Secularism'
redefined?
By
Amba Charan Vashishtha
Today's (May 11) The Statesman carried a news saying
that Maulana Badruddin Ajmal, the head of the All-India United Democratic Front
(AIUDF) pads for 'secular forces' to join hands to prevent BJP from coming into
power in Assam.
It is an irony — and to a great extent, hypocrisy — if a
person like Ajmal claims himself to be a 'secular'. Though nobody, not the Constitution
and even courts, have so far defined secularism,
yet if people like Ajmal claim themselves to be 'secular', then god save this
pious concept.
Reality is that many political parties which have confined
their membership to one community, like the Indian Union Muslim League and
others, claim themselves to be 'secular' outfits while they condemn BJP, RSS,
Shiv Sena and others who join hands with NDA as 'communal'. This is true of JD
(U) even. Till JD (U) was having a coalition government in Bihar with BJP and
had joined NDA government at the Centre, both BJP and RSS were not 'communal'
for it. But when for political and electoral opportunism, JD (U) snapped its
about 18-19 years old political-cum-electoral association, BJP and its allies instantly
became rank 'communalists'.
The fact of the matter is that practically every political
party, except the Congress, has at one time or the other shared power with or
got outside support of BJP — the same BJP whom they today condemn as 'communal'
and, to a great extent, untouchable.
Late V. P. Singh had no qualms of conscience to accept the
outside support of 'communal' BJP to occupy the chair of Prime Minister which,
he knew, he could never without it. But
the moment it withdrew support, it became 'communal'.
In the sixties during the Samyukta Vidhayak Dal governments formed
in various State, even communists shared power with Jana Sangh, the earlier
avtar of BJP of today. BJP, it looks, becomes 'secular' and 'communal' to these
'secular' parties depending upon whether they need it for power or not.
When will our political parties stop befooling the public on
the issue of 'communalism' and 'secularism' with their hypocritical conduct?
