Dr Subramanian Swamy
The worst
possible thing for the Indian nation has been the politics practiced by
Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi. It has been
unprincipled, placing personal aggrandisement over national resurgence,
and rooted in corruption. Today due to what I call as Nehruism, the
nation is at the weakest. India’s adrenalin has almost been drained.
We mutely witness terrorist attack,
ensure that there is no retaliation by us, and treat captured terrorist
as State Guests. What recently happened in Pune and Kokrajhar should
awaken any patriot. I met several “moderate” intellectuals who dismissed
this huge affront to our sovereignty as of “low grade explosives in
Pune” (the IEDs did not explode) or “ethnic clash in Kokrajhar” as if
that is inevitable, or that the murder of innocent Sikhs in Wisconsin
USA as Sikhs’ fault for having beards like Osama Bin Laden. Indians have
been programmed by Nehruism to be bereft of patriotic feelings.
Today Ms. Sonia Edwidge Albina Antonia
Maino Gandhi has destroyed the Prime Ministership by creating diarchy of
the PMO and the NAC. Manmohan Singh and his Cabinet colleagues perform
much like circus lions do before a ring master. This in my opinion is
the most dangerous phase of our national history.
Question is what do we do? Patriots must
force an early election; in any case 2014 is not far off. To me,
committed to democracy, we must eschew stunts like fast unto death
staged with ayurveda treated water. Indian democracy survives because
the broad masses are still with profound common sense as we saw in 1977.
General Election to the Lok Sabha is the
only cure we have to get out this Nehruvian morass. As Jaiprakash
Narayan told me in 1977, the existence of the organisational network of
the RSS is still the bulwark on which we can base an assault against the
Nehruvian skullduggery.
But coming to power is not enough if the
next Prime Minister is a cheap imitation of Nehru or imbibed with
Nehruism as we have seen in the past. Nehruism is capitulation for
personal aggrandisement.
We need a new style of politics now.
Politics is the art of governance of an organised and civilised society.
The rules of politics vary with the ideological foundation adopted by
such a society. These rules therefore differ between democratic and
authoritarian ideologies of governance. Hence the principles that guide
politics will also depend on the ideology we adopt.
I advocate here today that politics with
principles in India is possible only if each of us make an unshakeable
commitment to a clear concept of the Indian identity.
Indian identity
My call today for protecting our
democracy with its fundamental right to human freedoms is first and
foremost for undiluted unity of Indians, a unity based on a mindset that
is nurtured and fostered on the principles of human rights.
That will require for us Indians to be
able to identify ourselves with this land, rivers, and our
civilisational past of thousands of years. For this identity to flower,
we need to commit to the following:
First, the definition of the identity of
India. India is Hindustan, a nation of Hindus and those others who
proudly accept that their ancestors are Hindus. Muslims and Christians
are a part of the Hindustan if they accept this truth and revere it.
This means we then become inheritors of a long continuous and glorious
civilisational history.
A rudderless India, disconnected from
her past, as a consequence, becomes a fertile field for religious
poachers and neo-imperialists from abroad who paint India as a mosaic of
immigrants not as a nation but much like a crowd on a platform in a
railway station. India is connected to her hoary past because this
India is a nation of Hindus and those others (such as Muslims and
Christians) whose ancestors were Hindus. That definition applies to Jews
and Parsis too because of inter-marriage and now proved by DNA testing.
It is this acknowledgement that remains
pending today, which delays the unity of the nation on a historic
identity based. We can accept Muslims and Christians as part of our
cultural family when they proudly acknowledge this fact and accept that a
change in religion does not require change of culture or values. Thus
the cultural identity of India is undeniably, immutably, and obviously
its Hinduness, that is rooted in Vedic values.
The concept of a collective Hindu
mindset is being ridiculed as chauvinist and retrograde, even
fundamentalist. The BJP is regularly advised by its enemies to purge out
Hindutva from its poll plank to become more “acceptable”. This fatuous
advice from enemies however deserves to be thrown into the dustbin where
it belongs. There is nothing to debate in this because such a debate
would only be dysfunctional and will disrupt the synergy between voter
appeal and cadre morale that is necessary for electoral success of the
patriotic forces.
Otherwise we may be numerous like goats
and sheep but run helter skelter at the sight of just one tiger or
hyena. Or we can be individually strong and well fed like circus lions,
but obey the commands of a physically much weaker circus ring master.
Hindu society today lacking a cohesive corporate identity, is thus in
the process of becoming fragmented, and hence increasingly in disarray.
This fission process is on simultaneously with the reality of millions
of Hindus going to temples regularly.
We need today a mindset committed to
retaliate when attacked. This defensive retaliation must be massive
enough to deter future attacks. If terrorists come from training camps
in Pakistan, Bangladesh or Sri Lanka, India must seek to carpet bomb
those training camps, no matter what the consequences. If 5 lakh
Kashmiri Hindus are driven out of the Valley by Islamic terrorists, we
must arm and financially equip 10 lakhs of the able-bodied ex-servicemen
Hindus to go with their families and settle in the former residences of
the driven-out Hindus to keep the Constitutional guarantee under
Article 370 of not maintaining the religious composition of the state.
If Bangladesh permits its population to
infiltrate into Hindustan, then India must demand territorial
compensation within the meaning of the Indian Independence Act of June
1947 passed by the British Parliament to legitimise Partition. The Act
was framed on the principle that Muslims not wanting to live under what
Jinnah called as the ‘hegemony’ of the Hindus, be carved out of
undivided India, called as Pakistan, in proportion to it. One-third of
Bangladesh Muslims now, after six decades after Partition, have already
infiltrated back into Hindustan to live under Hindu ‘hegemony’.
That basic strategy of those who want to
see a weak and pliant India remains the same as before: Making Indians
to lose their self esteem by disparaging their tradition-- the strategy
of British imperialists for the conquest of India. Only the tactics have
changed.
At the same time, the lack of Hindu
unity and the determined bloc voting in elections by Muslims and
Christians has created a significantly large leverage for these two
religious communities in economic, social and foreign policy making.
Thus, although Uniform Civil Code is a Directive Principle of state
policy in the Constitution, it is taboo to ask for it because of this
leverage.
It is not as if Muslims will not accept
uniform laws when it suits them, even if it is against the Sharia. For
example, Muslims accept Uniform Criminal Code under the IPC in India
even though it infringes the Sharia, but resist Uniform Civil Code
because it violates the same Sharia. Muslims accept Uniform Civil Code
in Australia and USA, and now Germany and Japan.
Hence, in a democracy fighting elections
are very important part of the struggle for implementation of an agenda
for national renaissance. For this it is necessary for formation of a
bloc vote of all those who cherish the Sanatana Dharma values. In India
even if half of the Hindu population decides to vote as a bloc in
elections, a government will be formed by a two-thirds majority. Therein
lies the salvation for us who cherish our ancient values and aspire for
a national renaissance.
Towards this end, I would suggest in my
individual capacity, that the next election be fought by the NDA by seat
adjustments and not by ideological compromise. Of the six parties in
the NDA, five accept the Hindutva formulation for national integrity and
progress. The sixth can then have seat adjustments with the five, and
join on a Common Governance Programme to form the government later.
But the five parties of the NDA should
vigorously campaign in the next general elections to Parliament on two
issues: Fighting corruption credibly, and espouse Hindutva for national
integrity. Muslim and Christian voters should be wooed on promise of
fairness, co-option and security and not on appeasement. The broad
masses of these minorities ache for co-option and justice, but the
Congress has always chosen to court the Mullahs, Bishops, and foreign
controlled intellectuals in their communities. NDA must not follow the
same route. In any case if half the Brihad Hindu voters can be aroused
to vote together for the NDA, majority in Lok Sabha is certain. The
masses of the minorities would join anyway then.
(The writer is former Union Law Minister, Harvard University Professor and President, Janata Party).
Source: http://www.organiser.org/Encyc/2012/8/13/-b-Planning-for-Ousting-the-Congress--b-.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment