Religion and politics have always been together. Religion and politics are neither new nor unique to India. It is universal phenomenon. There is considerable increase in use of religion since end of cold war. The end of clash of ideologies led to clash of civilizations. Secular ideologies gave way to religious fundamentalism of all sorts around the world.
Like any other -ism, communalism is also a political ideology. The purpose of political ideology is the mobilization of voters. When religion is used for mobilization of voters, it is called communalism. Communalism is a politics of identity. Identity politics is appealing to passion or emotions of people. Identity politics is always violent.
Man is social ‘animal’. Man is dominated by passions, once passion is appealed, raised, they become uncontrollable. Reason will end and violence is bound to happen. There is nothing wrong in being emotional or passionate about one’s own religion, culture or language. However, it is wrong on part of elites to use people by appealing to issue for which people are emotional.
1. Evolution of Communal Politics in India
According to British historians, Indians have always been communal. The politics in subcontinent has always been communal. Marxist historian Romila Thapar challenges the orientalist discourse suggesting that there was no communal violence on the subcontinent before the advent of British, though there were local sectarian conflicts. As suggested by Edward Said, it was a politically motivated project.
1.1 Evolution of Communal Politics During British Rule
- British started appeasement of Hindus as they though Muslims were responsible for 1857 revolt. To prevent marginalization of Muslims, Sir S.A. Khan promised loyalty to British.
- British left Hindus for sake of minorities which are always better partners for imperialists.
- In 1905, British announced Bengal Partition to divide Indians.
- In 1906, Muslim League was formed in Dhaka.
- In 1909, there was a statutory recognition that Muslims are separate community from Hindus.
- 1919’s separate communal electorate was extended to other religious minorities.
- In 1915, Savarkar formed Hindu Mahasabha against Muslim League.
- In 1923, Savarkar gave theory of Hindutva.
- Mohammad Iqbal answered by giving concept of Muslim Ummah / Brotherhood. He held that Quran does not permit Muslims to live under man-made laws. Quran does not look at Muslims as separate nationality. There is no concept of territorial nationalism, all Muslims are one community.
- 1925, Formation of RSS: Hegdewar & Golwalkar. It was against pan Islamism. RSS promoted ‘militant form’ of Hinduism to overcome Hindu sense of vulnerability.
- 1932 – Ramsay Macdonald award: After separating different communities on ground of religion, British wanted to reduce Hindus to minority.
- All these developments ultimately culminated into partition on ground of religion and the subcontinent suffered one of the worst forms of communal violence.
1.2 Post Independence
Till 1960s, there was no major riot in the country but the bitterness of partition was continuing. Nehru could maintain harmony partly because the position of Congress remained un-challengeable and also because government had put ban on communal organizations.
1.3 From 1960s to 1980s
The hegemony of Congress started breaking. Political competition started becoming challenging. Communal mobilization started. During lifetime of Nehru, communal riots took place in many towns – Jabalpur, Nagpur, Aligarh, Ahmedabad.
Selig Harrison has described 1960s as ‘dangerous decade’. According to western scholars, Indian experiment is over, India will not survive beyond 60s. There were communal riots, Linguistic movements, opposition to Hindi as national language, and demand for linguistic states.
‘Nehruvian consensus’ started breaking down. Fortunately, India survived. During 1970s and 80s, massive use of religion started. The breakdown of the congress system was the reason that congress had to use religion as an ideology or political method.
One of the worst examples of religion-based violence was the ‘uncivil war of Punjab’. It culminated into tragedy of operation ‘blue star’, assassination of Indira Gandhi and 1984 riots against Sikhs.
1.4 Communalism in 1990s
There is phenomenal rise in communal politics in 1990s.
Anthropologist Thomas Blom Hansen has explained the phenomenon of communalization in his book The Saffron Wave denoting the rise of BJP from 2 seats in 1984 to the status of formation of government and first successful completion of coalition govt.
To Hansen’s thesis, we can add that in 2014, and 2019 elections, BJP could get absolute majority. Thus at least it has put halt on coalition politics. According to Suhas Palashikar, there is a possibility of India moving towards BJP system.
Since 1990s, there is a growth of communal parties. V.P. Singh was unable to manage the coalition, insurgency in Kashmir and Punjab, economic challenges; Played caste card by announcing implementation of Mandal commission. Mandal commission had consequences for BJP. It means division of Hindus on caste grounds. Hence BJP had to fall back on Ram Mandir.
Congress becoming fearful of getting marginalized, tried to appease Hindus by opening Ramajanmabhoomi. Congress followed double appeasement. To appease Muslims who were angry at Ramajanmabhoomi, Congress nullified revolutionary SC judgement of Shah Bano case.
Congress hijacking Mandir agenda left BJP more insecure, and no option but to start Rath Yatra. It culminated in demolition of Babri Masjid and subsequently Mumbai riots, Godhra riots, Gujrat riots and Muzaffarnagar riots.
2. Analysis of communal riots in India
There are four schools of thoughts.
2.1 Essentialist
According to this school, Hindus and Muslims are two antagonistic communities. Hence, they are bound to fight against each other. This view has been propounded by western scholars like Louis Dummont. Jinnah’s two nation theory is also based on above approach.
2.2 Instrumentalist
Bipin Chandra. According to this school, communal violence whether pre-independence or post-independence is because of the elites. Elites prefer mobilization on the lines of caste and religion. According to this theory, politicians use communal politics but people are not communal. Hence after some time, normalcy come back.
2.3 Institutionalist
Asghar Ali Engineer. According to him, state policies promote communalism. State actions, public policy make one community insecure and nurtures the feeling that other are appeased and they are being discriminated.
2.4 Social Constructivists
According to them, different communities continue to nurture some stereotypes against each other, they develop mental maps and live with that map. According to social constructivists, the lack of communication between the communities forces them to live with such stereotypes. The trust deficit between the communities due to lack of communication is a major problem.
2.5 Contribution of Paul Brass
According to him, communal riots are not spontaneous events. There is a well-developed machinery in the country. They are not riots, but programs of targeted violence. They are executed in a very professional manner. The atmosphere is never free of communal violence. Political parties never allow the atmosphere to be free. Communalism has to remain in the air.
He gives three stages of in the evolution of communal violence. There is proper division of labour according to him.
- Preparatory stage: There are proper rehearsals. In this stage, there is a role of fire tenders. Keeping communalism in air through speeches.
- Precipitation stage: This is a stage when major violence erupts. Now comes the role of conversion specialists.
- Explanatory stage: Now the blame game starts.
According to him, everyone loves good riots in India. All parties are benefitted. Voters of all parties get consolidated due to polarization. The most dangerous times to be watched is near elections. This also shows that communal violence can be easily controlled. According to studies, district administration has enough power to stop it within three hours. Prof. Dipankar Gupta has mentioned the concept of picnic riots. Proper picnic takes place after riots, people get awarded for work. Parties take place.
3. Conclusion
The above analysis show that communalism and casteism are examples of increasing plebianisation (mobocracy) of Indian democracy. They can be considered as Indian variants of Fascism. As political competition will become cut throat, we can expect greater violence in the name of religion
India is a diverse country. And different models can be applied to different parts of the country. In some parts, riots are result of politicization of the issues while in some other parts there exists ‘historic enmity’ in communities.
4. Short Note on RSS
RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh / National Volunteer Organization) is an Indian right winged, Hindu nationalist, paramilitary organization and is wholly regarded as parent organization of ruling party of India, BJP. Founded in 27 Sep 1925, it is world’s largest voluntary missionary organization.
Politically it is criticized as right extremist party and its training resembles to that of army, but for ideological purpose. Accused of participant in communal riots especially 1992 Babri Masjid blast. However, it continues to function with its 59,000 branches all over India and more than 50 lakh members.
Christophe Jaffrelot argues against comparing RSS with European fascist rules. He says “RSS’s ideology treats society as an organism with a secular spirit, which is implanted not so much in the race as in socio-cultural system and which will be regenerated over the course of time by patient work at grassroots….” He writes that ideology of RSS did not develop the theory of state and race, a crucial element in European nationalism. And that RSS leaders were interested in culture as opposed to racial sameness.
In his recent Article Christophe Jaffrelot also remarks that along with grassroot work, RSS is moving more towards statist style, which it refrained from in its early decades.
Read thru this article it looked very non biased and informative. Very consise and helpful. Thank you