The danger of BJP

BJP’s dangerous approach !!

 

The BJP believes that (a) Muslims are not welcome in India since this is a Hindu nation (2 nation theory) and (b) Historical wrongs have to be "righted".  BJP says at http://www.bjp.org/history/history.html "Historic wrongs had to be righted, however, symbolically, for a lasting solution of the Hindu-Muslim problem" (re: the Babri issue etc.).

 

RSS said in Organiser of January 14, 1990 that it "was not a case about the title of a place but of undoing a historical wrong and for that matter no court could decide it."

 

LPI says “LET US HAVE PEACE!!” - vote out BJP!!

 

There is not the slightest RELIGIOUS basis or BJP to go about "righting" the 'wrongs' of history. Bigotry - yes, but not Hindu religious basis.

 

In any case, do two wrongs make a right? And if one has to ‘right the wrongs’, why only go back 400 years, why not 4,000 years, why not 40,000 years? Why don’t we all go back to Africa? Why don’t we attack Britain and kill all the British? Why don’t we, each of us, take out a sword and kill everyone whose ancestors have in any way caused injury, real or perceived, to our ancestors? There is a thing known as “law of limitations” - but even beyond that, there's a thing known as common sense, and even beyond that, is a thing known as humanity. Has BJP lost sense of its humanity and common sense?  That they are not Hindus is quite clear, but are they not even human beings?  Do they not understand the elements of shared living on a common planet?

Babri Masjid 

Facts on Babri Masjid and subsequent riots

 

Would Mr. Advani explain why he led the movement for the destruction of Babri Masjid? How can he protect India as Home Minister when he is such an un-Hindu fanatic?

  

Role of Hindu Mahasabha, Jan Sangh, and BJP in stoking communalism in India

The role of  Britain, Muslim League, etc., in fomenting communism in India is somewhat widely commented upon in history books. But there is need to mention that there were genuine fears about “Hindu majoritarianism” that were aroused by people pretending to be ‘representing’ Hindus (striking examples of this fear are available at p.248-252, Mother India by Katherine Mayo).

 

If the demotion of the Babri Masjid is an illustration of what these pretend-Hindus had in store for Muslims, apart from the brutal deployment of their Police might during riots to allow significant damage to Muslims, then one is afraid, the Muslims were probably right in demanding a separate nation, in the very end.

 

While the Muslim League spoke between 1906 and 1940 in favour of many ways of protecting Muslims - a minorty, it did not speak of two nations till 1940.  Politically, it was the Hindu Mahasabha that FIRST spoke of the two nation theory during its annual session of 1939.

 

Between 1906 and 1940 an increase in communal tension was taking place because of political jostling. The British needed a counterweight of the Congress, which they tried to promote through other organisations, including the Muslim League (founded: 1906) and the Hindu Mahasabha (founded: 1917).  In December, 1930 Sir Muhammad Iqbal, while he was President of the Muslim League session, suggested that there should be the amalgamation of what is currently Pakistan and because at that time to a combination of four states, into one. That was NOT the same thing as a two nation theory.

 

The two nation theory first into existence in January 1933 when Rahmat Ali, a student in England, proposed by independence of that proposed state (that did not include the current Bangladesh. Events till 1937 showed that Muslims at large in India did not at all believe in this concept. Jinnah had not fully formulated this view by then, in any case. 

 

Political relations between the Muslim League and the Congress became strained in 1937, as "Congress proceeded to read the Muslim politicians of the United Provinces, the province where historically Muslims had considered themselves the natural aristocracy, a lesson in the power of elected majorities" (Page 225 of Hardy: The Muslims of British India, 1972).  While the Muslim Leaguers, who had won a very few seats, wanted to participate in the coalition government, the Congress insisted that the Muslim Leaguers must cease to function as a separate group and that the Muslim League Parliamentary Board must be dissolved.  This was the last attempt made by the Muslim League to liaise with the Congress.  Indeed, Jinnah repeatedly cites this event as the breakup point (it is worth remembering that Jinnah started his political career with the Congress).

 

In the 1939 annual session of the Hindu Mahasabha in Calcutta, V.D. Savarkar stated, "In India we Hindus are marked out as an abiding Nation by ourselves... Let us bravely face the unpleasant facts. There are two nations in India, the Hindus and the Muslims"  (Page 185 of Nichols: Verdict on India, 1944). Politically therefore, it was the Hindus who first raised the concept of two nations in their national platform; the Muslims did so only in the subsequent year, 1940.  It takes two hands to clap, and Rahmat Ali's concept would have definitely gone nowhere had there not been strong support for from the other side, the Hindu fanatics. 

 

In my current opinion, it was not merely the events of 1906-1937 that led to a breakdown in relations between the two major religious groups in India; it was the thick headedness of the Congress in 1937 and the hatred displayed by the Hindu Mahasabha in 1939 that led to the subsequent and huge bloodshed of the 20th century in India - the partition, the violence in Punjab and Kashmir, and now the continuing bloodshed as Muslim fanaticism retaliates against Hindu fanaticism within India itself. The Muslim league had become effectively impotent many times in its few decades of existence, as the Congress leaders engaged with Muslims, particularly in the Khilafat movement. Engaging with the minorities is crucial in easing their fears.

 

BJP as the offshoot of the Mahasabha

One of the most damaging things of the last century was the creation of the Hindu Mahasabha, whose only ideology was its religious identity.  This was equally - if not more, harmful than the Muslim League, given that it represented a majority religion, and needed to be much more understanding of the minorities. 

 

BJS was the successor to Hindu Mahasabha which got into trouble with the assassination of Gandhi and was dissolved. Further, BJP is the successor of BJS.  The offshoots of the Mahasabha are now ruling India, further rending apart the beautiful and integrated fabric of India.  The danger of the BJP continuing to promote RSS, VHP and the Bajrang Dal needs to be strongly opposed.

 

This web site is held by Sanjeev Sabhlok in trust. It will be transferred to the National Liberal Party of India when it is formed.

This is not a registered political party of India, nor it close to becoming a party.

It is the Ideal party promoted by the India Policy Institute in 1998-2000. It awaits your energy.