Economic and Political Weekly (Bombay)
March 30, 2002

When the 'Silent Majority' Backs a Violent Minority

However much liberal and Left political and social scientists may try
to explain every communal riot as a conspiracy by a bunch of
politicians in league with religious fundamentalists, we cannot deny
the fact that such riots take place on a soil fertile with religious
prejudices and hatred. Administrative interventions like prompt
police action can indeed prevent riots, but can never eradicate the
canker of religious communalism that has remained embedded, and is
fast spreading, among the 'silent majority'.

by Sumanta Banerjee

After every major communal riot, people like us who want to believe
in the humane qualities of Indians go on reiterating the old cliche -
the majority of Indians are secular-minded and all Hindus and Muslims
believe in living together in peaceful harmony! We describe them as
the 'silent majority', and pity them as mute observers of vicious
riots. We interpret the riots as misdeeds perpetrated by a gang of
criminals only, in the pay of a minority of unscrupulous politicians
in league with a handful of fanatical religious groups. In our
desperate urge to defend this wishful image of the 'silent majority',
we pick upon every little scrap of news which may describe how in
some isolated incident, a single brave Hindu individual or family
saved a Muslim neighbour, or vice versa.

While surely admiring such courage, we forget that exceptions do not
always make the rule. We refuse to face up to the fact that the
silence of this 'silent majority' often amounts to acquiescence in
communal riots, and can also provide a social sanction for their
outbreak and continuation for days together. What is worse, from the
role of passive assenters during communal riots in the 1960-70
period, a large number of the 'silent majority', both Hindus and
Muslims, have graduated to the role of active participants in such
riots during the last two decades. The recent holocaust in Gujarat
shows that they are no longer silent. In their post-Godhra
retaliation, the RSS-BJP-VHP axis succeeded in mobilising thousands
from among these silent Hindu majority. As exposed by the media,
Hindu rioters and killers came from educated and upper class families
- moving around in cars and with cellphones, while looting
Muslim shops and burning Muslim families. Keshavram Kashiram Shastri,
said to be a highly respected literary figure of Gujarat, and also
the chairman of the Gujarat unit of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, in an
interview on a web site (www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/12train.him)
has proudly described them as 'kelvayela Hindu chokra' (well-bred
Hindu boys), whose acts cannot be condemned! It is significant that
even the poor and the oppressed among this 'silent majority' - the
tribal people - joined the rioters in the villages of Gujarat in the
anti-Muslim pogrom.

It was not as if these people were coerced into supporting and
joining the miscreants. It was not out of fear of the Sangh parivar
gangsters that the 'silent majority' of Hindus in Gujarat refrained
from resisting the holocaust. It was out of loyalty and sympathy for
these gangsters that they actively participated in the massacre. We
have to face this stark fact, and understand the tilt in the mind of
the Hindu 'silent majority' that had taken place during the last
decade or so. It is not peculiar to Gujarat. We had noticed it in the
early 1990s, when thousands from all over India joined Advani's
'ratha-yatra' to Ayodhya, and in every state that they passed
through, unleashed anti-Muslim riots. The anti-BJP political
organisations, ranging from the Congress to the socialists, from the
CPI(M) to the Naxalites, failed to mobilise their ranks on the
streets and halt this march. I remember, at that time I posed a
question to my friends in the CPI, CPI(M) and some Naxalite groups:
'You can bring thousands of your ranks and followers at a moment's
notice to the Delhi Boat Club for a public meeting. Why don't you
organise them to form a human chain to prevent Advani's ratha-yatra?'
While others prevaricated, a CPI(M-L) leader of the Liberation group
was frank enough in his reply. He admitted that while his party's
followers and sympathisers (the majority of whom are from the poor
and depressed castes and tribals) would readily congregate at a
public meeting on economic demands, and even face police bullets to
fight for those demands, they would hesitate to respond to any call
given by their party that may pit them against their religious
establishment which upholds their faith. He then added the usual
refrain: "After all it's up to the state administration to prevent
communal riots".

Although many other Leftists may not agree with this assessment, I
think this frank acknowledgement throws light on the pathetic state
of mind that has paralysed the Left and secular circles in India. It
also illuminates the cobwebbed nooks and corners of the psyche of our
'silent majority'.

Triumph of Religious Mindset

When we look back at Advani's ratha-yatra and the abortive attempt on
the Babri masjid in 1990, we are struck by two developments. One, all
through Advani's march, there was no popular resistance, whether
spontaneous or organised by political parties and social activists.
Two, the only resistance came in the form of administrative actions -
the arrest of Advani in Bihar by the Laloo Yadav government, and the
shooting down of the Sangh parivar vandals in Ayodhya under Mulayam
Singh's government.

This reveals two trends. First, religious hatred seems to be the most
cohesive agent that can make any mass movement successful in India,
and any appeal to it by communal political parties disarms even the
secular parties. Two, there is a growing tendency among the Left and
secular parties to depend on the state administration, instead of
mass education and mobilisation, to resist communalism. Such an
abdication of the responsibility of political education along secular
lines, can only sacrifice the 'silent majority' to the political
indoctrination campaign of the religious fundamentalists - whether of
the Hindu or the Muslim variety. The RSS-run Saraswati Shishu Mandirs
and the Jamaat-run madrasas have filled the vacuum created by the
disappearance of secular intervention in Indian civil society.

The unopposed march of Advani's ratha-yatra set the tone, and more
and more Hindus felt emboldened to respond to the call of the Sangh
parivar sadhus and leaders. They came out on the streets, and finally
reached Ayodhya on that fateful day, December 6, 1992 to dance the
'tandava-nritya' around the destruction of the Babri mosque. The
post-destruction riots in other parts of India again were marked by
the massive participation of middle class Hindus, including women (of
the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra), in the looting and killing spree
directed against the Muslims. Other Hindus who were still a bit
ashamed of directly taking part in the mayhem, betrayed their
sneaking sympathy for the vandals by expressing all sorts of specious
opinions, ranging from the suggestion that the religious faith of the
majority community should be respected to the suspicion that the
Muslims might be acting as Pakistani agents. During the last one
decade since the Babri mosque demolition, the paralysis of the Left
and secular forces and the dithering of the successive governments at
the centre, had only helped the Hindu fundamentalist terrorists to
recruit more people to their ranks and win over larger sections of
the Hindu 'silent majority' to their side. The latest pogrom in
Gujarat, carried out with active support of Hindus of all sections,
should be an eye-opener for all. Even in the Left citadel of West
Bengal, the VHP succeeded in gathering a large number of Bengali
kar-sevaks for their march to Ayodhya. It was not popular resistance
from the villagers, but prompt police action that prevented them from
carrying out a 'yagna' (which would have led to another communal
conflagration) in rural Canning - a Left stronghold.

Deadly Hold of Religion

It is about time therefore that we take the blinkers off our eyes,
and have a close look at the 'silent majority' in India - whether
Hindus or Muslims. Leave alone secular-minded, they are not - and
cannot be - even pluralistic in their religious outlook. The simple
reason is that as long as they allow themselves to be controlled in
their social life by the clergy and follow the antediluvian tenets of
their respective religions, they will never be able to understand the
values of a secular civil society, and accept the principle that
people of different races, religions and political beliefs can live
together peacefully with equal status in the same society. The
religious beliefs and practices that their clergy dictate and which
they blindly accept, have been traditionally socially divisive,
creating pejorative terms like 'javanas' used by Hindus to despise
the Muslims and 'kafers' used by Muslims to denounce the Hindus. They
have created divisions even within their respective religious
communities - caste conflicts among Hindus, Shia-Sunni discord among
Muslims. But looming large over all these various intra-religious
conflicts in India is the inter-religious war between Hindus and
Muslims.

It is quite natural therefore that in continuation of that divisive
tradition, historical religious war-cries like 'dharam-yudh' and
'jehad' can even today easily mobilise and unite large numbers in
both the communities respectively - behind the Hindu terrorists over
the Ayodhya issue or the Muslim terrorists over the Kashmir issue.

Let us not fudge the issue by using selective instances from the
past. I appreciate the well-researched efforts made by eminent
historians in revealing that Shivaji employed Muslims in his army or
that Akbar's commander was a rajput Hindu king. But from these facts
if we jump to the conclusion that Hindu-Muslim relations among the
'silent majority' were always hunky-dory in those days, we shall
perhaps err on the side of simplistic generalisation, just as the
Sangh parivar's less erudite historians do. They also select
instances like the demolition of some Hindu temples by Muslim rulers
and ignore numerous cases of the granting of sites for temples by
other Muslim rulers. From this selective approach, they claim that
the entire Muslim rule in India was a history of unmitigated tragedy
for the Hindu 'silent majority'.

A hundred years from now, some historians may try to prove that
Muslims were living happily in India in the 1990s, by picking up the
news item that the Toyota in which L K Advani led his ratha-yatra was
driven by a Muslim, while ignoring the other news of the massacre of
Muslims that his yatra instigated. While writing the history of India
of 2002, some may try to prove that the BJP was an extremely tolerant
party, by pointing out that it appointed a Muslim minister in the
government that it was leading. They may further list the number of
Muslims that had become BJP members, MLAs, corporation councillors,
among others. Will the massacre of Muslims that was taking place at
the same time in Gujarat under BJP rule feature in this future
history?

To come down to brass tacks - past historical illustrations of
certain policy decisions by the rulers, as well as the choices made
by certain individuals among the ruled, need not reflect the actual
state of relations at the grass roots between members of the two
religious communities. For instance, Shivaji did indeed employ Muslim
soldiers in his army, but they joined him as mercenaries. One doubts
whether such acts ever set a model for a secular society, or a
lasting Hindu-Muslim fraternity in Maharashtra. The Hindu rajput
king, Man Singh, chose to join Akbar, command his army and play a
crucial role in subjugating both Akbar's Hindu and Muslim opponents
in Bengal and other parts of India. But it is evident that he was
just carrying out his role as an accomplice-cum-employee of the Mogul
emperor and was not inspired by any ideology to foster Hindu-Muslim
unity within a secular framework.

Similarly, today in Indian politics, such accomplices and mercenaries
can be found among Muslim politicians (as well as from other
communities). Some among them are willing to serve the ruling BJP and
its parent the Hindu Sangh parivar - despite their ideological
crusade against Muslims - out of their sheer personal ambition, for
instance, to get ministerial berths, or occupy a position of power.
Some, who may be less opportunist, rationalise their support to the
BJP by privately admitting that since the secular Constitution cannot
protect them, they might as well pay 'protection money' to the
saffron brigade in the shape of votes and other forms of support.
These Muslims may be willing to heed the warning given to them by the
RSS at its recent Bangalore session: "Let the Muslims understand that
their real safety lies in the goodwill of the majority... Winning
goodwill means respecting, tolerating and cooperating with the
majority community" (The Indian Express, March 18, 2002). In other
words, they have to reconcile themselves to the status of
second class citizens.

But this is reconciliation under coercion - and it also implies the
demotion of the Muslims to an inferior position. This warning against
Muslims by the Sangh parivar is nothing new. Their activists lose no
chance in reinforcing this by reminding them of their inferior status
- as the 'kar sevaks' did by forcing them to shout 'Jai Shri Ram',
and taking goods from Muslim pedlars without paying them at Godhra
station. It is such provocations and aggressive acts, along with the
long history of RSS-organised communal riots - which have been
allowed to gather momentum by successive ruling parties both at the
centre and states - that reinforce the hold of the clergy among the
alienated and aggrieved Muslim populace, whom they try to rouse to a
religious frenzy, telling them that Islam is in danger. As a result,
some among them are gravitating towards aggressive retaliation,
either spontaneously or through terrorist organisations. The Godhra
incident is an indication of the trend. Whether instigated by the ISI
or carried out by the local criminal elements in the area (who are
reported to be mainly Muslims), what needs to be noted is the
participation of a large number of Muslims, including women, in the
assault on the train which carried the 'kar sevaks'.

The abiding hold of religion on the 'silent majority' in India is
further bolstered by the growing trend of criminalisation and
corruption that has totally vitiated the social environment. The
abominable effluent of mass putrefaction is pouring out from every
segment of society - spoilt sons of upper class bureaucrats, army
generals, businessmen and politicians who can get away with murder;
middle class clerks, traders and unemployed youth who have no qualms
in cheating others in their struggle for existence on principles of
laissez-faire; industrial workers in the cities who do not think
twice before joining the the lumpen proletariat to make a fast buck;
farmers in the villages who are ready to snuggle up to armed
gang-lords in order to grab land from their neighbours. These are the
creepers and climbers, grovellers and schemers, scrambling over one
another, who form India's 'silent majority'. For them it is just
another step from demanding a bribe to looting a shop, from
threatening a neighbour to killing him. And when such acts become a
part of a collective action sanctioned in the name of religion, they
are assured of their protection by society. In Gujarat, for instance,
the VHP has formed a panel of 50 lawyers to help release the Hindu
rioters, and none of these lawyers will charge any fees.

We have seen the faces of these members of the 'silent majority'
again and again - sometimes at the front of the riotous mobs,
sometimes behind them not taking part but letting things go. They
were there in 1984 - the Hindu upper and middle class youth, the
Hindu dalit poor, who looted the shops and homes of their Sikh
neighbours and killed them. They reappeared from their 'silent'
background in 1992 when they went on a killing spree all over India -
this time against Muslims. And now in Gujarat, Orissa, Haryana and
other parts of India, members of this 'silent majority' have asserted
by their behaviour that they are no longer willing to be 'silent'.

In the 1960-70 period, assertion by the 'silent majority' was
manifest in mass movements on issues like rising food prices, curbs
on democratic rights, etc, which drew together people from all
religious communities. But today, whenever the 'silent majority' in
India, whether Hindus or Muslims, become articulate, it seems to lead
to communal riots. The change indicates the transformation in the
psyche of the 'silent majority', as also the failure of the secular
political parties to comprehend the transformation, and prevent it
from spilling out in communal conflagration.

Bane of Religion

However much liberal and Left political and social scientists may try
to explain every communal riot as a conspiracy by a bunch of
politicians in league with religious fundamentalists, we cannot deny
the fact that such riots take place on a soil fertile with religious
prejudices and hatred. Administrative interventions like prompt
police action can indeed prevent riots, but can never eradicate the
canker of religious communalism that has remained embedded, and is
fast spreading, among the 'silent majority'.

Well-meaning secularists who hope to bring about peace among Hindus
and Muslims by harking back to selective quotations from their
respective scriptures in support of religious harmony appear to be
barking up the wrong tree. All that remain of those scriptures are
their corpses that have become breeding grounds of communal
pestilence. Religions have lost the creative impulses that produced
the best in art and culture in the past. We can never make the saints
of the 'bhakti' and 'sufi' traditions walk again today. The
literature that they created still remains a source of aesthetic
enjoyment, but it was produced in a period which, to quote what Marx
said about Greek culture, was the "social childhood of mankind, where
it had obtained its most beautiful development". He added: "A man
cannot be child again unless be becomes childish" (A Contribution to
the Critique of Political Economy). In India today, the Hindu
'Ram-bhakts' in their madness to revive the mythology of a
'Ram-rajya', and the Muslim fundamentalists in their zeal to impose
the laws of a bygone era, are not behaving like innocent children
asking for the moon, but as hardened criminals determined to impose
their will.

Watching them, one remembers the sad observation made by the French
poet Paul Valery about the 'silent majority' which surrounded him
during the second world war - "Man is human only in small numbers".
It goes back to Rousseau's concept of man being a 'noble savage'.
Sadly enough, most of the time in history, the savage had prevailed
over the noble. India today can provide a classic example of the
superiority of savagery over nobility.