Reporter in 1972: “What’s the influence of the French Revolution?”
Zhou Enlai, premier of the People’s Republic of China: “It’s too early to say.”
How JP Movement Shaped Bihar And India’s Politics
The JP movement of the '70s birthed the careers and dynasties of several politicians. Whether the promises it made actually trickled down is another story.
When the Narendra Modi government passed the three farm bills in Parliament last year, triggering widespread protests across several parts of the country, Bihar did not witness any big agitation over the issue. When the Prime Minister chose to repeal them recently, there was no jubilation in the state either.
Farmers of Bihar, at best, remained indifferent towards the year-long movement that had impacted the states of Punjab, Haryana, and to some extent Uttar Pradesh. They were, in fact, equally indifferent when, way back in 2006, the Nitish Kumar government had chosen to abolish the Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) Act in the state. This time around, Nitish has sought to downplay the repeal of the farm laws, saying it is the decision of the Prime Minister.
In a state where Swami Sahajanand Saraswati led a storied farmers’ movement to deal a blow to the zamindari system, and more recently, Loknayak Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) spearheaded the famous Total Revolution (Sampoorna Kranti) to oust the Indira Gandhi-led Congress government at the Centre, not only with the spontaneous support of college students but also a large section of farmers in the state, it is surprising to find such a tepid response to the latest movement of peasants. This is despite the fact that the farmers’ leaders have professed to have followed the Gandhian method of protests, which JP had religiously done all through his movement against the erstwhile Congress regime.
In fact, the JP-led movement was the biggest Gandhian movement in the post-Independence era, which paved the way for the installation of the first-ever non-Congress government at the Centre, something which seemed unthinkable until the early-to-mid 1970s. And it also inspired many other subsequent movements in the country. Among other things, it underlined the fact that a spontaneous movement by the common man, if guided by a visionary leader, had the potential to overthrow even a mighty regime through democratic means.
Now, as the latest farmers’ movement failed to find echoes in Bihar, the focus has shifted back on the legacy of the JP movement in the state in the present context. The JP movement not only saw the emergence of Lalu Prasad Yadav and Nitish Kumar, but also many others stalwarts like Sushil Kumar Modi, Ram Vilas Paswan and Ravi Shankar Prasad. But did the ideals of that ‘revolution’ lose relevance along the way in the very state which has been ruled by his followers over the past 30 years?
Advertisement
Political experts do not think so. Patna-based economist Nawal Kishore Choudhary says if one looks at any revolution or movement in the immediate context, it would seem as if it had failed. “French Revolution was finally used by Napoleon Bonaparte, who declared himself as an emperor. French Revolution was not meant to create another emperor but it happened, and led to imperialist wars,” Choudhary tells Outlook. “But some changes did take place. The third estate became powerful and it gave the last blow to feudalism with its principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.”
ALSO READ: 'Hum Dekhenge': Times When India Protested
Choudhary asks: “What was the Russian Revolution all about? What’s Russia doing today? What about the Chinese Revolution, and what’s happening there today? Did Mao think of ushering in market capitalism? The way China is now pursuing an expansionist policy the world over, is akin to imperialism. Yet, can we say those revolutions failed?”
Advertisement
According to Choudhary, after the Total Revolution movement launched by JP, social empowerment of intermediate castes did take place in Bihar, but they were not ready to hand over power further down to the lowest sections of society. “In the name of socialism, Lalu Prasad Yadav ushered in dynastic rule and Nitish Kumar practised some form of autocratic rule,” he says. “However, the biggest takeaway of the JP movement is that if people want, they can change the government and also get laws repealed.”
Political observers also believe that the empowerment of people, which JP called lok shakti, has been emerging at the national level, if not in Bihar. Choudhary says any movement can’t be seen in isolation, that JP’s Sampoorna Kranti movement has contributed to the process of change. “It is always a process; sometimes it is hidden, sometimes it’s explicit. Every movement which empowers people contributes to that,” he contends.
Advertisement
He, however, believes that Bihar has not witnessed any movement in recent years and the ideals of the JP movement are nowhere to be seen today. “All leaders of Bihar who owe their political career to the JP movement are walking in a direction opposite JP’s,” he says. “JP believed in social and economic transformation along socialist lines. He envisaged a corruption-free society in a democracy, but what do you see everywhere today? It’s not only ironic but also a betrayal of the ideals of societal change by Gandhi and JP which includes economic change based on democratic principles and justice.”
Veteran socialist Shivanand Tiwari, however, rues the fact that people tend to analyse the JP movement on the basis of the behaviour of people who rose from it and held power in Bihar, such as Lalu Yadav, Nitish Kumar, Sushil Kumar Modi and others. “I think it is not fair,” he says.
Advertisement
He says the JP movement materialised because it reflected a sense of unease in a section of society, otherwise it would not have spread on such a massive scale. “The major task after Emergency ended was to restore democracy in the country. JP got several parties dissolved to come on a common platform. After the Janata Party came to power in 1977, many constitutional amendments were made to ensure that,” he says.
Incidentally, socialist icon Ram Manohar Lohia had given the slogan of gair-Congresswad (anti-Congressism) and worked to stitch up a front comprising both Left and Right in 1967, but they managed change of regimes only at the state level. The first change of government at the Centre took place under JP’s leadership—a big achievement in itself.
Tiwari feels the JP movement did not get enough time to bring about desired changes at the social level. “It was launched on March 18, 1974 and the emergency was imposed in June 1975,” he says. “It’s too much to expect the movement to have impacted society enough, in such a short span of time, to bring about social changes right up to the grassroots level,” he says.
Tiwari, who was associated with JP during the movement, points out that JP did try to organise those youths who had joined his movement without any prior political affiliation. The name of a youth front Chhatra Yuva Sangharsh Vahini, which emerged out of the movement, was inspired by the Mukti Vahini of Bangladesh. A meeting was also held at Acharya Rammurti’s ashram, but where was time to implement all those changes, he asks.
The former Rajya Sabha member says questions are often asked about the legacy of the JP movement and also if its objectives were fulfilled? “It is difficult to answer. What happened to Gandhi’s legacy? While declaring Nehru his successor, Gandhi had hoped he would at least talk about his work. But Nehru’s approach on subjects like society, system, development model and even secularism was different from Gandhi’s. Gandhi worked among the people to realise his dream of a new society. But his ideas were not even included in Congress programmes,” he says.
ALSO READ
Show comments