“The revolutionary people’s movement can only be strengthened with scientific temperament and spiritual experiences of Buddha and Ambedkar.” - Tilak Pariyar, Secretary, Central Advisory Committee, CPN-M

Mr Tilak Pariyar is a member of the Central Advisory Committee of the Communist Party of Nepal. He is a very senior political leader from a revolutionary party with massive social experience. Hailing from a Pariyar community, which is one of the largest untouchable communities in Nepal, Tilakji rose to the highest body of the party. He is very articulate and a thought-provoking political leader who experienced the caste discrimination in his life. He was attached to the revolutionary movement from his student life when he came to study in Delhi in 1960s. He was impressed with the Marxist ideology and started working for the masses. In a wide ranging discussion with activist-writer Vidya Bhushan Rawat on the issue of caste discrimination in Nepal and future of the revolutionary movement in the country, Tilak Pariyar spoke eloquently and in vivid details.

VB: Tilakji, you are the Central Committee member of your party CPN. It is a great        achievement for any one as there are not many leaders from Dalit communities at the highest echelons of the left movements in India. Could you elaborate how and when you were included in the Central Committee?

TP: I have been in Central Advisory Committee of Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist since 2003, during the People's War and now I am acting as the Secretary of that Committee since 2013. There is dialectical relation between ideology and leadership. On the condition of the majority of the communists with the mixed culture of Marxism and Brahmanism in our society, based on the caste system, the development of the leadership for women and oppressed (Dalit) community is challenging. The leaders developed from the Dalit community should be prepared to work hard and satisfy others in the field of ideology and politics.

VB: Nepal has been a traditional society. Caste system and untouchability is being practiced. Did you face anything like that in your childhood? Have things changed ? If yes then how and who changed them?

TP: We initiated the Great People's War with the aim of resolving the contradictions of Nepalese society including political, economical and social ones. By the initiation, Nepalese rulers declared to destroy the movement and finish the Maoists, but failed. That was the result of the dedication of Maoist party struggling to adopt the pro-people policy, solubility with the people, defense of Nationalism and high morale to establish a democracy. During that operation, the Dalits were backward in all sectors of life including economic, political, and social due to upper caste insistence on a caste system with untouchability, which had been going on since thousands of years against the Dalit community. The Dalits were involved in the PW and fought against the enemy. During the practice of proportional inclusiveness and special rights in People's Government, People's Court and People's Liberation Army, the changes over caste system and untouchability culture were among the base. It is essential to run the campaign of economic, social, cultural transformation and to extend it continuously.

VB:  Could you share with us the struggle that you had to do in your childhood? What kind of caste discrimination did you face in your childhood? 

TP:  In the social structure of caste system and untouchability culture, to take birth in the Dalit family means to face the discrimination within the mother's womb. I was born in a very poor family. My parents were ignorant and uneducated. They did have the courage to send me to the school, but the teachers used to discriminate against me even in the school. I couldn't drink the water fetched by the peon. I had to run to the water tap to drink water. We were addressed with offensive words and physical hurt. I have been struggling against it. My sharp understanding is that the Hindu religious rituals are the origin of the Dalit problem which actually resulted in the Hindu hegemonic oppression of Dalits. We boycotted temples and worshiping, burned the Manusmriti and the books abusing the Dalits. Teachers beat me for this but I kept on my dissent. My rebellious nature and progressive thinking inspired me to be Marxist-Leninist-Maoist.

VB:  You studied at the Delhi University and then became part of revolutionary politics. How did you get engaged to the left political ideology?

TP:  I was impressed by the instructions of Com. B.D.Randiwe, an Indian communist leader, when I was studying B.A. in Delhi University and was doing part time job in 1964/65. Then I came in contact with Com. Pusplal, the founder of Nepalese Communist Movement, through him and he introduced me to the party. I am proud of my birth in the Dalit community. I have observed that most of the leaders and cadres from non-dalit background have shown an opportunist character.

VB:  In Nepal despite ideological differences people accept the role played by the Maoists in bringing the Dalit issues to the core particularly the land relations in the village. Unfortunately, the language and idioms that have been used by the movement still avoid targeting the brahmanical value system which subjugated the Dalits. Is it deliberate so that you do not lose the upper castes along with you?  It is important to use the Marxist terminology of class but caste is a harsh reality too in our society. Have you ever given it a thought that without eliminating the caste system, we can not bring equality in society?

TP:  You have asked an important question, it is found true that Economics counts not only the relations of goods but the relations of mankind too and especially between the classes. Caste system is also a product of class divided society. Thus, the fact is roved that the problem of caste system and untouchability is a form of class exploitation and oppression. It is notable that the whole and parts have dialectical relation; the whole gets completeness only after integrating several parts. To talk about pure class liberation or pure Dalit liberation in isolation means to serve the status-quo. Marxism has no relation with it. The dialectical materialist outlook which understands and transforms the Dalit problem and the spiritualist religious ideology which argues the development of the human society as the wish of a god can't be the same. We can't identify the problem until we are not clear on it. If we show recklessness to treat without the diagnosis, it has risk for side effect or there won't be any efficacy. The cause of the acceptance of Dalit agenda and the question of the land to the Maoists is based on a clear outlook and has a correct political line. Humans need food, dwelling and clothing before politics, cultural tradition, rituals, art, and entertainment. We can operate all types of activities of social cultural transformations on the foundation of them. Economic equality, assurances of political access and social combination are integral parts of each other. It is essential to understand it in totality.

VB: How important is Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar for you and your cadres? As you know Ambedkar now symbolises struggle for dignity and human rights. His acceptance in social movements have transcended beyond India and among huge number of people outside India. Nepal's Dalit movement is also claiming his legacy now. What are the meeting points and where do you differ in perceptions?

TP: Baba Saheb Ambedkar is a respectable and honorable Dalit leader for me. His important contributions to the Dalit movement are rememberable. He struggled for the right to vote. He took a stand for separate electorate system for the Dalits. But he felt obligated to leave it after Gandhi's fast. For the first time in history, a person from the Dalit community was established as the builder of a nation’s Constitution, the Indian Constitution. Despite these contributions, he was not clear on the outlook to identify the problem. As the result, he converted to Buddhism on the last moments of his life. I have a strong view that proselytism can't be the right guidance for the liberation of Dalits.

VB: But Dalit representation in CA is merely 8%. In fact, last CA was much better in terms of representation. Will it not be inadeqate that without fair representation of Dalits in CA, it would somewhere lose its legitimacy? 

TP:  The Article 21 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal accepts the principle of proportional inclusiveness on the question of social justice. The population of Dalits is 13.2% as the Governmental statistics and 20% as per the Non-Governmental one. The number of total members of the Constituent Assembly is 600. So, 78 Dalits as the Government or 120 Dalits as the NGOs have the instinctive right to represent in the CA. But the electoral system of First Past the Post and Mixed system of Proportional List is adopted. Multi-candidate direct election system has made women and Dalits to lose the election as per the system of competition among unequals. The same thing was adopted during the CA election of 2007. At that time, with the influence of 10 years People's War and 19 days People's Movement, 7 Dalits had been elected from the direct election. That was 8.2%. Only 6.8% Dalits are representatives to the so called CA recently. Parliamentarians are active not only in reducing the representation of Dalits but also in dismissing the representation by so called democratic process by vulgarizing the proportional electoral system. The two-third majority of the CA of 2007 was pro-people and now the so called CA has two-third majority who are anti-people. If they move to the process, the past pro-people achievements will be thrown away and the agenda of reconstruction of the state will surely be dismissed. That's why we believe the CA election, occurred on 19^th November, 2013, is without legitimacy. If they are ready to make the Constitution to authorize the people and to protect the national independence, it is essential to make the national political consensus on the essence of the constitution by organizing All Political Conference.

VB:  Where is Nepal's Dalit movement at the moment? We do not see much stronger struggle against land rights and untouchability. Your party raised the issue but never really challenged the brahmanical hegemony in Nepal. How can Nepal be a representative and egalitarian society?

TP:  The problems of right to land and freedom from untouchability are complementary to each other. The New Democratic revolution is inevitable to solve this problem in Nepal which contains the situation of semi-feudalist and neo-colonial society. To defend the nation’s independence and enrich the people with rights is the basic minimum goal of the New Democratic revolution. In the past, we had entered into the process of building equalized society by establishing people's government, challenging the Bramhanical norms and hegemony. But the revolution suffered a setback due to the reactionary forces, both foreign and domestic, and the class and national capitulationist elements inside the party. It will take time to prepare for the revolution but it is essential to organize the revolutionaries, empower the internal side and balance the external powers. It is possible to build an equalized society by forwarding the process of unity-struggle-transformation.

VB:  You have differed with your original party led by comrade Prachanda. What were the points of difference? He is trying to play an important role in democracy and bring change through democracy. It is difficult to go back to the pre-democratic positions after peace accord. If you do not participate in democratic exercise, wouldn’t it be easier for your opponents to blame you for not having people's support?

TP: Prachanda has abandoned the political line of "People's insurrection on the foundation of the People's War", which was passed by the plenum of 7000 cadres, and adopted the so-called socialist revolution saying that the New Democratic revolution is over. This is the result of his ideological deviation. How can one be the leader of the original party who had abandoned the official line of the party? We have nothing to say if it is orginal by the recognition of American and Indian ruling class.

VB:  You claimed that you will go for Janvidroh? How can you reassure the Dalits and minorities that this Janvidroh has a place for them? How many of the Dalits are represented in the highest body of parties in Nepal? I have no issue people claiming to work for the Dalits but you can not sidetrack the issue of the leadership emerging from the community.

TP:  The question of the construction of a revolutionary party cannot be answered by the method of proportional representation. Dalits and backward classes are basic classes for the revolution but all of them haven't developed a revolutionary leadership. Party should prioritize the development of leaders from the basic classes and communities. The leaders and cadres of the concerned communities should be clear ideologically and theoretically. There are 14 Dalits at the central level in our party. All of them are the comrades who had fought the 10 years People's War and had achieved an ideological and political clarity. But the leadership is not developing as expected. The People's War or an insurrection can't be done by subjective method. These can be initiated by the plan-of-action line and action-plan on the basis of concrete analysis of concrete circumstances and other objective situations.

VB:  What is the socio-economic agenda that you want to set for Nepal? How do you propose to bring equality in the society? Untouchability and other traditions like Kumari and Baadi are still being practiced. There is manual scavenging (cleaning human excreta) from Mehtar community but so far these issues have not come up for discussions at the highest level. They have not become part of the public discourse and Dalit movement. 

 TP: First of all, these agenda can't be implemented for the interest of workers, peasants, Dalits, women and the oppressed people without the establishment of a New Democratic Republic. So, political revolution is the essential precondition. After this, the socio-economic agenda, which are related to solutions of the problems of nationality, democracy and people's concerns, will achieve the desired importance and effectiveness. Our party says that the interests and rights of workers, peasants, women, Dalits, indigenous nationalities, Madheshis, Muslims, backward mass and national capitalist class. It says the special rights to women; Dalits and Muslims community should be arranged with compensation until the relative development on social, economic and political equality is achieved. It also says the arrangement of right to preference and assurance of representation to all organs of state power on the basis of proportional inclusive theory should be managed. Our party wants to develop federalism with the identity of oppressed ethnicity, construction and development of independent national economy, termination of feudal land ownership and revolutionary land reform, independent foreign policy, democratic educational policy, democratic judicial system, resolution of basic problems of people's concern including education, health, employment, food sovereignty and residence as well as democratic and scientific culture.

On the question of solving the problem of Baadi, Mehtar and Kumari customs, as you have mentioned are one of the problems of the entire Dalit community. And it should be resolved by the process of ‘Unity, Struggle, Transformation.’  Our party will give these communities special priority within the provisions meant for Dalits.

VB:  Do you support political reservation for the Dalits which ofcourse, is there in your Constitution but there is no reservation for the Dalits in the government services? Without giving them enough representation in the government services, you can not really do away with discrimination. What is your party's view on it?

TP:  The genuine MLM communists don't believe in the policy of reservation because it diverts the issue of proportional participation of all sectors based on the population. This policy depends on the mercy of rulers instead of our own rights. The policy of proportional representation is correct in the form of rights. On the basis of theory of compensation for the historical oppression since thousands of years, additional rights (Special rights) should be given till the relative equality isn't established. These rights can be increased or decreased on the basis of Human Development Index. Because these rights are given to Dalits by deducting from the share of non-Dalits, termination of untouchability and environment of social combination would take place rapidly. The thematic committees of the now dissolved CA had recommended the special rights for the new Constitution.

VB:  Number of people from different movements in India, are going to read your views. What is your message to them? Do you believe Buddha, Marx and Ambedkar converge at certain points and if we bring them together, a revolution will not be a dream but a reality?

              TP:  I would like to pass my message to all Indian oppressed and justice loving people that the liberation movement will obtain the necessary speed by moving ahead including the leadership of the MLM scientific ideology and spiritual experiences of Buddha and Ambedkar. Main focus should be given to the scientific ideology and rational outlook.

Systematic betrayal of Nehru’s ideals

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

We remember Jawahar Lal Nehru on his 50^th death anniversary yesterday on May 27th, the man who crafted India into a secular socialist democratic republic.  It is tragic that generation which has born years after Nehru is vilifying him for the values that India is known for and is appreciated.  The democracy that all we are ‘celebrating’ today with smooth transfer of power cannot really ignore the contribution of Nehru in nurturing it after putting strong foundation for it.  The institutions are stronger unlike our contemporaries and neighbors in South Asia where people have to fight for ‘democratic’ government as well as their fundamental rights.  Most of them remained in the tight grip dictatorial martial law regimes or monarchies.  Democracy and constitution became the biggest victims of such regimes where constitutions were changed time to time according to suitability of their dictators.

Nehru has been one of the most 'criticized' men today when the propaganda machinery of Sangh Parivar unleashed vicious campaign against him in the past one decade. However, it reached at its level best in the past three years after the UPA regime which could be termed as one of the worst in independent India. Some of the right wing ‘intellectuals’ blame him for being ‘leftist’ and pushing the model of ‘Public’ sector and thus creating a ‘huge’ bureaucracy. The other ‘nationalists’ felt he was ‘Anglican’ in nature who to has no interest in Indian i.e. which according to them is Hindu culture. They had very problem with the word ‘secularism’ which Nehru espoused so much. Many criticized him for pushing dynastic rule in India while huge number of ‘fake’ account holders on web world publishes his photographs of ‘drinking’ and ‘smoking’ with women particularly Edwina Mountbatten.

I have no first hand ‘experience’ of ‘Nehruvian’ age as I was born nearly four years after his death. But it is important to understand Nehru by socio political situation and first-hand experience of many of his contemporaries. He was a thorough democrat and fiercely secular, a word which has subsequently misused by the Congress Party in the post Indira Gandhi regimes where the party started playing ‘liberal Hindu’ card and secularism became ‘symbolism’ of worst kind.  In fact, Nehru is today paying a price for the wide level corruption and lack of ideological clarity in the Congress party after his death. His daughter Indira Gandhi made party more personalized and subsequently her son Sanjay created a much bigger era of ‘personality’ around her compelling the ‘chamchas’ to coin phrases like ‘Indira is India and India is Indira’.  The decline of Congress Part actually started when it promoted cronyism in the leadership and tilted towards Hindutva and a few things in the post 1980s prove that.

Today, we blame Narendra Modi for a presidential style campaign built up around personality cult of an individual but way back in the 1980s, one of the biggest sycophants of the Gandhi family Vasant Sathe had openly campaigned that India must opt the America’s presidential form of government. In fact, Sathe wrote a book ( I was send an electronic copy by Sathe’s relative when I wrote for Proportionate Electorate System for India) suggesting that ‘coalition’ government are not suitable for India and because India was entering into it hence need for more stability so that the government can function without facing the Parliament.

Congress Party developed ‘remarkable’ tolerance towards religious fanaticism and not acting. It created a Bhindarwale in Punjab to counter Akalis and used Hindu card too later when the army made assault a the Golden Temple. In the Jammu Kashmir elections Indira Gandhi played same Hindu card to allure the voters of Jammu. In 1984, the Punjab problems was converted to an issue between Hindus and Sikh and so much so that when Indira Gandhi was assassinated in October 1984, the Congress used her death and came to power with a massive mandate. The BJP was reduced to mere 2 seats in Lok Sabha but the fact of the matter it was a communal mandate based on hatred towards Sikhs.  In 1986 Rajiv Gandhi got Lok Sabha passed a bill to undo the Shahbano judgment by the Supreme Court to placate the Muslim conservatives who demanded the same to undo what they termed as ‘intrusion’ in the Muslim Personal Law. In the 1989 elections, Rajiv campaigned from Ayodhya and promised to bring ‘Ram Rajya’. His close colleague Arun Nehru got the locks of the disputed complex in Ayodhya and created unprecedented communal crisis in the country.

When VP Singh government decided to implemented Mandal Commission recommendations, Rajiv opposed it. When BJP withdrew support from the government, the Congress could not save a government which was actually fulfilling its constitutional obligation in protecting the Babari Masjid. After Rajiv’s unfortunate death, Congress lead by PV Narsimharao completely abdicated the Nehruvian model of economy and followed the path of ‘capitalist’ economy. Thus, affirmative action programme of the government and welfare state concept became biggest victims which Nehru nurtured so laboriously. Narsimha Rao was glorified by the Indian industries despite his corrupt regime. Babari Masjid was demolished under Rao’s regime which he promised to build but that never happened. Rao was too depended on some of the BJP’s stalwarts like Vajpayee who he send as India’s representative on various international  forums defending India’s Human Rights records towards the minorities and Dalits-aadivasis.

Once Congress bid adieu to Nehruvian model through ‘liberal’ Hinduism as well as the abdicating the state’s responsibility on social sector, everything was great about them. The media made Sonia Gandhi as mother Teresa once she handed over the ‘power’ to Man Mohan Singh who together with Chidambaram and Montek Singh Ahulwalia ensured that India’s natural resources were not meant for the rural poor but for the big companies.  When the things went beyond their head, Sonia tried to calm down things in the second term for UPA in 2009. Man Mohan too asserted, so was Chidambaram and others. It is the new economic order where corruption is bound to happen with so much of donation for elections and business-governments nexus hand in glove of what we ‘beautifully’ term as ‘Public Private Partnership’ is nothing but democratic stamp on illegal control of the corporate over these national resources.

At the time when corporate are deciding and ‘managing’ our ‘mandate’ this return to Nehruvian model was too late and inadequate. Most of the Congress’s cadres and leaders hail from upper caste middle class background and hence not very committed to the core values of Nehruvian principles such as secularism and social justice.  Those who believe in social justice had no space in Congress party. So mere speaking to ‘secularism’ and ‘social justice’ added with a few ‘welfare’ legislations would not take you anywhere unless there is a committed leadership on that issue. Congress made itself the party of ‘liberal’ ‘elite’ which equally abhors the issue of social justice like the right wing Hindus. So, when the party decided to go back to Nehru’s principles, it was too late and too little was done in that direction. You  can’t  enthuse your cadres unless they take issue of secularism and social justice dear to their heart. The right wing Hindutva groups were already operatives on the internet to defame Nehru through various things which today’s congress party was unable to defend.

The ‘moral’ aspect of these sinister campaigns was that Nehru did not like Indian ‘culture’. I say, if he has the courage to say things wrong then what is wrong. After all Nehru did not say anything which Ambedkar had said long back and yet Sangh Parivar is bowing to him. Nehru was progressive but definitely not such much committed to the idea of social justice as we wished him. Yet, it was he who was keen on getting the Hindu Code Bill passed drafted by Dr Ambedkar though the right wing lobby in the party led by leaders like Rajendra Prashad, Sardar Patel and others ensured that the progressive legislation is thwarted.  Dr Ambedkar resigned in protest against Nehru’s inability to get this important bill passed in Parliament though he himself knew that Nehru remained isolated in his own party on the greater issue of personal laws and their codification. He never liked the highly conservative attitude of Rajendra Prasad at the Rastrapati Bhavan yet he was always respectful towards him and followed all the constitutional propriety with him. Compare it with Rajiv Gandhi who with his mighty mandate forgot to all the constitutional proprieties that President Gyani Jail Singh deserved during his tenure and even thought of dismissing him as Prime Minister but good vision saved India from a chaotic political situation.

For years, the Sangh Parivar and their champions continued with this campaign of calumny of Nehru as a person who did not know ‘Indian’ culture. Nehru’s ‘relations’ with Edwina and some of his photographs smoking with her went viral on social media in all these years.  It is rather unfortunate as Nehru never hid his relationships and ideals but many of the icons of Sangh Parivar and Hindutva actually never lived the ‘ideal’ life they prescribe for the society to follow. In fact many of the top leaders followed exactly the opposite of what they preached to people at large. Unfortunate part was that Congress Party could not defend the honor of its leaders and kept quiet. Government could nothing with sinister campaign at the social media in the name of not allowing ‘freedom of expression’. It was clear who this freedom of expression is as we know how people are being arrested for simple criticism.

Nehru’s secular socialist model is more than important for India. Congress deviated from this path and in the post 2004, it believed in giving the rural poor ‘entitlements’ or subsidized products but never really worked on their real issues. Hence, Dalits and AAdivasis were being displaced from their places without being rehabilitated while government was propagating the ‘right to food’ bill which was nothing but a dole out. You snatch our resources and give us job for rupees one hundred a day and that too without a firm guarantee. The land acquisition act came after lots of pressure from social movements and incidents that happened in Singur and Nandigram. The political economy of Man Mohan Singh faithfully promulgated and implemented by P.Chidambaram and Montek Singh Ahulwalia is a clear violation of Nehruvian model. Moreover, continuous surrender to the religious right wing from the days of Indira Gandhi has also weakened Congress’s politics. Despite hugely popular leader, Nehru never suffered from megalomania and continued to interact with people. He was a true secular giant who never compromised with religious fanatics and yet fought with convictions. Congress post Indira Gandhi actually failed to develop on democratic lines and promoted the ‘personality’ cult. No credible state leadership was allowed to be built. The drawing room manipulators ensured that only a full scale sycophant gets the seat and the best example was Uttarakhand where a mass leader who brought the party to electoral victory twice was sidelined and puppets were imposed from Delhi who were highly unpopular and thoroughly corrupt. How could Congress say that it is genuinely committed to probity in public life and secular values when it has leaders like Vijay Bahuguna, Shri Prakash Jayaswal and then Ajai Rai in the list for? How can it claim secular values when it has certain babas fighting from a constituency just because he happened to oppose Modi. Congress forgot that such adjustment would have won several seats to them in the past but now people particularly upper castes were in no mood to vote for it as they felt uncomfortable with it and more attracted to Hindutva. The Dalits, AAdivasis and Muslims have no reason to come to congress automatically unless the party was seen to be doing something genuine for them.  Today, Congress workers do not fight and why should they when the leaders are being promoted in a crony political way. Why should a grassroots worker be ready to shed his blood when the leaders come from drawing rooms who are not ready to sit with them and take pride in the ideology of the party.

Why should the marginalized sections of people join congress unless it genuinely believed in their concern and develop their leadership. Nehru was iconic as he understood India better and its problems. He knew that superstition and orthodoxy would damage India the most and hence attempted everything to discourage them. In personal life he never visited astrologers or any temples. In fact, his daughter Indira Gandhi unfortunately encouraged such ‘spiritual’ gurus who he would have despised.

Nehru’s biggest contribution to India is its commitment to secular democracy. Except for the dismissal of the first ever communist government of Kerala, Nehru did not touch the states. The dismissal of a duly elected government was a blunder that Nehru committed on the advice of his daughter Indira Gandhi. He respected his political opponents and ensured that they are not defeated in the elections. Parliament those times, people recall, was to be seen to be believed. Ram Manohar Lohia was his fierce critique yet both were deeply fond of each other. There were many other stalwarts in Parliament who enriched its debate during the period. His son in law Feroze spoke against the nexus between politicians and businessmen his own party’s finance minister and Nehru listened to it. The Minister Mr T.T.Krishnamachari had to resign.

Nehru’s differences with Patel were well known but they were close associate. Both had similar views on many things particularly on the national affairs. In those days of dual international structure, Nehru opted for a non-aligned India which Indira Gandhi too was committed too but subsequently the government later abandoned. Today, India is changed and so are the policies of our political party. We have left all other neighbors and only interested in pleasing the US, resulting in our own isolation in South East Asia where we could have made good inroads as culturally they were closure to us because of Buddhist values.

Nehru was an intellectual individual also and hence appreciated art and culture. He ignited the flame of change and a new progressive India among many in the Hindi cinema. The poetry and cinema flourished during those years and one can say with convictions that some of our best films and music came from that era which are still very relevant and evergreen. It is not that writers, lyricists, journalists such as Sahir, Faiz, Harivansh Rai Bachchan, Khwaja Ahmed Abbas, Mulk Raj Anand and numerous other progressive writers and artists were not just friends of Nehru but virtually adored him.

Walking near the Oxford streets of London, I stopped at a roadside shop to buy woolen for me. Just to know about my nationality, he started the conversation asking me about it. He smiled proudly, when I said that I come from India, linking Nehru and Mustafa Kamal Ataturk’s friendship. I love Nehru, great secularists who build India, he said. Some of my Pakistani friends still fondly call Nehru as Panditji, a term, I always hated but they would continue,’ Vidya, you will only understand Nehru when you face the crisis like situation that exists in our country. Nehru’s biggest contribution to India is a secular plural democracy where you all have got a chance to progress which no other South Asian countries have been able to achieve. Even if your democracy may not be a first class one, you are much better and far ahead of us and you cannot ignore the vital contribution of Nehru, they would say.

I do not know much but definitely Nehru is being abused for the failure of the respective Congress governments who became highly unpopular because of corruption scandals as well as lost trust of countries minorities, Dalits and marginalized for their failure to protect the interests of these segments. A large number of people also despised the Congress Party in the recent elections because it could not take a decisive stand against communalism and it failed to address the issue of communalism with conviction. Nehru’s legacy was buried by Narsimha Rao and Man Mohan Singh regimes who not only advocated uncontrolled free market but also connived with the communal forces to create fear psychosis among the Muslims. Rather than being proactive on secularism, social justice and welfare state, congress reduced people to mere ‘free bees’ which too did not reach people resulting in credibility crisis. All attempts of Sonia and Rahul to ignite the flames of Nehruvian socialism failed as people were not really ready to believe and just remembering Nehru and giving the overdose of government’s adverts during his birth and death anniversaries only angered people who felt that Nehru was being imposed at the cost of public exchequer. That was not the way to strengthen the legacy of Nehru but only defaming him. It is time Congress learns its lesson, build the party on truly secular principles of democracy and develop dynamic leadership at different levels. That would be the fitting tribute to Nehru when the party that he led would stand for the people who marginalized and becoming victim of religious fanaticism. Nehru has become more than relevant today when Indian state has abdicated its welfare state mechanism and ‘secularism’ has turned as much despised word in political and academic circles.

Death of a missionary : K Jamanadas

 

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

I have always been fascinated to the writings of Dr K.Jamanadas and came in touch with him through our common writings in ‘Dalit Voice’. The depth of his understanding of Ambedkarism as well as Indian history and brutality of Brahmanical invasion on Buddhism would enlighten any one. It was such a pleasure to speak to him and listen attentively his thoughts. For me such people who are witness to some of the greatest events of our history and who documented a great deal of things which would have gone unnoticed need special salute. They deserve our respect and tribute. There is no doubt in my mind that he remained one of the very few who truly served the Ambedkarite cause and dedicated his life for the same. He was a treasury of enormous information about Baba Saheb Ambedkar as well as Buddhism and his work reflect that but one thing is clear if he had resources and good support, he would have contributed much more. After Bhagwan Das, I am witness to this man of enormous scholarship who actually did not get requisite support and help at the end.

For last several years he has not been keeping in great health and was confined to his bed and computer table for work at home in Chandrapur alone. Though he has been writing regularly, very few knew how he was coping with his ill health. It was the spirit of Ambedkarism that was moving him. It was difficult for him to move around without help and yet his spirit was so high that you can only appreciate and acknowledge that. He was a retired surgeon, a devoted Ambedkarite Buddhist and also associated for several years with Kanshiramji and contested on BSP ticket too.  He was also a member of board of studies in History for two terms of three years each in Nagpur University. He wrote extensively and  authored several books, the prominent being ‘Tirupati Balaji was a Buddhist Shrine’, ‘Decline and fall of Buddhism’, ‘Maratha revolt against Brahmanism’, ‘Devadasis ancient to modern’ etc. It was a great pleasure when he gave me his book of great research on Materialism in Indian traditions when I went to specifically meet him at his residence in Chandrapur.

He was a young man highly influenced with the mission and vision of Baba Saheb Ambedkar. Hailing from Chandrapur, he was witness to historic conversion of Baba Saheb in 1956 at Nagpur. He was a young man preparing for his final years MBBS examinations when he saw the massive conversion of Baba Saheb Ambedkar to Buddhism at the Deeksha Bhumi, Nagpur.  He was also witnessed to his second day's ceremony in Chandrapur. These are moment great historical importance for us. They were a group of youngsters who actually invited Baba Saheb Ambedkar to their convention. His eyes sparkled whenever the narrative of his live conversation with Dr Ambedkar was ever referred. He narrated in detailed the entire environment to me during our conversation to me when I met him at his residence in October 2012,’

“The crowd was more than the present “Diksha Bhoomi” could accommodate. The area beyond the road, where today there are big buildings was a vacant plot of land. The Deputy Mayor being an Ambedkarite the whole labor gangs of Corporation along with volunteers of “Samta Sainik Dal” (SSD - Volunteer Force for Equality) were busy in uprooting small shrubs and clearing and cleaning the wasteland into a vast ground for the function. The stage was huge, and protected from all sides. By the side, there was a road built right from the main street to the stage for Babasaheb’s car and protected by bamboo matting from both sides. Excellent arrangement was for sound projection. Stage of shape of Sanchi stupa was erected and covered with white cloth. All the stalls of eatables and free meals were arranged beyond the streets by various organizations.

It was ordained that those who wish to get converted, must come in white apparel, but in the markets white all cloth was exhausted, and then it had to be announced  that, any clean clothes of any color would do. Similarly, it was declared that all those wishing to be converted should enroll themselves in Godbole’s office. The rush was so much that in spite of hundreds of volunteers for record keeping, the arrangement broke down. That was the magnitude of the numbers. A conservative estimate was half a million people, who poured down from all directions with whatever conveyances they could get. Many walked down with meals packed for three days, dried pieces of homemade jaur bread and an onion or two’.

He was the leader of a group of students that met Dr Ambedkar and was also invited at the tea party at Shyam Hotel in the evening. There are hundreds of aspect of Dr Ambedakr’s life which are unknown or may be ignored by many but K.Jamnadasji brought all those facets through his anecdotes. It was interesting to hear from him how Baba Saheb Ambedkar was trying to do. His narratives of the tea party in the evening of Dhammachakra Pravartan Diwas provide deep thought on which Baba Saheb Ambedkar was focusing.

‘I had heard Babasaheb on many occasions before, but that was the first time, I was hearing him talk in fluent Hindi. The speech though brief had many new points, and very scanty reports of this speech are available. He said that we all cared more for politics than social and religious change.  He had achieved everything in his life for himself. There was nothing more to be achieved for himself, “except perhaps the post of Prime Minister”, among cheers, he declared. But he was worried for all of us, as we keep on fighting amongst ourselves. He said, we were not used to work with people of other castes. Though the “Scheduled Castes Federation” (SCF) would be in existence for some more time and though Buddhists, we could still be members of it, as he had already made provisions in Constitution of SCF for “sympathizers”, it was time we change our ways and start learning to work together with other castes. He was already in touch with other leaders like R. M. Lohia, N. G. Gore, Madhu Limaye, P. K. Atre, S. M. Joshi and others and he had prepared the Constitution of new party, which would be launched soon. He gave a lot of stress on mixing with the people of democratic thoughts, belonging to other castes. It is rather unfortunate, that this aspect of his speech is totally neglected by the next generation of leaders, our predecessors. When next year in 1957, Republican Party of India was formed, there was not one single member of other castes’.

Most of the us world over know about the Nagpur conversion ceremony but I was amazed to hear from Dr K.Jamanadas that the Chandrapur mass conversion on October 16^th, 1956, was equally big and had huge crowed waiting for Baba Saheb. It is great that he has recorded all these events which give us ideas of how people have so much faith in Dr Ambedkar due to his idealism, conviction and commitment for the cause of the society. The impact of conversion was wider though it remained confined to Mahars in Maharastra yet they discarded Hindu festivities and symbols. Hundreds of women threw away their ‘Mangalsutras’ once they were informed that it is the symbol of slavery of a woman and against the principles of Buddhism.

Dr Jamanadas was a devoted Ambedkarite who lived every day according to principles of Ambedkarism and Buddhism. The women question was very important to him and he felt that Ambedkarites were not doing enough in that direction. He felt that joint family system was destructive and governed by Mitakshara law which is in force in practically whole of India.  According to him, Dr. Ambedkar wanted that the Dayabhag Law should replace it. This is not achieved as yet. Unfortunately, the Ambedkarites are not fighting for the demand of introduction of Dayabhag Law all over the country. They have not yet realized that this one single measure would give a strong blow to the caste system.

He explained the differences between Mitakshara and Dayabhag laws so that Ambedkarite could fight for the latter.

‘While stating that the main difference after Hindu Code would be ‘the abolition of the right by birth and the principle of survivorship and the substitution of the Dayabhag for Mitakshara in the Mitakshara Provinces, Dr. Ambedkar, in his speech on Hindu code, explained the fundamental differences between two systems of inheritance in Mitakshara and Dayabhag Law. According to Mitakshara, the property of a Hindu is not his individual property. It is property, which belongs to what is called a coparcenary, which consists of father, son, grandson and great grandson (the ‘sapinda-s’). All these people have a birthright in that property and the property on the death of any member of this coparcenary passes by survivorship to the members who remain behind, and does not pass to the heirs of the deceased.

‘The Bill, while it does away with coparcenary’, Dr. Ambedkar said, ‘maintains the joint family’. He further clarified that, ‘The only distinction will be that the members of the joints family instead of holding their rights as joint tenant will hold them as tenants in common’.

We had several conversations on phone and on email. He would ask me to come to his place and stay over. He used to send me a lot of stuff written by him and complimented many time on my writings. He always admired the way I was involved in with people and writing those experiences from the grassroots. In my zeal to record things, I went to meet him at his residence in Chandrapur on October 28, 2012. Actually, I had long wanted to have a conversation with him and record it but unfortunately my camera ditched me that day and all the videos and photographs that day got deleted inadvertently. It is one of the biggest regret of my life. Anyway, the interaction with him was thought provoking and cleared many of ambiguities in my mind. He was thought provoking and you would just hear him attentively to understand the depth of his knowledge. I send him a questionnaire but due to ill health he could not respond to all the questions and send his thoughts, materials and submissions etc to me to make from them. In fact, a majority of quotes have been taken from his email conversations and material that he made available to me.

He was very clear that Naxal movement was not helping the Dalits and Aadivasis but definitely expressed his unhappiness on the issue of continuous erosion of natural resources. He maintained that, ‘Land of Adivasis should be treated as special category. If they are sitting over metal ore or forest produce, the ore and produce must belong to them. They should get the benefit of that product. But our business community is not willing even to give them 26 percent share in the profit. It must be realized that it is the property of Adivasis and they are entitled for hundred percent profit, why only 26%? If they cannot utilize the ore themselves, government should form their co-operative societies and fund them in initial stages or arrange finance for tapping these resources and bring it to the market and export by financing by state agencies or by long-term bonds at government guarantee.

Unlike many other Ambedkarites, Dr Jamnadas considered land issue as very important for Dalits, Aadivasis and minorities and essential for their identity and dignity. He was against loot of natural resources and building of SEZs.  He said, ‘This is urgent need. Enforce land ceiling and tenancy laws, with due consideration of SC, ST and religious minority rights. Distribute the surplus lands to these people. Stop all grabbing land by mafias, with or without consents of bureaucrats and/or ministers and politicians. Punish the guilty, Recover back the land from mafia, demolish all illegal constructions and cancel all SEZs and prevent all land grabbing by vested interests. Bring in new proper laws for acquiring land from farmers, and pay them according to market rates. Define unambiguously what constitutes ‘public interests’ and keep a strict vigil on implementation’.

He was equally vocal on the issue of electoral reform when I discussed some of these issues with him. He felt that entry of criminal should be banned and felt the best way to do it is to the basis of the filing of a charge sheet against the person.  ‘If a charge sheet is filed one year before and case is still pending, he should not be allowed to contest. A minor offence, or a politically motivated charge, one year should be considered enough time for him to clear it out. He was very apprehensive of forces trying to convert Indian electoral system on American presidential pattern which he mentioned was a brahmanical conspiracy. ‘It is a venomous idea of Hindutva forces to destroy the Constitution and bring in a dictator and fix his term for five years. What they could not do while in power, they want to do it through the means of so-called ‘Civil Society’, which is neither civil nor society, he suggested.

He passed away living a fruitful life of about 88 years yet at a time when India is at crucial stage and Dalits, Aadivasis and minorities live in uncertain time as a right wing Hindutva government is preparing to take charge of the country. The politics of parties like BSP and RPI has faced serious rout in the elections and parties have compromised on their basic principles. He was upset with the things happening in Maharastra and that is why kept away from political parties after making his attempt to contest as BSP candidate. He was doing things singlehandedly when actually he required support. Despite that he remained a very warm hearted Ambedkarite whose main consideration was to spread the message of Baba Saheb Ambedkar and to write history from an Ambedkarite perspective. His contribution to the growth of Ambedkar movement will always be remembered for extraordinary work that he produced through his powerful writings which will be guiding principles for new generation of people, a man who was witness to history and who document each aspect of it so well despite all disabilities that he had to face at his ripe age yet he has become immortal and milestone in the Ambedkar movement for all the work that he has done and deserve to be acknowledged and appreciated.

.Date : May 19, 2014

Understanding the verdict 2014

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

There are huge lessons for every political party as well as people who aspire for a secular democratic space in this verdict 2014 which has brought glimmer in the face of a huge number of people who believed in a ‘dream’ sold to them but also apprehensions and fear among those who have fought against the process of communalization and corporatization. We cannot blame people if Narendra Modi led BJP has been able to get a thumping majority in Lok Sabha as in democracy you have to respect the verdict of the people. There are a lot of issues which need to be debated. Many talked about electoral reforms and switching over to Proportionate Electorate System (PES) as is in a majority of European countries which clearly give you equivalent number of seats according to your vote percentage and no vote goes waste in it.  But why should we blame BJP for that as the Congress has always got benefitted with division of votes in the past which is now replaced by the BJP. So even when BJP got 33% of votes, it got nearly 55-60% seats in Loksabha while a party like BSP got nearly 4.5% of votes of the electorate and yet drew a blank. It is the problem of the electoral system but unfortunately even the BSP was not ready to listen to those who have been leading a campaign for electoral reform in India. Coincidently, it was BJP which was receptive to the campaign apart from the left parties who supported Campaign for Electoral Reforms in India (CERI) of which I had been an active member for several years. In fact, now time has come to discuss these issues seriously and form a consensus among political parties but those who gain from First Past the Post System (FPTP) module do not want to even give a moment to think over it.

Whatever be the excuses as well as our reservation with Narendra Modi, we cannot take away the shine from him at this hour of glory. He single handedly campaigned much more than any of his contemporaries did and travelled across the country from East to West and North to South and used all medium of communications with the people. BJP used all forms of methods of communication to reach the people right from social media like twitter, Facebook and Whatsapps to mass contact programmes and public meetings. The BJP was not depending on one vote catcher but their huge Sangh parivar cadre was diligently working to ensure that their candidates win. We know this election was fought with huge money that influence our media and shaped public opinion. But the fact is didn’t other parties use them and who stop a party like Congress to use media? After 40 years of ruling, it did not have enough ‘resources’ to match BJP? No, the congress’s media strategy was perfectly imperfect. It tried to show that it did not have the money but then where has the money gone? Its Facebook page was only providing us ‘glimpse of Gandhi Nehru dynasty’ and their ‘contribution’ to India. There is no doubt about the contribution but India today does not really want to live in the ‘contribution’ of one family or dynasty. Modi could sale the thought that Gandhi dynasty has destroyed India. He did not say that Gandhi Nehru dynasty did not do anything but directly suggested that it destroyed India and if they are poor it is because of them. And then he went on to suggest the Gujarat model which was accepted by most the people who are mostly migrant voters from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar who have been depressed with the situation in these two states. We are witness to the absolutely abysmal social human development index in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar which has been thoroughly neglected and ignored by the political leadership who felt that only ‘identity’ fetch the votes. This election has great lessons for them too to come out of their ivory towers and not treat people as their ‘praja’.

Elections are fought and won not on strategies alone but also on developing wider public perceptions. The perception of the common people had built up against congress party particularly after the UPA-2 government that it was the most corrupt government in the last 65 years and its minister highly arrogant, unaccountable and unapproachable. Modi sold the perception that this is the most inefficient leadership and he could communicate very well that this is the ‘maa-bete’ kee sarkaar’ without any responsibility and accountability. There is no doubt that UPA passed some of the most important legislations in the past 10 years and credit must go to Sonia Gandhi for bring these right based legislations but people also realized that none of these acts are functional truly with such kind of governance which has already made procedures to thwart them. Secondly, most of the people also realized that Congress or UPA is not making any of these laws out of love for people but out of compulsion, hence attempt to show that Congress is fighting against corruption looked like a joke.  Nobody in his dream would accept the fact that Congress party and its government at centre particularly UPA-2 sincere in fighting against corruption.

It is not coincident that the biggest beneficiary of anti-Congressism was the Bharatiya Janta Party. It was a non-entity before 1975 and Jai Prakash Narain legitimized it in the Janata Party government. Subsequently, they separated and contested as Bharatiya Janata Party in 1980. They never looked back since then. It is wrong to say that in 1984 they were defeated as Rajiv won with a thumping majority where opposition remained almost defunct. There is no ambiguity in saying that 1984 was a Hindutva mandate given to Rajiv Gandhi on anti-Sikh propaganda and India paid a price for defeating the entire opposition as the government ‘destroyed’ all the institutions. The next formation of the alliance of anti Congress forces under the leadership of Vishwnath Pratap Singh further helped the Hindutva forces in spreading their feet in the Hindi heartland. Their social base got extended with support to Bahujan Samaj Party in Uttar Pradesh. It is a fact that the Sangh Parivar is the biggest social engineer than anyone else. The Marxists never believed in social engineering which they felt was ‘tokenism’ and the Congress only gave ‘token’ representation to puppeteers such as Meera Kumar and Sushil Kumar Shinde whose contribution to ‘Dalits’ and ‘Dalit cause’ is ‘well known’.

Congress government at the centre have always been prone to corruption charges as perhaps the party always felt that it was never an issue and at the end of the day people would vote on caste and religion line. Being the largest party of the country gave it a certain advantage over others as the vote division among the parties and low voting trends always helped the party. Congress always used these techniques to gain power and perhaps did not even realize that India has changed a lot. It created a huge class of sycophants whose only accountability was towards 10 Janpath but who got their positions in power due to their approximate to the Gandhi family and not due to any work done among masses. Gandhis were surrounded by such brahmanical elite which claimed to work for ‘liberal’ ‘secular’ India but in fact kept them away from people. On the other side, the government of the day was competing to hand over India’s natural resources to big companies. Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh, Finance Minister P.Chidambaram and Planning Commission deputy chairman, Montek Singh Ahaluwalia were actually nothing but ‘agent’ of Washington lobby and it would be amusing if Modi can do anything different than them as far as economic policies are concern.

The Indian corporate were always satisfied with the troika in the Congress. It only started dissociating with Congress Party after the later got several bill passed particularly the Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Bill and then government’s inability to protect coal block corrupt businessmen, it started fueling antigovernment sentiments. Till that time, Congress Party and government remain under the illusion that they did not have any ‘opposition’. The Sangh Parivar knew it well that if it has to take up an opportunity, it needs to discredit the whole system and make congress and its allies as synonymous to corruption. BJP and its allies were not in a position to do it hence the entire Parivar pushed its force behind ‘non-political forces’ actively supported by corporate media. A larger than life image of Anna Hazare was created and entire system was sought to be discredited by his team.  Parliamentarians were abused openly and television channels broadcasted everything live. Congress party till that time did not heed to any public opinion and termed them mere foreign funded NGOs. They played politics with it and tried to deviate from the issue.  Initially, Ramdev was also planted and later when the thing went wrong, he too became active campaigner against Congress Party in particular. Leaders like Salman Khurshid, Kapil Sibbol, Sushil Kumar Shinde showed little respect for the people. While Congress did not try to put its house in order but tried to use the contradiction in Anna Team. Sangh Parivar on the other side was observing carefully the team Anna and its furious attack on Congress Party. Anti-Corruption campaign became synonymous to anti congress-ism and BJP was waiting for the moment. Unfortunately after the enormous media coverage and bad mouthing, Kejriwal had no other option than formation of a party. They were young activists and suddenly became ‘messiah’ of the nation hence it is difficult for them to understand the basics of politics. They wanted to run political party according to their ‘civil society’ action. The fissures divided the movement as pro BJP lobby openly opposed the formation of a political party and there were people who did not want to fight election but wanted ‘positions’ in power.

The anti-congress sentiments were further fuelled in December 16^th 1912, Nirbhaya case. The problem with 10 Janpath was that it never reacted to people’s issues. It felt the best way to kill a movement is to make them tired through delaying tactics. Congress’s this politics of dividing the movements and forcing people for retreat actually boomeranged on them. The Nirbhaya incident created a situation when any government could have gone in a public coup. The unfortunate part is that Rahul Gandhi who always tried to distance him from the government’s acts actually did nothing to douse the flames of anger among the youths. There was no attempt by the senior leadership of the party to join the protest and share the agony of the people. It is not that it was the first time such incident had happened but the large scale resentment against it was actually convergence of many things. The congress was unable to see why small things were becoming bigger for it daily. It was trying to take comfort in forming committees and bringing a legislation rather than trying to fight against the perception that was being built assiduously against the party and the government that it is not just corrupt government but thoroughly criminal. By this time, the Facebook-twittarati also jumped in and became abusive and nasty against the party.

In the last session of 14^th Lok Sabha, the government got the statehood to Telangana bill passed. The way it was done, made it clear that UPA-2 brought all the bills only under pressure and when things moved out of its hand. The congress leaders felt that they have undone the damage in Telananga but they were wronged. They were routed in both the places. Ofcourse, they have chances in Talangana in future but in Seema Andhra the things will be very difficult unless they decide to talk to their old members to merge their parties.

The biggest lesson was for the politicians that do not think voter is a fool. People know how you are getting your things done and that is why Congress could not satisfy any one as it wanted to ‘satisfy’ every one. The problem is it had no zeal in doing so and it was more playing ‘politics’ with the sentiments of the people. For years, since 1984, Congress has lost the support of upper castes who have switched to BJP. The Dalits in Uttar Pradesh too have deserted the party. After the demolition of Babari Mosque, Muslims too deserted the party. Nothing was done. The Manmohan Singh government remained one of the most inefficient and insensitive government whose solution to every problem was formation of a ‘committee’. People were frustrated with growing inflation and yet no effort by the government to control it. It had left the middle classes, which was slowly communalized to fetch itself. UPA party’s government was doing everything that Narsimharao did at the cost of Congress Party.

Today the media is deliberately blaming Rahul Gandhi for the debacle who was in a catch 22 situation of not to criticize the government for the sake of its stability and speak absolutely less due the danger of disturbing the existing relationship between the prime minister and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi. The fact is that Congress’s debacle are basically because of the economic policies of Manmohan Singh, Chidambaram and Montek Singh added with party’s failure to protect the interest of Dalits and minorities. Why should minorities vote to party which has done nothing for them in past 10 years. Rahul Gandhi’s problem was that he did not have the ideas about these policies. He rarely spoke on inflation, corruption and wanted to tell us what his party has ‘given’ to people. This language was more of an old feudal language where ‘raja’ gives to ‘praja’. Rahul must understand that India is a new India and it does not like such language particularly in the age of communication when your speeches will broadcasted and interpreted in different ways. Rahul’s ‘fight’ against ‘corruption’ and ‘dissociation’ with the ‘corrupt’ government looked absolutely artificial. So, during the election he was on an uphill mission. His party felt that they need a Gandhi name, which they do need but that alone is not sufficient. Elections today are to be managed. You need social media, you need media, you need cadres at the grassroots and above all, you also need leaders with integrity. Where do Congress have leaders with integrity? How many OBC leaders do Congress has who can be trusted to bring vote to Party? How many Dalit leaders the party has who can win it vote? Let us not talk of Uttar Pradesh but outside the state? How many Muslim leaders does it have? Yes, it promoted leaders like Salman Khurshid and Sushil Kumar Shinde who are good for nothing. They can’t win their own seats and Khurshid ended up at number five in his constituency of Farukhabad shows how much arrogant and inaccessible he was to the people. Your fight against corruption and criminalization look hollow when you field ShriPrakash Jaiswal, the coal block hero from Kanpur and Ajay Rai from Varanasi.  Congress could have avoided fielding the candidate from Varanasi rather than fielding a criminal.

Rahul Gandhi’s media interaction was not that of a leader who wanted to go for an election. He did not have much to give. He wanted to go in election with the ‘achievements’ of Manmohan Singh who as I wrote earlier would be second ‘Narsimha Rao’ for Congress who were glorified at the cost of the party. Rao finished party and Manmohan though was not engaged anywhere in party circles too finished party through his lethargy, sluggishness, inaccessibility and inactivity apart from his inadequate economic model. No leader of any stature could have brought Congress back unless the party was bold enough to take action against its own erring government but it never did. The bold step could have been also like inability to run a coalition government but then Congress believed running government even if it is looking thoroughly paralysed was important to send the message to people that we only ‘know’ how to run a government. This has failed to attract and therefore the task before Rahul was gigantic in nature and he was not cut for the same.

These elections have not just exposed the hollowness of Congress party, its management and state of its organization but also deflated the hype build around ‘social justice’ groups in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Yes, the big jolt to Mulayam Singh, Mayawati and Lalu Yadav is warning for them to improve or you will be obliterated. The biggest lessons have to be taken by Mayawati who has been always proud of the Dalit vote. Amit Shah and other knew well that Maywati’s dalit loyalty was nothing but Chamar vote and hence they targeted other communities like Pasis, Khatiks, Dhobis, Chauhans, Mushahars, Rajbhars etc. The Hindutva party made right noises with OBCs where they attracted Kurmi votes through Apna Dal. Most of the non yadava OBCs shifted to BJP. Muslims were already looking for alternative and finished voting to different ‘contractors’ of ‘secularism’ such as BSP, Congress, SP and AAP. Mujaffarnagar riots and their mishandling created different convergence point for the Hindutva group. Dalits, OBCs, Jats became Hindus in the name of Muslim polarization. This technique helped them elsewhere too. That is the irony of being a Muslim in India and why they are unable to bring out any seats. It will continue unless Muslim seats too are reserved for them like Dalits and tribals.

Congress party will have to be rebuilt and it needs statesmanship, management and conviction. It mean that Congress will have to provide a huge platform to Dalits, OBCs, Muslims, Aadivasis and develop their leaders independently who could raise the issues. Congress will have to be developed a cadre based ideological party with strong secular leanings. Today, in this hour, Congress did not get support of these segments as they never believed in the party. The Dalit vote that Congess got was in deep compulsion and not due to any positivity. With growing rapes in Haryana and inefficiency of Hooda government how can it expect the vote of Dalits. Congress may not need them in Haryana but definitely it has to act in greater interest of democracy and justice and secondly the track record would have helped it elsewhere. Today, a majority of Congress leaders subscribe Hindutva ideology or soft Hindutva and hence cannot fight for the cause of secularism. When its top ministers were unabashedly pro corporations and had no intention to control inflation, how would anybody believe that it cared for the poor. Congress took the issue of land acquisition seriously only when Mamta Banerjee made it an issue in West Bengal and won the election after the Singur movement.

Mulayam, Lalu and Maywati focused too much on their calculations and arithmetic’s without really preparing for the elections. Even when Mayawati had announced the names of her candidates a year back, the fact is, we did not hear her saner voice on Mujaffarnagar violence. We never heard on violence against Dalits in Haryana and elsewhere. We never say her visiting Dalit villages and meeting the women working at the field who sweat day in and out. It was surprising that while she had criticized Rahul’s visit to Dalit bastes, she did not find time to visit those areas where she was needed and her presence would have been a soothing balm for people. Least said about Mulayam is better. The Uttar Pradesh government failed to instill confidence among Dalits, Muslims as well as common people and hence the anti-incumbency vote which should have gone to Mayawati actually went to BJP resulting heavy outpouring of support for them.  BSP has drifted far away from its Bahujan mission and therefore the non Chamars communities were targeted by the Hindutva groups. The poll results have actually serious challenges for the Dalit Bahujan movement and their capacity to represent the communities as Hindutva forces have already incorporated a lot of them.

That apart, mainstream left too was decimated completely. The situation has arisen when left have to support parties like AAP at various places and were almost begging Jayalalitha for an alliance reflect their condition today. Prakash Kararth declared that Mulayam Singh Yadav would be the prime ministerial candidate without even consulting any other party. A lot has been written about Rahul Gandhi’s ability to lead who was definitely facing anti-incumbency but why Prakash Karath failed to deliver? Why he was unable to take a lead and develop alliances with different left parties and other secular democratic forces. The parties have no idea how to move ahead and now the situation has put them in serious crisis. There is no other alternative then making a new beginning among all these parties and making a rainbow coalition which could rightfully represent the Dalits, Aadivasis, minorities, Kisans, mazdoors and even middle classes as threat to them is real.

The biggest lessons these elections have given us is that if you do not address the perceptional issues fast then you are decimated. All the kshatraps who did take people for granted actually got finished. None would actually shed a tear for Salman Khurshid, A.Raja, Sushil Shinde, Kapil Sibol, Farukh Abdullah and various clans of Karunanidhi and Lalu Yadav.  However, clan of Mulayam survived in Uttar Pradesh and all other got defeated. BSP could not get a single seat.  Most of the leaders in parties including Congress who were sons and daughters got defeated except for a few.  The voters are not going to vote just because you look more ‘secular’ as they need transparency and responsive government.

However, it is essential not to ignore the huge corporate money pumped into these elections. That media played an active role to propagate larger than life image of Narendra Modi. They became PR agencies of Narendra Modi. The media imposed self-censorship in hiding information about Gujarat and promoted issues that discredit other parties particularly Congress party.  It shielded Modi and became its main propaganda machinery in its war against Congress.  All other parties were completely neglected. AAP got more space than others which reflect that what media is looking forward is the parties and group that serve the new economic interests as well as interest of the caste Hindus. The downfall of media is the biggest results of this election.

I had long back visualized that this election was not being fought by political parties but purely corporate media which joined hand with Hindutva zealots to communalise the atmosphere wherever was necessary. Assam saw violence and threatening speeches were made in Uttar Pradesh and Bengal by BJP leaders targeting Muslims without much action from the election commission. Modi himself challenged the Commission on many occasion.  In fact, Bengal, Tamilnadu, Kerala and Telangana are new state to be watched as the influence of Hindutva is growing there.

The elections used to be fought on ideologies and issues but this time they were fought on ‘perceptions’. The upper castes pro liberal middle classes were sold a dream and ofcourse everything that is pro social justice was to be despised and need to be rejected. A majority of young middle class voters actually got attracted to Modi as none others tried to reach them. Modi is a natural choice as all others look casteist, backward and communal to them due to ‘appeasement’ and pro reservation stand.

Whatever be the reason, it is time for all the political parties to sit and chalk out their strategy. They will have to come to join hand together as these elections have shown us mirror of our real strength. These have shown us what we lack and given us opportunity to join hand and fight against any attempt to deny people their right. If the government does better no issues and should be given credit but it cannot take away the rights of the people to fight for their right. Many people say that calamity is the biggest opportunity and I think this is one of the biggest calamities upon secular parties, social movements and left political groups. They need to use this to rebuild the organisations and develop further links with people as their time for action has now begun. The election results are  a warning for all secular progressive democratic forces to come together and work diligently as in the absence of work for the people mere identities and secular talks will not get you people’s vote. It is time to work for people as merely ideologies are not going to get you people’s support, leaders will have to promote young team and talk of their aspirations too. Uttar Pradesh and Bihar will only come back to forces of social justice as those who claim the legacy of Ambedkar and Lohia need to look beyond their caste, community and family interest and will have to become more democratized and large hearted. More important, they will have to show that they know to govern and deliver. They need to sale their dream better but not through cycles and laptops but through new infrastructure, land reforms, jobs and opportunities to  young voters who are desperate for the same. It is time for them to leave aside their egos and forge an alliance at national level. This must start from today so that whenever elections are due at any place such alliances can work better. In the meanwhile all parties must evaluate the work of their existing government doing and delivering. How is that BJP led state governments did not face any incumbency but all the Congress led governments and other governments faced it except for Mamta and Jayalalitha? It is time to seriously introspect and act on that.