HVK Archives: The secular contract - an editorial
The secular contract - an editorial - The Statesman - Editorial
Posted By ashok (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
25 June 1996
Title : THE SECULAR CONTRACT
Publication : The Statesman - Editorial
Date : June 25, 1996
MR V. N. Gadgil is right in trying to work up a debate
over secularism. Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee called for it
in his speech in the Lok Sabha a few days ago. Such a
debate is necessary to clear some pseudo-liberal cobwebs
in which the thinking of our political intelligentsia is
enmeshed. The idea of secularism is grossly
misunderstood and mistreated by the ruling establishment.
In general, secularism has been interpreted to mean
tolerance for the religious practices of all faiths and
allowing them to interfere, to some extent, with the
principles governing the functioning of a modern nation-
state. This is not what secularism is all about. To put
it bluntly, a secular state is an atheist state, a state
that considers the existence of God and religious faith
to be wholly irrelevant to its purposes and objectives A
secular state deals with individuals or, in a poor,
developing society, with socioeconomic categories, with
classes. But it does not deal with religious communities
as such, except to affirm the supremacy of the State over
all religious institutions. The affirmation in order to
be effective has to be even-handed.
The BJP is not entirely right when it accuses the
Congress of appeasing the Muslims. The Congress has
appeased all religions, Hinduism included, especially
under Indira and Rajiv Gandhi, although it is true that,
till the demolition of the Babari Masjid, some of the
more spectacular surrenders on secular ideals - the Shah
Bano case, the banning of The Satanic Verses - were in
favour of the Muslims. The BJP is also being
disingenuous when, speaking of a uniform civil code, it
focuses exclusively on marriage laws. What about the
Hindu undivided family which is recognized as a vastly
attractive commercial entity? What about the proposed
ban on cow slaughter which, if ever adopted, will become
the first piece of legislation to be explicitly based on
religious considerations? Perhaps, what the BJP resents
is the fact that the Congress has always treated Muslim
religious identity as a sensitive issue. This was not a
conscious ideological stance as much as a straightforward
electoral necessity. What the BJP would like to do is to
compensate for this by treating Hindu religious identity
as a sensitive issue as well and appeasing the atavistic
aspirations of the Hindu majority. Mr Gadgil is also
right when he says that caste politics is a threat to the
modern nation-state, since it shifts the focus of the
struggle against backwardness away from the attainment of
material prosperity to the removal of a symbolic stigma
through primarily symbolic means (reservations will not
lift the mass of the backwards out of poverty).
Although, it must be said that having been denied, all
these years, the wherewithal to do just that, a certain
amount of militancy among them is to be expected. It is
difficult to resume the two issues of caste and religion
together. The first step, however, would be to make a
bold declaration to the effect that for the State, the
individual is above all a citizen. All other identities
and affiliations are secondary. What the State demands
of the individual is that he should give of his best and
the State, for its part, undertakes to create the
conditions in which he can do so. That Is the secular
contract.
Back
Top
|
