The global journey of the bulldozer
The bulldozer has become the symbol of a strong state for the BJP and its supporters, while critics see it as a symbol of state oppression and anti-Muslim prejudice.
The idea of bulldozer justice originated in UP, where the administration made the destruction of property a form of extrajudicial punishment for those suspected of offences, primarily Muslims. Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s admirers adoringly name him ‘Bulldozer Baba’ -- a moniker that travelled all the way to New Jersey, USA. Parades in two U.S. towns on Indian Independence Day last month had bulldozers with the pictures of ‘Bulldozer Baba’ and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. No wonder then that other BJP Chief Ministers, from Madhya Pradesh to Karnataka and Assam, now aspire to follow the ‘Yogi Model.’ In recent days, bulldozers are active in Assam, where the Himanata Biswa Sarma government has ordered the pulling down of madrasas suspected to be linked to the Al Qaeda network.
To be fair, the Yogi government has used bulldozers against Hindus too; and also intervened to protect a Muslim who was at the receiving end of extortion by a corrupt official. The Yogi administration sent bulldozers to raze down illegal construction by a BJP leader who belongs to the powerful Tyagi community in western UP recently. A Sub Divisional Magistrate who sent a bulldozer to the shop of a Muslim trader in Moradabad, after he insisted that the official pay for the furniture he bought, was removed from his post by the Yogi government.
The bulldozer show in the New Jersey towns of Edison and Woodbridge led to a furore in the US, and anti-Hindutva Hindus and Muslims flagged it with the authorities. The Indian Business Association that organised the events was initially reluctant to apologise but finally said it was “a divisive image that did not reflect our mission.” The Independence Day parade, which should have been a show of unity among Indian Americans, exposed fault lines, and even hostility.
Indians have been at the receiving end of prejudice and hate in many western countries in the recent past. Indians are wearing their prejudice about other Indians on the sleeve as well. An aggressive show of hostility, this time targeted at Hindus, was captured on video by the person at the receiving end in California last week. A Sikh Indian American went on a nearly 10-minute abusive rant at a south Indian Hindu at an eatery, calling him a “dirty Hindu” and a “disgusting dog,’’ until the police arrived.
Rahul Gandhi - To be or not to be
The Congress party is in turmoil even as it plans to elect a new president and organise a Bharat Jodo Yatra across the country. Scion of the Nehru Gandhi family, Rahul Gandhi, has said a flat no to returning at the helm of the Congress. That has set his mother Sonia Gandhi scurrying to find a suitable candidate to succeed her as party president. The choice was Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot. Mr. Gehlot is a trusted loyalist of the party and the family, and he would not say no the wishes of the Gandhis. But he would want to continue as the Chief Minister also, which may become a bone of contention. If a Gandhi is not in the race, other Congress leaders may also throw their hat into the ring. Congress leader Shashi Tharoor is planning to, and is clear that if nothing else, his candidacy will be a good occasion to generate a debate on the party. It may not be entirely surprising, but even the possibility of his candidacy has spurred enthusiasm among the party workers. A Congress functionary told me the following: “The first 30 people around the Gandhi family will not like his candidacy; the next 70 people would be split, but beyond that, among the nearly 8,000 voters, Tharoor will make a big impact.” He added a caveat though. “That is assuming that Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi will remain neutral.”
The call for internal democracy is very valid, but we need to note two points: one, that there is no internal democracy in any Indian political party; and two, that among all, the Congress has the maximum internal democracy. No other party in India allows the space for its leaders to be openly critical of the party as Congress does. That is why Ghulam Nabi Azad raising the question of internal democracy is rather ironical, as he has enjoyed the luxury of power for half a century without ever winning any real political contest on his own strength. For that, however, the blame must lie with the Gandhi family, which has consistently allowed sycophancy to flourish at the cost of popular leadership. We write in our editorial: “Mr. Azad’s career itself is proof of the validity of the charges that he makes against the party. With little popularity and no accountability, he remained a key decision maker in the party, became Union Minister for several terms, the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir once, and a member of Rajya Sabha for five terms, totalling 30 years…. In fact, rootless managers who masqueraded as leaders ensured that mass leaders were humiliated and driven out of the party. The list of such people who could not remain in the Congress is long — from Mamata Banerjee to Sharad Pawar to Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy. “
The questions before the Gandhis -- Sonia, Rahul, and Priyanka -- are three. 1) Should one of them become the president of the party? 2) If none of them wants to be president, who should be the candidate, if at all there is one? 3) What role, other than that of president, could they play in the party?
Close supporters of Mr. Gandhi are still hopeful that they would be able to persuade him to take over the reins. The Bharat Jodo Yatra begins on September 7 while the last date of filing nomination for the president is on September 30. There will be a clamour in the party for Mr. Gandhi to take over as president. The first weeks of the yatra will be in TN, Kerala and Karnataka, where the Congress can mobilise people. Loyalists of Mr. Gandhi are hoping to create a groundswell of support for his return as president. Mr. Gandhi will have a justifiable defence if he were to give up his reluctance to become party president.
Privacy in marriage, voting
Last week we discussed caste and also noted the suggestion that inter-caste marriages can be one way to overcome caste prejudices. But intercaste and inter-religious marriages face social hostility across the country, though the degree may vary across places.
The Special Marriage Act helps couples who do not want to marry under religious laws, for whatever reasons. But marriages under the law has become increasingly difficult as vigilantes scan the public announcements made beforehand as required under the Act, and target couples from different castes or religions. The issue of privacy was brought to the Supreme Court, which refused to intervene on the grounds that the petitioners were not aggrieved by the law.
The controversy over forcing voters to link their Aadhaar number to the voters list has brought to the fore concerns about privacy.
Marriage is a private affair of two individuals at the fundamental level, but it is also a social sanction of their relationship. If the society had no role at all to play, then there is no requirement of marriage at all, under any law. Two people can live as they like.
Voting is a private decision of the individual, but there is a social requirement to ensure that the voter is legitimate. Various measures in the past have sought to prevent fraud in voting. There is a need to establish the identity of the voter, which is an invasion of privacy. Controversies abound in several countries including the US over attempts to verify the voter.
Federalism Tract
The Centre can borrow as much as they want, but States are not allowed to do so. What are the issues involved here. Here’s piece on Challenges of sub-national fiscal correction.
Kerala Finance Minister K N Balagopal explains recent measures by the Centre that further curbs the borrowing powers of States for discretionary spending.
I interviewed Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on railways, telecom and IT. This detailed interview gives an overview several policy and welfare initiatives that are taking place.
We started with a discussion on bulldozers and India’s image. I spoke to author and academic Ravinder Kaur on how India seeks to brand itself on the global stage. Ravinder is author of ‘Brand New Nation: Capitalist Dreams and Nationalist Designs in Twenty-First-Century India.’ She teaches at the University of Copenhagen.
