The Congress formula for Indian
Muslims is rooted in colonial legacy: divide and rule. The BJP approach has
been shaped by rage at partition: avoid and rule. All Muslims want from both
claimants to national power is provide and rule; not because they are Muslims
but because they are largely poor.
Poverty was the prevailing story when India became independent. It
cut across other fault lines: there was a morbid equality of poverty. More than
six decades of uneven growth later, we have the inequality of partial success.
Neither the Congress nor the BJP prescription is sustainable , but
in the short run Congress gains from cynicism have been so spectacular that it
has stopped thinking outside its established clichés . The BJP thinks in
spasms, if it thinks at all.
Congress squeezed into space created by the psychological bounce
of a traumatic history. After dramatic initial resistance to British
colonialism, Muslim elites bought into separatism with a vengeance,
particularly when they realized that the tactics of division could perpetuate
their privileges within a slice of geography. Battered by defeat in the battle
for Pakistan, Congress capitulated intellectually and tweaked the slogan, after
1947, from division to isolation. It concluded that the quickest route to the
Muslim vote was through accommodation with the extreme rather than dialogue
with the broad Muslim centre. In the 1940s partition became the fashionable
ideology of the landed gentry and middle class in north India. When they left
for Pakistan the vacancy was filled by suddenly empowered clerics who,
unsurprisingly, stressed faith over economics.
This kept both clerics and community poor, but the atmospherics
were rich in tokenism. A normal relationship with Muslim voters would have kept
the balance of debate along jobs and revival. This bargain with the extreme
suited Congress perfectly. There were not too many jobs on offer in the first
phase of our development. The upper castes got the chunk of the initial bite;
the second surge went to 'Backward Castes' who had mobilized under different
banners but displayed common economic purpose. The Muslims got false promises
and high drama, hyped with high-voltage simulation of a "Hindu
backlash" . Such a backlash never came because it never existed. But fear
was the electoral key: if Muslims could be driven into a polling booth on the
basis of fear, why waste jobs on them?
In the absence of economic security, Muslims were fobbed off with
security of faith. This was essentially meaningless, as it is the Constitution
which guarantees religious freedom, not any political party. The narrative of
violence was edited as required: Gujarat's riots continue their refrain, but
Assam , where the violence drove hundreds of thousands of Muslims into
near-permanent refugee camps, is excised from attention; and the horrors of
Mumbai in 1993 erased from memory despite the fact that no action has been
taken on the subsequent enquiry committee report.
BJP and Muslims lived on the same street, but walked on opposite
pavements without a zebra crossing. They did not speak the same language.
Attempts at conciliation, let alone reconciliation, were rare. The BJP had
little to say, and Muslims did not want to hear that little. Even when the
BJP's liberal icon Atal Behari Vajpayee tried to reach out when he contested
from Lucknow, he was spurned. There is little point discussing whether Muslims
will vote for the BJP if Narendra Modi is named its candidate for prime
minister. Will they vote for BJP if he is not?
Every election registers some flicker of change on the barometer.
In the Congress case, the chicken came before the egg and produced a farmful of
votes. With the BJP, the egg must come before the chicken. This egg has to be
fertilized in the mind. In this important therefore that the most significant
statement of the campaign so far was Narendra Modi's remark that the only
religion of a politician must be the Constitution of India. This may be only
the opening line of a chapter yet to be written, but it is already a huge
variant on conventional perception. The themes of that chapter must be
employment, education and political equity, for they are the true antidote to
any community's impoverisation.
Onions, like the Constitution of India, have no religion either .
It is bizarre to believe that an impoverished people will continue to support,
en masse, a catastrophic government that has taken food off their plate and
looted the nation with a creativity that should win the highest awards. Over
the last decade, particularly at the state level, Muslim voters have displayed
sophisticated tactical finesse: note the Assembly results in UP, Bihar and
Bengal. They want jobs, and a better life.
The most efficient form of economic growth comes when a country
can maximise development across all its demographic segments. Everyone will not
pull equally, but everyone must pull. Half of India is still underperforming.
Raise its wealth and walk into high double digit growth. Economics is not
complicated once the human being gets more attention than statistics.
1 comment:
An excellent article capturing Muslim tilts and votes since Independence. Extremists should not be allowed to take center stage in development of any society.That is what actually happening in Indian electoral.
Post a Comment