Column

On our front page today is a photograph of a young Sikh wielding a sword in an aggressive manner on the streets of Mumbai. This is an unusual sight in this city, for several reasons; firstly, weapons that can kill are not displayed so openly here — this is not the Mumbai way and secondly, Sikhs in Mumbai are perceived to be model citizens. For them to come out and brandish swords this way suggests that they are quite charged up about something.

That something is the presence here of Baba Ram Rahim, chief of the Dera Sacha Sauda, one of the many sub-sects of the faith who have broken away from the control of the mainstream Sikh clergy and set up their own camp. Such sects are mushrooming in Punjab and attracting many Sikhs (and non-Sikhs too), which has angered the apex body, the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabhandhak Committee (SGPC) the powerful religious organisation that rules all the Gurudwaras. Both sides have battled each other for a long time and last year the conflict came out into the open in a violent way when the Baba was photographed dressed up in the manner of a Sikh Guru. Though the violence eventually died down, the tension has simmered and when the Baba came here, the Sikhs protested. In the ensuing clash, the Baba’s bodyguard opened fire and one Sikh died. Now it looks like this could become an even bigger problem.

Suddenly it looks like all kinds of little fires are breaking out in different parts of the country. In otherwise calm Rajasthan, a tiny group of Gurjars went berserk and demolished public property because they wanted the government to transfer them to the list of Scheduled tribes. In the east, the Gurkhas of Darjeeling reprised a two decade old agitation to demand that they be given a separate state. And now the Sikh anger in Mumbai.

The common thread in all these cases is the violence. Violence is not the last resort; it is the first bargaining chip. To get your voice heard above the cacophony of claims and counter-claims there is no better way than to launch a violent agitation. That brings in the media and the television cameras who then amplify the noise so that the rulers can hear you loud and clear. We may be the land where Satyagraha was invented and was used to drive away a strong colonial power, but Gandhi’s fasting would have hardly made the ‘Breaking News’ criteria; where’s the colour, the energy, the passion? So get your loudest and strongest young men out on the streets, destroy a few buses, sabotage a rail line or two and then see how the government buckles.

The other noteworthy aspect is that all ethnic groups and minorities are splintering even further. The Gurjars may be spread all over the country, but this was a local agitation largely limited to Rajasthan and even here the community is divided over who will lead them. The public face, Colonel Bhainsla is already under challenge from a newer generation.

A similar situation prevails in Gorkhaland, where the old guard, represented by Subhash Ghising has been discredited and a new team is emerging. As for the Sikhs, the very presence of the Deras is a threat to the existing leadership of the SGPC. Mainstream Sikhs are retaliating because they see their identity getting diluted and fear for a day when there won’t be just one kind of Sikh. This will naturally reduce their importance in the political theatre.

In short, the day of the large, united minority standing up and demanding its rights are slowly dying and a new kind of tribalism is emerging. These neo-tribes have a set of demands and aspirations fine tuned to their specific needs which could be based on location, cultural affiliation or political sensibility. Politicians may see an advantage in managing such sub-groups and power-brokers will emerge to mediate between such groups and existing power structures but it will be a challenge for policy makers as well as for society at large to manage the aspirations of so many new claimants.

This is not particularly new, in that sub-castes and sub-sub-castes have existed in India for a long time. But can a modern democracy afford to have so many tiny vested interests demanding special rights and favours? Is such tribalism an example of identity politics gone too far? The political science answer to this is Yes; no modern republic which believes in fraternity and equality of all citizens would like to become nothing more than an aggregation of micro vested interest groups all concerned with their own
micro agendas.

Yet, the sad truth is that we are well and truly on that road. Our early republican dream is now severely dented. Such groups are emerging because they see it as the only way to hold on to an identity in a changing world. At one level, globalisation is seen as a threat that can submerge cultural uniqueness; at another, they feel the need to quickly and firmly stake a claim for a special piece of the economy before it is given away to someone else. In times of transition, it is tradition and heritage that appear the most stable and comforting. Which is when it makes sense to reach for the sword.

Email: sidharth01@dnaindia.net