For too long and far too unfairly, secularism had become a dirty word in Indian politics. It’s been ridiculed, scorned, mocked and maligned. It became an open sport from the 1980s, when the newly energised Hindutvawadis kicked around the football of secularism so aggressively that it became battered, bruised and misshapen. As a concept, secularism lay in tatters. As an ideal, dead.
Secularism as an ideal symbolises not just tolerance and equal treatment of all religions, but for the clear separation of church and state. It’s an ideal modern, progressive nations like France champion steadfastly. Citizens are entirely Catholic or Protestant, but Jesus and Bible, rituals and sermons are confined strictly to the church or private domain. They have no place in the state apparatus. It’s the pursuit of this ideal that propelled France to ban Muslim headscarves in government schools and simultaneously oppose the inclusion of the description ‘Christian’ in the EU constitution.
Sadly in India, secularism became synonymous with appeasing minorities. The Congress must take the blame for giving secularism a bad name. And the BJP must take the blame for hanging it. The former provided a variety of silly sops to the Muslims that did little to empower them but succeeded in enraging the Hindus. In retaliation, the Hindutvawadis adopted a scorched-earth policy toward secularism, morphing it into the phantasmagoria of "pseudo-secularism". Ceaseless, strident and vitriolic smear campaigns drove "pseudo-secularists" to the ground. Secular votaries were browbeaten, bullied and buried under the debris of this bombardment. Guerrilla attacks waged through anonymous hate mails and vicious whisper campaigns became the brigade’s terror tactics. The Hindutvawadis have the gall to call themselves patriots when they waged a systematic onslaught against the nation’s most important and secular institutions—the Supreme Court, the Election Commission, the National Human Rights Commission. ngos, journalists, historians, parliamentarians, artists, human rights activists, all came under their hail of fire. Exactly as Parliament and the office of the prime minister have now been stripped of their dignity, earlier the Hindutva brigade stripped discussion of its decency. Debate degenerated into abuse. Decibel, not argument was used to discredit and undermine opponents. Against this, secularists became defensive, weak, confused, robbed of their strength and credibility to assert themselves.
Arjun Singh, Mani Shankar Aiyer and a few others in the Congress regime have emerged as the new warriors of secularism. Some of their actions may be needlessly needling, but it is indisputable that under the new dispensation, secularism is regaining its confidence, voice and muscle. It is vital for India’s health that secularism finds its feet again. There’s no other way that India can be. Indians are religious, but they are secular too, and this is not a contradiction.
Contrary to what the Hindutvawadis charge, secularism does not mean the denigration or denial of religion. Even Communists concede atheism will not be accepted in a god-fearing country like India. Communists tried hard to overthrow religion in Russia, but all they succeeded in doing was to drive Christianity underground. Any effort by political groups to exploit religious differences for the pursuit of power and dominance will wreak havoc in a country like ours where differences among Hindus are huge, never mind the deep and wide regional, religious, linguistic divisions. The unravelling of Yugoslavia, its brutal wars, pogroms, ethnic cleansing and break-up should serve as a warning of the dangerous consequences of narrow, divisive, sectarian agendas in multicultural nations. While strictly secular, Scandinavian countries infuse the spirit of Christianity in their nationhood. The spirit has nothing to do with religiosity. It is what engenders them to be law-abiding and charitable.
India’s predominantly Hindu. The spirit of Hinduism is tolerance and it is this spirit—not our laws and Constitution—that makes India secular. Hinduism unites, Hindutva divides. Therein lies the difference. India’s destined to be democratic, socialist, secular. Any effort to tinker with our national character brings ruin, suffering and defeat. Indira Gandhi tried to alter the democratic underpinnings of the nation through Emergency. The BJP tried to alter our secular spirit. In both instances, the parties and the people suffered and lost. India won. Our national character asserted itself.
Now secularism is asserting itself. Secular warriors are emboldened by two factors—the BJP’s defeat and the way the BJP itself appeased the minorities when in power. In power, the BJP was equally guilty of pseudo-secularism. Having perpetrated the same crime, the BJP now lacks the credibility to go on the rampage about pseudo-secularism.
Appeasement may well be a useful instrument of power. But one hopes the Congress will not revert to its bad habits. The BJP is right. Appeasement is bad in principle. It weakens the appeased and inflames the non-appeased. It uplifts neither. What we need is genuine secularism, a clear separation of church and state, where religion plays no role in administration, is a matter of personal choice and is confined to homes and places of worship. The ongoing war will hopefully help secularism regain its vigour and resurrect its ideals.
(The author can be reached at post@anitapratap.com)
