Publish with Us

Follow Penguin

Follow Penguinsters

Follow Penguin Swadesh

India on the Move – Protests, Politics, and a Nation in Transition

When protests erupted at JNU, students found themselves labeled as “anti-nationals,” sparking a nationwide debate on patriotism. Slogans like Bharat Mata Ki Jai and Jai Shri Ram transformed from symbols of pride into charged political expressions. This book explores these events, from JNU to the farmers’ protests, unearthing the deepening divides over what it means to be truly patriotic.

Read the excerpt below for a powerful glimpse into India’s evolving identity.

Front Cover India on the Move
India on the Move || Marya Shakil, Narendra Nath Mishra

 

Time: Sometime in 2019

Place: A WhatsApp group of friends

 

Adnan: Not sure how all of you will take my comments but the political situation really worries me. Over the last five years the BJP has polarized votes to such an extent that political parties are shying away from giving tickets to Muslim candidates. I mean they feel just by doing it, it will cost them the Hindu vote bank.

 

Ahmed: You are right, the Congress, in particular, has reduced the number of tickets to Muslims due to fear that it will backfire electorally. No one is really willing to confront the BJP on its practice of exclusion of Muslims. They are afraid of being branded pro-Muslim, and therefore anti-Hindu.

 

Mohammad Sajjad: Truly. I believe this whole concept of Hindu majoritarianism is aimed at making India’s Muslims electorally irrelevant.

 

Ahmed: I think the fault also lay in the fact that the Congress looked at Muslims only as a ‘vote bank’ and did little to promote leadership within the community.

 

Mohammad Ashfaq: I don’t even think it is just a Muslim issue. I think the Congress, for one, needs to rethink its politics not just for the sake of Muslims but to salvage its own image as a party that is committed to the constitutional principles of secularism and pluralism.

 

Hasan: Whatever it is, I hope good sense prevails sooner rather than later and as a country we do not lose our pluralistic ethos.

 

* * *

 

Hobson’s Choice

‘Some sections of society have an impression that the party is inclined to certain communities or organisations. Congress policy is equal justice to everyone. But people have doubts whether that policy is being implemented or not. This doubt is created by the party’s proximity towards minority communities,’ A.K. Antony, veteran Congress leader, said.

 

After the Congress Party faced a resounding defeat in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, being relegated to as low as forty-four seats, a review committee set up under A.K. Antony’s leadership found minority appeasement to be one of the major causes of its electoral loss. It was found that a significant section of Hindus felt that most non-BJP parties overlooked their interests and focused mainly on minorities. It didn’t help that the BJP seemed to be advancing the notion that the Congress Party and the other so-called secular parties engaged in religious pandering to secure their Muslim vote bank in the garb of secularism.

 

Post the 2014 elections, it stands to reason then that there was little talk of secularism by parties as there was the potent fear of being labelled ‘minority appeasers’. From the A.K. Antony report to the more recent Raipur Plenary of the Congress Party (the 85th plenary session of the Congress that concluded in Raipur in Chhattisgarh outlined a strategy for the 2024 Lok Sabha election) ‘how to remove the anti-Hindu tag’ has been a key focus area within the Congress. The obvious solution was to pivot to brandish their own Hindu credentials to blunt the BJP’s appeal. In the words of political activist Yogendra Yadav, ‘Secular politics faced a Hobson’s choice: it could take a “hard” line and face electoral marginalization. Or it could go for “soft Hindutva” and betray its cause.’

 

Whether it meant betraying their cause or not, most opposition parties chose the latter. While it may seem ironic that the cure for the BJP’s marginalization of the Muslims was to make the Congress more Hindu, the Congress Party’s manifesto in Madhya Pradesh in 2018 included setting up gaushalas, or cow shelters, in each of the state’s 23,000 panchayats; it also committed itself to developing the Ram Van Gaman Path, or the route that was taken by Lord Rama on his way to exile that was widely revered by Hindus.

 

Despite these sporadic efforts, the 2019 Lok Sabha polls turned out to be an encore for the BJP, with it garnering the highest-ever national vote share. According to Lokniti-CSDS’ post-poll survey for the 2019 elections, the BJP and its allies managed to secure close to 52 per cent of the Hindu votes all over India, the highest consolidation of Hindu votes nationally in three decades. Intriguingly, the oath-taking ceremony for members of Parliament to the seventeenth Lok Sabha was drowned in shouts of ‘Jai Shri Ram’; the chant particularly gaining decibels during the oath-taking of specific members of the Opposition.

 

***

 

Get your copy of India on the Move by Marya Shakil, Narendra Nath Mishra on Amazon or wherever books are sold.

 

The Untold Vajpayee: An Excerpt

Something Is Afoot

15 May 1996. A man in his seventies alighted from an Ambassador car, paused to steel himself against a spasm of vertigo, wiped his broad forehead in the sweltering heat of summertime Delhi with a handkerchief, and began walking towards the office of the President of India.
Raisina Hill, which houses the stately, imposing offices of the federal government, simmered in the sun. For want of shade, even the pigeons had receded into roof voids. The old man’s baggy dhoti didn’t conceal his slightly faltering gait, and though he was panting mildly, his face had the relaxed composure of a man just about to break into laughter, his eyes half closed. Affecting restraint, the clean-shaven man with oiled grey hair muttered to his companion in a soft, conspiratorial tone that was quite uncharacteristic of his oratorical self: ‘Bhai, maamla gadbad hai (something is afoot).’
Atal Bihari Vajpayee was fond of such Orwellian doublespeak, which very often left people perplexed and scurrying to decipher the meaning. Since he knew through experience that no such effort made any good sense, his son-in-law, Ranjan Bhattacharya— Vajpayee’s companion on this hot May afternoon—didn’t bother to inquire further. He preferred to wait and see.
Vajpayee and his humble entourage had left his Raisina Road home just after lunch to meet President Shankar Dayal Sharma, who had invited him to discuss the formalities of forming the next government. The just-concluded national elections had thrown up a fractured verdict with no party in a position to create a government on its own or with its prepoll allies. The Hindu right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Vajpayee, had emerged as the single biggest constituent in the 543-member Lok Sabha, or Lower House of the Indian Parliament, winning 161 seats. In the run-up to the polls, the BJP had said that it wouldn’t stake any claim to form the government unless it had 220–225 seats in the Lok Sabha. But now, it had a new agenda: to keep the Third Front, a loose term for a grouping of non-BJP, nonCongress parties, out.
The Congress party, the incumbent that had ruled India for several decades, had won only 140 seats and the rest of the seats were divided among a constellation of political outfits, several of which saw the BJP as a pariah. This was why Vajpayee had no inkling of the responsibility that would befall him when he drove to the sprawling Rashtrapati Bhavan, home to the viceroys in the days of the British Raj. The idea was to offer a perfunctory gesture of claiming to form the next government. The BJP was not exactly confident of getting the numbers to ensure a simple majority in the Lok Sabha, 272 seats, with the help of non-Congress, non-Left parties. Still, there was a flicker of hope that in politics, there was always a way to turn adversities into advantages. The BJP, for its part, was ready to reelect Congressman Shivraj Patil as the Speaker if the Congress agreed to abstain from a trust vote of Vajpayee’s government. It also didn’t expect various allies to come together—as they would soon, to form what later came to be known as the United Front (UF) government.
Vajpayee’s car was driven by Majeed, who has been the BJP heavyweight’s chauffeur for a while. Also in the car was a peon of Vajpayee’s. Ranjan Bhattacharya, still an unfamiliar name in Delhi’s power circles, had begun showing signs that he would be the seventy-two-year-old politician’s eyes and ears in the years to come. Vajpayee trusted him, but still called the thirteen-year-long husband of his adopted daughter, Namita (also known as ‘Gunnu’),  ‘Bengali babu’ or ‘Mukherjee bhai’. The BJP veteran was terrible with remembering people’s names, unless they were his buddies from his younger days. He even called his daughter ‘Namrita’ at times and had to be reminded her name was ‘Namita’. But neither Gunnu nor Ranjan minded.
Vajpayee returned less than half an hour later after his meeting with Sharma with a file in his hand. He stayed silent for several minutes. Then he told Bhattacharya that he was carrying a letter from the President requesting him to take the oath of office as the next prime minister of India. Sharma, who was fond of Vajpayee, had even specified the time of the swearing-in, after consulting priests for the auspicious moment. Vajpayee had sensed that his visit was more than just a ceremonial one from the reception he got as soon as he arrived at the presidential palace. He guessed that ‘something was afoot’ and the reverence on display at the gates was confirmation that the President was on his side.
From the Rashtrapati Bhavan, Vajpayee drove back to announce the presidential nod to his party and the public. What followed was disbelief among rival politicians who were busy cobbling a post-poll alliance to secure a simple majority in the House. The walls along the corridors of power clamoured with whispers of shock and gossip.
The next day, Vajpayee became the tenth prime minister of India, a watershed moment for his party, which had the ignominy of winning a mere two seats in the Lok Sabha twelve years earlier. Back then, Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had poked fun at the BJP members in the Lok Sabha using the famous family planning slogan of the time: ‘Hum Do, Humare Do (We Two, Our Two).’ Pundits would later attribute the BJP’s 1996 victory partly to the soaring popularity of its prime ministerial candidate, Vajpayee.
Hoping to attract support from other parties, Vajpayee made a speech to the nation, outlining the BJP’s priorities. He argued that inviting the party that had the maximum number of seats to create the next government was the most constitutionally correct decision. He also stressed that the post-election camaraderie between several parties in the Opposition had a single-point agenda: to stop the BJP at any cost.
His speech was powerfully evocative and was meant to establish his credentials as a level-headed leader of the country, someone who was a breakaway from the usual mould of Hindu nationalist BJP leaders, someone who was more secular in his thinking:
India is an ancient civilisation. It has always had different sects and religious practices. We do not limit ourselves to one God or one Prophet or a single book. We are a multi-religious country, and we believe in the equality of all religious faiths. It is because of this that we have never had any tension, leave alone a violent struggle, on the correct path to achieve a realisation of God. ‘Sarva panth samabhav’, or equal respect to all faiths, is part of our lives. India never was, and never will be, a theocratic state . . . what happened in Ayodhya on 6th December 1992 was not the result of any pre-planned conspiracy. If problems related with religion are not resolved for long periods of time, then the result is what happened at Ayodhya . . . It is hardly necessary to recall that immediately after the advent of Islam in West Asia, the first mosque was built in Kerala, then ruled by a Hindu Raja. In like manner, soon after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the first Church was established in India. These manifestations of different faiths are living symbols of our secular traditions. We will maintain these traditions.
The reactions to his speech in the media were largely sympathetic. An editorial in the Indian Express soon after suggested that ‘Vajpayee appears to have successfully diluted BJP’s untouchability among the people, even if he has not been able to translate that mood for the political classes’. It also added, ‘Even if he loses the battle, he may end up winning the war.’
Vajpayee’s speeches in the last week of May, delivered on the floor of the Lok Sabha during the trust vote on his government, were even more riveting. In his opening note, he recalled how he used to sit in the opposition benches when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was prime minister (he entered Parliament for the first time in the second Lok Sabha in 1957) and how his party (earlier called the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, or BJS) had grown in strength and popularity to become the biggest constituent in the House while the Congress had diminished in electoral prowess over the years. Extolling the transformation under way in the political dynamics of the country, he said he was glad that winds of change were sweeping across the country.

***

51a-xbnozll-_sx311_bo1204203200_

Thoroughly researched, supported by hard facts and accompanied by inside stories and anecdotes, insightful interviews and archival photographs, The Untold Vajpayee will open a window to the life and times of a poet-politician.

error: Content is protected !!