Opinion Why Rahul Gandhi bit the Savarkar bullet

For the Congress of 2022, there is a need to showcase, on the one hand, ideological consistency and clarity and on the other, political calculations that are necessary to emerge from the electoral backwaters to challenge the BJP. The perception among many if not most observers (even within the Congress) is that while attacking Savarkar may help the former, it hurts the latter. The binary, however, may not be as stark as that.

For some time now – especially since the rise of the post-2014 saffron hegemony – Congress has been unable to answer a simple question: What does the Grand Old Party stand for? Rahul’s earlier attempts at defining his party’s outlook in post-Modi India simply did not work. “Suit-Boot ki Sarkar”, “Chowkidar Chor Hair” and references to “Adani-Ambani” fell flat for multiple reasons. First, rather than offering an alternative – a reason to support the Congress other than disliking the BJP – they doubled down on negativity and the appearance of corruption. Given the recent memory of the perceived corruption in the UPA years, and the evident electoral popularity of the prime minister, they found little resonance. Secondly, Congress has not really been perceived as “socialist” since Indira Gandhi’s time and the attack on big business may have rung a little hollow. Finally, in no small part thanks to the economic liberalisation (1990s) and subsequent growth (UPA-1) ushered in by Congress-led governments, big business is no longer seen as “anti-people” by most voters.

With the Bharat Jodo Yatra, Rahul Gandhi seems finally to be able to articulate an ideology and politics. In the age of TikTok, Instagram reels and clever tweets, there is the use of images and people that can, perhaps, help develop a narrative more than direct attacks on “divisive Hindutva”. Over the last three months, the Congress leader has walked with young Muslim women (as hijab was villianised), the mother and sister of Gauri Lankesh and Rohith Vemula’s mother. And most recently, the great-grandsons of Mahatama Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru walked together, unafraid of the charges of “dynasty”. He has spoken of a positive idea of India – non-violent, fraternal and one that strives for substantive equality – that in a sense is an espousal of the spirit of the Indian Constitution. And by being literally on the ground – consistently, for now – it seems for the first time in years that the Congress’s politics isn’t about top-down lecturing, posturing or the shrill moral certainty of the university student. So, did the Savarkar comment ruin – or at least hurt – the gains made by the Yatra thus far?

His critics and even well-wishers within the party may see the comments as backsliding. In Maharashtra, the alliance with the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena has held despite the strong pro-Hindutva history of the party. Since Rahul Gandhi’s position on Savarkar and Hindutva are well-known, the argument goes, it would have made political sense to have not mentioned him, particularly in Maharashtra. It’s not quite like tearing up an ordinance when the UPA was in power – but isn’t that just a difference in degree, not in kind? Perhaps, but that may not be the point.

The BJP is the most dominant political force India has seen in over three decades. At its bedrock is an ideological clarity that few other political parties have – opposed to Mandal, for mandir and with an imagination of “civilisational Bharat” that is often seen in practice as opposed to the country’s composite history, one in which there is “1,200 saal ki ghulami”. Congress is searching for an ideology. So far, it has done so – during the Yatra – by showing and walking, rather than engaging in polemics from a pulpit.

Rahul Gandhi surely knows that once the idealistic march is over, the realities of politics in India will set in. There will be factions in his party, attacks from the opposition, the compromises of building coalitions and the attacks from the ruling party and government. To build a credible image, he need not make a simplistic attack on Savarkar. That is a way of demonstrating ideological clarity using the metier of those he opposes. It is better to demonstrate, as he is trying to do, how Congress’s proposed idea of India differs from New India, which Savarkar’s supporters seem to back. As every student of writing knows, it’s better to show than tell.

aakash.joshi@expressindia.com