Opinion God in Gods Own Country
The case of the Kerala professor sums up the challenges of our religious politics
-
Share -
-
-
The macabre story that unfolded in Kerala over the last few weeks is a harbinger of how complicated and threatening currents of religious politics are likely to remain. Some fanatics,allegedly associated with the Popular Front of India (PFI),chopped off the hand of Prof T.J. Joseph of Newman College for setting an exam question that was seen as containing a controversial reference to Prophet Mohammad. The college then terminated the services of the professor. Mahatma Gandhi University,the affiliating institution,has correctly served a notice to the college questioning the professors dismissal,but the Archdiocese has supported action against the professor.
It is always difficult to gauge the significance of any incident in the context of wider politics. But this story encapsulates many challenges of religious politics in our time. First,it provides more evidence,if any was needed,that a prolonged exposure of a state to left of centre and so-called progressive politics does not necessarily diminish religious sensibilities or fundamentalist sensitivities; it merely redirects and sometimes enhances them. This is for two reasons. Left politics and progressive politics in India have often been premised upon politically managing community identities rather than transcending them. This has often required reinforcing a sense of identity amongst communities,which in turn has required often deferring to their sentiments,even when these go against the grain of constitutional values. Just think of the CPMs handling of Taslima Nasreen in West Bengal,another state where communal attitudes are slowly simmering under the facade of communist rule.
While reinforcing communal identities,progressive discourse does not address a challenge. Since the object of religious reflection,namely some form of transcendence,has been delegitimised,religion can no longer be understood in any way other than a form of ethnic identity. It has become a will to difference. Believers now measure the strength of their belief by protecting community,not be seeking God or Truth. This is a crisis afflicting all organised religions. Fanaticism is a species of communal blasphemy. It assumes that it is our job to protect our gods,since the gods can no longer protect us,or themselves.
Second,competitive offence-mongering has been the currency of religious assertion for some time now. This politics is now truly global; every organised religious community is policing the boundaries of offensive speech or representation with a vengeance. This politics is also very competitive; patterns in one religion are seen as a license for other religions to mobilise. Unfortunately,the response of liberal states has been exactly backwards. While giving gratuitous offence to any religion usually reveals the small-mindedness of those who engage in it,there is no way that in a modern society,religion can be protected against offensive speech. But by promising to exorcise speech offensive to religion through various laws and political interventions,all we have done is simply given more groups incitement to mobilise. We have also legitimised the thought that community sentiment is a valid argument for trampling individual rights. The problem is that we have legitimised too much the idea that speech offensive to religion should be an actionable offence,so that those wanting to police offences against religion feel empowered. No wonder the Archdiocese in Kerala (perhaps out of fear) is at one with the fanatics in saying that an actionable offence was committed in this case. In a university setting you want the learning environment to not be intimidating to any student simply on account of their religion. Any university will have to ensure that. But it also has to get across the message that you cannot be shielded from representations that try your patience.
Third,we now genuinely have a problem of managing what might be called the politics of dissociation. After every incident like this,there is a predictable set of responses. Such acts are un-Islamic. There is condemnation from within the community,as there was in this case. There is a plea not to see the perpetrators as representatives of the community. But the paradox of our times is that the more we are trying the politics of dissociation,the more a community comes to be identified with the worst elements in it. It is as if these acts have a far greater symbolic power in shaping the views of those outside the community than any mainstream denunciation. This is one of the reasons why a crackpot Florida pastors threat to burn the Koran caused such anxiety; it had more potential to polarise communal relations than any good faith attempts and gestures at conciliation. The blunt truth is that a political calm notwithstanding,Hindus and Muslims and Christians are,in a global context,much more at odds in their views of each others intentions towards their community.
In an ironic way,many religious communities are struggling with a version of this problem,and this has produced a certain equipoise. It is perhaps not an accident that the RSS has not jumped over this incident as vehemently as it might,because it too is now trying hard to engage in a politics of dissociation,it does not want any equation of isolated acts of terror with the sensibilities of Hindus as a whole. We are living in a world where the power of isolated bad acts to incite fear seems to be greater than broader political attempts to assuage sensitivities. This will require a very vigilant politics.
Finally,we do not fully understand the ramifications of complex social change. Keralas culture and economy,more than any other state,is being shaped by global flows of both resources and ideology,and local adaptations will increasingly come under strain from larger currents and ideologies generated elsewhere. Their sense of who they are answerable to also changes. Even if condemned locally,they can draw succour and support from similar small groups and networks elsewhere; in short,they can always manufacture a constituency. As much as we might like to believe that the next generation of young people will have transcended identity politics,nothing could be farther from the truth. Indian society and Indian universities are producing masses of young people all across whose sense of identity is very fragile. They will often express their frustrations by turning to radicalism. The advantage of any collective ideology is that it has the potential for compensating for a sense of individual failure and inadequacy. The power of genuinely liberal values in the face of these assorted anxieties is more fragile than we think. To preserve them will require a clarity and consistency,not the equivocation and double standards our political parties are used to. Kerala is a stark reminder of how even well developed states can regress.
The writer is president,Centre for Policy Research,Delhi express@expressindia.com
-
Share
-
-
-
Share
