10-08-2006, 07:35 PM
<b>Insight into Minoritism</b> - By Muzaffer Hussain
Book review by M. V. Kamath
In almost all countries in the world, a certain
segment -ethnic, religious linguistic or ideological
would be in the majority and some others would be in a
minority. That is inevitable. A multi-cultural
national like the United States has its majority and
minorities as well, but one seldom talks about them.
The biggest minority would be the Blacks, but whoever
would think of providing reservation for them in the
Senate or Congress or in government service?
Indeed in older textbooks on political science there
would hardly be any reference to majoritarianism and
minoritarianism. These are recently-coined words. <b>But
India is different. Here we constantly talk of
minorities as if they are a plague and we even have a
Minority Commission! It is a carry over from British
colonialism. </b>Nobody in India talked of a majority or a
minority in the days of Tipu Sultan or during hayed of
Mogul rule. Hindus were even then in a majority but
they were often treated as if they were non-existent.
Hindus were made aware of their majority status during
the time of the British, as were Muslims of their
minority place in society.
That may have been a display - and a distorted one at
that - of British sense of Justice, but the
consequences were severe, resulting, for one thing, in
partition of the country. Reference has been made to
this in Muzaffer Hussain's well-argued book Insight
into Minoritism, which goes into the subject in
different contexts and in some detail. Minorities have
been dealt with very poorly in Pakistan and
Bangladesh, India's immediate neighbours. Hussain
draws pointed attention to that.
Says Hussain: <b>"There is a sizeable population of
Hindus in the Gulf countries but those countries are
not ready to give any facility to them in the name of
minority or Human Rights. The Hindus are not allowed
there to cremate their kith and kin as per their
belief. They can't construct places for worship nor
can they celebrate their festivals at public places.</b>
During the Ramzan, non-Muslims can't eat anything at
daytime in public places. The Muslims expect to get
everything as minorities in the countries of Hindus,
Buddhists and Christians but in Islamic countries the
minorities don't have such privilege.."
We have to blame history for that. In India,
minorities like Jews, Parsis and Christians have full
freedom. No Christian missionary dare try in an
Islamic country, but in India every citizen,
especially if he is a tribal or one from the lower
caste, is fair game to Christian missionaries. In
India propagation of religion is not a crime. The
freedom given is often interpreted to mean that one
can resort to conversion, which is frequently resorted
to in tribal areas. It started under the British when
missionaries flooded the northeast and converted large
number of tribals to Christianity. Unconsciously this
has caused problems for free India.
Hussain damns minoritism as a "menace" which it has
indeed become. Hussain maintains that Christians and
Muslims in India can't be dubbed as minorities because
they are very much Indian. As he puts it: When all are
born and brought up in the Indian context, the
question of 'alien' and 'indigenous' people don't
arise". Hussain's argument is that all over the world,
a minority status is granted only to those classes,
which have migrated from abroad. So he says: "Hence it
is not proper to designate Muslims and Christians (of
India) as aliens since they, too are very much
Indian".
All are one in this country where there is one
citizenship for all and everyone is a part of this
nation. The word 'minority' Hussain asserts, weakens
the unity of the country and draws a dividing line
between individuals" . How right he is. Hussain is
critical of Muslims in India who, he says, haven't
accepted democracy. Inevitably the Islamic world has
been gripped by fanaticism and narrow thinking. The
point indeed was well made by Justice Chandrashekhar
Dharmadhikari in his preface. Writes Mr Dharmadhikari:
"India as a nation has suffered continuous tussles
between the religious and orthodox religious
fanaticism even after the creation of Pakistan. How
many Muslim mohallas or Madarassas hoist the national
flag and sing the national anthem collectively on the
occasion of Independence Day!"
How many indeed. The former Justice adds: "To accept
special rights for any community along with the
provisions of equal human rights are mutually
contradictory principles. This creates a controversy
and the majority class begins to feel unprotected and
adopts a defensive mechanism". Hussain in his treatise
goes into this subject in a special and separate
chapter entitled "How to tackle minoritism", He notes
that there are three distinct approaches in handling
minoritism". In the Arab world minorities like
Christians and Hindus have no political or religious
rights. The second category belongs to western
countries where religion is recognized but the country
comes first. Religion has no role in framing laws and
rule. National interest alone is taken into account.
In the US, 18 per cent of the people are blacks but
they are not given any minority status. Britain and
France solved the problem by enforcing a uniform civil
code. What should India do in the circumstances?
<b>Hussain has his answer ready. He says: A uniform civil
code is the only answer."</b> He points out that the
Fundamental Rights as enumerated in the Constitution
ensure religious freedom for all. As Hussain sees it,
minorities will continue to exist in one from or
another anywhere in the world. That is only but
natural. The term 'Minority' Hussain concedes, is not
in itself bad, but problems arise when it is used by
vested interests, As he sees it, minoritism is a
'deception' practiced on human civilization of which
one should be aware of. And majority communalism is a
myth.
In a democracy, Hussain insists, it is essential to
respect the opinion of the majority in day-today life.
There haven't been many treatises on this subject and
Muzaffer Hussain's attempt, almost the first of its
kind, is highly praiseworthy. He has no hesitation in
asking inconvenient questions. For example he asks:
"How can Muslims who form between 15 to 20 per cent of
India's population consider themselves a minority?"
Not many have dared to raise this question. Hussain
has. All praise to him. This is a book that our
policy-makers and politicians would do well to read.
It may not necessarily have all the right answers, but
it certainly raises all the right questions. And isn't
that what a good study should be all about?
<i>-- Book review by M. V. Kamath, Free Press Journal,155pp,
Delhi: India First Foundation, Price Rs.250 </i>
http://members. tripod.com/ indowave/ MINORITISM. html
Book review by M. V. Kamath
In almost all countries in the world, a certain
segment -ethnic, religious linguistic or ideological
would be in the majority and some others would be in a
minority. That is inevitable. A multi-cultural
national like the United States has its majority and
minorities as well, but one seldom talks about them.
The biggest minority would be the Blacks, but whoever
would think of providing reservation for them in the
Senate or Congress or in government service?
Indeed in older textbooks on political science there
would hardly be any reference to majoritarianism and
minoritarianism. These are recently-coined words. <b>But
India is different. Here we constantly talk of
minorities as if they are a plague and we even have a
Minority Commission! It is a carry over from British
colonialism. </b>Nobody in India talked of a majority or a
minority in the days of Tipu Sultan or during hayed of
Mogul rule. Hindus were even then in a majority but
they were often treated as if they were non-existent.
Hindus were made aware of their majority status during
the time of the British, as were Muslims of their
minority place in society.
That may have been a display - and a distorted one at
that - of British sense of Justice, but the
consequences were severe, resulting, for one thing, in
partition of the country. Reference has been made to
this in Muzaffer Hussain's well-argued book Insight
into Minoritism, which goes into the subject in
different contexts and in some detail. Minorities have
been dealt with very poorly in Pakistan and
Bangladesh, India's immediate neighbours. Hussain
draws pointed attention to that.
Says Hussain: <b>"There is a sizeable population of
Hindus in the Gulf countries but those countries are
not ready to give any facility to them in the name of
minority or Human Rights. The Hindus are not allowed
there to cremate their kith and kin as per their
belief. They can't construct places for worship nor
can they celebrate their festivals at public places.</b>
During the Ramzan, non-Muslims can't eat anything at
daytime in public places. The Muslims expect to get
everything as minorities in the countries of Hindus,
Buddhists and Christians but in Islamic countries the
minorities don't have such privilege.."
We have to blame history for that. In India,
minorities like Jews, Parsis and Christians have full
freedom. No Christian missionary dare try in an
Islamic country, but in India every citizen,
especially if he is a tribal or one from the lower
caste, is fair game to Christian missionaries. In
India propagation of religion is not a crime. The
freedom given is often interpreted to mean that one
can resort to conversion, which is frequently resorted
to in tribal areas. It started under the British when
missionaries flooded the northeast and converted large
number of tribals to Christianity. Unconsciously this
has caused problems for free India.
Hussain damns minoritism as a "menace" which it has
indeed become. Hussain maintains that Christians and
Muslims in India can't be dubbed as minorities because
they are very much Indian. As he puts it: When all are
born and brought up in the Indian context, the
question of 'alien' and 'indigenous' people don't
arise". Hussain's argument is that all over the world,
a minority status is granted only to those classes,
which have migrated from abroad. So he says: "Hence it
is not proper to designate Muslims and Christians (of
India) as aliens since they, too are very much
Indian".
All are one in this country where there is one
citizenship for all and everyone is a part of this
nation. The word 'minority' Hussain asserts, weakens
the unity of the country and draws a dividing line
between individuals" . How right he is. Hussain is
critical of Muslims in India who, he says, haven't
accepted democracy. Inevitably the Islamic world has
been gripped by fanaticism and narrow thinking. The
point indeed was well made by Justice Chandrashekhar
Dharmadhikari in his preface. Writes Mr Dharmadhikari:
"India as a nation has suffered continuous tussles
between the religious and orthodox religious
fanaticism even after the creation of Pakistan. How
many Muslim mohallas or Madarassas hoist the national
flag and sing the national anthem collectively on the
occasion of Independence Day!"
How many indeed. The former Justice adds: "To accept
special rights for any community along with the
provisions of equal human rights are mutually
contradictory principles. This creates a controversy
and the majority class begins to feel unprotected and
adopts a defensive mechanism". Hussain in his treatise
goes into this subject in a special and separate
chapter entitled "How to tackle minoritism", He notes
that there are three distinct approaches in handling
minoritism". In the Arab world minorities like
Christians and Hindus have no political or religious
rights. The second category belongs to western
countries where religion is recognized but the country
comes first. Religion has no role in framing laws and
rule. National interest alone is taken into account.
In the US, 18 per cent of the people are blacks but
they are not given any minority status. Britain and
France solved the problem by enforcing a uniform civil
code. What should India do in the circumstances?
<b>Hussain has his answer ready. He says: A uniform civil
code is the only answer."</b> He points out that the
Fundamental Rights as enumerated in the Constitution
ensure religious freedom for all. As Hussain sees it,
minorities will continue to exist in one from or
another anywhere in the world. That is only but
natural. The term 'Minority' Hussain concedes, is not
in itself bad, but problems arise when it is used by
vested interests, As he sees it, minoritism is a
'deception' practiced on human civilization of which
one should be aware of. And majority communalism is a
myth.
In a democracy, Hussain insists, it is essential to
respect the opinion of the majority in day-today life.
There haven't been many treatises on this subject and
Muzaffer Hussain's attempt, almost the first of its
kind, is highly praiseworthy. He has no hesitation in
asking inconvenient questions. For example he asks:
"How can Muslims who form between 15 to 20 per cent of
India's population consider themselves a minority?"
Not many have dared to raise this question. Hussain
has. All praise to him. This is a book that our
policy-makers and politicians would do well to read.
It may not necessarily have all the right answers, but
it certainly raises all the right questions. And isn't
that what a good study should be all about?
<i>-- Book review by M. V. Kamath, Free Press Journal,155pp,
Delhi: India First Foundation, Price Rs.250 </i>
http://members. tripod.com/ indowave/ MINORITISM. html