in his modest house in Old Golimar. “But when the list came out I was shocked to see myself appointed as a sanitary worker in the finance department.” His eyes fill with tears as he remembers the day. “It hurts to be called a bhangi [sanitation worker],” he adds.

At the Sindh law department, a Hindu employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity fearing his dismissal from service, said he had completed a college degree but is suffering due to his different beliefs.

“This is what the poor and minorities get for educating themselves,” he said. “We are suffering because of our faith.” He does not plan to spend money on educating his child, as he believes that won’t help him get a decent job in the end. The sanitary worker had got the job on minority quota after he asked for help from his community’s political representatives.

“It is sad that uneducated Muslims are appointed as clerks and cannot even write their names, but we are cleaning trash.”

The linkage between blasphemy law and the Bhangi community must be understood clearly and so far none has looked into it. Actually, the violence against ‘Christian’ in Pakistan is actually violence against the Sweeper community who are completely isolated by the mainstream Pakistan society and their issues rarely raised to lime light. Hence whenever the Bhangis have come up in education and asserting themselves, such frivolous charges are raised against them for ‘defaming’ the ‘Prophet’ or desecrating Quran. The dirty fact is that Pakistani society is as criminal, racist and caste-ist as their counter parts in India and other parts of South Asia. There is no security protection for them. Their number is miniscule as total minorities in Pakistan remain less than 5% and yet Pakistani society is ‘afraid’ of them. The Bhangis are considered as dirty, drunkard, untouchable by the Pakistani elite and no constitution protection provided to them. In fact, it is quite shocking that most of the time violence against them is misleading headline meant as violence against Christian. In South Asia caste matters the most and Pakistan is no stranger to this. In fact, the way Pakistani middle classes, writers, singers use term Bhangi to denigrate others puts us to shame. Several years back a Pakistani band produced a super hit sufi song ‘ Hum Charsi Bhangi hai’ which was appreciated very much but it clearly send out a message that Bhangis despite being ‘charsi’ are the best friends and good at heart. While the messenger wanted to communicate a good message yet it stereotyped a community and strangely enough there was no protest in Pakistan against it. For me it is strange that whenever I listen to this song again and again I do find the usage of Bhangi as contemptuous and full of flaws.

It is time Pakistan government must abolish the draconian blasphemy laws as Pakistan Muslim don’t need protection of their identity. Actually, Pakistan needs to pass laws to protect the rights of Dalits and pass the laws. Denigrating God and ‘holy book’ is offensive and can send you gallows while humiliating and insulting  people based on their birth and caste identity can go scot free. Islamic societies in South Asia are rigid, feudal and caste-ist and they need to change their outlook about others. Practice of Untouchability and caste discrimination must be made blasphemous and not the denigration of so-called God that does not exist. It is time to put pressure on each of these countries where caste and untouchability exist to pass laws for the protection of human rights of the Dalits and completely prohibit inhuman practice of untouchability, manual scavenging and caste discrimination. 

Understanding Muslim anger in Uttar-Pradesh

Zia’s martyrdom a rallying point for Muslim youths

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

Muslims in Uttar-Pradesh are rightly feeling betrayed by the state government. They continue to protest in different parts of the state as the government of the state is trying to subvert the process of law and getting rid of the entire issue under the pretext that the inquiry has been given to CBI. There are serious issues in this case but before that it is important to understand why the Muslims of the state are restive and agitating and whether their demand has some communal undertones as media is charging.

Zia ul Haq was an honest officer who died for the cause for which he took oath of office. It is strange that he was allowed to be killed by the mob in the village as his coward colleagues had ran away from the village leaving him to be lynched. There is a need to inquire into it whether these policemen posted in the thana had any relation/friendship with the power gangs of Kunda? The UP police officials have suspended by the five policemen who went along with Zia but the question is why not dismissal? Why not prosecute them for failing in their duty?

Definitely the murder at the first sight does look a crime but it has communal undertones. It was well planned and politicians are expert in creating new situations for their own benefits. The fact is that most of these protests are painful symbols of Muslims disgust with the administration. Day in and out, they face the brunt of administration in the name of fight against terror. They are being targeted and youths have been arrested by the police. None of them get a house to live beyond the Muslim locations and most of their cases of human rights are being raised by a few individuals and organisations, who face boycott and condemnation all over. Samajwadi Party government in Uttar-Pradesh had come to power on the promises of empowering the Muslims too. The youths had seen the games of Congress and BJP and hence they felt that Mulayam Singh Yadav and his Samajwadi Party would go beyond symbols but the state saw over 15 communal riots and systematic attempt to isolate Muslims. Azamgarh has become the point of reference for the so-called terrorism and its linkages with Muslims. Efforts have not been made by political parties to ensure that this tag of terrorism is not linked to Muslims but they exploited it. Media was used to create the crisis of identity among Muslims so that they remain defensive.

It is not that Muslim youths are making it communal but the fact is that Zia’s colleagues ran and there is a close link with communal flare up in a village in Kunda about a month back. There is also a reality that  a Muslim district magistrate was send to Pratapgarh but was transferred. There is also a reality that Raja Bhaiya and his family has been close associate of RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal. There is also a reality that so far BJP and sangh parivar have not talked about the arrest of Raja Bhaiya. There is a reality that Mulayam Singh Yadav made Raja Bhaiya a minister knowing fully well his track record and various cases against him. There is a reality that Raja Bhaiya is not even a member of Samajwadi Party at the moment. And there is a bigger reality that Raja Bhaiya is now being praised by the upper caste Sangh parivar lobby and has a huge fan following now. Also news is coming that many members of state assembly met Raja Bhaiya after he was charge-sheeted and this unity goes beyond party lines. BJP which has been active in asking for the head of Mukhtar Ansari and Shahabuddin elsewhere keep quiet on the issue of Raja Bhaiya.

Some years back when Raja Bhaiya was released from Jail, his followers were more than happy and he was given a rousing welcome in Kunda. ‘jail ke taale toot gaye, Raja Bhaiya chhoot gaye’, was the slogan. And the huge crowd would jostle to come close to him, have a look at him and virtually prostrate in front of him. The oppression is high and unquestionable as the state machinery has failed. That is why it is important whether the policemen trapped him to go to village or they ran away fearing the crowd. This issue must be investigated. The issue is communal because they knew it well that killing of a Muslim officer will polarize the electorate and not influence the equations locally. Moreover, it is sure that police people would go to attend the ‘darbar’ which Zia ul Haq has always ignored. So, how come a Muslim and that too from a backward community ignore the darbar of Raja Bhaiya and that is the bone of contention.

Uttar-Pradesh’s PAC is known for being Muslim basher during the communal disturbances. There are reports of how PAC has been used to systematically target Muslims and control them. Samajwadi Party has failed to fulfill any of its promise which Muslim youths were expecting from it. In the administration and police services the numbers of Muslims are nominal. In fact, an officer of CO rank would be very few in Uttar-Pradesh. It is always felt that Muslim population in Uttar-Pradesh must have representation according to its ratio in the governance, administration and police. But that has rarely been an issue for political parties who were ‘appeasing’ a few mullahs to get the votes. Why the political issues of Muslims are allowed to be handled by the religious leadership and not by the political leadership? So far Mulayam Singh has promoted feudal like Azam Khans and Maulanas like Ahmed Bukhari in the name of Muslim representation and it is time political parties must stop in such juggleries. Muslim youths are look for great jobs, social security and not isolation from rest of the society. They do not want leaders in their name but leaders from the ground who work for the rights of the community. It is tragedy that political parties are still playing games. So the pain of Muslim youths is that one there are very few numbers of their officers and secondly those who are honest too are finding it difficult to work in this corrupt castiest atmosphere. So the fight is not just for Zia ul Haq but for an honest officer who happened to be a Muslims and might have become victims of the communal agenda of these communal mafias who used the identity for their own political purposes.

More shameful are the things when the media and paid media being used by political parties to defame them. It is disgusting to see how media is reporting as if the wife of slain officer bargaining with the government. There is no doubt that our families are artificial and once the male head is gone, there is a war between the family of the boy and the girl. The government tried to hide their inefficiency by donating cash and offering jobs. Now, given the nature of political parties these days, they try to calm down the protest by actually ‘winning’ over the individual who is affected and hence these offers of job to family members of Zia ul Haq but then the same government and its officials are playing politics by leaking such thing to media and making it as if the family of the girl is just bargaining. Can any one really understand the pains of a girl whose husband is killed brutally with in some years of their marriage? No government and cash can return her the loss of her near dear one. It is shameful how embedded media is expert in such stories which really convert an honest officer’s family to cheap money minded.

The political parties can undermine the protest by such tactics but if the government fail to take action against the culprits and ensure free and fair investigation Muslims will always feel betrayed. Their disgust and disappointment with system might grow if their representation remains below minimum and their youths are hounded by the police and investigating agencies. The Muslim unrest in India’s largest state is a wakeup call for political parties to treat them equally and address to their real issues. If they continue to treat Muslims as vote bank and use religious leaders to ‘control’ and ‘appease’ the community, there will a big backlash as various communities of Muslims are now raising their voice against discrimination and want their share in power. Those who killed Zia ul Haq physically might have wanted to eliminate him but in his death Zia will become a rallying point for Muslim youths who will raise their voice against injustice and for their fair share in India’s development and power structure which nobody would be able to ignore.

Power and Politics in Pratapgarh

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

The shocking incident of murder of a young Police officer in Pratapgarh district of Uttar-Pradesh reminds us the power of mafias and extra constitutional authorities in their region. It aggravate if they get support of the state power and often result in bloody caste wars as well as open defiance of the law.

A young police officer of Uttar-Pradesh police was killed by the political mafias of Uttar Pradesh at the infamous village Kunda in district Pratapgarh. DSP Zia-ul-Haq went to a village with his police team on receiving an emergency call in the night when two groups loyal to different political parties were in war with each other and killed the village Panchayat head.  When the police officer went to the village along with his team, he faced stiff resistance as if he has entered in the war zones. The cowered and opportunist policemen ran away from the spot after Zia was caught was the criminal mob which humiliated him and later killed him. On a normal day, it looks a story where a policeman goes to the village and people kill him ‘anger’ and in this country everything is justified in the name of ‘people’. All our acts of morality, killing, and moral policing are done in the name of ‘people’s sentiments’.

It is not shocking for police to behave like that and reach the venue three hours later when the brave officer was murdered by the thugs in the villages who were ready to shed blood purely on unquestioned caste loyalties.  There are more glaring facts which make politician like Raja Bhaiya in win-win situation as political parties vie to capture their attention as they know their ‘political power’. Unfortunately, every caste has its own Raja Bhaiya and they survive on the caste identities which culminate in their ‘political’ ‘empowerments’ and frequent killings of the opponents.

Kunda therefore was an unquestioned domain of Raja Bhaiya and his family and that is why when Mayawati government took action against him it send a strong signal to people of the state though Kunda remained loyal to Raja Bhaiya and the reason for it is that the common man knows well that the government in Lucknow and Delhi will come and go but the domain of the local goons will always be there and hence it is they who they have to face on daily basis and hence keeping silence remain the biggest strategy for survival without getting disturbed. When the mafias become power and our decision makers, it is bound to happen as they are high on demand everywhere.

The fact that Zia ul Haq was feeling tremendous pressure of not going to the ‘darbar’ of the minister well known for his ‘loyalists’ and their muscle power.  His wife described the threat unambiguously and called for Raja Bhaiya’s arrest. For any new officer, Pratapgarh and particularly Kunda is the toughest posting to handle. Those of us who know well the political landscape of Pratapgarh can vouch how the district is a different zone once you enter there. There is a parallel administration in Kunda and the Raj darbar helds Kangaru courts providing instance justice to people. No one can oppose the decision of the ‘high command’. The police and the administration of the Indian government do not work there as the ‘loyalist’ of the ‘raj parivar’ will not allow you to function. Nobody can raise a voice for their rights. Land redistribution actually never happened in this region and caste hierarchies prevail in the region with dalits face the biggest victimization if they raise their head against any injustice.

How will the writ of Indian constitution run in Kunda which is still living in feudal age where you cannot speak for your right and each violation has a heavy penalty including ‘death penalty’? Can such parallel courts be allowed to function in a democracy and that too by a minister who takes oath in the name of the constitution? We speak against Khap Panchayts, Sharia Courts and all those parallel structures which are prevailing in this country against absolute violation of our constitution. They are potential bomb to derail social justice and rule of law.

The Minister has resigned. The chief minister visited the home of slain officer and distributed two cheques of Rs twenty five lakh each and assured that ‘law of the land would take its course’, typical way of handling the case with insensitivity. You compensate people with cash so that they do not blame the state apparatus for failure of protecting the officer. Also, it intends to calm down the person for not making any ‘politically incorrect’ statements which could be detrimental for the government. As the tempers run high and matter is getting politicized, the government is handing the inquiry to CBI and they know it well that anything happen to the King will have dire repercussion. They are power people and play power games and in these times of coalition politics each ‘elected’ leader is priceless and in the case of Raja Bhaiya who won as an independent candidate, was made a Minister by Akhilesh Yadav despite Samajwadi Party getting absolute majority on its own. The two important Ministries that he was looking after were Prison and Food etc.

Raja Bhaiya has ‘condemned’ the incident and termed it the most traumatic moments of Kunda. Such an incident had not happened in the past he said and added that the slain officer was ‘very respected’ and ‘honest’ and that he is ready for a CBI inquiry. Raja Bhaiya resigned after his close associates were put in FIR along with him but it will be tough and very difficult for the police and investigating agencies to find the truth and get a conviction in the case. The reason is the nature of killings and investigation done by the police. Moreover, as long as power politics is behind this, nothing will happen. Politicians know it well that these issues would be raised for some days and after that it would be the same story as usual.

Political parties know well that different zones of Uttar-Pradesh and Bihar have become fiefdom of individual mafias masquerading as politicians and hence they don’t action. Raja Bhaiya may be close to Sangh Parivar and family but his utility stands for all the political parties. In the anti-Dalit schemes of things he fits in Mulayam’s agenda very well. And though the killing of police officer cannot be termed as communal violence, it definitely has an angle. It is very difficult for Muslim officers to work in the bureaucracy and police with independent mind. They have to suffer and succumb to various pulls and pressures. That is why most of the officers ensure that they have to be extra vigilant about their own behavior and practices during the work as they become not only the role model of the community but any charge of them can be put as a norm of the community.

Uttar-Pradesh is the most important state for 2014 and therefore every actor here is making and vitiating the atmosphere. The clan villages identities are being revived and sub castes are also now being packed up. New promises are being made for inclusion and exclusion in various categories of SC-ST and OBCs. Promises are being made to Muslims too and one does not know how many ‘developmental’ financial promises would be made by parties by the year end. There would be communal disturbances and we have already noticed so many of them in the past one year. As long as Indian villages remain the holy cows, we will always have space for more such feudal lords who will undermine our democratic space. Raja Bhaiyas are not product of democratic system but of feudal village which Gandhi admired so much where ‘caste’ ‘identity’ is the most important factor of your life. It is important to note as why Pratapgarh remain the ‘den’ of powerful caste and feudal forces despite a strong political movement against the same.

In the meantime, we demand strong action against the guilty and complete demolition of these extra constitutional authorities and parallel governments prevailing among us. The central government must bring out legislation outlawing such practices and putting all those people to trial who run such system. All those who run such parallel government must be brought to book and barred from contesting elections in future. Let the Uttar-Pradesh government act on it and punish the guilty only then its intents would be found. It would be in fitness of things that CBI be given time frame to finish the case and constitute a special court outside Uttar-Pradesh so that justice is not influenced in this case.

Unforgettable Chavez

Viva Chavez

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

The death of Hugo Chavez is a great blow to movement against imperial world order unleashed by powerful and greedy corporates. As Venezuelan president, Chavez instilled sense of self respect and dignity in the masses of Latin America. After Fidel Castro, he was the most influential leader of Latin America who inspired people world over.

The powerful president of Venezuela Mr Hugo Chavez passed away last night battling a two year long cancer. The man who rose to the highest office of his country passing through various phases and difficult childhood actually had huge fan following world over despite deep rooted racial prejudices against him in the American and European countries. It must be understood why Chavez has attracted extreme reactions world over. As the world moan over his death, we can analyze the entire perspective with the tribute that have started pouring in as the news broke in by the vice president of Venezuela on the state TV. The Latin American countries went into moaning on the death of hero who stood against the tyranny of powerful countries and taught them to stand up keeping their head high. Cuba, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, and many other countries have stood together, formed coalition and tried to provide an alternative to the current economic social policies being pursued by the greedy transnational corporations who are the modern invaders with the help of powerful nations.  Evo Morales, Bolivian President said they felt "destroyed" by the news of the passing of his Chavez. "It hurts, but we must stand united in this process of liberation, not only of Venezuela but of the whole region..." Morales said. "Chavez is now more alive than ever", he added further.

The most important factor of Hugo Chavez is that he strengthened the legacy of Fidel Castro, the living legend from Cuba who challenged the might of United States of America and taught his country to live with preserving their resources. Chavez was a great admirer of Fidel Castro and tried to implement his vision by forming alliance with neighboring countries against a common threat. Today, all there is a breeze of freshness and change blowing in the entire Latin America where the US interventions were order of the day. Nobody can deny the fact that prior to Chavez, Venezuela was a non-entity at the international map but now people have got an identity and respect world over. That way, Chavez filled a sense of dignity and self-respect among his people and converted the entire system of governance more and more people centric much the chagrin of the western commentators who always found his rule as tyrannical violating human rights of the people. Yes, in his efforts to promote social justice and state socialism, Chavez might have angered many others who dominated the horizon of his country but then masses adored him for his actions.

A new wave of change is blowing in the entire Latin American world which feels betrayed by the successive American policies towards it. Several years back when I travelled to some remote part of Bolivia, I tested that feeling of anti- Americanism in the masses for they were enjoying. The urbanized cities are Americanised but the rural population, the ethnic communities who were just crushed before were founding their new sense of dignity and empowerment. It was not for nothing that Che Guevara, the much revered figure in the entire Latin American world was not given due space and respect by the American sponsored governments in Bolivia. There was not a single monument for a man who devoted his life to Bolivian people and was executed by the American sponsored forces as for them he was a criminal but for millions world over, Che is the ultimate icon of revolution. Today, the ethnic identities are asserting in these countries and that resulted in victory of president Moralis in Bolivia, who too is following the same path as shown by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and giving his ethnic communities a new sense of dignity and self-respect.

The western reactions on Chavez’s death are based on their future calculations, depending whether Venezuela would be able to hold together as one nation as it was till today. Former American President Jimmy Carter said, ‘Although we have not agreed with all of the methods followed by his government, we have never doubted Hugo Chávez's commitment to improving the lives of millions of his fellow countrymen.  President Chávez will be remembered for his bold assertion of autonomy and independence for Latin American governments and for his formidable communication skills and personal connection with supporters in his country and abroad to whom he gave hope and empowerment. During his 14-year tenure, Chávez joined other leaders in Latin America and the Caribbean to create new forms of integration. Venezuelan poverty rates were cut in half, and millions received identification documents for the first time allowing them to participate more effectively in their country's economic and political life.’

But Carter also mentioned the ‘divisions’ created by Chavez’s policies and said, ‘ At the same time, we recognize the divisions created in the drive towards change in Venezuela and the need for national healing. We hope that as Venezuelans mourn the passing of President Chávez and recall his positive legacies — especially the gains made for the poor and vulnerable — the political leaders will move the country forward by building a new consensus that ensures equal opportunities for all Venezuelans to participate in every aspect of national life.’

Problem here is that in the process of national reconstruction and social justice those who ruled and absorbed the national resources would always feel left out or sidelined. The modern Human Rights principles and ‘democratic’ laws actually save those in the name of human rights who have violated it to the most. We must not forget that Human Rights Principles have been used and misused by the western democracies according to their conveniences. Though there is little doubt that in the name of providing social justice, most of the governments in the third world countries actually violated the human rights of their opponents, arrested political leaders and executed writers, activists and journalists who they felt were the opponent to government’s policies or were exposing them. These oppressive systems actually led to the fall of many communist regimes in the 1990s in various parts of the world. It never meant that people did not like socialist secular values but the fact that people wanted to get rid of tyrannical regimes where one individual was supreme and all others were orphaned if that individual passed away. Human Right Watch documented the violation of human rights in Venezuela and stood to its ground even today when Hugo Chavez passed away. It says that ‘Hugo Chávez’s presidency (1999-2013) was characterized by a dramatic concentration of power and open disregard for basic human rights guarantees.

It added:

By his second full term in office, the concentration of power and erosion of human rights protections had given the government free rein to intimidate, censor, and prosecute Venezuelans who criticized the president or thwarted his political agenda.’

In recent years, the president and his followers used these powers in a wide range of prominent cases, whose damaging impact was felt by entire sectors of Venezuelan society.’ President Chavez was very angry and expelled the director of Human Rights Watch José Miguel Vivanco,
after he issued a report criticizing the country's human rights record in 2008. This charge was rebuked by the intellectuals and academics of Venezuela vehemently.

The fact is that despite his short comings and violation of human rights here and there, Hugo Chavez was truly a world leader who tried to organize the poor nations against the growing tendencies of powerful nations to use their natural resources in the form of neo liberalism. Learning from Cuba, he reformed the health and education sector in his country. His boldness and unambiguity was never liked by the Western World as he could stand up and challenge George Bush in the UN general assembly by saying he was the biggest ‘devil’. Many of the western commentators may term these as harsh and undiplomatic words but then the American administration too has been using undignified terminology against their opponents. Even when he was highly critical of US policies particularly of its corporates, Chavez was exporting 90% its crude oil to United States only and praised President Obama suggesting he were a US citizen, he would have voted for Obama,

It has to be understood that when any political leaders work for people, he get enormously popular and that result in his ‘larger than life’ image. The fact is that all the third world countries are still living in ‘developing’ democracy where the institutions of democracy are still at very nascent stage and often used by the powerful elite for their own benefits. The leaders of the countries who emerge from the mass movement become tyrannical and bigger than the movement which result in uncertainty later on. Today, most of the countries have not developed democratic principles and are turning into self-serving despots. It is therefore important for the leaders of mass movement to prepare their generation and instill among their people the sense of democracy and decision making process should be made more transparent and discussed threadbare. Hugo Chavez redefined the governance in his country as he would invite people, academics, journalists to his decision making process and would speak on TV shows without a prepared script for hours and hours. We have heard how Fidel Castro is a vociferous reader who scan more than 100 newspapers a day even today and how he speak on any given subject with great authority, more than any world leader or an academic too. This tradition of knowledge in leadership is what makes a Castro or a Chavez legend.

In the absence of democratic structure or it percolating further at the grassroots, political leaders become bigger than the institutions must to the detriment of the process itself. Hugo Chavez was a revolutionary but still a human being. At the fag end of his life, his ideological boldness as a Marxist became questionable when he started following Christianity, met Pope and said, ‘ Today, the revolution is more alive than ever. I feel it, I live it, I touch it ... If Christ is with us, who can be against us? ‘If the people are with us, who can be against us?’ These are contradictions of our life and many people suffer from them and Chavez was no different to that. In political life, a political leader has to use contradictions of our life for his own purposes. It is sure that even when he invoked Christ’s name, he never used Christ for his political purposes.

Hugo Chavez is no more but he reminds us that even when you belong to a small country yet an inspiring leader can convert the country into greatness. It needs lot of intellectual, mental and moral strength to stand up against mighty forces and make people belief in their power. Chavez made people believe in themselves. For a country like India, Chavez is provide a great inspiration as how to make our people believe in state socialism as well as how can a country like India hold its head high against the neo colonialism being imported to us through powerful countries. As the biggest nation of South Asia, India can initiate the process of uniting the countries and make common cause with them. It will need a visionary and strong leadership to do so. Will India have such statesman and visionary who can stand up and challenge the hegemony of these greedy corporations and their mentors sitting in Europe and America?