The authoritative verdict of 2019
meant that post Nehru 1957, PM Modi was the first to win a back to back
elections with increase in both seats and vote share. To the edifice fabricated
at connexions of Marx, Nehru and Mohammad, the shock magnitude was high. The follow
up surgical strikes in Article 370, Ayodhya judgment and grant of accelerated
citizenship to persecuted religious minorities seemed insult to injury. Faced with an existential crisis, it was
inevitable to see a spill-over of emotions onto the street, the outcome being
full view in the last month and half or so. While Mamta was first off the block vowing to
prevent CAA being implemented in her state, the competitive pursuit ensured Kerala
go a step forward to have its assembly pass a resolution opposing the
implementation of CAA. Many other states opposition states have joined the
rhetoric notwithstanding CAA is central subject and states have no role in the
same. Contrast to Tukde Tukde slogans in the previous JNU battles of 2015-16,
an interesting difference is the adoption of national flag, constitutional
preamble and national anthem as symbols of protest. Perhaps there is
realisation maybe belated that secessionist slogans might be politically
costly. The citizen at heart is a nationalist and will never tolerate
intentions to break the country. This is true in any geography. However, regardless
of the changed symbolism, deep within the outgoing ecosystem fighting a rear-guard
action, the idea of India being split into multiple territories has not vanished.
The slogans, banners, posters and pamphlets emergent in the protests are pointers
to the fact. It might seem extremely low probability of mainstream political
opposition adopting the route of prospective secessionism, this cannot be ruled
out given the high stakes in the war.
The war over the ideological
directions of the socio-politico-cultural ecosystem is best analysed through
a comparison with the ‘Bodyline’ Ashes of 1932-33. Bodyline is attributed to
three factors. There was a high stakes prize which involved the invoking of
national identity and pride to the extreme. Ashes was precisely a contest of
the same in a cricket crazy countries. Cricket in fact defined culture in those
regions. Secondly, one side had an individual/group
whose dominance would be so overwhelming and maybe only non-conventional method
irrespective of its legality would stop the force. Bradman was precisely such a
character. Third, there must be an individual who apart from having unqualified
and total support from his teammates and teammates who had the ability to
execute his ideas, must be willing to go out of the way and use any means as
long as ends are met. Bradman had a
narrow chink in armour against fast bowling on the leg stump. In Douglas
Jardine, there was a captain who not just had unstinting support from his
bowlers (Gubby Allen notwithstanding) but willing to go with the leg theory as
the first line of offense ( narrow chink in Bradman’s armour). To Jardine, it
was evident that ends mattered irrespective of the means he used. He had his
instruments in Larwood, Voce and Bowes to achieve the target he aimed for. The outcome
of course was bringing Bradman to more human levels, an average of 57 still
some 15 runs ahead of Walter Hammond, his nearest rival. Spirit of cricket did
not matter, just the ends mattered. 1932-33 Ashes saw convergence of all the
three factors.
The pretext of so called Gandhian
moral approach combined with Hindu guilt trapping ensured Nehru-Marxian
monopoly on the public intellectual, educational, social, cultural and artistic
spheres. The monopoly was further with convenient coalition with the Islamists.
Multitude of reasons exist on how the monopoly emerged but suffice at the
moment to argue that the 65 year dominance is not just challenged but in the
process of dismantling. The deracinated Hindu mind might give way to the
original Indic identity thus sending the self-styled liberal ecosystem into
oblivion. The system cultivated and profited from at the altar of Indian
culture and identity is being broken by one Narendra Modi along with his lieutenant
Amit Shah. In terms of electoral victories they seem Bradmansque. To a system on throes of death, it needs an
action that should save itself without bothering about the means of achieving the
end. Evidence of Jardinism, egged on by
media manifested from Kanahiya Kumar to Hardik Patel to Chandrashekhar Azad to
Shah Faisal to the latest in the stable Aishe Ghosh.
Yet liberal ecosystem is missing
undisputed leader to challenge Modi and Shah. Internal divergences are perhaps
too strong. Further the leader to demonstrate Jardinism will have to not
command blind support of his vote-bank but have capabilities to inflict
violence at low costs. Violence of few
is sufficient enough to unnerve the rest of the society. This is precisely how
Islam and later British ruled India for centuries. Leadership fulfilling the needs is perhaps
possible in the Islamic movement given its infra and super structures. What
perhaps is being exhibited is the advance operations or what in military
parlance is termed road opening party, Going forward, it is likely that the
left and Nehruvians etc would subordinate themselves as foot soldiers and
generals to an Islamic led movement seeking to dethrone Hindu right. External
backing cannot be ruled out. The current
violence with low costs and relatively higher marginal benefits are a façade for
a larger design to emerge. Given the first signs are visible, calls for
secessionism or Tukde Tukde might emerge once again and perhaps scaled up? There
might be pretensions of Nehru-Marx complex at the top of disassociating from
the emergent radicalism a la Shashi Tharoor. Yet it would just be a smokescreen.
The probability of such escalation beyond photo-ops of the fringe might seem
low, yet cannot be ruled out. History is always by accident and just a small
tinder is enough to set the forest on fire. Eternal vigilance is price of
liberty
Comments
Post a Comment