JOIN USRe-root civilisational centrism in Congress
"It doesn't matter whether a cat is white or black as long as it catches mice,” was Deng Xiaoping’s famous refrain. According to him, it was unwise, nay counterproductive, to try to force-fit a society within an ideological purity. On the contrary, the question is, what should be the policies that produce the desired results. Put another way, the clothes should fit the person, not the other way. This practicalism of Deng explains why the Communist Party of China (CPC) is still in control of China, while Communist USSR disintegrated.
Panning focus from CPC to INC -- Indian National Congress -- I recall an apocryphal story of the 1980s in the then undivided Andhra Pradesh. T Anjaiah was Chief Minister and state party president. He suspended a prominent man from the Congress party for being critical of its leadership. That man ridiculed Anjaiah for suspending a non-member. Anjaiah smugly retorted, “Since you are not a member of any other political party, you are automatically deemed to be a Congress member, and hence you are suspended.”
What is the message in this hilarious, yet profound, apocryphal story? That the Congress was a microcosm mirroring Indian society, wherein one is considered a Hindu by default unless one explicitly denies it. Likewise, in the political arena, all Indians were, by default, considered as belonging to the Congress, unless they explicitly denied it. In other words, like the typical polytheistic Hindu society, the Congress accommodated all sections of people with varied interests and shades of thought and opinion.
The absence of any viable Hindu party during the freedom struggle and for a while thereafter, and the inclusiveness of the Congress, gave rise to the perception that it was a default Hindu party. Whether it represented in any measure Hindu-specific interests was beside the point. The role of Jinnah, the Ali brothers and the Muslim League and other non-Hindus in imposing this Hindu image on the Congress was no less, notwithstanding denial by its leadership. This foisted Hindu persona ensured political fortunes for the Congress in a largely Hindu India for more than half-a-century -- till it started working against itself.
The 1980s marked an important turning point in the political trajectory of the Congress. The Janata Party, which was an unprincipled conglomeration of opportunistic, casteist, pseudo-Hindu and left-liberal elements, captured power post-Emergency, only to implode and fragment within three years. Some of its incongruent groups and individuals gradually wormed their way into the Congress, while others formed regional outfits, cooking their political meal by polarising society on caste and religious lines, and thereby destroyed the Congress’ base.
The progressive marginalisation of the Congress was accompanied by increasing attacks by pseudo-Hindu groups castigating it as pseudo-secularist, nay anti-Hindu. And the rhetoric of the left-liberal motormouths of the Congress ecosystem reinforced that negative narrative, pushing Hindus into the BJP’s arms. In other words, by living up to the ‘anti-Hindu’ slur, the Congress vacated the centre-right political space for the BJP. Notably, though the DNA of the BJP is as casteist and divisive as that of many splinters of the erstwhile Janata Party, it has the huge advantage of its ‘holding company’, the RSS, camouflaging it in pseudo-Hindu garb.
Going back to the CPC, Deng’s practicalism should be a lesson for the Congress to course-correct as it has become a prisoner of its own perceived ‘anti-Hindu’ rhetoric that is proving counterproductive and making it electorally irrelevant in large parts of India. If the slide in its electoral fortunes continues, the BJP’s avowed plan of ‘Congress-mukt Bharat’ will soon come to pass.
After more than eight years of disappointing rule, a large section of Hindus are disillusioned with the BJP for taking them for granted. They have seen through the diabolical game of the RSS in emotionally polarising society on communal lines on inane issues to secure Hindu votes but not redressing any of the accumulated collective grievances of Hindus. For want of suitable political options, this disaffected chunk of Hindus remains silent. If the Congress is any wiser, it should tap this huge section to its side, as Lord Ram did by taking the conscientious Vibhishana to his side to end the tyranny of Ravana.
Interestingly, the Congress has institutionalised frameworks to address issues concerning SC, ST, OBC, farmers, professionals, women, students, labour and minorities, but not of Hindus as a religious group. Since India is a secular polity, the concerns of every section of society, big or small, ought to be addressed by any national party. Ignoring the legitimate concerns of Hindus, who are the largest segment, is not politically advisable.
It may be argued that the BJP, too, does not have a Hindu wing, so why must the Congress have one. But that is not true. While the Congress is an independent entity, the BJP is the political wing of the RSS, which has deep structures in all segments of society, including Hindus. Its Vishwa Hindu Parishad organises Hindus for the BJP. This void in the organisational framework of the Congress has become a chink in its political armour.
Take the example of the Ram Janmabhoomi issue, which the BJP adroitly exploited. To the credit of the Congress, under Rajiv Gandhi’s leadership, it did make sincere efforts to resolve the issue amicably. But at every stage, both the left-liberals and the pseudo-Hindutva RSS-BJP would block its initiatives -- because, if the Congress were allowed to resolve the issue, they would both become politically irrelevant. While the left-liberals would instigate the Muslims, the RSS-BJP would get VHP to mass-mobilise Hindus. In the absence of an institutional mechanism of its own, the Congress was severely handicapped in messaging to the larger Hindu society about its initiatives, which were being stymied by the pseudo-Hindu shenanigans of the RSS-BJP. Its political consequences were severe -- not only did Congress’ efforts go in vain, but its ‘anti-Hindu’ tag got reinforced.
A political party in a predominantly Hindu country cannot be perceived as anti-Hindu and yet seek to win political power. And a party that remains out of power for too long will become irrelevant and disintegrate. For power is the centripetal force that binds a political party. Therefore, to spring a comeback, the Congress needs to institutionalise a framework to systematically work for removal of the ‘anti-Hindu’ tag. Such an organisational mechanism should work to ascertain and articulate the genuine collective grievances of Hindus and suggest modalities of redressing them within the constitutional framework. As there are no short-cuts in this endeavour, trivialities must be avoided.
Put another way, for the Congress to become politically relevant, it is imperative to mainstream itself by firmly re-rooting itself in civilisational centrism.
(The writer is a former Director, CBI)