और अपने लिये एक नयी जनता चुन लें

अंधड़ का मुकाबला कीजिये… ये रात खुद जनेगी सितारे नए-नए

पलाश विश्वास

माफ कीजिये मेरे मित्रों, भारत और पूरी तीसरी दुनिया के देशों में हूबहू ऐसा ही हो रहा है। सत्ता वर्ग अपने हितों के मुताबिक जनता चुन रही है और फालतू जनता का सफाया कर रही है।

हमने अमेरिकी खुफिया निगरानी तंत्र के सामंजस्य में आंतरिक सुरक्षा और प्रतिरक्षा पर बार-बार लिखा है और हमारे सारे साथी इस बात को बार-बार लिखते रहे हैं कि कैसे राष्ट्र का सैन्यीकरण हो रहा है और धर्मोन्मादी कारपोरेट सैन्य राष्ट्र ने किस तरह अपने ही नागरिकों के विरुद्ध युद्ध छेड़ रखा है।

क्रयशक्ति संपन्न कथित मुख्यधारा के भारत को अस्पृश्य वध्य इस भारत के महाभारत के बारे में कुछ भी सूचना नहीं होती।

जब हममें से कुछ लोग कश्मीर, मणिपुर समेत संपूर्ण पूर्वोत्तर और आदिवासी भूगोल में नरसंहार संस्कृति के विरुद्ध आवाज बुलंद करते हैं, तो उनके खिलाफ राष्ट्रद्रोह का अभियोग चस्पां हो जाता है।

जिस देश में इरोम शर्मिला के अनंत अनशन से नागिक बेचैनी नहीं है, वहाँ निर्वाचन प्रहसन के सिवाय क्या है, हमारी समझ से बाहर है।

पूरे भारत को गुजरात बना देने का जो फासीवादी विकास का विकल्प जनादेश बनाया जा रहा है, उसकी परिणति मानवाधिकार हनन ही नहीं, वधस्थल के भूगोल के विस्तार की परिकल्पना है।

सबसे बड़ी दिक्कत है कि हिंदू हो या अहिंदू, भारत दरअसल भयंकर अंधविश्वासी कर्मकांड में रात दिन निष्णात हैं। जो जाति व्यवस्था के आधीन हैं, वे भ्रूण हत्या के अभ्यस्त हैं तो जाति व्यवस्था के बाहर या तो निरंकुश फतवाबाजी है या फिर डायनहत्या की निरंतर रस्में।

हम जो अपने को भारत का नागरिक कहते हैं, वे दरअसल निष्क्रिय वोटर के सिवाय कुछ भी नहीं हैं। वोट डालने के अलावा इस लोकतंत्र में हमारी कोई राजनीतिक भूमिका है ही नहीं। हमारे फैसले हम खुद करने के अभ्यस्त नहीं हैं।

मीडिया, सोशल मीडिया की लहरों से परे अंतिम सच तो यह है कि लहर वहर कुछ होता ही नहीं है। सिर्फ पहचान होती है। पहचान अस्मिता की होती है।

जाति, धर्म, भाषा और क्षेत्र के आधार पर लोग हमारे प्रतिनिधित्व का फैसला कर देते हैं। जो फैसला करने वाले लोग हैं, वे सत्ता वर्ग के होते हैं।

जो चुने जाते हैं, वे सत्ता वर्ग की गूंगी कठपुतलियां हैं।

सत्ता वर्ग के लोग अपनी अपनी सेहत के मुताबिक हवा और मौसम रचते हैं, हम उसी हवा और मौसम के मुताबिक जीना सीखते हैं।

इस पूरी लोकतांत्रिक प्रक्रिया में हमारी कोई भूमिका नहीं है।

नरेंद्र मोदी या मोदी सर्वभूतेषु राष्ट्ररुपेण संस्थिते हैं, लेकिन अंततः वह ओबीसी हैं और चाय वाला भी। अगर वह नमोमयभारत के ईश्वर हैं और हर हर महादेव परिवर्ते हर हर मोदी है, घर घर मोदी है, तो हम उसे ओबीसी और चायवाला साबित क्यों कर रहे हैं। क्या भारत का प्रधानमंत्रित्व की भूमिका ओबीसी सीमाबद्ध है या फिर प्रधानमंत्री बनकर समस्त भारतवासियों को चाय परोसेंगे नरेंद्र मोदी।

हमने बार-बार लिखा है कि राजनीति पहले रही होगी धर्मोन्मादी और राजनीति अब भी धर्मोन्मादी ही रहेगी। लेकिन राजनीति का कारपोरेटीकरण, राजनीति का एनजीओकरण हो गया है। राजनीति अब बिजनेस मैनेजमेंट है तो सूचना प्राद्योगिकी भी। राजनेता अब विज्ञापनी मॉडल हैं। विज्ञापनी मॉडल भी राजनेता हैं।

तो यह सीधे तौर पर मुक्त बाजार में मार्केटिंग है। मोदी बाकायदा एक कमोडिटी है और उसकी रंगबिरंगी पैकेजिंग वोर्नविटा ग्रोथ किंवदंती या फेयरनेस इंडस्ट्री के काला रंग को गोरा बनाने के चमत्कार बतौर प्रस्तुत की जा रही है।नारे नारे नहीं हैं। नारे माइनस कार्यक्रम है। नारे बिन विचारधारा है।नारे दृष्टिविहीन है। नारे अब विज्ञापनी जिंगल है। जिन्हें लोग याद रख सकें।नारे आक्रामक मार्केटिंग है, मार्केटिंग ऐम्बुस है। खरीददार को चकाचौंध कर दो और बकरा को झटके से बेगरदन करदो। जो विरोध में बोलें, उसे एक बालिश्त छोटा कर दो।

फासीवाद का भी कायाकल्प हो गया है।मोहिनीरुपेण फासीवाद के जलवे से हैलन के पुराने जलवे के धुंधलाये ईस्टमैनकालर समय जीने लगे हैं हम।

मसलन जैसा कि हमारे चुस्त युवा पत्रकार अभिषेक श्रीवास्तव ने लिखा हैः

Forward Press का ताज़ा चुनाव विशेषांक देखने लायक है। मालिक समेत प्रेमकुमार मणि और एचएल दुसाध जैसे बहुजन बुद्धिजीवियों को इस बात की जबरदस्‍त चिंता है कि बहुजन किसे वोट देगा। इसी चिंता में पत्रिका इस बार रामविलास पासवान, अठावले और उदित राज की प्रवक्‍ता बनकर अपने पाठकों को बड़ी महीनी से समझा रही है कि उन्‍होंने भाजपा का दामन क्‍यों थामा। जितनी बार मोदी ने खुद को पिछड़ा नहीं बताया होगा, उससे कहीं ज्‍यादा बार इस अंक में मोदी को अलग-अलग बहानों से पिछड़ा बताया गया है। इस अंक की उपलब्धि एचएल दुसाध के लेख की ये आखिरी पंक्तियां हैं, ध्‍यान दीजिएगा:

"चूंकि डायवर्सिटी ही आज बहुजन समाज की असल मांग है, इसलिये एनडीए यदि खुलकर डायवर्सिटी की बात अपने घोषणापत्र में शामिल करता है तो बहुजन बुद्धिजीवी भाजपा से नए-नए जुड़़े बहुजन नेताओं के समर्थन में भी सामने आ सकते हैं। यदि ऐसा नहीं होता है तो हम इन नेताओं की राह में कांटे बिछाने में अपनी सर्वशक्ति लगा देंगे।"

इसका मतलब यह, कि भाजपा/संघ अब बहुजनों के लिये घोषित तौर पर non-negotiable नहीं रहे। सौदा हो सकता है। यानी बहुजन अब भाजपा/संघ/एनडीए के लिये दबाव समूह का काम करेंगे। बहुत बढ़िया।

इस पर मंतव्य निष्प्रयोजनीय है। अंबेडकरी आंदोलन तो गोल्डन ग्लोब में समाहित है, समाजवादी विचारधारा विशुद्ध जातिवाद के बीजगणित में समाहित है तो वामपंथ संसदीय संशोधनवाद में निष्णात। गांधीवाद सिरे से लापता।

इस कायाकल्पित मोहिनीरुपेण फासीवाद के मुाबले यथार्थ ही पर्याप्त नहीं है, यथार्थ चैतन्य बेहद जरूरी है। ब्रेख्त की पंक्तियां हमें इसकी प्रासंगिकता बताती हैं।

इसी सिलसिले में कवि उदय प्रकाश ने ब्रेख्त की एक अत्यंत लोकप्रिय, लगभग मुहावरा बन चुकी और बार-बार दुहराई जाने वाली कविता की पुनर्स्मृति कथाकारी अंदाज में उकेर दी है। अब अगली बहस इसी पर।

उदय प्रकाश ने एक जरूरी बहस के लिये इशारा कर दिया है। इसलिये उनका आभार।

हिटलरशाही का नतीजा जो जर्मनी ने भुगता है, आज के धर्मोन्मादी कारपोरेट समय में उसे समझने के लिये हमें फिर पिर ब्रेख्त की कविताओं और विशेषतौर पर उनके नाटकों में जाना होगा।

सामाजिक यथार्थ महज कला और साहित्य का सौंदर्यबोध नहीं है, जो चकाचौंधी मनोरंजन की अचूक कला के बहुरंगी बहुआयामी खिड़कियां खोल दें हमारे लिये। सामाजिक यथार्थ के प्रति वैज्ञानिक दृष्टिभंगी इतिहास बोध के सामंजस्य से ही जनपक्षधर सृजनधर्मिता का चरमोत्कर्ष तक पहुंचा जा सकता है।

फासीवाद के जिस अनिवार्य धर्मोन्मादी कारपोरेट यथार्थ के बरअक्स, हम आज हैं, वह ब्रेख्त का अनचीन्हा नहीं है और कला माध्यमों को हथियार बतौर मोर्चाबंद करने की पहल इस जर्मन कवि और नाटककार ने की, यह खास गौरतलब है।

''सरकार का

जनता पर से विश्वास

उठ चुका है

इसलिये

सरकार को चाहिए

कि वह जनता को भंग कर दे

और अपने लिये

एक नयी जनता चुन ले ।।।"

(यह सटीक अनुवाद तो नहीं, ब्रेख्त की एक अत्यंत लोकप्रिय, लगभग मुहावरा बन चुकी और बार-बार दुहराई जाने वाली कविता की पुनर्स्मृति भर है। जिन दोस्तों को मूल-पाठ की याद हो, वे प्रस्तुत कर सकते हैं।)

उदय प्रकाश ने यह उद्धरण भी दिया हैः

"उनके माथे और कनपटियों की

तनी हुई,

तनाव से भरी,

उभरी-फूली हुई

नसों को ग़ौर से देखो ।।।

ओह!

शैतान होना

कितना मुश्किल हुआ करता है ।।।!"

(ब्रेख़्त और Tushar Sarkar के प्रति आभार के साथ, अनुकरण में इस छूट के लिये !)

इस बहस के भारतीय परिप्रेक्ष्य और मौजूदा संकट के बारे में विश्लेषण से पहले थोड़ा ब्रेख्तधर्मी भारतीय रंगमंच और ब्रेख्त पर चर्चा हो जाना जरूरी भी है।

संक्षेप में जर्मन कवि, नाटकार और निर्देशक बर्तोल्त ब्रेख्त का जन्म 1898 में बवेरिया (जर्मनी) में हुआ था। अपनी विलक्षण प्रतिभा से उन्होंने यूरोपीय रंगमंच को यथार्थवाद के आगे का रास्ता दिखाया। बर्तोल्त ब्रेख्त मार्क्सवादी विचारधारा से प्रभावित थे। इसी ने उन्हें 'समाज' और 'व्यक्ति' के बीच के अंतर्संबंधों को समझने नया रास्ता सुझाया। यही समझ बाद में 'एपिक थियेटर' जिसकी एक प्रमुख सैद्धांतिक धारणा 'एलियनेशन थियरी'(अलगाव सिद्धांत) या 'वी-इफैक्ट' है जिसे जर्मन में 'वरफ्रेमडंग्सइफेकेट' (Verfremdungseffekt) कहा जाता है।ब्रेख्त का जीवन फासीवाद के खिलाफ संघर्ष का जीवन था। इसलिये उन्हें सर्वहारा नाटककार माना जाता है। ब्रेख्त की मृत्यु 1956 में बर्लिन (जर्मनी) में हुई।

भारतीय रंगकर्म के तार ब्रेख्त से भी जुड़े हैं। दरअसल, संगीत, कोरस, सादा रंगमंच, महाकाव्यात्मक विधान, यह सब ऐसी विशेषताएं हैं जो ब्रेख्त और भारतीय परंपरा दोनों में मौजूद हैं, जिसे हबीब तनवीर और भारत के अन्य रंगकर्मियों ने आत्मसात किया। छत्तीसगढ़ी कलाकारों के टीम के माध्यम से सीधे जमीन की सोंदी महक लिपटी नाट्य अनुभूति की जो विरासत रच गये हबीब साहब, वह यथार्थ से चैतन्य की सार्थक यात्रा के सिवाय कुछ और है ही नहीं।

भारत में बांग्ला, हिंदी, मराठी और कन्नड़ रंगकर्म से जुड़े मूर्धन्य तमाम लोगों ने इस चैतन्य यात्रा में शामिल होने की अपनी अपनी कोशिशें कीं। हबीब तनवीर और गिरीश कर्नाड,बा। बा। कारंथ से लेकर कोलकाता के नादीकार तक ने।दरअसल भारत में नये नाट्य आंदोलन के दरम्यान 60-70 के जनआंदोलनी उत्ताल समय में ब्रेख्त भारतीय रंगमंच के केंद्र में ही रहे। इसी दौरान जड़ों से जुड़े रंगमंच का नारा बुलंद हुआ और आधुनिक भारतीय रंगमंच पर भारतीय लोक परंपरा के रंग प्रयोग किए जाने लगे। यह प्रयोग नाट्य लेखन और मंचन दोनों क्षेत्रों में हो रहा था। ऐसे समय में ब्रेख्त बहुत अनुकूल जान पड़े।

गौरतलब है कि ब्रेख्त के लिये नाटक का मतलब वह था, जिसमें नाटक प्रेक्षागृह से निकलने के बाद दर्शक के मन में शुरू हो। उन्होंने नाटक को एक राजनीतिक अभिव्यक्ति माना, जिसका काम मनोरंजन के साथ शिक्षा भी था। ब्रेख्त ने अपने सिद्धांत एशियाई परंपरा से प्रभावित होकर गढ़े थे। 1935 में ब्रेख्त को चीनी अभिनेता लेन फेंग का अभिनय देखने का अवसर रूस में मिला, जहां हिटलर के दमन और अत्याचार से बचने के लिये ब्रेख्त ने शरण ली थी। फेंग के अभिनय से प्रभावित होकर ब्रेख्त ने कहा कि जिस चीज की वे वर्षो तक विफल तलाश करते रहे, अंतत: उन्हें वह लेन फेंग के अभिनय में मिल गई। ब्रेख्त के सिद्धांत निर्माण का यह प्रस्थान बिंदु है।

कवि उदय प्रकाश मौजूदा संकट को इस तरह चित्रार्पित करते हैं-

23 दिसंबर 1949 की आधी रात, जब फ़ैज़ाबाद के डी।एम। (कलेक्टर) नायर थे, उनकी सहमति और प्रशासनिक समर्थन से, बाबरी मस्ज़िद के भीतर जो मूर्ति स्थापित की गई, उसकी बात इतिहास का हवाला बार-बार देने वाले लोग क्यों नहीं करते ?

इस तथ्य के पुख्ता सबूत हैं कि इस देश में सांप्रदायिकता को पैदा करने वाले और इस घटना के पूर्व,30 जनवरी, 1948 में राष्ट्रपिता महात्मा गांधी की हत्या करने वाली ताकतें अब केंद्रीय सत्ता पर काबिज होना चाहती हैं।

उनके अलंकृत असत्य और प्रभावशाली वागाडंबर (लफ़्फ़ाज़ी) के सम्मोहन ने और पूरी ताकत और तैयारी के साथ, उन्हीं के द्वारा खरीद ली गयी सवर्ण मीडिया के प्रचार ने देश के बड़े जनमानस को दिग्भ्रमित कर दिया है।

क्या 'विकास' की मृगमरीचिका दिखाने वाले नेताओं के पास अपना कोई मौलिक, देशी विचार और परियोजना है? या यह तीसरी दुनिया के देशों की प्राकृतिक और मानवीय संपदा को बर्बरता के साथ लूट कर, उसे कार्पोरेट घरानों को सौंप कर, सिर्फ़ अपना हित साधने वाले सत्ताखोर कठपुतलों के हाथों में समूचे देश की संप्रभुता को बेचने वालों को सपर्पित कर देने की एक देशघाती साजिश है, जिसे'राष्ट्रवाद' का नाम दिया जा रहा है ?

यह एक गंभीर संकट का समय है।

सिर्फ़ चुनाव में जीतने और हारने की सट्टेबाज़ी का सनसनीखेज़ विज़ुअल तमाशा और फ़कत राजनीतिक जुआ यह नहीं है।

ऐसा मुझे लगता है ।

राजीव नयन बहुगुणा का कहना है

इतिहास के सर्वाधिक रक्त रंजित, अंधकारपूर्ण और कम ओक्सिजन वाले दौर के लिये तत्पर रहिये। संभवत इतिहास की देवी अपना मुंह अपने ही खून से धोकर निखरना चाहती है। एक बार वोट देने के बाद जो क़ौम पांच साल के लिये सो जाती है, उसे ये दिन देखने ही पड़ते हैं। अंधड़ का मुकाबला कीजिये… ये रात खुद जनेगी सितारे नए-नए

About The Author

पलाश विश्वास। लेखक वरिष्ठ पत्रकार, सामाजिक कार्यकर्ता एवं आंदोलनकर्मी हैं। आजीवन संघर्षरत रहना और दुर्बलतम की आवाज बनना ही पलाश विश्वास का परिचय है। हिंदी में पत्रकारिता करते हैं, अंग्रेजी के लोकप्रिय ब्लॉगर हैं। "अमेरिका से सावधान "उपन्यास के लेखक। अमर उजाला समेत कई अखबारों से होते हुए अब जनसत्ता कोलकाता में ठिकाना।

इन्हें भी पढ़ना न भूलें

बिरसा मुंडा की तरह हम सभी मार दिये जायेंगे क्योंकि लकड़बग्घा तुम्हारे घर के करीब आ गया है

March 31, 2014

भूत धरम का नाच रहा है/कायम हिन्दू राज करोगे? सारे उल्टे काज करोगे?

March 29, 2014

काँग्रेस की मनमोहिनी सरकार जो नहीं कर सकी उसके लिये बाजार में नये कसाई की तलाश में "नमोपा" कॉरपोरेट आविष्कार है

March 27, 2014

यह वक्त बलात्कार के खिलाफ चीखों का नहीं है शायद

March 25, 2014

हो सकता है कि यह आखिरी कुरुक्षेत्र हो और आखिरी महाभारत भी…

March 23, 2014

अंबेडकरी झंडेवरदार अपने वर्ग हितों के खिलाफ जमीदारों के कारिंदे और लठैत ही बन सकते हैं, नेता नहीं

March 21, 2014

An Ambedkar for our times ANAND TELTUMBDE

An Ambedkar for our times ANAND TELTUMBDE with a disclaimer

Palash Biswas

Disclaimer

Our dear friend ANAND TELTUMBDE had been kind enough to inform me about this article while he wrote it in the context of Arundhati`s outlook interview and the controversy created by her preface to Annihilition of caste.Our respected friend Vidya Bhushan Rawat wrote and excellent piece,the dissent essence write up.Rather Rawat intelligently emphasised that anybody has the right to write on Ambedkarite movement and his ideology.It is a positive departure from the point of view expressed by Dalit intelligentsia including AIBSF and Forward Press who oppose Non Dalits who write on Dr Ambedkar.There had been a little misunderstanding while I replied to our respected author Anita Bharati criticising the suicidal globalisation supporter flagbearers of Ambedkarite movement.Rawat,however,has a different point of view that Annihilition of Caste or any other writins by Ambedkar needs no preface by others.

Here you are!

I have been writing on Ambedkarite movement as an Ambedkarite activist and have been discussing about the greater role of the followers of Dr Ambedkar in present day context of ethnic cleansing of the ninety percent Indian People including SC, ST, OBC, Minorities, peasants, labour,women from every community who are tread Shudra and underclass irrespective of religion and caste and racially discriminated geography along with the so called caste Hindu people but virtually reduced to untouchable status,degenerated because of exclusion and deprivement of purchasing power in the open market economy.

Mind you,Ambedkarite activists are not the whole sole property of opportunist co opted creamy layer politicians and other elements who use Ambedkarite movement as an ATM.

It is to be noted that Activists who have been working with Dr BR Ambedkar and Kanshiramji have become disillusioned with Ambedkarite power sharing,fence crossing,corporate politics.

We have already suffered very much during last two decades of reforms which is treated as Golden age by those only who have adjusted very well under the fatty cover of the creamy layer at the cost of the ninetynine percent.Now we do face a fascist turnaround of the zionist corporate imperialist state power empowered with a manipulated mandate created by intensive misinformation campaign and unprecedented mind control with surgical precision by the ruling hegemonial racist manuist class.

Second generation of ethnic cleansing all on the name of development killing agrarian communities and the productive forces with a racist gender bias is the agenda to be accomplished and it is religious identity tsunami all the way to select a fascist corporate Hindu government.

At this juncture, tagged activism would not help our topmost priority to breakthrough an avenue out of the Killing fields,the Indian People`s Republic reduced to.Irony is that all those people involved neck to bottom in identity politics has aligned with Hindutva fascism which is strictly based on caste system,racial apartheid,purity myths and rituals, exclusive economics, social and geographical exclusion,militarisation of state,army rule in untouchable geography,havoc builder promoter raj, unplanned urbanisation,displacement,retrenchment, irrelevant reservation politics,war against people, corporate lobbying, corporate funding and policy making by extra constitutional elements killing the constitution,democracy,republic,the people and the nature.

Key to power politics deviated entire Ambedkarite movement whereas Babasaheb had said that the depressed classes have to fight against two enemies at the same time,the Brahaminical class and the capitalism.He never did mention caste anyway.We have embraced the caste identity only to destroy ourselves forgetting the enslavement of thousands of years.it is the catse,the Indian version of apartheid which have been subjecting us to not only racial discrimination,exclusion but also demonising majority communities to justify the ethnic cleaninng.The myth industry is all about ethnic cleanisn which produces the religion and it is all the way Hindutva.Our leaders have crossed the fences to align with the fascist killers and our intelligentsia is glorifying them.

Mind you Baba Saheb warned:

Parliamentary Democracy has never been a government of the people or by the people, and that is why it has never been a government for the people. Parliamentary Democracy, notwithstanding the paraphernalia of a popular government, is in reality a government of a hereditary subject class by a hereditary ruling class. It is this vicious organization of political life which has made Parliamentary Democracy such a dismal failure. It is because of this Parliamentary Democracy has not fulfilled the hope it held out the common man of ensuring to him liberty, property and pursuit of happiness.

-Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar

For me,Arundhati is the best person to write on the current system run by corporate fascist imperialism.

The debate should continue so that we may opt for a gesture of resistance at least.

The urgency highlighted by Arundhati is the call of the day provided we opt to stand against corporate fascist tsunami enveloping the nation and the people.

Thus,we have been debating.Anand wrote this article to address our present problems and the real issues long forgotten.

We must thank the Hindu editorial.

But the article mentioned Gandhi as Gandhiji.As Dr Ambedkar never said Gandhi was the mahatma.Anand also never caled Gandhi Gandhiji.

We talked on this issue and Anand confirmed with a SMS and a letter followed.

It should be noted to avoid further deviation and controversy.

Dr. Anand Teltumbde

12:14 PM

Dear Palash,

I just sent an sms to you. In the article, a jarring reference to Gandhi is coming as 'Gandhiji' . While those who know me, do know also that I never use Gandhiji for Gandhi, there is a section who might exploit it in the social media forgetting the core issues in the article.

I think you can explain (when you will circulate it-- I hope you will) that you spoke to me and that I explained that it was done by the copy desk of Hindu. Either way, I have never used Gandhiji ever. We should preempt the irrelevant controversy by our esteemed brethren!!!

Regards

An Ambedkar for our times

ANAND TELTUMBDE

Today, Ambedkar certainly outshines every other leader in terms of public acceptance. However, the incidences of casteism also show parallel growth. This paradoxical phenomenon can be explained only by separating the real Ambedkar from the unreal one

In an interview published in Outlook (March 10, 2014), Arundhati Roy says, “We need Ambedkar — now, urgently” — it was in connection with the publication of a new annotated edition of Ambedkar’s text, The Annihilation of Caste, brought out by Navayana, a New Delhi-based publishing house. Ms. Roy wrote a 164-page essay titled “The Doctor and the Saint” as an introduction to the book, which has now become 415 pages thick, expanding the core text of just about 100 pages.

Behind the controversy

Her introduction has already created an unseemly controversy in Dalit circles, reminiscent of the debate in the 1970s in the wake of incipient Dalit literature, about who could produce Dalit literature. The protagonists of Dalits insisted that one had to be born a Dalit to do that. The controversy now reflects a similar identitarian obsession that one had to produce a caste certificate (Scheduled Caste) to introduce either Ambedkar or his text. It is intriguing however why such a controversy has cropped up only in the case of Ms. Roy especially when scores of non-Dalits have written on Ambedkar and his writings earlier. Is it because of her celebrity status or of her infamy as a Maoist sympathiser as perceived by middle class Dalits? The latter is more probable. For them, anything even remotely connected with communism is enough to evoke despisal and disapproval.

Whatever be the motivation behind this uproar, it is surely unwarranted. Ignoring the outpouring of nasty “one-liners” in social media, the main objections, at a reasonable level, to her writing this piece appear to be her undue projection of Gandhiji to introduce Ambedkar or to her being qualified to do the job in the first place or even her purported introduction not being an introduction to the text that followed. Even if one concedes the validity of these viewpoints, they need not have been expressed with such vehemence and negativity. As a matter of fact, the creative writer in Ms. Roy chose not the text per se but the stand-off between Ambedkar and Gandhiji in the context of Gandhiji’s reaction to the text in his magazine Harijan. She imagined that she could bring forth the problem of castes far more effectively if she used the contrast between Ambedkar and Gandhiji, who best represented moderate Hindu society, than dealing with the subject matter in a dry and mechanical manner. As for the qualification, while she took great pains to understand the issue she wrote on, her writings never reflected any aura of authority beyond a commonsensical objectivity necessitated by her style. Perhaps, and therefore, they appeal more to common people than to the so-called intellectuals.

Ambedkar, real and unreal

The most interesting argument however came not from Dalits but, paradoxically, an upper caste journalist (“B.R. Ambedkar, Arundhati Roy, and the politics of appropriation” by G. Sampath,Livemint, March 18, 2014). Challenging Ms. Roy, it said that if she wanted the bauxite under the Niyamgiri hills to be left to the Adivasis, why did she not leave Ambedkar who has been the only possession of Dalits to Dalits themselves? Interestingly though, the implication of the argument can be dangerous insofar as any engagement of the “other” defined as such on the basis of caste can be dismissed as illegitimate. May be, Ambedkar symbolises the cultural good of Dalits, but still, to ghettoise him to Dalits alone will mean downright disrespect to him and incalculable harm to the cause of Dalits. Niyamgiri left to the Adivasis implies a progressive interrogation of the prevailing developmental paradigm, while leaving Ambedkar to Dalits will mean retrogressive destruction of the annihilation-agenda of Babasaheb Ambedkar.

The controversy has surprisingly gone past the main point — that it is the bland business logic of the publisher that has fundamentally drawn Ms. Roy into writing the introduction. With her stature as a Booker Prize awardee, later amplified by her fearless pro-people stands on various issues on various occasions, the book was sure to go global. Moreover, it can well be imagined that her writing would certainly create a controversy, as has happened before. All this would mean a bonanza for any publisher in boosting sales of the book. Whether Navayana had consciously thought it out this way or not, these established product strategies of a publisher cannot be grudged by anyone as, after all, s/he has to follow the grammar of business. Notwithstanding the “anti-caste” tag Navayana tends to wear of late, publishing adulatory and cultish literature on Ambedkar is not the same thing as supporting the annihilation of castes. Once this controversy raked up by a few dies down, the vast majority of Dalits would rather take pride in the point that even Arundhati Roy joined them in worshipping their god. Every such form of Ambedkar adulation has indeed been reinforcing the caste identity and directly distances the annihilation project.

The acceptance of Ambedkar does not necessarily equate itself with the spread of an anti-caste ethos. Today, Ambedkar certainly outshines every other leader in terms of public acceptance. No other leader can rival him in the number of statues, pictures, congregations, books, research, organisations, songs, or any other marker of popularity of/on him. Curiously, his picture has become a fixture even in movies and television episodes. However, the incidences of casteism as indicated by cases of caste discrimination, caste atrocities, caste associations and caste discourses, etc. also show parallel growth. This paradoxical phenomenon can be explained only by separating the real Ambedkar from the unreal one, cast into the icons constructed by vested interests to thwart the consciousness of radical change ever germinating in Dalit masses. These icons package the enigmatic real Ambedkar into a simplistic symbol: an architect of the Constitution, a great nationalist, the father of reservations, a staunch anti-communist, a liberal democrat, a great parliamentarian, a saviour of Dalits, a bodhisattva, etc. These icons of the harmless, status quo-ist Ambedkar have been proliferated all over and overshadow a possible, radical view of the real Ambedkar.

Which Ambedkar?

Notwithstanding the intrigues behind the promotion of such icons by vested interests with active support from the state, the evolution of Ambedkar, the pragmatist sans any ideological fixation, all through his life, makes him intrinsically difficult to understand. A young Ambedkar who theorised castes as the enclosed classes, the enclosure being provided by the system of endogamy and exogamy, expecting the larger Hindu society to wake up and undertake social reforms like intermarriage in order to open up castes into classes is in contrast to the post-Mahad Ambedkar, disillusioned by the rabid reactions from caste Hindus, turning his sights to politics to accomplish his objective. Were his threats of conversion to Islam for a separate political identity for Dalits, or to force caste Hindus to consider social reforms? Then there is the Ambedkar of the 1930s, anxious to expand his constituency to the working classes sans castes, who founded the Independent Labour Party (ILP), arguably the first Left party in India, and walked with the communists but at the same time one who declared his resolve to convert to some other religion to escape castes. What about the Ambedkar of the 1940s, who returns to the caste, dissolves the ILP and forms the Scheduled Castes Federation, shuns agitational politics and joins the colonial government as labour minister or the one who wrote States and Minorities, propounding state socialism be hardcoded into the proposed Constitution of free India? Or Ambedkar, the staunchest opponent of the Congress or the one who cooperated with the Congress in joining the all-party government and accepted its support to get into the Constituent Assembly? Or even the Ambedkar who developed the representation logic culminating in reservations, expecting that a few advanced elements from among Dalits would help the community progress or the one who publicly lamented that educated Dalits had let him down? Or the Ambedkar who was the architect of the Constitution and advised Dalits to adopt only constitutional methods for a resolution of their problems or the one who disowned it in the harshest possible terms and spoke of being the first person to burn it down? And finally, the Ambedkar who kept referring to Marx as a quasi benchmark to assess his decisions? Or the one who embraced Buddhism and created the ultimate bulwark against communism in India to use the words of one of his scholars, Eleanor Zelliot, or even the one who would favourably compare Buddha and Marx just a few days before bidding adieu to the world, saying their goal was the same but that they differed in the ways of achieving them — Buddha’s being better than Marx’s? These are just a few broad vignettes of him, problematic in typifying him in a simplistic manner. If one goes deeper, one is bound to face far more serious problems.

Ambedkar is surely needed as long as the virus of caste lingers in this land but not as a reincarnation of the old one as most Dalits emotionally reflect on. Not even in the way Ms. Roy would want him to come now and urgently. He will have to be necessarily constructed to confront the far messier problem of contemporary castes than that obtained in his times.

(Anand Teltumbde is a civil rights activist with CPDR, Mumbai.)

"The pragmatist sans any ideological fixation" thats what Ambedkar is

.Very good one

from:  Aditya

Posted on: Apr 2, 2014 at 12:30 IST

Both Gandhiji and Ambedkar were complex personalities. However each was useful to India in their own way. Gandhiji's movements achieved independence in a unique non violent manner. Ambedkar helped frame a constitution based on the principles of equality, equity and justice to all. There may be a purely academic purpose in discussing the nitty gritty of their actions and words today. Let us give them credit where it is due to each one of them and move ahead. India today needs practical solutions to everyday problems of the common people which can be achieved if common people rise above their apparent differences (of caste, religion. language, race etc.) and use their democratic right of voting to choose honest politicians and honest leaders (irrespective of party affiliations) to take India forward.

from:  Aditya G

Posted on: Apr 2, 2014 at 12:11 IST

Ambedkar is misunderstood by the leftists not because he did not have full support to left ideology in indian context but on indian socio-political reality. He wanted to do best possible help to the Dalits. indian marxists failed to understand him from their point of view.

from:  anil bharali

Posted on: Apr 2, 2014 at 11:53 IST

The term 'Dalit' is a thing of past . They all belong to Hindu community . Dalits were prosecuted in past by so-called 'upper caste' Hindus . Now a days these people have progressed a lot . No such untouchable factor is there now a days. The real danger country suffers is terrorism and extremism.

from:  anil

Posted on: Apr 2, 2014 at 10:58 IST

Dr Ambedkar envisaged reservation for a short period so that the Dalits will get the necessary social surrounding to compete with others . If he has put in black and white that the family of the person who gets reservation benefit should not be given further reservation, many more dalit families would have benefited in the last 60 years. Now at least dalits who have not benefited should insist on this change , otherwise the vested interests will enjoy the benefits forever and the rest cannot compete with general population .The caste factor has been blown out of proportion since even in the brahmin community inter marriages within eight sub castes of brahmins is rare .More than the caste the type of profession pursued decides the persons level in the society .An alternative to the present system ,

reservation should be based on the profession pursued by the parents

.

from:  s balaraman

Posted on: Apr 2, 2014 at 10:27 IST  

Arundhati Roy explains how corporations run India and why they want Narendra Modi as prime minister

by CHARLIE SMITH on MAR 30, 2014 at 1:51 PM

http://www.straight.com/life/616401/arundhati-roy-explains-how-corporations-run-india-and-why-they-want-narendra-modi-prime-minister

Booker Prize winner Arundhati Roy predicts that a Narendra Modi–led government would send in the army against poor villagers.

INDIAN AUTHOR AND social critic Arundhati Roy wants the world to know that her country is under the control of its largest corporations.

"Wealth has been concentrated in fewer and fewer hands," Roy tells the Georgia Straight by phone from New York. "And these few corporations now run the country and, in some ways, run the political parties. They run the media."

The Delhi-based novelist and nonfiction writer argues that this is having devastating consequences for hundreds of millions of the poorest people in India, not to mention the middle class.

Roy spoke to the Straight in advance of a public lecture on Tuesday (April 1) at 8 p.m. at St. Andrew's–Wesley United Church at the corner of Burrard and Nelson streets. She says it will be her first visit to Vancouver.

In recent years, she has researched how the richest Indian corporations—such as Reliance, Tata, Essar, and Infosys—are employing similar tactics as the U.S.-based Rockefeller and Ford foundations. 

She points out that the Rockefeller and Ford foundations have worked closely in the past with the State Department and Central Intelligence Agency to further U.S. government and corporate objectives. 

Now, she maintains that Indian companies are distributing money through charitable foundations as a means of controlling the public agenda through what she calls "perception management".

This includes channelling funds to nongovernmental organizations, film and literary festivals, and universities.

She acknowledges that the Tata Group has been doing this for decades, but says that more recently, other large corporations have begun copying this approach.

Private money replaces public funding

According to her, the overall objective is to blunt criticism of neoliberal policies that promote inequality.

"Slowly, they decide the curriculum," Roy maintains. "They control the public imagination. As public money gets pulled out of health care and education and all of this, NGOs funded by these major financial corporations and other kinds of financial instruments move in, doing the work that missionaries used to do during colonialism—giving the impression of being charitable organizations, but actually preparing the world for the free markets of corporate capital."

She was awarded the Booker Prize in 1997 for The God of Small Things. Since then, she has gone on to become one of India's leading activists, railing against mining and power projects that displace the poor.

She's also written about poverty-stricken villagers in the Naxalite movement who are taking up arms across several Indian states to defend their traditional way of life.

"I'm a great admirer of the wisdom and the courage that people in the resistance movement show," she says. "And they are where my own understanding comes from."

One of her greatest concerns is how foundation-funded NGOs "defuse people's movements and...vacuum political anger and send them down a blind alley".

"It's very important to keep the oppressed divided," she says. "That's the whole colonial game, and it's very easy in India because of the diversity."

Roy writes a book on capitalism

In 2010, there was an attempt to lay a charge of sedition against her after she suggested that Kashmir is not integral to India's existence. This northern state has been at the centre of a long-running territorial dispute between India and Pakistan.

"There's supposed to be some police inquiry, which hasn't really happened," Roy tells the Straight. "That's how it is in India. They...hope that the idea of it hanging over your head is going to work its magic, and you're going to be more cautious."

Clearly, it's had little effect in silencing her. In her upcoming new book Capitalism: A Ghost Story, Roy explores how the 100 richest people in India ended up controlling a quarter of the country's gross-domestic product.

The book is inspired by a lengthy 2012 article with the same title, which appeared in India's Outlook magazine.

In the essay, she wrote that the "ghosts" are the 250,000 debt-ridden farmers who've committed suicide, as well as "800 million who have been impoverished and dispossessed to make way for us". Many live on less than 40 Canadian cents per day.

"In India, the 300 million of us who belong to the post-IMF 'reforms' middle class—the market—live side by side with spirits of the nether world, the poltergeists of dead rivers, dry wells, bald mountains and denuded forests," Roy wrote.

The essay examined how foundations rein in Indian feminist organizations, nourish right-wing think tanks, and co-opt scholars from the community of Dalits, often referred to in the West as the "untouchables".

For example, she pointed out that the Reliance Group's Observer Research Foundation has a stated goal of achieving consensus in favour of economic reforms.

Roy noted that the ORF promotes "strategies to counter nuclear, biological and chemical threats". She also revealed that the ORF's partners include weapons makers Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

Anna Hazare called a corporate mascot

In her interview with the Straight, Roy claims that the high-profileIndia Against Corruption campaign is another example of corporate meddling.

According to Roy, the movement's leader, Anna Hazare, serves as a front for international capital to gain greater access to India's resources by clearing away any local obstacles.

With his white cap and traditional white Indian attire, Hazare has received global acclaim by acting as a modern-day Mahatma Gandhi, but Roy characterizes both of them as "deeply disturbing". She also describes Hazare as a "sort of mascot" to his corporate backers.

In her view, "transparency" and "rule of law" are code words for allowing corporations to supplant "local crony capital". This can be accomplished by passing laws that advance corporate interests.

She says it's not surprising that the most influential Indian capitalists would want to shift public attention to political corruption just as average Indians were beginning to panic over the slowing Indian economy. In fact, Roy adds, this panic turned into rage as the middle class began to realize that "galloping economic growth has frozen".

"For the first time, the middle classes were looking at corporations and realizing that they were a source of incredible corruption, whereas earlier, there was this adoration of them," she says. "Just then, the India Against Corruption movement started. And the spotlight turned right back onto the favourite punching bag—the politicians—and the corporations and the corporate media and everyone else jumped onto this, and gave them 24-hour coverage."

Her essay in Outlook pointed out that Hazare's high-profile allies, Arvind Kerjiwal and Kiran Bedi, both operate NGOs funded by U.S. foundations.

"Unlike the Occupy Wall Street movement in the US, the Hazare movement did not breathe a word against privatisation, corporate power or economic 'reforms'," she wrote in Outlook.

Narendra Modi seen as right-wing saviour

Meanwhile, Roy tells the Straight that corporate India is backing Narendra Modi as the country's next prime minister because the ruling Congress party hasn't been sufficiently ruthless against the growing resistance movement.

"I think the coming elections are all about who is going to crank up the military assault on troublesome people," she predicts.

In several states, armed rebels have prevented massive mining and infrastructure projects that would have displaced massive numbers of people.

Many of these industrial developments were the subject of memoranda of understanding signed in 2004.

Modi, head of the Hindu nationalist BJP coalition, became infamous in 2002 when Muslims were massacred in the Indian state of Gujarat, where he was the chief minister. The official death tollexceeded 1,000, though some say the figures are higher.

Police reportedly stood by as Hindu mobs went on a killing spree. Many years later, a senior police officer alleged that Modi deliberately allowed the slaughter, though Modi has repeatedly denied this.

The atrocities were so appalling that the American government refused to grant Modi a visitor's visa to travel to the United States.

But now, he's a political darling to many in the Indian elite, according to Roy. A Wall Street Journal report recently noted that the United States is prepared to give Modi a visa if he becomes prime minister.

"The corporations are all backing Modi because they think that [Prime Minister] Manmohan [Singh] and the Congress government hasn't shown the nerve it requires to actually send in the army into places like Chhattisgarh and Orissa," she says.

She also labels Modi as a politician who's capable of "mutating", depending on the circumstances.

"From being this openly sort of communal hatred-spewing saccharine person, he then put on the suit of a corporate man, and, you know, is now trying to play the role of the statesmen, which he's not managing to do really," Roy says.

Roy sees parallels between Congress and BJP

India's national politics are dominated by two parties, the Congress and the BJP.

The Congress maintains a more secular stance and is often favoured by those who want more accommodation for minorities, be they Muslim, Sikh, or Christian. In American terms, the Congress is the equivalent of the Democratic Party.

The BJP is actually a coalition of right-wing parties and more forcefully advances the notion that India is a Hindu nation. It often calls for a harder line against Pakistan. In this regard, the BJP could be seen as the Republicans of India.

But just as left-wing U.S. critics such as Ralph Nader and Noam Chomsky see little difference between the Democrats and Republicans in office, Roy says there is not a great deal distinguishing the Congress from the BJP.

"I've said quite often, the Congress has done by night what the BJP does by day," she declares. "There isn't any real difference in their economic policy."

Whereas senior BJP leaders encouraged wholesale mob violence against Muslims in Gujarat, she notes that Congress leaders played a similar role in attacks on Sikhs in Delhi following the 1984 assassination of then–prime minister Indira Gandhi.

"It was genocidal violence and even today, nobody has been punished," Roy says.

As a result, each party can accuse the other of fomenting communal violence.

In the meantime, there are no serious efforts at reconciliation for the victims.

"The guilty should be punished," she adds. "Everyone knows who they are, but that will not happen. That is the thing about India. You may go to prison for assaulting a woman in a lift or killing one person, but if you are part of a massacre, then the chances of your not being punished are very high."

However, she acknowledges that there is "some difference" in the two major parties' stated idea of India.

The BJP, for example, is "quite open about its belief in the Hindu India...where everybody else lives as, you know, second-class citizens".

"Hindu is also a very big and baggy word," she says to clarify her remark. "We're really talking about an upper-caste Hindu nation. And the Congress states that it has a secular vision, but in the actual playing out of how democracy works, all of them are involved with creating vote banks, setting community against community. Obviously, the BJP is more vicious at that game."

Inequality linked to caste system

The Straight asks why internationally renowned authors such as Salman Rushdie and Vikram Seth or major Indian film stars like Shahrukh Khan or the Bachchan family don't speak forcefully against the level of inequality in India.

"Well, I think we're a country whose elite is capable of an immense amount of self-deception and an immense amount of self-regard," she replies.

Roy maintains that Hinduism's caste system has ingrained the Indian elite to accept the idea of inequality "as some kind of divinely sanctioned thing".

According to her, the rich believe "that people who are from the lower classes don't deserve what those from the upper classes deserve".

Her comments on corporate power echo some of the ideas of Canadian activist and author Naomi Klein.

"Of course, I know Naomi very well," Roy reveals. "I think she's such a fine thinker and of course, she's influenced me."

Roy also expresses admiration for the work of Indian journalist Palagummi Sainath, author of the 1992 classic Everybody Loves a Good Drought: Stories from India's Poorest Districts.

However, she suggests that the concentration of media ownership in India makes it very difficult for most reporters to reveal the extent of corporate control over society.

"In India, if you're a really good journalist, your life is in jeopardy because there is no place for you in a media that's structured like that," Roy says.

On occasions, mobs have shown up outside her home after she's made controversial statements in the media.

She says that in those instances, they seemed more interested in performing for the television cameras than in attacking her.

However, she emphasizes that other human-rights activists in India have had their offices trashed by demonstrators, and some have been beaten up or killed for speaking out against injustice.

Roy adds that thousands of political prisoners are locked up in Indian jails for sedition or for violating the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.

This is one reason why she argues that it's a fallacy to believe that because India holds regular elections, it's a democratic country.

"There isn't a single institution anymore which an ordinary person can approach for justice: not the judiciary, not the local political representative," Roy maintains. "All the institutions have been hollowed out and just the shell has been put back. So democracy and these festivals of elections is when everyone can let off steam and feel that they have some say over their lives."

In the end, she says it's the corporations that fund major parties, which end up doing their bidding.

"We are really owned and run by a few corporations, who can shut India down when they want," Roy says.

Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter @csmithstraight.

The Indian Summer Arts Society presents An Evening with Arundhati Roy at St. Andrew's–Wesley United Church (1022 Nelson Street at Burrard) at 8 p.m. on Tuesday (April 1). Tickets are available for $25 ($20 for students).