And are generally not religious, but they seek to not then solves of their sectarian image and integrate themselves.” The Hindus I have encountered use the word mona and got munni.
Auther Bonner. the leading author of this book wrote the following chapters: The Culture of Caste, Revisionist History, Nationalism and the RSS, Sowing Dragon’s Teeth, Two Documents on the Fragility of India, Women and Sisterhood, and The End or Illusions. Mr. Bonner compiled these chapters with information extracted from the writings of many Indian journalists. Perhaps, because of that, there are some serious fundamental flaws in Mr. Bonner’s wrongs. I shall only dwell on few of the more important once.
(1) On page 4, the author gives an impression as if the Indian constitution is a guarantor of basic human rights. He writes: India’s Constitution, under “Fundamental Rights,” lists the “Right to Equality,” the “Right to Freedom,” the “Right against Exploitation,” the “Right to Freedom of Religion,” and the “Cultural and Educational Rights,” with long subsections elaborating each of these nights. Mr. Bonner missed the Right to Constitutional Remedies. Part III of the Indian consultation (Article 12 thru Article 35) constitute all the minutia on fundamental rights. Or these 24 articles, in Total, on the fundamental rights, the truth is, there is no guarantee of basic human rights.
(2) Further continuing. Mr. Bonner points out another section of the Indian constitution: Next. the “Directive Principles of State Policy” requires the stale to “Secure for each citizen adequate means of livelihood.” along with “equal pay for equal work for men and women,” “the protection of health and strength of women and children,” and “equal justice and free legal aid” in all, subsections categories with several subsections for each. Part IV of the Indian constitution (Article 36 thru Article 51) constitute all the Directive Principles of State Policy. Or these 16 articles, in total, the Article 37 is the most important: The provisions contained in this Pari shall not be enforceable by any court…. Again, the truth is, the Directive Principles of State Policy is nothing more than the paperitis written on I have yet to meet an Indian who has set his eye on the Indian constitution, let alone read Mr. Bonner must read the current official copy of the Constitution of India
(3) On page 84, Mr. Bonner wrote: “In sanitized Hinduism, the Bhagavad Gita an obvious fifth century A.D. document inscribed into the older Mahabharata texts to justify Vaishava sectarian claims is held out as the defining texts of orthodoxy and monotheism, but the Gita was not translated into modem Indian languages until the 1880s, when Bankimchandra, Tilak, and Gandhi gave it differing glosses. For Bankimchandra and Tilak, it was an incitement to war and conduct, while Gandhi Insisted it was a call to spiritual Doc.” Dhagavad Gua is not a Oath cooler document. The fact is no howdy scaly knows when it was winch Mr. Bonner wants us to believe Dal Bhagavad Gita was “foreign document which was inserted into an older Mahabharata texts. Again, this has not been an established fact However, in accordance with Mahabharata, there is no such a thing called Bhagavad Gita Then. How did we get it? Mahabharata has 18 sections, called books. The sixth Kook is the Bhishma Parva. A section of Bhishma Parva is called Bhagavad-Gita Parva. Which is composed of essentially 30 chapters. The last 18 chapters of Bhagavad-Gita Parva were plucked away, compiled in a separate book form and then dubbed as – Bhagavad Gita. Who did it? When was it done? Why was it dono? Nobody knows. And, will never be known. Again, if you read Bhagavad Gira with a mind of a political scientist, the most essential feature of Bhagavad Gita is that it is a killing doctrine. This killing doctrine fills in perfectly with its parent body Mahabharura, which in itself is nothing less than a war document. Did Gandhi really think of Gita as a call to spiritual battle and nothing more? Gandhi’s inner vole spoke of Gita in a tongue of holy opportunism. Take for example his speach at Excelsior Theater, Bombay on 31 August, 1924, Gandhi said: “The Bhagavad Gita says Thai masses follow the elite.” Later on in a speech at Krishnath College, Bchrampur, Gandhi said: “Gita says: As the great men do so do the men in de street.” After the British departure, Gandhi took another forward “spiritual” look at Gua. During the speech at RSS rally on September 16, 1947.ac. cording to him, the use of violence was recognized by Gita but only on a condition: “I could be exercised by the properly constituted Government only.” By making this statement, Gandhi supported the violence on the part of Nehru and Patel since both of them were head of a “properly constituted government” handpicked by none other than Sergeant-Major Gandhi whimsical.
(4) I thank Mr. Bonner (on page 227) for drawing to our attention the statement of Debabar Bancji: “The virtual breakdown of the public health system in the country is associated with frequent oulbrcaksof epidemics…of kala-azar, Japanese encephalitis, pyrogenic meningitis, cholera and gastroenteritis, bacillary dysentery, inspective hepatitis… literally millions of people are allowed to die of the most elementary preventable diseases because of the inaction by the government….” It is truce that Hinduism is associated closely with promoting many of the discuses that the poor Indians finally succumb to. There are those senior Indian officials who take a sigh of relief that at least the discuses are some chow controlling the population, if not through other means. In this sense the Indian establishment is following the advice of Gandhi that he uttered to Louis Fischer on 8 June, 1942 on the only method of population control acceptable to him: “… We need some good epidemics.” Unfortunately, not even the “good epidemics have been able to control the population growth. India needs “better epidemics” in a true gentian spirit.
(5) Reading this book from once end to the other, one draws two solid conclusions: (1) that the killings in India are directly or indirectly sponsored by the Indian state, and (2) the image of Gandhi is diminished greatly, after all, he willingly comminuted to the continuation of the caste system. And yet in a seat of sheer imbecility, Mr. Bonner on page 229 contradicted almost everything the reader has learned from this book when he addressed Gandhi as a visionary idealist and the Human rights abuses are not government sponsored but are officially deplored italics are mine ). It seems to me Mr. Bonner should take some lessons on Gandhi and the psychoanalysis of Hindu leaders.
In summation, there is not much in this book pertaining to what the title says: Democracy in India: A Hollow Shell. In fact, the tide is inappropriate. I expected this book to have performed the anatomic exploration of the outer shell of democracy, to say the least with a chapter devoted to: (1) induction through back-door maneuvering of aspirants into the political parlays, (2) selection of party nominees by the party bosses to run for elections at the designated districts, or potential candidates buying party tickets for election to the parliament and state legislatures: which then together “elect president. (3) the president then nominal’s (actually appoints) the Prime minister (whoever he wishes), who thon forms his cabinet. There is an irony to this whole process: As the selection, election, and nomination process moves up, the preceding institutional group loses substantial relative power, a process what I call —The Politics of Diminishing Returns. The Indian masses are the ultimate losers of this intricate Hindu game what had been hailed as the “world’s largest democracy.” India’s elected representatives owe their called status not to their constitutors but to their party boss. This book should have been titled more correctly, perhaps, such as: The Cost of Hinduism in India.
I recommend this book to the novice readers designing to learn turbulent India.
Article extracted from this publication >> January 13, 1995
