|
Misconceived
and Mischievous
By
B.G.Verghese
A
recent book launch had Mr L.K. Advani, the nation's Home Minister
and Deputy Prime Minister, eulogise the volume " Religious
Demography in India" authored by A.P. Joshi, M.D. Srinivas
and J.K.Bajaj of the Centre for Policy Studies, Chennai. The authors
classify the people of India as being either "Indian Religionists"
(Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain and tribal) or Non-IR (Muslim and
Christian), sheep and goats, we and they and, implicitly, Indian
and foreign. This is a well established thesis articulated by
Savarkar, Hegdewar and Golwalkar and now assiduously preached
by the Sangh Parivar and Hindutvadis extolling "cultural
nationalism", an exclusivist political creed with little
reverence for true faith and tradition.
Mr
Advani looks upon demography as realpolitik. His Foreword quotes
Augustus Comte, the French philosopher, as saying that "Demography
is Destiny". Why? Because "knowing, predicting and controlling
the social and economic pressures created by our changing demographic
patterns is essential for the noble task of nation-building".
Certainly, the ghosts of Partition still haunt memory. Yet, rather
than build anew after that trauma, the Home Minister speaks of
the "strategic pressures" of India's external and internal
demography and calls for rigorous and continuous observation and
analysis of the changing demography of different religious in
various regions. This, he believes is of "paramount importance
in maintaining the integrity of our borders, and peace, harmony
and public order within the country".
Mr
Narendra Modi is keeping careful watch in Gujarat and, in another
context, the MMA in Pakistan. Both represent birds of a feather
on either side of the border. The Parivar invented the two-nation
theory and obviously still clings to it. Some nation-building.
The
statistics, meticulously compiled, are culled from over 100 years
of Census data. The Home Minister's Foreword now advocates that
the Census organization take note of this volume. This indicates
"several areas where detailed data needs to be collected
and that of the previous censuses reorganized" so that future
editions of this book are "more complete and rigorous".
"Religious
Demography of India" speaks of "pressures" building
on IRs from Christianity and, more particularly, Islam, with their
population "suffering" a decline from 86.64% to 85.09
% between the Census years of 1901 and 1991. The thesis that unfolds
is that IRs enjoy overwhelming dominance in northwestern, central,
western and southern India (less Kerala). But in "the heartland
and eastern regions" comprising UP, Bihar, and Assam, IRs
are "under great pressure", especially in several border
districts. In the border regions of J&K, the Northeast, Goa,
Kerala, Lakshadweep and Nicobar the IRs constitute a third or
less of the population or are in a minority.
The
inference drawn from this analysis is that India's timeless "cultural
and civilisational homogeneity" is threatened by those who
look on it "as a source of oppression and backwardness".
This ideological prejudice is manifest in "protection of
distinctive ways of life of religious minorities", especially
those belonging to Islam and Christianity. So there it is. India's
pluralism and diversity that the Constitution proudly proclaims,
is the enemy within, a cancer that must be contained if not eradicated.
The
volume contains some bogus sociology. Sample this. Indigenous
faiths lost ground during centuries of Islamic rule and Western
dominance. With decolonisation, the share of Asian and African
populations in the world rose sharply after 1951 largely to neutralise
the gains made by European people during the previous hundred
years. Wrong. The population explosion was caused by modern medicine
and measures to combat famine.
The
authors do not explain why, if IRs constitute a single happy family,
Buddhists and Jains suffered persecution and numerical decline
over wide areas of India in the transition to the medieval period.
Nor does it tell us why caste "backwardness and oppression"
disgracefully linger to this day, compelling many trapped in a
caste time warp to seek liberation by opting out through change
of faith. Ambedkar warned that this would happen 50 years ago.
Nor again does this thesis explain the unpunished pogrom against
Sikhs in Delhi in 1984.
The
Constitution of India, to which the Home Minister is pledged,
proclaims a common and equal citizenship. "Religious Demography
in India" would deny this basic feature. It views all Indians,
not as citizens, but as so many potentially antagonistic religious
categories. The Constitution celebrates and protects India's rich
diversity and tradition of accommodation that has been its great
civilisational strength. The authors of this volume, however,
see this as a political and cultural threat. The HRD Ministry
has recently constituted a Task Force to improve all levels of
education in India. Among its terms of reference is one that would
define and promote a "national culture". Is this the
"cultural nationalism" of Hindutva and the Sangh Parivar
? India will not be bludgeoned into a cultural sameness by sundry
cavemen.
The
blurb on the dust jacket of "Religious Demography of India"
calls on India to start afresh and "get into the task of
nation building with an abiding passion". We have been warned.
(Mr.
B.G. Verghese is a Columnist. He is the Treasurer of the Executive
Committee of CHRI in addition to being an Honorary Research Professor
at the Centre for Policy Research , New Delhi).

|