A Nation Searching for a Narrative in Times of Globalisation Author(s): Neera Chandhoke Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.

34, No. 18 (May 1-7, 1999), pp. 1040-1047 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4407906 Accessed: 27/05/2010 02:54
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

Nation in

Searching
Times of

a Narrative for Globalisation

Neera Chandhoke As India 's position in the world has receded, as Indians are seeing other countries of Asia, and increasingly China, outstrip their country, as Indian society is mired in caste and religious wars, as the statt has to devote more and more of its energy to these cases as well as to cases where people demand self-determination, as integration into the world marked through globalisation underscores India's underdevelopment and powerlessness in the global arena, the response of large sections of the Indian middle class has taken the form of aggressive intolerance. This intolerance that puts the blame on readily identifiable scapegoats the religious minoritiesfor instance -providesfertile groundfor the seeds ofcommunalism and majoritarianism. The net result is that the nation has been narrated in a new model - that of majoritarianism that serves to exclude rather than include, marginalise rather than inantegrate, and keep out rather than embody large sections of its own inhabitants. thepresent - have been perhapsirremediably As the gruesome and searing images of soeverwracked rupbyuncertainity of the nationthat Christianmissionaries being burnt alive mayhavebeen,was ours.Todayfor most tured.And the narrative and churchesbeing set on fire etch them- of us even the presentmarked as it is by was lovingly and carefullybuilt through selves on our collective consciousness, loss of control andeconomic and in the struggleagainstcolonialism, overpolitical with their irrefutableconnection to the agendasas Indiarapidlyglobalises,does and that constitutedmuch of the immeearlier patternsof brutal destruction di- not seem to be ours.Forglobalisation - my genhas diate post-colonialgeneration rected at the Muslim community,can we to be on the marginsof a grandfinale eration- appears put a neatend, proclaimed as citizens of this democratic republic as it were, to all our convictionsthatthe obsolescence. dodge the hardquestion as to how did we countryis in controlof its own destiny, Whatis perhapsodd is thatat the very get here.1 of the nationis self- time that the nationhas been openedup andthatthe narrative inasmuchas it drawsits sus- to international referential, messaging, we see the INTRODUCTION in a distenance from internal interactionsand eruptionof culturalnationalism THE proposition that middle age brings debates. turbingmode.At the very time as we are Now a greatdeal of theoretical with it profound lassitude, dispiritedness, energy being constitutedby the informational in explaining, and perhaps resignation may be a truism, hasbeenexpended concep- revolutionas citizens of what McLuhan but it is not by that fact necessarily ren- tualising, and describing globalisation. calls the 'global village', we are seeking as the inheridereduntrue.Because life undeniably does Westerntheoriststell us thatthe process to recoverour 'authenticity' fide of some bona tors interconnectedness, seem to be so much more messier when hasintensified meaning system global On second the nation and its inhabitantsarriveat mid- so events in one partof the world- the on whatit meansto be Indian. glance, however, this contradictionis age. For one, the dizzying euphoria of collapse of stock marketsfor instanceof the affect other can future and the that the perhaps endemic to the process of parts simultaneously present youth Foreven as the processhas be managed, if not ordered, and guided, world.DavidHarveyin an evocativefor- globalisation. narrative of the self-referential if not controlled,declines into a generalised mulationdescribesthe processof simul- ruptured havebredtheir For the nation,these ruptures and crippling lack of confidence that taneityas 'time-space compression'.2 in the form world,however,this own reflexes and trajectories perhaps it cannot be so. Even more dis- us in thepostcolonial on formulations of defensive and reactive and be but cannot formulation the is incomplete accompanying recognition turbing Indeed the nationis about. inasmuch as it fails to capture whattheIndian that perhaps we may never be able to inadequate restsin the factthat of powerthat occupies ironyof globalisation control the future; that perhaps we have the phenomenon never been able to do so despite all the the core of globalisation. Indeed,as the attheverytimeit seeksto poundtheworld massive conceits of youth. This seems to west imposes its own ideas of how our into a single consciousnessthroughthe thisveryrevolurevolution, be particularly true of India and Indians society, cultures,economy, and politics informational on us, most of the tion has bred and fostered several unas our country proceeds beyond middle should be arranged definitions of cultural exclusivity. palatable postcolonial world has experienced age too - and here the imagination flo.nThis may possibly be naturalto the ders. For no one seems to know where we globalisation as colossal arrogance and inasmuch ashuman of theworldis being human condition, are going, though there is still some violence.As thispart beings huntforassurances. into shape to meet the needs constantly Therefore, measure of reasonable certainty that we hammered of a worldthatpromises know where we have come from, and of the globaleconomyonce again,as we the construction are being told how to thinkand what to open-ended possibilities, a world that perhaps where we are right now. self-sufficient assures multiple definitionsof who we Contrastthis to the heady optimism that thinkonce again,relatively deep and profound opento receive are, can also nurture pervaded the country in roughly the 15 societieshavebeenprised them- uncertainity and confusionas to who we on how to comport years following independence. Bolstered new commands of on really are. Oversetby doubt and hesitaand buoyed by memories of the impres- selves. The dreamswe once dreamt sive victory that the nationalist, anti-co- ourrespective pillowsthatIndiawouldbe tions people tend to searchfuriouslyfor of identitythat will fix lonial movement had won against colo- in time a self-reliantand self-sufficient definite referrals vision whotheyareforthemselves andfor others. hereI speakof theNehruvian nialism; we had felt that the future how- nation
1040 Economic and Political Weekly Mayl, 1999

Inotherword ^Ie aredisposedto chase tnendingly for 'referrals', at the very moment thatwe aretoldthatidentitiesare notonlyplural butthattheyarefluid.And more often than not, these 'referrals' happento be that of a unified, homonationalism genised(albeitconstructed) The a nationalism thatpledgescertainty. problemis that the quest for certainty amidst flux has bred undesirable and unviableformulations of culturalnationdefinedon the axis alism;a nationalism of themajority religion,andanationalism, recollect,thathad been ruledout by the in India. leaders of thefreedom movement at indeRecollectalso thatthe leadership in had to bind sought people pendence sentiments of belonging that accrue civicnationalism basedoncitizenthrough ship rights, democracy, and equality. on cultural ororganic Todayformulations nationalismseek to overturn all such notions and practices. someof theseformulaUnquestionably, tions give us cause for worry. For a on generalisedmuscularaggressiveness in has resulted whatit meansto be Indian andviciousattacks on cultural belligerent and religiousminorities,aggressiveness a againstPakistan,and institutionalised in of intolerance generalised atmosphere the body politic. Notions of a culturally areleadingthenationfaraway purenation in whichit wasoriginally fromthemanner the narrated left liberalleadershipin by India.In the processwe - andI speakof left liberals- seem to have lost control over historically constitutedand handed of the nation, because down narratives they have been hijackedby fringes of rightwingelements. Now we canrespond to thisdebilitating loss of controlin two ways. One, overcomeby a generalsenseof fatiguewe can are saying, say, as manypostmodernists thatcanbe done;that thatthereis nothing inthepolity dreams of political intervention are both futile as well as illusive. Such interventions wecanargue inapostmoder mood inevitablydegenerateinto statusof powerin quoismandtheconsolidation time. We can in other words shrug our andrenounce shoulders all responsibility for sortingout this mess. On the otherhand,arguably messiness can occasionally prove to be creative. Perhapsthis, I suggest, is the time to narrate the nationin a new mode;a mode

violence against tedly overused but neverthelessuseful that paradeintolerance, formulation as pa'imagined',at least by some minorities,and frankcriminality, sections of the body politic. In fact, an triotism. of engagementwith received narratives I construcnationalism maybe profoundly The Nation Re-Imagined tive. For it is only throughthis process, that we can shift from being consumers In a prefatory that pointit canbe argued of receivednarratives, to beingproducers a nationcannotbe (throughdebatesand of the nation. or 'imagined'as contestations)narrated of a shared narrative This narrative in'orderto proveviable Andersonwouldhaveit, once andfor all, forourneeds- thatof a multi- and left to fend for itself. For the social andrelevant andmulti-ethnic conditions in which this narrative is cultural, multi-religious society- shouldpossess in the mainone received - the conditionsof receptionif It shouldof coursepossess the we will - inevitablychange over time. property. unlessthe narrative constantly potentialto addressthe problemsof the Therefore, hereandnow, as well thecapacityto take adjuststo changedconditionsandaltered onundesirable formulations on thenation. aspirations,it will be quickly rendered But more importantly, it should be able incongruous and irrelevant. In other inademocratic mode. words, the nationneeds to be constantly tofashionthenation Fortherehappens to be no earthlyreason re-negotiated to suit the needs of the does not democ- present.If such re-negotiation why societiesthataspiretowards fresh of nationaloccur the of and should racy through adoption speaklanguages on intolerance, chau- appropriate ismthatarefounded techniquesof representation, will fail to sparkoff collecvinism,andfascism.Such languages,we the narrative need to recognise, neutralise,and even tive imaginations of belonging and of In otherwords,if our connectedness.And once this happens, betraydemocracy. as the narrative of the nation society has to fulfil its own promiseof nationalism democracy, our narratives of the nation is itself. rendered archaic. In short, at have to be democratic. There is no other historically significant moments of its choice, for no healthysociety that also political biography,any nation will be happens to lay claim to being a great compelledto both re-imagineas well as itself to its inhabitants and for civilisationcan live with schizophrenia. re-narrate Today, however, our society is fast its inhabitants. such historically the verge of schizophrenia, Now arguably signifiapproaching canarisein atleastfourand to cantmoments becausewe proclaimourcommitment at the very time discoursesof possibly more situations.The first such democracy will logicallyanisewhenmemofascismhavemadetheirappearance onthe situation in whichthenation was political stage. But there is no way that riesof themoment we can live withdemocracy as a constitu- originallyimagined- in the Indiancase andfascismas the duringthe freedom struggle- begin to ent politicalprinciple, Thetwo are fadefrompeople'smindsandrecollection. constituent national principle. if the nationhasto continue to andattempts Therefore, incompatible, fundamentally its inhabit the of continue to commensurate suchincompatible psyches people, prins famouswords,a "24hour ciples arenotonly politicallyandmorally to be in Renan' flawed,they are franklydishonest.If we plebiscite", it will need to adopt new Thesetechadopt democracyas the foundingprin- techniquesof representation. maybe culledout ciple of the body politic,we will have to niquesof representation - memories, subscribeto a democraticnation;if we of manysources mythologies, all pretensions songs, literature, and films. What is adoptfascism,we abdicate is thatthey collectivelyimpart to democracy.And whetherwe want to important give up democracy as the organising significanceto whatit meansto be Indian, of the bodypoliticis something and they harness collective emotional principle we need to urgentlyreflect on. For this energies in the project of the nation. will inevitablyhappenif we continueto Therefore, anew theyhaveto be fashioned watch silently the untamedcommunali- at such historicallysignificantmoments sationof our society. And silence I may simply in orderto performthe task that remindthe audience,signifies acquies- has been assigned to them. cence. We really have no option except Ironically, the origins of the second that will perchance cover theflanks of the to interveneimmediatelyin this matter. momentthatcompels re-narration of the of nationalism in a nationusuallyemanate that most of. us The nation has to be re-narrated narrative outof theoriginal mode in orderto recoverthe act of imaginingthe nation.For the act inherited as our patrimony.It is also democratic timeto explorethe structural nationfor the people of India.It has to of imagininga nationin a pluralsociety, conceivably inthewayinwhichthenation be re-narrated in a democraticmode to inevitably inadequacies generates multiple imaginations has been in BenedictAnderson'sadmit- retrieve it fromfascist,right wingelements of multiplenations.We in Indiaaresurely
Economic and Political Weekly - May 1, 1999

1041

familiar withthisphenomenon. Roughlyat the same momentthatthe Indiannation took shapethroughand in the anti-colonial struggle,sections of Indiansociety began to imagine a nationthey were to - an act of imagination latercall Pakistan thatled inexorably to the partition of the country.Nationalism,therefore,as historyshowsus in some tragicdetailbreeds its owntrajectories in theformof multiple Yugoslavia,the Soviet Union, Ethiopia, andRwanda,and now Bosnia, Kashmir, the north-east of IndiaandPunjabnot so long ago. As these nationsof intent increasinglydefine their political identity theoriginal narrative of one,united, against nationalism willhave political community, It to come to termswith these assertions. doesso by acknowledging them, normally them, coercingthem, or asneutralising similatingthem. In each of these cases, the original narrativeof nationalismis restructured asitbattles withsuchdevelopments - sometimessuccessfully, sometimes unsuccessfully. The thirdsituationin which the nation willhavetobe re-negotiated usuallyarises when religious, language,regional, and within ethnic communities theplural nation demand oftagainst increasingly autonomy, of homogeneous nationalism. thenarrative sucha momentwill consoliConversely, dateitself when majoritarian movements endeavour tobuild ahomogeneous, 'united' nationthroughsuppressingthese assertions and curbingidentities, and when they posit one identity,one culture,one languagefor the pluralnation.A prudent andajudiciousnationnormally acknowledges thatidentitiessmallerthanthat of the nationare legitimateand acceptable, and that people have a right to them. It its narrative to assert, accordingly adjusts orto reiterate An unwise nation plurality.3 mood tries to following the majoritarian curb these smalleridentities,often with disastrousresults - think of Bosnia or Rwanda. In both cases, the nation is compelledto re-imagineitself. Fourthly,as we see all over the postcolonialworld,nationstend to re-narrate themselves,often in a belligerentmood, when the international communityintervenes openly in the affairsof sovereign nations.This intervention may take the shapeof open use of militaryforce as in Iraq.Orit maytakethe formof harshand stark politicalandeconomicconditionalities that accompanyloan packages by multi-lateral lending agencies. The net resultis thatthe(formerly) self-referential character of the national andthe narrative of therecipient countries have sovereignty
nations of intent. Think of erstwhile

Most nations been deeplycompromised. have sought often in disastrousways to counter theseinterventions byaggressively theirown nationness, reformure-stating lating in the process the original act of imaginingthe nation. II The Crisis of the Nation in India By the lastyearsof theeighties,all four of these situationshad convergedin a particularlyinsistent manner to raise questions about the original project of nationnessin India.Much of the charm and the seductivenessof a nationalism, that had accompanied a sustainedand a victorious struggle against the colonial power, had worn off for generationsof Indians born25 yearsafterindependence. to the nationhad simultaCommitment their neouslywanedwithpeopleinvesting energies in regional, caste, language, religious, and other such particularistic agendas. The national consensus had further frayedas regionalmovementsin Punjabnot so long ago, Kashmirand in parts of the north-eastchallenged the of thecountry. Various territorial integrity groupsbasedon languageand religionthinkof the Shah Bano case - were astheir Above andidentity. serting autonomy all as Indiawas forcedthrougha combito go to the IMF nationof circumstances for a loan in 1991 the nationalnarrative was deeplyjeopardised. Indeed,the fragility of the nationwas never as evident as when the countryhad to modify and sometimes andplansthat abdicate projects had been arrivedat throughhistorically constituted under harsh economic debates, conditionalities. Now this was precisely the moment whentheproject of hindutva, whichserves to define the countryin a majoritarian on thepolitical mode,madeits appearance stage.AttheverytimeIndiawasaccepting its integration into the world on grossly unequalterms,and as it was openingup its bordersto the worldoutside,sections of societywereseekingto turnthecountry inwards. Thisturning backto some inward, Hindu tradition unspecified -garv se kaho to thecomplexof causesdescribed above. The point is that the responsetook the shapeof raucousand belligerentappeals to ideas of a 'strong' nation based on culturalpurityand exclusiveness.These appealsfoundreadyresonancein a civil frussocietythatwas showingincreasing withthewaythecountry wasgoing. tration Resultantly,the nationfor at least large sections of civil society began to be remood. Logiimaginedin a majoritarian
hum hindu hai - may have been a response

cally, the same rhetoricthat sought to mobilisethe countryon the groundsof a Hinduismservedto openly 'regenerated' excludethe minorities fromthedefinition of the nation.For if the nationis defined by the fact thatthe majority belongto the Hindu religion, those who do not subscribeto the religionarenot a partof the nation.This is the clearandunambiguous message of hindutva. Theproject of hindutva is not,of course a new one. by any stretchof imagination, It happenedto come into existence at roughly the same time as the Congress initiated theproject of secular nationalism in the twenties. This is not strange,not whenwe recollectthateveryconstruction of nationalism is a plural venture. If is a participative nationalism projectbecause it is plural,each participant group constructsits own and perhaps naturally incommensurable version of whatit means to be a nation.This is intrinsicto mass nationalism. as rivalformuAccordingly, lations struggledin the public arenato imprintthe body politic with their own imageryandmodelof thenationstate;the nationbecamea contestedconcept.It, in otherwords,becamethe objectof diverse and often incognisantthinking. On the one hand,the leadership of the mainstream sectionof thefreedom struggle
- Jawaharlal Nehru in particular- was to

thatit insist repeatedly and emphatically to use the termsHindu was undesirable tocharacterise Indian andHinduism history andculture.Even as competingreligious around the linesof the identities polarised two-nationtheorywere to challengeand fragmentthe movement, the Congress continuedto reiterate that the only basis upon which the new nation could be organisedwas secularismand the rights of the minorities to theirown religionand Theserightsweregranted culture. as early as 1928in theMotilalNehruconstitution. Subsequently,article 29 and 30 of the fundamental of the Constirightschapter tution sanctioned minority rights, and the freedomof articles25-30 guaranteed religion. The task of buildingand consolidating a secular nation gained urgency as the alongthe lines of countrywas partitioned that religion,andas wholesalemassacres the birthof Pakistan seared accompanied collective memoriesof the body politic. In fact, the explosion of religioussensibilitiesaround thiseventprovoked intense emotionalism andsomedegree of irrationalism. Severalleaderswerearguing forthe establishment of a Hindu state to offset the Islamic state that would presumably consolidateitself in Pakistan. The demo-

1042

Economic and Political Weekly

Mayl, 1999

craticleadership of thecountry, therefore, had to accomplishtwo tasks in orderto fulfil its commitments to secularnationalism.First,it had to send a straightand that unambiguous messageto themajority thenew nationhadno place for a majoritarian religion,andthatit wouldfunction ortheGandhian onthebasisof secularism
respect for all religions - sarva dharma

sambhava. the Secondly,it hadto reassure minoritiesthat their identitieswould be in societyandinthepolity."The protected of acountry likeIndia", Nehru government was to statefirmly,"withmanyreligions thathave securedgreatand devotedfolcanneverfunction lowingforgenerations, in the modem satisfactorily age excepton a secularbasis".At another point,he was to say that- "Wecall our statea secular one. The word 'secular'perhapsis not a very happyone. And yet, for want of a we haveusedit. Whatexactlydoes better, it mean? Itdoesnotobviouslymeana state wherereligionas such is discouraged. It of religion means freedom andconscience, forthosewhomayhave freedom including no religion." was to state unAnd Radhakrishnan that"weholdthatno religion equivocally should be given preferentialstatus, or uniquedistinction,that no one religion shouldbe accordedspecial privilegesin national relationsfor life, or international that would be a violation of the basic of democracy andcontrary to the principles of religionandgovernment... bestinterest No group to itself of citizensshallarrogate rightsand privilegeswhich it denies to others.No personshall suffer any form or discrimination becauseof of disability his religionbutall alike shouldbe free to shareto the fullestdegreein the common life." Nehru Pandit stated Correspondingly. on anotheroccasion that "anythingthat creates such an apprehension[majoriin the minds of any groupin tarianism] India is tobe deprecated. Ittendsto disturb and is opposed to our secular ideal." Secularismwas, therefore,designed to regulatedebilitatingreligious strife, to assurethe minoritiesof theirsafety, and to set at rest any apprehension that the wouldalignitself with the domicountry nant religion. The vision that underlay such a commitmentwas that of civic inasmuchas peoplebelongnationalism, were granted ing to different persuasions the right to their persuasions,and the freedom to practice theirreligioneven as they were integratedinto a democratic nationalpolity. However,it is also truethatNehruvian ideas were repeatedly challengedwithin the CongressParty either explicitly or
Economic and Political Weekly

implicitly from day one. Since the twenties when the organisational activities of the party expanded, the support base and the political affiliations of sections of the party overlapped to an alarming degree with that of Hindu revivalist movements. Chris Bayly writes thatthe Congress Party at the grass roots level was sometimes indistinguishable from the movement for the protection of cattle or for the propagation of Hindi. There was, according to Bayly, "a sharpcontradictionbetween the secular, and non-communal, catch-cries used in the Congress publicity or official pronouncements, and the idioms shaped by its orators".4Significant sections of the Congress provincial committees were pledged to the programme of the Hindu Mahasabha.Leaderssuch as MadanMohan Malviya and Lala Lajpat Rai combined a commitment to religious movements with commitment to the secular credo of the Congress. Above all the use of Hindu symbols, slogans, and religious ideas to mobilise people gave the activities of the Congress a predominantly Hindu flavour. Under the surface, it is obvious thatdeep disagreements on the shape of the future nation permeated the Congress. Rhetoric and beliefs about the virtues of a Hindu nation continued to co-exist, howsoever uneasily, with the ideology of the left liberal leadership that gained ascendancy over the Congress since the thirties. But this uneasy co-existence extracted its own price. Mushirul Hasan writes of the Hindu centred view that came to be stridently expressed in Congress circles. No two Congressmen understood the meaning of secularism in the same way.5 He cites the words of a troubled Nehru who wrote in the aftermathof the partition thus: "all of us seem to be getting infected with the RSS mentality. This is a curious finale to our careers...If the present Hindu outlook does not change radically, I am quite sure that India is doomed". Nehru is reported to have complained that some of his colleagues had forgotten one of the basic principles and planks of the Congress, i e, intercommunal unity. And he was to dismiss those who spoke of the secular state, as having understood it the least, and having belied it by their own words and actions.6 Nehruvian ideas triumphed for some time, but the maturation of historically constituted tensions gravely weakened the commitment of the Congress Party to the cause of the minorities.In the troubleddays following Nehru's death, the Economic and Political Weekly was to sum up the

comes from the mannerin which the goverment andthe countryareallowing themselvesto be pushedoff the edge of secularisminto the abyss of communal reaction;falling back to the frightening atavismof stagnant,dark and medieval ethos of the Hindu speakingareas, the MadhyaDesa which had witnessedages ago the finest blossomingof Indianculture. It spells dark and dank reaction".7 These fears were not unfounded,because later prime ministersof the CongressPartywereto openlyplaytheHindu card,revealingthus the schism between andrhetoemptyideologicalprotestations ric andpractice.In fact, in sharpcontrast to Nehru'sown positionandcommitment to the norm, the Congresshas been remarkablyvacillating when it comes to secularism. At times,individual members of the partyhave flagrantlyviolatedthe secularprinciple.The Congresshas still not been able to establishthatits leaders were not involved in the 1984 pogroms theSikhcommunity against despiteample And recollectthat proof to the contrary. in 1992, the Congressgovernment at the centreremained muteandinactiveas the Babri masjid was razed to the ground. At the Panchmari session of the party in 1998, the Congress presidentSonia Gandhicandidlyadmittedthat the comof the partyto the minorities mitment had been deeply compromised.But despite this admission,the Congresscontinues to display ambiguity towards secularism. Therefore, even though the highly communalisedsituationin the country, the attackson the Christian particularly minoritiescalls for unequivocal censure, A K Antonyat a meetingof theCongress on January Committee 16, 1999, Working is reportedto have remarkedthat the inthematter. shouldtread Congress warily The partyhad, said the leader,been accusedin thepastas pampering theminorilost the confidence ties, it had,therefore, of the Hindumajority(more pertinently the vote of the Hindu majority). The Congressnow intendsto re-approtheplankoriginally priate appropriated by the BJP - Hinduism.The tolerantcharis the best guarantor acterof Hinduism of secularism,arguesthe Congress,and we should tellthepeoplewhatHinduism really means.Apartfromthe factthatHinduism has not preciselybeen knownfor its tolerance towardsits own people, particularlytheso-calledlowercastesandwomen, the strategyis deeply flawed. For surely the instrumental use of Hinduismto reassureminorities who subscribe to different religions is highly paternalistic and thefactthat politicalmood thus "[t]herudestshocks patronising. Notwithstanding

May 1, 1999

1043

areas mucha partof religiousminorities the body politicas the majority, notwithstandingthe fact that they are the equal inthenation, inheritorsofand participants theyarebeingtoldthatthemajority group toleratesthem becausethatis the nature of the majorityreligion. What could be morecondescending? Whatcouldbe more What could alienating? testifymoreto the victory of the BJP set agenda?And it if it werenotso tragic wouldbe laughable thattheBJPhasactuallyhailedtheacceptanceof Hinduism by the Congress.This acceptancecompletelyand utterlyrepudiatesthe insistenceby Jawaharlal Nehru thatthetermHinduandHinduism should notbeusedtodescribe thecountry. Nothing could illustratemore starklythe gap between the presentpartyand the original Congress leadership that dreamt of a democratic secularnation.Whatis more is thatdespiteall its rhetorical important statements thatit is committed to thecause of the minorities, thehistorical ambiguity thatthe Congressdisplayswhenit comes to secularism,cannot but feed into the hindutvaproject that openly visualises and defines the nationas predominantly Hindu. hasconsolidated itselfrecently Hindutva in civil societyin India,but its originsgo back to the 1920s. In 1923, Savarkar constructed the political category of 'Hindus'andthe Hindunation,by denying to otherreligiouscommunitiestheir rightfulplace in India. The Hindu, he wrote, "inheritsthe civilisation of the in a commonhisas represented country tory, commonheroes, a common literature,a commonart,a commonlaw and a commonfairsand commonjurisprudence, and ceremonies festivals,ritesandrituals, sacraments".8 India for the Hindus, he both fatherland and holyland.Therefore, though the Christiansand the Muslims have "inherited along with Hindus a anda greater commonFatherland partof the wealthof the commonculture- language,law, custom,folkloreandhistory, [they] are not and cannotbe recognised as Hindus...Their holylandis far off in Arabiaor Persia".9 And M S Golwalkarwas to narrowly Hindustan as thelandof the conceptualise Hindus- "this country,Hindustan,the racewithits Hindu Hindu Religion,Hindu Culture,and HinduLanguagecompletes the Nationconcept".'l These ideas were to inspireandpropelthe movementfor a Indiaboth HinduIndiaor a majoritarian in colonial and in postcolonialtimes. In pursuitof this projectthe minoritiestargeted as they were, in brutalandsoulless
1044 argued, is pitrabhumi and punyabhumi,

stereotypes as 'hostile', 'menacing', or 'demonic', were mar'threatening', fromtheveryconstruction of the ginalised nation. Fromthe 1950sto the 1980s,the sangh parivar kepta low profile.It occupiedthe right wing fringe of Indianpolitics; the centre space was occupied by the consensual l hegemonic Congress system. It weretheeventsof the 1980sand 1990s, which were to bringnotionsof undifferculentiated majoritarianism, citizenship, turalnationalism, the conceptof a strong an attackon secularism and nation-state, of andthedevelopment cultures, minority evenfascistconcepchauvinistic, narrow, tions of the nationto the fore.12 Thereasonsfor the successof hindutva in substantial sectionsof civil societyare admittedlylarge and complex. What is is thatthehindutva seeks important brigade to restorewhatit sees as thejeopardised itself unityof the nation,by proclaiming as weddedto the onenessandintegrity of on theneedto build India,andby harping a strongnation.The ideology has found of civil readyresonance amonglargeparts civil society society- a deeplyfrustrated that was looking for explanations, quick andreadysolutions, andmoreimportantly scapegoats,for the quagmirethe nation found itself in. As India's position in the world has areseeingothercounreceded.as Indians tries of Asia and increasingly China, theircountry, as Indiansocietyis outstrip miredin caste and religiouswars,as the statehas to devote more and more of its energyto these cases as well as to cases wherepeopledemand self-determination, asintegration intotheworld market through India's underglobalisationunderscores developmentand powerlessnessin the global arena,the responseof large sections of the Indianmiddleclass has taken theformof aggressive intolerance.13 This intolerance thatputstheblameon readily identifiable scapegoats - the religious minoritiesfor instance- providesfertile fortheseedsof communalism and ground The net resultis thatthe majoritarianism. in a new mode nationhas been narrated - that of majoritarianism that serves to exclude ratherthan include,marginalise rather thanintegrate, andkeep out rather than embody large sections of its own inhabitants. The BJP may have formallymodified its positionon secularism andon minorities once it attainedpowerat the centre, butthe harmhas been done. Forone, the off and the consolidation of a triggering mood- thatof Hindutva, hasbredits own in the shapeof unleashing consequences

murder openfascistforces.Thegruesome of a 59-yearold missionaryand his two sons, one aged seven and the othernine, outis the direct even if an unintended, come of the triggering off andconsolidation of this mood. For once people's totheproject energieshavebeenharnessed of buildinga Hindustate- whatever that mean and once the that leads might party this mobilisation in civil society acquires statepower,such acts takeon the veneer of reasonableness, they may even seem natural. Even if technicallyspeakingthe partyis not involved in specific crimes theminorities, itcertainly is responagainst sible for unearthingnefarious and distastefultrendsin the polity. For undeniably the partyalong with the affiliatesof the Sangh parivarhas been directlyimplicatedin whippingup hate campaigns thereligiousminorities forthepast against decadeor so. Underthe umbrellaof soft Hinduism by thecentral governpractised findsfullexpresment,a fascistHinduism sion in hateful and virulentpogromsof the religious minorities. As far as the areconcerned, thediscourse minorities of hindutvaat best reeks of paternalism; at worst, it reeks of fascism.14And this is passed off as patriotism! If theconsolidation of a moodis responsibleforthedestruction of theBabri masj id andnow the crimesagainstthe Christian in Gujarat andOrissa, it is equally minority responsible for the spread of a fairly belief thatthe rightfulinherigeneralised tor of the nation is the majoritycomOtherwise well meaning munity. perfectly people now subscribeto the formulation that the minoritieshave been pampered throughthe Nehruvian conceptsof secularismand minorityrights- the lettersto the editor columnsof any newspaper or news magazinewill testify to this. That these rights have been grantedby the andthatthey flowed out of Constitution, debatesis glossed constituted historically of over, even challenged.The overthrow hasneverbeenmorecomplete, and history theshortsightedness of thisoverthrow has never been more obvious. Whatis important is thatall this poses a threat to thedoctrine of secularandcivic nationalism basedupona commitment to religious freedom,the distancingof the state from all religions,and the grantof citizenship rightsto allpeopleirrespective of theiraffiliation,thatthe Indiannation hadbegunits post-independence life with. This causes some sadness when we remember thatatonepoint,theIndian nation had been constructed juridically and politically.Itstoodforpoliticalliberation, foruniversal human forsecularism, rights,

Economic and Political Weekly

Mayl, 1999

and for plurality.Today an aggressive nationalconsciousness calls for homogenisation and sameness. Appeals to ascriptiveidentitiesare louder than appeals to political norms. And pungent notionsof thevolkreplacethecommunity of rightsbearingcitizens. whereas,the liberalleaderUnhappily, ship underNehru designed secular and to assurethe minorities civic nationalism has of fairplayandjustice,todayhindutva for secularism.An unbeen substituted of this is the formulation easy reminder in ajudgment of the Supreme on hindutva Courtof India.15 The courtruledthatthe conceptof hindutva,which incidentally hadbeen used to garer votes in an election,is not a religiousdoctrinebut a way of life.Theuseof thetermdoesnotamount anelection.No to corrupt practices during ruledthe court,can confine interpretation the meaningof hindutvato the narrow limitsof religionalone, or equateit with Hindu religious bigotry. fundamentalist denotes stated thecourtfurther, Hindutva, thecontent of Indian cultureandheritage. It is a way of life for the people in the subcontinent.This is a deeply flawed have as variouscommentators judgment andlegitimising institutionalising argued, as it does discriminatory practices and provocative oratory.16What is more is that it simply indicatesthe important dissolutionof the nationalconsensuson thatwas at one point secularnationalism relations to manage adopted intergroup amongcommunities. Thesedevelopments need,I suggest,to be countered stronglyif we want to preIn other credentials. serveourdemocratic words, we have to pool our collective a democratic narraenergiesto formulate tive of the nation.For only a democratic will allowus to dream of a future narrative where people belonging to diverse and will incommensurable persuasions perhaps inpeaceandcivility. beabletolivetogether II1 Attempting Some Recovery of a Civil Narrative of the Nation As a prefatory pointlet me suggestthat nationsfind feasiblenarratives for themselves, only when those narrativesthat the nationto and for its inhabrepresent itants,manageto connect them through ties of belongingto each otherandto the nation.A nationcan only prosperwhen its members feel thattheirlives andtheir without eachother. dreams areincomplete And it can flourishonly when its inhabitantsfeel thattheirfates areinextricably intertwined to thatof the nation.This is the very purthe essenceof nationalism,

into pose for whichthe nationis brought existence through representationsthat serveto createandconsolidate feelingsof connectedness.A nation, in effect, can only harness the collective emotional energiesof its peoplewhenit managesto and correestablishsuch connectedness spondingfeelings of belonging. themselves nationsconstruct Certainly, suchas territorial around objectivefactors common hisborders,sharedtraditions, anda toricalmemories, rituals,practices, common language.But the presenceof objective factors is simply not enough. haveto be investedwithrich Thesefactors sothattheyevoke andmeaning symbolism deep sentiments of identification and belonging.It is only thenthata groupcan I suggestthat becalledanation. Therefore, whethera groupof peoplecan be termed a nation,dependslargelyon whether they

to, and that if they do not have this something they will be lost, that they will 'float upwards' without anything to hold them to the ground. If this is true, then lack of belonging inevitably leads to alienation and deprival. And homelessness as any refugee or immigrant can tell us, can perhaps prove to be the most enervating and tortured experience of human beings because there is nothing within hailing distance. SukritaPaul Kumarwrites abouta noted poet R Parthasarthywho migrated to the west, because as he confessed, "I became hypercritical of everything Indian. Indian society was, I felt, deeply neurotic, it feet chained to a grossly exaggerated past. India was a nation of sleep walkers". Fascinated by an England he had created in his mind in the twilight of the Raj, he was unprepared for the alienness and the consider themselves as belonging to one, bareness of the country of his adoption. themselves dis- It was then in his poem the 'Exile' that andwhether theyconsider tinguishedfrom othersby this fact. It is he was to write. He had spent his youth whoring simply not enough to depict a nationin and terms of its institutions,structures, After English gods. There is something to be said for exile: ideologies;it has to be depictedin terms of feelings. of structures you learn that roots are deep That language is a tree, loses its colour of feelings may well These structures under another sky be unexpressed,they may well be sub-

terranean, they may well be for the most - this partunrealised,and unarticulated is that Whatis important is not important. people experienceconfusion, bewilderment, or incompleteness; they feel that of whothey theyhavelittleunderstanding are,wheretheycomefrom,andwhatthey andnot so idenshoulddo in identifiable tifiablesituations, iftheyaredeniedaccess to their nationalcommunity- think of orof exiles.Whatis thebestthing refugees about migrantsand seceded countries? wondersSalmanRushdiein Shame. "I whatis thinkit is theirhopefulness...And the worstthing?It is the emptinessof our from luggage...Wehave floatedupwards history,from memory,from time." Now thesesentiments of belongingcan arise and consolidate themselvesin only the imaginationsand in the emotional if the nation energies of its inhabitants speaksto all sectionsof its people.To the it shouldpromise inhabitant belonging,to therefugeeortheimmigrant thememories of belonging,to the aspirantcitizen the promiseof belonging.But at all times it hasto aboveall thingsspeakthe language This is important for people of belonging. to feel intuitivelythat they are at home, is theirs,andthat,therefore, thatthenation theyhaveasenseof rootsandof rootedness. People must feel thatwhereverthey are, whatever theyaredoing,theyalwayshave somethingand somewhereto come back

However, the most reassuringthing about the past is that it has happened.17 But then there cannot be one feeling of belonging, or one 'reassuring thing about the past' - in a society that consists of various linguistic, religious, and cultural groups. For people belong to the nation in different ways - through their own languages, cultures, andreligions. Belonging is always plural in its ties, its imagination, memory, sense of history, and perception of the present. Therefore, we call any attempt to impose one sense of belonging on diverse groups, each of which relate to the nation in their own way, through the imposition of one language, or religion, or culture - fascism. In other words, people must in a democratic nation at least be free to belong to the nation in their own ways. The crucial term here is freedom. Freedom in turn involves two propositions. One, that groups should be free to follow their own religious and cultural practices within the ambit of what is democratically permissible. Secondly, groups should not be targeted on the ground that they subscribe to a religious persuasion that is not that of the majority. A failure to do so, it is evident, leads to alienation, estrangement, and withdrawal. The narrative of the nation in such an

event negates the possibilityof its own existence - that of belonging.

Economic and Political Weekly

May 1, 1999

1045

of the Indian and systems of value. Communitiesof Therefore, any narrative the first instance,whose membership is we can furthersay, possess involuntary, theirmembers, as appreciate the fact of plurality.The the powerof tyrannising of plu- and limiting their perceptions and recognitionand the appreciation ralityis good for variousreasons.It is, for worldviews.We should take every step theholdof thecommunity instance, good for every society to be we canto break exposed to differentways of life. This over its people. widens social horizons, because people to the first two of (II) Or we subscribe learnfrom each other differentways of thethreepropositions on offer.Therefore, of thefirst negotiatingthe world. Societies acquire we canallowthatcommunities tolerationand open-mindedness even as instance are of such overridingimporthe boundaries of society are broadened tancethatindividuals shouldbe given the This is the best guarantee right to them. But at the same time, we andexpanded. to prevent inwardsupon need not necessarily believethatwe have societiesturning to themaintenance of these themselves,frombecomingchauvinistic, a commitment If theyaredecaying,it must But above all we need to communities. or intolerant. recognise pluralismbecause this is the be that they are not viable enough, or - a nation because the membershave not invested bestguarantee of a viablenation thatspeaks to allthelanguage of belonging. sufficientlyin them. connecthereis nonecessary However, in the currentlysurcharged Therefore, of intolerancetowardsreli- tion between the three propositionson atmosphere a commitment to plural- offer. giousminorities, ismmaynotbe enough.Infact,pluralism, However,note that if we subscribeto but not let me suggest,may be essentialbut not the firstof the threepropositions, sufficientto serveas a constituent feature to the secondandthird,or if we subscribe of the body politic. to the first two but not to the third,we but we may Letus, forinstance,examinea situation may landup with a principle wherethreepropositions areon offer.The lacka constituency. For,thisconstituency is thata commitment firstproposition to may have been destroyedeitherthrough implies acceptanceof the fact deliberatetargetingor throughbenign pluralism thata society consists of variousgroups, neglect.Because we have neitherundereach of which subscribeto differentand stood that people have a right to their ways of life. religiouscommunity,and thatthis comperhapsincommensurable The secondproposition'is thatthatthese munity has a right to maintainand reto ways of life are of such overwhelming produceitself, we may be subscribing for their membersthat they pluralism attheverytimethattheseplural importance havea rightto them.Thethirdproposition communities aredecaying.These groups is thatif perchance these ways of life are may simply have been hammeredinto underattackor if they are decayingbe- eithernon-existenceor into non-identity to benignneglect, by the majority. causetheyaresubjected the proposition thatIndiais Therefore, they should be protected through the environ- a pluralcountryand thatthis fact should institutionalisation of supportive ments or throughminorityrights. be acceptedis by itself essentialbut not Now considerthat there is no logical enoughas a constitutiveprincipleof the connection between thethreepropositions. bodypolitic.Forwe mayhavea principle for to gloat over, but we may not have a (I) We acceptthe valueof pluralism anumber of reasons. of groupson ourhands.A comWe, therefore, accept plurality the first but not the second proposition, mitment is just not sufficient to pluralism so we feel thatthereis nothingso sacro- in ourcurrent not if we rememsituation, sanctabouttheseways of life, or thatthey berthatpeoplearebeing deniedthe right become an good of such overridingim- to theirreligion,and thatreligiouscomthatwe have to grantor institute munitiesare being targetedmercilessly. portance a rightto them.People, we can say, have We, it is obvious,haveto lookfurther than access to an infinite number of com- pluralism to establish therightof minority munities in ademocratic society,andthere religious communitiesin the nation. is no reasonwhy one community should (III) Supposewe were now to reverse beprivileged overothers. made Peoplecanrelate -theorderof the threepropositions to the world througha myriadof com- above. The order was that pluralism andbecomedeepandcompleted allows us to understand thatpeoplehave munities, individuals. Ontheotherhand,to confine a rightto theirreligio-cultural communiournotionof the good to the community ties, andthisin turnprompts us to commit - religionforinstance, ourselvesto supporting of thefirstinstance these communiis tolimitandtruncate individual epistemes ties. This by itself, we saw, is not enough
nation in order to fulfil the conditions of its own existence has to recognise as well

to secureminority groupstherightto their identity.But assume we begin from the perspectiveof the individualratherthan thatof society.Canthisbuildup a logical betweenthe two? Let us see. relationship (IV.1) The first propositionis that we assumethatcultures/religion andreligioculturalcommunitiesare of overriding importancefor the individual,because humanbeings acquirethe evaluativecapacities that help them to map out and assessthe worldfromthesecommunities. Withoutsuch access, individualsare di- withminished. Note thatthis statement commuout access to the religio-cultural nity that providesthem with evaluative resources,individualsexperiencediminishment, is not something that can be measuredin the same way as we can for measuresocio-economicmarginality instance.This is a speculativestatement, which falls within the realmof morality inasmuchas it announcesa stand- this is what is importantfor humanbeings. This standneed not be justifiedby refersuch as ence to empiricalconsiderations, the statement thatwe have so manypoor becausewe measure peoplein thecountry, povertywith referenceto some empirical - the poverty line for inconsideration stance.We cannotempirically provethat human are diminished without their beings religious community,just as we cannot empirically proveforinstancethathuman beings possess rights by virtue of their capacityto be moral. Nor shoulddo we tryto do so. Rousseau could not prove that humanbeings were bor free and were yet everywherein chains.No one untilnow has to beenable to perceivethe thicknessor the lengthof these chains, or indeed prove that when humans are born they are not tied by chains. So when Rousseauspoke of humanbeingsbeingbornfreeandyet having two beingchained,he was accomplishing tasks- bothof thembeingnormative. He was pointingout the illegitimacyof coercion as well as the desirability of free- human dom.Therefore, the proposition if theyaredeprived beingsarediminished of theirreligiouscommunity- can only be justified in terms of mnorality. And is so self-evident, thatif someone morality - for instance,that believes the contrary forhuman religionis notimportant beings - he shouldbe asked to give reasonsfor his statement. (IV.2) The second propositionthat is intrinsicallyrelatedto the first is that if communitiesare a good religio-cultural fortheindividual, thisshouldbe of enough to secureaccessto overriding importance them throughthe rightto religion.How-

1046,

Economic and Political Weekly

Mayl, 1999

ever, and this is the thirdpropositionnote that the effectiveness of this right depends on the presence of a community.

We cannotgive individualsthe right to whenthecommunity itselfis being religion destroyed. That will amount to sheer Theexistenceof a commumindless-ness. for the is a pre-condition nity, therefore, exerciseof theindividual rightto religion. if we acceptthe firstpropoTherefore, sition,we will have to acceptthe second one's. We will haveto realise andthethird thatsincereligionsandcultures area good for the individual,if a religion is being orif it is soughtto be assimilated targeted, into the majorityculture, we have an social obligationto institutea supportive andpoliticalenvironment. It is only then that we can securethe rightof the individual to his/her religion. This is the objectiveof minorityrights. (V) Now considerthat if diverse religions andculturesareallowedto flourish in society, we will logically possess a pluralsociety.Note thatif we begin from the empiricalfact of pluralism,this by itself does not institutean obligationthat diverse and often incommensurable ways of life shouldbe respected,or that vulnerable religionsshouldbe protected. to pluralism, We mayhavea commitment but we may not have diversereligionsto value and cherish (except the majority religions),and logically a principleor a normneeds a constituency,otherwise,it is rendered redundant. Therefore,we are of narrative obligedwithina democratic thenationto protectminority groups,and among them, we have to protect those who arethe most vulnerable or the most targeted. It is time,I suggest,thatideasof pluralism and the accompanyingpremise of is strengthened toleration by a firmcommitment of the rightsof minoritygroups to their religionand culture.This is essentialfor the Indiannationto become a viableentity,for the language flourishing of nationalismas argued above has to above all instil instinctive feelings of belongingandhometo all its inhabitants. This it can only do when it accepts that peoplebelongto the nationthroughtheir their through specificreligionandculture, andways of belonging. specificlanguage Any attemptto wipe this out will lead to the creation of homeless, alienated citizens. fails to recognisethis, If the narrative we can logicallyexpect thatthe concept of the nationwill fragandtheinstitution anddissolve.Wecannot ment, shred, speak of an Indiannation,when constructions of this nationare built upon politics and

legitimationsof exclusion and denials. For viable nationsare at all times build upon the politics of inclusionthat combine respect for distinct identities with of these identidemocratic incorporation ties within the narrativeof nationness. This it seems to me is the only way in which people belonging to diverse and incommensurable persuasionscan live togetherin a nation.This is the only way in which they can feel thatthe nationis in theirmemoriesandin there,embedded theirimagination for the presentand the indefinite Thisis theonly stuffout future. of whicha viable,flourishing, democratic, nation can be constructedin times of globalisation that have witnessed the eruption of several distasteful cultural identities.
Notes
[This paperwas originallypresentedat a seminar on 'The Novel in Searchof the Nation', organised by the Sahitya Academy. It is based upon my forthcoming work Beyond Secularism: The Rights of Religious Minorities,currentlyin press (OUP, Delhi).] I Malini Parthasarthy, 'Fascism on the Rampage', The Hindu, January 26, 1999. 2 David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1989. 3 I am using the term reiterate for a specific reason. In India, the Congress had asserted the plural characterof the nation as early as 1928. India, hold several theorists, was one country that choose not to become a nation, because the leadership recognised that the country consisted of several relatively autonomous groups who would logically resisted being moulded into a nation state of the kind that had been built in Europe. See RavinderKumar, India: A 'Nation-State'or a 'Civilization-State'. Occasional Paperson Perspectives in Indian Development, Centre for ContemporaryStudies, Nehru Memorial -Museum and Library. (Delhi, Teen Murti House) no VIII, 1989. Also Bhikhu Parekh, of the NationalistDiscourse' 'Ethnocentricity in Nations and Nationalism, Vol 1, no 1, pp 25-52, 1995. 4 Chris Bayly, Local Roots of Indian Politics: Allahabad 1880-1920, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 142, 1975. 5 MushirulHasan,Legacy of A DividedNation. India's Muslimssince Independence,Oxford University Press, Delhi, p 138, 1997. 6 MushirulHasan,Legacy of A Divided Nation, pp 149-50. 7 EconomicandPolitical Weekly,'Government Abdicates', November 5, 1966, p 476. 8 Savarkar, Hindutva:WhoIs a Hindu?note 40, p 81, 1949 [1929], 4th edition,Gokhole,Pune. 9 Savarkar,Hindutva, p 92. 10 M S Golwalkar, We or Our Nationhood Defined (Nagpur, P N Indurkar, Bharat Publications) p 43, 1939. 11 On this see the first chapterof Tapan Basu et al KhakiShorts and Saffron Flags, Tracts For the Times, OrientLongmans,Hyderabad, 1993.

12 See Sumit Sarkar,'The Fascism of the Sangh Parivar', Economic and Political Weekly, January 30, 1993, pp 163-66. 13 Thomas Blom Hansen, 'Globalisation and NationalistImaginations: Hindutva'sPromise of Equality through Difference', Economic and Political Weekly, March 9, 1996, pp 603-16. 14 See Sumit Sarkar,'The Fascism of the Sangh Parivar', 1993. For a response to this point of view see Achin Vanaik, Communalism Contested, (Delhi, Vistaar), chapter 5. 15 The Supreme Court had to decide whether 12 elected representativesto the BJP/Shiv Sena government in Maharashtra, that included the chief minister Manohar Joshi and the Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackerayhad engaged in corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act. Section 123 (3) of the act makesthe appealto religion, race, caste, community, or language, or the use of or the appeal to religious and national symbols, for the purpose of winning the election or for prejudicely affecting the election of any otherperson, corrupt practices. Section 123 (a) of the act prohibits the promotion of feelings of enmity or hatred between the people on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language for the purposes of winning the election or for prejudicing the prospects of any other candidate winning the election. The court found several of the accused, including Bal Thackeray guilty of promoting religious enmity and hatred.What is interestingis the pronouncement of the court on hindutva .ManoharJoshi v Nitin BhauraoPatil, 1995, 7 SCALE 30, Ramesh Yeshwant Probhoo v Prabhakar Kasinath Kunte and Ors1995. 7 SCALE 1. and ten others. 16 CossmanandKapurdelving into the historical contexts within which the conceptof hindutva was articulated, state emphatically that hindutvacannot be separatedfrom its appeal to religion, nor from its assault on the legitimacy of minorities - 'the courts conclusion thatthereis nothingin the concept of hindutva that promotes religious enmity or hatredbelies the fact that the attackon the religious minorities is a constituent element of hindutva'. Brenda Cossman and Ratna Bench-Marked by Hindu Kapur,'Secularism: Right', Economic and Political Weekly, September21, 1996, pp 2613-30 in pg 2625. Also see Anil Nauriya, 'The Hindutva Judgments: A Warning Signal', Economic and Political Weekly, 6, 1996, vol 31, January no 1, pp 10-13. 17 Cited in SukritaPaul Kumar,'The Changing Mask of Indian Reality' in Indu Banga and Jaidev (eds), Cultural Reorientation in Modern India, Manohar, Delhi, pg 141-42.

Economic and Political Weekly

available at

A H Wheeler Bookstalls Western Railway Borivlito Vile Parle

Economic and Political Weekly

May 1, 1999

1047