Bulldozer as a metaphor
Bulldozer is a metaphor for undemocratic behaviour reeking of brute power; and the BJP government in UP seems to have decided to make this contraption the symbol and seal of its governance. When it rolls into Muslim neighbourhoods to bring down homes and hearths of protesters, a new kind of instant, communalised punishment without trial or hearing is getting institutionalised. Our Constitution has given governments the monopoly of violence only to safeguard the life and property of its citizens through the due process of law. But, unfortunately, the government is unleashing violence against the property of its own citizens, bypassing the due process of law.
Abusive ruling party spokespersons and government bulldozers have an eerie similarity that violates the basic principles of democratic discourse.
The Supreme Court has justly intervened in the petition filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind against the UP policy of illegal retaliation against protesters ordering that, ‘no demolition will take place without following the process of law’. This order, stopping short of a blanket stay that the petitioner deserved, should put an end to the naked violation of the legal process by a duly elected government which, ironically, is mandated to uphold the process of law. The larger philosophical question that the Supreme Court’s order triggers is, how should a society respond to a government that bypasses the process of law. For, as the intensity of protests increases so does the retaliatory measure, and it can lead only to the spiralling of violence, further marginalising and criminalising protests.
Worse, such acts are being done with impunity because the ‘rulers’ believe that they would rule till kingdom come. What if the next Akhilesh Yadav or Mayawati government drives the same bulldozers into the houses of their political opponents? After all, building bylaws are the worst enforced rules across the country. Our society’s corruption is best manifested in the lack of enforcement of building laws by local bodies. This is a reflection more of poor governance than compliance by the citizenry. Any building violation anywhere can often be regularised through a bribe or vote-bank bargaining, if it is done by a large group of people. Why hasn’t the bulldozer ever been driven into India’s poshest illegal colony — the Sainik Farms in Delhi?
Obviously, it is not so much the violation but the violator who is being punished by sticking a notice on the door of the house and razing it the day after. And when a community gets targeted thus, the credibility of the government gets challenged. Why should Muslims be blamed for believing that the UP Government is biased and they would not get justice from this government? Isn’t this fear of a biased government oppressing a particular community the very idea of bad governance enshrined in the memory of the reign of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb? So, while vilifying Aurangzeb, are Hindutvavadis trying to replicate his biased, communal governance?
It is a fact that many of the protesters of UP are instigated by Islamist forces which believe in Maududism — exclusivist political Islam that seeks to create Islamist rule in India — and are willing to take up arms to further their political objectives, like the violent takeover of J&K by Pakistan. The alphabet soup of Islamist political organisations with progressive pro-Dalit facades that are incubated in Kerala and unleashed across the Hindi heartland have only been legitimising violence against the ‘other’, be they Hindus, Sikhs or Christians, particularly where they are vulnerable.
So, violent street protests (two persons died in police firing in Ranchi) over remarks against the Prophet, only after the Gulf nations made an issue of it, could have been triggered by extremist, Islamist elements. And once they are identified, they should be tried under the strictest of laws and locked up to ensure that they do not spread hatred and disharmony. But bulldozers cannot be a remedy for lazy policing. Just knowing by instinct or gut feeling that somebody is a troublemaker is not good enough in a rule-based society. The prosecution has to work hard to marshal evidence against agent provocateurs and in the process if the accused are let off due to lack of evidence, so be it. The process would then legitimise the government’s intent and its actions. But the lack of process de-legitimises the elected government and all its actions, particularly when these bulldozers are not driven into Hindu neighbourhoods in similar contexts.
The ‘Prophet remarks controversy’ that led to all this violence and retaliatory bulldozing has had a salutary impact as the BJP was forced to disown its spokesperson and an office-bearer. Yet, Friday morning Indian time, nearly three weeks after the incident, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price condemned the remarks, thereby pointing at the US using this issue to express its displeasure towards India. Earlier, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh had claimed that the US allies in the Gulf were responding to the External Affairs Ministry dismissing a US report on religious minorities in India. The latest US condemnation could even be over the India-Russia trade pact that firms up a new payment mechanism for the much-needed Russian oil.
The BJP, unlike the Congress, does not shy away from diplomatic rows and op-ed articles attacking the party or the government. For, the BJP believes that the US that has supported a genocidal regime killing lakhs of Hindus and Muslims in East Pakistan does not mean what it says about communal amity and minority rights. But in its attempt to ape the might-is-right doctrine of the superpowers, our government is stepping into boglands of diplomatic uncertainty and domestic strife, inviting a backlash.
Abusive ruling party spokespersons and government bulldozers have an eerie similarity that threatens, bullies and violates the basic principles of democratic discourse. It does not matter what others think about us, but it matters a lot what we think about ourselves. And is the self-image of a bully, spewing venom while driving a bulldozer out to raze somebody’s home agreeable to us?
