JOIN USWhy hasn’t the Bharat Jodo Yatra set the Ganga on fire yet?
It cannot be overlooked that throughout the ongoing 3,000-km Bharat Jodo Yatra, Rahul Gandhi has been drawing considerable attention and crowds, though he may not have set the Cauvery, down south, or the Ganges, the Hindi heartland, on fire. Eminent people and celebrities have joined Rahul along the way for short distances – among them Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav, activists and former AAP members, renowned Carnatic singer and Magsaysay awardee T M Krishna, former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan, and assorted Bollywood stars. The BJP jibes that the Yatra is a non-event of a political leader who abdicated his throne and is now in the wilderness. Congress leaders complain that the media, largely in thrall to the ruling BJP, has blocked out the march from the news.
We can recall two momentous non-violent marches from recent history which have shaped our times -- the Dandi Yatra or Salt March in 1930, led by Mahatma Gandhi, which defied British rule; and the Washington March in 1963, led by Martin Luther King Jr, himself inspired by Gandhi and Nehru, demanding civil liberties for Blacks. We will exclude other noteworthy marches or campaigns, like the fascist Mussolini’s March on Rome in 1922 or Mao’s Long March, which were in essence armed marches to seize power. They were all epochal events that changed the history of the world.
Rahul’s Bharat Jodo Yatra is a call to unite India, with emphasis on healing the deep fractures in society along religious and caste lines. A lofty ideal, and timely too, but somehow the march is coloured by party politics and is perceived more as an anti-BJP, anti-Modi march, rather than as a noble intention to rid the nation of its communal cancer that is devouring its vitals.
It cannot be denied that the Hindu-Muslim divide and caste conflicts have worsened after the BJP came to power in 2014. Authoritarian rule has grown both at the Centre, with BJP at the helm, and in states where strong chieftains of regional parties wield power. Institutional autonomy has been diluted, investigating agencies both at the Centre and in the states have become loyal to the party in power rather than to the Constitution, and the judiciary seems effete and is struggling to assert itself. The attacks on institutions and journalists are brazen.
Those in power and their minions, and even many of us in society, are easily offended by journalists who question, whose job and very raison de etre is to question those in power; we are intolerant of those who practice a different faith, incommoded by those who speak a different language, see red if others sport a black dress, we are resentful of those with differing tastes and food habits, or miffed and even outraged by those who love their country in their own ways not compatible with our outlook. We are enraged even at cartoonists and comedians who draw a caricature or crack a joke to expose our foibles, puncture our inflated egos, or poke fun at our asinine behaviour. Those in power jail them, and the rest of us take to vigilante justice or resort to trolling. Why have we become so sanctimonious and such pompous prigs?
To cure ourselves of these ills, was a Bharat Jodo Yatra the need of the hour? If yes, why has it not set the hearts of the young aflame and why haven’t millions more joined Rahul’s march? Why are we not seeing a similar electrifying cry reverberate in the skies as we saw when Jayaprakash Narayan gave his call for a ‘total revolution’, which brought on Indira Gandhi’s Emergency and united the entire Opposition, and all castes and communities, against the Congress and eventually brought her down? Or more recently, the India Against Corruption movement, which ignited the hearts of the youth across the country and led to the siege of Delhi and the downfall of UPA-2. The Bharat Jodo Yatra pales in comparison. Why? More than two-thirds of the Yatra has been covered, yet the crowds have not swollen, and the land is not echoing with the voices of the masses through the land.
Why? Rahul’s opponents and detractors may ridicule him as ‘Pappu’ or paint him as a shallow greenhorn and dilettante, but he is none of that. If you listen to him carefully, he comes across as a serious, mature and well-informed man who is seized of the country’s problems. He is not an intellectual giant like his grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru, nor does he have his aura. He doesn’t have the decisiveness, the astute and ruthless political instincts and the magnetism and courage of his grandmother Indira Gandhi, nor does he possess the indefinable charisma of his father Rajiv Gandhi. Rahul comes across as personable, decent, and humble, and has shown courage and consistency in his own way in taking on Modi and the BJP by highlighting many of the issues plaguing our country -- poverty, unemployment, casteism, communal conflict, corruption and crony capitalism, among others. But these charges against Modi or the BJP, even if they stick, won’t win people over to Rahul’s side because Congress is accused of these very ills. If Modi is seen as appeasing Hindus, Rahul is seen as pro-Muslim and anti-Hindu. And Rahul is still seen as part of a decadent Congress establishment and legacy.
We all know where Modi and the BJP stand on many issues that undermine democracy -- their brand of Hindutva and majoritarian politics, an unwritten code that authoritarian rule by a strong leader will solve the nation’s problems, aggressive chest-thumping nationalism, subordinating all institutions to the political executive, ignoring vigilante justice by the party-faithful if it serves their politics of winning elections, etc. But where does Rahul stand? We cannot detect the precise man through his actions. When the Supreme Court spoke for a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens, which promises to give equal rights to Muslim women, Rahul was perceived to be siding with Muslim conservatives opposed to it. In the Sabarimala temple case, when the Supreme Court ruled that women of menstrual age can enter the sanctum and offer puja, he seemed lost between the court ruling and his party’s need to not antagonise Hindu conservatives. In short, he was seen to be trying to appease conservatives of both communities.
The Congress ship is itself rudderless and is foundering with internal strife. It now has an elected president but many within the party believe he’s a dummy. While his mother and sister hover over the party and its decisions, Rahul seems torn between the old guard and the young brigade, and both camps are insecure and many are jumping ship.
Napoleon said, ‘A leader is a dealer in hope.’ Does Rahul inspire and instil hope in the masses? When he does, fortune may favour him.
(The writer is a soldier, farmer and entrepreneur)