IN/JIAN

I 'i1'~1 .,

1M III 111'11

All
O"...IIIIIW,I

We're all kar sevaks now

SWAPANDASGUPTA
It is unlikely the American academic who coined the evocative
phrase "secession of th,e successful" had Indian society even
remotely in mind. After the December 6 happenings in Ayodhya,
however, there is no better description for the relentless war being
waged by a beleaguered political elite against its own people. In the
past three weeks or so, even as a leaderless nation attempted to come
to terms with its past, present and future, the upholders of the status
quo have launched a vicious counter-offensive aimed at the very core
of Indian nationhood.
The magnitude and intensity of the assault are understandable.
Whatever may have been the calculations of the Sangh parivar on the
morning of that fateful Sunday, impatient and angry kar sevaks took
matters into their own hands and forced a new agenda on India.
Hindu nationalism was always an underlying politiccn concern. On
Dec. 6, Hindutva became a state of mind, the unifying ethos of an
ancient nation groping for a modem identity.
The ramifications of this revolutionary break have not been
sufficiently
grasped.
With characteristic
shortsightedness,
disoriented secularists persist in viewing the explosion as an
ephemeral burst of fanaticism -"the face of lumpenised India" which is quite alien to the spiritual and metaphysical concerns of
Hinduism.
The assessment is partially right and horribly wrong. In many places
the riots turned out to be the occasion for settling personal scores
and expressing latent anti-Hindu or anti-Muslim prejudices. But
the breakdown of law and order was momentary, and despite
continuing tension in many areas, the country has rapidly returned
to normalcy. Change and violence are n?t necessarily co-terminus.

lit II ..IIMIII

\V 11,11 h,II,

11,,\\1 \'11

.1111'1,d I.. \111111

n', "","11\11"h. Ihl ,..1111I1"1i1"' 1lllIduII, !'lit! I..otrIII'WII-..d'u nul

"Itlll.ly dt1nwllPihII "ymhol 01 '1lIt'n rogancc, they si;J,ultaneously
11\"I'lluJ'lwd tht' Ingrained
Hindu
mindset
61"" defeatism,
IIIt'''IUI'fudlng as moral superiority. Gandhiji had initiated the
1'1111('"'' by harnessing
Hindu passivity to a satyagraha
.IH,tl"'" colonialism which literally guilt-tripped the British into
1t,.lVln~ India. Unfortunately, the transfer of power was not
'tlnlmpanied by a corresponding social resurgence and Jawaharlal
Nt'hm's socialistic trust merely succeeded in transposing a set
of "modem" values on a people still burdened by mental

'1l'I'vitude.

'

What is pejoratively labelled "pseudo-secularism" was not merely

minority appeasement. That is only a small aspect of the perversion.
The central thrust of the Nehruvian consensus lay in consciously
dissolving Hindu pride. It purposefully prevented Hindu society
from overcoming the burden of centuries of subordination. India's
post-independence
development was flawed because cultural
nationalism was kept out of the purview of nationhood, and Hindu
Renaissance detached from the political agenda.
Bellicosity: On Dec. 6, Hindu society was confronted with its own
audacity. Initial confusion soon gave way to bellicosity once
it became painfully clear that the remaining obstacle to national
fulfillment was a political establishment completely out of sync with
the prevailing mood. The gap between state and civil society has
further increased with constant secularist shenanigans aimed at
rubbishing India to its own people. The pious platitudes on
Doordarshan, the self-flagellation by deracinated intellectuals and
left wing McCarthyism have merely reinforced popular unease
with a regime which would rather abolish the people and elect
a new one,

Involuntarily removed from the political arena, even L.K. Advani

seems to have underestimated the extent of Hindu disquiet. His
depression at the breakdown of the Sangh parivar's discipline and
his lament at not being able to abide by the 'assurances given to the
Supreme Court suggest an unfortunate reluctance to come to terms
with the great leap forward in Hindu consciousness. It is no longer
a question of the RSS,BJPor even the Sangh parivar in its entirety.
At stake is the future of the Hindu parivar.

mE 5 HOURS AND AFTER

VI'I'"Savarkar grasped this distinction as early as 1923. "Hindutva',
he wrote, "is not a word but a history. Not only the religious or
spiritual history of our people as at times it is mistaken to be

by being confounded with the other cognate tenn, Hinduism ...

Hinduism isonly a derivative, a fraction, apart ofHindutva ... Failure
to distinguish between these two concepts has given rise to much
misunderstanding" .
History, a RSSleader told me at Ayodhya on that decisive Sunday,
"does not merely happen; it is also made to happen". Circumstances
have forced India to break with its own degrading lack ofself-esteem.
It can fritter away the opportunity through lack of leadership and
mindless populism.
Alternatively, it can overcome residual squeamishness and prepare
to face the future with certitude. After December6, there is little scope
for dithering. Metaphorically, we are all kar sevaks now.