The term for the Constituent Assembly (CA) got extended for three months on May 28. Roughly two weeks before extension, a peculiar news alert was being electrically circulated. It said that the new constitution of Nepal would incorporate anti-proselytizing provision. And, it is, as it claimed, against the principle of ´secular´ state. The mobiles were showered with short messages urging people to protest against such inclusion. A similar campaign was waged last year too at around the same time.
The underlying intentions of such an exercise are apparently not pious. A ´secular state´ only means that, first, the state will not have an official religion of its own. Second, no religion or sect will be discriminated on the basis of the faith it belongs to. And, third, all religions are free to practice their respective rituals but in a way in which the state mechanism would not be used to infringe the religious freedom of its citizens. But this does not at all mean that any coerced or coaxed conversion should be allowed. Rather, any secular state must ensure that any form of such forced conversions is made punishable by law.
Then, why are such campaigns taking place, even without verifying the fact whether the provisions like the one mentioned above are actually being considered by CA? Simply, there is an obvious dimension to it. For all practical purposes, proselytizing in our context means nothing but conversion of the so-called low-caste Hindus and Janajatis into Christians. The geometric rise in the number of churches over the years, in every nook and corner of the country, is a vindication of this. Therefore, the effort to ensure constitutional guarantee for proselytizing is undoubtedly a Christian missionary agenda.
There is no dearth of resources for such purpose as Nepal has allowed every single person or organization from the Christian countries to operate here without any screening. True, to some extent, our own orthodox rituals and social system, marked by untouchability, caste hierarchy etc also provided them grounds to blame Hinduism for the wretchedness of some communities. But, the fact of the matter is: Penury and religion are not relative, as evident in many Christian countries where poverty is still appallingly rampant. Nor is Hinduism the cause of backwardness. On the contrary, it is only due to highly democratic and liberal milieus of Hinduism that these missionaries in many forms, names and hues could so freely operate here without facing slightest of objections and obstacles, from the state or the communities.
Unquestionably, Nepal as a nation-state must employ policies to ameliorate the hardships and provide social and economic justice to its citizens. But conversion surely is not and cannot be the strategy to have these ends met.
These moves have inherent political connotation than the pious religious motives alone. The expansive tirade of Christians against Hindu-structuralism has provided fertile ground for proliferation of communism in Nepal. The collusion here, too, between Christianity and communism is in tandem with many ´theories´ and literatures developed as Christian Communism world over. The hammer in the communist flag has been replaced by the cross to provide a common emblem for the so-called Christian Communism.
But in the particular context of Nepal, this collusion has more grotesque face. It has proved to be one of the major curses for the present political mess and potentially destabilizing social intolerance. Initially the Christian crusaders tore apart the existing social fabric primarily inciting anguish in low-caste and Janajatis against the upper caste people. This move targeted at the marginalized groups, at its surface looked justifiable to the point of awarding self-respect, recognizing their role in the social businesses and putting inhuman treatment to fellow humans to an end. But the campaign soon exceeded its limits. It started to portray Christ as hero capable of doing any miracle and Krishna and other Hindu Gods as the villainous agents of all ills in their lives. Many Janajatis, who do not have scripture-rich and philosophized religions to follow, were easy prey of resource-rich, glib preachers of Christianity. These preachers sowed the seed of hatred among the communities and presented themselves as the angels of equality.
Then, the communists, particularly the radicals like the Maoists, taking cue from this hatred, led these masses to revolt. They honed the ´fighter´ sentiments of these people and used them as means to expand their organizational strength. Even worse, powerful communist outfits promised for separate ´states´ for each ethnic group. It further extended to the issues like putative right to self-determination and ethnic rights on local natural resources-jal, jameen and jungle.
All major donors who are supposedly providing financial support to Nepal, almost without exception, have dormant if not explicit agenda of furthering Christianity. Christianity has by now pervaded to even remote villages of Nepal, wearing a communist cloak. And, communists are the one who are mightiest in the present day Nepali politics.
The issues of inclusion and reservation are also gaining a distorted visage. The constitutional or legal assurance for inclusion and reservation means that the listed ethnic or caste identity need to be maintained to avail these benefits, thus, indefinitely preventing them of equal status and equal social standing. For example, if certain percent of employment is reserved for untouchable caste, it has to remain untouchable forever to qualify for the benefit. This is a tangible antithesis to human equality which has devastatingly counterproductive effects on nation-building process. They are equally mysterious too. If the state is capable and prepared to provide basic services and opportunities for every citizen on an equal basis, then why on earth is any law needed to create ´more equal´ citizens? If all citizens get food, shelter, education and employment on a fair basis and enjoy basic human rights, what could be the additional demand of these ´enlisted´ groups? The pro-proselytizing provision would definitely remain at the center of this entire discourse and the drafting process of the new constitution.
However, at present, there seem to be no takers of these opinions. There is no secret to the reasons for this. All major donors who are supposedly providing financial support to Nepal, almost without exception, have dormant if not explicit agenda of furthering Christianity. Christianity has by now pervaded to even remote villages of Nepal, wearing a communist cloak. And, communists are the one who are mightiest in the present day Nepali politics.
Therefore, it is no surprise that a single Dalit now is a pastor in the church, a hard-line communist ideologue, an inclusion activist and an advocate of ethnic federalism. Also, many topmost communist leaders at present are either former students or employees of Christian missionary schools.
The writer is the editor of Arthik Abhiyan
Friday, July 8, 2011
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
UPA policies roadblock in Muslims’ mainstreaming says Sachar member
5 July 2011 - 7:00pm
MNN
New Delhi: Salman Khursheed’s controversial statement linking Sachar Committee report with ghettoization, has stirred a debate around the way the government should or shouldn’t have approached and implemented the committee’s recommendations. In an ironical twist to the story, Rakesh Basant, a former member of the Sachar Committee and a professor of economics at the Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad says that it’s not the Sachar report but the Congress led UPA government’s policies which have become a roadblock in the overall mainstreaming of Muslims in India.
“Making the Ministry of Minority Affairs the nodal agency for implementing the Sachar Committee recommendations was a grave error, and has probably gotten in the way of mainstreaming this process,” writes Basant in his article published on the website of the Centre for Advanced Study of India (CASI) University of Pennsylvania.
Almost after five years after the report was submitted, Basant criticizes the government for narrowing down the recommendations of Sachar for petty political gains. According to him the main recommendations of the Sachar report like an Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), favor general programs with better inclusion of all under-privileged groups including Muslims rather than Muslim-specific programs. They in turn could have facilitated the mainstreaming of Muslims and other marginalized groups.
“The UPA has not only picked up recommendations in isolation, but has also highlighted the community-specific programs and its implementation in its election manifesto and other communications…Apparently, the mainstreaming measures recommended by the Sachar Committee had much less political utility than promises of community-specific benefits and programs,” adds Basant.
Instead the government recasted them into community specific programmes and emphasized too much on minor recommendations like those related to Urdu and Madarsa education when it was reported that less than four percent of Muslim children go to Madarsas.
“Typically, community specific recommendations, which were quite minor in the overall framework of the report, are being focused upon and actually enhanced. As a result, the main recommendations, which were not community specific, are getting sidelined and even being re-cast as Muslim-specific,” adds Basant.
According to Basant, if the government is serious about preventing the ghettoization of the community then the implementation task of the Sachar recommendations should be given to line departments instead of the Minorities Affairs Ministry (MMA).
“The policy-making and implementation task should lie with a general ministry – such as the Ministry of Home or Finance – to obviate this bias,” adds Basant.
Basant further adds that policy action shouldn’t be seen only through the “minority lens…It is important to recognize that mainstreaming would require a significant change in the nature of politics.”
Surprised at the selective use of recommendations, Basant says that “such actions would make the BJP’s claims of minority appeasement seem more credible to voters in the majority community.”
Casualty of Politics over Sachar
Basant also highlights the fact that one of the biggest casualties due to the politics over the Sachar report, was that interesting and newer insights about Muslim women were never used to “broaden the discussion on gender injustice vis-à-vis Muslim women.”
For instance, Basant points out, “child mortality among Muslims is lower than in other communities and the sex – female to male – ratio is higher. Moreover, both these sets of indices have been improving faster for Muslims than for others in recent years despite the slower rates of improvement in other development indices.”
“Son preference seems to be lower among Muslims than among Hindus, which could potentially explain Muslim advantage. Moreover, despite no significant differences in access to public health services, a higher proportion of Muslim mothers tend to seek treatment for diarrhea, which is one of the leading causes of child death. Moreover, the data shows that Muslim women are not less autonomous than Hindu women in areas such as healthcare access and the use of women’s earnings.
“Gender issues among Muslims are usually identified with Muslim personal law. Such a focus not only results in the exclusion of general gender-related concerns in education and employment that Muslim women face on a continuing basis, it also disregards a completely contrary picture that emerges from the analysis of sex ratios and infant/child mortality rates. Should we not use these insights to broaden the scope of the discussion on the status of women in different communities?” he further asks.
MNN
New Delhi: Salman Khursheed’s controversial statement linking Sachar Committee report with ghettoization, has stirred a debate around the way the government should or shouldn’t have approached and implemented the committee’s recommendations. In an ironical twist to the story, Rakesh Basant, a former member of the Sachar Committee and a professor of economics at the Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad says that it’s not the Sachar report but the Congress led UPA government’s policies which have become a roadblock in the overall mainstreaming of Muslims in India.
“Making the Ministry of Minority Affairs the nodal agency for implementing the Sachar Committee recommendations was a grave error, and has probably gotten in the way of mainstreaming this process,” writes Basant in his article published on the website of the Centre for Advanced Study of India (CASI) University of Pennsylvania.
Almost after five years after the report was submitted, Basant criticizes the government for narrowing down the recommendations of Sachar for petty political gains. According to him the main recommendations of the Sachar report like an Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), favor general programs with better inclusion of all under-privileged groups including Muslims rather than Muslim-specific programs. They in turn could have facilitated the mainstreaming of Muslims and other marginalized groups.
“The UPA has not only picked up recommendations in isolation, but has also highlighted the community-specific programs and its implementation in its election manifesto and other communications…Apparently, the mainstreaming measures recommended by the Sachar Committee had much less political utility than promises of community-specific benefits and programs,” adds Basant.
Instead the government recasted them into community specific programmes and emphasized too much on minor recommendations like those related to Urdu and Madarsa education when it was reported that less than four percent of Muslim children go to Madarsas.
“Typically, community specific recommendations, which were quite minor in the overall framework of the report, are being focused upon and actually enhanced. As a result, the main recommendations, which were not community specific, are getting sidelined and even being re-cast as Muslim-specific,” adds Basant.
According to Basant, if the government is serious about preventing the ghettoization of the community then the implementation task of the Sachar recommendations should be given to line departments instead of the Minorities Affairs Ministry (MMA).
“The policy-making and implementation task should lie with a general ministry – such as the Ministry of Home or Finance – to obviate this bias,” adds Basant.
Basant further adds that policy action shouldn’t be seen only through the “minority lens…It is important to recognize that mainstreaming would require a significant change in the nature of politics.”
Surprised at the selective use of recommendations, Basant says that “such actions would make the BJP’s claims of minority appeasement seem more credible to voters in the majority community.”
Casualty of Politics over Sachar
Basant also highlights the fact that one of the biggest casualties due to the politics over the Sachar report, was that interesting and newer insights about Muslim women were never used to “broaden the discussion on gender injustice vis-à-vis Muslim women.”
For instance, Basant points out, “child mortality among Muslims is lower than in other communities and the sex – female to male – ratio is higher. Moreover, both these sets of indices have been improving faster for Muslims than for others in recent years despite the slower rates of improvement in other development indices.”
“Son preference seems to be lower among Muslims than among Hindus, which could potentially explain Muslim advantage. Moreover, despite no significant differences in access to public health services, a higher proportion of Muslim mothers tend to seek treatment for diarrhea, which is one of the leading causes of child death. Moreover, the data shows that Muslim women are not less autonomous than Hindu women in areas such as healthcare access and the use of women’s earnings.
“Gender issues among Muslims are usually identified with Muslim personal law. Such a focus not only results in the exclusion of general gender-related concerns in education and employment that Muslim women face on a continuing basis, it also disregards a completely contrary picture that emerges from the analysis of sex ratios and infant/child mortality rates. Should we not use these insights to broaden the scope of the discussion on the status of women in different communities?” he further asks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
