The Republic is dead. Long live the Republic!
Let this adaptation of the British adage—“The King is dead. Long live the King”—be our national call this 26 January.
On 22 January 2024, the Republic of India, which came into being on 26 January 1950, was fully dismantled. This process was going on for a long time. I have been speaking about the ‘end of the republic’ for some time now. But now we can put a definite date to it. Now on, we live in a new political order. Those who seek opportunities within the new order will rapidly adapt to the rules of the new game, if they haven’t already done so. We who commit to reclaim the first republic have no option but to radically rethink our politics. We need to craft a new political language that can offer a more robust and rooted defence of our republican values. We must also shift our political strategies and rework political alignments, from old-style parliamentary opposition to a politics of resistance.
Let there be no mistake about it. The consecration ceremony in Ayodhya was not about the statue, or Lord Ram, or the Ram temple for that matter. It was not about maryada (norms), astha (faith) or dharma. It involved multiple violations of constitutional, political, and dharmik maryada. It undoubtedly involved astha of crores of believers, but only as an object to be hijacked. It has led to an inversion of dharma and its relationship to rajasatta (state). Indeed, this represented the political colonisation of Hinduism. In its background, its design, the nature of its mobilisation, and in its impact, 22 January was a political event, meant to anticipate, precipitate, and consolidate a political triumph. It was, in essence, a consecration of a “Hindu rashtra” that is neither in line with Hindu ethos nor a rashtra as defined by Indian nationalism.
Also read: Accept 4 truths to counter BJP hegemony. They offer a formula to reclaim republic in 2024
A new order in place
We have a new constitution now, not in the form of a fresh document, but by way of a fresh arrangement of political power that crystallises the changes that we have witnessed over the past decade. The original Constitution recognised minority rights as the limit, so as to define wha democratically elected government could not do. The new one institutes the will of the majority community to draw a line of fire that no organ of the government can cross, no matter what the text of the original Constitution said. We now have a two-tier citizenship: Hindus and associates are the landlords while Muslims and other religious minorities are the tenants. The original compact of the “union of states” has been replaced with a unitary government that delegates some administrative functions to the provinces. The fast-fading fiction of division of power between executive, legislature, and judiciary has now been repudiated in favour of governance by the all-powerful executive that lays down legislative rituals and demarcates the arena where the judiciary is permitted to adjudicate. Parliamentary democracy has given way not to a presidential system but to a rule by one — an elected king — a system where people elect their supreme leader and then leave everything to him.
This imposition of a new constitution does not yet enjoy the legitimacy of a constituent assembly. The Cabinet resolution might claim that the spirit of India was liberated on 22 January 2024, but it is not yet the official date of birth of India’s second Republic. We still have a battle on our hands to prevent this de facto abrogation of the Constitution. The coming parliamentary elections are the first front in this battle. But whatever the poll outcome, we cannot wish away the reality of this new political order. We cannot push away any further the challenge of radical rethinking.
We must be conscious of our own culpability in the demise of the first republic. It is pointless to blame the RSS and the BJP for doing what has been their raison d’être. The onus must lie with those who pledged their allegiance to the Constitution of the first republic. The gradual degeneration of secularism from the politics of conviction to convenience has contributed to this dismantling. The sheer arrogance of secular ideology, its disconnect with the people, its refusal to speak to people in their language and idiom has helped the delegitimisation of the very idea of secularism. We cannot forget that this death knell came thirty years after a full-fledged warning was announced by way of the demolition of the Babri Masjid. For thirty years, secular politics prevaricated, from a lazy assumption that this disease will disappear on its own to the cynical belief that caste politics can counter it. If secular politics is in shambles today, it is the outcome of its own sins of omission and commission.
What was lost through politics can only be regained through politics. We don’t have many options today. We, who stand for the Constitution, can either live like a beleaguered ideological minority in our own country, offering token opposition occasionally, when not trying to fall in line. Or we can forge a bold and energetic republican politics.
Also read: Indian Constitution was bulldozed between Ram Navami & Hanuman Jayanti. It needs to be rescued
Two-pronged affair
This republican politics has to be a two-pronged affair. First of all, it has to be a cultural-ideological battle to be fought over the next few decades. It must begin by reclaiming Indian nationalism, our civilisational heritage, our languages, and our religious traditions, including Hinduism. And it must go on to articulate a new vision of India, redefine a new ideological equilibrium, in line with the aspirations of the bottom of the pyramid. Some of the ideological battles of the 20th century — between communists and socialists and Gandhians, for example — are irrelevant today. We need to draw from all the liberal, egalitarian and anti colonial strands to forge a new ideology for our times, something like Swaraj 2.0.
This has to be accompanied by a new kind of politics. Politics of opposition has to give way to counter-hegemonic politics of resistance. Electoral contestation may not be pivotal to this politics. Republican politics has to rethink its strategy. The old lines dividing different parties may not be relevant in this new political world. The present crisis calls for a tectonic reconfiguration in politics. Those who are true to the spirit of the Republic will have to practically merge into a single political bloc. As elections turn into a plebiscite with a pre-decided outcome, electoral politics will have to take a back seat. Movement politics and street opposition would be more efficacious in this new situation. But that too would come under pressure as the space for democratic protest would shrink. Politics of resistance would need to carve new and innovative ways while remaining democratic and non-violent.
There is a joke doing rounds on social media inviting us to celebrate this Republic Day well, lest this be the last one. The irony is that it was already dated before it was shared. This 26 January can either be a day to commemorate a Republic that is now dead. Or it can be a day of national resolve to reclaim the Republic.
Happy Republic Day.
Yogendra Yadav is National Convener of the Bharat Jodo Abhiyan. He tweets @_YogendraYadav. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)
So you think this the end. Well since you have written in English you will know that each time something ends – in this case your republic – something new starts – the disaster as a new republic as you say. The voters want it – right. You say the mandir and Jan 22 were not constitutional ?? You do remember the SC judgement on this – right? So, let me try and understand this. Your republic – whatever that meant – do not hold the SC verdicts as constitutional, have over turned judgement given by the courts for political gains – Google it if you don’t remember – Gave free hand to your politicans to mint money and generally screwed the people of India in the name of secularism. It’s over now for past 10 years and I sincerely hope it will stay like this for some time to come. Like some other reader said, apart from cribbing, do you have any – ANY – concrete idea which will benefit people of India and not your ego and pockets ???
It’s just denial, delusion, ignorance and a little bit of acceptance. You don’t want reconciliation and peace.
Because of Babri demolition, innocent Hindus have paid the price in Mumbai blasts and other terrorists attacks. SC gave a separate land to build a mosque. Still you have to invoke Babri demolition in every opportunity.
I believe except a minuscule number, Hindus don’t hate Muslims but a large number of Hindus (with or without any political affiliation) don’t like political Islam. Do you understand the difference? Why don’t ask yourself that why it’s always hindu muslim, not any other religion? Why don’t you talk about political Islam? Why your secularism has to be at the expense of Hindus?
People like you will not create the conflict directly but you want the conflict to remain forever. Because you feed on poor people’s poverty, you feed on people’s vulnerability. Mr Modi is closing India’s age old wounds. That’s a problem for you. Now deal with it.
If you believe the Republic is dead, WHY CAN’T your team can’t find revival narrative?? Who’s stopping you? We still have functional democracy isn’t it?? BJP is winning elections through people’s mandate right?? Is your Pseudo secularism -Dictated by so-called religious minorities stands fully exposed??
This year my view of the Republic Day parade changed. After the destruction of the constitution the parade did not celebrate the formation of the Republic but the display of the power of the administration of the Bharatiya Junta (sic) Party.
For those who wish republic to be dead, it is dead. The republic that they imagine, existed in their collective mind only not in reality. A republic where few self-anointed oracles like the author himself, never deserved to exist.
Everything pointed out in this article would have been avoided by more English-medium schools in North India right from. 1947. What was Congress doing. Their apathy created 70 years of inferiority complex-ridden Indian men struggling to get by, their pinnacle of achievement an H1 Visa or whatever, and became raging communal pro-templeists. A chip on the shoulder carved over 70 years will reshape a country’s character as effectively as ideology.
stop following Pappu Gandhi first.Your jealousy for AAP’s rise is no secret. After Modi, it’s Yogi Adityanath : ) No street protest or movement will have any effect now. Because Pappu has no respect of any Indian. The few votes Congress still gets is of Modi dislikers because congress being still the main opposition. It’s not that that much people have any faith in that dumb, morally corrupted Pappu.
If you take a step back and remove the hysteria in this piece, you actually have the kernels of truth about where the demarcation lines are in Indian politics today.
On the one side is the newly dominant point of view of the BJP – we are a civilization first, and our diversity is the tapestry underneath. Our civilization might have been divided by caste and language in the past, but as it is reimagined today, it is a new way of presenting ourselves to us and the world. The religious underpinning of this identity is overwhelmingly Hindu, but we are a civilization that accepts all that recognize ourselves as a civilization first. That is me speaking as an atheist Hindu, which is a complete non-contradiction.
On the other side, is the old view which insists that our identity be more atomized. Caste, religion, or language first, and then the nation. So the heavy emphasis on ‘Union of states’. In this view, the Indian peoples only ever united in the fight for independence, and when we got it, we went back to being a loose coalition held together by Nehruvian principles.
It is ok for the opposition to come out clearly and present itself as such. Then we have a clear distinction between the two sides. The INDI Alliance is led by a weak Congress and regional and caste parties. The BJP presents the case for a new vision of culture first. Go present these competing visions and let the people decide. Maybe this tussle will be cyclical. If the BJP starts to demand a Hindi first identity, the regional identities might again take precedence. But don’t talk about non-electoral paths. Have the guts and the honesty to present your views.
Perfect comment in today’s scenario. If Indians are not carried away with religion intoxicated(sorry) with politics I am sure we can see something different. The disparity has gone to its maximum.
Your version of republic is probably dead as you say. Time for you to retire and shut up. Don’t you realize that masses want to get away from people like you?
Curse the republic, citizen and everyone else for rejection of pseudo secularism you people have been using as tool to marginalize and castigate the majority who was a meek spectator of his own subjugation.
Stop your nonsense Salim Yadav.
YOGENDRA ji still can’t come up with an Indian version of Charles de Gaulle-ian construct of “Republic is Dead”. Still stuck in pre-war iconography. And he wants to reclaim Indianess. I wonder how silly & contradictory his thoughts are.
Okay cool. Street politics, resistance and whatnot. Fascinating stuff. Although I was meaning to ask what are some reforms the Congress has in mind to accelerate the Ease of Doing Business in this country if it comes to power. Oh while we’re there, can we talk about the Party’s vision on developing a manufacturing ecosystem in this country that will be able to support the growing workforce while ensuring that India improves her presence in high-value sectors like Semiconductors, Telecom equipment and Aerospace? And finally, it would be a cherry on the cake if someone could bring to light Rahul’s opinion on AI and how the country can catch-up with the cutting-edge research seen in the US and China while ensuring the threats to employment are minimised?
Sincerely,
A random young, educated and urban elector