Home / Articles / A view from India: Sectarianism suppressing democratic right of Expression

A view from India: Sectarianism suppressing democratic right of Expression

Ram Puniyani

Freedom of expression has been the core value which accompanied the struggle for India’s Independence. The British did attempt to stifle the voices of dissent but the freedom fighters did see this as a crucial mechanism of rooting democratic ethos in the society. At heavy cost the major leaders had to face the wrath of British colonialist powers for upholding the foundation of a democratic society through freedom of expression. The same values got enshrined in our Constitution, with various articles and clauses upholding it.

What we are witnessing today is a stifling of dissent from the ruling party, the ruling ideology of sectarian nationalism. The suppression of dissent and freedom of giving expression is not just through control of media and stifling of writers. Ruling party; through control of a section of media; is using heavy hand to control the free thinkers. One major and frightening phenomenon accompanying this attempt to muzzle the dissenting opinions has been to eliminate the thinker’s writers physically.

We know that sometimes state can outright control the media, as happened during emergency. The censoring of media, raids on the publication houses had been resorted to by the authoritarian state. The current phenomenon is slightly different. Here along with the heavy hand of the big brother watching, those inspired by the communal nationalism, are taking the law into their own hands, with full knowledge that the ruling party-state is with them and they can get away with their crimes of eliminating those thinkers and activists, whom they can’t oppose at ideological level. By nature most of the ideologies which promote nationalism in the name of religion are grossly intolerant and indulge in the street violence and killing to promote the communal divides. The matching phenomenon to what we are witnessing in India is also seen in Bangla Desh, where those inspired by the Islamic nationalism have been targeting the bloggers and have been physically eliminating them. 

During last several years we have tragically witnessed the murders of the writers-social activists who have been upholding rational thought, those who have been opposing the hold of values which support caste, those who have been opposing the politics in the name of Hinduism. When Narendra Dabholkar was shot at, the trend began at the abominable level. Dabholkar was active in promoting rational thinking, and had formed Andh Shraddha Nirmula Samiti (Committee for eliminating blind faith) in Maharashtra. 

Govind Pansare, a dedicated saintly worker for human rights, was not only promoting rational thought, he was also opposed to sectarian nationalism, he promoted a rational version of Shivaji story, which presented him humane king, taking care of his subject irrespective of their religion and who in his administration had Hindus as well as Muslims. M.M. Kalburgi a rationalist scholar was opposed to the Brahmanical values and so talked to promoting Lord Basvanna’s teachings of social equality, he also articulated that Lingyats should be regarded as religious minorities, away from the grip of Brahmanism dominated prevalent Hinduism. 

In the sequence to this came the tragic murder of Gauri Lankesh, a fearless journalist, who opposed the politics of Hindu nationalism at grass root level, who supported the rights of religious minorities, participated in the local communal harmony groups to oppose the politics being constructed around Baba Budan Giri and Id Gah ground. She was also for recognizing Lingayats as a religious minority. The impact of these activists was perceived as a threat, they were wring in regional languages and were perceived as a thorn in the flesh of divisive ideology. The pattern of their murders was similar, motor bike riders coming and shooting them. The investigations have so far not yielded much and except one worker of Sanatan Sanstha, ideologically close the dominant political tendency today, no arrests have been made. 

As such these murderers are like tip of the iceberg. These murders are accompanied with the growing intolerance in the society, which has also lead to killings beatings of Muslims-Dalits in the name of Holy Cow Beef. The killing of Mohammad Akhlaq, Junaid Khan and Una floggings has been the major incidents amongst the brutal acts unleashed by the growing intolerance in the society. While intolerance has grown gradually from last decade or so, during last three years in particular, there is a qualitative change in the nature of intolerance. How do we understand the growing communalization of society, worsening intolerance and killings of those standing for democratic norms?

In independent India first major act of ideological murder, killing for political goals, prompted by intolerance was murder of Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi. Godse was the killer and RSS was banned. Saradar Patel, the then Home minister wrote to RSS chief Golwalkar, “As regards the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha… our reports do confirm that, as a result of the activities of these two bodies, particularly the former (RSS) an atmosphere was created in the country in which such a ghastly tragedy became possible.”– Sardar Vallabhai Patel, India’s first home minister, on the assassination of Gandhi, in a letter dated July 18, 1948 to Shyama Prasad Mukherjee. (Sardar Patel Correspondence, Volume 6, edited by Durga Das)

The type of suppression we saw during Emergency of 1975 was the one imposed by an authoritarian state, now the present phenomenon is not just the one brought in by the state. State, since is being controlled by narrow nationalism is playing its role, but the deeper and more damaging part is the one brought in by the so called fringe elements, the storm troopers of the ideology motivated by communal hatred. The divisive ideology is creating Hate not only against the religious minorities but also against those who are trying to uphold democratic, plural and diverse values in society.

Diverse opinions, debated in an open spirit are the best guarantee for democratic society. The sectarian ideologies are opposed to democratic ethos and so they are pushing the intolerance worse possible levels. There is a need to protect the democratic freedom by combating communalism.    

   

 

About admin

Check Also

Time to create Rakhine as a Muslim State for Rohingyas

Myanmar insists that Rohingyas are interlopers from Bangladesh despite most of them living for generations in western Rakhine state of Myanmar, they have long been denied basic political rights and liberties. Bangladesh does not accept that Rohingyas have a Bengali lineage. Anthropologists believe that Rohingya roots trace back to Saudi Arabia, who migrated to Myanmar (Burma) around 7th & 8th century AC. Except Bangladesh and Myanmar who think such a return as a good idea, there are hardly any buyers of such forced eviction. United Nations doesn’t want forced eviction to happen. United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, warned that forcing the first batch of about 2,200 Rohingya living in refugee camps to ground zero of mass violence against the minority Muslim group would be a “clear violation” of core international legal principles. Human Rights groups have called the move “dangerous and premature.” A number of Human Rights groups say “they are shocked”. Even the people who will be affected the most, Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar, are upset that their future, once again, is being decided without their input.So far Aung Suu Kyi’s leadership performance has been derisive. No one expected governing to be easy for her, as country’s leader. Her election had ended more than a half-century of military rule; yet the hegemony has not retrieved; and Bonapartism is galore. In pursuit of her over ambitious political objectives, she has been used and discredited by Junta. Suu Kyi had declared ending the long-running ethnic insurgencies that have torn the country apart as her top priority, but her lacklustre peace effort has proved ineffective. Ever since fighting between government forces and ethnic groups has been spiralling up. Though World has been shocked by reports that the military has carried out atrocities, including rape and murder, against the Rohingya, Aung Suu has said little on the matter and done even lesser. Her government’s growing suppression of speech on the Internet seems perverse for a onetime democracy icon who spent 15 years under house arrest. No wonders her popularity is on decline. Growth has slowed and foreign investment has dipped significantly. Suu Kyi faces daunting challenges. In rebuilding the country, she must overcome decades of mismanagement and profiteering by previous military governments that enriched the generals and their cronies and brought the economy to its knees. The biggest stain on Suu Kyi’s record may be her government’s brutal treatment of the Rohingya, and her tepid response to it. Prevailing World order is known for acting very fast in Muslim versus non-Muslim conflicts where outcome is likely to benefit non-Muslims. And it shows criminal negligence when Muslims are likely to gain through political settlement of any such conflict. When pushed too hard, conflict is settled in a way that it’s a paralytic outcome, ensuring mitigation of equitable advantage to Muslim faction of population. Some of the conflicts like Kashmir and Palestine are deliberately kept on back burners as their settlement would benefit Muslim segment of respective population. Myanmar’s Rohingya conflict also falls in “let ferment” category. Likewise is the situation about Afghan and Yemen crisis, as well as simmering Middle East and North African Muslim countries. Muslims are right to assume that current World Order has not served them a fair deal; and unless there is a significant change in its format, Muslims will continue to be marginalised at state, community and individual levels. But the billion dollar question is that how long the current World Political Order would take to assume ownership of Myanmar crisis? Time has already reached for declaring Rakhine as a sovereign State where Rohingyas could live peacefully and practice their religion peacefully.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *