Today’s reports revealing Rahul Gandhi’s leaked observations over conversations with foreign diplomats have created a furor.
Rahul Gandhi, the “crown prince” of Indian politics, told the American ambassador last year that Hindu extremist groups could pose a greater threat to his country than Muslim militants.
In comments likely to cause a storm in India, Gandhi, who is considered a likely prime ministerial candidate, warned Timothy Roemer that though “there was evidence of some support for [Islamist group Lashkar-e-Taiba] among certain elements in India’s indigenous Muslim community, the bigger threat may be the growth of radicalised Hindu groups, which create religious tensions and political confrontations with the Muslim community”.
The 40-year-old son of the Congress party president, Sonia Gandhi, said that “the risk of a ‘home-grown’ extremist front, reacting to terror attacks coming from Pakistan or from Islamist groups in India, was a growing concern and one that demanded constant attention”.
His words were revealed in one of 4,000 leaked U.S. diplomatic cables sent from Delhi. The cables reveal a difficult but increasingly warm relationship between a prickly emerging power and a superpower keen to be friends but on its own terms.
There has been predictable Hindu outrage against Rahul Gandhi’s comments that mirror his imbibed political philosophy. However, restricting the current outrage to Rahul’s person will hardly serve any purpose when the malaise is ideological.
In Hindusthan, the progenitor and main container of Secular-Liberalist ideology has been the Congress Party. This ideology espouses a contract between the State and individuals exemplified in equal citizenship rights for all those that sign on the contractual dotted line. When it comes to the majority, such a State does not give credence to ethnicity, socio-religious values and the majority’s innate sense of historical experience and nation-hood. When the question is of minorities, all of these factors gain prominence by default because the liberal dogma of this ideology demands that the quality of “minority welfare” be the determining factor of righteous Statecraft. One can now see that a progressive weakening of the majority with a consequent strengthening of the minority is simply logical.
The Secular-Liberal State does not believe in “majority-minority” because it purports not to have a State religion with minority religious affiliations. However, as one observes above, it cannot really close its eyes to the existence of minorities since the quality of the latter’s welfare are this State’s moral compass to an extent where any rightful national assertion by the ethnic majority is immediately viewed as dangerous fascism.
The progress and ascendency of Secular-Liberalism in our highly religious country is actually a testimony of the gullibility of Hindu nationalist leadership – past and present. But coming back to the topic at hand, Rahul Gandhi, not well known for his intellectual qualities, was merely mouthing off something he’s always heard at the family dinner table. “Majority communalism is fascism and more dangerous than minority communalism”.
What the current outrage must consider is just how much of this ideological poison has been imbibed by so called Hindu organizations and political parties. When they attack Rahul Gandhi’s comments as they will; are they really attacking its ideological basis or the hollow individual bearing the message?