Our country is continuously in election mode. Either there are local bodies polls, assembly elections in some states or other and Lok Sabha elections besides bye polls round the corner. This is keeping the parties election battle ready. It is said that in a democracy, the first thing that comes is not the nation or its economy but a win in the immediate next elections. The intense polarization of the electorate particularly in the Northern belt decimated the Congress Party, which was seen to have provided a corrupt UPA-II regime. In the development driven election propaganda the impact of the polarized polity created by the hate campaign of ground level local leaders and ably assisted by second rank leadership with the top leadership looking the other way brought rich dividends to BJP in 2014.
With the development façade wearing out and with less intensive polarization the ‘Acche din party’ got trashed in Delhi and Bihar. The aspirational class which was carried away by the ‘acche din’ dream is distancing from the party. The polarisers are bound to go to their old ways. In these two years we have seen theatrics over ‘development’ and ‘Make in India’ from the top leadership while the second rung leaders have been spreading hate through love jihad, cow slaughter, beef ban campaigns. The tirade is directed against the Muslim community with the deafening silence from the top. The recently concluded Muzafarnagar bye polls elections are a shining example of how polarized electorate can be of help. The elections in Assam and West Bengal shall see the debate on Bangladeshi illegal migrants providing enough fodder for the division on religious lines.
The anti-Muslim tirade looks pedestrian. Nationalism appears more romantic, more acceptable to polarize the state and its population. The nationalism is laced with Afzal Guru, Yukub Menon and Ishrat Jehan. The crisis at the JNU and the charges of sedition against the students are to be understood in the context of creating a polarized polity and an attempt to create an atmosphere of fear where dissent is not tolerated.
The Hyderabad Central University crisis which led to the death of a dalit research scholar was sparked of by a students association expressing sympathy for Yakub Memon. His execution was also questioned by the progressive legal fraternity. At JNU the crisis began with a student protest meeting in support of the parliament attack accused Afzal Guru.
After his conviction was upheld by the highest court, Afzal Guru’s execution was a subject matter of legal discourse over the type of evidence (circumstantial) based on which the conviction was sustained and the manner in which the entire execution was carried out. BJP’s ally in J&K believe Afzal Guru to be a martyr.
Every time the high profile execution happened there has been a legal discourse. The killers of Indira Gandhi had sympathy from none other than former prime minister A.B. Vajpayee. It was believed that their trial was not fair. D.S. Bhullar the killer of the former chief minister of Punjab Beant Singh got full support from the Akalis an ally of BJP. The killer of Mahatma Gandhi is also idolized. The debate on judicial process or death sentence is a perfect legitimate legal discourse. but then Afzal guru happens to be a Muslim. The discourse over the killing of Ishrat Jehan is as though, it is legal to treat a terrorist as a wall lizard. But then she deserves that! She also happens to be Muslim! How dare you question the so called encounter? And what an opportunity to build a case of anti nationalism against those who question?
Sadhvi Jyoti, Giriraj Kishore and central ministers have been attacking the Muslim community left, right and centre. A central minister declared a war on Muslims. A bakt offered five lakhs to anyone who can cut Kanhaiya’s tongue. Another bakt has offered supari to do away with him. Beef eaters are killed in broad day light and Dalit students who held contrarian view points have been treated as anti nationals. The silence even in ‘maan ki bhat’ proves that the hate creators are acting with the approval from the top. The nationalism–anti nationalism discourse has brought the divisive agenda back on the table with new vigor
This issue of likening dissent to anti-nationalism is nothing new. The anti- nationalism debate fuelled by the debate on the hanging of Yakub Memon and Afzal Guru is now seen as a god sent opportunity to polarize the country on ultra patriotic lines using the same law which was used by the British against Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi. The new discourse has energized the ‘pseudo nationalists’ to attack teachers, journalists and lawyers with liberal outlook. Even the ‘noise hour’ hero is emboldened to attack the liberal thinking intellectuals.
The hyper nationalistic rhetoric had also helped the ‘ache din party’ to divert attention from its failure on almost every front. Prices of food grains continue to rise. The employment market is shrinking. The stock market is tanking and the dollar is rising against the rupee. There is hardly any debate on these issues. Everyday we have cow, JNU, Ishrat and azadi as our night time fodder.
There is a silver lining. The hyper national rhetoric has consolidated progressive forces including teachers, journalists and all sections from the secular spectrum like never before. The award wapsi campaign and the pro-Kanhaiya campaign had stellar effect on the national pschye. The mahagatbhan happened in Bihar as a backlash to the communal forces. It need not be emphasized that the formidable energy unleashed by the pseudo nationalism with intent to polarize the society can only be defeated by unity of all secular forces. Secular Goa beware 2017 is not far away.
(The writer is a practicing Lawyer and lecturer in law.)
