If Gandhi were born again and to undertake a political pilgrimage to Champaran today, he would have bought a non-AC three-tier ticket—if not a general one—on the Sabarmati Express from Ahmedabad to Muzaffarpur. From this north Bihar town, the untiring crusader may have opted to march to the land of indigo farmers, where the Mahatma had launched his first non-violent struggle almost a century ago, or 97 years to be precise. On its way, the train would stop at Vadodara, Godhra, Lucknow, Ayodhya, Varanasi. It would not, however, loop back to Delhi.
Circa 2014, though, any route to Delhi has to go via Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Narendra Modi, therefore, is leaving no stone unturned to conquer these two states before laying claim to the crown in New Delhi. It is another matter that Modi doesn’t travel by train these days, he is flying too high to be grounded.
Challenging him in this land of the Buddha are two former railway ministers, known for their divergent stands on the Godhra tragedy of February 27, 2002, which was followed by a communal earthquake which to a large extent devastated the social fabric of the state.
Both incidentally at different points of time have nursed the ambition to become prime minister. Both, however lost the race—Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Laloo Prasad Yadav in 1996 and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar in the recent past.
However, as the electoral battle reaches its voluble climax half-way through, the country suddenly finds itself in the grip of a heated debate over the DNA of two non-biological entities—casteism in Bihar, and the BJP itself.
The recent remarks of former party president Nitin Gadkari—“there is casteism in the Bihar DNA”—and staunch NaMo loyalist Giriraj Singh saying “the Centre gave subsidy to those who exported beef and taxed those who reared cows” and his exhortation to NaMo opposers to head for Pakistan have reinforced the growing perception that the saffron party has travelled much beyond Hindutva and even Moditva. It seems caught instead in an ideological muddle as many of its staunchest supporters are finding it difficult to defend the party.
Though some have already voted for the BJP in the ongoing election, many now want the DNA of the party to be tested as it no longer seems to be the outfit it has been projecting itself to be in the last few months.
“My father, a retired employee of the Patratu thermal plant, is so upset by recent developments that he went and voted for the Janata Dal (United) candidate fully knowing that it is not going to win,” a middle-aged man in Patna tells Outlook, not wishing to be named. “It is wrong to believe that the BJP would benefit by such extreme stands. Where have the slogans of development and good governance gone?”
Incidentally, an FIR was lodged on April 20 in Deoghar, Jharkhand, against Giriraj, Gadkari and Nishikant Dubey, the BJP candidate from Godda Lok Sabha seat, following Giriraj’s beef statement. Though he alone made the statement at the election meeting, Gadkari and Dubey too have been named because they were present on the occasion. firs were also registered at the Patna Airport police station and in Bokaro for Giriraj’s April 18 go-to-Pakistan statements.
“This is downright condemnable,” says state Congress vice-president and media incharge Prem Chand Mishra. “Not only Giriraj and Gadkari, even the party’s prime ministerial nominee, Narendra Modi, does not hesitate in calling political rivals Pakistani agents and in raising the issue of beef export.” It was indeed in Giriraj’s constituency, Nawada, that Modi first raised the dubious bogey of the Pink Revolution. Though meant to woo the Yadav voters, RJD chief Laloo dubbed it “nonsense” and asked why Modi himself wears leather shoes and sandals.
CM Nitish Kumar recalled that it was Giriraj, who as animal husbandry minister in his cabinet (till June 16 last), had approved the setting up of modern slaughterhouses across Bihar. Giriraj, he also said, was a meat-lover.
“I am a pure vegetarian. But I know that the majority of BJP leaders are non-vegetarians and prefer to kill animals to satisfy their belly,” he said while releasing his party’s manifesto on April 5. Modi, however, was quick to defend his statement in an abp News programme at night on April 22, that no particular community is engaged in the meat export; indeed, several Jains too are involved in the business.
Maulana Nitish Greeting Muslims on Id-ul-fitr in Patna
To which critics promptly responded: why did he opt to raise this particular issue here in Nawada, where the Yadavs are a substantial presence, and not in Gujarat where Jains are in a good number? Even Giriraj’s statements, they assert, are an echo of what Modi has been saying elsewhere. On March 26, for example, Modi had at an election rally in Hiranagar, Jammu, barely 5 km from the Pakistani border, said: “Three AKs—AK-47, A.K. Antony and AK-49 (Arvind Kejriwal, who was CM for 49 days)—had emerged as Pakistan commanders on the Indian side.” Giriraj’s comments were an extension of this Pakistani agent theme.
Modi has also been at pains to emphasise his backward caste origin in almost all his speeches in Bihar, saying the BJP is no longer a party of the Banias and the Brahmins. Why blame Gadkari alone then for his casteist remarks?
Patna-based political observer Ajay Kumar questions the very timing of such statements. “Gadkari and Giriraj started polarising the already polarised atmosphere ahead of the April 24 election when seven constituencies of northeast Bihar go to poll. Five of these seats have fairly large Muslim voters but are held by the BJP. The remarks should be seen in the light of JD(U) nominee Akhtar-ul-Iman withdrawing from the electoral battle in Kishanganj.”
Iman, till February 24 an RJD MLA, switched loyalties to CM Nitish’s JD(U). The latter quickly made him the party’s candidate against sitting Congress MP Maulana Asrar-ul-Haq. But perceiving the electoral battle too tough against the Maulana, who too is a Surjapuri Muslim like him, Iman pulled out on April 15 to “avoid the division of secular votes”, as he put it.
The BJP has fielded Dilip Jaiswal as its candidate from Kishanganj, a constituency which has 70 per cent Muslim voters—9,89,773 out of a total of 14,13,962. Kumar thinks this is because the BJP assessed that it did not do too well in the election for the 13 constituencies on April 10 and 17. “So why not polarise the electorate further on caste and community lines?”
It is also perhaps why the BJP has been gradually shifting its slogans from development and corruption-free India to ones that appeal to the Hindu votebank. The emotive beef export issue is of a piece with this strategy, intended to split the Muslim-Yadav combination, which never seems to fail, including this time perhaps.
In fact, the self-obtained tactical sense of the general Muslim electorate has caught the poll pundits off-guard, as several community leaders and organisations have been repeatedly telling them to vote for JD(U). Even on the morning of April 17, the day seven constituencies, including prominent ones like the Patna Sahib and Pataliputra, went to polls, Maulana Anees-ur-Rahman Qasmi, general secretary of the Imarat-e-Shariah, a Muslim religious organisation more than 90 years old, in a statement issued to English daily Hindustan Times applauded “the developmental vision” of CM Nitish.
Though the statement was ostensibly a mere clarification for a report published the previous day in the daily, the Maulana said: “Nitish has a solid core base and his vision is very clear. He is committed to the development of the state as well as the country. People of all castes and creed, including a majority of Muslims, support and stand by him (sic).”
The grand trunk route A BJP rally wends through the streets of Patna. (Photograph by Manoj Sinha)
The very next day, however, Rehan Ghani, editor of the Urdu daily Pindaar, in his column Do Tok strongly criticised the Maulana for supporting the ruling party so brazenly. This when Pindaar, till a few days back, like several other regional dailies, was considered a mouthpiece of the state government.
Urdu journalist-turned-social activist Naiyer Fatmi was more forthright while talking to Outlook: “Never in the history of the Imarat-e-Shariah has such an appeal been made on election day. This is simply reprehensible. Maulana Anees-ur-Rahman has lowered the prestige of the institution.”
It was only a day later that Giriraj, while talking to some mediapersons in Patna, accused the ‘Pakistan-prast’ (pro-Pakistan) elements in the country of opposing NaMo. While some regional channels highlighted his remarks, several dailies and news agencies ignored it. He went on to reiterate the same in Deoghar later in the day and then tweeted on April 19 that he stood by what he had said.
“Giriraj and Pravin Togadia’s utterances as well as Rajnath’s statement on infiltrators are just the logical extension of Modi’s anti-Pakistan and anti-Muslim posture. Hindutva is coming in the garb of development. But now they all stand exposed,” says Satya Narayan Madan, a political activist since the JP movement days.
There is no question, therefore, of the party taking action against Giriraj or anyone else, he adds. Madan and others are of the view that Modi’s April 22 tweet distancing himself from the remarks of hardliners is only tactical, meant just for public consumption.
As Indians vote in the hope of getting rid of corporatisation, criminalisation, communalisation, caste-based polarisation in the country, the irony of the electoral battle is that the message of the father of the nation has been nearly forgotten by the key players of the country. Modi seldom misses an opportunity to eulogise ‘lauh purush’ Vallabhbhai Patel—the Congressman during whose home ministership the RSS was banned—but he could not find enough iron to build the world’s tallest statue of Mahatma Gandhi, also a fellow Gujarati.
Were Gandhi to visit Champaran today, he would remain aloof from this great struggle for power politics. He may return to his birthplace travelling all alone on the Silchar-Porbandar East-West Corridor, once again cutting through Uttar Pradesh but bypassing the hustle and bustle of Delhi.
After all, he spent August 15, 1947, in Calcutta, leaving the reins of the nation in the hands of Jawaharlal Nehru.
Formerly with the Times of India, Patna-based Soroor Ahmed is a columnist in The Telegraph
The writer of The Merry Whys and Wherefores of Bihar seems to be myopic. India has a long history of offering sanctuary to people from other countries. Do you think all of a sudden Hindus will not look after the minorities?
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.
Last ditch desperate effort by the secular fascist Outlook magazine.
Beef export from a Hindu country (yes, a Hindu country just like UK and US are christian countries) is a matter of human rights for the secular Muslims.
They are not content with taking away a third of the land mass and completely cleansing it off Kafirs. Now they want to complete their unfinished fascist project of total islamicization of this land. If it comes at the cost of civil war, so be it. Such is thier devotion to their faith.
As the election approaches, you can feel more and more desperation in the quality of articles chosen by the editors of Outlook.
It seems that the writer is myopic. India has a long history of giving a sanctuary to destitute people and is also the land whose people have for centuries crossed the seas to travel. So is the writer thinking that majority Hindus will not look after the minority in the country? If he feels so than he has to know the history. More harm has been caused by people who have claimed to represent the minority (the so called secular people) tahn by hindus. Indeed hindus have suffered by infliction of damage to them by the people to whom sanctuary has been given.
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