Role of Religion in Indian Politics

What type of politics is the politics of Caste, Religion and Ethnicity?

They are types of identity politics.

Define identity politics and do you think identity politics is evil or the indicator of vibrancy of
democracy?

According to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, the phrase “identity politics” has come to signify
a wide range of political activity and theorizing founded in the shared experiences of injustice of
members of certain social groups. It typically aim to secure the political freedom of a specific
constituency marginalized within its larger context.

Identity politics is when people of a particular race, ethnicity, gender, or religion form alliances and
organize politically to defend their group’s interests. The feminist movement, the civil rights movement,
and the gay liberation movement are also examples of this kind of political organizing besides backward
class movements or movements by minorities.

Identity politics seems to be experiencing a surge in recent times, even in developed countries, the
movements like black lives matter show the continued relevance of identity politics.

Critics of identity politics claim that it only deepens the divides that exist between different groups in
society—black versus white, straight versus gay, Jew versus Arab, Sunni versus Shia, Protestant versus
Catholic, and so on. Thus , divisive and detrimental to both development and integrity of the nation.

However, there is an alternative perspective which holds that the dominant section of the society tend to
project identity politics in a derogatory manner because it presents challenge to “status quo”. In India,
the notion of identity politics is rooted in the violent history of partition and demand for separate
electorate. Therefore, it is often seen as divisive and threat to integrity of the nation.

Over the years, the idea of identity politics has got “problematical” and it is seen as a treat to the very
emancipatory politics that it seeks to achieve. Scholars like Asghar Ali engineer held that the identity
politics is an indicator of a healthy democracy because it shows vulnerable sections are making active
bid for a share in power. As Asghar Ali Engineer wrote, the issue is never simply the assertion of a caste,
religious or regional identity by itself, but how identity functions as “an instrument” to access material
gains in a power set-up.

"Democratic process intensifies power struggle, and hence, assertion of various identities assumes
vital importance in a democratic set-up. Under authoritarian regime various identities may be
suppressed or subordinated but it cannot be done under a democratic regime. Democracy is nothing if
it does not give free play to power struggle between various sections of people".

Similarly Kancha Ilaiah pointed out how in postcolonial India, democracy was largely confined to the
upper castes. He wrote, “Neither in family relations, nor in market relations and nor in political
relations has democratisation of civil society taken place so far. The caste system has frozen mobility
in social structures and socioeconomic relations.” These political mobilizations therefore need to be
read as attempts to unfreeze the order of things to get the wheel of social mobility turning.

Scholars like Arun Shorie holds that, use of caste as a political identity threatens the integrity of the
country. Identity politics keep on resurfacing in the form of caste based reservations, and thus leading to
the social discord.

Writing in the context of the politics forged around ethnic identities in the North East that also coalesced
around the experience of racism, R K Debbarma wrote that if identity politics evolves from an uncritical
evaluation of the “self”, then it is often self-defeating. This is because the politics of the oppressed
mirrors the politics of the oppressors in certain instances, however, if an identity that is meant to be the
“site of resistance” for a community becomes oppressive to the very people it is trying to emancipate, by
replicating the structures of oppressors, then one has to re-examine the boundaries of the identity itself.
One of the strongest criticisms of identity politics has been that it tends to “fetishise” the historical
injustices suffered by communities, which can perhaps contribute to the “fossilisation of beliefs” that
has been referred to above.

However, a way forward is that identities need to be situated historically, but with a view of the
future. The purpose of organizing under an identity in the present is to overcome a historical injustice,
with a view of the identity no longer being required in the future when the objectives outlined by the
present political project have been achieved.

ROLE OF RELIGION

COMMUNALISM: Politicization of religion

Clash Of Civilisation Thesis

The Clash of Civilizations is a thesis that people's cultural and religious identities will be the
primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. The American political scientist Samuel P.
Huntington argued that future wars would be fought not between countries, but between
cultures. It was proposed in a 1992 lecture at the American Enterprise Institute, which was then
developed in a 1993 Foreign Affairs article titled "The Clash of Civilizations?", in response to his
former student Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man .
The age of ideology has come to an end. It has given rise to the age of religion, defined as clash of
civilisations. Whether it is west or east, there is a rise of majoritarianism and fundamentalism. We can
give the example of India and Turkey, the two countries in the developing world having the secular
constitution, but emerging as a Defacto religious states.

Whether politics in India was ever free from religion?

The answer will be no. Neither before independence nor after independence.

Views of Pratap Bhanu Mehta:

 The politics of Hindutva is not recent. Even Congress has followed the politics of Soft-Hindutva
along with orthodox Muslims. He gives the example of the decision of Rajiv Gandhi Government
to allow the opening the gate of Ram Janma Bhoomi. He also gives the example of Rajiv Gandhi
Government nullifying the verdict of Shah Bano judgement, ignoring the voice of liberal Muslims
to appease the orthodox sections.
 Similarly, he cites the example of Indira Gandhi government using Sikh fundamentalists against
Akali’s and then Hindu fundamentalists against Sikhs. In recent times, the display of JANEU by
Rahul Gandhi, the support for cow by Digvijaya Singh shows that Hindutva has always been the
features of Indian politics.

Whether the role of religion and caste is declining in Indian elections?

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP’s) overwhelming victory in 2014 sparked claims of a change in the
Indian voter’s mindset. Many claimed that the 2014 results showed that voters were now driven by an
agenda of broad-based and inclusive development(Vikas), rather than caste and religion. However, a
new study by Abhijit Banerjee, Amory Gethin, and Thomas Piketty, published by the Economic and
Political Weekly, debunks these claims and shows how identity and religious-ethnic conflicts, rather than
economic issues and social policy, determine India’s electoral choices.

Comparing data from national and state elections between 1962 and 2014 with electoral surveys and
social spending data, the authors classify the support base and vote bank for parties across the
ideological spectrum. They find that the BJP and other right-wing parties, such as the Shiv Sena and the
Shiromani Akali Dal, have drawn their support from the Brahmins and other forward castes. On the other
hand, the Congress, centre-left and left parties have drawn their support from Muslims and lower caste
Hindus.

Shreyas Sardesai in his article on "The Religious Divide in Voting Preferences and Attitudes in the 2019
Election" held that religious polarization was at the core of the 2019 Lok Sabha election verdict. Relying
heavily on the National Election Study (NES) data sets, it finds that the election result was in large
measure an outcome of massive vote consolidation on religious lines, with the majority Hindu
community preferring the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in
unprecedented proportion and the main religious minorities largely staying away from it, although
there were some exceptions.

PRERNA KUNDU in her study held that Indians vote on caste, religion because they lack information on
MP, MLA performance. An analysis of post-electoral surveys for national and state elections from 1962–
2014 concludes that the main driver of voter choice during this period was caste and religious
identification. Research suggests that this can negatively affect legislator quality, and lead to a higher
incidence of political corruption.

It shows that, for two national elections in a row, the Narendra Modi and Amit Shah-led BJP has been
able to overcome the caste hierarchies among Hindus and systematically construct a Hindu category of
voters versus others. This chasm between Hindus and the minorities is also seen with respect to their
attitudes regarding the government, its leadership and contentious issues like the Ayodhya dispute. This
study, however, does not find sufficient evidence with regard to the claims that a large part of the Hindu
support for the BJP-led alliance may have been on account of anti-minority sentiments.

“The Saffron Wave: Democracy and Hindu Nationalism in

Modern India”-Thomas Blom Hansen

The rise of strong nationalist and religious movements in

postcolonial and newly democratic countries alarms many
Western observers. In The Saffron Wave, Thomas Hansen turns
our attention to recent events in the world’s largest
democracy, India. Here he analyzes Indian receptivity to the
right-wing Hindu nationalist party and its political wing, the
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which claims to create a polity
based on “ancient” Hindu culture. Rather than interpreting
Hindu nationalism as a mainly religious phenomenon, or a
strictly political movement, Hansen places the BJP within the
context of the larger transformations of democratic
governance in India.

Hansen demonstrates that democratic transformation has

enabled such developments as political mobilization among
the lower castes and civil protections for religious minorities.
Against this backdrop, the Hindu nationalist movement has
successfully articulated the anxieties and desires of the large
and amorphous Indian middle class. A form of conservative populism, the movement has attracted not
only privileged groups fearing encroachment on their dominant positions but also “plebeian” and
impoverished groups seeking recognition around a majoritarian rhetoric of cultural pride, order, and
national strength. The Saffron Wave offers fresh insights into Indian politics and, by focusing on the links
between democracy and ethnic majoritarianism, advances our understanding of democracy in the
postcolonial world.

Moin Shakir’s Article “Electoral Participation of Minorities and Indian Political System”

Unfortunately, minorities in India have very limited choices either to choose from the reactionary
ideologies like Gandhism on one hand and casteist and communal parties on the other.

Tausif Ahmed’s article “Minorities in a democracy: Not just a number game ”

The communalism in India emerges from a fact that India is a country with limited resources . There exist
a situation where the resource is used by a particular community only at the cost of the other. The
ongoing communal polarization is a result of a such situation . So, long land was owned by the
community , the problems didn’t emerge. However, the electoral politics and distribution of resources on
the basis of game of number leads to polarization . Minority communalism is an effort by them to assert
their identities , but in the process they tend to get obsessed with their identities , religious spaces and
cultural moorings and hence alienate themselves from rest of the society . He gives the name if Muslim
parties like Jamat-e-Islami, Jamat-e-Islami Hind, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, such
nomenclature limits their political prospects and strengthen Islamophobia. It not only hampers present
outlook of minorities , but dampens their future prospects also. He suggest them to adopt more secular
approach , avoid alienation from mainstream society , rather get integrated with the social fabric.
Equality , fair play and justice envisaged in Indian Constitution can be achieved through pluralistic and
inclusive politics .

Causes of the role of religion in Indian politics:

There are four theories –

1. Essentialist argument: Advanced by western scholars, for example, Louis Dumont [prominent
sociologist and also the narrative of colonial state]. According to this narrative, Hindus and Muslims are
two antagonistic communities and hence conflict is natural. Jinnah’s ‘Two Nation Theory’ is also based
on the above approach – Jinnah, Sayed Ahmed Khan, Savarkar etc.

2. Instrumentalists arguments: Bipin Chandra – it is a preference of elites to go for elites to go for

mobilisation on the basis of ethnic identities. From this, perspective people are not communal.

3. Institutionalists arguments: Asghar Ali Engineer – When public policies are based on ethnic identities,
it gives rise to communal politics.
4. Social constructivist arguments: Mamdani- According to this school, communities carry mental maps
or stereotypes about each other, and in the absence of regular communication. They provide basis to the
elite class. Thus, there are different causes behind the role of religion in Indian politics, we can consider
the growing plebianisation of Indian politics as a prominent factor.

Timeline of the evolution of communal politics in India:

For Additional reading , refer to :

The Fate of Secularism in India(CHRISTOPHE JAFFRELOT)

https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/04/04/fate-of-secularism-in-india-pub-78689

View of the British state: Politics in India has always been communal

Views of Romila Thapar:

We have some incidents of localised sectarian violence, but communalism is a phenomena started with
the British state

Before independence:
1. After the revolt of 1857, British started appeasement of Hindus, in reaction Sir Syed Ahmed Khan
expressed the loyalty of Muslims towards the British Raj. British left Hindus for Muslims. Everywhere
minorities were better partner for imperialists (because they are insecure)

2. Against the rising tide of nationalism, British took following action –

a. Partition of Bengal, 1905
b. Support to Muslim League, 1906
c. Separate Electorates for Muslims, 1909 gave institutional recognition that Muslims form a
separate community.

3. In 1915, Savarkar formed Hindu Mahasabha against Muslim League

4. In 1919, separate electorates were extended to all other religious communities like Sikhs, Parsis,
Anglo-Indians. Thus, challenging Indians belongs to one nation

5. In 1923, Savarkar gave the concept of ‘Hindutva’ – to assert the stronger form of nationalism. In
response, Muhammad Iqbal gave the concept of Muslim Brotherhood. It denied the existence of
territorial nation. Muslims form one nation
6. In 1925, K B HEDGEWAR formed RSS against the rising Pan-Islamism. He wanted to promote militant
Hinduism to address the Hindu sense of vulnerability

7. In 1932, British offered Communal Award. They have already divided Indians, now the idea was to
divide Hindus and reduce Congress as a party of minority.

All such development finally culminated into partition and the worst form of communal violence for the
sub-continent

After independence:

Up till 1960’s: Communal politics was subsided. No major communal incident, yet bitterness of partition
remained.

Why not major communal violence?

 Congress was in hegemony
 Nehru emphasised on secularist agenda
 Government had banned communal organization

1960’s: Selig Harrison calls 1960’s as Dangerous Decades.

Why?
 War with the neighbours
 Linguistic movements
 Eruption of communal violence
 Communal riots started in industrial towns like Ranchi, Nagpur, Aligarh, Ahmedabad, Jabalpur

1970’s-1980’s: Increasing role of religion in politics.

Why?
 Breakdown of Congress system: It made the political competition tough. Hence, political parties
had to go for greater use of money and muscle power
 Punjab became the worst theatre of communal politics. It culminated into the tragedy of
operation blue star, followed by assassination of Indira Gandhi, followed by anti-Sikh riots in
North India

1990’s:
a. Congress losing its base among Dalit. Congress started double appeasement

b. This made BJP insecure. It started MANDIR issue

c. Role of V P Singh govt.: He was unable to manage coalition. He was also not able to manage militancy
in Punjab and Kashmir and deteriorating economic situation.
d. Hence, to consolidate his position, he used Mandal Card (another communal award to divide India).
This made BJP more insecure. It was not left with any option other than RATHA YATRA – it culminated in
the demolition of Babri Mosque – Demolition of the option illusion of secular state. Though, it is seen as
an ideological agenda of BJP, yet the lack of political will on the part of Congress government led by
Narasimha Rao at the centre have further questioned the Congress commitment to secularism.

e. Demolition of Babri Mosque was followed by Mumbai Riots, it was followed by Godra riots, it was
followed by Gujarat riots and followed by Muzaffarnagar riots Thus, the communal riots which earlier
seen as urban phenomena and interpreted as phenomena of class politics became rural politics.

BIPIN CHANDRA

According to bipin Chandra, communalism has developed in three stages:

1. 19th century: followers of a particular religion started thinking that they have common religious
as well as political , social, and economic interests
2. Beginning of 20th century: communalism made proper appearance. Community realized there
interests are different from each other
3. Communalism emerged in the form of mutually antagonistic interests giving birth to two nation
theory and Pakistan

According to BIPIN CHANDRA, communalism is an assertion that secular interest of a person are co-
extensive with its religious identity. According to Asgar ali engineer, communalism is essentially a poltical
and socio-economic phenomenon and not a religious phenomenon.

Analysis:

According to Neera Chandoke, Indian model of secularism, itself allowed space for legitimization of
communalism. BJP has been successful in establishing Congress model as pseudo secular and its own
communal model as genuinely secular

Analysis of communal riots in India:

Contribution of Paul Brass –

Theme: Communal riots are not spontaneous. They are not riots rather POGROMS. They are executed in
the most professional manner. There is a proper division of labour.

“Production of Hindu-Muslim Violence in Contemporary India” book written by Paul R. Brass is an

extensive study devoted exclusively to post-Independence Hindu-Muslim riots in Aligarh.
Paul Brass does not regard acts of collective Hindu-Muslim violence mainly as spontaneous riots `caused'
by social, demographic, economic and political specificities of the time-space situation, but as "dramatic
productions in which what is spontaneous can occur only because the scene has been prepared with
numerous `rehearsals' by various players with defined roles and division of labour."

In view of this, instead of raising the misdirected question "what causes riots?" Paul Brass focuses on
"who - individuals, organizations or groups - produce riots, how and when do they produce them, and
how is our attention diverted from questions that could be answered to questions that cannot?" He
admits that a multiplicity of factors may precipitate riots and "a variety of factors and forces come into
play, when the opportunity for producing riots occurs", but claims that large-scale Hindu-Muslim riots
are primarily organized political productions.

Paul Brass's main concern is to understand the institutionalized riot system in India in order to be able to
answer the question, "Why do riots persist?"

In the face of the persistence of riots in India as an endemic widespread and routine aspect of politics,
Paul Brass views with concern the attempts at treating them as occasional, exceptional acts, committed
by the dregs of society drawn from the slums, as they induce self-deception among the political and
intellectual elites in India, which reassures them "that they still live in a basically peaceful land, in the
world's largest democracy where such aberrations are bound to occur in the process of India's advance
from backwardness to modernity".

He gives the three stages in the evolution of communal riots –

 Preparatory Stage: In this stage, there is a role of fire tenders (who ensure that the atmosphere
kept warm with their speeches). There are rehearsals. This ensures that communalism never go
out of environment
 Precipitation Stage: This is the stage where communal violence actually erupts. In this stage,
there is a role of conversion specialists
 Explanatory stage: This is the stage where blame game starts.

The preparation of new riots starts.

CONCLUSION

The above analysis shows that religion is an institutionalized feature of Indian politics. If we look at the
global trend as well as the determinants of voting behavior, role of religion in politics is not going to
subside.