Plurality and Imagination

Plurality and Imagination

Medieval theologian William of Occam is known for challenging the Avignon based Papacy for its doctrinaire excesses. But he is still revered for his reductionist system of logic evocatively dubbed “Occam’s Razor”. The razor is designed to cut out the obfuscation of “imaginative theorising,” or to keep it simple. But even Occam had to concede that there was indeed a time and place for multiple threading, running in parallel, only stating that: Plurality should not be posited without necessity.

And it was indeed necessity that drove India’s Constituent Assembly in the drafting of our Constitution in 1949. It had to recognise India’s diversity of caste, creed, religion, habit, manners, mores, cultural, culinary and political persuasion. And then there was the matter of unifying Princely India with British India, protectorates and special territories included, with the rest. India had to meld together as a brand new republic, post-imperial, post-feudal, post a very traumatic partition; with the bold gift of universal franchise.

But even then, our founding fathers did point towards one law for all under Article 44. The controversial article refers to an intended Uniform Civil Code, to come about someday, when, as a consequence of the natural evolution of our polity, it becomes possible.

This original intent was modified somewhat by aspects of the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution of 1976 which stipulates that we are also specifically “Secular”. This insertion is interpreted as meaning that imposition of a uniform civil code is thereby unconstitutional and in breach of a plural peoples’ fundamental rights. It is also considered mercilessly majoritarian, and threatening to the minorities and their entire way of life.

But if one wants to look for signs of hope, of Occam’s Razor being applied to the debate of one civil law for all; we could look to yet another insertion made in the 42nd Amendment, namely that we were to be “Socialist,” thereinafter and evermore.

However, Socialism is not what it used to be. If not quite given the complete go-by in India approaching Independence Day 2009, the old Socialism of the Nehru and Indira Gandhi years is certainly much diluted.

And the future is headed towards a competitive, integrated and globalised market economy. This is essential if we are to sustain high growth rates and eliminate the very poverty that Socialism has never been able to tackle. India has already emerged as the world’s second largest market and the world is clamouring for greater access to it.

So, despite the gloating of the Indian Socialists who think the recent troubles of the global economy are emblematic, there is no way out. The Capitalist system may not be perfect, but it is still the best system that global economics has evolved. It is also much more resilient in 2009 than it was even twenty years ago. The cycles of recession are getting much shorter due to globalisation, better communications, real-time decision-making and a much bigger world economy.

Tacitly conceding that Socialism’s day is largely done, our present Government is leaning towards a much more wholesome Welfarism. This shows commitment towards reducing the travails of the poor without curbing the entrepreneurship of the rich, while concerning itself with eventually balancing the fiscal deficit too!

Similar evolution is expected in the political and theoretical debate on Secularism.
It is daunting to behold the inflexibility with which the concept is widely viewed in India. It is as if the religion of the majority is the unmentionable elephant in the room. And without specific protections against this threat, the minorities are truly done for. Of course, this notion is aggravated by vote-bank politics that seeks to leverage not only religion, but caste, sub-caste, language, water-sharing, even the proper ownership of heroes and saints of old!

Ergo, Secularism must be treated both as shield and sword, to keep the would- be predator at bay. That this is clearly in conflict with the traditionally tolerance and tranquillity loving people of this land is continuously ignored.

We are not only unbelieving of our own better nature, but clearly influenced by a largely dysfunctional and insecure SAARC muttering about regional hegemony. This is compounded by Pakistani and sporadic Bangladeshi propaganda from without and certain right-wing Christian evangelist postures within. The Hindu majority, like some hydra-headed gorgon, is allegedly hard-wired to gobble up everyone else--leaving nary a trace of the minority culture, custom or demographics.

This is laughable in a country that has never been expansionist. And the only influence the Bharatvarsha of old exerted was cultural, and this did travel far and wide and endures; in China, in the Far East, in Arabia, in Africa, even to this day.

Hindustan has been ruled for 400 years by Mughals and 200 years after that by an Anglican Britain, with both entities not above pushing their religions at the people as a matter of course. But this has not happened in a free India and the communal rioting we have seen in over 60 years is minimal compared to the horrors of partition. And this, despite recent terrorist provocations at revered shrines, mosques and churches.

It is self-evident that we need a revision of our assumptions. We have successfully implemented a non-denominational attitude in the Indian Armed Forces with complete freedom of worship. We have done this also in the composition and working of our national and regional cricket teams. We have implemented this in Bollywood. India Inc. too is integrated and dynamic. So is the burgeoning media, be it in print, online and broadcast. So why can’t the same uniform wave be carried through legislatively, politically and judicially?

Secularism is indeed a big idea. It means much more than petty protection of the right to worship and practice one’s religion freely. It is about refusing to let prejudice of all kinds affect the political, legislative and judicial workings of our nation. This properly should take in Ageism, Sexism, exploitation and all other oppressive constructs that live within communities attempting to erect or retain protective barriers under the cover of pluralism.

But we cannot afford to hang onto these twisted versions of the truth. It is dividing people with illogical notions of what is communal and secular. The time may have come to use Occam’s Razor to cut out the cant and get ourselves a fresh new start.

(1,052 words)

9th August 2009
Gautam Mukherjee


Published as Leader Edit on Edit Page of The Pioneer on August12th,2009 as "Plurality and imagination". Also published online at www.dailypioneer.com and archived there under Columnists.