The problem for the BJP is that it is now divided into two broad groups. One comprises the old-timers and the other is made up of the newcomers who came into the party when its fortunes appeared bright. In a way, this second section can be described as fair-weather friends, who are not fully attuned to the Sangh parivar's pro-Hindu weltanschauung.
As a result, they do not seem to understand that the RSS is not a collection of old fogeys but constitutes the focal point round which the other units of the parivar - the BJP, the VHP, the Bajrang Dal, the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad - revolve. Outwardly, these outfits pretend to be autonomous but, inwardly, they are all aware that they cannot take a step in defiance of the RSS.
Inevitably, therefore, whenever the BJP fares poorly in the elections, the newcomers call for it to sever its ties with the RSS without realising that this is a virtual impossibility. It is like asking a child to disown his parents. As Vaidya has pointed out, such a step would mean cutting off the umbilical cord.
Not surprisingly, one of the first to make this demand was Sudheendra Kulkarni, a former Leftist who drifted into the BJP when the going was seemingly good for the party. There are others like him, former Leftists who are now fervent Rightists, especially several journalists who were welcomed into the BJP in the Nineties since the party was short of the English-speaking types and could not reach out, therefore, to the chattering classes.
After Kulkarni, it was Jaswant Singh who wanted clarifications on the term, Hindutva. Singh, too, came into the BJP from the Janata conglomerates, as did Yashwant Sinha and Sushma Swaraj. Of the three, only Swaraj seems to have imbibed the RSS culture fully probably because women are more practical-minded than men. Jaswant Singh, however, faced immediate criticism from the Bajrang Dal's Vinay Katiyar for his observation on Hindutva since it hinted at a mindset which favoured a dilution of the concept.
Jaswant Singh has other grouses, too, but these have more to do with personal ambitions than ideology. He is unhappy, for instance, to be deprived of the opposition leader's position in the Rajya Sabha, which has gone to Arun Jaitley while in the Lok Sabha, it is Swaraj who has become L.K. Advani's deputy. Yashwant Sinha, too, seems to have similar grievances about being overlooked.
But these are typically petty-minded complaints which are made to harass a party leadership in difficult times. They do not reflect the BJP's real problem, which is to be politically successful without compromising on its outlook. Till its defeat in 2004, the party had thought that it had managed to perform this tricky operation by putting the three key items of its Hindutva agenda - construction of the Ayodhya temple, the scrapping of Article 370 and introducing a uniform civil code - on the back burner.
But, now, its second successive defeat in a general election has made it realise that the ruse is no longer working. The BJP is still seen as a rabidly communal party, whose real views are expressed by Varun Gandhi, Yogi Adityanath and Ashok Sahu (of Kandhamal) and not by its official spokesmen who are wheeled out by the party to face the TV cameras. The same perception of the party's anti-minority stance is also conveyed by the burning of churches in Orissa and its patriarchal world-view by the attacks on women in Mangalore.
To those who have not been reared in the shakhas, it is the RSS which is to blame for the incendiary speeches of Varun Gandhi and the antics of Sri Ram Sene. Hence, Kulkarni's advice to the RSS to consider why its views are not acceptable to large sections of the Hindus. To the faithful, however, whether it is Advani or Rajnath Singh or Murli Manohar Joshi, such a comment is nothing short of heresy. And the since old-timers outnumber the newcomers by a large margin, it is a safe bet that the latter are fighting a losing battle.
There is no question of the BJP making any concession to them on the question of abandoning its majoritarian policies, which are explained in the phrase, one nation, one people, one culture, which explains the concept of Hindutva. Needless to say, one culture means Hindu culture, which negates the pluralism of Indian society. This steadfastness of the Advanis and the Murli Manohar Joshis is not only due to the fact that they have known no world outside the RSS-centric one, but also because they are convinced of the correctness of their pro-Hindu position. Just as the communists believe that “scientific socialism†will be the final victor, the RSS and its acolytes in the BJP are sure that the Hindu nationalists will have the last laugh. Their detractors in the party believe, however, that such stubbornness is a recipe for disaster. (IPA Service)
Indian Politics
BJP's deepening dilemma
How to survive without giving up Hindutva
Amulya Ganguli - 16-06-2009 09:16 GMT-0000
The taunting advice by the RSS ideologue, M.G. Vaidya, to the BJP that it could dump Hindutva to win back its “secular†allies shows two things. One is that the saffronites are not devoid of humour. The other is that the RSS is confident that it has got the BJP in its iron grip. Had this not been so, Vaidya would not have mocked it in such a sneering fashion.