Secularism is like an out-of-shape hat

[Guest guest]

Secularism is like an out-of-shape hatDr P.C. Alexander

http://www.asianage.com/The report in newspapers last week about a CPI(M)

leader's grievance that the LJP and its allies were splitting the "secular"

vote in Bihar and thereby helping the "communal" forces, reveals how confusing

the concept of secularism has become in our country now. Let us look at the

various claims about "secularism" and their inherent contradictions. The LJP

alliance which is accused of helping the "communal" forces consists mainly of

Ram Vilas Paswan's LJP and the CPI, both of which are seen by the common people

as secular parties. The term communal forces obviously refers to the NDA which

consists of the JD(U) and the BJP.Since no one seriously questions the secular

credentials of the JD(U), the reference must be to the BJP. But the BJP claims

that its brand of cultural nationalism is the authentic version of secularism

and that what other parties claim as secularism is "pseudo secularism." The

Congress and the CPI(M) which claim to be the strongest champions of secularism

are partners in an alliance led by the RJD whose publicly announced election

strategy is the forging of an alliance, known as the "MY," between the Muslims

and the Yadavs. RJD's allies appear to be having no inhibitions in accepting

the "MY" alliance as secular in spite of it being based on both religious and

caste loyalties.The LJP which is accused of splitting secular votes claims that

it is more secular than its rival RJD, since it has pledged that it will ensure

that a Muslim is appointed as chief minister of the state if it wins the

election. It sees no contradiction between its insistence on having a Muslim

chief minister and its claims about being secular at the same time. Both the

RJD and the LJP seem to believe that their well publicised support to a

religious minority in the elections is itself proof of their secularism, though

this adds a strange dimension to the concept of secularism.Thus we see very

confused and self-contradicting versions of secularism, each party claiming its

own brand of secularism as the most authentic. The famous saying of a British

political philosopher that "socialism is like a hat which has lost its shape

because everyone wears it" now seems to apply equally to secularism in India.In

order to understand how much the concept of secularism has got distorted in the

last five and a half decades after Independence, it will be useful to refer

briefly to the background of it being accepted as an essential ingredient of

the nation's political philosophy in the early decades of the 20th century. The

first occasion when secularism came to be formally accepted by people in India

was when the committee appointed by the Indian National Congress under the

chairmanship of Pandit Motilal Nehru submitted its report in 1928 giving a

clear and comprehensive definition of the concept.The Nehru report stated that

"there shall be no state religion for the Commonwealth of India or for any

province in the state, nor shall the state directly or indirectly endorse any

religion or give any religion any preference or impose any disability on

account of religious beliefs or religious status." It further stated that "no

person shall by reason of his religion, caste or creed be prejudiced in any way

in regard to public employment, office or power or honour and the exercise of

any trade or calling." It was this concept of secularism which led the way to

the further elaboration of secularism through Article 15 and Articles 25 to 30

of the Constitution and the inclusion of these Articles as part of the

fundamental rights of the citizens. As everyone knows, the Constitution which

was adopted by the Constituent Assembly had not specifically used the words

socialism or secularism; these words were added to the Preamble of the

Constitution only 26 years later through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment of

1976. The concept of secularism as the basis of national integration and unity

was already inherent in the various provisions of the Constitution and its

special mention in 1976 was intended only to highlight the nation's continuing

commitment to it. It may be noted that secularism accepted by India was

different in its content and objectives from what was known by secularism in

the western countries. In these countries the problem was one of strengthening

the authority of the state through completely severing its links with the

ecclesiastical establishment.The Church had played a dominant role for several

centuries in its relations with the State and since such subordination to the

Church was contrary to the principles of democracy, the State decided to shake

off the tutelage of the Church completely. However several religious practices

which are incompatible with the orthodox criteria of secularism still continue

in some of the western countries particularly on occasions like the coronation

of the monarchs. In England the monarch is still recognised as the head of the

Anglican Church and the "defender of the faith" and the British people so far

have not shown any inclination to have a clean break with the Church in this

respect. In contrast, the concept of secularism adopted by us was based on the

principle of total separation of religion from the management of the affairs of

the State and was intended through such separation to promote national

integration and unity in a multi-religious and multi-lingual country like

India.Unfortunately, the trend during the last five and a half decades of our

Independence has been favouring the divisive forces in the society rather than

the forces of integration and unity. The greatest distortion of the concept of

secularism in India has been the dominance that caste has been allowed to

acquire in electoral politics.While we may claim that we have been trying to

keep religion out of politics, we have to admit that there has not been even a

feeble attempt to keep caste out of politics. Today caste has become the most

important determinant in electoral politics. Everyone knows that the main

criterion for selection of candidates for contesting elections is the caste

composition of the constituency rather than the suitability of the candidate.

Appeals for votes are blatantly made in the name of caste and sub-caste

loyalties and often people are told that unless they cast their votes for their

own caste members, they will never be able to have a share in power.During

elections even threats are issued of social boycott and other such penalties if

they do not vote for the candidates from their own castes. Very often the slogan

of "social justice" is raised in order to justify the use of caste in elections,

though social justice actually means elimination of discrimination and injustice

based on caste. Some people may argue that caste is a reality in Indian social

life and therefore it cannot be kept out of electoral politics. But religion is

also very dear to most people in India and we have at least acknowledged the use

of religion in elections as an offence deserving severe punishment.Elections are

no doubt indispensable for democracy, but if elections are influenced mainly by

considerations of caste, such a democracy cannot be considered as a government

genuinely representative of the people.

bjpnews (AT) bjpfriends (DOT) orgReply- bjp-l (AT) bjpfriends (DOT) org (BJP Discussion

Group) vaidika1008 (AT) hotmail (DOT) comSubject: [bJP News] Secularism is like an

out-of-shape hat Fri, 18 Nov 2005 08:45:54 -0800>Secularism is like an

out-of-shape hat>Dr P.C. Alexander>http://www.asianage.com/>>The report in

newspapers last week about a CPI(M) leader's grievance>that the LJP and its

allies were splitting the "secular" vote in>Bihar and thereby helping the

"communal" forces, reveals how>confusing the concept of secularism has become

in our country now.>Let us look at the various claims about "secularism" and

their>inherent contradictions. The LJP alliance which is accused of helping>the

"communal" forces consists mainly of Ram Vilas Paswan's LJP and>the CPI, both of

which are seen by the common people as secular>parties. The term communal forces

obviously refers to the NDA which>consists of the JD(U) and the BJP.>>Since no

one seriously questions the secular credentials of the JD>(U), the reference

must be to the BJP. But the BJP claims that its>brand of cultural nationalism

is the authentic version of secularism>and that what other parties claim as

secularism is "pseudo>secularism." The Congress and the CPI(M) which claim to

be the>strongest champions of secularism are partners in an alliance led by>the

RJD whose publicly announced election strategy is the forging of>an alliance,

known as the "MY," between the Muslims and the Yadavs.>RJD's allies appear to

be having no inhibitions in accepting the "MY">alliance as secular in spite of

it being based on both religious and>caste loyalties.>>The LJP which is accused

of splitting secular votes claims that it is>more secular than its rival RJD,

since it has pledged that it will>ensure that a Muslim is appointed as chief

minister of the state if>it wins the election. It sees no contradiction between

its insistence>on having a Muslim chief minister and its claims about being

secular>at the same time. Both the RJD and the LJP seem to believe that

their>well publicised support to a religious minority in the elections

is>itself proof of their secularism, though this adds a strange>dimension to

the concept of secularism.>>Thus we see very confused and self-contradicting

versions of>secularism, each party claiming its own brand of secularism as

the>most authentic. The famous saying of a British political philosopher>that

"socialism is like a hat which has lost its shape because>everyone wears it"

now seems to apply equally to secularism in India.>>In order to understand how

much the concept of secularism has got>distorted in the last five and a half

decades after Independence, it>will be useful to refer briefly to the

background of it being>accepted as an essential ingredient of the nation's

political>philosophy in the early decades of the 20th century. The

first>occasion when secularism came to be formally accepted by people in>India

was when the committee appointed by the Indian National>Congress under the

chairmanship of Pandit Motilal Nehru submitted its>report in 1928 giving a

clear and comprehensive definition of the>concept.>>The Nehru report stated

that "there shall be no state religion for>the Commonwealth of India or for any

province in the state, nor shall>the state directly or indirectly endorse any

religion or give any>religion any preference or impose any disability on

account of>religious beliefs or religious status." It further stated that

"no>person shall by reason of his religion, caste or creed be prejudiced>in any

way in regard to public employment, office or power or honour>and the exercise

of any trade or calling." It was this concept of>secularism which led the way

to the further elaboration of secularism>through Article 15 and Articles 25 to

30 of the Constitution and the>inclusion of these Articles as part of the

fundamental rights of the>citizens.>>As everyone knows, the Constitution which

was adopted by the>Constituent Assembly had not specifically used the words

socialism or>secularism; these words were added to the Preamble of

the>Constitution only 26 years later through the 42nd Constitutional>Amendment

of 1976. The concept of secularism as the basis of national>integration and

unity was already inherent in the various provisions>of the Constitution and

its special mention in 1976 was intended only>to highlight the nation's

continuing commitment to it. It may be>noted that secularism accepted by India

was different in its content>and objectives from what was known by secularism

in the western>countries. In these countries the problem was one of

strengthening>the authority of the state through completely severing its links

with>the ecclesiastical establishment.>>The Church had played a dominant role

for several centuries in its>relations with the State and since such

subordination to the Church>was contrary to the principles of democracy, the

State decided to>shake off the tutelage of the Church completely. However

several>religious practices which are incompatible with the orthodox

criteria>of secularism still continue in some of the western

countries>particularly on occasions like the coronation of the monarchs.

In>England the monarch is still recognised as the head of the Anglican>Church

and the "defender of the faith" and the British people so far>have not shown

any inclination to have a clean break with the Church>in this respect. In

contrast, the concept of secularism adopted by us>was based on the principle of

total separation of religion from the>management of the affairs of the State and

was intended through such>separation to promote national integration and unity

in a multi->religious and multi-lingual country like India.>>Unfortunately, the

trend during the last five and a half decades of>our Independence has been

favouring the divisive forces in the>society rather than the forces of

integration and unity. The greatest>distortion of the concept of secularism in

India has been the>dominance that caste has been allowed to acquire in

electoral>politics.>>While we may claim that we have been trying to keep

religion out of>politics, we have to admit that there has not been even a

feeble>attempt to keep caste out of politics. Today caste has become the>most

important determinant in electoral politics. Everyone knows that>the main

criterion for selection of candidates for contesting>elections is the caste

composition of the constituency rather than>the suitability of the candidate.

Appeals for votes are blatantly>made in the name of caste and sub-caste

loyalties and often people>are told that unless they cast their votes for their

own caste>members, they will never be able to have a share in power.>>During

elections even threats are issued of social boycott and other>such penalties if

they do not vote for the candidates from their own>castes. Very often the slogan

of "social justice" is raised in order>to justify the use of caste in elections,

though social justice>actually means elimination of discrimination and injustice

based on>caste. Some people may argue that caste is a reality in Indian

social>life and therefore it cannot be kept out of electoral politics.

But>religion is also very dear to most people in India and we have at>least

acknowledged the use of religion in elections as an offence>deserving severe

punishment.>>Elections are no doubt indispensable for democracy, but if

elections>are influenced mainly by considerations of caste, such a

democracy>cannot be considered as a government genuinely representative of

the>people.>>>>>------------------------------->This

message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.>>