French political scientist Christophe Jaffrelot, an expert on India and the BJP, talks to Pranay Sharma on what a ‘Congress-mukt Bharat’ forebodes for India. Excerpts:
Many are predicting a complete rout of the Congress in this parliamentary election. Do you share that view?
Congress will definitely suffer a setback. But a complete rout would mean that the party would not be number two in the Lok Sabha. That is doubtful.
Even if the Congress suffers heavy defeat, will it mean that the party will find it difficult to recover and reinvent itself?
The Congress has had ups and downs indeed. It has been around 100 seats before and has reinvented itself.
In its post-independence history, the Congress has faced several crises. How different is the one that the party faces now?
The present crisis is different because the party is facing two crises simultaneously—a crisis of leadership, because the scion of a great family is not necessarily made to lead, and a moral crisis, that is not related only to corruption but also to the fact that the party’s identity has become fuzzy: is it business-friendly or people-friendly? For the people or populist? Last but not least, no prime minister had been in office for 10 years in a row since Nehru, when communication was not as important as today. Today, nobody can rule that long and let opponents spread venom without reacting equally forcefully (if not viciously). This is the age of television.
The BJP has been calling for an India that is free of the Congress. If that ever happens, will it be a good thing?
Democracy needs a strong opposition. If the Congress loses the election and then vanishes, it will be a tragedy for democracy—if no political force can resist those in power, especially if institutions like the judiciary and the media lose their independence and if the state parties remain more opportunist than anything else.
Would you agree with the view that the Congress still represents plurality, inclusiveness, liberal ideas and freedom in comparison to many other parties in India?
The Congress grew as a catch-all party. This is the reason of its decline: in the Hindi belt, it cannot get the vote of the Dalits, the Muslims and the Brahmins any more. This is one of the consequences of Mandal and Mandir. But it is still the only party that wins seats in the north and the south, has Muslim and Hindu MPs and so on and so forth.
Does the Congress at present lack ‘big ideas’, and if so, how will you define them?
The ‘big idea’, in fact, is the Congress itself! What is the alternative? A majoritarian and authoritarian form of democracy in which the minorities are invited to be second-class citizens? (And what if they refuse?) Or a third force made of state parties which will not last more than two years? Congress does not need ‘big ideas’ to reinvent itself; it has simply to be true to its creator, Mahatma Gandhi, who shaped the party in 1920. Young Congressmen are prepared to take over on behalf of the country’s motto: ‘unity in diversity’. The party leaders should let them come up!
What a disgraceful interview with Christophe Jaffrelot (‘The Congress itself is the big idea’). Sad to see what Outlook has come to after being a quality publication for so long. (I was one of its first subscribers.) It has clearly sold its soul to the Congress.
Radhanath Varadan, Hanoi, Vietnam
Amusing that the Congress has to rely on outsiders (so-called experts) for support.
Uday Sharma, Bangalore
The Congress can become a big idea (again) if it gets rid of the family. The latter has hijacked the party. Indira Gandhi was quick to get rid of privy purses for all the maharajas but kept it for herself and her family.
Priya Madhavan, Rochester
Jaffrelot is introduced as “an expert on India and the BJP”, but the whole dialogue is about the Congress and its essentiality. Since when did ‘political scientists’ start using phrases like opposition spewing venom and that too when the opposition has brought attention on to huge scams?
Abhijit Kane, Mumbai
What is this edition all about, eulogies for the late, unlamented Congress party?
Cdr Arun Visvanathan, Chennai
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
" Congress without the Gandhis
By Pritish Nandy, Mumbai Mirror | Sep 3, 2014, 12.00 AM IST
One of the first things everyone agrees upon in private and denies in public is that the Congress party has reached such a sorry state because of the Gandhis who currently run it. Even Congressmen now admit to it. But as they fear the wrath of the dynasty, they avoid saying it in the open. It remains but an unspoken verity.
You have to read Natwar Singh's autobiography to figure how Rajiv single-handedly got India into such an awful mess in Sri Lanka, and Natwar (you must remember) was as ardent a Rajiv fan as you will get. Till of course Sonia managed to rile him.
Natwar's book tells you as much about the Camelot years as it does about Sonia and the fall of the Congress. It is the first stone. More will be cast I am sure. By others.
Till now all the fault lines in the party were blamed on others. Manmohan Singh got the brunt of it. He was for Sonia what Sanjay was to Indira. The perfect fall guy, the man everyone came to hate. It was a deliberate strategy to show him up as a wimp who ran away from the battlefield. As the man who let the party down. Short of calling him corrupt, a charge that few would buy into, every other insult was directed at him through a pliant party apparatus and a submissive media looking for someone to target in a season of endless scams where billions were --
Since the media was too scared to take on the Gandhis, they chose the safer option. They targeted Manmohan and, like a fool, he allowed himself to be led to slaughter. From there began the rise of Narendra Modi, the man the nation chose to throw the Gandhis out. Modi was charismatic. He was seen as powerful, decisive. So the electorate decided he could do the job the media and the Congress party had failed to. From that choice came Modi's real power. Not from the BJP or the RSS. Not from Hindutva. Modi was the man, India decided, who could rescue our politics from the grip of the Gandhis. He had an equal reputation for ruthlessness. It was steel for steel. Modi versus the Gandhis. The BJP and Congress were only observers. ''
Horrible corruption did congress in. It may recover in future if it mends its ways. How will it demonstrate good governance?
One last but not the least question: I never said, “The Congress Itself Is The Big Idea.”
Answer: I know that but my masters concluded it from our interview. I am just doing my job.
Fail, epic fail. Unity in diversity? you, sir, are a french fry
Mr CHRISTOPHE JAFFRELOT
Completely erroneous understanding of India and the time!!
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT