Like Socialism, Hindutva is now like a hat that has lost its shape, and, therefore, can fit on any head. It can be tailored to suit any situation. In politics ambiguity – you may call it confusion also – is a virtue. For the last two decades, this dubious virtue has been helping out the Saffron. Whenever in crisis, the practitioners of Hindutva try to mould and reshape it to steer clear of the difficult situation.
THEN & NOW
Not long ago, the doctrine was breaking mosques and heads. It had, and perhaps has, a hit list of shrines to be distroyed in future in case Muslims do not hand over them voluntarily for the construction of temples. That definition rather interpretation has now been revised. But proper care has been taken in not tampering with its innate ambiguity and confusion.
Mr. L.K. Advani cautioned recently the participants of the 2-day meet of the BJP national executive against “narrow bigoted anti-Muslim interpretation” and favoured change. He also informed his audience that the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) had rejected theocracy i.e. the Hindu Rashtra concept. This is the view of the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
The President of the BJP, however, reaffirmed his faith in the core philosophy as propounded by the ideologues of the RSS.
The Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh clean-bowled all: Hindutva is development and prosperity.
If you sum up the self-contradictory situation, the gist will be: right to Muslims to live with total dignity like equal citizens of Bharat, a uniform civil code for the entire multi-religious India, construction of a magnificent Ram Temple at the debris of Babri Masjid; abrogation of Article 370 that gives special status to Jammu & Kashmir and all-round development of the country.
At times, in their anxiety to whitewash their crimes against Muslims and Christians, the neo-Hindutvawadis define and interpret the doctrine as the philosophy of tolerance of such a higher degree that would put the thoroughbred secularists to shame.
RESOLUTION
To quote the BJP national executive resolution: “Hindutva is not to be understood or construed narrowly confined to religious practices or expressed in extreme forms. It is related to the culture and ethos of the people… a way of life… and, therefore, inclusive.” The party rejected theocracy or any form of bigotry as “alien to our ethos.”
The point is: Who the BJP stalwarts are deceiving – themselves, their critics or Muslims?
A glance at the New Delhi meeting proceedings creates the impression that it was an essay in whistling in dark to keep up the morale. The ground reality is: The BJP could not open an account in Kerala. It was wiped out in Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Delhi. And the Leader of the Opposition is assuaging the frayed tampers by asserting: it is not rout. It is just a setback.
Mr. Sudheendra Kulkarni narrates an incident in one of his recent columns. In August 2002, the BJP organised a chintan shibir in Goa. It was attended by Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee also. Mr. Sudheendra Kulkarni says: During the tea break when I happened to be sitting alone with him, he surprised me by breaking the silence with his remark: “Yeh Hindutva kya hota hai?” If ever there was a telling question, which contained its own answer, this was it: Here was the party’s tallest leader, one who headed the BJP-led government at the Centre, expressing scepticism over the way the party’s core ideology was being interpreted and articulated.
INSTRUCTIVE
Here it would be instructive to recall that neither in the constitution of the erstwhile Jana Sangh nor in that of the BJP, the word Hindutva has been used. Hindutva is not their fundamental ideological representation.
In the 50s, the Jana Sangh emphasised “Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan”. If this chauvinist plank had not been given a quiet, decent burial, Karnataka would not have been with the BJP today. Similarly, abandoning Rama Sene was a right step in the right direction.
In the context of alliance-politics, the BJP’s former ally, the TDP openly told the former that it cannot afford to deprive itself of Muslim patronage in the elections. So happens to be the case with the Trinamool Congress.
Adopting softer Hindutva is not going to pay dividends to the BJP as the Congress is already practising it with a tinge of hypocrisy. The Samajwadi Party, the RJD, the Left and the BJD cannot work with the BJP. Left only with the Shiv Sena and the Akali Dal, their alliance can work only in two states.
MATRIX & MOSAIC
When the Saffron zealots try their hand on the digital divide of the Indian polity, they ignore a few basic realities. To quote Aijaz Ilmi, the eminent Urdu journalist, (Indian Express, June 4, 2009) “The Vanniyars and Thevars in Tamil Nadu have more affinity with their Muslim neighbour in Arakkonam than with the Yadav farmer of Etah. The Nair graduate in Thrissur has had Christian and Muslim classmates from kindergarten. The Muslims of Bellary have lived cheek by jowl with the RSS-trained Yediyurappa family for generations.”
The Saffron cannot break these bonds. The argument boils down to the point: Much above the Pan-Hindu matrix happens to be the unique Indian mosaic.
For its own relevance, let the BJP have a dispassionate, second look at its ties with the RSS and the Hindutva.
Without these two detrimental tags too, the BJP can be a viable Indian Right party.