Hypocrisy In The Name Of Secularism

Mr. Shahabuddin's latest ideological piece WillYou Walk Into My Parlour? reeks of blatant hypocrisy. Indeed, he is notalone in such an exercise; such hypocrisy has been part and parcel of Muslimleadership for the past fifty years. It is appalling to note that the Muslimleadership has always blamed others for the pitiable state of Muslims inIndia. It is high time that they should be made equally accountable forfailing the Indian Muslims.

Mr. Shahabuddin is right when he says that we should not forget the horriblecarnage of Gujarat. But why does he forget Bhagalpur? Why doesn't he mentionthe anti-Sikh pogrom of 1984? Both were heinous crimes which should not beforgotten and both were committed with Congress complicity. How can oneforget the role of Congress in the Babri Masjid controversy and theconsequent riots afterwards?

It seems that after opportunistically hitchingthe Congress bandwagon, Mr. Shahabuddin forgot everything about the soft Hindutva practiced by the Congress for years. Suddenly he has come to therealization that the 'secular' Congress can save the Muslims from the'communal' BJP. Perhaps he should remember that it was the same Congresswhich did not have the spine to send its Muslim leaders to campaign in theGujarat elections after the pogroms. It is repugnant that someone whoconsiders himself as 'Muslim' leader is advocating for a party which has somuch blood on its hand.

r. Shahabuddin has nailed thirteen demands on the doors of BJP. Thesedemands themselves are vacuous but more on that later. First of all one istempted to ask if the BJP accepts these demands, will Mr. Shahabuddin advicethe Muslims to join the BJP? Such an understanding means that any partywhich accepts these so called 'Muslim demands' automatically becomes'secular'.

Such a warped understanding had done much harm to the practice ofsecularism in India. The bane of Indian secularism is that it is completelydevoid of any democratic agenda. The real debate in India should be aboutthe practice of democracy and rule of law. It is hard to imagine howsecularism can thrive in a country whose people do not appreciatedifferences of opinions and lifestyles.

In a situation where even dissent ishardly tolerated within communities, it is too much to expect any kind ofreligious tolerance. Far from talking vacuously about secularism, leaderslike Mr. Shahabuddin need to look within their own communities. It need notbe overemphasized that there are people in all Indian communities who aredeeply patriarchal, anti-democratic and consequently anti-secular.

Unfortunately, within the Indian Muslims, these are the very people who areat the helm of affairs and who decide the politics of vast majority ofIndian Muslims. Apart from empty sloganeering of 'Islam in danger', theyhave done little for the Muslims. It is time perhaps that Indian Muslimleadership introspects what they have done for the democratization of IndianMuslims. If anything, they have actively contributed in strengthening theregressive tendencies within the Indian Muslim society.

The Shah Bano caseis a perfect example of how Muslim leaders in alliance with the myopicCongress government could not tolerate even nominal empowerment of IndianMuslims women. Talking of secularism without democratic empowerment isnothing but shadow boxing and a ploy to divert the attention of people fromissues of real importance.

ow let us turn our attention to the demands which Syed Shahabuddin hasplaced before the BJP. Mr. Shahabuddin wants the BJP to grant 50 seats toMuslim candidates and that there should be 10% Muslims in the council ofMinisters. Now one is intrigued whether his own party, the Congress has done so. And if he is trying to suggest that these 50 MPs (hoping that the'secular' Congress gives 50 seats to Muslims and all of them win) will workfor the rapid advancement of the Muslims, then he is completely mistaken.

Perhaps he needs to be reminded that Kishanganj, which made him an MP in1991, still has a shameful female literacy rate of only 18%--the lowest inIndia. Incidentally (?), Kishanganj has one of the highest concentration ofMuslims in the country. Clearly then there are other constituencies whereMuslims have made advancements without having a Muslim representative. Mr.Shahabuddin's demand is essentially communal badly presented in a seculargarb.

His other demands include more schools in the all areas of deprivation andreservation for Muslims in Legislatures, higher education, publicemployment, etc. in proportion to their population. Now one is tempted toask whether demanding more schools in deprived areas is solely a Muslimissue. Is it not a collective issue which all Indians who have been leftbehind should agitate for?

Had leaders like Mr. Shahabuddin ever beeninterested in such an alliance of the disadvantaged sections of India,things would have been very different now. Instead Muslim politics hasessentially revolved around religious issues like Muslim Personal Law, BabriMasjid, etc. It is highly unfortunate that Muslim leadership has seldomagitated on issues which affect all Indians irrespective of their religiousaffiliations.

One fails to understand why issues like economicliberalization are not worthy of debate within the Muslim leadership. Don'tthese issues affect the Muslims too? As a result of which the Muslim masseshave become apathetic to issues other than those which are religious. Suchapathy can only lead to resignation which is precisely what any fascistparty wants. One is tempted to think that Muslim leadership has a great roleto play in the rise of fascist ideology in India. One can only hope thatthey do something rethinking before it is too late.

eservation for Muslims is one of the pet demands being floated these daysby the Muslim leadership including Mr. Shahabuddin. It is at oncepreposterous, impractical, unprincipled and unethical idea. It isimpractical because it requires a constitutional amendment which is verydifficult in the present scenario. But more importantly it is unethical andin contravention of the principle of reservations itself.

It is well knownthat sections of Muslims are quite well off and that they possess therequired economic and cultural capital to be successful. On the other handthe majority of Muslims lack access to even basic education and propernourishment. Stratification within the Muslims is not only based on classbut also on caste which places the lower castes and classes in variousdegrees of exclusion. Introducing reservation in such a stratified societywill be detrimental to its very purpose.

Only the better placed sectionswithin the Muslims will reap the benefit of such a system. And perhaps Mr.Shahabuddin knows this very well that's why he is putting this demand withsuch force. He knows that the benefits of reservation will not percolate tothose poor Muslim women in Kishanganj whom he left unlettered but will besiphoned off by the likes of Syed Shahabuddin who are already well placedwithin the system.

Comparing the situation of Muslim with Dalits iscompletely erroneous as sections of Muslim have not faced the systemicexclusion and abuse which the Dalits have faced for centuries. Moreover, itis extremely dangerous because a backlash of such a policy will mostdefinitely translate into massive electoral gains for the BJP.

inally, the religious demands of Mr. Shahabuddin ask the BJP to stop theperformance of Hindu rituals at state functions, non-interference of statein matters of religion and abide by the Supreme Court verdict on the Ayodhyaquestion. It is a well known fact that religious rituals at state functionshave a long history and Congress has done nothing to maintain that mostimportant secular principle of the distance between state and religion. Onewonders if Mr. Shahabuddin will put the same demand to the Congress now thathe has joined that party.

It is rather annoying to hear Mr. Shahabuddinasking BJP to respect the decision of the Supreme Court in the Ayodhyadispute. Well one can legitimately ask him what his position was on the ShahBano case. After all, the Muslim leadership did not accept the Supreme Courtjudgment at that time. Isn't it hypocritical of Mr. Shahabuddin that he isnow advocating the finality of the same Supreme Court?

He should be made tounderstand that leaders like him, by pandering to the conservative sectionsof Muslim society have actually taken the Muslims backwards. In the name ofreligion, leaders like him have ossified the Muslim society and haveinhibited the inculcation of progressive ideas.

But more importantly whatare these religious matters which Mr. Shahabuddin is trying to shield fromstate intrusions? Well mostly they are matters relating to Muslim familylaws. These laws are based on the Sharia which has been modified from timeto time throughout Islamic history. After all the family laws in Pakistan,Indonesia and other Muslim countries have been modified many times. It isnot immutable as Mr. Shahabuddin seems to suggest. There is a section withinthe Muslims, including Indian Muslim women who are demanding changes in it.So far the conservative section has been resisting changes in the familylaws which clearly are detrimental to Muslim women's interests.

I feel likeasking leaders like Shahabuddin that if they are so much guided by Islamicprincipals, why they don't demand the extension of religious laws tocriminal cases also? This would mean that a Muslim rapist should be stonedto death and a thief's hands should be cut off. I wonder if the Muslimleadership in India who always compete with each other in terms of 'Islamiclifestyle' will agree to put such a demand. But as we all know perhapspatriarchy is more powerful than religion.

n conclusion, Mr. Shahabuddin assures himself that Muslims will not votefor the BJP because as he says 'it cannot meet these demands'. But the truthis somewhat different and he knows it quite well. There are Muslim who arejoining the BJP and the Muslim leadership is particularly responsible forit.

Mr. Shahabuddin says that Muslims can see the difference between 'flaweddemocracy and fascism'. But he forgets that Muslims can also see where theMuslim leadership has taken them. In the name of Muslim politics they haveseen how Muslim leaders have exploited them time and again. Their patienceis running out and they cannot find any other alternative.

And, of course,they do not trust the Congress for what it has done to them in the name ofprotecting secularism. This election should be an eye opener for the Muslimleadership. Those Muslims who are joining the BJP are sending a clearmessage to Muslim leaders like Syed Shahabuddin. And this message is thatMuslim leaders cannot use Islam and Muslims for their own partisan gainsanymore.

Arshad Alam is International Ford Fellow, Department of Muslim Religious and Cultural History, University of Erfurt, Germany.

Business

Sports

Travel

Others

Hypocrisy In The Name Of Secularism

Tags