FASCINATION FOR ‘HINDUTVA LITE’ AMONG OPPOSITION PARTIES
Subhash Gatade
Politics is a strange beast.
It looks incredulous how at times it helps Satans being metamorphosed into Saints and biggest murderers of hapless communities emerging as the defenders or ‘heartthrobs’ of their ‘own people.’
Perhaps it is a sign of this weirdness that Donald Trump’s vitriolic speeches targeting Haitian immigrants – that they eat pets — have not appeared incredulous to a large section of the US population, which is 79% literate, as the records show. Finally, Haitian groups themselves had to approach the courts to expose “racial animus against Haitian immigrants” over the years.
Interestingly, while the strongest democracy in the world is in the midst of a manufactured controversy around pets, the biggest democracy in the world, is witnessing another fabricated controversy around Laddoo – a spherical sweet from the Indian subcontinent — thanks to the intervention of what can be called as ‘new converts’ to Hindutva Lite politics.
Literally one fine morning/evening, Chandrababu Naidu, leader of Telugu Desam party (TDP) and Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, shocked the devotees of a very famous Tirupati temple by making unsubstantiated claims about the quality of laddoos served there, alleging that they contained animal fats.
The motive behind raking up this issue – without even ordering an enquiry into it – was obvious to everyone. Naidu, who kept brandishing his secular image despite his cosy relations with Supremacist forces (or his support to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party or BJP at the Centre) wanted to target not only his predecessor Jagan Reddy, a born Christian and leader of the YSR Congress Party, who is also the ex-Chief Minister of the state, he also wanted to communicate to voters that if the time comes, he can prove a ‘bigger Hindu’ than BJP because he is equally sensitive to ‘majority community anxieties’.
Naidu’s shedding his secular image was matched equally by what his Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan of the Jana Sena Party did in this laddoo row. While Naidu made unsubstantiated claims about presence of animal fats in the laddoos (sharing selected contents of a July report in the month of September), Kalyan went a step further. He peddled the theory that Hindu faith was in danger in India and it was time to constitute a Sanatan Dharm Raksha Board.
As we write these lines, there are reports that Kalyan, who once praised Che Guevara and proudly displayed his red scarf is busy touring Andhra Pradesh on a Varahi Yatra with his saffron scarf.
What is worth emphasising is that all these attempts to vitiate the communal atmosphere were strongly rebuffed by the highest court of the country, which asked Naidu to ‘Keep God out of Politics’
The not so silent metamorphosis of ‘secular’ Naidu or Pawan Kalyan, who once worked in close coordination with Left parties/formations, into promoters of Hindutva Lite politics, is now no longer hidden.
There is nothing surprising about this growing fascination of Hindutva Lite politics in this part of South Asia.
With the ascent of Hindutva Supremacists at the Centre and many states, this phenomenon of packaging oneself as Hindutva Lite is looking attractive to many in the Opposition camp.
The recent attempts by Vikramaditya Singh, son of the late Chief Minister and Congress leader of Himachal Pradesh, Virbhadra Singh, and at present a minister in the Congress government to ask vendors in the state to display their names, much on the lines of the experiment in BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh, could be seen in this light. Later, when the party high command intervened, he had no qualms in saying that it was all a media creation and he was a loyal soldier of the party.
Also, recall how Kamal Nath, ex-Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh and state president of the Congress had similarly resorted to cheap gimmickry in a bid to marginalise BJP. It is a different matter that his public religiosity or his moves to build statues of gods or even his promoting worshiping of Hindu gods in Congress offices did not help the party much. It was one of the worst performances of the party in the state elections that year.
It was clear that Nath did not bother to heed the advice of Shashi Tharoor (his colleague in the Congress party) who had famously said in an interview that any attempt at becoming Hindutva Lite would lead to ‘Congress Zero’ and had emphasised the need to defend and expand the secular space.
This fascination for Hindutva Lite politics is understandable. Avowedly secular parties also seem to be falling prey to it under mass pressure on occasions.
Interestingly, on the eve of elections to the 18th Lok Sabha in May 2024, Trinamool Congress, under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee, was also found slowly submitting herself to Hindu interests.
What was remarkable was that only in January (2024), the West Bengal Chief Minister had lambasted the inauguration of the Ram Temple as a ‘political stunt’, refused to declare January 22, 2024, as a holiday and had organised Sarv Dharm (all-religion) rallies in Kolkata and the rest of Bengal.
Three months down the line, Banerjee seemed to have softened her stance and to blunt the criticism of the BJP — which tried to corner her government for not declaring public holidays on Hindu festivals but doing so for Muslim commemorations like Shab-e-Barat — suddenly declared Ram Navami (April 17) as a public holiday.
Perhaps all these new entrants to this Hindutva Lite experiment may consider themselves smart players in Indian politics, who are supposedly able to retain their identity but also expand their footprints in the region but forget the fact that by not defending secular principles and values and trying to imitate Hindutva politics in their own non-intimidatory way, they are basically furthering and consolidating the Hindutva project itself.
All their so-called smart moves further accelerate the dynamic of the saffron project to rebuild India into a Hindu Rashtra
Leading public intellectual Pratap Bhanu Mehta had explained this agenda in these words a few ago:
“Elections will come and go. But the BJP will measure its success by a longer-term cultural transformation. The goal of this cultural transformation is twofold. It is to assert Hindu majoritarianism. But it is also to transform Hinduism from a variety of religious practices into a consolidated ethnic identity. “
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), led by Arvind Kejriwal, which at present rules two states in the country and is keen to increase its footprint in rest of India, has achieved a rare perfection in embracing this kind of politics. It is a different matter that it is able to impress upon even a section of analysts/scholars that its triumph during elections is a rejection of hate politics.
For example, take a look at the consecration ceremony of the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya and what AAP did during these celebrations. The Congress termed the ceremony a “political event” and despite receiving invitations, its top leaders did not attend the event. AAP, as per reports, decided to conduct ‘Shobha Yatra’ and organise community kitchens (bhandara) and ‘Sunderkand’ recitals in various Assembly segments in Delhi to celebrate the occasion.
What one notices is that this pandering to majority sentiments is a significant marker of AAP’s decade-old politics.
One can even look at Kejriwal’s first attempt to fight elections.
When the electoral battle started (in 2014), AAP did not field a single candidate from the minority community in Gujarat despite the fact that the population of Muslims in the state is more than 9%. According to the AAP state leadership, it did not “find any suitable candidate from the community” to contest elections. Neelanjan Mukhopadhyay, a well-known writer, had written that AAP thus did not challenge the prevalent norm that ‘Muslims are not to be given tickets’ by the mainstream parties. (Modi ki Raah Chale Kejriwal, Deshbandhu, April 30, 2014).
Perhaps it would be opportune to revisit AAP’s electoral victory — a hat-trick of sorts — during elections to the Delhi Assembly (2020). No doubt, BJP had lost the elections, but it has also seen a swing of around 8% – – not a small number — vote in its favour, since the last elections (2015). This surge in its vote share was definitely an outcome of the most ‘vitriolic campaign’ led by BJP in the history of Delhi.
A journey down memory lane would remind one that never before one had witnessed direct public provocation to violence against the ‘others’ from Cabinet ministers who had taken oath on the Constitution in public meetings, or from BJP leaders in rallies. Never before had one seen elected members of Parliament stigmatising a community and provoking the majority sentiment by openly communal rhetoric.
Hate speeches by BJP leaders are in the public domain but at the ground level, a much more coarse, poisonous rhetoric targeting the ‘others’ was used on a large scale in a more organised and planned manner. The bare argument was that ‘Hindus are in danger’ (do not ask how and why despite having around 85% of population in the country) and if they do not act unitedly ‘the others will take over’.
In the unfolding scenario, it was incumbent upon any political formation, which has the wherewithal and experience to rule the people, and which does not subscribe to communal worldview, to take on the hatemongers and ensure that laws of the land could be used against them.
But, one discovered that AAP miserably failed to counter this unfolding menace by deciding not to engage in these debates. It found it a worthwhile strategy to keep quiet and merely focus itself on its ‘work’.
No doubt, if politics is reduced merely to the activity of gathering votes at any cost and keeping oneself aloof from the raging debates/controversies in the country, then it was definitely a smart move by AAP, but when the whole edifice of the Constitution was under question and a conscious attempt was on to dismantle its structure bit by bit, remaining silent or keeping oneself aloof from the unfolding debate is highly questionable.
What was rather disturbing was that Kejriwal did not take any stand on the Shaheen Bagh protest (against the Citizenship Amendment Act) for a long time. Only when he found himself cornered in a debate, he questioned Home MinisterAmit Shah’s inability to clear the road — where the sit-in protest was being held — and even declared that “[i]f Delhi police was under the state government’s jurisdiction, it would have opened the Shaheen Bagh Road in two hours.” Thus, inadvertently or so, the AAP leader pandered to the majoritarian sentiment, which is prejudiced toward social and religious minorities.
Kejriwal’s sudden metamorphosis a few days before the elections into a Hanuman Bhakt — by reciting Hanuman Chalisa and visiting the famous Hanuman Temple — was another move basically to cater to similar sentiments.
The question is whether Kejriwal’s increasing concerns (which could be also construed as pandering) toward majority sentiments was then a recent phenomenon or had he always been conscious of it.
Take the case of Kejriwal’s support to the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir, or his claims merely few months before elections (May 2019) to Parliament when he made statements that were construed as ‘polarising’! One can recall when AAP’s chances of an alliance with Congress finally fizzled out, he had claimed in a press conference that according to ‘our survey, no Hindu will vote for Congress anyway. Muslims were initially confused, but now they will vote for us,”. No details of the survey were ever provided, and the claim was clearly construed as a statement which aimed at ‘polarising’ voters on religious basis.
Analysts had also noted a “perceptible attempt” at reinforcing Kejriwal’s own identity as a Hindu. post these elections. Under Kejriwal, AAP did win the elections but as journalist Swati Chaturvedi rightly underlined “anyone who says the Delhi result turns down the dial on bigotry is delusional.”
Perhaps one can go on and on about why and how Hindutva Lite is becoming a ‘cool thing’ for many in the Opposition and how to render such politics ineffective and strengthen and deepen secular politics in the country. It is time such leaders understand that riding a tiger (may be a metaphorical one) always looks promising in the near future, but a tiger is a tiger, and such trips are always short-lived.