Category Archives: Focus

ट्रम्प लोकप्रियता के वाहक: श्वेत कचरा, मिट्टी खोर, रेड नैक….!

October 06, 2024 | By Ramsharan Joshi

“अमेरिकियों ने लोकतंत्र के शिष्टाचार का ही स्वाद चखा है जोकि वास्तविक लोकतंत्र से बिलकुल भिन्न है. मतदाताओं ने धन-सम्पति में गहरी विषमताओं को स्वीकार कर लिया है , और इस अपेक्षा के साथ कि उनके द्वारा निर्वाचित प्रतिनिधि उनसे भिन्न नहीं निकलेंगे.” नैंसी इसन्बर्ग ( वाइट ट्रैश, पृ.16 )

विश्व के सर्वश्रेष्ठ लोकतांत्रिक और विकसित देश होने का दंभ भरनेवाले अमेरिका में ऐसे भी मतदाता हैं जिन्हें आज़ भी ‘श्वेत कचरा, नमूना कचरा, मिट्टी खोर, आलसी, ज़ाहिल, लाल गर्दन, पीली चमड़ी, फालतू लोग, पहाड़ी भोंदू, पटाखा, कीचड़ घूरा, बक़वास, रेत छुपैया, पहाड़ी ‘ जैसे विकृत उपनामों से सम्बोधित किया जाता है! क्या आपको हैरत नहीं है?

ज़ी हां, यह अमेरिकी या यांकी समाज की ऐसी कुरूप सच्चाई है, जिसे बड़े जतन के साथ ढक कर रखा जाता है. लेकिन, मतदाता- बाज़ार में इन उपनामों का शोर भी सोशल मीडिया और आपसी चर्चाओं में सुनाई देने लगता है. जब से रिपब्लिकन पार्टी के राष्ट्रपति पद के उम्मीदवार डोनाल्ड ट्रम्प की पंचम स्वर में चुनावी सभाएं होने लगी हैं, तब से इन अपमानजनक सम्बोधनों की चलन रफ़्तार भी बढ़ गई है. टीवी स्क्रीन पर सभाओं को देखते ही सामान्य दर्शक बताने लगते हैं, ‘ जोशी जी, देखिये भीड़ में बैठे वे वाइट ट्रैश ( श्वेत कचरा ) हैं और ट्रम्प के कट्टर समर्थक भी हैं. ‘ अमेरिकी समाज में मनुष्यों या मतदाताओं के ऐसे भी सम्बोधन प्रचलित हैं? मैं हैरान हूँ!

मेरी अमेरिकी आवाजाही रहती रही है. लेकिन, इस दफ़ा इन अजीबो -ग़रीब सम्बोधनों ने मेरा ध्यान अपनी तरफ़ खासा खैंचा है। इनकी तह में जाने की कोशिश की. ये सम्बोधन अश्वेत ( भारतवंशी समेत ) समुदायों के लिए नहीं हैं, बल्कि इनका प्रयोग खांटी श्वेत समुदाय के लोगों के लिए किया जाता है. इसका लम्बा इतिहास है. मगर, चुनाव के वक़्त ये उपनामधारी ज़रूर आकर्षण का केंद्र बन जाते हैं। जबसे ट्रम्प का अमेरिकी राजनीति में राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर उभार हुआ है तब से ये लोग लगातार चर्चा में रहते आये हैं. 2016 में ट्रम्प की पहली पारी की शुरुआत से इस और विशेष ध्यान जाने लगा है. बौद्धिक क्षेत्रों में बहसें होने लगी हैं. 2016 में प्रकाशित नैंसी इसन्बर्ग की पुस्तक ‘ white trash ( श्वेत कचरा )’ की वजह से इस वर्ग के लोगों पर नये सिरे से बहस हो रही है। जाना जा रहा है कि ये लोग श्वेत और स्वतंत्र लोग हैं, फिर भी श्वेत समाज की मुख्यधारा में इन लोगों को सम्मान व गरिमा की दृष्टि से देखा नहीं जाता है। चुनाव के समय ही इनकी पूछ बढ़ जाती है। मतदान समाप्ति के बाद इन लोगों को वापस उनके अपमानजनक संबोधनों के साथ वापस हाशिए पर फेंक दिया जाता है।एक तरह से ये उपेक्षित, जहालतभरी जिंदगी जीने के लिए अभिशप्त हो जाते हैं। इनमें से अधिकांश अवैध धंधों को अपनाते हैं; माफिया, मादक वस्तुओं के तस्कर, यौन तस्कर, पेशेवर हत्यारे आदि बन जाते हैं। अमेरिका की अंडरग्राउंड लाईफ के स्वामी कहलाते हैं। समझा जाता है कि देश के 25 _ 30 शहरों में इनकी प्रभावी मौजूदगी है। अमेरिका के टॉप 10 शहरों में इनकी तूती बजती है, जिनमें शामिल हैं लिटिल रॉक, अल्कांसा, टोलीडो, दायतों ( ओहिओ), एबलाइन, वाको(टेक्सास), स्प्रिंगफील्ड,, नॉर्थ कैरोलिना, ओखोलोमा सिटी, लुसियाना, मोंटोगोमरी ( अलबामा)जैसे शहर हैं। इन शहरों ने अपने विशेषीकृत अपराधों के लिए कुख्याती अर्जित की है। इन शहरों को ट्रंप भक्तों के अड्डों के रूप में देखा जाता है। हैरत यह है कि ब्लैक समुदाय के लोगों के लिए पहले से ही अशोभनीय संबोधन हैं, लेकिन अभिजन श्वेत वर्गों ने अपने ही श्वेत लोगों के लिए अपमानजनक संबोधनों को गढ़ रखा है।

ऐसे संबोधनो के संदर्भ मुझे भारत में हाशिए के लोगों के प्रति प्रयुक्त तिरस्कारपूर्ण संबोधनों की याद ताज़ा हो जाती है। भारत में भी हम लोग दलितों और आदिवासियों के लिए विकृत उपनामों का प्रयोग करते हैं;बिहार, छत्तीसगढ़, मध्य प्रदेश, राजस्थान, ओडिशा, तमिलनाडु जैसे राज्यों में वंचित समाज के लोगों के लिए असभ्य शब्दों का इस्तेमाल करते हैं। उन्हें ’ बुड़बक, जाहिल, गंवार, निकम्मा, आलसी, लफंगा, कामचोर, ठग, पिंडारी, भंगी, चमार, छोटी जात, नीच, जंगली, हरामखोर, अछूत, लुटेरा’ आदि जैसे तिरस्कारपूर्ण शब्द से उन्हें संबोधित किया जाता है। राज्यवार इन संबोधानों में विभिन्नताएं रहती हैं। वंचित हिंदू वर्ग के नामों बिगाड़ दिया जाता है।निजी अनुभवों के आधार पर मैं ऐसा कह रहा हूं। दलितों को लेकर जातिसूचक संबोधन बेशुमार हैं।

अमेरिका में श्वेत कचरा की बसाहट दक्षिण प्रांतों में अधिक है। और ये लोग रिपब्लिकन पार्टी के परंपरागत समर्थक रहते आए हैं। इनमें अधिकांश स्कूल ड्रॉप आउट रहते हैं। इनमें उच्च शिक्षा की बेहद कमी है। इनकी जीवन शैली की विशिष्ट पहचान हैं: _ खुरदुरापन, अशिष्टता, आक्रोशित चेहरा, भद्दी भाषा, भड़काऊ रंगढंग, काऊ बॉय, अंधविश्वासी, विगत जीवी, श्वेत श्रेष्ठता और वर्चस्वता का भ्रम,बुनियाद परस्ती, नस्लवाद, चरम राष्ट्रवाद , सैन्यवाद और अमेरिका महानवाद । वास्तव में विभिन्न प्रकार के काल्पनिक भ्रमों में श्वेत कचरा समुदाय के लोग जीते रहते हैं. इन लोगों की दृष्टि में, अमेरिका महान के पतन के मुख्य अपराधी वे लोग हैं जो उदार लोकतंत्र, बहुलतावाद,रूढ़िवादी या निरंकुश लोकतंत्र विरोध वैज्ञानिक चेतना, आप्रवासी समर्थन, गर्भपात समर्थन, गन संस्कृति के विरोधी, करवादी, कॉर्पोरेट पूंजी विरोधी, मुस्लिम समर्थन , इजराइल विरोध, मध्य वर्ग समर्थन, श्वेत सर्व वर्चस्व विरोध, ओबामा केयर समर्थन जैसी प्रवृत्तियों के पक्षधर हैं. इन प्रवृतियों का प्रतिनिधित्व डेमोक्रेटिक पार्टी करती है। इस समय इन प्रवृत्तियों की पोषक और संरक्षक कमला हैरिस हैं. इसलिए, उनका विरोध किया जाना चाहिए। हैरिस के प्रतिद्वंद्वी डोनाल्ड ट्रम्प ने श्वेत कचरा समुदाय के लोगों में दो सौ वर्ष पुराने अमेरिकी का वैभव जगा रखा है. ये लोग मानते हैं कि उत्तरी अमेरिका के लोगों ने ही ‘अश्वेत लोगों की गुलामी ‘ की प्रथा को समाप्त कर श्वेतों के वैभव पर कुठाराघात किया है. गुलाम व्यापार और गुलाम प्रथा को समाप्त नहीं किया जाना चाहिए था. इसलिए ये लोग अभी तक तत्कालीन राष्ट्रपति अब्राहम लिंकन से भी नफरत करते हैं क्योंकि उन्होंने ही नीग्रो या काले गुलामों को आज़ाद किया था. याद रहे, दक्षिण प्रान्त के व्यक्ति ने ही वॉशिंगटन में लिंकन की अप्रैल,1865 में फोर्ड थिएटर में नाटक देखते समय हत्या कर दी थी. यह अलग बात है, आज भी बेशुमार लोग उस दीर्घा को देखने आते हैं जहां राष्ट्रपति लिंकन नाटक को देख रहे थे. लम्बी लम्बी कतारें लगती हैं और थिएटर की दूसरी तरफ राष्ट्रपति पर लिखी गईं हज़ारों किताबों की नुमाईश है. यह लेखक का निजी अवलोकन है. वंचित श्वेत समाज के लोगों ने यह भ्रम पाल रखा है कि ट्रम्प की जीत का अर्थ है विगत अमेरिका वैभव व महानता की पुनर्स्थापना। इसलिए ट्रम्प अपने हर चुनावी भाषण में ‘ अमेरिका महान’ के नारे लगाते हैं. और इसके साथ ही कचरा समुदाय के लोगों में महानता का स्वप्न जगने लगता है. इसी नारे और मनोसंरचना के आधार पर अमेरिका के दक्षिण प्रांतों में ट्रम्प -समर्थन उमड़ने लग जाता है। दिलचस्प यह है कि विभिन्न टीवी कार्यक्रमों में श्वेत कचरा की जीवन शैली का चित्रांकन उपहासपूर्ण अंदाज़ में किया जाता है. एक शो काफी चर्चित रहा है : here comes boo boo dynasty. निश्चित ही श्वेत कचरा समाज के लोग निर्धन और अशिक्षित होते हैं. ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में इनकी बहुतायत रहती है. इस समाज के लोग भिक्षावृति को भी अपना लेते हैं. पुलों के नीचे और सड़कों-पार्कों के किनारे पड़े रहते हैं. इन्हें मीडिया में ‘बंजर भूमि और पहाड़वासी ‘ तक लिखा जाता है. इनके बच्चे रोगग्रस्त रहते हैं और ठीक तरह से पुस्तक पढ़ भी नहीं पाते हैं. कुछ का अनुमान है कि श्वेत कचरा समाज में 42% लोग गरीबी की सीमा तले अपना गुज़र -बसर करते हैं. इनके लिए जातीयता महत्वपूर्ण है, जनकल्याण कारी कार्यक्रम दूसरे पायदान पर हैं. लेकिन, अपने पिछड़ेपन के बावज़ूद ये लोग दक्षिण अमेरिका ( प्रान्त ) का पुनर्निर्माण करना चाहते हैं और उत्तरी अमेरिका ( बोस्टन, न्यू यॉर्क या न्यू इंग्लैंड ) के समकक्ष लाना चाहते हैं. बेशक, ट्रम्प उनके इस स्वप्न को ज़बरदस्त ढंग से भुनाने की कोशिश भी कर रहे हैं. समाजशास्त्रियों के मत में अमेरिका में ’सामाजिक गतिशीलता के स्थान पर दैहिक आवागमन गतिशीलता बढ़ी है।’ किसी भी देश के असली विकास का पैमाना है सामाजिक यानि सोशल मोबिलिटी का विस्तार होना। अमेरिका में इसका अभाव है।भारत के संदर्भ में भी यह कड़वी सच्चाई है।

अमेरिका का यह परिदृश्य हम भारतियों के लिए अज़नबी नहीं है. यहां भी धर्म-मज़हब -जाति के नाम पर बेशुमार भ्रमों को वंचित वर्ग के मतदाताओं के दिलो -दिमागों में पैदा किया जाता है; विश्व गुरु, भारत महान, अखण्ड भारत आदि के स्वप्न दिखाए जाते हैं. लोकतंत्र को सिर्फ मतदान तक सीमित कर दिया गया है. वोट डालने का अर्थ ही लोकतंत्र है, जबकि यह लोकतंत्र की सिर्फ एक क्रिया है. लोकतंत्र जीवन और देश की जीवन शैली है. क्या मतदाताओं को लोकतान्त्रिक चेतना से लैस किया जा रहा है ? क्या सरकार बदलना ही सबकुछ है? राज्य और शासकों का कैसा चरित्र होना चाहिए, क्या ऐसे सवालों की शक्ति से जनता को लैस किया जा रहा है ? कहीं हम विविध रंगी मतदाताओं को सिर्फ ‘ मत कचरा ‘ में तब्दील तो नहीं किया जा रहा है ? कहीं हम ‘श्वेत कचरा -मिट्टी खोर’ के भारतीय संस्करण तो नहीं बनते जा रहे हैं ? यदि इसका जवाब ’हां’ है तो लोकतंत्र को मौत से कैसे बचाया जा सकता है?ज़रा सोचिये.. !

An Open Letter to the Chairperson of the National Commission for Women, on Gender justice in film industry

September 30, 2024 | By V K Cherian

Respected Madam Chairperson,

I am reaching out to you as a concerned citizen and a media professional with 44 years of experience. I wish to call your attention to the current concerns in the Malayalam film industry that arose after the publication of the Justice Hema Committee report on women’s working conditions in the Kerala film sector. This marks the first occasion in recent years that a state government has formed a high-level committee to investigate the gender issues in the film industry. The committee, chaired by a distinguished retired High Court judge, comprised a former IAS officer and a celebrated Telugu film star who happens to be well-regarded in Kerala.

Following a High Court intervention two months ago, their findings and recommendations were disclosed to the public. Despite this, the state government, which had been the one to request the report, delayed its publication for more than four years for reasons that were best known to it. With an increasing number of women from the film industry, particularly supporting actresses and crew members, sharing their experiences, numerous senior actors are now under investigation by the state police, which has established a dedicated special team of female officers. The High Court has intervened to guarantee that these women obtain justice and legal safeguards. I believe the Commission is already informed about these developments, given their extensive coverage in both national and international media.

I wish to inform the Commission that women in the film industries of Tamil Nadu, Bengal, and Karnataka have been actively advocating for the establishment of Hema Committee-style bodies in their respective states. The question remains why women in Bollywood (the Hindi film industry) have not expressed such demands publicly, despite the fact that numerous women in the industry have either served or are serving Parliament members.

As you are aware, the National Commission for Women Act, 1990 (Act No. 20 of 1990) was enacted in January 1992 to establish the National Commission for Women as a statutory body. Its objective is to:

review the Constitutional and Legal safeguards for women ;
recommend remedial legislative measures;
facilitate the redressal of grievances and
advise the Government on all policy matters affecting women.

Given that the Commission’s mandate is to address the demands of women in the film industry throughout the nation, it is imperative that the Commission implement women-specific legislation in response to these allegations. These include the following:

The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956;
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (PREVENTION, PROHIBITION and REDRESSAL) Act, 2013;
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013;
The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.

I believe that the Commission is committed to ensuring that “The Indian Woman is secure in her home and outside, fully empowered to access all her rights and entitlements, with the opportunity to contribute equally in all walks of life.” And that its mission is to “strive towards enabling women to achieve equality and equal participation in all spheres of life by securing her due rights and entitlements through suitable policy formulation, legislative measures, effective enforcement of laws, implementation of schemes/policies, and devising strategies for solving specific problems arising from discrimination and atrocities against women.”

I am deeply confident that the Commission possesses the authority to set up a Justice Hema-style committee to assess the working conditions of women in the film industry across the nation or to recommend that all states and even Central government to establish similar committees within their jurisdictions.

I understand that the Government relies on established precedents in these matters. Historically speaking, the British Raj recognized the need for similar oversight. In 1927, a committee was constituted by the Raj, under Diwan Bahadur T. Rangaohariar, an advocate of the Madras High Court, to investigate the film industry and its practices. This came about following closely on the heels of a report filed by the British Social Hygiene Council in 1926.The Council robustly condemned the industry by stating that “In every province and State visited by the Delegation the evil influence of the cinema was cited by educationists and the representative citizens as one of the major factors in lowering the standard of sex conduct and thereby tending to increase the dissemination of disease”. It also observed that actresses were often recruited from the “dancing girl” class, with women of better social standing eschewing the film industry altogether.

Since then, the country has seen numerous governmental committees and public debates on the contentious issue of censorship in the film industry. Sadly, the main emphasis of these discussions has been the extent to which female bodies and sexuality need to be depicted on screen. The film industry has reinforced a simplistic stereotype over the years, equating women in the sector with the “dancing girls” of bygone eras.

Numerous expert groups and scholars have painstakingly uncovered the operations of the film industry, revealing a disquieting pattern of gender exploitation and illicit money. The primary allure for businessmen looking to enter this field has been shaped by these factors.

“In the vibrant atmosphere of the 50s, the cinema began to be viewed as possible art form. Cinema, until this time has been treated, as worst as, a reprehensible, though unavoidable, social catastrophe, at best a barbarous past time of the uncultured,” noted the late author ArunaVasudev in her renowned work, The New Indian Cinema.

The Justice Hema Committee’s conclusions, that call for a nationwide investigation into the status of women in India’s film industry, echo those expressed a century ago. The report highlights serious concerns, including:

Sexual demands made of women seeking entry into the film industry.
Sexual harassment, abuse, and assault at the workplace, in transportation, and in accommodations.
Punishment of women who resist or reject these demands.
Denial of basic facilities such as toilets and changing rooms on film sets.
Unsafe working conditions, including during outdoor shoots in remote areas.
Gender discrimination, particularly in wages and roles.
Online harassment and a lack of legal awareness among women regarding their rights.

The report also noted that the women are unable to access water or other facilities to change or dispose of sanitary napkins during their menstrual periods. Additionally, it asserted that they are compelled to suppress their inclination to urinate for an extended period of time.

Given the establishment of a commission dedicated to safeguarding women’s rights in the workplace, I believe the time has come to consider launching a national inquiry to investigate the presence of similar conditions in regional film industries across India. Even if it were to disrupt patriarchal traditions and vested interests, such an investigation is likely to inculcate a more supportive environment for women in the film sector.

In my youth, I had aspirations of joining the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) in Pune; however, my parents serious expressed reservations, feeling that it might not align with the values of “respectable” families. Although progress has been made since that time, there remains a considerable amount of work ahead, as highlighted by the Justice Hema Committee.

It is high time that the National Commission for Women ensures that there is gender justice in film industry, which by all counts skewed against women going by the general reports and also evidenced by the Justice Hema committee.

I eagerly await a positive response from your end.

Sincerely,
V. K. Cherian

Understanding caste survey politics

August 30, 2024 | By V K Cherian

“It is wrong; it should not happen,” senior BJP leader Murali Manohar Joshi told media in 2010 itself when the issue of caste census came up. . “It will further divide society and divert attention from issues like internal security, terrorism and poverty. A national debate is required on the caste census, but in my opinion it is not good for the country.”, he added.

Days back, RSS had also spoken against the caste census and though are not open about it now, various RSS leaders have spoken against the caste census. Recently their Hindi journal had an editorial on the issue too.

But BJP leaders such as Sushma Swaraj, Gopinath Munde and M. Venkaiah Naidu have said that numbers with regard to OBCs will help the government plan welfare measures for them. Clearly there is an issue with regard to counting the caste population in India in the next census of India. The decadal census which was to be held in 2021 , but postponed due to Covid -19 season, threatens not just raise a political storm, but a caste storm in India, going by the increasing public statements about the issue both by political parties and caste leaders. However, the States of Bihar and Karnataka has already conducted the caste survey on their own is planning to reorient their policies and politics accordingly.

The survey results of 2011 census revealed a complex caste counting process. The 2011 census had already initiated the caste survey process, but limited itself to the traditional scheduled caste and scheduled tribe count and not yet gone over to the other backbwaard castes. The provisional rural data of SECC 2011 shows Scheduled Castes at 18.46% (or 15.88 crore), Scheduled Tribes at 10.97% (9.27 crore), Others at 68.52%, and 2.04% (or 36.57 lakh) as “No Caste & Tribe” households.

What is in stores for India’s caste census has been given as a curtain raiser by the Pew research centre of USA, which undertook a religious survey in India and its results are astonishing. “Pew Research Center’s new survey about religion in India asked about caste in a different way than the 2011 Indian census. All respondents, regardless of religion, were asked this question: Are you from a General Category, Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or Other Backward Class? (Note: General Category includes castes and sub-castes that don’t fall into a lower caste category.)

Using this methodology, 25% of Indians self-identify as Scheduled Caste and 9% say they are from a Scheduled Tribe. The SC estimate is considerably higher than the 2011 census estimate of 17%, although the ST estimate is identical (9%). An additional 35% of Indians identify as OBC in the Center’s survey.

The Pew paper on this said that “,In the Center’s survey, the Hindu caste distribution generally resembles that of the total population, but minority groups differ widely in their caste composition. For example, a large majority of Buddhists (89%) identify as SC, but just 3% of Jains fall into this category. Among Muslims, a small share (4%) identify as SC, but many (43%) identify as OBC.”

The American research centre concluded that; “Caste remains a complicated and integral aspect of life in India, as well as a political flashpoint. Measuring caste in India is highly consequential for understanding social dynamics in Indian society as well as for policymaking. But so far there is no consensus on how to measure caste identity in India, or even who should be asked the question (all Indians or members of particular religious groups). These differences in methodology can result in national sample surveys yielding different estimates than the 2011 Indian census.”

If the estimated data as given by Pew centre says 77% of Indians fall in categories of OBC, SC and ST and the reservations meant for caste representations in government jobs have to be revised, it will create more political upheavals as such a percentage is way above the maximum of 50% as prescribed by the constitution. The Ambedkarite and Mandal politics in North Indian States will further get emboldened and can pose a threat to the current prevailing Hindutva politics. After all when chips are down it is the economic status which matters to the majority of the population and not religion.

In real politics, Congress has been demanding the caste census to ensure the real representation of people in government. The opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has been in the forefront of this demand realizing that it will divide the Hinduvta politics. Having learnt from Mandal order and the politics of backward castes which followed in 1991, the Congress wants to reap the politics through the caste census demand of the next census. The ruling BJP having realized the political potential of the caste census is treading cautiously though BJP, ideological mentor RSS dominated by upper castes have opposed it in various forums.

Census is all about collecting data from the population, with their physical and social attributes to help governments plan and focus their development initiatives. All governments wow’s to reach the poor through their welfare schemes. Having identified the lower castes, OBC, SC and ST as the least developed communities in terms of castes, it is logical to enumerate them to focus the developmental attention to them. However with power politics coming in its way, it needs to be seen how parties and the government decide on the modalities of a census which is yet to happen this decade. May be the census of the decade can get postponed to the next decade, so that like many issues, the idea of a caste census can die out in time.

South Rajasthan Tribals Assert Their Identity

July 11, 2024 | By Sunny Sebastian

The raging controversy over Adivasi identity in Rajasthan is indicative of a churning taking place in the state’s tribal belt. For the first time in many years an Adivasi leader from this part of the country has publicly challenged the standard practice of terming tribals as part of the Hindu society. The person who has questioned the ‘given’ notion of Adivasi faith is Raj Kumar Roat, who won the Lok Sabha seat from the ST-reserved Banswara, fighting under the I.N.D.I.A banner. The Bharat Adivasi Party (BAP), co-founded by Roat, is a partner in I.N.D.I.A.

Roat, two times MLA from Chorasi in Dungarpur district, last month crossed swords with Rajasthan’s Education Minister Madan Dilawar on the issue of Adivasi identity. Dilawar, once a Bajrang Dal activist, had asserted that Adivasis were Hindus provoking Roat to say that the tribals had their own identity and they followed a different faith than Hinduism. Insinuated, Dilawar, who has a track record of targeting minorities, hit back recommending a DNA test for Roat so that his real identity could be determined.

The suggestion for DNA test to know the parentage of Roat was serious provocation as it carried other possible meanings as well. Not letting it go, Roat, along with Congress MLAs Ramkesh Meena and Ghanshyam Mahar, last week marched to the official residence of Dilawar in Jaipur carrying blood samples for DNA test but they were stopped on the way by the police.

The Rajasthan Assembly on Thursday (July 4) witnessed uproarious scenes when BAP MLAs, along with those of the Congress, staged a protest in the well of the House seeking the removal of Dilawar as minister. They also demanded an apology from Dilawar for recommending DNA test to Adivasis for indentifying their Hindu blood (!). In the end, though cagey, Dilawar, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste community, explained that it was not his “intention to insult” tribals. However he made it a point to reiterate that, “tribals were always Hindus and will always remain so”.

“The Adivasi population in the whole region is on the edge. As such tribal consciousness has been on the rise in south Rajasthan and in the adjoining parts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh,” observes Dr. Bhanu Kapil who teaches history in Udaipur’s Bhupal Nobles University (Deemed). The 2023 Assembly election in which BAP secured three seats in Rajasthan and one in Madhya Pradesh was an indication of the emergence of a new political force among the Adivasis, he points out.

The emergence of BAP as a strong political entity in such a short period under such a young leader (Roat is 32) should be termed a phenomenon in Rajasthan politics. The party, an offspring of an earlier formation called BTP (Bharatiya Tribal Party), which had secured two seats in the 2018 Assembly election in Rajasthan, almost eliminated its parent party, founded by the Gujarat-based politician, Chhotubhai Vasava, in the current Rajasthan election. First the BTP and then the BAP, focusing on Adivasi asmita (identity) fought both the BJP and the Congress to make space for themselves. This time again, when the negotiations on a possible tie-up with the Congress on Banswara Lok Sabha seat got delayed Roat and his men had gone ahead declaring their candidature.

The Congress, left with no choice after the popular leader of the party and former Minister Mahendrajeet Singh Malviya joining the BJP on the election eve, conceded to the demands of BAP. Banswara seat was won by Roat with a margin of 2,47054 votes against Malviya even when the latter had allegedly sponsored two more Raj Kumars in the fray who together polled 1,16388 votes.

Raj Kumar Roat and those of his ilk who talk about a “Bhil Pradesh” could be the future leadership of the Adivasis in the tri-junction of Rajasthan, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. From the time the Mangarh Bhil uprising, held against the tyranny of the kings of Banswara, Dungarpur, Sant Rampur and the British in 1913 in which 1,500 tribals were killed, Adivasis had dreamt of their own self rule in the region. And after the death of the Socialist leader Mama Baleshwar Dayal in December 1998, they had been drifting among the Congress, the Janata Dal and the BJP.

“More than the territorial aspirations—which would, anyway, figure in the future—the current fight is for the protection and preservation of the very identity, tradition and culture of the tribals of this region. As the SCs and STs voted this time against the BJP to protect the Constitution and save reservations, they are also getting ready to fight the possible introduction of Uniform Civil Code which would play havoc with their lives,” asserts Dr. Bhanu Kapil.eom

Income and Wealth Inequality in India, 1922-2023: The Rise of the Billionaire Raj

July 11, 2024 | By Nitin Kumar Bharti, Lucas Chancel, Thomas Piketty, and Anmol Somanchi

In terms of inequality dynamics, the Modi years of 2014-2023 can be divided into 3 phases: 2014-2017,2018-2020, and 2021 onwards. In the first phase, the economy was growing moderately fast and bothincome and wealth inequality continued to rise. In the second phase, from 2017-18 to 2020, growth slows down considerably and then plummets in 2020. In this second phase, we see top 10% income and wealth shares decline by 1-2 percentage points. The most likely explanation for which is the pro-cyclical nature of inequality, i.e. the rich tend to benefit disproportionately from boom periods and are isproportionately hurt during slumps, as Ghatak et al. (2022) also argue.41 This seems the most likely explanation especially given that we observe similar trends for both income and wealth during this phase. Moreover, as shown in Figure 2b, the wealth of the richest Indians as a share of national income also declined between 2018 and 2020. It is hard to think of other factors that concomitantly explain these trends for both incomes and wealth.42 Measurement error is of course a possibility, which we address shortly. Finally in the last phase, after the lock-downs were lifted and the economic effects of COVID-19 dissipated, we find top shares revert to their upward trend in 2021 and 2022, while bottom shares decline back to their 2014 level. By examining the growth incidence curve for incomes and wealth between 2014-2022, we find that the real beneficiaries in the recent years appear to be the super-rich, the top 1% and beyond (Figure 17b). This is particularly so for wealth concentration at the very top. This lends some support to political economy assessments that have characterized the economic system in India in recent years as “conglomerate capitalism”(Damodaran, 2020) and a “conclave economy” (Bardhan, 2022).The other interesting aspect to note is that both with income and wealth, the middle 40% seem to have grown slower than the bottom 50% during this period. This is likely to exacerbate the phenomenon of India’s “missing middle class” (Chancel and Piketty, 2019). The bottom 50%, in return, grew at the same rate as that of the average of the population, preventing an increase in their share of total income and wealth. We must, however, emphasize that this result might be overly conservative.

Recent ICE360 data indicates a significant decline in the bottom 50% income share over the period 2015-16 to 2020-21 (see Appendix Figure B.3), with growth rates well below the average. Enhanced access to household survey and administrative data sources is essential for a deeper understanding of these dynamics, as discussed subsequently.

7.3 Growing data challenges in recent years

During the last decade, various key data sources in India have either become unavailable or their quality has become suspect. This applies to all the key inputs that go into our inequality series: national income accounts, tax tabulations, and surveys. We briefly discuss these issues with the aim of drawing caution when interpreting the estimates for recent years.

National income accounts: Various concerns have been raised about validity of India’s national income accounts data in recent years.43 At least two detailed empirical exercises, one by an ex-chief economic advisor to the Government of India, point to possible over-estimation of GDP in the years post-2011 (Morris and Kumari, 2019; Subramanian, 2019a). Some concerns have also been raised regarding the possible mis-measurement of India’s GDP deflator (Subramanian and Felman, 2023).

More generally, the dated nature of the underlying data used to estimate GDP is very concerning –key inputs like the CPI, WPI, input-output tables, industry codes, consumption expenditure, etc. are currently based on data that might be 10-15 years old (Sapre and Bhardwaj, 2023). This is especially a worry for aspects relating to the informal sector of the economy. If it is indeed the case that GDP is being overestimated in recent years, that would imply that our inequality estimates would be slightly downward-biased. 44 43 As India’s ex-chief statistician clarified recently, the issue with India’s GDP estimates in recent years seems to be less about methodology and more about the severely outdated underlying data and unreliable proxies (Thapar, 2023).

44 This is because (70% of) per-adult net national income serves as the “control average” for the generalized Pareto 28

Tax tabulations

The British colonial administration introduced an individual income tax with the Income Tax Act, 1922. Since then, data on individual incomes began being collected and the colonial administration published this data in tabulated form on an annual basis. This practice which was continued by the Indian government post-independence. Between 1922 and 1998, annual publication of these ‘All-India Income Tax Statistics’ provided a vital source of information on top incomes, mobilizing which Banerjee and Piketty (2005) estimated the share of national income going to the top 0.01%, 0.1% and 1% during this period. There were naturally improvements to the methodology used to generate these tabulations over the years (partly owing to technological and computational improvements), but systematic and regular release of this data was not disrupted.

However, starting 1999 onwards, the government of India strangely stopped publishing these tax tabulations for reasons that remain unknown. For a whole decade when India experienced strong macroeconomic growth (2000-2010), no tax tabulations are available to date. Then in 2016, the government etrospectively released data but only starting 2011. For the next few years, data releases continued till retrospective data for 2017 was out, after which once again no tax tabulations were available. Finally in mid-2023, the government again retrospectively released data for the years 2018-2021. In short, the release of tax data has been highly erratic and incomplete in recent decades.

The reason for this remains unclear. One possibility is that the analysis and release of tax data falls low on the priority list of the Income Tax department. This stands in sharp contrast to the past when, for instance, government appointed committees specially provided recommendations on ways to better analyze and report data from income tax returns.45 Besides releasing all-India tabulations, the income tax department also used to release state-wise tabulations till 1998. These could potentially allow going beyond all-India analysis and shed light on the evolution of top incomes and inequality at the state-level. Given the size and population of individual states, larger than many European countries in many cases, this is an important endeavor. However, starting 1990 (to the best of our knowledge), state-wise statistics have not been released at all, even post-2011 when all-India statistics have been released. The non-availability of state-level data in recent years is strange, not only because it used to be released regularly before, but also because computerization and digitization of records in recent decades should make dis-aggregation and tabulation of returns at the state-level easier than before. This leaves the estimation of state-level income and wealth inequality an incomplete endeavor.

Income and consumption surveys

One of the key challenges when updating the income inequality series for the last decade is the absence of a comparable NSSO consumption survey after 2011-12.interpolation algorithm used to extract a distribution of top incomes from the tax tabulations. A lower control average would mechanically increase top income shares. To what extent this issue affects our estimates depends on the extent to which national income is being over-estimated.

45 As an example, the ‘Committee on Direct Tax Statistics’ recommended using a part-sampling and part-census approach for generating tabulations of income-tax statistics from 1974-75 onwards – all returns with incomes above INR 25,000 were to be covered by a census while those with incomes below INR 25,000 were to be sampled, with most states assigned a 10% sample, some 20%, and a full census in some union territories like Delhi (Directorate of Inspection, 1978). Incidentally, this was a time when the government of India was explicitly interested in curtailing the power of the elites.

As noted earlier, NSSO has historically steered clear of measuring incomes and instead focusing on consumption expenditures. Consequently, our measurement framework also relies heavily on these consumption surveys. The NSSO did conduct a round in 2017-18 but it was suppressed by the government. From 2017-18 onwards, the PLFS came to our rescue. As it turns out, even though it is primarily designed for labour market outcomes, it collects preliminary data on ‘usual’ consumption expenditures. By correcting these for comparability with past NSSO CES rounds, we are able to extend our income inequality series on an annual basis from 2017-18 onwards. However, this involves a correction that is bound to be only imperfect at best. This creates an additional degree of uncertainty around our estimates in the recent years. More importantly, we find that alternate data sources present contradictory trends for bottom incomes. For instance, based on percentile-level growth rates of per-capita incomes between 2015-16 and 2020-21 in the ICE360 survey, we find a steeply upward sloping growth incidence curve such that bottom 50% shares would decline from 14.4% in 2015 to 9.8% in 2020 (Figure B.3). This stands in sharp contrast to the trends in our benchmark series which suggest a relatively stable bottom 50% share over this period, besides a temporary and marginal increase (1 percentage point) between 2018 and 2020. Therefore, we see our benchmark estimates as a conservative scenario until better data emerges to improve our estimation.

Wealth surveys

It is also worth mentioning a couple of concerns relating to NSSO AIDIS that forms the basis for our wealth inequality series. First, as highlighted earlier, it appears that the issue of under-estimation at the top has worsened over the last three successive rounds in 2002, 2012 and 2018 – the total (net) wealth of USD MER billionaires in the Forbes list as a percentage of the total survey wealth increased from 1.26% in 2002 to 2.74% in 2012 to 6.01% in 2018. The issue of under-estimation and under-representation of the very rich and wealthy in sample surveys is not unique to India but the fact that the issue is getting worse over time deserves closer attention by the NSSO. More stratification and purposive over-sampling at the top could be ways to counteract the current trend of increasing non-representativeness of the right tail. Further, with all its surveys (CES, AIDIS, PLFS, etc.), NSSO should release non-response rates by some variable like, say, the ‘usual’ consumption expenditure variable that it could collect at the household listing stage – this would allow decomposing the non-representativeness of surveys for the right tail more clearly into response-related and measurement-related issues. It is also worth highlighting that we are likely to under-estimating wealth at the top of the distribution due to off-shore wealth. Of the total foreign owned off-shore real-estate in Dubai, 20% is owned by Indians (Alstadsater et al., 2024), amounting in total value to to 1.1% of India’s GDP (Alstadsater et al., 2022). The second concern relating to AIDIS relates to the timing of the release of the latest round of the data. Starting in 1961-62, these surveys were meant to be decennial surveys and indeed they were conducted every 10 years, in 1971-72, 1981-82, 1991-92, 2002-03 and 2012-13. It is unclear why the last round was conducted within a shortened gap of 6 years in 2018-19. If this is part of a broader plan of more regular AIDIS rounds, then it is a welcome change. If, on the other hand, this was the result of political considerations, then 30 there is a cause for worry. Coincidentally (or not), our estimates suggest that the top 10% wealth share may have been at its lowest during the last decade in 2018 .

Inequality dynamics in India (2014-22)( excerpts from World Inequality Lab report)

Manipur needs a fresh start

June 30, 2024 | By Eklavya

When moderate voices are marginalized so completely and effectively as has happened in the North-Eastern state of Manipur over the past year and more, it is apparent that societal cleavages have deepened exponentially. Indeed, a number of highly respected commentators are now saying that the Meitei-Kuki divide has widened to form an unbridgeable chasm.

Of the many causes for this state of affairs, the prolonged inability and/or unwillingness of the N Biren Singh government to take on the Meitei radical and vigilante groups is surely a pivotal factor. This is not to say that Kuki armed groups have not been equally vicious if not more so. But to underline the fact that it is of some solace to saner minds across the political spectrum that this so-called strategy did not pay off. In fact, it seems to have boomeranged with the Congress winning from both Lok Sabha seats in the state including the Meitei-dominated Inner Manipur parliamentary seat. It also is worth noting that RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat in his post-General Election statement indicated that the Sangh wants the hurt, resentment, and fear across vast swathes of the population of Manipur to be addressed on a priority by the administration at the state-level and the Centre.

Recent reports that the Chief Minister, who has served primarily his own agenda regardless of whether he was in the Congress or the BJP over the past two decades, is finally on the way out were denied but primarily by Biren Singh himself! In Delhi’s power corridors, the talk is of when, not if, there is a change in political leadership in Manipur. And about time too. For, a new beginning is sorely – and surely – needed.

The adjective used by a longtime observer of state politics to describe ties between the Meitei and Kuki communities, “toxic”, is unfortunately entirely accurate. This, in turn, has led leaders on both sides to say in private that coexistence is not possible for Meitei and Kuki within Manipur. If the divide in the state is as permanent as the ground reports suggest, the atrocities we have seen till now will likely fade in comparison with what may yet come.

Though the violence has not been one-sided, the Kuki community has borne the brunt of Meitei mobs on the rampage across the state over the past year. Kuki distrust of the state government is entirely understandable as the state law-enforcement machinery has failed in its primary duty. The bigger concern, however, is that the dominant narrative amidst the majority Meitei community seems to justify violence against the Kuki.

The Kuki community, it is alleged, are mostly illegal immigrants from Myanmar who are engaged in poppy cultivation having cleared large tracts of forest land in the hills of Manipur. The truth of this assertion is contested, though it cannot be wholly dismissed. But that is a law-and-order issue which should have been dealt with strictly by the Biren Singh administration. That this did not happen, however, can in no way justify the mob on the street calling for the large-scale “eviction” of the minority Kuki community from the state much less be a ground for the atrocities unleashed on those belonging to it.

The bloodshed in Manipur may have been sparked by the attacks on members of the Meitei community by hardline Kuki in Churachandpur District in May last year, but there should have been no room for so-called “retaliation” by vigilante groups. It was a clear failure of the state government which could not handle the fallout of the May attacks by swift and robust action against the perpetrators. Anyone who is claiming anything to the contrary is indulging in whataboutery. The atmosphere of intimidation in the months following the violence, and the lack of politicians of stature attempting to seriously initiate inter-community dialogue till today, points towards a bleak future.

It must also not be forgotten that a state-seeking separatist movement in Manipur was led by a section of the Meitei community in past decades, and many of the cadres of proscribed outfits such as the UNLF led the orgy of violence against the Kuki community in 2023. It would be naïve to believe that these are the people who have taken up arms against “Kuki infiltrators” out of a desire to protect the integrity of India. In this context, the Meitei community in particular needs to be appreciated for having, in essence, sent out a clear message to its hardline leaders in the Lok Sabha poll – not in our name. Moderate voices in both communities need to take a stand. Because Manipur deserves better.

Lessons for India from the UK election

July 01, 2024 | By Eklavya

Whether the Indian electoral-governance matrix, premised as it is on the British Westminster model, was the appropriate choice to deal with complexities of governing post-colonial India is a debate that has been going on for the past 75 years. And one can be sure it will continue in future decades.

After all, calls for a so-called Second Republic have been aired in India for a while now. Arguments and counter-arguments on the merits of a Presidential system as opposed to the extant Parliamentary system for the country too continue to be made. The debate on which method of making the vote count, as it were, and best reflects the Indian electorate’s will – proportional representation or the current first-past-post-the-post, winner-takes-all electoral approach – also have passionate adherents on either side.

But this is not an essay on these lofty debates. Rather, it a practical itemisation of the lessons stakeholders in the Indian political system could learn, if they so choose, from what has just gone down in the United Kingdom. As the headlines in the global media understandably highlight the Labour Party’s landslide electoral victory in the July 2024 General Election, which delivered its best showing in terms of number of seats won since the 1920s, there are some critical minutiae that seem to have been lost in the focus on Labour’s stupendous win. These hold lessons for India which follows much the same electoral system as the UK.

First, the Labour Party, while it emerged the winner in 412 Parliamentary seats in the 650-member House of Commons, did so on the basis of only 34% of the popular vote. Replace the Labour Party with BJP and the House of Commons with the Lok Sabha, and the parallels are eerie (albeit the BJP’s vote share has been a few percentage points more than Labour’s over the past three Lok Sabha polls.)

Secondly, the Conservative Party, in winning a measly 121 seats, did not completely collapse in terms of percentage of votes cast in its favour as some political pundits were predicting, which stood at 24%. Think of the Congress Party and the narrative shaped by BJP-simpatico media that India’s Grand Old Party is in terminal decline to understand the similarity. Indeed, the Congress too has been winning about 20-22% of the vote on average in three successive Indian elections beginning 2014.

Thirdly, the Eurosceptic Reform UK Party led by the controversial Nigel Farage won four million votes, which is about 15% of the popular vote, but ended up with just four seats. This compares to the traditional third party in British electoral politics, the Liberal Democratic Party, which won as many as 71 seats with a mere 12% of the national vote. Readers may decide which parties in the Indian set-up correspond with the smaller British parties such as the LDP and Reform to reach their own conclusions.

The fact remains, as the BBC pointed out in its coverage of the UK Election, that the disparity between the vote-share of parties and the seats won by them has been the highest in British history at 30%. Disproportionate representation, anyone?

The short point for Indian political parties which still operate within the ambit of the Westminster system despite desi variations, is that political parties will win some polls and lose others, but the structural issues in the Indian electoral system will have to addressed urgently to prevent a perversity in the name of democracy. For that to happen, however, these issues need to be debated and decided both within party fora and in public discourse. There is, unfortunately, no sign of that happening anytime soon. Readers may decide which parties in the Indian set-up correspond with the smaller British parties such as the LDP and Reform to reach their own conclusions.

The short point for Indian political parties which still operate within the ambit of the Westminster system despite desi variations, is that political parties will win some polls and lose others.

Imperceptible minority influencing India Bloc election surge

June 15, 2024 | By V K Cherian

The 2024 Lok Sabha elections witnessed the minorities, including the Muslim community, becoming a prominent, albeit frequently unnoticed influence, posing a threat to the dominant Hindutva party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.Although Muslim ministers are conspicuously absent in Modi’s third cabinet, the election results show a notable shift in areas with sizable minority populations, indicating the community’s calculated vote against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The numbers say it all. Witness this: Of the 96 constituencies where the Muslim population exceeds 20%, the India Bloc managed to secure 55 seats, which is a significant improvement compared to the 19 seats they had won during the 2019 elections. These constituencies are predominantly concentrated in Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh (UP), Delhi, Maharashtra, and Kerala, with sprinklings in Haryana, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh (MP), and Telangana.

A prominent headline in Pakistan’s daily Dawn reads, “India defeats hate-Modi left at the mercy of Muslim friendly allies”,underscoring the considerable impact of Muslim voters. International media, notably The Guardian, has been critical of Modi’s anti-Muslim campaign rhetoric. Yet, mainstream Indian media have largely disregarded the boiling discontent among the 20% minority population, with some commentators ridiculing it as “vote jihad”.

A prominent figure from the Muslim community asserted that the act of strategic voting was intended to thwart the BJP as opposed to explicitly supporting any one political party. This approach has clearly and noticeably influenced the results of elections in various critical states.

Year of elections	Total seats with more than 20% Minorities	NDA-BJP	Non NDA-India bloc
2019	96	77	19
2024	96	41	55

In certain states, notably Assam, concerns have arisen regarding the nationality of minority communities and the creation of detention facilities for those suspected of being non-Indian. The voting trends exhibit an atypical pattern, which mirrors this circumstance.

Eight of the fourteen Lok Sabha constituencies in Assam have a Muslim population over 20%. The vote percentage indicates that these communities have conveyed their discontentment with the policies of the ruling BJP. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) earned 37.43% of the votes, while the primary opposition party, the Indian National Congress, garnered 37.48%.

The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has a comparatively lower total voting percentage when taking into account the percentages of votes cast for India bloc organisations such as TMC, CPI, CPIM, and two regional parties. Nevertheless, the AsomGanaParishad (AGP), which is an ally of the BJP, holds a vote share of 6.46%, allowingit to retain a competitive edge.

The allocation of Lok Sabha seats does not exactly represent this voting trend due to substantial delimitation, which has led to a more equitable distribution of population across most constituencies. However, out of the eight Lok Sabha seats where the Muslim population exceeds 20%, only three were secured by political parties other than the BJP. One of these seats was won by AGP, a BJP collaborator.

It needs to be reiterated that, despite having won only three seats, the Congress party established itself as a formidable competitor in eight of Assam’s 14 seats, all of which have a Muslim population over 20%. This signifies a significant degree of dissatisfaction with the governing party within these groups.

In the neighbouring state of West Bengal, out of its 42 Lok Sabha constituencies, 21 have a significant percentage of Muslim voters, ranging from 20 % to as high as 60%. It is clear that the India Bloc, particularly the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC), has successfully consolidated minority votes. Of the 21 seats up for grabs, India Bloc parties secured an impressive 19, while TMC successfully regained two seats from BJP. This setback resulted in a notable decrease in BJP’s vote count, dropping from 18 seats in 2019 to a mere 12 seats in the recently concluded elections. TMC maintained a consistent lead of seven percent over BJP in terms of voting percentage, securing 45.76% of the total votes polled in the state.

Nonetheless, in Bihar, out of the nine seats where minorities represent between 20% and 60% of the population, the India Bloc parties could only secure three seats. This suggests a split in the votes, with a sizeable portion going to the BJP-aligned Janata Dal-United (JD-U).

Uttar Pradesh witnessed a distinct consolidation of minority ballots in favour of the India Bloc parties comprising the Samajwadi Party and the Indian National Congress, with a combined voting percentage of 43.05%, which is two percent higher than the ruling BJP’s. In the 2019 elections, the India Bloc managed to secure 11 out of the 22 seats where the minorities hold significant influence. This resulted in the capture of five seats previously held by the BJP.

In Delhi,though, the India Bloc drew blank although there were two constituencies in which the minority votes mattered.

However, in Haryana, the India Bloc managed to recover one seat, Ambala, from the BJP. Despite this, the incumbent party retained control over the other two seats, where the minority community constitutes almost 30% of the total population.

In Karnataka, the India Bloc reclaimed two seats from the BJP out of four where minorities could cast a deciding vote. Previously, Karnataka’s cities of Bidar and Gulbarga were controlled by the BJP.

Of 20 Lok Sabha seats in Kerala, six were in the Malabar area and remained with the India Bloc parties; however, the BJP effected its debut in the history of independent India from Trisoor in the state of Kochi.

One of the four Muslim-factored seats in Maharashtra was returned to the India Bloc by the BJP, while the other two remained with the splinter group Shiva Sena.

Ladak, too, witnessed the BJP losing its seat, which an independent candidate went on to win and who has now aligned with the India Bloc.

On the other hand, the scenario remained unchanged in Jammu and Kashmir, Telegana, Uttarkhand, Lakshadweep, Jharkhand, and Gujarat, even though there were a few seats available in these states with a sizable Muslim population.

To sum up: Lok Sabha election results across various states indicate a significant participation of the Muslim population, ranging from 20% to 60%. Their active involvement played a crucial role in the rise of India Bloc parties, alongside the support from backward classes, dalits, and tribals. These groups appeared deeply concerned about the potential removal of job reservations in the government by the BJP. Meanwhile, Muslims were visibly disturbed by the prevailing Islamophobia, which seemed to be openly supported by the ruling party. It is evident that no political party in India can overlook the significance of the 20% of the population if it aims to secure a substantial majority in the 545 seated Lok Sabha.

A Tale of Two Indias

June 04, 2024 | By Eklavya

The dichotomy in the priorities, target groups, and programmes of the two major national parties for the 2024 Indian General Election could not be starker. This is reflected in sharp relief in the manifestos of both the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress Party. An analysis of both documents shows that the parties’ respective understanding of the Indian condition – and the mitigation strategies each promises to implement for the greater good – is premised on two very different Indias, as it were.

The broad political messaging in the BJP and Congress manifestos is explicit. While the former projects confidence in coming back to power and promises, effectively, more of the same, the Congress, as the challenger, has done some out-of-the-box thinking to try and make a mark among an electorate that has been wary of voting for it at the national level over the past decade.

The BJP presents its focus on infrastructure creation and making India a “product nation” as the stepping stone to the country becoming a developed country or Viksit Bharat by the 100^th anniversary of Independence in 2047. No major new welfare schemes have been announced in the manifesto which includes promises to increase the Minium Support Price (MSP) for farmers, extend the Ayushman Bharat health scheme to senior citizens (over 70 years of age), and enable large-scale manufacturing.

The party seems confident that its personality-centric campaign crafted around Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his “guarantees” will do the trick. Reading between the lines of its manifesto, the BJP also implicitly derides the political culture of freebies or revdi and doubles down on the there’s-no-free-lunch philosophy albeit with a security net for the poor and marginalised sections of society. Apart from a manufacturing and infrastructure push, the BJP manifesto focuses on controlling inflation, ensuring macro stability, and placing a premium on fiscal prudence as it promises to make India the world’s third-largest economy (after the US and China) during its third term if re-elected. But what it doesn’t do, is set a target in the manifesto for what India’s GDP per capita – currently an abysmal US $2,000 – should be as the third-largest economy in nominal GDP terms. Therein lies the rub.

It is this perceived policy gap which elides the actual spending power or money in hand of individual citizens which brings forth the issue of the concentration of wealth in a few hands that the Congress has tried to focus on.

The Congress manifesto doesn’t pull it punches, promising cross-sectoral reservations on the basis of socio-economic/caste criteria, and a wealth redistribution effort. These bold if controversial assurances have the potential to strike a chord among the electorate if pitched right in the election campaign. Despite criticism from the usual suspects of the Congress seemingly intent on taking the country back to its “crony socialist” path, and India being reduced to relying on quotas and cash transfers in lieu of economic growth, there is a vast multitude of Indians for whom these assurances matter deeply. The party has shown courage in going against conventional wisdom and promising to reset economic policy.

Among its traction-inducing promises are the Rs 1 lakh annual cash transfers to the poor; a new employment-linked incentive scheme for corporates to encourage additional hiring; a nationwide socio-economic/caste census and reservations based on its results; raising the 50 per cent cap on reservations for SC, ST, and OBC sections of society; making available easy institutional credit to SCs and STs; a massive increase in health expenditure; legal guarantee for MSP; increasing wages under MGNREGA; introducing an urban employment guarantee programme; and bringing in a law to curb monopolies in media as well as cross-ownership of media by mega corporates. Congress has said it will refer cases of suspected monopolies to the Competition Commission of India and all media organisations will be required to disclose their ownership structures (direct and indirect), as well as cross holdings if any.

Combined with some of the Congress’ forward-looking manifesto promises, these so-called throwback policies may, if propagated sensibly, explained fully, and implemented without bloated bureaucracies indulging in rampant corruption, give Congress a fighting chance in the 2024 poll. Especially, outside of the metros and big cities of the country where economic distress is real and the voice of the marginalised often goes unheard.

आपातकाल : तब और अब

April 23, 2024 | By Ramsharan Joshi

जंग है घोषित इमरजेंसी बनाम अघोषित इमरजेंसी ?

18 वीं लोकसभा के लिए चुनावों का पहला चरण हो चुका है; 62 प्रतिशत से अधिक मतदान के साथ मतदाताओं ने ईवीएम के द्वारा 102 सीटों के भाग्य का फैसला दे दिया है. शेष सीटों के लिए चुनाव प्रक्रिया 1 जून तक ज़ारी रहेगी. चुनावों के शोर के बीच मोदी -भक्त और भाजपा समर्थक अक़्सर इंदिरा गांधी के शासन काल की इमरजेंसी या आपातकाल का तल्ख़ी के साथ याद दिलाने से चूकते नहीं हैं. 25 जून, 24 आनेवाला है. 25 जून 1975 में लगी इमरजेंसी को उस रोज़ आपातकाल के 49 वर्ष पूरे हो जाएंगे. बेशक़, लोकतांत्रिक व्यवस्था में किसी भी दल की इमरजेंसी ‘ नामंज़ूर’ है. 25 जून 1975 से 21 मार्च 1977 के इक्कीस मासी कालखंड को प्रधानमंत्री इंदिरा गांधी की चुनौतीपूर्ण लोकतांत्रिक यात्रा का ‘अंधकारग्रस्त पड़ाव’ ही कहा जायेगा. किसी को इससे इंकार नहीं है.

इस एक वर्ष कम आधी सदी के कालखंड में भारत की लोकतान्त्रिक व्यवस्था और शासन शैलियों में अनेक बदलाव आये हैं. लेकिन, विगत एक दशक के मोदी- शासन शैली ने कई प्रकार के संदेह, आशंकाएं, भय , अनिश्चितता, राज्य के चरित्र में परिवर्तन जैसी संभावनाएं पैदा करदी हैं. क्यों समाज के कतिपय क्षेत्रों में ऐसी आशंका है कि 2024 के आम चुनाव अंतिम है ?; यदि मोदी -नेतृत्व को प्रचंड बहुमत मिलता है तो संविधान में आमूलचूल परिवर्तन हो जायेगा ?; क्या प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र दामोदरदास मोदी भारत को हिन्दू राष्ट्र की घोषणा का तोहफ़ा उनकी मातृ संस्था राष्ट्रीय स्वयं सेवक संघ को उसकी अगले वर्ष जन्म शताब्दी वर्ष के अवसर पर देंगे ? क्या भाजपा के लिए वर्तमान चुनाव ‘ करो या मरो ‘ का अनुष्ठान बन गया है ? क्या मोदी -शाह शासन देश को’ विपक्ष व प्रतिरोध मुक्त भारत’ बना कर रहेंगे ?

भययुक्त आशंकाओं के अलावा बहस इस पर भी है कि क्या भारत में अघोषित इमरजेंसी का माहौल है? क्या देश में बहुसंख्यकवाद पर सवार तानाशाही है; क्या चुनावी अधिनायकवादी सत्ता का शासन है ? क्या मोदी हुकूमत को 21 वीं सदी का फासीवादी संस्करण कहा जाना चाहिए?; क्या अल्पसंख्यक समुदायों में विभिन्न हथकण्डों- नारों से ‘ दोयम दर्ज़ा या सेकंड क्लास सिटीजन’ के भाव भरे जा रहे हैं? क्या मुख्यधारा का मीडिया अघोषित सेंसरशिप का क़ैदी है?; क्या लोकतंत्र का अघोषित पटाक्षेप हो चुका है ? क्या भाजपा या मोदी विरोधियों को राष्ट्र या राज्य द्रोही और गद्दार की नज़र से देखा जा रहा है ? क्या वाक़ई भारत 1975 में लौट रहा है ? ऐसे सवालों और आशंकाओं के बादल देश के सामाजिक -राजनीतिक परिवेश पर छाए हुए हैं।

सबसे पहले इंदिरा- इमरजेंसी की पड़ताल करते हैं. जून, 1975 में इमरजेंसी की घोषणा से पहले देश का वातावरण बेहद आंदोलित था; इंदिरा शासन के ख़िलाफ़ समाजवादी -गांधीवादी नेता जयप्रकाश नारायण उर्फ़ जे.पी. के नेतृत्व में ‘सम्पूर्ण क्रांति’ का बिगुल बज चुका था; मुशहरी आंदोलन, भारत नव निर्माण जैसे आन्दोलनों ने देश के सामाजिक – राजनीतिक तापमान को बहुत बढ़ा दिया था.इससे पहले, जनवरी 1971 के आमचुनावों में शानदार जीत और दिसंबर में पाकिस्तान -विभाजन व बांग्लादेश के जन्म में भारत के निर्णायक रोल ने इंदिरा गांधी को राष्ट्रीय राजनीति के शिखर पर पहुंचाने के साथ साथ अंतराष्ट्रीय मंच का एक महत्वपूर्ण खिलाड़ी के रूप में भी स्थापित कर दिया था. यह वह समय था जब दुनिया ‘दो ध्रुवीय ‘ थी और सोवियत संघ व अमेरिकी शिविरों में बंटी हुई थी. लेकिन, इंदिरा गांधी ने गुटनिरपेक्ष आंदोलन के परचम तले भारत को चमकाये रखा था. ज़ाहिर है, अमेरिकी शिविर बेहद उखड़ा हुआ था. शीत युद्ध का दौर और सी.आई. ए.( अमेरिकी गुप्तचर संस्था) और के. ज़ी. बी. ( रूसी गुप्तचर संस्था) के माध्यम से भी प्रॉक्सी जंग लड़ी जा रही थी. भारत भी इसका अपवाद नहीं था. . देश में ज़बर्दस्त रेल कर्मचारियों की हड़ताल हुई ,विभाजित होने के बावज़ूद नक्सलबाड़ी आंदोलन ने शासक वर्ग के चूलें हिला कर रखी हुई थीं.देश की विभिन्न जेलों में बंद करीब 32 हज़ार राजनीतिककर्मियों का भी मुद्दा उभर रहा था. भ्रष्टाचार का मुद्दा भी केंद्र में आता जा रहा था. इंदिरा जी का ‘ गरीबी हटाओ ‘ का नारा खोखला लगने लगा था. इस राष्ट्रव्यापी, विशेषतः हिंदी प्रदेश, असंतोष की पृष्ठभूमि में 1975 में समाजवादी नेता राजनारायण की एक चुनाव याचिका की सुनवाई में इलाहबाद उच्च न्यायालय ने प्रधानमंत्री गांधी के ख़िलाफ़ फ़ैसला दे दिया था. उत्तरप्रदेश की राय बरैली सीट से निर्वाचित इंदिरा जी का प्रधानमंत्री पद संकटों से घिर गया था.यहां तक कि सर्वोच्च न्यायालय तक यह प्रकरण पहुंच गया था. इसी बीच दिल्ली में आयोजित विपक्षी नेताओं की एक सार्वजनिक सभा में सम्पूर्ण क्रांति के सूत्रधार जयप्रकाश नारायण ने अत्यंत गंभीर व संवेदनशील भाषण दिया था. इंदिरा गांधी से त्यागपत्र की मांग करने के साथ साथ उन्होंने सेना, पुलिस और सरकारी अधिकारियों -कर्मचारियों से भी अपील कर डाली कि वे इंदिरा सरकार के अवैध और अनैतिक आदेशों का पालन न करें. उन्होंने देश के तत्कालीन मुख्य न्यायाधीश ए.एन. रे से भी कहा कि वे इलाहबाद उच्च न्यायालय के फैसले के विरुद्ध इंदिरा गांधी की याचिका को मत सुने. जयप्रकाश जी की इस अपील के बाद तो पारा तक़रीबन अपने शिखर पर था. इस बढ़ते खतरे से निपटने के लिए प्रधानमंत्री गाँधी ने 25 जून को संविधान सम्मत ‘आंतरिक इमरजेंसी’ को लागू कर दिया। उस समय राष्ट्रपति थे फखरुद्दीनअली अहमद। चंद्रशेखर सहित सभी बड़े नेता गिरफ्तार कर लिए गए. जे. पी. भी. मेरी दृष्टि में संपूर्ण क्रांति बिल्कुल भी क्रांति नहीं थी। एक प्रकार से 2012_ 13का भ्रष्टाचार विरोधी अन्ना हज़ारे आंदोलन का मूल रूप था। जे पी आंदोलन से ही राष्ट्रीय राजनीति में संघ और जनसंघ की अस्पृश्यता दूर होने लगी थी। जयप्रकाश जी सरल राजनीतिक प्रकृति के राजनेता थे।उन्होंने संघ परिवार के असली मंसूबों पर शंका नहीं की थी।फलस्वरूप वे जे पी आंदोलन में घुलमिल गए थे। संघ परिवार की विस्तारित भूमिका को अन्ना आंदोलन में देखा जा सकता है।इस भूमिका का क्लाइमैक्स है मोदी सत्ता का उदय ।

अब एक काल्पनिक दृश्य. यदि वर्तमान दौर में जय प्रकाश जी के स्वरों में विपक्ष के शिखर नेता( शरद पवार, खड़गे, ममता बनर्जी, राहुल गांधी, अखिलेश यादव, स्टालिन, सीताराम येचूरी, लालू यादव, फारुख अब्दुल्ला आदि ) प्रधानमंत्री मोदी से इस्तीफ़े की मांग के साथ साथ राष्ट्र के आधारभूत बलों (फोर्सेज) से कहें कि वे सरकार के अवैध व अनैतिक आदेशों का पालन न करें, तो मोदी-शाह सत्ता प्रतिष्ठान की प्रतिक्रिया कैसी रहेगी ? क्या वह सेना, पुलिस और अधिकारीयों से की गई अपील को सहन कर सकेगी? क्या वह उन्हें तुरंत ही जेल की सलाखों के पीछे नहीं डाल देगी ? यह सवाल इसलिए पैदा हो रहा है कि सरकार या मोदी जी की आलोचना को देश-राष्ट्र की आलोचना का पर्याय बनाया जा रहा है. राष्ट्र द्रोह का केस लगा कर गिरफ्तार किया जाता है. जे. पी. की तर्ज़ में सेना और पुलिस को नाफ़रमानी के लिए कहना स्वयं में संगीन मामला है. एक प्रकार से देश की निर्वाचित सरकार व व्यवस्था के ख़िलाफ़ बग़ावत करने का आह्वान जैसा है. इसे कोई भी संविधान सम्मत सरकार सहन कैसे कर सकती है? अगर, मौज़ूदा दौर में ऐसी स्थिति पैदा होती है तो दिल्ली का सत्ता प्रतिष्ठान पल भर के लिए सहन नहीं कर सकेगा.वह विपक्ष को राष्ट्र विरोधी के साथ साथ हिन्दू विरोधी, मुस्लिम व पाकिस्तान परस्त, विदेशी ताक़तों का दलाल जैसे तमगों से जड़ देगा.

जयप्रकाश जी ने अपने भाषण में इंदिरा गांधी के फासीवाद के ख़िलाफ़ खड़े होने की बात कही थी. क्या आज़ का सत्ता तंत्र स्वस्थ लोकतान्त्रिक व उदारवादी है? क्या यह फासीवादी शक्तियों के विरुद्ध खड़ा है ? क्या यह लोकतंत्र के नाम पर समाज का ध्रुवीकरण कर नहीं रहा है ? क्या यह हर विरोधी आवाज़ को धर्म और हिंदुत्व के चश्में से नहीं देख रहा है ? क्या चुनाव के दौर में ई.डी., सी.बी. आई. जैसी सरकारी एजेंसियों का दुरूपयोग नहीं हो

किया जा रहा है? क्या मुख्यमंत्री और मंत्रियों को जेलों में नहीं डाला गया है ? क्या बैंकों में विपक्ष के खातों पर पाबंदी नहीं लगाई है? क्या विभिन्न कारनामों से विपक्ष को अपंग नहीं बना दिया गया है ? क्या चुनाव में ‘लेवल प्लेइंग फील्ड ‘ रह गया है ? क्या विपक्ष के लिए ‘ऊबड़-खाबड़ मैदान ‘ बना नहीं दिया गया है ? यह किस इमरजेंसी से कम है? क्या इंदिरा गांधी की इमरजेंसी में धर्म-मज़हब का इस्तेमाल हुआ था ? क्या 1977 के आम चुनावों में विपक्षी दलों के बैंक खातों पर पाबन्दी लगी थी ? क्या जेल में बंद जॉर्ज फर्नाडीज़ सहित अन्य विपक्षी नेताओं को चुनाव लड़ने से रोका गया था ? क्या उनके यहां इन्कम टैक्स जैसी संस्थाओं के छापे पड़े थे ? 1977 में चुनाव हारने के बाद इंदिरा जी ने शालीनता के साथ अपनी पराजय को स्वीकार किया था. सारांश में, उन्होंने जो कुछ किया, घोषित ढंग से किया था. क्या वर्तमान में ऐसा किया जा रहा है ? आज निवर्तमान मोदी -मंत्रिमंडल में एक भी मुस्लिम मंत्री नहीं है. इतना ही नहीं, एक भी सांसद नहीं है. क्या यह देश के सबसे बड़े अल्पसंख्यक समुदाय के विरुद्ध परोक्ष सामाजिक+सांस्कृतिक + राजनैतिक इमरजेंसी नहीं है ? इंदिरा -इमरजेंसी में ऐसा नहीं था. यदि भाजपा को 303या370सीटें नहीं मिलेगी तो क्या मोदी जी शालीनता के साथ सत्ता छोड़ देंगे? यह सवाल भी उठ रहा है। मोदी जी विनम्रतापूर्वक कुर्सी त्याग नहीं करने वाले हैं।लोगों में ऐसी आशंकाएं हैं।

बेशक, इंदिरा इमरजेंसी ने प्रेस पर सेंसरशिप लगाई गई थी. कुलदीप नैयर जैसे कई वरिष्ठ पत्रकार गिरफ्तार भी हुए थे. इण्डियन एक्सप्रेस पर शिकंजा कैसा था. लेकिन, 26 व 27 जून, 75 को ऐसे भी दैनिक थे जिन्होनें सरकारी पाबंदियों के खिलाफ लिखा था. मुझे याद है, इंदौर से प्रकाशित प्रसिद्ध नई दुनिया के तत्कालीन संपादक राजेंद्र माथुर उर्फ़ रज्जू बाबू ने इमरजेंसी के विरुद्ध सात लेख लिख कर सत्ता तंत्र को हिला दिया था. उन्हें गिरफ्तार नहीं किया गया था . इमरजेंसी के दौरान मैंने स्वयं दिनमान, साप्ताहिक हिन्दुस्तान, लिंक, इकनोमिक पोलिटिकल वीकली में लेख लिखे थे. नई दुनिया में मेरा इंटरव्यू छपा था. मुझे याद नहीं, मेरे लेखों पर रघुवीर सहाय, मनोहर श्याम जोशी, राजेंद्र माथुर जैसे चिंतक-लेखक सम्पादकों ने सेंसरशिप की कैंची चलाई हो! ऐसा भी समय आया था जब मेनस्ट्रीम के सम्पादक निखिल चक्रवर्ती सहित कई सम्पादकों व पत्रकारों ने इमरजेंसी व सेंसरशिप का खुल कर विरोध करना शुरू कर दिया था. संपादकीय स्पेस को खाली छोड़ना शुरू कर दिया था. क्या आज के मोदी -शाह दौर में गोदी मीडिया का कोई स्वामी, सम्पादक, एंकर सामने आ कर खुला विरोध करेगा ? क्या गोदी मीडिया ( टीवी+ प्रिंट ) मोदी जी के भाषण पर कैंची चला सकता है? क्या गोदी मीडिया में वित्त मंत्री के पति व विख्यात अर्थशास्त्री डॉ. प्रभाकर की चेतावनियों पर चर्चा की गई है ? क्या सीए जी (comptroller and auditor general of india) की रिपोर्टों में उजागर प्रकरणों को लेकर गोदी मीडिया में बहस हुई है ? क्या चीन की कारस्तानियों को लेकर चर्चा करवाई गई ? क्या गोदी मीडिया के पत्रकारों ने प्रधानमंत्री से कभी पूछा है कि वे प्रेस वार्ता क्यों नहीं बुलाते हैं ? क्या गोदी मीडिया ने मोदी जी और शाह जी पूछा है कि वे चुनाव आयोग की आचार संहिता का यथावत पालन करते हैं? क्या गोदी मीडिया ने चुनाव आयोग की कार्य शैली पर सवालिया निशान लगाया है ? गोदी मीडिया की यह कार्य शैली क्या दर्शाती है ? क्या यह आज़ाद मीडिया की प्रतीक है ? क्या इसे अघोषित सेंसरशिप नहीं कहा जाना चाहिए ? क्या कभी गोदी मीडिया ने पत्नोन्मुख लोकतंत्र और उभरती अधिनायकवादी प्रवृतियों पर चर्चा आयोजित की है ? प्रायः चैनलों पर भारत व पाकिस्तान और हिन्दू व मुसलमान की लज़ीजदार बहसों को परोस दिया जाता है. मीडिया में ‘उत्तर सत्य मीडिया और उत्तर सत्य राजनीति ‘ की अपसंस्कृति का प्रभुत्व छाया हुआ है। दूसरे शब्दों में, ‘सत्य का असत्य और असत्य का सत्य’ में सुविधानुसार मनभावन रूपांतरण की अपसंस्कृति की सत्ता फैली हुई है.सार तत्व यह है कि मौज़ूदा दौर में घोषित इमरजेंसी या आपातकाल नगण्य प्रतीत होते हैं. जंग में इंदिरा इमरजेंसी परास्त हो चुकी है. तब क्यों न मोदी -शाह दौर की इमरजेंसी के काल खण्ड को घोषित इमरजेंसी से अधिक भयावह और विजेता घोषित किया जाए?