Date: 1/21/2005


The Nehruvian-secular "compulsions of coalition politics" (2 of 2)

VICHARAMALA no. 81 Jan 21, 2005

Thoughts on issues of current interest [my comments - as an Indian citizen - within square brackets], including instances of some double standards of our public figures, especially in the construction of Indian identity (all those Macaulayan myths, and the hypocrisy that is Nehruvian secularism) - Krishen Kak

[The previous part opened with the statement of a senior union minister declaring 70,000 killings in Bihar under the overlordship of his fellow-minister LP Yadav, and ending with my observation of how Constitutional and statutory authorities watch silently as innocent Indians continue in the thousands to die. Because of Nehruvian secularism.

Meanwhile, as these deaths continue:

The BSP suprema Mayawati, who by her own declaration has earned almost a crore each year she has been in politics, now declares her birthday as money-collection day ("arthik sahayata diwas") and allegations of her corruption a BJP (read "Hindu") plot. She also justifies the induction of criminals into her party so that she can serve tit-for-tat with the Samajwadi Party (S Mishra, "Maya's Threat", India Today, Jan 17, 2005).

However, since she is "secular", such corruption is not a concern of the Nehruvian keepers of our national conscience.

Indian communists bedded with Sunni Muslims and fought against the emergence of a free and united India (P Goradia, "Secularism and bharatiyata", The Pioneer, Jan 15, 2005), and now a Nehruvian-secular government decides that 4000-odd of them are freedom-fighters "entitled to pensions and other benefits like railway concessions, [that] will cost the exchequer Rs 20 crore annually" (S Thapa, "Freedom Fighter: One who fights against India", Times News Network, Jan 15, 2005, 01:57:01 am).

However, since they are all "secular", such dishonesty is not a concern of the Nehruvian keepers of our national conscience.

Indian communists have never objected to pan-Islamic unity, but are vociferously against pan-Hindu unity ("CPI slams call for broad Hindu unity", The Hindu, Jan 17, 2005). And the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat and its president Syed Shahabuddin (whom we met in V'mala 53) advises "secular voters, including Muslims" to vote for Muslims in the coming Haryana elections ("AIMMM asks minorities to vote for Congress", The Hindu, Jan 18, 2005).

A Hindu leader asking for votes for Hindus is communal, but a Muslim leader asking votes for Muslims is secular!

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf declares "We will not accept any solution to Kashmir with the stamp of `Made in India'" (quoted in The Pioneer, Jan 16, 2005) and demands free entry ("without insistence on passports or visas") of Pakistanis into Kashmir (BM Reddy, "No more CBMs with India, says Musharraf", The Hindu, Jan 17, 2005). Oho, we have a Nehruvian-secular government that announces that all people of Indian origin who had migrated from the country after 26 January, 1950 would be granted dual citizenship, so that millions of Bangladeshi Muslims brought into and sheltered in India by Nehruvian secularism can easily become Indian citizens if they claim that they were originally Indians who migrated to East Pakistan ( ), even as the same Nehruvian secularism refuses to notify KPs a minority. And even as the same Nehruvian secularism still refuses State voting rights to a lakh Partition refugees (A Lavakere, "Travesty & tragedy of J&K democracy", ). We have a Nehruvian-secular government that has already made unilateral concessions to Pakistan notwithstanding Musharraf's snubs, Pakistan's raison d'etre as hostility for and Islam's jihad against India - but that is silent over the mass deletion of KP names from the electoral rolls (V'mala - 79). And not just deletions. No additions either, " though", as Lavakere asks, "thousands of them became eligible to vote since 1990, they had been unable to enroll themselves in the electoral list because of 'the failure of the Commission to create a mechanism for doing so.' So why then did James Michael Lyngdoh, the then Chief Election Commissioner, get the Magsaysay award? Was it because he succeeded in deferring Narendra Modi's return to power?"

Our prime minister is "distressed" by the low representation of Muslims in the public and private sector (,curpg-1.cms ). His government issues instructions for a 20% reservation for Muslims in our paramilitary forces ("Govt wants to divide nation again: BJP", The Pioneer, Dec. 2, 2004). This is "secular". The J&K deputy chief minister admits "representation of Kashmiri Pandits in State Government was `almost negligible' as `adequate' number of youth from the community had not been recruited after 1990" ( ). But our prime minister is not distressed. This too is "secular". Nehruvian-secular.

Every prime minister of this country has sold out on the Kashmiri Pandits. Without exception. Including the current one. Mufti Sayeed as far back as 1986 led a persecution of the KPs - and was rewarded by VP Singh with the country's home ministership. His appointment "acted as the signal for the fundamentalists to unleash terror in Kashmir in 1989-90. The Rubiya Syed kidnapping drama was enacted then to get five most dreaded terrorists released from jail" (editorial, Koshur Samachar, Delhi, Jan 2005).

That same Mufti Sayeed, whom some call the "Butcher of Anantnag", is "secular". And our country's external affairs minister lauds Kashmir as an example of India's secularism because it has this Muslim chief minister and a Muslim majority ( )! And Nehruvian-secularists laud as a return to normalcy the return of tourism and the Mufti's cosmetic gestures of restoring some temples. But what about the return of the refugees, not to two-roomed ghettoes surrounded by barbed wire but as EQUAL citizens in Kashmir? Nah, KPs are welcome as visitors but not as the indigenes, not (as the Koshur Samachar editorial makes clear) unless we convert.

"Kashmir mein rehna hai to lai-illah-u-allulah kehna hoga".

Fed with stories by a clearly suspect prosecution, our Nehruvian-secular mainstream press gleefully convicts the Kanchi senior Shankaracharya in a trial-by-media broadcast the world over, and suppresses the AP High Court judgement in which Justice Narasimha Reddy finds that the Kanchi mutt was "virtually targeted and persecuted in an organised manner in an independent country" and that the petition before him against the senior Shankaracharya is "a product of press clippings" indicating "the miserable levels" of the journalism involved (S Gurumurthy, "Will the `secular' media heed Justice Reddy's warning?", ). The TN chief minister repeatedly declares "the law must take its course" but, in her own case of the Guruvayoor crown, her minister for temple administration states "Religious sentiments have to be considered. We can't go by legality alone" (MG Radhakrishnan, "Thorny Crown", India Today, Jan 24, 2005). And India Today uses the Shankaracharya arrest to ask in a "mood of the nation opinion poll" whether there should be special treatment for religious leaders, but has never thought of asking this in the special treatment invariably extended to Muslim religious leaders (V'mala 78).

Shashi Tharoor (that Nehruvian-secular Stephanian - V'mala 72) waxes eloquent on the Mahabharat, dragging in "destruction of the Babri Masjid or the near-pogroms in Gujarat" and pretending that its lesson is not :"revengeful warfare" but "Arjuna's compassion (The Hindu Magazine, Jan 2 &16, 2005). Aha, why doesn't this UN fatcat, this "lord of poverty"*, preach compassion to the jihadis the world over? Why doesn't he preach Arjuna's compassion to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia? Why doesn't he ever mention the temples destroyed in Kashmir? Why doesn't he ever mention the killings there and in Bihar? How has Israel survived if not because of :"revengeful warfare"? Is the lesson of the Mahabharata "compassion" or "reciprocity"? Is the lesson of its Gita "compassion" or the "duty to fight"? Does Krishna advise Arjuna to show compassion to Karna or to kill him?

"In 1989-1990, when some Muslims in the Kashmir valley slaughtered some 10,000 Kashmiri Pandits, killed or raped their women in front of their eyes, and ultimately expelled some 350,000 Pandits from their homes, that was genocide..." (A Lavakere, "UNDP is ignorant and insolent", ).

Did the KP engage in revengeful warfare? S/he is peaceful and law-abiding, compassionate. So the Muslims "terrorised him to flee out of Kashmir. And the Pandit is still on the run" (Koshur Samachar, op cit). Have the Tharoors, who preach compassion, spoken up for the KP? Have the defenders of our democracy spoken up for the KP? Have our Constitutional and statutory institutions protected the KP? No.

Nehruvian secularism as much as Islam is responsible for the genocide of the KPs.

Where are all those Nehruvian secularists who abused Hindus for changing "Bombay" to "Mumbai", but are silent at the widespread change of Hindu names of towns, villages, roads and rivers to Muslim ones in Kashmir ( )?

"Make no mistake. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is never going to be a truly emotional and ethnic part of India until the Kashmir valley's ego is first burst and its back broken. That's the only way to treat blackmailing hybrids and hypocrites" (A Lavakere, "Hybrids and hypocrites", ).

Not compassion, but reciprocity. Hindus have forgotten the lesson of the Mahabharata.

And, in an update on that "killer clown" LP Yadav (V'mala 44), the Election Commission "frowns at Lalu's antics" (N Shukla, The Pioneer, Jan 20, 2005). It "talks tough" (K Balchand, The Hindu, Jan 21, 2005). But does LP Yadav care? He announces he "will rake up" the Godhra report (The Hindu, Jan 21, 2005). His member of parliamrent brother-in-law threatens to take the Commission to court if it prevents the Yadavs from exploiting for Muslim votes this highly-suspect report (The Hindu, Jan 20, 2005)?

Openly, the Election Commission is challenged.

LP Yadav, a man widely perceived to be thoroughly corrupt, a man who repeatedly violates the election code, a man who intimidates district magistrates and the Railway Board into misusing their positions to favour him electorally, a man whom the Election Commission itself finds guilty of election bribery, a man who so openly is playing communal politics , a man who treats the election code with contempt and defies the Election Commission of India - and the Commission fires only a "blank shot" (editorial, The Pioneer, Jan 21, 2005)?

LP Yadav imports Bangladeshi Muslims to enlarge his vote-bank (P Goradia, "Bihar and the cost of secularism", The Pioneer, Jan 29, 2005). Nehruvian secularism enfranchises illegal Muslim aliens in Bihar and elsewhere, even as Hindus in Kashmir are disfranchised - and the Election Commission of India still evades its responsibility by accepting LP Yadav's "munh mein Ram" though clearly visible is his "bagal mein chhuri"?

This is what the Nehruvian-secular compulsions of coalition politics is really about. An amoral, cunningly-crafted, cleverly-marketed, no-holds- barred lust for power.

Meanwhile, thousands die in Kashmir and Bihar.

Where are all those Nehruvian secularists who, sponsored by anti-Hindus, travelled to the West to flagellate Hinduism for the "thousands" of Muslim deaths in Gujarat (never mind that their Times of India's own figure for these is 522 - V'mala 67)? Where are the Bidwais and Nayars and Setalvads and Manders and Roys and Ramdases as their secular heros Mufti Sayid and LP Yadav preside over the murders of thousands of Indians? Where is that "good" man, our napunsak prime minister (V'mala 69, 73)? Where is the National Advisory Council? Where is the National Human Rights Commission? Where is the Supreme Court of India with its homily on rajdharma (V'mala 40)? Where is the President of India, who preaches speaking the truth (V'mala 67) and writes books about igniting minds, while citizens wail over burning bodies?

Busy being Nehruvian-secular (V'mala 20).

*from "Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige, and Corruption of the International Aid Business" by Graham Hancock. For examples of such corruption in Tharoor's own time, see K Gupta, "Tainted UN can't be trusted", The Pioneer, Jan 19, 2005] .