Sociology Of Communalism
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Secular Perspective
19 May, 2003One cannot understand phenomenon of communalism without understanding the very nature of society. Society plays very important role in genesis of communalism. One cannot divide unless society is divisible along certain fault lines. These fault lines get further aggravated in certain conditions. In feudal societies too these fault lines exist but do not play politically divisive role as do in a colonial or capitalist society, which are much more competitive.
It is important to note that Indian society was never homogenous
throughout history. It was highly diverse religiously, culturally,
caste-wise and linguistically but there was hardly any tension
between these groups. It all began with establishment of British rule in India and so most of the scholars agree that communalism is a modern phenomenon and not a medieval phenomenon.Why the social cleavage got so aggravated with the advent of British rule? The cleavage did exist all through but it turned hostile only in the British colonial period. The explanation for this is quite
complex, as there are host of reasons for this. However, three
reasons are quite predominant which are as follows: The British
divisive policies, competitive nature of colonial, political and
social structure and backwardness of colonial society with stunted
economic growth.The British rule was shaken with war of independence in 1857 as
Hindus and Muslims united to challenge British hegemony. It was
easier to divide as fault lines were sharpening and communal
consciousness was emerging among Hindu and Muslim elite. It is
further to be noted that communal phenomenon is basically an upper class elite phenomenon. The Hindu elite welcomed the British rule as a 'liberative' one and began to aspire for higher administrative jobs.The Muslim elite - mostly feudals - on the other hand, considered
British rule as unmitigated disaster as not only they lost power but
also because they suffered most during the retaliatory action by the British after 1857 uprising. They developed a sort of aversion for the British rulers and were quite reluctant to take to modern
education introduced by the Britishers.Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, a great thinker and educationist urged Muslim elite to go for modern education to better their future. Thus the Hindu and Muslim elite began to compete for British jobs and
political favour. This widened the cleavage between the two elite.
The British fully exploited this in their favour. The formation of
Indian National Congress in 1885 also made the British more
apprehensive of rising aspirations of the 'Hindu nationalism' and now began to manipulate Muslim feudal elite and play them against the Hindu elite.Thus the colonial society sharpened communal consciousness and the British further fuelled separation through political manoeuvres. The Hindu and Muslim masses remained aloof from these controversies and coexisted without such hostilities. Among them neither there was competition for jobs nor for political posts. However, there was some trickling down effect.
The communal hostilities intensified with passage of time and
controversies about sharing power between Hindu and Muslim elite and constitutional arrangement for sharing power. It must be noted that communalism is product not of religious hostilities but of political and economic struggle for share in power and resources between the educated elite. It is not a subaltern phenomenon either as they are not involved in such struggles.Jinnah, a product of Lincoln's Inn in London, represented Muslim
elite, not Muslim masses. The orthodox 'Ulama, on the other hand,
were closer to the masses and represented their aspirations. No
wonder than that Jinnah and the Deobandi 'Ulama never saw eye to eye on political matters. They were closer to Indian National congress than to Muslim League, which was the party of the Muslim elite. They supported the composite nationalism than Muslim separatism.The British society was essentially a colonial society and masses had no say in political matters, as there was no universal franchise. After independence universal franchise was introduced and masses of people began to participate in the political processes. For few years after independence the Congress got elected to power. Its leaders like Nehru and others enjoyed tremendous prestige and people of all castes and communities continued to vote for it.
However, the political scenario began to change sharply at the end of sixties. Few general elections had brought more political
consciousness among different caste and communities. Each caste and community began to develop heightened consciousness and began to demand greater share in power. Among Hindus only upper castes had all the political or economic benefits so far. Now increased participation in political processes made minorities and lower caste people understand importance of their vote and they began to make increased demands thus changing the dynamics of political change.This gave new dimension to communalism, which we had inherited from the British period. Economic changes also added to the social strife. With land reforms middle castes in various states acquired more social clout and they demanded greater share in political power. The Reddys and Cammas in Andhra Pradesh, Patels in Gujarat, Marathas in Maharashtra, Yadavs in Utter Pradesh. and Bihar etc. acquired much greater clout and political parties began to woo them.
During early eighties Mrs. Gandhi realised the potential of these
newly emerging castes and sought their support for electoral
purposes. For these castes communalism provided an easier route to power in some cases. Thus Patels in Gujarat flocked around BJP to claim greater share in power. Also other backward castes found it very attractive to support communal outfits.A sociological study of castes supporting VHP will be quite an
interesting phenomenon. Most of the backward caste people finding no place in established secular parties found ready acceptance in outfits like the VHP. And to be in VHP, one has to compete with others in displaying communalism. The communal rhetoric helped them doubly: it helped them rise in the esteem of upper caste Hindus and also ensure them quicker rise in political power hierarchy.The BJP which earlier had narrow upper caste base found it extremely difficult to win few parliamentary seats. It felt the necessity to widen its base. Initially it opposed implementation of Mandal Commission in 1990. But soon it realised its political potential and began to woo the OBC's to its fold. For these OBCs it was not easier to rise to the higher ranks of the political hierarchy. They thus flocked to VHP, which was a militant Hindu organisation. The extreme communal rhetoric made them more acceptable to the Hindu nationalist organisation.
It is such extreme rhetoric, which ensured quick rise of OBC leaders like Kalyan Singh who rose to became chief minister of U.P., Uma Bharti, Sadhvi Rithambara, Acharya Dharmendra Acharya Giriraj Kishor, Pravin Togadia and others. Ramjanambhoomi became their peg to hang their political aspirations on. It was confrontationist politics all along for them. More extreme the rhetoric quicker the rise. The Shiv Sena too attracted those castes which were below Mahars in the caste
hierarchy in Maharashtra. The Mahars already had acquired political clout due to struggles by Ambedkar but those below Mahars had no such clout. It is Shiv Sena looking for expanding its political base gave them political importance and attracted them.The Muslim politics too underwent similar change. In pre-partition
days Muslim politics was monopoly of upper class Muslims known as ashraf. Most of the ashraf from minority areas like Utter Predesh. and Bihar migrated to Pakistan leaving behind low caste and poor Muslims known as ajlaf. Most of these Muslims were artisans and belonged to lower professions.It is these Muslims who began to acquire economic clout in
post-independence India. They began to rise in class hierarchy and upper class status and began to aspire, like OBCs among Hindus, for more political power and this drove a section of them to religious and fundamentalist rhetoric. The confrontationist postures some of them acquired during Shah Banu movement and Babri Masjid issue also has to be seen in this light. This confrontationist postures from both sides led to sharpening of communal consciousness and eruption of communal violence became more intense and widespread during eighties and early nineties.The Indian society will continue to experience such violent caste and communal eruptions as long as it does not find political and economic equilibrium in terms of castes and communities. The rise of OBCs on one hand, and impact of globalisation on Indian economy on the other, will continue to cause occasional eruption of violence in Indian society for quite some time. Caste and communal polarisation will be with us as long as we are not able to create more egalitarian society.
Medieval
History And Hurt Psyche
By Asghar Ali Engineer