Excerpts from “Unclaimed Baggage” – A critique on Secularism

I am not a big fan of Ashis Nandy but I found this article thought-provoking. Excerpts from “Unclaimed Baggage Part I and Part II” (emphasis mine):

*** “Unclaimed Baggage” Excerpts Begin ***

…Today, we seem to be back to square one. There are some remarkable similarities between the Partition massacres of 1946-48 and the Gujarat riots. This is a wrong context in which to examine the vicissitudes of the Indian experiment with secularism.

…First of all, I must nervously proclaim that I have nothing to do with the decline of Indian secularism. I have merely said that it is in decline. Strangely, when I first said so, it was already a cliché. There was also a consensus in the whole of South Asia that secularism was not in the best of health in the region and there was much lamentation on that count. That consensus survives. It also cuts across ideological boundaries and disciplines. There is little difference on the subject between Asghar Ali Engineer and Lal Krishna Advani, T.N. Madan and Achin Vanaik or, for that matter, between the functionaries of India’s main political parties.

…Now, to the causes and responses to the decline of secularism. The standard diagnosis proffered by Hindu nationalists is that secularism has failed because, as practised by their political opponents, mainly the Gandhians and the Leftists, secularism has meant the appeasement of minorities…What the Hindu nationalists say they want is genuine secularism, as opposed to the pseudo-secularism of most other parties, but mainly of the Indian National Congress and the Leninists.

…One random evidence is that, today, only the Hindu nationalists have been left pleading for a uniform civil code. Almost all other mainstream parties oppose it. India must be the only country in the world where the ethnonationalists plead for a uniform civil code, while their opponents oppose it.

…The policies and actions of the Hindu nationalists may often have not been secular, but a part of their soul has always been. One example would be Nathuram Godse’s last testament in court, in which he repeatedly accuses Gandhi of flouting the canons of secular statecraft. The opponents of the Sangh Parivar, not finding any intellectually meaningful response to these anomalies, pretend as if they do not exist or paper them over with the help of trendy, imported theories of fundamentalism and religious extremism.

…The other diagnosis of the failure of secularism, ventured by many liberals, finds voice in the belief that secularism would have flowered in India but for recalcitrant, nasty politicians and a biased law and order machinery.

…Thirdly, there is a variation on the second position that claims that the Indian state and a sizeable section of its functionaries have never wholeheartedly implemented secular policies and that they have never been entirely secular. They have made compromises all the way. For instance, instead of being irreligious, they have tried to get away with equal respect for all religions.

This was bound to lead to disaster sometime or the other, and we face that disaster today.

…Finally, there are the scholars who believe that something is drastically wrong with the idea of secularism itself, particularly in societies that do not share the experiences of Europe, do not have sharp inter-religious boundaries or church-like structures, and have for centuries lived with immense religious diversities. In such societies, the concept of secularism is insufficiently grounded in culture, especially vernacular culture, making it virtually meaningless to the common run of citizens.

…In the storms in teacups that often strike mainstream academe, the last group of scholars are accused of supporting the most retrograde elements in society, though it is quite likely that many in the group do not like their own prognosis. In India, two critics of secularism, Triloki Nath Madan and Partha Chatterjee, have by no means jettisoned the idea of secularism. Claims that they have done so are stupid, if not dishonest and motivated.

…They are like doctors who, after pathological tests and a clinical examination, feel called upon to inform the patient’s relatives that the patient’s days might be numbered.

…My case is different. I have given a pathologist’s report and declared the patient incurable. I have also said that the patient has had a reasonably good life and has done some good to society, but now happens to be senile and infirm and suffering from diseases that are fatal.

I may not have pleaded for euthanasia but I have said that it is time to give up on the patient and look towards a new generation of concepts. And I have said all this with a touch of glee, without obediently shedding tears for secularism.

…Fortunately, irrespective of my personal predilections, secularism in India is unlikely to flourish, at least in the near future. It might have staged an academic comeback in the Indian haute bourgeoisie, as a form of rebrahminisation and as resistance to the growing violence, but that has little to do with its political career. The only way it can stage a comeback is by ensuring the dominance of the urban middle classes in Indian politics. This is an empirical, not normative judgement.

*** End of Excerpts ***

Somewhat Related Posts:

“Secular Fundamentalism”…alive & kicking in India

Secularism has its own agenda

On Constitution and Secularism

Perverse secularism and India’s future

If you enjoyed this post, pl. consider subscribing to my blog or have it delivered by email.