No enemy, no RSS ideology: Biggest threat to Mother India
If we think that violence perpetrated by terrorists is wrong, how is the Right wing's violence justified?
The manner in which Jawaharal Nehru
University Students' Union president Kanhaiya Kumar was roughed up in
Patiala House Court premises, while being brought to be produced in the
courtroom, in the presence of observers from the Supreme Court who were
there to ensure the security of Kanhaiya and everybody else targeted by
the RSS-BJP, has brought back memories of the 1992 Babri Masjid
demolition incident.
The people associated with Sangh Parivar are quick to accuse
others who do not believe in their ideology, of being anti-national at
the slightest pretext or sometimes even without any concrete evidence,
but are themselves guilty of having scant regard for the Constitution of
this country or any respect for law and order.
At present the biggest threat to this nation is from the
Sangh Parivar itself which is hurtling the country speedily towards
anarchy. Those of Hindutva ideology feel that under the present
dispensation they are free to beat up anybody or even kill without
attracting any punishment, as the police is under one of their own,
Rajnath Singh, the home minister, who was quick to point out that JNU
incidents were instigated by Hafiz Saeed without providing any proof for
this claim.
Today, there is a raging debate in this country. People
believing in Hindutva ideology claim to be patriots, accusing anyone who
disagrees with them of being anti-national. The dubious actions of the
RSS-associated people make us question their categorisation. Is it
enough to be called a patriot if you hold a picture of Mother India,
raise "Vande Mataram" slogans, wave the Indian Tricolour, hurl abuses at
Pakistan and beat up anybody who disagrees with any of these things?
The Delhi BJP MLA OP Sharma said that if he had a gun he
would have shot the anti-national people. If we think that the violence
perpetrated by terrorists or Naxalites is wrong, how is the violence by
the Right wing justified? It is amazing that police and judiciary
continue to be mute spectators of all their acts of vandalism.
The policies made in this country are making the rich richer
and increasingly distancing them from the poor. Half the children born
in this country are malnourished. One-fourth of children are victims of
child labour. Of the one thousand children born, 47 die at child birth
and 14 more die before they reach the age of five years. When one lakh
children are born, 200 mothers die during childbirth.
Since the country has adopted the economic policies of
liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation about three lakh farmers
have committed suicide as they were not able to repay their loans.
Shouldn't the people who make policies for this country, who are
responsible for the abovementioned deaths and extreme levels of poverty
in this country, be called anti-national?
Some private corporations are in debt to the extent of a
total of Rs 1.14 lakh crores to the banks of this country which have
conveniently decided to call these unpaid loans as Non-Performing
Assets. In a country where poor live in the shocking state described
above, will it not be considered anti-national to simply write off the
loans of private corporations in this manner?
Should people who indulge in corruption and pocket public
money for private gains not be called anti-national? BJP has always
talked about bringing back the black money stashed in foreign banks but
nobody likes to talk about the black money in our economy which helps
the corrupt and criminal enter our legislatures.
Are people using this black money not anti-national? Is
seeking foreign capital to set up industrial units, which will be free
to exploit our labour, not anti-national?
Is giving rights over natural resources to
national-multinational corporations to make profit and denying our own
citizens access to them not anti-national?
For example, Pepsi and Coca Cola are exploiting our
underground water resources and taking away the profits to US. Should
helping them set up units in India not be called anti-national? Is
helping students cheat in examinations and thereby jeopardising their
future not anti-national?
On the other hand is it not patriotic to help the
empowerment, in any way, of marginalised sections of this country? Is
the act of enabling a child to attend school, who is otherwise unable to
do so, not an act of patriotism? Is helping a needy person access
medical help for treatment not a patriotic act? Does it not count as
patriotism to organise socioeconomic weaker categories of people to
fight for their basic rights so that they may improve their living
conditions?
Is it not patriotism to help any victim seek justice from
the system? Will it not be considered a patriotic act to raise voice
against injustice so that some people are not harmed and demand the
right policies so that people are benefitted?
Is it not patriotic to raise a voice against misuse of
public money by the government so that the resources may be equitably
distributed? For example, will it not be wise to demand reduction in
defence budget and simultaneously work on resolving bilateral problems
with neighbours whom we consider enemy so that the saved resources could
be spent on education, health care, employment generation, etc, which
will benefit citizens of our country as well as fellow deprived citizens
of our enemy country, which too will reduce its defence budget in
response.
Is this not patriotism? In fact, this kind of patriotism is
in the interest of our nation as well as our neighbours, who presently
see us as a threat.
If we examine carefully the idea of nation is as divisive
as the ideas of religion and caste, all of which are artificial
categories created by human beings. The concept of nation should meet
the same fate as in Europe, where there are no armies on the borders and
one can cross from one country into another without requiring a
passport or a visa.
We hope that one day we will be able to cross from one
country into another just like we cross over from one district to
another, in South Asia as well. In such a concept of nation the
Right-wing people will not have an opportunity to practice their
ideology because there will be no takers for it.
The RSS ideology exists only so long as there is an enemy,
either real or imagined. This is the biggest contradiction of the
Hindutva ideology. This implies that the existence of RSS is dependent
on the existence of their enemy. That is why targeting an enemy is the
focus of all RSS activities. This is the reason wise people do not fall
in their trap.
