Musings on Family, Religion and Politics

Every institution in the society sustain themselves through three core parameters: identity, ideology and incentives. Some may say ,ideals,identity and incentives. This could be in various configurations at various points in time of an institution.

The basic institution that sustain society and politics is the institution of family. It is the DNA of all other institutions in the world - from state, economy and Religion too. Family as an institution survived for many thousands of years as it a shared space of human beings to meet their physical ( food, sex), procreative, re-creative, social and psychological needs. Institutions are also about boundaries, basic social contract, notion of reciprocal relations based on certain conditions and norms over the years. Institutions are necessary to sustain human enterprise, creative and procreative urges. While institutions sustains through systems that manage the needs, discipline, incentives, dignity and identity. Family as an institution survived as it the basic system that manage birth, procreation, economic, social and psychological needs as human beings are social and community animals.

Family as an institutions survived, despite all critique of it all through the years, as it is the site three core aspects of human life gets managed: Birth, puberty, and death.- and all these three aspects combine elements of ideals, identity and incentives/interest( needs) . This also involves pro-creation. And eventually all these get negotiated through Identity. It is at the site of family that religion, politics and economy meet. It is also here the organized religion and politics meet basically negotiating, managing and eventually controlling these identities and making identity itself as an ideology that rationalize and control the very institution of family . That is why Marriage often end up as a social, religious and political contract sanctioned by both religious and secular laws.

It is the family that is basic site of economy as it is where the consumption of food, cloths and shelter etc happen. So the basic institutional core of economy is family as the organised need and demand happen at that level( schools, hospitals, food and provisions etc).It is based on this demand that all economic/manufacturing institutions of supply come in to existence. This organised forms of demand and supply around institutions are what make organized economy and employments possible.

There are two aspects of life that human beings do not have definitive control. Despite the growth of all science, technology and institutions these two aspects that define human life are beyond the reach of human made science or technology or constructed rationalism. These are Birth and Death. Both have an important element of mystery and unpredictability and often not in the hands of human beings.
For example, the very act of birth depends of fertility and the formation of an embryo. Usually there are around 400 to 300 millions sperm count in the semen of men at each ejaculate. In some cases the sperm count may be more than that. Women are born with all the eggs they are ever going to have, and they don't make any new eggs during their lifetime. Women are born with approximately two million eggs in their ovaries, but about eleven thousand of them die every month prior to puberty. But the very making of life depends on the biochemistry of wonder when one sperm among 400 millions meets an egg through sheer chance with a bit of mystery.The mystery of the birth begins with that act of fertilization. It is here that 400 or 500 million sperms chases one single egg. This means the chances of a particular human embryo formation is one in 400 or 500 millions as one usually is one among this millions of sperm has a chance to meet the egg. This means every act of birth of particular person (of a part gender, coloure, physical features) is one in 4000 or 5000 million chance! This also means every birth in unique and in tun every single human being is unique and it is not yet possible to replicate another person fully. So if it is X or Y sperm meeting the egg, it can all make the big difference in terms of gender, physical quality etc. And in the very act of birth, a nanosecond can make a huge difference in terms of physical qualities and very chances can affect the child life long.

It is the same with Death as human beings so far have not succeeded in predicting death or stopping someone from dying. Is is this Alpha and Omega of life that in many ways are based on 'chances' or 'accident' that is at the roots of human existential insecurity. It is the hope of birth and fear of death that in many ways control the human behaviour and approach.

And it is precisely due to this 'Hope' of birth and the existential 'Fear'/anxiety of death that human beings can't live by bread alone. The physical and existential insecurity of human being often make them seek metaphysical narratives to sustain themselves. It is the Hope of Birth and Fear of death that make two other important aspects that sustain human life: They are Love and Faith.
It is not just an aberration that people use the word 'Making Love' for the sexual union or consummation usually between a woman and man. Because 'sexual union' is the core existential need to pro-create as well as to feel the physical well-being. In this 'Love' is the life-sustaining psychological force with hormonal implications that induce human beings to 'make love' to pro-create and sustain the species. That is how Love make life possible and sustain life as the very force of creation and creativity. It is precisely because of this Love also acquires a divine dimension. But this very trinity of human life- Birth, Procreation( love) and Fear( of death) get connected through 'Faith' ( loyalty, strong commitment, reciprocal certainty etc). All these physical aspects then get in to metaphysical dimension to create a broader narrative on Love, Faith and Hope. It is at this level of metaphysical narratives that organised belief system began to form.

Making Love and procreation is based on basic faith as a social contract and Hope that act of Making Love will pro-crate, leading to birth of a child. Various streams of human beliefs in terms of its metaphysical rational to beat the fear of death ( due to natural calamities, various physical ailments, war etc) got established over the generations as religious beliefs. It is precisely due to this human being begin to see the birth of a 'child ' as a 'gift of God' or 'blessing' and hence we use the term ' blessed with a child'- and it is also due to this we also used the term 'Rest in Peace'- and this 'peace' aspect get transformed in to 'Hope' after death( by overcoming the fear of death) through 're-birth' ( prevalent in many of the pagan, tribal beliefs) or hope of 'heaven' and 'eternal' life. And also the 'fear of hell'. Family sustain through identity ( hence caste, religious and language dimension of 'naming'.) Every religion got institutionalized through managing birth rites( Baptism, circumcision, or dedication to a deity through sacrifice or symbolism) , rites of puberty and rites of marriage and eventually the funeral . Every single organized religion operate through the minds of people through the management of birth, puberty, marriage, procreation and death through rituals that confirm the identity - and the identity is established through a language game of 'naming' a person and the family 'name' then become the basis of dignity and honor of a person.

This institutionalization of sex( love), marriage( faith- hence the norm to be 'faithful' to each other) , procreation( Hope) and Death ( recreated Hope) often politically controlled by religions through a mix of psychological process of consensus ( belief) and institutional process of coercion( social sanction, honour , ex-communication). This is precisely due to this organized regions became the first institutionalized form of power- by managing and negotiating power through control of the family and through collectivization of family in to society. By controlling these aspects of identity, ideals( hence theology and philosophy) and incentives( in this life and beyond) , organized religion became the most powerful institutions within most of the societies through our the history of the last three thousand years. Hence it is from this organized religious streams the idea of marco-power institutions of state with coercive control over a territory emerged.

Since religion operate at the existential, experiential and psychological( emotional) level of human beings through family and sustained through temples, mosques and churches ( basically a collective institutions where families are organized at the societal level) and other places of community worships such as viharas.. And this societal/community institutions also become a site of social and political protection to the families associated/affiliated to them.

The notion of larger politics emerged out of this process. Hence the history of politics till early twentieth century is intermingled with organized institutions of religions in one or the other way. With emergence of modernism and modern institutional framework of 'nation-state' and 'nationalism', the institutionalized religious identity operated in the in the background( for secular) and in the foreground( non-secular formation) of various streams of national identity.

In the history, organized political establishments made use of religious identity and establishments to fight war or sustain power. History of all organised religions is also the history of the war. Because most of the existing religions /streams survived through the patronage of organized political power of Kingdoms or Empires. They propounded peace and then went for war in the 'name of peace'. They propounded "love' and went for war to protect the 'love'. They went for war to sustain 'hope' in themselves. Right from Alexander( Greece) and Darius( Persian empire), to Jihad and Crusade and the tussle between Shaivism and Vaishavism- and both with Buddhism etc are basically the war for domination and control over the territory of earth and more in the territories of human mind. The mother of all politics and war are organized religions. Without the political patronage and the patronage of economy, no religion in the world survived. Most of the rulers in the history often ruled 'on behalf of God' or a Deity. They often rationalized their legitimacy from the sovereignty of their God. Organized religions also provided political ideology for the kingdoms and empire. It is precisely because of this Priests and Prince work together to sustain each other. Priestly class/caste also became the ideologues who justified the established political power ( of Kingdoms and empires). This is one of the reasons that all through the history Political establishment and power invested in the making of grand places of worships of community of power. These included huge temples, Churches, Mosques and all other places symbolizing the economic and political capacity of Kings/queens and emperors. From Angokorwat in Cambodia to the grand churches and mosques in Istanbul/Constantinople, from the Basilicas and Cathedrals in Rome, London or Paris, St Peters Berg or the grand mosques in Cairo or Tehran or the big temple complexes in different parts of India or the grand synagogues in Israel or the Pyramids in Cairo or Mexico city, the city of Petra in Jordan or Machu Pictchu in Peru , one can see the clear linkage on how organised political establishments and religious establishments reinforced each other through our the history.

With the advent of knowledge revolution and advance of science in the 19th century and with the emergence of 'nation-state' where identity often get expressed over a territory, language, race etc, the organized region often took a back seat from the organized political power and religions then went back to its primary site of family and community( collectivization of family in the context of language, food and culture). With this retreat of religion in the background of organised nation state, they still have huge influence through families and identities of creed and castes ( 'Name' and all religious rites from birth to death and after the death). However it is also important to make a distinction between organized religion as an expression of identity-belief based power, and the experience of religion and faith at an individual level.

Religion exists at five level. 1) At the experiential level of an individual an intensely emotional psychological need to deal with insecurities, disappointments and also happiness, hope and love. So when a person prays to God it is an intensely personal experience based on his/her choices, inherited or acquired beliefs and conviction in certain values. 2) At the level of knowledge and culture:Almost all alphabets, knowledge process , compilation and collectivization of knowledge through multiple narratives of stories, poetry , art and architecture negotiate through religion 3) At the level of Philosophy and Theology of life,sustenance and death- or as organized systems of knowledge that got institutionalized to build a larger meta-narratives of Universe( Brhaama). It is interesting the term 'Yahova' come from the root of Yaha( Universe)- So Yahova becomes a Universal God of a pastoral community of Jews as they could not have a territorial god or fertility goodess of agricultural communities.
The notion of 'Brahmmav'( the one who is in control of Brhamma- Universe) also emerged from the pastoral communities that stretched from West Asia to South Asia. The point is all these 'names' of God or Gods have something to do with the 'cultural semantics' and language context. 4) The Religion exist as Rituals- these are codified practices that link the physical world to the 'metaphysical' or linking individuals to Institutions and local to the Universe, Life to death and beyond death. These rituals are the binding force that link a family unit to the institutionalized regions where identity get established through 'naming' rites or rituals. 5) At a fifth level Religion exist as a political establishments of power that establish control over Identity, religious legal framework, sanctions, coercion and prositilization and politicization through multiple means. It is this fifth aspect of Religion that survived in partnership with organized political power. Often they became the two sides of the same coins of managing power in the society.

However, most of the ordinary people's beliefs are around the experiential aspect of religions. So it is important to make a distinction between the first level of experience of religious beliefs or prayers etc from the fifth aspects of organised religious establishments. While the number 1 to 4 of the religion are linked in many ways, number five is not really linked to the personal experiential aspect of religion.

Hence, one has to make a distinction between the power establishments of religions and experiential faith and prayers of ordinary people. All through the History power establishments used identity or ideology of religious establishments for both to rationalize their power and fight war or capture power and sustain organized power. The organized Political power sustain through coercion as well as collective consensus .Organized Religious establishments were ideological Enterprises to derive legitimacy for organized Political power. Hence Priests , Prince collaborated to capture Power all through the history and they needed merchants to sustain the power of organized Religious and Political power establishments.
Established and organized religions all through the History combined identity and ideological to capture and sustain power. This needs to be differentiated from experiential or belief locations of ordinary people in God or Goodness due to multiple reasons of existential and livelihood insecurities and idea of fairness that existed from the beginning of human civilization. There are existential, ethical as well economic reasons that sustain the experiential beliefs of ordinary human being in God and Goodness of God. However this is different from organized religious power establishments that sustain itself by using the collective identity of religions for rationalize Political power.
The three thousand years of history power establishments used organized religion,: between Vedic Religion and Buddhism : between Greek pagenism and Persian Zoroastrianism ; between Shaivism and Viashnavism ; between Catholic establishments and Muslim power establishments: between Catholic power establishments and Protestant power establishments,; between Hindu power establishments and Muslim rulers : between Sunni and Shia power establishments.
This discourse changed only towards the end of 19 the century with the emergence of knowledge revolution due to enlightenment, and emergence of science and technology, leading to modern secular and then democratic discourse. The idea of greater common good is a discourse that arose along with the ethics and philosophy of Enlightenment and modernity.

But politics and Political discourse are not linear process with a logical end ( though communism itself based on this linear assumptions of 'progress' as a modern idea ). Hence contestation of power often use multiple rational and in the post 19th century these discourse are woven around various kinds of nationalism where religious ideology itself is used to build nationalist discourse. whether Brexit, Hindutva or ISS all of them now use Nationalism with different political or ideological shades to capture or sustain power. That is how nationalism , hyper-nationalism , patriotism and jingoism emerged as the holy cow of organized political power in the 20th century and continue to do so even now. However, these multiple narratives of nationalism also co-exist with new notions of inclusive internationalism and universalism based on universal secular normative principles beyond the confines of a nation-state. And of course the very idea of greater common good is built on universal normative framework that give legitimacy to the ideas of Sustainable Development, inclusive Democracy and human rights for all.

However, such a perspective of universal framework has been in constant tussle with the various shades of exclusive nationalism that once again emerged in the context of reactive neo-conservatism. The emergence of reactive neo-conservatism also need to be seen as a reaction to the hyper institutionalization of many liberal values where people often see 'classical liberal values' as establishment of elite power that led to corruption, subversion and elite capture. Hence the present tendency to once again use established religious establishments and identity is a reactive tendency wherein people at the lower end of economy and politics felt that they got a bad deal in the widened gap between the rhetoric and reality of liberal values.

Implications of the Right to Privacy Verdict

by JS Adoor

The ruling of the Supreme Court of India on Right to Privacy is a very important landmark in the context of democracy and human rights in India. It is also one of the first of its kind of verdict in Asia, particularly linking Right to Privacy with Right to Life. "The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution," the constitutional bench declared in a 547-page order.

At a time when in many countries where the Constitution and the role of independent judiciary is undermined by the governments, this unanimous ruling by a Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India also signifies a ray of hope for all those who believe in democracy, human rights and the independence of judiciary. Hence, this verdict is important for the larger discourse on human rights and access to justice beyond India as well.

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home, or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to protection of the law against such interference or attack”, thus says Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. It is the very first clear articulation of the human rights to privacy.
In a landmark judgement of the Supreme Court of India, the Constitutional Bench comprising of nine judges affirmed the article 12 of UDHR by unanimously ruling that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right, under Article 21 of the part 3 of the Constitution of India. This ruling in many ways is a paradigm shift. Because by this verdict the Supreme Court overruled the two earlier verdicts indicating that Right to Privacy is not protected under the Indian Constitution. In the MP Sharma case in 1958 and Kaharak Singh case (1960), the right to privacy was not recognized as a Fundamental Right.

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution says: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to a procedure established by law.” The Supreme Court in its various rulings affirmed that Right to Life "includes the right to live with dignity, right to lead a healthy life so as to enjoy all faculties of the human body. It also includes the right to protection of a tradition, culture, heritage and all that gives meaning to life. It includes right to live in peace, etc., (Sunil Batra vs Delhi Administration; Menaka Gandhi vs the Union of India; Vishaka vs the State of Rajasthan). The right to life is also interpreted as the right to live with dignity - and this includes the right to education as well. In the Vishaka Case, the sexual harassment at workplace too is linked to the right to live with dignity. Hence, the verdict of the Supreme Court ruling on that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right as it is a part of the life right to life and liberty.

It is important to understand the implications of this verdict. This verdict affirms the Independence of the Indian Judiciary. This is important due to two facts: The political executive often tend to undermine the rulings of the Supreme Court without directly challenging the court. And the second reason is that the populist authoritarian tendencies often gave an impression that the Union government will adopt policies and initiatives, even if it is undermining the basic fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

By this unanimous verdict linking it with Article 21 of the Constitution of India makes Right to Privacy now a Fundamental Right. This also meant affirming the primacy of the Constitution of India and reaffirming the Right to Live with Dignity and Liberty. In the Golaknath vs State of Punjab case (1967) the Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights included in Part III of the Constitution are given a 'transcendental position' and beyond the reach of the Parliament. It also declared that any amendment that 'takes away or abridges' a Fundamental Right Conferred by the Part III is unconstitutional. In the famous Keshavanda Bharati vs State of Kerala, the Supreme Court held that Parliament did not have power to destroy or emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the Constitution, now known as the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution.

It is also important to understand the political context of this judgement. It is in the context of the Union government aggressively imposing Aadhaar (Bio-metric based Unique Identification card) to live or die in India and for anything and everything. This verdict is an assertion that no government can take the Judiciary or the Constitution for granted. It is also important that this verdict is in relation to a case filed challenging the imposition of Aadhaar everywhere. Due to the imposition of Aadhaar for everything and anything, those who suffer more are the poorest of the poor, particularly to get access to the welfare schemes and pension. Hundreds of thousands of people are denied welfare pension and other social protection measures because they do not have Aadhaar. Despite the Supreme Court ruling earlier, the Union government has continued to impose Aaadhar for every single interface with the government and even to open a bank account or to get a mobile phone or to get a birth or death certificate.

The petition was filed by Justice KS Puttaswamy, a former judge of the Karnataka High Court and others challenging that the biometric data and iris scan used to issuing Aadhaar card violated the citizen’s fundamental right to privacy as her/his personal data is not protected and is vulnerable to misuse, compromising the very safety of people. A group of senior advocates including Soli Sorabjee, Indira Jaising, and Gopal Subramanyam appeared in this case. Subramanyam argued
"Privacy is about freedom of thought, conscience and individual autonomy and none of the fundamental rights can be exercised without assuming a certain sense of privacy". He further argued that "Liberty is fundamental to democracy and citizens cannot exist without privacy".

Hence by upholding the Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right, the Supreme Court of India asserted the primacy of people and citizens with right to life and liberty as non-negotiable and form the very fundamental DNA to the birth, existence and future of an independent democratic Republic of India. This verdict also affirmed that Right to Privacy is inherent to Right to Live with dignity and liberty.

This verdict will also have implications in terms of the validity and future of Aadhaar and also the ruling on Section 377 that criminalizes gay sex. Hence this verdict is not only a paradigm shift precedent in the case of India, but also a very important landmark in the history of jurisprudence. This is also a landmark verdict in relation to the Human Rights discourse at the international level where once again the Indian Supreme Court has made significant contribution.

Why the SAARC is in limbo ?

The Social Charter and Democracy Charter of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) look more ironic than ever. Because SAARC is itself in deep crisis due to the absence of core democratic values within itself and in most of the countries that constitute SAARC. It was formed in Dhaka on 8 December 1985 . Today in Bangladesh democracy itself is in crisis without opposition and targeting anyone who question the government. The situation of India is not better. And one of the biggest 'achievements' of the present Modiraj is the collapse of SAARC process itself .

The SAARC Charter of democracy : "Convinced that undemocratic and unrepresentative governments weaken national institutions , undermine the Constitution and rule of Law and threaten social cohesion and stability in the long run, we hereby commit to strengthen democratic institutions and reinforce democratic practices".

The SAARC Social Charter affirmed: "Promote universal respect for and observance and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, in particular the right to development; promote the effective exercise of rights and the discharge of responsibilities in a balanced manner at all levels of society; promote gender equity; promote the welfare and interest of children and youth; promote social integration States Parties affirm that highest priority shall be accorded to the alleviation of poverty in all South Asian Countries. Recognizing that South Asia's poor could constitute a huge and potential resource, provided their basic needs are met and they are mobilized to create economic growth, States Parties reaffirm that the poor should be empowered and irreversibly linked to the mainstream of development. They also agree to take appropriate measures to create income-generating activities for the poor'

The fact of the matter is that South Asia has the largest number of poor people in the word, an estimated 400 million people. Democratic spaces are shrinking in almost all the countries . Human rights violations are on the rise . Minorities are marginalised and live under fear in most of the countries. Neoconservative Politics and consequent violence is on the rise. The rich in all these countries are becoming richer and the poor still remain poor. Econmic , social and Political ineqalities are on the rise. And South Asian countries are the biggest buyers of arms and ammunation .

The problem is the SAARC itself is in ventilator and in comma. Compare this Charter with real practice on the ground. Despite electoral democracy in many countries, the real democratic institutions and practices are undermined in almost all the countries.

The last SAARC Summit happened in Kathmandu on 26-27 November 2014. And the next Summit supposed to be held in Pakistan was cancelled due to increased tensions between Indian and Pakistan. Ever since SAARC as a political platform cooperation among countries of South Asia became dysfunctional.
Why the SAARC is in limbo? It is here one has to see the huge gap between the rhetoric and reality in the foreign policy in the Modiraj. Despite the big bonhomie at the Oath making ceremony of Modi, today the relationship of India with most of its neighbors are worse than before . Nepal has close ties with India but today the relationship with India and Nepal is in an all time low. And today SAARC is dysfunctional. Modi made famous undeclared visit to Pakistan. And today there is more enmity. There is more tension with China. In a nutshell like everything else Modi has been good at packaging with out content. Good at promises and not good at performance. Rhetoric is great. Reality is bleak. He has been a master of spins. But spins don't work anymore.

One of the biggest achievements of the PM is that he did something unprecedented and set a new record. He is the first ever PM who visited the largest number of countries within a short period. What is the outcome? He gave many enthralling feel good speeches to largely middle-class and upper-caste Non-resident Indians , gave few more teleprompted speeches here and there and also free photo opportunity. What is the total result? Zilch! Of course there is one. We have International Yoga Day. What about India's effort for a permanent seat in the UN security council? Did not move an inch ahead. What about FDI for the Making India Project . Hardly anything significant.

The articulate and active Minister of External Affairs in India proved to be a good Minister of NRI affairs as she played a role to negotiate the return of Indians trapped in war-zones of Iraq and elsewhere. But the substantive foreign policy is supposed to be forte of the PM and his well orchestrated frequent diplomatic missions across the world. And what are the concrete outcome beyond Policy posturing and rhetoric? Posturing does not help or make a substitute for an effective Foreign Policy or good relationship of trust with neighbors. This is a challenge India needs to address.

We need to play a true democratic leadership role in reviving and renewing SAARC. And for this the first prerequisite is to build an honest , positive and trustworthy relationship between every single country in South Asia. This should begin with India practicing SAARC charter of Democracy within the country. And relationship with neighbors get improved when there is substantive improvement in trade , Development cooperation and trustworthy Political relationship of imagination and integrity. We have to go beyond promises to performance.

There is no shortcut to building democratic societies and institutions. This has to happen at the national levels by renewed movement for freedom, rights, inclusive Politics and democratic practice and also by exposing and resisting enemies of freedom and democracy. Without democratic countries and a collective commitment towards a democratic, peaceful and a more equal South Asia , the SAARC in itself can't much of difference with empty statements and charters of rhetoric.

Ganesha smiles in Indonesia!

Indonesia is the country with the largest number of Muslim population in the world- and it is in Indonesia one can discover and celebrate the best of preserved Hindu and Buddhist temples and cultural heritage. How many people in India know the best of Ramayana performance in the world is in Indonesia and performed by Muslims? How many people know the link between Malabar and Indonesia?

Indonesia never ceases to amaze me. It is the fourth most populous country in the world with an estimated population of 264 millions. And more than 87 percent are Muslims. And some of the well preserved ancient temples in the world are in Indonesia, country with a mere 1.7 % Hindus, largely based in Bali. Garuda is the name of airlines. Two of the Universities have Ganesha as the symbol. The best of Ramayana performance is at the Prambana temple in Yogyakata ( Jogjya) and performed by mostly Muslims. The 9th century Mahayana Buddhist temple Borobudur happened to be the largest Buddhist temple complex in the world.
The organic link between India and Indonesia is not only in their names but also a shared cultural heritage. Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam came to Indonesia from India and that too from the south. And the colonialist also followed via India in search of spices. So was the Arabs. The Arab- trade connection has a link with Malabar ( in Kerala) that many may not even know. Religions got established here through trade and not through sword. Hence it was acculturation and symbiosis rather through war and destruction. Hence co-existence and coalescence is at the core of Indonesia cultural strata that can be traced to more than 2500 years. And the national language of Indonesia is "Bhasha'- the very same word used in Malayalam and other Indian languages. Aaakasha Pura is the word of airport. Parvati or Shanti can be the names of devout Muslims. Ganesha happily smiles from different places in Indonesia.

Republic of Indonesia is a liberal democratic republic with freedom of religion. Around 10 percent people are Christians. There are Buddhists too (0.72%) At a time when there is so much of stereotype about Islam in India and elsewhere, Indonesia is an inspiring example of syncretic liberal Culture. India is also an example of syncretic cultural heritage and such a diversity is what makes India unique. While Indonesia has the largest number of Muslim population in the world( 13.1% of the world, India has the second largest number of Muslims ( 11% of the total Muslims in the world). Both are democratic countries. Hence, there is a lot to learn from each other.

Those proponent of majoritarian Hindutva should go and learn few lessons from Indonesia. Those proponents of Islamic fundamentalism should learn few lessons from Indonesia. In a country where the largest number of Muslims live in the wold., there is a liberal democratic republic that celebrate it's syncretic cultural heritage. It is Indonesia that should inspire us .

How many people know the Malabar connection with Indonesia? Malabar is an area in West Java in the Bandung district. Malabar coffee is well known and there are Malabar restaurant too without knowing Malabar has something to do with Kerala, till I explained to my good Indonesian friends. My first visit to Indonesia was in 1996 and then visited the country at least ten times- and every time I learn something new. Indonesia is a country where I feel at home and never get tired of visiting as it continues to inspire me in the best of syncretic cultural symbiosis.

+2

LikeShow More Reactions

Comment

Share

Book diary - Mr and Mrs Jinnah - by Sheela Reddy

Enjoyed  reading Mr and Mrs Jinnah: The marriage that shook India by Sheela Reddy. A very well researched book tells the story like a novel. It gives a rare portrait of Jinnah as a young man. And also about the high Mumbai society where Jinnah climbed to the top as a self made man with determination, hard work and sheer will to win. And how he married Ruttie, the only daughter of one of the richest Parsi families of Bombay . She was 24 years younger to him and became a teenage bride at 18. His sister Fatima, Sarojini Naidu, her daughter Patmaja Naidu and the parents of Ruttie Sir Dinshaw Petit and Lady Petit are all characters in this important historical and social narratives of the first half of the last century. It also gives a glimpse of Jinnaha and Gandhi interface . Worth reading this book to get to know one of the fascinating persons and leaders of the last century: his triumphs and tragedy.

Freedom is the Oxygen for the very idea India!.

It is not only the Children of UP who die without oxygen, it is also the very idea of India that will begin to die without the oxygen of Freedom. It is the slow and steady suffocation of the idea of free India that pose great challenge to the very idea , ideal and future of India.
 Struggles for Freedom is what unified the people of India across caste, creed, religion and region. It is the promise of inclusive Indian nationalism that sustains the very idea of India. When the freedom gets discounted and unfreedom begins to unfold that will undermine the very idea of India- and also the unity of the Indians people as the people of India..

Freedom is what made India possible. It is the struggle for freedom that unified the people who speak different languages and with diverse historical trajectories. If the British never ruled India, history would have been different. Because before them no empire in India included most of the parts of the country now we call as India. The subcontinent was politically dispersed with numerous small feudal kingdoms warring with each other.

Even during the Mughal rule , it was largely North-West India or up to Deccan. It is the British domination that included most of the landmass of India with establishment of the rule of law( though most of them oppressive) unified administration and institutions( Survey of India, Archaeological Survey of India, Indian Railways etc) Paradoxically, it is the English language, their version of history, Indian railways and the widely shared sense of injustice and extractive exploitation that paved the way for a political resistance imagination that emerged in the second half of 19th century and thus emerged what is now called and revered as the Indian Nationalism. In other words there was nothing called primordial Indian Nationalism or Civilizational nationalism. Nationalism itself is a modern political project and narrative.

What we now as the Indian nationalism is a construct emerged mostly towards the end of 19th century.- constructing a past, ironically based on the history written by those from Britain or Europe. Even the Indus valley Civilization is identified based on the excavation only in 1920s. It was Sir John Hubert Marshall who began excavation in 1921-22 and resulting in the discovery of the civilization at Harappa by Sir John Marshall, Rai Bahadur Daya Ram Sahni and Madho Sarup Vats, and at Mohenjo-daro The Mohenjedoro -Harappa is largely identified by the Archaeological Survey of India under the British Raj in 1861.
The first publication of a Harappan seal dates back to only 1875, in the form of a drawing by Alexander Cunningham. While certainly there have been a lots of material evidence and also the existence of ancient temples and monuments, it is the discovery of the Indus valley civilization ( in the present day Pakistan and North-west India) that established the long civiliizational heritage of the subcontinent.

In many ways the Colonial reading of India denied the multiple diversity of India and reduced these multiple diversity only on religious lines seen from a British perspective. The first modern history of India was the well known work by James Mill published in early 19th century - The history of British India ( 1818-23). It is Mill who did the periodization of Indian history in to three periods :the Hindu Civilization, Muslim Civilization and the British Period and such periodization was based on ruling powers and the religious identity. This very construct of Colonial history - based on religious identity, later on helped the British to divide people on the basis of religion and also helped to form multiple notions of nationalism based on religion. Hence paradoxically the Colonial reading and writing of history also in multiple ways influenced the multiple and often competing narratives on nationalisms in the sub-continent including the two -nation theory propounded by religious nationalists on both sides of the spectrum( Hindu Mahasabha- and later by RSS and Muslim League) .

In fact most of the writings on the ancient Sanskrit texts and heritage is also based on the work of European scholars like Max Muller, William Jones, Charles Wilkins etc. They translated some Sanskrit texts into English and attempted to prove the supremacy of ancient Indian culture, its heritage and philosophy. Some Indian scholars like R.G. Bhandarkar, H.P. Shastri etc. also helped in reviving the past glory of India.In other words, all these knowledge and language process helped the new English educated elites( largely those from the Brhamin community erstwhile Bombay and Bengal Provinces as they had early access to English education). If we read the narratives of 19 century and early 20th century nationalist writings one can see how these knowledge process influenced the multiple imaginative narratives on what is termed as the Indian nationalism.

It is the very same colonial or European narratives on Indian history and its ancient civilizational heritage that gave rise to multiple counter-narratives as resistance platform, though largely by upper-caste Brhamin elites of two dominant provinces( Bombay and Bengal) of the Briitish India. These multiple narratives of nationalism often based on religious sub-texts dominated the multiple responses to the British Colinialism and the economic injustice based on extractive colonial domination.

It is only by the 1920s that an inclusive nationalist discourse emerged as a unified struggle against British Colonial power. Gandhiji's major contribution is this creation of a major counter-metanarrative of inclusive Indian nationalism that sought to construct a discourse across the country and also across the religions and across all the caste divides. This meta-narrative of Inclusive Indian nationalism is the idea that propelled towards an independent and free India. Unlike the religious identity based nationalist narrative based on the past-glory as told by the Colonial historians and European writers, Gandhi drew from Buddhism and multiple Indian heritages and also drew from movements and writings across the world- including the writings of Tolstoy( who was in many ways outside the British-European imagination). This eclectic approach of Gandhi and based on his own personal experience of discrimination and fight against discrimination actually gave rise to a meta- counter-narrative of Indian nationalism as propounded by the Indian National Congress. It is this inclusive nationalism that largely used English as the lingua-franca is what unified the people of Indian across languages, religion, geographies and caste barriers. And the very purpose of this was the 'Freedom Struggle'

Hence this idea of 'Struggles for Freedom' that defined the very idea of the inclusive Indian nationalism of the Indian national Congress. This stress on Freedom and civil liberties. This was very well articulated in the Karchi session of the Indian National Congress in 1931.Karachi Session was presided over by Vallabhai Patel . Nehru drafted the Karachi resolution.

It is the Karachi resolution that gave Indian National Congress and the inclusive Indian nationalism a clear ideological direction. This included the following:

Basic civil rights of freedom of speech, Freedom of Press, Freedom of assembly, Freedom of association,
Equality before law
Elections on the basis of Universal Adult Franchise
Free and compulsory primary education.
Substantial reduction in rent and taxes
Better conditions for workers including a living wage, limited hours of work.
Protection of women and peasants
Government ownership or control of key industries, mines, and transport.
Protection of Minorities.

It is precisely this value-based narrative of the Indian Nationalism that enraged the upper-cast relgious nationalist of Hindutwa variety and the Islamist based nationalism of the Muslim League variety. The paradox of the history is that to counter the value based Freedom narrative of the Indian nationalism, the two other streams of religious nationalism sided with the British. The proponents of the Hindutwa nationalism opposed to the inclusive value based freedom nationalism of the Congress by siding with the British Imperialiam. This hegemonic exclusive nationalism of Hindutwa variety is what is now dreaming of Congress mukta' bharth. So this is basically a fight for the very soul of Indian nationalism. The key question is whether we need to stand up with Freedom, Justice , Rights and Rule of Law as clearly articulated in the Indian Constitution. Or whether we should discount all these and go with the populist authoritarian hegemonic and exclusive Hindutwa ideological nationalism of the old Hindu Mahasabha and then RSS?

It is the very making of the Constitution of India, led by Dr. BR Ambedkar that made India a democratic sovereign republic. Hence Constitution is what constitute the Indian Nationalism of an inclusive " We the People'. Constitution of India is non-negotiable as it is the very grammar of India and without the Constitution there is no India. And it is the idea of a free and independent India that we love.

"WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR ,DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought , expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all[6]
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION."

That is the choice the people of India must make. The choices between Freedom and Unfreedom. The choice between inclusive nationalism based on respect for Freedom, rights, diversity, pluralism and a unified India. I will always stand with Freedom. And it is time for the Indian National Congress to redeem the Karachi resolution in its letter and spirit and once again herald the uncompromising inclusive nationalism based on the values of Karachi resolution. It is a choice that will determine the very future of this country and also the future of the country. Freedom is non negotiable. It is the struggles for Freedom that united as a people . And it will be the struggle for Freedom what will help us to remain as the 'We the People of India'.

Hence 'We the people' constitute the nation. It is not the government of the day or for governments sake we celebrate our freedom. It is for our own sake ( We the People) that we celebrate freedom. Because freedom is not what a government bestow on us. Independence is not the favour of a government. It is not the speech by some leaders on some Fort that make us to realize the freedom. It is we who realize our freedom by standing up for justice, human rights and equality before Rule of Law. It is we who make freedom possible through struggles against all those who promote unfreedom. Hence, it is a remainder to ourselves that we are indeed independent. We will indeed celebrate our freedom and assert our rights, irrespective of the parties and leaders in the government and irrespective of their double talk and despite all their hypocrisies. Because we need to keep reclaiming our country from all kinds of unfreedom, injustice, discrimination and lies. We have a moral and political responsibility transform the country from a Republic of Fear and Lies to our Republic of Free and Fair India.India for Everybody, Everyday and Everywhere.

LikeShow More Reactions

CommentShare

Why I am still proud of Keralam?

Why I am still proud of Keralam? Why the crony media campaign against Kerala is an exaggeration of full lies and half backed facts ?

There is an ongoing orchestrated campaign against Kerala by a particular lobby with the support of a crony media and that of the blessings of the union government in Delhi. This campaign tends to paint Kerala as a state of 'terrorism' , violent commies, and hotbed of political violence and highest crime rates.

Despite living all over India and the world, I chose to return to my village/ town in Kerala. Because I am proud to be a Malayali and a Keralite. As I am a primarily a product of Kerala, as a truly Local- Global Malayali I feel responsible for my state as well as for my country.

Hence it is important to expose the utter lies and fake news spread by the Delhi centric crony media enterprise of the Sangh Parivar. What are the lies ? Is Kerala , the crime capital of India ? Utter lies. Kerala is the most literate states of India with the highest percentage of people with higher education. Kerala has the highest human development Indicators in India and even South Asia. Kerala has the lowest poverty rate in India. Kerala has the least maternal and infant mortality rates in India. Kerala has the best of gender ratio in India. The best e governance track record. And the governance performance, including the local governance of Kerala, was consistently rated as the best in India . Due to all this, police in Kerala report even the smallest oral complaint. Now most of the women too report domestic violence. As a result of an aware people and active Policing, reporting is high . In fact this is an indicator of better policing . In Hariyana , there is zero oral complaint. Why ? People are scared to go to police stations and even if they go police don't report. Isn't it an irony that Delhi centric crony corporate media chose to ignore increasing murders and violent crimes in UP or different districts of Rajasthan or Bihar ? Isn't it irony Delhi centric crony journalists with a divisive agenda fail to report on the suicide of farmers in MP or the massive vyapam corruption case in MP?

It is true that there is a history of RSS -CPM clashes in Kerala. It is true that it must stop. But if you really look at the numbers, the Delhi centric media exaggerated in a complete disproportionate manner . It is true that the policing reporting of any sort of crime is highest. Does it mean Kerala is the crime capital of India ? Utter lies. Kerala, on the contrary, is one of the relatively peaceful societies with less amount of feudal violence and least amount of communal violence in India. Kerala has also one of the highest economic growth rate in India and largest number of International airports when compared with the population size .

So why the crony media of the vested interest lobby paint Kerala in accusative dark coolurs ? Why do they unleash a targeted violent campaign against Kerala. ? Because unlike other states , in Kerala people, irrespective of caste or creed,
overwhelming majority of people eat beef everywhere and freely available every where. Because in Kerala there was never a mob lynching. Because Kerala is not ruled by Aditya Nadh . Because despite spending billions and engineering violence, BJP drew blank in all elections. Because Kerala is a state with a cosmopolitan history where the highest percentage of two minority communities live peacefully with Hindu community of various castes . Because they want to prepare ground to dismiss a democratically elected government. Because they want to rule Kerala by proxy. Because they are desperate to subvert all aspects of democracy.

Having said this I do a lot of critique of the society and the government in Kerala. And people in government and elsewhere do take such criticism seriously. Because the fact of the matter is Keralam still remains one of the relatively democratic societies in India and most of the countries in Asia. Despite all it's challenges which are many, it is the democratic and cosmopolitan character of the state of Kerala that make me a proud local Malayali and global Malayali at the same time.

We will also not compromise on democratic rights and human Rights. We will stand together against any divisive agenda .We will not allow the cow-belt hegemonic agenda to divide us.
We never elected the same government or party alliance to rule us for two consecutive terms, because we are an aware people who will not like anyone in governmental power to take us for granted. Despite different political perspective, when it comes to our Malayali cosmopolitan cultural heritage, we will not allow anyone ( media or modi) to mess up with our food, our language, and thousands of years of cultural heritage.
We are proud that we have culture where a temple will organize an iftar party and the people across religious spectrum may contribute to the making of a temple, church or mosque.

Kerala has a cosmopolitan cultural heritage

Kerala has a cosmopolitan cultural heritage where we have a multi-religious cultural spectrum that evolved over more than fourteen hundred...

BODHIGRAM.BLOGSPOT.COM

ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ പുതിയ ഇടതുപക്ഷ കാഴ്ചപ്പാടിന്‍റെ പ്രസക്തി

ഇടതു പക്ഷ അജണ്ട എന്ന് ഒന്ന് കേരളത്തില്‍ ഭരണത്തിലോ പാര്ട്ടികളിലോ ഉണ്ടോ ? ഇന്‍ഡ്യയിലെ ഏതെങ്കിലും പ്രധാന രാഷ്ട്രീയ പാര്‍ട്ടികളില്‍ അതുണ്ടോ ? ഉണ്ടെങ്കില്‍ അത് എന്താണ് ? അതിനു മാര്‍ക്സിസവും സോഷ്യലിസവും സാമ്പത്തിക നീതിയുമായോ ഇന്ത്യയിലെ വര്‍ത്തമാന അവസ്ഥകളുമായി കടലും കടലാടിയും തമ്മില്‍ ഉള്ള ബന്ധമുണ്ടോ ? തിരെഞ്ഞെടുപ്പില്‍ ജയിച്ചു ഭരണം മുറ പോലെ കൊണ്ട് പോകുന്നു എന്നതില്‍ ഉപരി പ്രത്യേകിച്ച് എന്തെങ്കിലും സവിശേഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയ സാമൂഹിക അജണ്ടകള്‍ കേരളത്തിലെ രണ്ടു മുന്നണികള്‍ക്കും കൈവിട്ടു പോകുന്നിടത്താണ് പ്രശ്നം തുടങ്ങന്നുത്.

എന്താണ് പ്രധാന പ്രശ്നം? . പ്രഖ്യാപിത പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര രാഷ്ട്രീയവും , തിരെഞ്ഞെടുപ്പ് രാഷ്ട്രീയ അടവുകളും ഭരണ-അധികാര രാഷ്ട്രീയ പോളിസികളും തമ്മില്‍ വര്‍ധിച്ചു വരുന്ന വലിയ അന്തരമാണ്. ഇത് ഒരു മുന്നണിയുടെയോ ഒരു പാര്‍ട്ടിയുടെയോ മാത്രം പ്രശ്നം അല്ല എന്ന് തിരിച്ചറിഞ്ഞാല്‍ നല്ലതു. ചോദ്യങ്ങള്‍ ചോദിച്ചാല്‍ പഴയ കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ പറഞ്ഞത് കൊണ്ട് മാത്രം കാര്യമില്ല. കാലം മാറുന്നതനുസരിച്ച് കോലം മാറിയാലും അത് ഭാവിയെ നിര്‍ണയിക്കുകയില്ല . ഇന്നെലെകളിലെ വീരസ്യം കൂടുതല്‍ പറയുന്നത് വയസ്സായ പാര്‍ട്ടികളുടെ ലക്ഷണമാണെന്ന് തിരിച്ചറിഞ്ഞാല്‍ നല്ലത്. ഇന്നലെ ചെയ്ത നല്ല കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ നാളെ വരുന്ന കലികാലത്തെ നേരിടാന്‍ ത്രാണി ഉണ്ടോ എന്നതാണ് ചിന്തിക്കണ്ട വിഷയം. പഴയ മുദ്രാവാക്യങ്ങളും ഭരണ ഭൂതകാലവും വര്‍ത്തമാന-ഭാവി അവസ്ഥകളെ നേരിടാനുള്ള ത്രാണി നലകുമെന്ന പ്രത്യാശയില്‍ ജീവിക്കുന്ന വന്ദ്യ വിധേയ വിശ്വാസികള്‍ പലപ്പോഴും മൂഡസ്വര്‍ഗ്ഗ പരിസരത്ത് ആണെന്ന് അവര്‍ അറിയുന്നത് കാലിനടിയിലെ മണ്ണിളകി തെന്നി വീഴുമ്പോള്‍ ആയിരിക്കും .

ഇത് പറഞ്ഞാല്‍ മിക്ക പാര്‍ട്ടികളും ഒരു സെല്‍ഫ്-ഡിനെയേല്‍ മോഡില്‍ ആയിരിക്കും . അവര്‍ക്ക് ഒരു കുഴപ്പവുമില്ല . മറ്റവര്‍ക്കാണ് കുഴപ്പം എന്ന് സ്ഥാപിക്കും. അവരവരുടെ പഴയ കാല വീര ഗാഥകള്‍ പറഞ്ഞു വരാനിരിക്കുന്ന നാളുകളിലും ജൈത്ര യാത്ര തുടരും എന്ന വിശ്വാസികള്‍ക്ക് അങ്ങനെയുള്ള ചോദ്യങ്ങള്‍ തന്നെ അലോസരപ്പെടുത്തുന്നതാണ് . അത് കൊണ്ട് തന്നെ ചോദ്യം ചോദിക്കുന്നവരേ ശത്രു പാളയത്തില്‍ കുടി ഇരുത്തും . ഇന്ന പാര്‍ട്ടിക്ക് എതിരാണ് എന്ന് സ്ഥാപിക്കും . ഇടതു പക്ഷ പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്രത്തിന്‍റെ ഭാവിയെ കുറിച്ച് ചോദ്യം ചോദിച്ചാല്‍ തന്നെ ഇടതു പക്ഷ 'വിരുദ്ധര്‍' എന്ന മുദ്ര കുത്തി ഉദ്ദേശ ശുദ്ധിയെ തന്നെ ചോദ്യം ചെയ്തു ഡയലോഗിനുള്ള ഇടം പോലും ഇല്ലതാക്കും . സെല്‍ഫ് -ഡിനേയല്‍ തന്നെ ഒരു സാമൂഹിക രാഷ്ട്രീയ പ്രതി സന്ധിയുടെ ലക്ഷണങ്ങള്‍ ആണെന്ന് എത്ര പേര്‍ തിരിച്ചറിയും ?

ബി ജെ പ്പിക്കു ഭരണ ബാഗുജുകള്‍ കേരളത്തില്‍ ഇല്ല . അവരുടെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ടകള്‍ കൂടുതല്‍ ക്രിത്യമായതിനാല്‍ അവര്‍ അജണ്ട സെറ്റ് ചെയ്യാന്‍ പഠിച്ച പണി പതിനെട്ടും നോക്കുക്കയാണ് . അതിനു നൂറു കണക്കിന് കോടി പണമിറക്കാന്‍ ഡല്‍ഹിയിലും ബോംബയിലും ഭരണം ഉപയോഗിച്ച് ശിങ്കിടി മുതലാളി മാര്‍ ക്യു നില്‍ക്കുകയാണ്. അക്രമം വിന്യസിക്കാന്‍ ഒരു മടിയും ഇല്ലാത്ത അവസ്ഥ . അപ്പുറത്ത് ഇസ്ലാമിക തീവ്ര പ്രതീകരണ രാഷ്ട്രീയം . ഒളിഞ്ഞും തെളിഞ്ഞും പാര്‍ട്ടികള്‍ക്ക് അകത്തും പുറത്തും ഐഡന്റിറ്റി പോളിടിക്സു ഐഡിയോലജിക്കല്‍ പോളിട്ടിക്സിനെ നിഷ്ക്രിയമാക്കുന്ന വിചിത്ര അവസ്ഥ . ഇതിനെയെല്ലാം എങ്ങനെ നേരിടണമെന്ന കാര്യത്തില്‍ രണ്ടു വ്യവസ്ഥാപിത മുന്നണികളും അങ്കലാപ്പിലാണ്‌ .

തമ്മില്‍ ഭേദം തൊമ്മന്‍ ആണ് എന്നു അനുയായികള്‍ ആശ്വസിക്കുകയോ , ന്യായീകരിക്കുകയോ ചെയ്യുന്നതു കൊണ്ട് രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ട ഉണ്ടെന്നു അര്‍ത്ഥമില്ല. തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പില്‍ എങ്ങനെ എങ്കിലും ജയിച്ചു -അധികാര സൌകര്യങ്ങള്‍ അനുഭവിച്ചു അഞ്ചു കൊല്ലം 'മെയിന്റനന്‍സ് ' നടത്തി കൊണ്ട് പോകുക എന്നതില്‍ അപ്പുറം ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജെണ്ടയോ , ഇടതു പക്ഷ അജന്ടെയോ വാചക കസര്‍ത്ത്കള്‍ക്കും ടീവി യിലെ അന്തി ചര്‍ച്ചകള്‍ക്കും അപ്പുറം പോകുന്നില്ല എന്നതാണ് കേരളത്തിലെ ഭരണ പാര്‍ട്ടികളും കഴിഞ്ഞ കുറെ കൊല്ലങ്ങളായി നേരിടുന്ന യഥാര്‍ഥ ആന്തരിക പ്രതിസന്ധി. നാട് ഓടുമ്പോള്‍ നടുവേ ഓടി ജയിക്കുക എന്ന നിലനില്ല്പ്പു രാഷ്ടീയം എന്നതില്‍ ഉപരി ഒരു സവിശേഷ ആദര്‍ശമോ ഒരു പ്രത്യയശാസ്ത്ര വ്യക്തതയോ നിലപാടോ ഭരണത്തിലോ പാര്ട്ടികളിലോ ഉണ്ടോ എന്ന് സംശയമാണ് .

എന്താണ് ഒരു ഇടതു പക്ഷ അജണ്ട എന്ന കാര്യത്തില്‍ തന്നെ സംശയമുള്ളവര്‍ പിന്നെ എങ്ങനെ അജണ്ട സെറ്റ് ചെയ്യും ? ഇവിടെ ഞാന്‍ ഒരു പാര്‍ട്ടിയുടെ കാര്യം മാത്രമല്ല ഉദ്ദേശിക്കുന്നത് . പ്രധാന പ്രശ്നം മാര്‍ക്സിസം വാചക കസര്‍ത്തുകളിലും ഭരണം സാദാ പതിവിന്‍ പടി ആകുമ്പോഴുള്ള മഹാ വൈരുധ്യം . രണ്ടാമത്തെ പ്രശ്നം തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പിനെ നേരിട്ടത് തന്നെ 'എല്ലാ ശരിയാകും' എന്ന ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജെന്ടയും ഇല്ലാത്ത പരസ്യ വാചകത്തില്‍ നിന്ന് .
ഇവിടെ സംഘപരിവാര്‍ അജണ്ട ഹൈജാക്ക് ചെയ്യുമ്പോള്‍ അതിനെതിരെയുള്ള ഒരു പ്രതീകരണ രാഷ്ട്രീയം മാത്രമായി ചുരുങ്ങുംപോഴാനു കൈയ്യില്‍ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു എന്ന് ജനം കരുതുന്ന അജണ്ടകള്‍ പോലും കൈവിട്ടു പോകുന്നത് .

പിന്നെ ഹാവാര്‍ഡില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള നവ-ലിബറല്‍ മുതലിളിത്തത്തിന്‍റെ വക്താവിനെ തന്നെ ഉപദേശി ആയി നിയമിച്ചപ്പോഴേ ഇടതു പക്ഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ടായല്ല , പാക്കേജിംഗും ബ്രാന്‍ഡ്‌ മാനേജുമെന്ടും ആണ് ഭരണ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തില്‍ കാര്യം എന്ന് പറയാതെ പറയുക ആയിരുന്നില്ലേ ? ഇത് പറഞ്ഞത് പ്രഖ്യാപിത പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര രാഷ്ടീയവും ഭരണ-അധികാര രാഷ്ട്രീയവും തമ്മിലുള്ള വലിയ വൈരുധ്യങ്ങളെയും
അന്തരങ്ങളെയും ചൂണ്ടി കാണിക്കുവാനാണ് . അത് മാത്രമല്ല അധികാര-അഹങ്കാരങ്ങളും ഇമാന്സിപെറ്ററി പൊളിട്സും തമ്മില്‍ ഉള്ള വൈരുധ്യങ്ങളെ തിരിച്ചറിയെണ്ടതുണ്ട് എന്ന് പറയാന്‍ കൂടിയാണ് .

ബീ ജെ പി യുടെ രാഷ്ട്രീയം ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ വളരെ ചെറിയ ഒരു ന്യൂന പക്ഷമായ വരേണ്യ ജാതി -വര്‍ഗ്ഗത്തിന്‍റെ തീവ്ര വലതു പക്ഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയമാണ്. അതിന്‍റെ പിന്നിലുള്ള ആര്‍ . എസ്.എസ് യഥാര്‍ഥത്തില്‍ ഒരു ബ്രാമ്മിന്‍ മേധാവിത്ത സംഘടനയാണ് . അതിന്‍റെ തുടക്കം തന്നെ മഹാരാഷ്ട്രയുടെ ഒരു പ്രധാന ഭാഗം പൂനാ കേന്ദ്രമായി ഭരിച്ച പേഷ്വാ ബ്രാമ്മിന്‍ മേധാവിത്തത്തിന്‍റെ ബാക്കിപത്രമായി ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ അധിപധ്യം ഉറപ്പിക്കുക എന്ന ലക്ഷ്യത്തോടെ തുടങ്ങിയതാണ്‌ . ആ സംഘടനയുടെ തുടക്കം മുതല്‍ ഇത് വരെ മഹാരാഷ്ട്രയില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള ബ്രാമ്മണ മേധാവിത്വത്തില്‍ വിശ്വസിക്കുന്നവര്‍ ആണ് അതിനെ നയിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളത് . അതിന്‍റെ പിന്നിലുള്ള ഗോരക്ഷ രാഷ്ട്രീയം മുതല്‍ വെജിട്ടെരിനിസം വരെ ആ അജെണ്ടയുടെ ഭാഗമാണ് . എന്നാല്‍ വളരെ ചെറിയ വരേണ്യ ന്യൂന പക്ഷ ജാതി മേധാവിത്തത്തിനു ഇന്‍ഡ്യ ഭരിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയില്ല എന്ന തിരിച്ചറിവില്‍ നിന്നാണ് പുനയില്‍ പേഷ്വാ ബ്രമ്മണായ സവര്‍ക്കര്‍ 'ഹിന്ദുത്വ ' എന്ന ആശയം മുന്നില്‍ വച്ച് മുകള്‍ തട്ടില്‍ ഉള്ള ജാതികളെ സംഘടിപ്പിച്ചു അധികാരവും ഭരണവും കൈയ്യാളുവാന്‍ ഒരു ത്രീവ്ര വലതു പക്ഷ ബ്രാമ്മാണ മേധാവിത്ത രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിന് 1925 മുതല്‍ കളമൊരുക്കിയതു . ഈ കുതന്ത്ര അപകട രാഷ്ട്രീയം ആദ്യം തിരിച്ചരിഞ്ഞത് ആദ്യം മഹാത്മാ ഫുലെയും പിന്നെ ഗാന്ധിയും അമ്ബെട്ക്കരുമാണ്. ഇവരെല്ലാവരും മഹാരാഷ്ട്രയില്‍ നിന്നോ പഴയ ബോംബെ പ്രൊവിന്‍സില്‍ നിന്നോ ആണെന്നത് യദാര്‍ശ്ചികം അല്ല . പക്ഷെ ഗാന്ധി ഈ അപകടര രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തെ തുടക്കത്തില്‍ തന്നെ തിരിച്ചറിഞ്ഞു ഒരു സനാതന കൌന്ടര്‍ നരേറ്റീവ് സൃഷ്ട്ടിച്ചതോട് കൂടി ആദ്യകാലത്തേ ആര്‍ എസ എസ അജണ്ട പൊളിഞ്ഞു . അത്കൊണ്ട് തന്നെയാണ് പൂനാക്കാരനായ വേറൊരു പേഷ്വാ ബ്രാമ്മണ മേധാവിത്ത വിശ്വാസിയായ ഗോട്സെ തന്നെ ഗാന്ധിജിയെ വെടിവച്ച് കൊന്നത് . ആ കൊലപതം അവരുടെ അക്രമ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിന്‍റെ തുടക്കമാണ്

ഗാന്ധിജിയെ കൊലചെയതതിനു ശേഷം ഗാന്ധി പ്രധിനിധാനം ചെയ്ത ഇന്ക്ലുസീവ് സനാതന അഹിംസാത്മക ഹിന്ദു ആശയങ്ങളെയും അംബേദ്‌കര്‍ മുന്നോട്ടു വച്ച ദളിത്‌ അവകാശ സ്വാന്ത്ര്യ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തെയും എതിര്‍ത്ത് അവര്‍ക്കെതിരായ ആശയ പ്രചാരണത്തിലൂടെ തോല്‍പ്പിക്ക എന്നതായിരുന്നു കഴിഞ്ഞ എഴുപതു കൊല്ലത്തെ അവരുടെ പ്രധാന രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ട. രണ്ടാമതായി അവരുടെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ട അന്താരഷ്ട്ര സോഷ്യലിസ്റ്റ്‌ ഇടതുപക്ഷെ ആശയങ്ങല്ക്കെതിരായ രാഷ്ട്രീയമാണ്. അതിനു അവര്‍ ആശയ സമരങ്ങളും അക്രമ സമരങ്ങളും അതുപോലെ കോഓപ്ടീവ് പോളിട്ക്സും ഒരു പോലെ രാജ്യമാകെ വിന്യസിപ്പിച്ചു . ഈ ന്യൂന-പക്ഷ വടക്ക് -പടിഞ്ഞാറെ ഇന്ത്യയിലെ ബ്രാമ്മണ മേധാവിധം പല രൂപത്തിലും ഭാവത്തിലും അടിച്ചേല്‍പ്പിക്കാനുള്ള അക്രമ-ആശയ ജനാധിപത്യ രാഷ്ട്രീയമാണ് ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ ഇന്ന് അരെങ്ങേറൂന്നത്. ഇന്ന് ആ അക്രമ -ആശയ രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിനു കൂട്ടായി മാര്‍വാഡി മുതലാളിത്വ സാമ്പത്തിക ശക്തിയും ഉണ്ട് . അതുകൊണ്ട് തന്നെ മാധ്യമങ്ങളെ അവര്‍ വിലക്ക് മേടിച്ചു അത് ഉപയോഗിച്ചു ഒരു ആശയ -അക്രമ യുദ്ധ തന്ത്രത്തിലൂടെ ഇന്‍ഡ്യയാകെ അക്രമോല്സുകമായ ഭീതിയുടെ ഒരു ഇല്ലബരല്‍ റിപബ്ലിക്ക്‌ നിര്‍മ്മിക്കുവാന്‍ എന്തും ചെയ്യുവാന്‍ മടിക്കാത്തത് .

കൊണ്ഗ്രെസ്സ് ഗാന്ധി-നെഹ്‌റു പ്രത്യയശാസ്ത്ര അടിത്തറ നഷ്ട്ടപെട്ടതോടു കൂടി അധികാരം പിടക്കാനുള്ള ഒരു തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പ് രാഷ്ടീയ-താല്പര്യ ഒരു കുടുമ്പത്തെ മാത്രം കേന്ദ്രീകരിച്ച നെറ്റ്‌വര്‍ക്ക് യായി ചുരുങ്ങിയതോടെ അതിന്റെ പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര പ്രസക്തി തന്നെ നഷ്ടടപെട്ടു. ഇന്‍ഡ്യയിലെ ഇടതു പക്ഷ പ്രസ്ഥാനങള്‍ ഒരു ഇടതു പക്ഷ ജനാധിപത്യ രാഷ്ട്രീയ ബദല്‍ മുന്നോട്ടു വച്ച് എന്നതാണ് അതിനന്‍റെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ പ്രസക്തി . ലോഹ്യ സൊഷ്യലിസ്റ്റ് ധാരയില്‍ ഉള്ളവര്‍ ജാതി സ്വത രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിന് വളരെ പ്രാധാന്യം കൊടുത്തപ്പോള്‍ ഇടതു കമ്മുനിസ്റ്റ്‌ രാഷ്ട്രീയം തികച്ചും യാന്ത്രികമായ വൈരുധ്യാന്മക ഭൌതീക സിത്തന്ധത്തില്‍ ഉറച്ചു നിന്ന് ദളിത്‌-ആദിവാസി പാര്‍ശ്വവലകൃത ജനവിഭാഗത്തിന്ന്‍റെ സ്വത രാഷ്ട്രീയ പ്രശ്നങ്ങളെ മനസ്സിലാക്കാതെ ഒരു വര്‍ഗ്ഗ രാഷ്ടീയ പ്രത്യായ ശാസ്ത്ര അടിത്തറയുണ്ടാക്കി ഒരു സംഘടനെ വളര്‍ത്തിഎടുത്തു ഇന്‍ഡ്യയില്‍ കിഴക്കും തെക്കേ അറ്റത്തും നിലയുറപ്പിച്ചത് അത് സംഘ പരിവാര്‍ രാഷ്ടീയത്തിന് വടക്കെ ഇന്ത്യന്‍ ഗോസായി രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിനും ജനാധിപത്യ ബദല്‍ ആയതു കൊണ്ട് കൂടിയാണ് .
എന്നാല്‍ കൊണ്ഗ്രെസ്സ്യം വടക്കെ ഇന്‍ഡ്യയിലെ ലോഹ്യ സോഷ്യലിസ്റ്റുകളും , ബംഗാള്‍-ത്രിപുര -കേരളത്തിലെ കമ്മ്യൂണിസ്റ്റ് മുന്നണികളും പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തില്‍ നിന്ന് ഭരണ രാഷ്ട്രീയ നീക്ക് പോക്ക് രാഷ്ട്രീയത്തിലേക്ക് ചുവടു ഉറപ്പിച്ചപ്പോള്‍ പ്രായോഗിക തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പ് നീക്ക്-പോക്ക് രാഷ്ട്രീയ അടവ് നയങ്ങള്‍ ഈ പാര്‍ട്ടികളുടെഎല്ലാം പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര അടിത്തറയെ തകര്‍ത്തുകളഞ്ഞു.

അത്കൊണ്ട് തന്നെ ഇന്ന് ഇന്ത്യയില്‍ അരങ്ങേറുന്ന വടക്ക്-പടിഞ്ഞാറെ ഇന്ത്യന്‍ ഗോസായി ബ്രാമ്മണ-മാര്‍വാദി മേധാവിത്ത അക്രമ രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ടക്ക് ബദലായി ഒരു പുതിയ ഇടതു പക്ഷ ജനാധിപത്യ പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ട ഉയര്‍ന്നു വരേണ്ടതുണ്ട് . ഇന്ത്യയിലെ പവപെട്ടവരും പാര്‍ശ്വവല്ക്രത സമൂഹങ്ങളും ഇന്ന് മറ്റെന്നെത്തെക്കാളും ഭീതിയും പ്രയാസങ്ങളും അനുഭവിക്കുന്ന കാലമാണ്. ആം ആദ്മി പാട്ടിയുടെ ഏറ്റവും വലിയ ദോഷം അതിനു ഒരു പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര ബദല്‍ ആകുവാന്‍ സാധിച്ചില്ല എന്നതാണ് . ഇന്ന് ഇന്ത്യ ഭരിക്കുന്നത് ഗുജറാത്തില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള അംബാനി-അദാനി നെട്ട് വര്‍ക്കും അവരുടെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ മുഖമായ മോഡി-ഷാ കമ്പൈനും ആണ് . പക്ഷെ തിരകഥ സംവിധാനം നാഗ്പൂരില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള ബ്രാമ്മണ മേധാവികള്‍ തന്നെ . അതില്‍ വെറും ഒരു സപ്പോര്‍ട്ട് ആക്ട്ടര്‍ റോള്‍ മാത്രമേ അരുണ്‍ ജെറ്റ്ലിയെ പോലുള്ളവര്‍ക്കൊള്ളൂ . കേരളത്തിലെ ബീ ജെ പി നേതാക്കള്‍ക്ക് വടക്ക്-പടിഞ്ഞാറെ ഇന്‍ഡ്യയിലെ ഗോസായി രാഷ്ട്രീയ അജണ്ടയില്‍ ഒരു എക്സ്ട്രാ നടന്‍മാരുടെ റോള് പോലുമില്ല എന്നതാണ് സത്യം . കാരണം ദ്രാവിഡ രാഷ്ട്രീയം ഗോസായി രാഷ്ട്രീയ ചരിത്ര-സാമൂഹിക -സാംസ്‌കാരിക ബദല്‍ ആണെന്നതാണ് . അത് കൊണ്ട് തന്നെയാണ് പഠിച്ച പണി പതിനെട്ടും നോക്കിയിട്ടും ഇവര്‍ക്ക് തമിഴ് നാട്ടിലും കേരളത്തിലും വേര് പിടിച്ചു തിരെഞ്ഞെടുപ്പില്‍ ജയിക്കുവനിതുവരെ കഴിയാതെ പോയത് .

അക്രമോല്സുകമായ ത്രീവ വലതുപക്ഷ വരേണ്യ ജാതി ആധിപത്യത്തില്‍ ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ വേലിയേറ്റം ഉണ്ടാക്കി ഇന്ത്യന്‍ ജനാധിപത്യ പ്രക്രിയയെ തുരങ്കം വെക്കാനുള്ള ശ്രമങ്ങലാണ്‌ നടക്കുന്നത് .

എങ്ങോട്ടാണീ പോക്ക് ? ഇത് എവിടെക്കാണ് രാജ്യത്തെയും കേരളത്തെ കൊണ്ട് പോകുന്നത് ? ഈ ചോദ്യം ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ പാര്‍ട്ടിയോടോ മറ്റൊരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ പാര്‍ട്ടിയോടോ അല്ല . ഇവിടെ ജനാധിപത്യം യഥാര്‍ത്ഥത്തില്‍ നില നിന്ന് കാണണം എന്ന് ആഗ്രഹിക്കുന്ന ഓരോരുത്തരും സ്വയം ചോദിക്കേണ്ട ചോദ്യമാണ് .

ഇവിടെ ഒരു പുതിയ ജനകീയ -ജനധിപത്യ പ്രത്യയ ശാസ്ത്ര ബദല്‍ രാഷ്ട്രീയവും പുതിയ സംഘടന രൂപങ്ങളും ഉണ്ടെകേണ്ടത് പുതിയ കാലത്തിന്‍റെ പുതിയ ഇന്‍ഡ്യയുടെ ആവശ്യം ആണെന്ന് തിരിച്ചറിവുള്ള അധികം ആരും ഭരണതിലോ ഭരിച്ചു വയസ്സായ പാര്‍ട്ടികളിലോ ഇല്ല എന്നതാണ് കേരളവും ഇന്ത്യയും നേരിടുന്ന ഏറ്റവും വലിയ വെല്ലുവിളി .

LikeShow More Reactions

Comment

Share