क्या जनबुद्धिजीवी प्रोफेसर आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े सलाखों के पीछे भेज दिए जाएंगे ?

जन संस्कृति मंच, दलित लेखक संघ, न्यू सोशलिस्ट इनीशिएटिव, रमणिका फाउंडेशन, साहित्य वार्ता, प्रगतिशील लेखक संघ और जनवादी लेखक संघ के प्रतिनिधियों द्वारा जारी बयान

एक आसन्न गिरफ़्तारी देश के ज़मीर पर शूल की तरह चुभती दिख रही है।

पुणे पुलिस द्वारा भीमा कोरेगांव मामले में प्रोफेसर आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े के ख़िलाफ़ दायर एफ आई आर को खारिज करने की मांग को सर्वोच्च न्यायालय द्वारा ठुकरा दिए जाने के बाद यह स्थिति बनी है। अदालत ने उन्हें चार सप्ताह तक गिरफ़्तारी से सुरक्षा प्रदान की है और कहा है कि इस अन्तराल में वह निचली अदालत से जमानत लेने की कोशिश कर सकते हैं। इसका मतलब है कि उनके पास फरवरी के मध्य तक का समय है।

इस मामले में बाकी विद्वानों, मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ताओं को जमानत देने से इन्कार करनेवाली निचली अदालत इस मामले में अपवाद करेगी, इसकी संभावना बहुत कम बतायी जा रही है। सुधा भारद्वाज, वर्नन गोंसाल्विस, वरवर राव, गौतम नवलखा, अरुण फरेरा जैसे अनेक लेखक और मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ता सरकार के निशाने पर आ चुके हैं और इनमें से ज़्यादातर को गिरफ़्तार किया जा चुका है।

   

दलित खेत मज़दूर माता-पिता के घर जनमे और अपनी प्रतिभा, लगन, समर्पण और प्रतिबद्धता के ज़रिए विद्वतजगत में ही नहीं बल्कि देश के ग़रीबों-मजलूमों के हक़ों की आवाज़ बुलन्द करते हुए नयी उंचाइयों तक पहुंचे प्रोफेसर आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े की यह आपबीती देश-दुनिया के प्रबुद्ध जनों में चिन्ता एवं क्षोभ का विषय बनी हुई है।

विश्वविख्यात विद्वानों नोम चोमस्की, प्रोफेसर कार्नेल वेस्ट, जां द्रेज से लेकर देश दुनिया के अग्रणी विश्वविद्यालयों, संस्थानों से सम्बद्ध छात्र, कर्मचारियों एवं अध्यापकों ने और दुनिया भर में फैले अम्बेडकरी संगठनों ने एक सुर में यह मांग की है कि ‘पुणे पुलिस द्वारा डा आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े, जो वरिष्ठ प्रोफेसर एवं गोवा इन्स्टिटयूट ऑफ़ मैनेजमेण्ट में बिग डाटा एनालिटिक्स के विभागाध्यक्ष हैं, के ख़िलाफ़ जो मनगढंत आरोप लगाए गए हैं, उन्हें तत्काल वापस लिया जाए।’ जानीमानी लेखिका अरूंधती रॉय ने कहा है कि ‘उनकी आसन्न गिरफ़्तारी एक राजनीतिक कार्रवाई होगी। यह हमारे इतिहास का एक बेहद शर्मनाक और खौफ़नाक अवसर होगा।’

मालूम हो कि इस मामले में प्रोफेसर आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े के ख़िलाफ़ प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट पुणे पुलिस ने पिछले साल दायर की थी और उन पर आरोप लगाए गए थे कि वह भीमा कोरेगांव संघर्ष के दो सौ साल पूरे होने पर आयोजित जनसभा के बाद हुई हिंसा के लिए जिम्मेदार हैं (जनवरी 2018)। यह वही मामला है जिसमें सरकार ने देश के चन्द अग्रणी बुद्धिजीवियों को ही निशाना बनाया है, जबकि इस प्रायोजित हिंसा को लेकर हिन्दुत्ववादी संगठनों पर एवं उनके मास्टरर्माइंडों पर हिंसा के पीड़ितों द्वारा दायर रिपोर्टों को लगभग ठंडे बस्ते में डाल दिया है।

इस मामले में दर्ज पहली प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट (8 जनवरी 2018) में प्रोफेसर आनन्द का नाम भी नहीं था, जिसे बिना कोई कारण स्पष्ट किए 21 अगस्त 2018 को शामिल किया गया और इसके बाद उनकी गैरमौजूदगी में उनके घर पर छापा भी डाला गया, जिसकी चारों ओर भर्त्सना हुई थी।

गौरतलब है कि जिस जनसभा के बाद हुई हिंसा के लिए उन्हें जिम्मेदार ठहराया जा रहा है, उसका आयोजन सेवानिवृत्त न्यायाधीश पी बी सावंत और न्यायमूर्ति बी जी कोलसे पाटील ने किया था, जिसमें खुद डा आनन्द शामिल भी नहीं हुए थे बल्कि अपने एक लेख में उन्होंने ऐसे प्रयासों की सीमाओं की बात की थी। उन्होंने स्पष्ट लिखा था कि ‘भीमा कोरेगांव का मिथक उन्हीं पहचानों को मजबूत करता है, जिन्हें लांघने का वह दावा करता है। हिन्दुत्ववादी शक्तियों से लड़ने का संकल्प निश्चित ही काबिलेतारीफ है, मगर इसके लिए जिस मिथक का प्रयोग किया जा रहा है वह कुल मिला कर अनुत्पादक होगा।’

मालूम हो कि पिछले साल इस गिरफ़्तारी को औचित्य प्रदान करने के ‘सबूत’ के तौर पर पुणे पुलिस ने ‘‘कामरेड आनंद’’ को सम्बोधित कई फर्जी पत्र जारी किए। पुणे पुलिस द्वारा लगाए गए उन सभी आरोपों को डा तेलतुम्बड़े ने सप्रमाण, दस्तावेजी सबूतों के साथ खारिज किया है। इसके बावजूद ये झूठे आरोप डा तेलतुम्बड़े को आतंकित करने एवं खामोश करने के लिए लगाए जाते रहे हैं। जैसा कि स्पष्ट है यूएपीए (अनलॉफुल एक्टिविटीज प्रिवेन्शन एक्ट) की धाराओं के तहत महज़ इन आरोपों के बलबूते डा तेलतुम्बड़े को सालों तक सलाखों के पीछे रखा जा सकता है।

डा आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े की संभावित गिरफ़्तारी कई ज़रूरी मसलों को उठाती है।

दरअसल रफ़्ता-रफ़्ता दमनकारी भारतीय राज्य ने अपने-आप को निर्दोष साबित करने की बात खुद पीड़ित पर ही डाल दी है: ‘हम सभी दोषी है जब तक हम प्रमाणित न करें कि हम निर्दोष हैं। हमारी जुबां हमसे छीन ली गयी है।’

प्रोफेसर आनन्द की संभावित गिरफतारी को लेकर देश की एक जानीमानी वकील ने एक विदुषी के साथ निजी बातचीत में (scroll.in) जो सवाल रखे हैं, वह इस मौके पर रेखांकित करनेवाले हैं। उन्होंने पूछा है, ‘आख़िर आपराधिक दंडप्रणाली के प्राथमिक सिद्धांतों का क्या हुआ? आखिर क्यों अदालतें सबूतों के आकलन में बेहद एकांतिक, लगभग दुराग्रही रूख अख्तियार कर  रही हैं? आखिर अदालतें क्यों कह रही हैं कि अभियुक्तों को उन मामलों में भी अदालती कार्रवाइयों से गुज़रना पड़ेगा जहां वह खुद देख सकती हैं कि सबूत बहुत कमज़ोर हैं, गढ़े गए हैं और झूठे हैं ? आखिर वे इस बात पर क्यों ज़ोर दे रही हैं कि एक लम्बी, थकाउ, खर्चीली अदालती कार्रवाई का सामना करके ही अभियुक्त अपना निर्दोष होना साबित कर सकते हैं, जबकि जुटाए गए सबूत प्रारंभिक अवस्था में ही खारिज किए जा सकते हैं ? ’

‘आज हम उस विरोधाभासपूर्ण स्थिति से गुजर रहे हैं कि आला अदालत को राफेल डील में कोई आपराधिकता नज़र नहीं आती जबकि उसके सामने तमाम सबूत पेश किए जा चुके हैं, वहीं दूसरी तरफ वह तेलतुम्बड़े के मामले में गढ़ी हुई आपराधिकता पर मुहर लगा रही हैं। न्याय का पलड़ा फिलवक्त़ दूसरी तरफ झुकता दिखता है। इस बात को मददेनज़र रखते हुए कि अदालत ने जनतंत्र में असहमति की भूमिका को रेखांकित किया है, आखिर वह मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ताओं, बुद्धिजीवियों के लिए दूसरा पैमाना अपनाने की बात कैसे कर सकती है।’

लेखकों, संस्कृतिकर्मियों, प्रबुद्ध जनों की यह सभा इस समूचे घटनाक्रम पर गहरी चिन्ता प्रकट करती है और सरकार से यह मांग करती है कि उनके ख़िलाफ़ लगाए गए सभी फ़र्जी आरोपों को तत्काल खारिज किया जाए।

हम देश के हर संवेदनशील, प्रबुद्ध एवं इन्साफ़पसंद व्यक्ति के साथ, कलम के सिपाहियों एवं सृजन के क्षेत्र में तरह तरह से सक्रिय लोगों एवं समूहों के साथ इस चिन्ता को साझा भी करना चाहते हैं कि प्रोफेसर आनन्द तेलतुम्बड़े, जो जाति-वर्ग के अग्रणी विद्वान हैं, जिन्होंने अपनी छब्बीस किताबों के ज़रिये - जो देश- दुनिया के अग्रणी प्रकाशनों से छपी हैं, अन्य भाषाओं में अनूदित हुई हैं और सराही गयी हैं - अकादमिक जगत में ही नहीं सामाजिक-राजनीतिक हल्कों में नयी बहसों का आगाज़ किया है, जो कमेटी फ़ॉर प्रोटेक्शन आफ डेमोक्रेटिक राइट्स - जो मानवाधिकारों की हिफाजत के लिए बनी संस्था है - के सक्रिय कार्यकर्ता रहे है, जिन्होंने जनबुद्धिजीवी के तौर पर सत्ताधारियों को असहज करनेवाले सवाल पूछने से कभी गुरेज नहीं किया है, और जो फ़िलवक्त गोवा इन्स्टिटयूट ऑफ़ मैनेजमेण्ट में ‘बिग डाटा एनालिटिक्स’ के विभागप्रमुख हैं और उसके पहले आई आई टी में प्रोफेसर, भारत पेटोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड के कार्यकारी निदेशक और पेट्रोनेट इंडिया के सीईओ जैसे पदों पर रहे चुके हैं, क्या हम उनकी इस आसन्न गिरफतारी पर हम मौन रहेंगे!

आईए, अपने मौन को तोड़ें और डा अम्बेडकर के विचारों को जन जन तक पहुंचाने में मुब्तिला, उनके विचारों को नए सिरे से व्याख्यायित करने में लगे इस जनबुद्धिजीवी के साथ खड़े हों!

 ...................

अशोक भौमिक, जन संस्कृति मंच (जसम)

हीरालाल राजस्थानी, दलित लेखक संघ (दलेस)

सुभाष गाताडे, न्यू सोशलिस्ट इनीशिएटिव

रमणिका गुप्ता, रमणिका फाउंडेशन

प्रेम सिंह, साहित्य वार्ता

अली जावेद, प्रगतिशील लेखक संघ (प्रलेस)

मुरली मनोहर प्रसाद सिंह, जनवादी लेखक संघ (जलेस)

Erik Olin Wright 1947-2019

Prof. Erik Olin Wright died on 23rd January 2019, due to acute myeloid leukaemia. He was 72.

Prof. Wright was one of the most distinguished Marxist scholars of our times. He was best known for his theory of class, a field that preoccupied him for more than four decades. In his hands, Marxist class theory became a rigorous weapon of sociological research and hundreds of his students employed it in their study of numerous social formations.

Prof. Wright was one of the founders of Analytical Marxism. But unlike many of his colleagues who later on abandoned Marxism altogether, Prof. Wright was always mindful of the excesses of analytical theory and never lost sight of the basic socialist vision.

Towards the final decade of his life, Prof. Wright had turned his attention to the question of transition and socialist alternatives. In a series of articles and books, Prof. Wright argued that revolutions of the twentieth century kind (in his terms – ‘ruptural transformations’) are no longer in the agenda because of the changed times. So what is required today, among other things, is building of certain processes and institutions which will help the working classes in training and preparing themselves well before the moment of transition (transfer of state power). This involves, among other things, building and expanding non-capitalist solidarity sectors within the body of capitalism. This will ensure that when the time of transition comes, it will be less painful and a backlash doesn’t occur against the new socialist regime, as it is faced with a shrinking economy as a result of investment strike by capital. An already existing and nourished non-capitalist sector will ensure that the workers will be in a position to launch a successful counter-strike and run a worker controlled economy and polity on their own. 

We, at NSI, believe that there is an urgent need for renewal of socialist theory and practice, given our past experiences and requirements of the present. In this regard, we have a lot to learn from Prof. Wrights immense contributions.

NSI’s statement on the Peoples’ Resistance against the Citizenship Amendment Bill

New Socialist Initiative stands in solidarity with the people of Assam, Tripura and the other North Eastern states in their heroic struggle against the communally motivated Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB). It was only because of the resistance of the people that the government couldn’t table the Bill for voting in the Rajya Sabha after surreptitiously passing it in the Lok Sabha. This is in fact a victory for all the progressive and democratic forces of the country,who have been fighting to save and expand the secular character of the nation. While the danger still looms large and there is a strong possibility that the government may try to bring back the bill in the upcoming budget session, the mass resistance of the people has demonstrated very clearly that the evil designs of the fascists in power will not go unanswered and that the people will fight back with all their might.

Perhaps it is a testimony to the success of the peoples’ resistance and the frustration of the fascist rulers that the Assam police slapped sedition charges against three prominent personalities of the state, who have been leading the mass resistance against the CAB in the state. Marxist literary critic Dr. Hiren Gohain, KMSS leader Akhil Gogoi and senior journalist Manjit Mahanta have been booked under Sections 120(B), 121, 123 and 124(A) of the IPC. In Tripura, numerous protectors have been beaten up by the police and the state government has prevented civil society delegations from neighbouring states from visiting and meeting the injured. We appeal to all the left, democratic and secular forces of the country to condemn such fascist attempts to muzzle democratic dissent and raise their voice in solidarity with protesters.

Crises of Crony Capitalism: the Unraveling Incompetence of Modi Regime

(Report on the Public meeting by New Socialist Initiative on 24^th Nov, 2018 by Sanjay Kumar)

Speakers: Prashant Bhushan, DrAtulSood (JNU) and DrRohit Azad (JNU)

Economy is unarguably among the most important component of any society. However, it is also true that informed discussions and debates on issues related to economy rarely enter public discourse. Instead, a moralistic populism which is quick to eulogise heroes and vilify villains dominates. In their opening remarks, the organisers of the public meeting on the above topic cited this lacuna in the political discourse in India as the context of the programme. For example, during the most recent national elections in the US, France and UK, an increase in the minimum wage was an important part of the opposition candidates’ campaign. In India that is highly unlikely. This absence is especially dangerous for left politics because it does not allow a critical class consciousness to emerge. Ever since independence movement we are witness to a longstanding populism in India, which talks of the poor, and how they need to be ‘helped’. Through this thepolitically powerful develop patronage over the weak. However, the poor in whose name economic policies are declared cannot be agents who make history, which any left politics needs.

खतरे में लोकतंत्र - अपने पैरों से तेजी से फिसलती जमीन को देखते हुए दमनात्मक कदमों पर आमादा भाजपा

मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ताओं और जानेमाने बुद्धिजीवियों की गिरफतारी पर ‘न्यू सोशलिस्ट इनिशिएटिव’  का वक्तव्य

1.

न्यू सोशलिस्ट इनिशिएटिव, पुणे पुलिस द्वारा अपने केसरिया आंकाओं के निर्देशों पर मनमाने तरीके से और दुर्भावना के साथ मानवाधिकार कार्यकर्ताओं, वकीलों, प्रोफेसरों और कवियों के घरों पर एक साथ डाले गए छापे और उनमें से पांच को - सुधा भारद्वाज, गौतम नवलखा, अरूण परेरा, वेरनॉन गोन्साल्वेस और वरवरा राव - मनगढंत आरोपों के तहत गिरफतार किए जाने की कड़े शब्दों में भर्त्सना करता है।

इन सभी व्यक्तियों की बिना शर्त तत्काल रिहाई तथा उनके खिलाफ बेहद दमनकारी गैरकानूनी गतिविधियां निवारण अधिनियम/Unlawful Activities Prevention Act/ के तहत लगाए गए फर्जी आरोपो ंको वापस लेने की मांग करते हुए, उसकी तरफ से यह भी कहा गया है कि उन दोषी पुलिसकर्मियों के खिलाफ भी कार्रवाई की जाए जिन्होंने इस कार्रवाई को अंजाम दिया है।

Democracy Under Siege ! With Ground Slipping Fast Beneath Its Feet, BJP government Resorting to Draconian Measures

A Statement Issued by New Socialist Initiative (NSI) on the recent arrests of human rights defenders and public intellectuals

 1.

New Socialist Initiative strongly condemns the arbitrary and malicious manner in which the Pune Police, at the behest of its saffron masters, raided the houses of leading human rights activists, lawyers, professors and poets in different cities simultaneously and arrested five of them - SudhaBharadwaj, GautamNavlakha, Arun Ferreira, Vernon Gonsalves and VaravaraRao - under concocted charges.

Demanding immediate release of all these persons unconditionally and withdrawal of fabricated charges filed against them under the draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) , it also said that appropriate action should be taken against the guilty policemen as well involved in this act.

The Monks Who Spew Hate

Why Jailing of Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Did Not Become A News In This Part of Asia

...........................
Subhash Gatade  

“Ordered disorder, planned caprice, And dehumanised humanity…”

- Brecht (The Exception and the Rule)

(Quoted in Thesundayleader.lk )

“I have done my duty towards the country,”

Gnanasara told reporters as he boarded the bus taking him to prison. “Why should I regret?”

HINDUTVA UNLIMITED

Time to Militarise Hindus, Hinduise the Nation!

How the advent of Hindutva Supremacism has accelerated arming of Hindus for sectarian violence

Subhash Gatade

Introduction

Like every exclucivist ideology/organisation/formation which claims to be centered around a particular religion - may it be Islamism, Zionism, fanatic Buddhism - Hindutva has always entertained a dream of preparing/arming its followers to fight the 'others' and slowly albeit not so silently moving closer to usher into its dreamland of Hindu Rashtra. Its ideologues/leaders have been candid enough to point out to the faithfuls the 'internal enemies'' and ways to deal with them or exterminate them. All these preparations dotted by regular drills, games and other militant exercises serves as a counter to the the much publicised notion by the same people that 'Hindus are Cowards' 1 or "Islam was spread through the sword" which has been an item of belief for the Hindutva fundamentalists.

[NSI Statement] New Socialist Initiative Condemns Hindutva Engineered and Inspired Atrocities on Dalits

Hardly a day passes without headline news of some or another atrocity on Dalits. On 24 May, a Dalit man in the Ahmedabad district was beaten and his house attacked by a gang of so called ‘upper’ caste men after he had attached Sinh to his name on his facebook post.  On 21 May a dalit ragpicker was beaten to death in a Rajkot factory. Atrocities on Dalits are occurring in the midst of a public ideological environment against them. On 26 May news came of a private school in Delhi asking 8^th class students to write a note on how reservations help undeserving and unqualified people for their summer vacation homework.  According to National Crime Record Bureau reports for recent years, between 10 to 15 thousand cases of crimes are reported under the Prevention of Atrocities act every year; an average of 35 crimes per day. Many times more crimes actually go unreported. In 2016 Indian courts had over 45 thousand cases under this act. Out of the 4048 cases decided, conviction occurred in 659 cases only. That is, five out of six cases of atrocity against Dalits did not result in any punishment. The number of attacks against one of the weakest and the poorest sections of the society, and the abysmal rate of conviction would put any civilized society to shame, but India chugs along.

दक्षिणपंथ की कीलें

जावेद अनीस

Courtesy-dailyo.in

मोदी सरकार के चार साल हो चुके हैं, भारतीय राजनीति और समाज के लिये यह एक भारी उठा-पठक वाला दौर साबित हुआ है. इस दौरान हिन्दू दक्षिणपंथियों के बेलगाम रथ ने एक के बाद एक झंडे गाड़ने में व्यस्त रहा है. उनकी उपलब्धियां अभूतपूर्व है, आज देश में राष्ट्रपति,  उपराष्ट्रपति, लोकसभा अध्यक्ष, प्रधानमंत्री और 15 राज्यों में मुख्यमंत्री सीधे तौर पर भगवा खेमे से हैं और 6 राज्यों में सहयोगी दलों के साथ उनकी सरकारें हैं. भाजपा लोकसभा में सबसे बड़ी पार्टी तो पहले से ही है अब वो राज्यसभा में सबसे बड़ी पार्टी बन चुकी है.

Invisibility of Class in Popular Politics in India

Sanjay Kumar

(This paper was read as part of the workshop on Confronting the Rule of Capital in the Global South: Marxist analysis and class struggle in India on 4 May, 2018, at Marx 200 Congress, Berlin).

The name of the beast Marxists confront everywhere is Capitalism. We want to understand it theoretically and defeat it politically. This requires that we appreciate both its strengths and weaknesses. The exact nature of the rule of Capital in a society is both a reflection of latter’s universal properties, as well particularities of the given society’s politics and culture. Our hope is that an understanding of the rule of the Capital in a society like India will also throw light on its understanding in other countries.

निशाने पर ‘‘जूठन’

पेरूमल मुरूगन, सोवेन्द्र हांसदा शेखर और अब ओमप्रकाश वाल्मिकी

-सुभाष गाताडे

‘तुम्हारी महानता मेरे लिए स्याह अंधेरा है..

मैं जानता हूं,/मेरा दर्द तुम्हारे लिए चींटी जैसा/ और तुम्हारा अपना दर्द पहाड़ जैसा

इसलिए, मेरे और तुम्हारे बीच/ एक फासला है/जिसे लम्बाई में नहीं/समय से नापा जाएगा।

- ओमप्रकाश वाल्मिीक (जूता)

1997 में आयी वह आत्मकथा ‘‘जूठन’’ आते ही चर्चित हुई थी।

उस वक्त एक सीमित दायरे में ही उसके लेखक ओमप्रकाश वाल्मिकी का नाम जाना जाता था। मगर हिन्दी जगत में किताब का जो रिस्पान्स था, जिस तरह अन्य भाषाओं में उसके अनुवाद होने लगे, उससे यह नाम दूर तक पहुंचने में अधिक वक्त नहीं लगा। यह अकारण नहीं था कि इक्कीसवीं सदी की पहली दहाई के मध्य में वह किताब अंग्रेजी में अनूदित होकर कनाडा तथा अन्य देशों के विश्वविद्यालयों के पाठयक्रम में शामिल की गयी थी। एक मोटे अनुमान के हिसाब से देश के तेरह अलग अलग विश्वविद्यालयों में - जिनमें कई केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालय शामिल हैं - इन दिनों यह उपन्यास या उसके अंश पढ़ाए जा रहे हैं।

The Crisis of Liberal Order in India and Successes of Hindutva Fascism

Sanjay Kumar

The last three and a half years of Modi government have made many Indians acutely aware of the threat Hindutva poses to whatever little democracy exists in the country. Minorities and Dalits have been physically assaulted by supporters of Hindutva with full state patronage. The bureaucracy and criminal justice system, which were already autocratic and corrupt, have been systematically infiltrated to communalise them further. Critics of Hindutva like Gauri Lankesh have been murdered in broad day light.Social media, which has emerged an important medium for country’s urban youth to form and express opinion, is dominated by troll armies of Hindutva that spread hatred and openly threaten people challenging Hindutva, or Modi government. Large sections of traditional media have become mouth pieces of the regime and brazenly pander to Hindu communal sentiments. The leader reigns supreme. The chaterrati in the media even applaud his mindless actions like demonetization. Opponents of the regime are openly branded anti-national, and brazen lies are spread about them. All sensible people of the country realise that the hatred, public violence, and communalization of state institutionsby Hindutva organisations are taking country towards disaster, and if it is to be saved Hindutva needs to bedefeated politically. The disaster India faces is that of a successful fascism. In times like these politically aware groups also have an additional responsibility.Hindutva does need to be defeated. However, this does not mean that the extant liberal mode of governance threatened by it be accepted uncritically.To the extent that the Hindutva is not a conspiracy, and roots of its success lie within Indian society and politics, it is also necessary to critically examine accepted notions of Indian democracy and society.

Crisis of Indian Democracy

Sanjay Kumar

Indian democracy faces  an unprecedented crisis. We do not have to get into debates about whether the current regime is fascist, or not. It is clearly and cleverly, creating, as well egging on, a majoritarian politics, which for instance calls upon 'people of India' to target their selected enemies; minorities, leftists, anti-national liberals, etc.  What Nehru had warned against, a majority communalism masquerading as nationalism, is growing right before our eyes. This is no longer a possible conspiracy, or a plan of Nagpur headquarters, but an embodied reality in terms of popular attitudes, modes of behaviour and values. On the other hand, the Modi government is implementing many anti-people economic and social policies. But somehow the popular mobilisations against those are not able to cross a critical mass. We can compare and contrast the situation with Emergency when a particular leader and the state power became the symbol of anti people authoritarianism. Then, the idea that given a chance people will throw out the authoritarian leader seemed reasonable; and that is how indeed it turned out in 1977 elections. Now, the nature and modus operandi of 'authoritarianism' are different. How do you challenge a 'popular' authoritarianism, whose kit bag also contains legitimate 'democratic' tools. In any democratic project, it is ultimately the people themselves who assert their democratic rights and make society and state democratic. How do we address the people who are supporting anti-democratic politics. Old assumptions and methods will not work. It seems democratic politics now has to be 'molecular', work at micro-level, make people confront their own attitudes, modes of behaviour, and long held beliefs. At the other level, we have to unpack deeper and more rooted contradictions of the Modi regime with the people of India. Of course, all this is easier said than done. However, what we can call the 'self criticism' of the democracy in India, a self awareness of its blind spots  and limitations, can be a first constructive step.

So what are these blind spots and limitations? We can only briefly touch some of them here. Our understanding about democracy in India has generally worked on a simplistic notion of people, which can best be called populist. While presenting the draft of the constitution Dr Ambedkar had famously warned about the health and future of the plant on democracy in a social soil which was deeply anti democratic. He most likely had feudal, casteist, partiarchal hold overs in mind, which had made Indian society one of the most unequal and dehumanising in human history. People like Dr Ambedkar were deeply aware that in a society like India democracy will not be a spontaneous development. It was not that once a liberal democratic constitution is in place, the state and society will merrily start chugging along the path of democracy. We all know how the power of office (whose other name is corruption), money, and muscle have thrived in our society since independence. We have come to accept a narrow definition of democracy, which is mainly centered on regular elections and a modicum of freedom of expression and association for a small, relatively privileged minority. On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of Indians have been deprived of even basic citizenship rights, except of course the right to vote. Actually, the relatively small privileged minority also does not interact with state as citizens.  

There is no doubt that the past nearly seventy years of electoral democracy have expanded and deepened the stake people feel in the elected governments. Over time, many oppressed and deprived sections of society, which could not vote in  earlier  elections, have been mobilised, and in India we actually witness an interesting phenomenon that larger percentages of deprived and oppressed people vote than the privileged and the rich. Another interesting phenomenon is that this mobilisation has occurred at the level of community, mainly caste. It has been generally believed that participation of oppressed castes has broadened and deepened democracy in India. While this is true in its own special way, another parallel process got overlooked. All communities which become active during elections are actually 'created' communities, called into  action by leaders, parties and their ground level workers. If communities like these become the main mode of address to an average voter, then it is only a matter of time that an organisation gets successful  in mobilising the largest such 'community' , the Hindu religious community. This follows from the logic of the 'arithmetic' of electoral politics in our country. For some time many of us had thought that the pluralities of caste, language, and regional variations in India will not allow mobilisation of people around a monolithic Hindutva identity to be successful. Actually, it seems that in states like Asom and UP, Hindutva has gone around this problem. In UP it managed to mobolise non Jatav dalits and non Yadav OBCs by specifically targeting them under an the over all ideological hegemony of upper castes. In the process it managed to disempower nearly 18% Muslim voters. Actually this exercise of dis empowering a significant minority is not unique to India. In the US, in the past four decades, the Republican Party has evolved a programme which systematically disregards the interests to 12 percent African Americans. And, in all presidential elections the majority of white voters have always voted for republican candidates. This was the case even during 'landslide' Obama victories.

Among the blind spots of Indian democracy we must also touch upon its hugely compromising notion and practice of secularism. The unique brand of secularism in India has been called 'sarv dharm sambhav', which literally translates as equal attitude towards all religions. Opportunistic politicians have translated it to 'equal respect for all religions'. An idea like the latter is  completely against the spirit of secularism. Secularism in a democracy has two assumptions. One, the fundamental democratic values, those of equality and fundamental rights, are not based upon any religious idea. The people who give themselves a constitution do not derive this power from authority of any religious belief. In this sense the basic democratic values are secular. The second principle, that a secular state will not prefer any religion over others, is a requirement of the principle of equality. A consequence of the secular basis of democracy is that any religious practice which violate these principles, for instance the principle of equality, can be outlawed. No religious belief can sanction inequality. Indian state did outlaw untouchability, even though for many Hindus it was an article of faith. So a secular democratic state power can not follow a formula like equal respect, or equal attitude towards all religions. Yet it does not  mean that secularism is anti religion. It just does not entertain any religious sanction in its domain. It does not interfere in the sphere of personal beliefs, nor  does it deny believers the right to associate on the basis of their religion.

Finally, the vexed relationship of caste in India with democracy need to be addressed. The electoral democracy has largely succeeded in reducing struggles against caste oppression to a politics of representation. While the reality is that in the era of electoral democracy and reservations for oppressed castes in state jobs and educational institutions, caste inequalities morphed into newer forms, which the politics of representation fully integrated into existing structures is often unable to address. It is in this regard that Rohith Vemula's suicide note becomes an important window to the lived reality of politically and socially conscious Dalit youth. Second, an important observation of Ambedkar in Annihilation of Caste is that as long as Hindus remain caste ridden, Hindu society is actually not a society. Caste fragments, and arranges society hierarchically so that any large scale unity becomes difficult. A public sphere, in which any individual rights bearing citizen interacts with others as their equal, is an important part of  any democratic society. Continuing salience of caste in Indian society has limited and compromised the possibilities of public sphere in India?

The text is based upon author's presentation at a round table on the same title organised by People's Alliance for Democracy and Secularism on 15^th July, 2017. 

Populism and 'Post Truth': The Two Misrepresentations of Extreme Right Wing in Liberal Discourse

Sanjay Kumar

Populism has emerged as the latest bad word in the liberal commentary on current politics in the West. The understanding is simple. Populist politicians are supposed to appeal to the 'people' and stoke their jealousy against those who are economically, socially and politically successful. Why should liberal commentators be bad mouthing an appeal to the people? After all, is not democracy supposed to be government 'of the people, by the people, for the people'? To appreciate the liberal disdain of populism, it helps to unpack its conception of state and economy. The basic idea is that running a modern and complex state and economy is a specialists' job, much beyond abilities of ordinary people. That is why the liberal model of governance advocates representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. A related worry is the lack of cultural and civil behaviour of the masses. Masses vs classes, the former lacking public rationality and civility, while the latter being defined by these properties, is an apt description of the underbelly of liberal understanding of society. Depending upon how democratic a particular liberalism institutional structure is, the avenues to reach to the level of 'classes', through education, money, culture, etc. may be more or less open to individuals from different social strata. The liberal criticism of populism rests upon seeing it as a misguided, ill-informed and foolhardy attack on those without whom the political and economic system would not work.

Extreme right wingers relish the populist tag. It is a profitable wrapper over a racist, misogynist and communal core. What others see as racism and misogyny, someone like Trump sees as his courageous disregard of 'political correctness'. And he genuinely believes that his conduct has allowed ordinary people to challenge a public censorship liberal elites had forced on them. Same for Modi; he sees his open espousal of Hindu communal interests as unshackling the Hindu pride from emasculation by a pseudo-secular ruling elite. Besides targeting entrenched elites, extreme right wingers like Trump, LePen, or own Modi, also use national jingoism, racism, misogyny, and bigotry to advance their politics. The populist label given by liberal commentators fails to address the threat these pose to selected minorities. It fails to face up to the disdainful and ugly realities to social life. 

Another word used in liberal discourse to identify extreme right wing is 'post truth', designated as the word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries. The implication is that popular opinion now is somehow being easily swayed by emotionally charged rhetoric and fake news having no factual basis. The claim that this is happening only now is odd. The history of liberal media and politics is littered with selective reporting, commentary and demagoguery. Radical thinkers like Chomsky have uncovered how these tactics are used to create consent in liberal democracies. It was not too long ago that newspapers like NYT and Times were calling their readers to march to the drumbeats of war on Iraq on fake charges of weapons of mass destruction possessed by Saddam Hussein. Elected leaders like Blair were presenting 'sexed up' intelligence in the parliament to prepare their country for a war of aggression. The story was repeated without any remorse with regard to Libya and Syria. Nor is it the case that liberal media and politicians indulge in such skulduggery only for aggressions against third world countries, and are truthful saints when reporting on internal politics. The way even moderate left leaders like Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, or Malenchon have been lampooned, and their policies against austerity and increasing taxes on the rich ridiculed would put shame to any claims of fair reporting and neutrality. Websites circulating fake news and rumours, and claims of leaders like Trump or LePen are only more brazen and less polished attempts to create a favourable public opinion. To create a wall separation of between them and liberal discourse, with truth and facts on the one side, and 'post-truth' on the other is a motivated attempt to disguise the long history of dissemination of false information and propaganda by the liberal establishment. 

Neo-Fascism, not Populism 

Extreme right wing in the West is growing in the space opened by the legitimacy crisis of the existing liberal mode of governance. The neo-liberal political economy has unsettled existing patterns of social expectations, and meaning of social life and relations. Globalisation of production, information and culture, and continental level migrations are producing fundamental changes in working lives and public environment; opening opportunities, as well as causing crisis for many. All such changes would be expected from any advance in technology. What is unique to neo-liberalism is a market model of society in which the public sphere is increasingly becoming privatised. This is depriving people of public support to deal with sudden and unsettling change. While many ordinary people feel helpless against these changes, the rich are becoming super rich; taking inequality of income, assets and personal security to obscene levels. Alienation and insecurity are the primal fears on which the right wing is growing. This, however, is only one part of the story.

Lucknow Public Meeting: Democracy and People's lives लोक जीवन और लोकतंत्र

Democracy and People's lives

A Lecture by Dr Ravi Sinha

Time: 5.30 p.m. 4th June 2017

Jaishankar Prasad Sabhagar, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow

The world today witnesses rise of the rightwing at the global level which has generally remained on the margins after second world war. This rise is taking place through democratic routes only. Normally while discerning the menace of fascism which is unfolding before us via 'democratic' routes, the role of capital, finance, corporate houses, globalisation gets discussed but the role of 'people' and their 'lives' in this phenomenon get neglected. With this lecture, we intend to address this issue at the global level as well as in the context of India.

New Socialist Initiative (NSI) is organising this lecture. NSI - as you might be aware - is an ideological-political platform of the left which is committed to reorientation of revolutionary politics. Our attempt is to present a fresh critique of the present day capitalism, propose an outline of the new system which can provide an alternative to it and strengthen the attempts to fashion left politics in our times. No doubt, it can be accomplished by engaging in ideological preparations, internal debates - discussions along with social experiments and model building.

Dr Ravi Sinha, who is a leading member of NSI, is a well known Marxist intellectual and has been associated with the left movement for more than four decades. He is the principal author of the much-acclaimed book 'Globalisation of Capital - A New Modus Operandi of Global Capitalism' (1997) and has been a founding member of the Hindi journal Sandhan. Hundreds of his articles in English-Hindi have appeared in various publications 

You are cordially invited to join us for the programme and participate in the discussion.

New Socialist Initiative

Contact : 9565802785, 09868940920

The New Social Order in Uttar Pradesh

- Sanjay Kumar

UP elections results stunned everyone, losers as well as victors. With 40 percent of votes, the BJP managed to get more than 75% of the state assembly seats. Other major parties of the state, SP and BSP, were left far behind licking their wounds, even though these parties had managed to retain their core vote parcentages of 28% (in alliance with Congress) and 20%, respectively. The appointment of Adityanath Yogi, the mahant of Gorakhnath Math, as the chief minister, and actions of his government like the banning socalled illegal abbatoirs, anti-Romeo squads, and loan waiver of small and marginal farmers, are indications that the BJP government in state is clearly aiming for a new social order, an order which it hopes will consolidate its political success. 

Politics and Society under Bourgeois Democracy

Bourgeois democracies create a specifically mediated relationship between politics and society, through which both, politics and society shape each other. Politics and state action are not passive reflections of the social order. Rules of electoral politics in India have meant that majority governments have been easily formed with votes of even 30% of the electorate. Political success requires agency, conscious planning and organisation. All indications are that from micro level booth management to sending subtle messages to its core voters, the BJP simply out maneaouvered its opponents in UP. Politics, which ensures access to state power, the most organised agency in society, is actually a vehicle to mould society. RSS has been working on this premise for decades. Now that the BJP is in power at center and many large states of the country, there should be no doubt that it is going to try to turn India according to its ideology and vision. However, it will be wrong to attribute political success purely to the actions and abilities of players. Actually, political success itself is premised upon social influence. The latter can take diverse forms, from outright domination, hegemony with passive/active consent, to negotiated compromises. Hence, the political success of the BJP itself is based upon an underlying social dynamic. Through a combination of events, the BJP under Modi has been successful in tapping into this dynamic. What is this dynamic? What is the nature of its influence over society? How far the trends of this dynamic match with RSS gameplan? Also, what kinds of social currents are agaisnt this dynamic, and how can it be countered? There is little doubt that progressive and democratic forces in the country need to address these questions for making sense of the BJP success and developing credible alternatives. 

A lot has been written about how in this election, and before these in Asom and in 2014 Loksabha elections, BJP has been able to form majority governments by completely disregarding Muslims. The obverse of this is the consolidation of large sections of Hindus under a politicla programme which has a clear anti-minority agenda, and whose violent consequences have been evident for many years now. Persecution of minorities is an established fact of Indian social and political life, a lot has been writtten and discussed about it. However, a curious fact about discussions on, and activism against Hindutva is that little light is thrown on Hindu society which is giving its politically allegiance to Hindutva. We need to turn our lens towards the socalled 'majority' community and explore processes that are turning it communal. Without this we will be forced to argue that the success of Hindutva communalism is purely a result of propaganda, conspiracy, organisational acumen, etc (depending upon one's ideological orientation, any one of these can be picked) of the RSS/BJP. Without such an analysis we can not show and convince Hindus that the path of Hindutva is actually a path of complete disaster for India as a society. Hindutva is bad for every Indian, not just for minorities. The UP election results are as good an opportunity as any other, to have a look at the ways the Hindu social order, despite its many bewildering and contradictory diversity, is changing; changes which at present appear to be strengthening Hindutva appeal. 

Resurgence of 'Upper' Caste Hegemony: Caste has changed, but is still a dominant fact of social life in most of India. For more than five years UP was ruled by a Dalit woman. This is an unprecedented fact in more than three thousand years old history of Hindu society. Yet, caste has not disappeared. It remains perhaps the most common identity, both in private and public life, and has morphed into newer forms of hierarchy and social power. The so called upper castes, which constitute about 20% of UP population, remain the most influential caste group in society. Like in the rest of India, these castes dominate urban economy, bureaucracy, education sector, judiciary, media, and even non government sector organisations. Upper castes do not dominate UP through control of land and traditional institutions of rural society, the way their ancestors did upto two generations ago. Capitalism, political mobilisation of other castes in electoral democracy, and reservations in bureaucracy and educational institututions have meant that the old order with its naked violence and Brahmanical inhumanity is dead for good. 

'Upper' castes remain self-conscious of themselves as the upper castes in society, despite a number of inner fissures, and many among them actually living in poverty. Upper caste influence in UP takes different forms in different parts of social life. Their hegemony is most clearly visible in the media and public discourse. A popular movie like Dabang based on UP, has a Brahmin police officer as the hero, a Prajpat (of potter caste) as his love interest, and wrestler of a Netaji (not so hidden reference to upstart Yadavs) as the vile villain. All vernacular newspapers, tv news channels are owned and managed by upper castes. The upper caste self-representation is hegemonic because it is accepted as universal, while self-representations of other castes like of Yadavs, or Jatavs, are self-conscious particular. Notice another fact. While political commentators routinely refer to other castes and Muslims, as 'vote banks' of particular political parties, upper castes, to all contrary evidence, are rarely mentioned as a 'vote bank'. 

The political hegemony which upper castes enjoyed during the freedom movement, and under Congress rule, has been seriously eroded by subsequent political developments. In a nutshell, the Hindutva programme of BJP is a chance for upper castes to regain their political hegemony. This has been evident for many decades now, ever since the internal haemorrhage of Congress in the late eighties. Upper caste dalliances with SP and BSP were only tactical to serve immediate interests. Hindutva is a different bandwagon altogether. Like the national development plans of Congress earlier, Hindutva by design is a project with hegemonic pretensions, which aims to represent the entire Hindu society. Nationalism and development are the programmatic elements of this project, suitably modified from earlier Congress variants to match the neo-liberal political economy. In the present circumstances there is a natural gravitation of upper castes towards it. Now that the BJP has got a national level presence in Modi, it is very sure that upper castes form its natural core of voters. Like Congress earlier, it does not have to do anything special to attract them. Hindutva forces and 'upper' castes together can share in the glory of 'leading the nation'. 

This is very much evident in the results of recent elections. Upper castes now have more than double the number of elected members in the current assembly than their population ratio. Around half of BJP MLAs are 'upper' caste. According to election observers 'upper' castes this time maintained a strategic silence in conversations before elections, while in earlier elections they had been publicly vocal about their preferences (Messages, Mathematics and Silences in BJP's UP Win, Radhika Ramaseshan, EPW, 27 March, 2017). This was in consonance with the 'dog whistle' strategy of the RSS described by a pracharak as ' Man hee man se vote deejiye, sayam rakhiye apnee vaani par'. The aim was to keep political opponents, mainly Muslims confused. The BJP election arithmatic was simple. Gather other caste voters, who may be disgruntled with the Yadav dominated SP and Jatav dominated BSP, around the core of upper caste voters. This strategy is in obvious harmony with upper caste intentions to regain hegemony, for which they need to successfully counter politically organsied Yadavs and Jatavs.