JEDDAH, 30 January 2003 — India is said to be the world’s largest democracy. I thought I knew what democracy meant but when I look at the political scene in India these days, it doesn’t quite come up to the definition of democracy that I learned in school. Has the idea or concept of democracy changed? In search of answers, I leafed through some thoughts attributed to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, our beloved father of the nation. As we recall his most unfortunate murder by a fanatic Hindu on this day — Jan. 30 — 55 years ago, we can do Gandhi no greater honor than remembering some of his ideas and comments on secular democracy.
"My notion of democracy is that under it, the weakest should have the same opportunity as the strongest."
"Democracy is not a state in which people act like sheep."
"Democracy is a great institution and, therefore, it is liable to be greatly abused."
Globally, India is hailed for the sheer size of its democracy, but these days few laud our democracy for its moral greatness. Guidebooks to India frequently discuss and applaud the nation as a "celebration of diversity." Lately that diversity has been expressed by the political scene’s splintering into groups which focus on sectarian interests and thus abandon the integrity both of Indian society and the nation at large. The concept of inclusiveness which was sincerely embraced by India’s founders seems no longer to play a part. Gaining advantage at whatever cost has become all important. The politics of hatred has been nourished on the blood of Indians themselves.
In the aftermath of the Babri Mosque demolition, popular Hindi journalist Udayan Sharma wrote an interesting piece. According to him, the easiest way for an Indian Muslim to demonstrate his loyalty to the country was to declare his/her allegiance to the fundamentalist Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh or its political arm, the Bharatiya Janata Party. Supporting the RSS or BJP was in essence a way of showing fidelity to the nation. The reasoning was simple: Any Muslim who owed allegiance to the RSS and BJP, despite their being viciously communal, had proved that he was a staunch Indian. What Udayan Sharma wrote tongue-in-cheek in 1993 has now become the order of the day.
Even before their sweeping victory in Gujarat, the shrill voice of Hindu fundamentalists could be heard in every village throughout India. The campaign was on to force minorities into accepting that the BJP is India and that India is the BJP. The party’s think tanks want Muslims and Christians to believe that to oppose the BJP is in essence to oppose India. This is a dangerous campaign and an even more dangerous stance.
Where will this politics of hatred take India as a nation? The Sangh Parivar is peopled by elements who care nothing for the country but completely for their own pursuit — and achievement — of naked power.
Sadly and unfortunately, the Sangh Parivar has been able to attract a huge majority of Hindus. What has become of the inclusiveness of minorities which is supposed to be the primary feature of Indian democracy?
The likes of Narendra Modi, Praveen Togadia and their ilk who spew sectarian hatred have blackened the image of India abroad. Even Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee admitted this during his last visit to the United States. He described Gujarat as a blot on India’s image and said that everywhere he went, people were talking about Gujarat and the violence that occurred there.
Currently, there is a serious debate about the lack of leadership among Muslims. We must face the fact that at present Muslims in India are not only insignificant but also irrelevant as a political force. They have been demonized to the extent that it is impossible for them to rise up with any strength. Indian Muslims would do well to use the resources they possess to strengthen the power and influence of liberal Hindus. In spite of Gujarat, Modi and Godse — Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin — all is not lost. In the end, India is larger than Hindu fanatics. What the country really needs most is another Gandhi to apply the healing touch to a nation wounded by communal strife.
