The Indian Parliament is Infructuous (The Collapse of Parliamentary System of Democracy/Back to Lokvidya Swaraj & Panchayati Raj) Lalit K Kaul

The Indian Parliament is Infructuous

(The Collapse of Parliamentary System of Democracy/Back to Lokvidya Swaraj & Panchayati Raj)

Lalit K Kaul

In recent times an emerging trend is to defy any act of the Parliament on the streets; hold entire country to ransom; cause inconvenience to general public only to exhibit their muscle strength supplemented by those designated as ‘opposition’. Fight for ideological values don’t require muscle power, while agitations may be carried out. A very dangerous precedence was allowed to be set with the connivance of all political parties by allowing Shaheen Bagh & similar baghs for not very intelligible reasons. Yet, whatever the apprehensions of agitating women (most of them didn’t know   why) their enforced blockade shouldn’t have been allowed. Farmers have picked up from where Shaheen Bagh ended & are following the precedence. In the eighties, the protests led by farmers didn’t employ such ways as they are now. What’s the reason? Corona ended Shaheen Bagh; BJP didn’t gain anything in Delhi elections despite their chosen inaction, but Delhi riots followed. Which virus will end farmer’s blockade? Only Virus can tell.

Degenerate Political System:

Few reasons why our political system is degenerate:

1.    Opposition parties are to only oppose anything and everything that the ruling party may legislate. Like, nuclear test during NDA regime was opposed / criticized by the entire opposition. BJP, while in opposition, opposed Aadhar Card implementation. This is not by choice, but as a duty because all political parties have implicit understanding on it.

2.    Anybody can float a party; anybody can become a politician; more the number of crimes more the reason to become a politician; always welcome in any / all party’s fold if capacity to garner votes (muscle power)

3.      Political parties are allowed to be run as a family fiefdom.

4.    Every MP and MLA can get away with whatever they may speak in both the houses of Parliament and respective Vidhan Sabhas. It provides criminals full lung power to cast all kinds of aspersions on their opponents. This provision leaves a very harmful impact on the common citizens. Like, Kejriwal felt bold enough to declare in Delhi Assembly that he and his 61 MLAs had no birth certificates and so they were passing a resolution against CAA. Were they born to animals? These kinds of statements are very highly provocative and help generate vicious environment all around.

5.    During election campaigns and public rallies all kinds of unsubstantiated allegations can be hurled on the political opponents knowing pretty well that they will go scot free. It creates bad environment and the message that goes across the public is that unsubstantiated charges can be hurled at others.

6.   Self styled/proclaimed leaders of people are allowed to exploit the provision of ‘Freedom of Speech’ without any sense of responsibility. This freedom has been grossly misused by the Communists, some of the Moulvis and the rabidly communal elements in both the Hindu and Muslim communities, as was very evident during anti CAA protests. Even the politicians, while in opposition, have this indulgence; like, the way Sonia family publicly instigated people to move on to streets against CAA.

7.     Modern Indian establishments and political leaders have conscientiously shaped modern Indian societies in a way that they are particular only about their rights to avail anything and everything while the right to duty has long got lost into oblivion.  

8.     The Constitution of India talks of rights of all and sundry and ways to uphold them, does it talk of duties?

Recent Examples of Degenerate Politics:

        While Agri Bills were always going to go through the Lok Sabha, in the Rajya Sabha the opposition combine had the majority and therefore they could have stalled the bills and disallowed their passage. It was not blocked and thereafter the opposition parties sided with the farmers’ demands including scrapping of the bills! It can be nobody’s take that opposition parties sympathize or relate with the farmers’ problems. Had UPA been in power, then in the present situation BJP would have stood with the farmers’ demands & called for Bharat bandh.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee which has members from political parties had approved of bringing the Agri Bills in to the Parliament for initiating the reforms in the agriculture sector. Now, opposition parties are opposing publicly & associating with Bharat Bandh.

More significantly, the AAP government had already issued a notification to this effect, regarding Agri Bills implementation; but thereafter it gave a call to support farmers’ movement.

Peoples’ Representative Election Flawed:

The much talked about & acclaimed elections in the world’s largest democracy are fundamentally flawed in that they end up electing peoples’ non representatives. In the elections, people vote for a political party of their choosing nay, but more precisely, the leader of their choosing. Party selects the candidates; each candidate is supposed to represent on the average 3 to 4 lacs of people & that by itself is as incongruous as it can get. However, when the people vote they vote neither for the party nor for the candidate; they vote for the leader of the party. Earlier it was Indira Gandhi & now it is Modi and in between for coalition governments, people voted for leaders of their choice who happened to belong to different parties. Thus contestants’ credentials were never important to people, because मोदी है तो मुमकिन है; इंदिरा है तो इंडिया है! In between some pygmies don’t matter because they too tasted power- courtesy coalition governments.

The icing on the cake is that post election; every ‘representative’ as ‘elected’ through an election process within moments of winning gets transformed in to Neta ji – the very first act violative of the Constitution of India. What is the responsibility of this Neta ji? To propagate his/her party line from a platform/ dais that places him/her at much higher plane in all dimensions of life; so the subjects must hear in rapt attention else, there are goons to take care of any dissent. So there is no way this ‘representative’ shall be amenable to his subjects’ opinion on various issues concerning their day to day life.

Standing Committee out of synch with Ground Realities:

The members of the Standing Committee belong to various parties and obviously Akali Dal & Congress members in Punjab/Haryana etc should have been aware of the farmers’ apprehensions about the proposed bills which incidentally were a part of Congress manifesto and some others. Had they been, then the Standing Committee would have deliberated to determine what kind of bills, in terms of reforms & to what extent, would be acceptable to farmers. The problem is that fundamentally these MPs MLAs don’t represent people & therefore they don’t converse with them on one to one basis; they can’t legislate on real problems of the people because they remain out of synch with the people as they owe their chair in the Parliament / Assembly to their leader & indeed people did vote for the leader!

Politics on the Streets only Alternative:

The public display of disagreement by the people on any and/or every law enacted in the Parliament/Assembly is a symptom of diseased democratic set up. The politicians- the so called peoples’ representative- make the situation worse by making a U turn & opposing the bills they had supported in the Parliament/Assembly; all this in the hope that visibly standing by the people may help them in the next elections. So, the Parliament stands disgraced and it loses it place of pre eminence insofar as enacting of laws for the welfare of the people is concerned. Such kinds of deadlocks are avoidable only if the MPs/MLAs function like true representatives of the people & take their requirements to appropriate places of power & jurisdiction in a bid to find solutions for the peoples’ problems. That this organic link between the MPs/MLAs & their respective constituencies has been missing since 73 years now, safely extrapolates to making a statement that it shall continue to be so.

The biggest Incongruity in the Democratic set up:

It is to expect that a single individual can represent few lakhs of people in that establish an organic link between the elector and the elected. Life is not uni dimensional & so are not the day to day issues/problems of the people. Laying of multi lane roads & raising tall buildings, etcetera to explain development combined with linking increase in consumerism with economic growth may help project rosy pictures about the GDP & % growth as also FOREX reserves, but all these types of indices don’t portray the true picture of how a majority of the total population live in the country & more so when a vast majority lives only by labour having been disfranchised of their knowledge base. When more than 54% of the populace contribute only to 16% of GDP while being employed in unorganized sector then all the talk of % overall growth becomes a non representative figure.

In a democratic set up with its associated growth & development plan based on a certain economic model, if a vast majority from among the total populace lack capacities to buy energy, housing & other amenities- required for decent & honourable living- on their own and some Messiah in the form of PM/CM takes pride in distributing these free of cost then the state of affairs are indeed sordid. A growth & development model, that lacks the capability to empower people to buy things of their own accord & choosing and doles out charity for the fear of widespread unrest, gets perpetuated only when in a democratic set up the organic link between the elector and elected is snapped. Poverty cannot be tackled by act of charity; humans don’t live just for food, clothing & housing; they want to take their own decisions & be free to exercise their varied choices and therefore in this context doling out charity is tantamount to insulting the very human existence. And this must change.  

Back to Lokvidya Swaraj & Panchayat Politics:

The 3 tier system of Panchayati Raj is perhaps the most optimal system yet in terms of the feasibility of establishing an organic link between the electors & elected. Some thoughts on this are explained in the sequel. It needs to be debated for its feasibility and other related issues.

 

Election of Peoples’ Representatives:

The Panchayat Raj system has been seen as a developing system. It has three major components:

1. Lowest order: Gram Panchayat

2. Middle order: Panchayat Samiti

3. Upper order: Zilla Panchayat

The “Gram” is constituted of a village or a group of contingent villages. It is based on the voting population of the (covered geographical) region. Based on the voting population, the electorate is divided into 5 or more voter divisions/categories and each division/category elects one representative, who then come together to constitute the Gram Panchayat.

Each region of the District is represented by its Panchayat Samiti. The members of the Panchayat Samiti are elected by the respective Gram Panchayats constituting the region. Each Gram Panchayat elects 3 or more representatives to the Panchayat Samiti. These representatives constitute the Panchayat Samiti.

The entire District is represented by the Zilla Panchayat. Its representatives are elected by the Panchayat Samitis constituting the District. Each Panchayat Samiti elects 3 or more representatives to the Zilla Panchayat. These representatives constitute the Zilla Panchayat. Elected members of the State Assembly from the District are also members of the Zilla Panchayat.

The Constitution allows for only a three-tier system and so the Gram Sabha has no Constitutional validity or recognition. The Gram Sabha can be convened to meet up to 2 or 3 times a year. It can make suggestions for the implementation of programmes but cannot examine or reject the decisions taken by the 3-tier Panchayat Raj system.

An examination of the powers and scope of the Zilla Panchayats indicates that it has the right to take decisions on fundamental issues such as health, sanitation, safe drinking water, electricity, roads, employment etc. However, in reality there is tremendous interference of the government and political parties in all sectors and stages. The political parties influence the elections to the various bodies of the Panchayat Raj system. The result is that the Central & State Governments and political parties have rendered the Panchayat Raj system ineffective and meaningless.

This structure can be utilized to establish Lokavidya Swaraj through the election of Peoples’ Representatives. The rule by party-centred politics can thus be replaced by the rule of People-centred politics. In order to take this process forward towards the establishment of Lokavidya Swaraj, a few points are listed hereunder:

·         Gyan and Samajik Panchayats need to be constituted in place of Gram Panchayats. The manner of constitution of the Gyan and Samajik Panchayats is similar to that of the Gram Panchayat and any necessary changes may be brought in. The membership categories of the Gyan and Samajik Panchayats have been detailed in an earlier part of this document.

·         The Panchayat Samiti will be constituted from the members of the Gyan and Samajik Panchayats of that region or from outside. Every effort will be made by the Gyan and Samajik Panchayats to elect members of the Panchayat Samiti through unanimity/ consensus failing which an internal election may be held without any outside interference whatsoever.

·         The Zilla Panchayat will be constituted of members from the various Panchayat Samitis of the region and the number of representatives from each Samiti will be decided through mutual consent.

·         For Parliament and Assembly elections, regions have been delimited to form constituencies. Many districts fall under such Parliament and Assembly constituencies. For every district there is a Zilla Panchayat.

·         Zilla Panchayats in Assembly segments will constitute regional Vidhan Sabhas and similarly the ones in Parliament segments will constitute regional Parliaments. The membership of both the houses will be drawn from respective Zilla Panchayats and its methodology shall be worked out by mutual consent of Zilla Panchayats.

·         At the state level, the membership for the State Assemblies shall be drawn from their respective regional Assemblies.

·         For the Parliament in Delhi, the membership shall be drawn from their respective regional Parliaments.

 

Through this method the members of Assemblies and Parliament will be truly peoples’ representatives and not representatives of political parties. The Assemblies will elect their respective Chief Ministers and Council of State Ministers, and Parliament will elect the Prime Minister and Council of Central Ministers.

This manner of electing peoples’ representatives will avoid the influence of capitalists and requirement of large money. The generation of black money will also be greatly reduced. Vote bank politics based on caste, creed, religion and gender will cease to be a divisive element of electoral politics. Antisocial and criminal elements will find it hard to enter the Assemblies and Parliament.

The destruction of the natural environment and displacement-for-development could then be halted.

रिपोर्ट : बिरादरियों का आत्मसम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन

ज्ञान पंचायत 

शनिवार, 31 अक्तूबर 2020, विद्या आश्रम, सारनाथ  

कल अश्विन पूर्णिमा के दिन विद्या आश्रम पर ‘बिरादरियों का आत्मसम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन’ इस विषय पर एक ज्ञान पंचायत हुई. लगभग 50 की उपस्थिति रही. कई लोगों ने कहा कि विषय अलग किस्म का है और इस पर उन्होंने पहले से बहुत सोचा हो ऐसा नहीं है. पंचायत ठीक-ठाक ही हुई. बोलने वालों में तुलनात्मक दृष्टि से युवा काफी थे और जो सैद्धांतिक बातें हुईं भी वे बिरादरियों की गति और वर्तमान राजनैतिक परिदृष्य के सन्दर्भ में ही हुई. 

 राहुल कश्यप बिरादरियों के आत्म सम्मान के प्रयासों और राजनीति से संबंधों पर बोलते हुए

मंच पर बाये से - महेंद्र प्रताप मौर्य, सुनील सहस्रबुद्धे, रामजनम और चौधरी राजेंद्र

विद्या आश्रम की समन्वयक चित्रा सहस्रबुद्धे ने विषय प्रवेश कराया जिसमें उन्होंने कहा कि आत्म सम्मान अथवा गौरव को जब तक बिरादरियों के ज्ञान में अवस्थित नहीं किया जायेगा तब तक वह अस्थाई होगा और राजनीतिक दर्शन के स्तर पर विचार को गति दे सकें ऐसा शायद न हो पाए. उसके बाद जैसा कि पहले से घोषित था सुनील कश्यप, अभिषेक तिवारी और लक्ष्मण प्रसाद ने शुरू में अपनी-अपनी बात कही और उसके बाद और लोगों ने अपने विचार रखे.

अभिषेक कुमार  तिवारी व्यक्तिगत और सामाजिक आत्म सम्मान पर विचार साझा करते हुए. 

जबकि यह बात सबको मान्य थी कि आत्मसम्मान, समाज में सम्मान और गौरवमय इतिहास यह सब आपस में जुड़ा हुआ है और गरीब जनता के लिए समाज में सम्मानजनक स्थान हो इसके लिए जरुरी भी है. और इससे जुड़ी हुई राजनीति का विकास भी होना चाहिए. कुछ लोगों ने इस और ध्यान खींचा कि बिरादरियों के ही कुछ लोग इसका फायदा उठा कर राजनीति में अपने लिए जगह बनाते हैं और बाकी लोगों को पीछे छोड़ देते हैं, जो अवांछनीय है और गलत राजनीति को बढ़ावा देता है. तमाम बिरादरियों में अपने गौरव को आधार बनाकर सेनाएं बनी हैं जो कभी आत्मरक्षा तो कभी दूसरे पर हमला करने के लिए इस्तेमाल की जाती है. इन सेनाओं का नेतृत्व भी असामाजिक होता है. यह भी गौरव पर आधारित राजनीति को गलत दिशा में ले जाता है. यह बात सामने आई कि जाति का जो इतिहास लिखा और पढाया जाता है वह उसे एक सर्वथा स्थिर और बंधी हुई सामाजिक संरचना के रूप में पेश करता है तथा यह कि जातियां हमेशा से ही गतिशील रही हैं और अपने मूल्यों और अपने ज्ञान के जरिये समाज को अपना योगदान कराती रही हैं. जबकि यह बात सच है कि जातियां आज कट्टर ऊँच-नीच का शिकार हैं. यह अवश्य अध्ययन और चिंतन का विषय है कि ऐसी कट्टर ऊँच-नीच कब से और किन रूपों में रही है. यह भी कहा गया कि बिरादरियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच और उनके आत्म सम्मान और गौरव दोनों को उचित स्थान देते हुए उनके ज्ञान और मूल्यों को आधार बनाते हुए इस राजनीतिक दर्शन पर चिंतन ज़रूरी है जो एक नई राजनीति के द्वार खोले. अगर हम सम्मान और गौरव, इसका इतिहास और वर्तमान को सीधे राजनीति से जोड़ना चाहेंगे तो वह मोटे तौर पर वर्तमान राजनीति की सेवा में ही चला जाएगा, जैसा होते हुए देखा भी जा रहा है. आत्म सम्मान और गौरव और राजनीति को आपस में जोड़ने की कड़ी राजनीतिक दर्शन में है. अगर इसे अनदेखा किया गया तो समाज हित का राजनीतिक दखल नहीं तैयार हो पायेगा.

लक्ष्मण प्रसाद बिरादरियों के बीच उंच-नीच को ख़त्म  करने 

और आत्म सम्मान हासिल करने के शोषित समाज के आन्दोलन के बारे में विचार रखते हुए 

राजनीतिक दर्शन की चर्चा सामान्य नहीं है लेकिन सामाजिक कार्यकर्ताओं को प्रयास करके इस बारे में सोचना ज़रूरी है. उन्हें लोकस्मृति से, अपने इतिहास से और लोकविद्या के परिप्रेक्ष्य में उस विचार को मूर्त रूप देना है जो हमें एक अपने राजनैतिक दर्शन की ओर ले जायेगा.

राहुल राजभर बिरादरियों की वर्तमान गतिशीलता के बारे में बोलते हुए 

हरिश्चंद्र बिंद, नंदलाल. मोहम्मद अहमद, सुरेश वनवासी, राहुल राज, राम धीरज गुप्ताजी, चौधरी राजेन्द्र, महेंद्र प्रताप मौर्य, राम जनम और सुनील सहस्रबुद्धे ने ज्ञान पंचायत में अपने विचार रखे. ज्ञान पंचायत में इस बार अश्विन पूर्णिमा 31 अक्तूबर को पड़ी. अक्तूबर की 31 तारीख़ सरदार वल्लभ भाई पटेल, आचार्य नरेंद्र देव और आदि कवि वाल्मीकि की जयंती है. इसी दिन देश की प्रधानमन्त्री श्रीमती इंदिरा गाँधी की हत्या हुई थी, यह उनकी शहादत का दिन भी है. अलग-अलग वक्ताओं ने अपने वक्तव्यों में इनका ज़िक्र किया. ज्ञान पंचायत की शुरुआत युद्धेश के जनगीतों और लोकविद्या के बोल से हुई. 

 अंत में सुनील सहस्रबुद्धे ने कहा कि ऐसा प्रतीत होता है की इस बात को जब हम आगे बढ़ाएंगे तो इस ज्ञान पंचायत में उपस्थित युवाओं में कुछ ऐसे अवश्य हैं, जो बिरादरियों के मान सम्मान से जुड़े राजनैतिक दर्शन पर कुछ आगे की बात करेंगे. इसके बाद सभी ने खीर का प्रसाद ग्रहण किया.

विद्या आश्रम        

ज्ञान पंचायत : बिरादरियों का आत्म सम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन

अश्विन पूर्णिमा, शनिवार, 31अक्तूबर, 2020

विद्या आश्रम, सारनाथ, वाराणसी  

विषय प्रवेश

‘बिरादरी’ शब्द को खोल कर देखना होगा : बिरादरी का शाब्दिक अर्थ भाईचारे से है, एक ऐसा समुदाय जिसमें सब बराबर हैं. बिरादरी केवल पारंपरिक ही नहीं होती, नई बनती रहती हैं और कुछ अपना अस्तित्व खोती भी रहती हैं. बिरादरी को मुख्यतः पारंपरिक पेशेगत आधार पर देखा जाता हैं. अगर पेशेगत आधार पर देखें तो आधुनिक समाज में भी बिरादरियां दिखाई देती हैं. उदाहरणार्थ डाक्टर, वकील, इंजीनियर, प्रशासक आदि. लेकिन ‘बिरादरी’ शब्द में केवल पेशे का संकेत नहीं है. बिरादरियों के अपने सामाजिक, आर्थिक, राजनीतिक, धार्मिक, व्यवसाय आदि के मूल्य होते हैं. इसमें व्यापक जीवनमूल्यों और नैतिक संबंधों के दृष्टिकोण भी होते हैं, जो अलग-अलग हो सकते हैं और ‘बिरादरी’ को एक ‘समाज’ का अर्थ प्रदान करते हैं. इस ज्ञान-पंचायत में ‘बिरादरी’ के इस व्यापक अर्थ को स्थान दिया जाना है.

आज़ाद भारत में शुरू से अब तक विभिन्न बिरादरियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच का सवाल प्रमुख बना हुआ है. ऐसे तो बीसवीं सदी के प्रारंभ से ही सार्वजनिक जीवन में ‘बिरादरियों का आत्मसम्मान’ एक महत्त्व का मुद्दा बना. पिछले कुछ दशकों से बिरादरियों के आत्म-सम्मान और गौरव को संगठित ढंग से सामने लाने की कोशिशें हो रही हैं, जिसमें जातीय इतिहास को सामने लाने और जातीय सेनाओं के संगठन की पहल नज़र आ रही है. हम इन मुद्दों पर एक नज़र डाल के अपनी बात रखेंगे.

1.     बिरादरियों में ऊँच–नीच का सवाल और राजनीति : आज़ाद भारत में इस सोच के साथ कि बिरादरियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच सदियों से चली आ रही है, एक किस्म की राजनीति ने आकार लिया, जिसके अंतर्गत ब्राह्मणवाद का विरोध, आरक्षण की नीतियां, जाति-तोड़ो आन्दोलन, जाति-व्यवस्था का निर्मूलन, वर्ग विभाजन से जाति विभाजन को प्रमुख मानना आदि जैसे अभियान, आन्दोलन और सामाजिक-राजनीतिक गतिविधियों ने आकार लिया.  लेकिन आज भी बिरादरियों में ऊँच-नीच है, यह सच है और इसका राजनीति से गहरा सम्बन्ध है, यह भी सच है. संविधान में सभी नागरिक बराबर माने जाने के बावजूद राजनैतिक दल वोट संग्रह के लिए इस ऊँच-नीच का फायदा उठाते हैं. इस राजनीति से जातीय संघर्षों को भी हवा मिलती रहती है. यहाँ दो सवाल हैं. पहला, क्या इस ऊँच-नीच का स्वरुप और पैमाना सदियों से स्थिर है या बदलता रहा है? दूसरा, ‘विकास’ के राजनैतिक दर्शन ने पढ़े-लिखे और कम पढ़े/अनपढ़ लोगों के बीच जो आर्थिक-सामाजिक ऊँच-नीच पैदा की है क्या वह बिरादरियों के बीच की ऊँच-नीच जैसी ही है? बिरादरियों के बीच यह ऊंच-नीच तो ख़त्म होनी ही होगी चाहे वो सदियों से हो या आधुनिक राज्य की ‘विकास’ नीतियों से जन्मी हो. यह एक समग्र राजनैतिक दर्शन की मांग करता है लेकिन दोनों ही प्रकार की बिरादरियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच को ख़त्म करने के लिए एक नैतिक राजनीति का दर्शन चाहिए, वो कहाँ से आएगा?

2.        बिरादरियों का आत्मसम्मान और राजनीति : आज़ाद भारत में बिरादरियों ने अपने-अपने इतिहास को गौरवपूर्ण प्रस्तुत कर आत्मसम्मान को हासिल करने का मार्ग भी चुना है. इस मार्ग पर चलते हुए और आज की राजनीति का दबाव झेलते हुए पिछले दशकों से जातीय सेनाओं के संगठन की पहल भी दिखाई देती है. ब्रह्मर्षि सेना, निषाद सेना, रणवीर सेना, करणी सेना, भूमि सेना, आज़ाद सेना, भीम आर्मी, आदि. इन सेनाओं का आत्म-सम्मान का वैचारिक आधार अधिकतर ‘इतिहास में इनके पास राजसत्ता होने’ का है और आज सेना जैसे ‘बल-संगठन’ का आधार इसे पुनः हासिल करने अथवा अपने गौरव की रक्षा की इच्छा में है. हो सकता है इनके आलावा कुछ अन्य आधार भी हों. इस तरह की पहल बिरादरियों के आत्मसम्मान और आत्मविश्वास को आकार देने की शुरुआत भी कर रही हैं. लेकिन किसी भी बिरादरी का ‘भौतिक बल’ आधुनिक राज्यसत्ता की ताकत के सामने बहुत छोटा है. ऐसे में ये ताकतें आधुनिक राजनीति/राज्यसत्ता की सेवा में ही अपने अस्तित्व को बनाये रखने के लिए बाध्य होती हैं. ये न अपने लिए और न बृहत समाज के लिए न्याय हासिल करने की किसी नैतिक राजनीति के लिए मार्ग खोल सकती हैं.

3.        लोकविद्या आन्दोलन का दृष्टिकोण : लोकविद्या दृष्टिकोण उपरोक्त दोनों बातों, यानि बिरादरियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच को ख़त्म करने और बिरादरियों के आत्मसम्मान की सार्वजनिक स्थापना, को एक साथ लाने में नए मार्ग खुलने की संभावनाओं को देखता है. इसके लिए नीचे लिखे विचार प्रस्थान बिंदु हो सकते है.

·    बिरादरी एक समाज ही होती है और ऐसे कई समाजों से मिलकर हमारा बृहत समाज बना है. बिरादरी का आत्मसम्मान उनके समाज के ज्ञान में देखने पर, बिरादरी ये संस्कृतियों के ऐसे ज्ञान-पुंज दिखाई देंगी जो अपनी स्वायत्त पहचान के साथ स्वयं प्रकाशित हैं.

·    बिरादरी के ज्ञान में उत्पादन, तकनीकी, भण्डारण, वितरण आदि के साथ  कला, दर्शन, शासन, प्रकृति के साथ रिश्ते और अन्य बिरादरियों के साथ संबंधों का ऐसा ज्ञान मिलेगा जो आज ‘आधुनिक ज्ञान’ की क्षमताओं से बाहर हैं. इस ज्ञान के भण्डार को बिरादरियों के आत्मसम्मान का आधार बनाना होगा. उनका ज्ञान ‘आधुनिक ज्ञान’ से अधिक नैतिक व न्याय-संगत हैं इसका दावा पेश करना होगा.

·    पुराने ब्राह्मणवाद और आधुनिक ज्ञान से स्थापित नए ब्राह्मणवाद को एक साथ ख़त्म करने का रास्ता होगा- ज्ञान के आधार पर बराबरी और आत्मसम्मान का दावा करना. इसमें जातियों के बीच ऊँच-नीच को ख़त्म करने की सशक्त शुरुआत हो सकती है.

·    इतिहास हमें दिखाता है कि हमारे देश में विभिन्न कालों में देश के अलग-अलग हिस्सों पर अलग-अलग बिरादरियों के राजाओं ने शासन किया. और इन्हीं राजाओं के दौर में बृहत समाज ने ज्ञान के सभी क्षेत्रों जैसे दर्शन, कला, शिल्प, उत्पादन, गणित, तकनीकी, आदि में ऊँचाइयाँ हासिल कीं. ये कैसे हो पाया? आत्मसम्मान हासिल करने के आंदोलनों में ये किस प्रकार शामिल होगा?

·    केंद्रीकृत आधुनिक शासन में बिरादरियों का स्थान अटपटा ही बनता है. ये ऐसी शासन व्यवस्थाओं का अंग रही हैं और हो सकती हैं जिनमें स्वायत्तता, सम्प्रभुता और सत्ता जनता के अधिक निकट हो.

· 

चित्रा सहस्रबुद्धे 

विद्या आश्रम 

Some articles on the Self Respect movement of the early 20th Century

 The Gyan Panchayat on 31st October 2020

 

The Principles of Self-Respect

(from Wikipedia)

The Self-Respect Movement is a South Asian movement with the aim of achieving a society where backward castes have equal human rights, and encouraging backward castes to have self-respect in the context of a caste-based society that considered them to be a lower end of the hierarchy. It was founded in 1925 by S. Ramanathan who invited E. V. Ramasamy (also called as Periyar by his devoted followers) to head the movement in Tamil Nadu.

Periyar was convinced that if man developed self respect, he would automatically develop individuality and would refuse to be led by the nose by schemers. One of his most known quotes on Self-Respect was, "we are fit to think of 'self-respect' only when the notion of 'superior' and 'inferior' caste is banished from our land".

Periyar did not expect personal or material gain out of this movement. He used to recall in a very casual manner that as a human being, he also was obligated to this duty, as it was the right and freedom to choose this work. Thus, he opted to engage himself in starting and promoting the movement.

Periyar declared that the Self-Respect Movement alone could be the genuine freedom movement, and political freedom would not be fruitful without individual self-respect. He remarked that the so-called 'Indian freedom fighters' were showing disrespect of self-respect, and this was really an irrational philosophy.

Periyar observed that political freedom as conceived by nationalists such as Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru and others did not cover individual self-respect. To him neither revival of the original spirit of Hindu religion and ancient traditions which formed part of Gandhi's conception of freedom, nor complete liberation from the British rule which was considered by Nehru to be the meaning of freedom or both of them together could ensure individual self-respect or the eradication of social ills from Indian society. In his opinion, the task of fulfilling the need for self-respect would have to be faced whatever be the extent of political freedom gained. Pointing out that even the British monarch in a sovereign independent nation had no freedom to marry a person of his choice and had to abdicate his kingdom, Periyar raised a question whether Gandhi's vision of freedom or Nehru's concept of independence contained even an iota of individual self-respect.

Periyar believed that self-respect was as valuable as life itself and its protection is a birthright and not swaraj ('political freedom'). He described the movement as Arivu Vidutalai Iyakkam, that is, a movement to liberate the intellect.

The terms tan-maanam or suya mariyadai meaning 'self-respect' are traceable in ancient Tamil literature considered a virtue of high valor in Tamil society. Periyar once claimed that to describe the ideology of his movement, no dictionary or language in the entire world could provide a word better than or equal to suya mariyadai.

Started as a movement (Iyakkam in Tamil) to promote rational behavior, the Self-Respect Movement acquired much wider connotation within a short period of time. Periyar, speaking with M.K. Reddy at the First Self-Respect Conference held in 1929, explained the significance of self-respect and its principles. The main principles of the Self-Respect Movement in society were to be: no kind of inequality among people; no difference such as rich and poor in economic life; men and women to be treated as equals in every respect without differences; attachments to caste, religion, varna, and country to be eradicated from society with a prevalent friendship and unity around the world; with every human being seeking to act according to reason, understanding, desire, and perspective, and shall not be subject to slavery of any kind or manner.

Equality with stress on economic and social equality formed the central theme of the Self-Respect Movement and was due to Periyar's determination to fight the inequalities ingrained in the caste system as well as certain religious practices. Working on the theme of liberating the society from the baneful social practices perpetrated in the name of dharma and karma, Periyar developed the idea of establishing this movement as the instrument for achieving his objective.

Self Respect

Periyar's philosophy of self-respect was based on his image of an ideal world and a universally accepted one. His philosophy preaches that human actions should be based on rational thinking. Further, the outcome of the natural instinct of human beings is to examine every object and every action and even nature with a spirit of inquiry, and to refuse to submit to anything irrational as equivalent to slavery. Thus, the philosophy of self-respect taught that human actions should be guided by reason, right and wrong should follow from rational thinking and conclusions drawn from reason should be respected under all circumstances. Freedom means respect to thoughts and actions considered 'right' by human beings on the basis of 'reason'. There is not much difference between 'freedom' and 'self-respect'.[55]

Periyar's foremost appeal to people was to develop self-respect. He preached that the Brahmins had monopolised and cheated other communities for decades and deprived them of self-respect. He stated that most Brahmins claimed to belong to a "superior" community with the reserved privilege of being in charge of temples and performing archanas. He felt that they were trying to reassert their control over religion by using their superior caste status to claim the exclusive privilege to touch idols or enter the sanctum sanctorum.[52]

Women’s rights

As a rationalist and ardent social reformer, Periyar advocated forcefully throughout his life that women should be given their legitimate position in society as the equals of men and that they should be given good education and have the right to property. He thought age and social customs was not a bar in marrying women. He was keen that women should realise their rights and be worthy citizens of their country.[56]

Periyar fought against the orthodox traditions of marriage as suppression of women in Tamil Nadu and throughout the Indian sub-continent. Though arranged marriages were meant to enable a couple to live together throughout life, it was manipulated to enslave women. Much worse was the practice of child marriages practised throughout India at the time. It was believed that it would be a sin to marry after puberty. Another practice, which is prevalent today, is the dowry system where the bride's family is supposed to give the husband a huge payment for the bride. The purpose of this was to assist the newly wedded couple financially, but in many instances dowries were misused by bridegrooms. The outcome of this abuse turned to the exploitation of the bride's parents wealth, and in certain circumstances, lead to dowry deaths. There have been hundreds of thousands of cases where wives have been murdered, mutilated, and burned alive because the father of the bride was unable to make the dowry payment to the husband. Periyar fiercely stood up against this abuse meted out against women.

Women in India also did not have rights to their families' or husbands' property. Periyar fought fiercely for this and also advocated for women to have the right to separate or divorce their husbands under reasonable circumstances.While birth control remained taboo in society of Periyar's time, he advocated for it not only for the health of women and population control, but for the liberation of women.

He criticised the hypocrisy of chastity for women and argued that it should either apply also to men, or not at all for both genders. While fighting against this, Periyar advocated getting rid of the Devadasi system. In his view it was an example of a list of degradations of women, attaching them to temples for the entertainment of others, and as temple prostitutes. Further, for the liberation of women, Periyar pushed for their right to have an education and to join the armed services and the police force.

Thoughts on the Thirukkural

Periyar hailed the Thirukkural as a valuable scripture which contained many scientific and philosophical truths. He also praised the secular nature of the work. Periyar praised Thiruvalluvar for his description of God as a formless entity with only positive attributes. He also suggested that one who reads the Thirukkural will become a Self-respecter, absorbing knowledge in politics, society, and economics. According to him, though certain items in this ancient book of ethics may not relate to today, it permitted such changes for modern society.

On caste, he believed that the Kural illustrates how Vedic laws of Manu were against the Sudras and other communities of the Dravidian race. On the other hand, Periyar opined that the ethics from the Kural was comparable to the Christian Bible. The Dravidar Kazhagam adopted the Thirukkural and advocated that Thiruvalluvar's Kural alone was enough to educate the people of the country.

Periyar also asserted that due to the secular nature of Thirukkural, it has the capacity to be the common book of faith for all humanity and can be kept on par or above the holy books of all religions.

The Self-Respect Movement — The Emergence of South Indian Politics

By Vedika Agarwalla

The Self-Respect Movement was founded in 1921 by S.Ramanathan and invited E.V Ramasamy to head the campaign. E.V Ramasamy, popularly known as Periyar is regarded as the ‘Father of Modern Tamil Nadu.’ Periyar was a social activist, politician and a thinker who was way ahead of his time. He was the pillar of the Dravidian framework and philosophy that went on to shape the politics of Tamil Nadu.The Self-Respect Movement is also known as the Dravidian Movement. The three main ideologies that were propagated through this movement were the breaking down of the Brahminic hegemony, equal rights for the backward classes and women in the society and revitalization of the Dravidian languages which included Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, and Malayalam.

It opposed the domination of Brahmins as the superior class and hence, encouraged the facilitation of self-respect for those belonging to the lower end of the caste-based society in India. The movement believed in the principle of individuality which could be developed only when one gains self-respect.The movement had a lofty goal of achieving equality in various spheres of life. It wanted the liberation of the society from baneful social practices performed in the name of caste and religion which led to a vicious cycle of discrimination such as the practice of caste-based occupation and untouchability. The method of casteism led people to act in an irrational manner which hampered the ability of people to act according to reason, understanding, and perspective.

One of the most critical and significant sociological change that occurred through the Self-Respect Movement was the enforcement of self-respect marriages in which a marriage could be officiated without a Brahmin priest, as the ceremonies were usually conducted in Sanskrit which most people lacked an understanding of and therefore rituals were based on blind adherence. The movement regarded marriages to be not bound by caste and hence encouraged inter-caste and inter-religious marriages where one should be able to marry a person of their choice. The self-respect marriages stood for widows remarrying as well, because the prevalence of child marriages widowed many girls at a young age. Consequently, the movement was able to garner a wide audience of woman.Tamil Nadu was one of the first states to legalize Hindu marriages without the presence of a Brahmin priest which led to an increase of inter-caste marriages.

Apart from the anti-caste ideologies, the Self- Respect Movement had a deep-rooted sense of feminist values. It advocated for a society where a woman had the freedom over their physical, sexual and reproductive choice. Periyar’s model focused on enabling woman to gain access to contraception as well as permanent birth control; this came at a time when there was an extensive national talk on anti-conception medication. The feminist ideology of the movement propelled woman to have an equal right to choose partners, to divorce and the choice to remarry. The Self-Respect Movement wanted to bring a radical transformation in the heterosexual relationships by abolishing gender hierarchy and gender roles. It emphasized the importance of sharing domestic work and child-rearing activities among men and woman.

One of the primary aims of the movement was to eradicate the devadasi system which was prevalent in the eastern and southern parts of the country. In this system a woman between the ages of 7-36 were to dedicate their lives to the temple deity where they performed various arts. Initially the status of a devadasi was considered to be respectable, but later on, at the time of the colonial era, the devadasi system was condemned on the grounds of practicing prostitution as they bore many children to the priest and wealthy patronages. Moreover, the devadasi system isolated these woman from the society. Hence the movement consisted of women from all walks of life who were actively engaged in protests fighting for human rights. The basic motto of the Self-Respect Movement was to bring social changes in the society. It touched lives from all the strata of the community – not only attacked the caste system prevalent at that time, but also advocated for gender equality.

Even though Periyar never wanted this movement to become political, gradually it became so. As the movement slowly turned political, the leaders associated with it became power hungry, and corruption crept in. The origin of the two major political parties of Tamil Nadu- DMK and AIADMK can be traced to the Dravidian movement. Both these parties of Tamil Nadu have ruled the state for more than half a century. These parties have defiantly brought significant social changes, but subsequently, their main aim became to capture the popular mandate and vote bank politics. Unfortunately, most of the mass movements in our country which have noble intentions of bringing radical changes in our society tend to deviate from its intended goal.

 

बिरादरियों का आत्म-सम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन

 

निमंत्रण

ज्ञान-पंचायत

विषय : बिरादरियों का आत्म-सम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन

दिन : अश्विन पूर्णिमा, शनिवार, 31 अक्टूबर, 2020

समय : दोपहर 2.00 बजे से

स्थान : विद्या आश्रम, सारनाथ, वाराणसी  

हर वर्ष की भांति इस बार भी अश्विन पूर्णिमा के दिन विद्या आश्रम एक ज्ञान-पंचायत का आयोजन कर रहा है. इस ज्ञान-पंचायत का विषय है- ‘बिरादरियों का आत्मसम्मान और राजनीतिक दर्शन’. सदियों से चली आ रही जातिगत ऊँच-नीच और उसके उन्मूलन के राजनीतिक दर्शन हैं. बिरादरियों के आत्मसम्मान और गौरवमय इतिहास से एक दूसरे किस्म के राजनीतिक दर्शन की और संकेत होता है. यह राजनीतिक दर्शन कैसा हो सकता है और ऊँच-नीच को चुनौती देने में इसकी क्या भूमिका हो सकती है? क्या इन दोनों दृष्टियों के बीच समन्वय और एक नये राजनीतिक दर्शन की ओर कदम बढ़ाना भारत के ऊँच-नीच से मुक्त और न्यायसंगत भविष्य के लिए ज़रूरी है?

ज्ञान-पंचायत में पहले निम्नलिखित तीन सामाजिक कार्यकर्त्ता

विषय पर अपने विचार रखेंगे और फिर पंचायत में खुली बातचीत होगी.

प्रमुख वक्ता

सुनील कश्यप (‘समता परिवार’ संस्थापक सदस्य और कारवाँ पत्रिका के रिपोर्टर)

अभिषेक तिवारी (‘Owl Sabha’  संस्थापक सदस्य तथा संपादक ‘दी सभा’)

लक्ष्मण प्रसाद (‘विद्या आश्रम’ संस्थापक सदस्य तथा वाराणसी जिला अध्यक्ष, भारतीय किसान यूनियन)

आप इस ज्ञान–पंचायत में सादर आमंत्रित हैं.

चित्रा सहस्रबुद्धे

समन्वयक

विद्या आश्रम

संपर्क फोन : 9838944822, 9026219913