HVK Archives: Politics of ecular_reductionism
Politics of ecular_reductionism - The Economic Times
Diwakar
()
May 10, 1998
Title: Politics of ecular reductionism
Author: Diwakar
Publication: The Economic Times
Date: May 10, 1998
Of the various qualities that have become the hallmark of our
politicians, candour is certainly not one. They have perfected
the art of doublespeak. Yet, when in distress or anger they
cannot keep from blurting out the truth, even if unwittingly.
Last week, senior leaders of UF displayed their vulnerability to
this human weakness while addressing a rally at Hyderabad when
they talked about their role in promoting N Chandrababu Naidu.
'Sar pe chadha kar rakha tha' (we pampered him) CPI leader, A B
Bardhan, is reported to have rued.
The bitterness of the UF leaders is easy to understand in the
light of the painstaking efforts that they and the pro-UF
intelligentsia made projecting TDP leader as the dynamic
architect of 'secular' unity.
An argument that Naidu got more than what was his due during the
UF dispensation may not sound convincing if one considers that
Naidu had as good a claim as Deve Gowda or I K Gujral to be the
PM. It is also a fact that the unravelling of the UF would have
started much earlier if Naidu had also staked his claim.
It is a different matter that the leaders of the UF are loath to
concede this now. This, however, is hardly surprising. What is
important is that the UF's anger against Naidu helps expose fully
the political expediency that goes on in the name of anti-BJPism.
Bardhan's complaint against Naidu amounts to a confession of
this.
Bardhan along with Surjeet and other Leftists are the architects
of the tradition that seeks to elevate to an ideological crusade
what is in reality only a power struggle between the BJP and its
rivals. And they are trying to make it appear that while Naidu is
guilty of opportunism, their offensive against their erstwhile
ally is purely ideological.
That they have a weak case is best demonstrated by how they put
up with various measures that Naidu took while still being in
their august company. The AP chief minister slashed subsidy for
foodgrains. He hiked the power tariff, too. Opinions vary about
the desirability of his actions. For the Left, however, even a
modest increase in power tariff is an anti-people measure. As for
the hike in the price of subsidised grain, it remains committed
to oppose it irrespective of merits.
It hauled the Congress (I) over the coals for far lesser
rimes'. Its rhetoric against the BJP government over the
Ordinance for setting up the Central Electricity Regulatory
Commission demonstrates its determination to oppose even a token
move to increase the power tariff.
It, however, had little compunction in supporting Naidu when he
took the very same 'anti-people' measures. It considers the World
Bank and the IMF as evil institutions. But it used to feel proud
in being an ally of Naidu even while the latter unabashedly
sought funds and advice from the multilateral institutions.
That is not all. So far as that all important consideration of
class character goes, there is little to distinguish the TDP from
the Congress(I). In the Lok Sabha election, the TDP fully matched
the Congress (I) in fielding industrialists and moneybags as its
candidates. But that did not affect the zeal of the Left to
place the services of its class warriors at the disposal of Naidu
in Andhra Pradesh.
Naidu invited the Red wrath only when he refused to toe the line
of the Left and others in the UF to keep the BJP out of power at
all costs. The coming days are certain to see the Left stepping
up its .offensive against the TDP. What is also possible is the
discovery by the Left of tile nti-people facet of the Naidu
government. An agitation against, say hike in power tariff, also
becomes a strong possibility in the changed context.
The reappraisal of Naidu has served to put focus once again on
the politics of ecular reductionism which seeks to subordinate
every other issue, be it good governance, quality of life, or
security of the country, to anti-BJPism.
There is no other reason for the Left to have winked at the 'anti-
people policies of Naidu as long as he was willing to toe their
anti-BJP line. Or, why it is being loudly suggested that the Left
will have no problem in playing Nelson to Naidu once again if the
latter puts the BJP on top of its hate list.
The offensive against Naidu also smacks of the political high-
handedness that demands that one must abuse the BJP, irrespective
of the action of its merits and follow those who do that in order
to be certified as a practitioner of 'secular' politics.
Naidu is, by no means, the only one who is at the receiving end
of this type of politics. In the last session of Parliament,
Mamata Banerjee had narrated the harrowing experience that she
had had when she decided to align with the BJP to defeat her
enemy No 1, the CPI(M).
She claimed that the Leftists sought to deny her the support of
Muslims by accusing her --- a charge that no one from the CPI(M)
refuted -- of burning the Quran. The Left may have been satisfied
with painting Naidu and Banerjee into accessories of the
ommunal' BJP. But what they do not realise is that such a brand
of politics has so far proved to be only counter-productive.
It shows them up as inconsistent. Few will dispute that the
Left's refusal to offer the leadership of the non-BJP coalition
to the Congress(I) did not help the BJP any less than Naidu's
decision to align with the saffron outfit. Left had its
compulsions. Which is also why Surjeet has to indulge in the
charade of disproving Mulayam Singh Yadav's open advocacy for
support to a Congress(I)-led government. But Naidu and Mamata
have their compulsions, too.
It is such inconsistency, combined with incessant anti-BJP
rhetoric and invocation of the secular-communal divide that has
helped the BJP win new allies and carve out areas of
respectability. As Mamata Banerjee said in Parliament, but for
the Left's attack she would have never aligned with the BJP.
Back
Top
|
