Terrorism camouflaged in Nationalism

If I can terrorize you, then not terrorizing you according to my will would be called Democracy. You may differ. If you can terrorize me then all your initiatives will be like Democracy, where I would believe that only you can provide me a shelter. The terror of market economy is somewhat similar. Almost 70 crore people have become helpless in front of this vicious market. The Govt. has bowed down and has made the citizens consumers. Mumbai attacks have however made it clear that only Terrorism can confront the brute of market.

So should that mean our Judiciary is based on terror? The more the terror, bigger is the power, vaster is the Democracy and huge is the profiteer. The new face of Democracy is recognition against societal terror. Some six years back Atal Bihari Vajpayee preached Narendra Modi the nuances of National responsibilities. From a common man to a corporate and industrialist alleged Modi’s politics as divisive in nature. Modi was hailed as a black spot on the fabric of Indian Democracy by these businessmen.

From all that has changed in these six years one thing can be learned that Tata, Ambani, Mittal and likes want Modi as the Prime Minister of India. The question however isn’t that Modi has transformed himself or is rigidly against terrorism. Nor the question ever proves that the corporate and industrialists feel safe under Modi’s reign. The question straightly is that terror has replaced Democracy in true terms of its definition. The Indian constitution has imparted equal rights to every citizen, so does it not matter? Our Nation and Democracy is under threat.

Post Mumbai attacks the whole nation is raging against the Govt. which is a fact. The working and lifestyle approach of these leaders has filled masses with anger. The politicians are playing with their lives and no Govt. has been successful in curbing terrorism. Organizations responsible for dealing with terrorism are themselves caught up. In this whole game of power and Democracy, all the Govt. organizations are doing what they desire. No policy or plan lies in front of the people that could ensure the very existence of a leader or a govt. for that matter. Masses are infuriated over the death toll and this seems a valid reason as people have united themselves against terrorism now. There is a consensus over the frivolity of caste and religion based politics and a sense of unity among the masses to stand together for national interest. Many questions have come up in this context which point towards a simple reality that had not terrorism grip the nation; there wouldn’t have been this consciousness. Or is it the terrorism itself that can stimulate the nation?

If we see India as a terror struck nation from the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts and also keep in perspective the present day socio-political-economic conditions, both the above mentioned questions could be well touched upon. Fifteen years back, the Kandahar plane hijack was one such incident that shook the roots of the whole nation. Post that, till date our nation has faced more than 200 forms of terror attacks including the present Taj-Nariman killing. This dreadful trend was started with a blast in the Srinagar Vidhansabha premise where more than three dozen people were killed.

In the last one and a half decade, more than sixteen thousand people have been killed in various types of terror violence and more than 90000 crore rupees have been lost. The nation has also witnessed a clash between the political parties in efforts to curb terrorism. Demanding firm laws, the prevalent limitations of the Home Ministry and breach into the Security agencies are the issues being raised every now and then. This has highly infuriated the masses. Contemporary to that definition the present society has witnessed plethora of communal violence and regional conflicts.

No political party ever promoted implementation of any policy or laws against terrorism. On the contrary they have been playing a blame game all through. Everything of this sort began 15 years back. Babri masjid wasn’t just a demolition, but divided the whole society by drawing a line instead of erasing it. The political scene has darkened this line though. During this time, not only UP, Maharashtra, Orissa, Karnataka, Bihar, Punjab, Haryana, Assam but also 16 other states faced communal riots. Not considering 5 lakh in Gujarat, more than 70 lakh families have suffered atrocities of communal violence. More than 50,000 crore have been lost and all the ruling Govt. are blaming each other. The Central Govt. wouldn’t interfere in the working of State Govt. and all communal violence has a political genesis. The power politics has always justified its presence claiming its importance in the society using it as a base of the four pillars of the Constitution.

Regionalism has given this violence a new canvas based on caste and religion. People have been affected in Mumbai and Assam equally and more than fifty lakh families have been threatened of their livelihood. The outsiders are being blamed for snatching away the jobs of the so called resident insiders. This politics can be called Constitutional or unlawful but none of the Govts. have had the courage to stand against this ugly practice.

Supreme Court’s judgment also seemed like a whisper in front of this blatant parliamentary debate. It was time when the nation was being prepared to develop. The Govt. policies framed during 1991 did more bad than good in the form of Babri Masjid riots in 1992 and Mumbai serial blasts in 1993. It led to big time violence and killings and affected the prosperity of nation. A web of economic policies negated the struggle for freedom and redefined development in such way that India emerged as an army of consumers. The Govt. that is supposedly a well wisher of a 100 crore population was the one who framed the policies considering a country of 25 crore consumers above 8 developed nations. The remaining 80 crore who couldn’t come in the frame of eligible consumers were forced to become one owing to the policies framed by the leaders. The new economic policies were considered holy and became larger than the masses. The executives of these policies only cared about legitimacy on paper and needs of the public were presented distorted.

Everyone from the Finance Minister to the officials of planning commission, the officers of Zila Parishad, Panchayati Samiti etc saw economic development as a result of these economic policies where the purchasing power parity dethrone powers and the Constitution seems insignificant. Not only this but the market and capital become standards of Democracy. The terror of this market economics has defined security standards and the politics hence.

The impact of economic policies can not just be defined in terms of 60,000 farmer suicides. More than 2 crore people lost support and more than 1 crore lost their homes as a result of these development plans. The traditional means of livelihood have supported crore of families throughout. It has been linked with the profiteers and is recognized by the Govt. The land which even without an infrastructure fills the stomachs of crores, is being snatched away now.
Taking the banking sector into market economy, the Indian constitution has snatched away people’s right to equality and assurance to the weaker sections thereby. Bank is now synonymous to a newer understanding of development. During the period, the income per person became Rs. 2500 but also 50 crore people couldn’t earn more than 1000 annually. India became richer in terms of Millionaires and the aspirations to conquer the whole world neglected basics like water, health and education. The amount of money spent by ten crore people on water, health and educating their children to become a Doctor, Engineer, MBA degree holder in one year is an amount that 50 crore of population don’t even earn in a lifetime. In a society like India where the society moves from one household to another without any walls, this game of 10 crore Vs 50 crore runs very smoothly.

The failure of states and dominance of capital over Democracy dictated security and other nuances and this pushed people to the market they never belonged to. There was a sharp increase of 5-20% in suicides, murders and violence during this period alone. Tension, aggression, political violence and irresponsible behaviour inside Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha increased in the society during this time. This is where the politics lost itself as a New Economy in 1991, Ayodhya Riots in 1992; serial Mumbai blasts in 1993 drew a new line in the political power after the first Lok Sabha elections in 1996. The masses lost all the faith in the political parties and their politics.

Coalition may have seemingly supported Democracy but in circumstances of no choice the politics chose market of consumerist nature. The skill of production of goods was replaced by marketing strategies and likewise dollars replaced rupee. The responsibility of State shifted from a majority to a few hands and promoted privatization. The theory of profit became powerful and this power brought politics under profit. The parliamentary understanding of Democracy became a business more or less.

Keeping in light the development other than the cultural one, what will happen to the generations who have been attached to a land now being sold off? This is where the right and wrong directions of terror begin. All the terror violence that happened pre-26 November Mumbai attacks have shattered people’s trust over politics and society. The 26 November attacks shattered the very consumerist nature of this nation to which even the politics bowed down. For the first time it was not about a particular section but the whole nation. This raised an important argument, would India wake up only by instigating terror? India has taken various measures against terrorism but the inside system is moving on the same pace, as provided by Pakistan. Decentralization of power in the society has been that anyone can get into politics by means of terror.

Politics is posing itself as terror camouflaged in Democracy where election is the biggest weapon. You may choose between variants of ghettos and types of terror. Now, only a cross border terror can awaken the masses by creating incidents like Taj and Nariman, else the people won’t wake up. And if this holds true, then, is terrorism a new tool for Nationalism?