Monday, 15 March 2021

Clientelism

 

Clientelism in Indian politics

Indian political character is coined by new terminology - “Clientelism” to which it’s mass is still uncomfortable. Sharp changes of behaviours in Indian voters have been seen emerged, where spirit of democracy is totally redefined with gluttonous materialism. The system practiced in ancient Rome ‘Clientelism’ is seemed to be appropriate example for explaining the modern face of our democracy. French political theorists described that as Practice of Emperors, who used to offer gift to public and gain loyalty from them. Today votes are purchased and corporate driven political parties have founded the practice of offering reward in return of single votes. Votes are not casted for any good reason relating to national or regional policy on economy, education, agriculture, society etc. Votes for reward and whoever has that capacity to offer, he or she wins the election. Voters have their own reason to justify their changed behavior also and they say that, if politicians are not honest then how voters can be? New management concept has entered into the spirit of politics and elections are today nothing but a game of management skill. Big parties can afford engagement of multi-skilled and costly groups for research, policy and management, which small parties cannot. Era of Ideology or Ism based politics is over and purely growth based politics has ushered, where meaning of development is only co-opted unrefined. 

Couple of decades back a gentleman approached me and explained about idea for a new policy where voters also should have right to be paid money for giving votes to any party or any person. The matter was totally weird for me and I disagreed to agree the idea. In later stage that gentlemen formed a political party, which could work nowhere in India but in Bodoland area of Assam only. Things are defined in different ways but practices are not, because reward for vote is not a policy of the nation but practice of political parties. In business literature, that is common that where competitions are high and tuff, money power plays the last game. In our democracy also multi-party system is taking political battle to a war of power. You may win election for once, but sustaining in the same becomes game of money power in the next. Traditional thinkers Indian may not be comfortable with that development, but that is a truth that unless you get patronage of the big corporate houses, no election can be won. Mandate is patronized by multiple power houses; democracy is designed according to their needs and willingness.

Rich section never wants any ideology or ism of equality to prevail in any political system because, for them, totalitarian is the best system. They patronage parties and voters for their best interests only, not for public at large. One can take what is provided by them and remain within the level set by them, but can never dream of becoming providers. Equality and socialistic theories are now like a fancy idea that can never come into reality. Class as defined in terms of economic status, has created class divide of human society. Later religious superiority and inferiority theories created caste and creed system and now in modern age of technology digital divide has brought a new kind of classes in the society. No one can raucously say that the democracy is in peril totally, because it itself is passing through a changing phases of time. It cannot be stagnant theory; the new economic order will always redesign and redefine the mottos of our democracy. But fact is that human division on the basis of Social Stratum, Economic Class and Digital Divide will never go out of our mental physical jurisdiction. Power can emerge from any ideology and ism and that can command society keeping certain section on the top. Current affairs of Indian democracy is like a race where powerful horses are running with extra ordinary speed keeping other animals far behind.  

 

Monday, 3 August 2020

LORD RAMA : NON-DEBATABLE DEBATE


LORD RAMA : Non-DEBATABLE DEBATE
Lord Rama’s image was in thoughts as an amorphous definition; he is alive for millenniums in peoples’ hearts as an irreversible faith and believes without any disagreements in the stream of religion. But the time, since when our so called modern civilization brought him into a structure, human intellects started to debate over that fact also. As Irish poet Oscar Wilde said “Beauty ends where an intellectual expression begins”, never debated philosophy of Rama is now debated because we have begun giving intellectual expression over that.  The Lord Rama will now be found at Ayodhya, construction of his abode is underway with the intervention of man-made law of the land. How strange the fact is, human being has reshuffled the chronology and standard of their Gods also with the features of law framed according to their conveniences.
As per the mythological history, the Lord Rama born to King Dasharatha and Queen Khaushalya at Ayodhya in the kingdom of Kosala as the 7th Avthar of Lord Vishnu. The great Epic Ramayana was composed of journey of life of the Lord Rama.  His principle of life is depicted as ‘Dharma’ of human beings and his deeds in practical life, including 14 years in exile and war with Ravana, are depicted as ‘Karma’ in the Epic. ‘Mauryada’ or ‘Modesty’ and ‘Kartabya Parayanata’ or ‘dutiful devotion’, these two are the major thoughts that had been narrated through Lord Rama in Ramayana. For Modesty or Mauryada, Ram could leave throne also and go for exile.  He also fought against Ravana, destroyed Lanka and killed him for rescue of his wife Sita as a Kartabya.  As narrated by composer of the epic, Rama never broke Mauryada and escaped from the duty also. Ramayana became more popular after Ramananda Sagar converted the epic into TV Serial and people started to see Lord Rama in the form of man as dramatized in that serials of films. His advent on earth was meant for the establishment of Dharma by defeating O-dharma as described in the epic. Ravana was symbol of O-dharma, the reign of whom was destroyed by the Rama and Truth and Dharma established on earth. A son of human King was embodied as the reincarnation of Lord Vishnu for establishment of Dharma on human world. With the spread of Hindu religion, based on Ved, he later became God of all Hindu believers throughout the India and abroad.   
Knowledge about science, Geography, History, Sociology, Literature and Culture only cannot ensure the balance in nature as well as the human society. Had there been no religion in the world, human being would also have remained like animals. Religion has taught about love and relationship among men and women and sense of responsibility to each other.  First human relationship began with the relationship of man-woman as husband-wife. Birth of children added new relationship to that and thus relationship of father-mother to son-daughter began. In this way human race learned to think about humanity, mutual responsibility to each other and society.  Further, it is the religion, which taught us about caring nature, its surroundings and building better environment for all.  In fact it is a most wonderful education invented by human civilization, which has gifted us new ways of sagacious life.  Epic of Ramayana is also an education, from which we can learn about Mauryada and Kartabya. Likewise every epic of every religion gives us education of life that helps us in guiding ourselves.
No religion has so much of varieties as Hindu religion has today. Lord Rama came into controversies due to Ayodhya dispute.  Every ethnic community or race has their own God of belief, even within Hinduism also according their own history, tradition and culture. The 8th Avtar of Vishnu, Lord Krishna is widely worshiped across the Globe by Hindus and recognized by other religious groups of people also. His predecessor Lord Rama gave birth of concept of the Ram Rajya, which was conceptualized as the Ideal Nation by the Gandhiji also. As an Avtar Krishna is latest than Rama, Rama age is known as “Satya Yug” (age of truth) and Krishna age is known as “Kholi Yug” (age of openness), which is still continuing. Lord Rama came to establish rule of Dharma by defeating Ravana and Lord Krishna came to establish rule of Dharma by defeating Kauravas.  Kholi Yug is not considered to be ideal; it is the Satya Yug which is considered as ideal Yug on earth. Everyone is talking of restoring Satya Yug or Ram Rajya today, even each and every politician sing the song of that. Who else will be there on earth that that will not be happy if Ram Rajya really returns to India? But controversies are always created for new changes, whatever new Yug or Age may begin tomorrow, variations in narration of faith and belief will be re-scripted again. Because, we human beings are used to for thinking, believing and working according to our conveniences only.


Tuesday, 7 July 2020

Calculative and Meditative Thinking


Calculative and Meditative Thinking
Sometimes in the year 2014 in New Delhi, I was listening to a speech delivered by one scholar and social activist, the name of which I can’t remember today. He was speaking on the topic – “Changing human behavior in modern age”.   …….Calculative thinking is taking over the Meditative thinking, where people just gather inestimable information; put them together and use that for specific purpose in search of self benefit. Success-failure, profit-lose are more important than the soul of thought. Aphorism of life is re-scripted and spirituality is replaced by multiplicity of ideas.  Meditative thinking tries to find root to soul and to the body; motivate us to learn from the beginning to end about what and why of the happenings in our surroundings. Meditative thinking gives birth to imagination, then creativity and link road to the future. It is the creativity that binds human beings with the sense of the responsibility and for future. World will be in more chaotic condition because we have lost sense of responsibility to others. World had the history of class struggle between ‘Have and Have Not’ in the past, and today we try to say that that is over. But nothing is over, even in this age also, where Right to Food is a law in all most all countries of the world, there is still such situation prevailing, where a section of people have the right to preserve food, and others have to struggle for having that. Huge gaps of privileged and unprivileged, knowledge seeker and knowledge controllers are creating again new class.  Technology is controlled by wealthy people, chasing achievement of life in their prescribed road map; we lose everything of our foundation …......

Echoes of claps were heard and he was praised by chair person of the function. Such a thought provoking deliberation was outside my interest at that time. For me difference between calculative and meditative thinking was not so important. Because as we know every working people would be naturally calculative in nature and meditative thinking is for creative people and thinker only.  As a listener, I also couldn’t but clap along with others in the hall.

After the elapse of couple of decades, today I am re-connected by the soul of that speech just for a few reasons.  Reasons are : - (i) we have lost interest of reading book, because we need to pay cash for that and it consumes much time to go through. Contrary to that there are writings in net for cheaper price, which are short, precise, informative and useful in life. Meaning, searching of  soul  through the book reading is now old fashioned hobby for us. (ii) We now just try to know the culture as how comfort of technology teaches us, not the tradition. We want to enjoy it not to live in it, extract profit out of that and never try to understand.  (iii) Everything of society including politics and religion, now survives in management and publicity concept, not on any founded ideology or Ism. Organizational war of supremacy and dominance has converted all those to merely a material being from the foundation of thought.  (iv) We have seen the time where sons or daughters have started disowning their moral responsibility towards parents. Parallel to that parents have also lost much hopes from their children in their future life. Reason is that calculation of life disallows such responsibilities just because those are not manageable.  Most drastic change of fact is that calculation of practical life has seriously influenced now the thought process of thinkers and their creativity too. 

Ultimately concluding line of speech is Calculative thinking gives us sense of management with specific burden only, but Meditative thinking gives us about wholeness of life and nature. But after all we are human being; we all are more or less materialistic because, we are living in material world, where the calculation is much needed to win in the competition of life. We shall always opt for the path, which is convenient for the survival of individual life. But following the rowdy race of life, we shouldn’t forget to think about the truth that, the creative thinking is not a product of any factory that can be assembled with machinery. Our study and learning lessons should be a thorough process of finding the root, knowing the present happenings and understanding its future. Materialism shouldn’t be defined within the narrow space of avariciousness only; it also should have space for new imagination for the future. All these can be realized only by persons through in-depth learning processes and experiences of life.



Wednesday, 10 June 2020

Population: strength or weakness


Population: strength or weakness
“Population is strength of the nation, but it is weakness when it is beyond manageable limit.” This question is most relevant for India, especially in the time, when a Pandemic diseases like COVID -19 attacks. Current status shows that India’s population is over 136 crore and by 2024 it will be over 144 crores. Its current population growth rate shows trend of steady decline in many states from earlier status. But even if current growth rate is maintained it may overtake the China by within a decade from now.
India’s first population policy was comprehensively declared on the 16th April, 1976. In that policy state Governments were allowed to enact legislative measures regarding compulsory sterilization. Indians were against that policy of compulsory sterilization, but that was the beginning step of bringing awareness among Indian mass. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India earmarked for Plan and a Research and Programme Committee appointed by the centre. (a) Socio-economic and cultural studies (b) Biological and qualitative aspects, were two major sub-committees constituted within that main committee. In 1977 the policy was revised and renamed as Family Welfare Policy. Family planning had some compulsory guidelines but Family Welfare emphasized on awareness, health, economy and reducing or controlling birth and fertility voluntarily.  In that policy the age of marriage for girls was raised from 15 to 18 years of age and for boys it was raised from 18 to 21 years of age. Registration of marriage was suggested to be made compulsory, though it has not reached total success till today.
On the 15th February, 2000 the Government of India chalked out New Population Policy (NPP) aiming at to achieve Zero Growth of population by 2045. It included reducing (a) infant mortality rate, (b) maternal motility rate (c) birth rates (d) total fertility rate. New Population Policy extended its hands to tackle manifold issues with regard to the welfare of the population. National Commission on Population headed by the Prime Minister and its State level Commissions headed by Chief Ministers were two major bodies, which were supposed to contemplate the implementing policy through Panchayat, Municipality and Non Governmental public organizations. Compulsory registration of birth, death, marriage and pregnancy had been suggested to be made necessary by the states.
One of the major policies was freezing the number of seats in the Lok Sabha at the current level of 545, which is based on the 1971 census till 2026.  As per original schedule the number should have changed as per 2001 census. India in its new population policy avoided any kind of coercive policy of reducing birth rate. Compulsory sterilization or introducing any norms on number of child per couple never came as law in the policy. Empowering women for improved health and nutrition worked tremendously in bringing birth control. Free and compulsory education to every child up-to 14 years of age, universal immunization of children against all preventable diseases through vaccines or drops and promotion of delayed marriage were not direct policy approach to the birth control. But tremendous impact of these indirect policies through voluntary participation of men and women in certain sections was seen that stabilized the population growth to some extent. But in spite of consistency in policy and action the passive approach of population control the policy is yet to be realized in certain sections of Indian population. It is still explosive in rural areas of many central Indian states particularly with certain sections of society. India now need, not only awareness, but some clear cut approach towards the issue also. But laying down a coercive policy, compulsory norms and stringent law may still not be acceptable for the Indian mass. But a comprehensive, steady and dedicated programme of instilling right perceptions and meticulous followings among mass, especially in those sections, who are still contributing high growth rate of populations, is a very much need of the time today.





Friday, 5 June 2020

India or Bharat?


India or Bharat?
If the source of coming of the name ‘Bharat’ is from the name of ‘King Bharat’ then how can we call ‘Bharat Mata’ today, when the King is male? This is the commonly asked question today after demand for naming of our country as ‘Bharat’ instead of ‘India’ is taking its upward movement. Two stories of mythological history of India describe the fact that the name ‘Bharat’ derived from either the name of King or the name of Community. The word ‘Bharat’ is Sanskrit origin, which is a most ancient term of Tree. Purana, Mahabharata & Rigveda also referred this country as ‘Bharat’ or ‘BharatVarsha.’
According to Mahabharata, India was called BharatVarsha after the name of legendary Emperor Bharat Chakrabarty, who was ancestor of Pandavas and Kauravas. Emperor Bharat had conquered almost all major areas of greater India and united those into a single political entity, known as ‘BharatVarsha.’ But Rigveda has different story of becoming BharatVarsha. It was a battle of Ten Kings to overthrow King Sudasa, who belonged to the Bharata Tribe. Ultimately King Sudasa achieved victory and all defeated groups joined Bharata Tribe and accordingly his kingdom was called ‘BharatVarsha’
‘Bharat’ ‘Hindustan’ ‘Hind’ ‘Bharatbhumi’ ‘Bharatvarsha’ various names had been suggested for the present cosmopolitan India in the Constituent Assembly on September 18, 1949, before it was born. But finally the line - “India, that is, Bharat, shall be a Union of States” is written in the Article 1 (1) of the Constitution.
India is a home of oldest civilization of the world, which was believed to be inhabited approximately 250,000 years ago. The country, now known as largest democracy of the world, India is celebrating its 74th years of Independence in the current year, 2020. According to etymological history of India that particular word might have originated from the name of a valley that is 'Indus valley' and we were known as people of that. By that way the name 'India' came into being before independence itself. It is explained as English term of ‘Bharat’ by many language experts because; it was christened by them in the history. But the etymological study illustrates that the word is origin of old Indian civilization and very much connected with India. May be these are some core points as to why the Constituent Assembly decided to keep two identities of the nation, that is 'India' and the 'Bharat' in unison.
Now, if we go through two lines of thinking about renaming the country we need to see its two meaning and implications too. If the name ‘India’ is retained then that will be based on our civilization. But if it is changed to ‘Bharat’ then that will be like dedicated to one King or Community, which may again be questioned in future. Because. We had many Kings, Emperors and Communities in the history and they were also found equally dominant, powerful, and influential having great contribution in maintaining our identity and territories. India being a Union of different states, its language, religion and ethnicity are also heterogeneous not homogeneous. So decision of converting the name of ‘India’ to ‘Bharat’ may be easy in Parliament by majority, but it may click again to a long drawn debate and conflict among Indian scholars and mass.





Friday, 18 October 2019

WHY UPENDRA NATH BRAHMA IS CALLED “BODOFA?”
                                                                                                         U. G. Brahma, Ex-MP (RS)

A highly academic career conscious student in his school & college days, U. N. Brahma aimed to be a scientist in life first. But finally he opted for the path of movement as the career of life and led famous Bodoland Mass Movement from the 1987 to 1990. A question arises regularly that why he is Bodofa and what is “Bodofa?”.  “Bodo” is a name of community and “Fa” mean the father i.e. father of the Bodo – “Bodofa.” Bharat existed before Gandhi also, but independent India was founded by him and therefore, he is called father of the nation.  Bodo also existed before Bodofa as well, but he founded modern Bodo by bringing struggle for existence, and world recognized Bodo as distinct nationality and therefore, he is regarded as the father of the Bodos or Bodofa. His movement brought about new consciousness amongst entire tribal people of Assam about their rights, privileges, identity and created great zeal for existence with distinct identity. He struggled against chauvinistic and hegemonic rule of Assam and fought for the salvation of language and cultural identity of the Bodos as well as the tribal as a whole from any kind of domination. He was neither influenced by any kind of thought of Bodo Chauvinism nor inflexibly anti-Assamese emotion also. Having educated in Assamese medium, he had the strong command in Assamese language also and being Guwahatian during his College and University days, he enjoyed a good circles of Assamese friends too. In fact he was steadfastly against any kind of exploitation because; from his childhood itself he had witnessed how the innocent and illiterate society gets exploited by clever traders or businessmen from outside.  His village was one of the brilliant examples of the way how Bodo villages had been exploited economically and lost lands in the hands of money Lenders or businessmen. In his village maximum families lost their ancestral lands in the hands of shop owners because they had to hand over that to them on failing of making payment of money for the goods they used to take on credit. That was a common phenomenon in many tribal villages till the last part of the 20th century and such situation forced thousands of Bodo tribe to leave their ancestral lands also. In search of new lands to live they had to travel here and there in the forests or no-men’s land area and transformed into the group of illegal encroachers from the status of indigenous land holders. His determination to fight against any kind of discrimination, exploitation and deprivation originated out of suppressed state of mind and later it got transformed into the struggle for new aspirations of ethnic Bodo as well as the tribal.  He strongly believed that the safety and security of Bodos or tribal people as a whole, was not possible at all in Assam because the Dispur always safeguarded the interests of exploiters and illegal encroachers. That may be the exclusive reason as to why he believed in socialism and used to talk about nationalism on ethnic purview within Socialism. The thirst for Bodoland was to safeguard the tribal entity, their linguistic and cultural identity and economic prosperity under new state of equality. Ethnic nationalism and Socialism can also co-exist in one situation and that cannot be a strange face in the history of the revolution, as he believed.
 He was one of those Cottonians, who used to stay at Third Mess that was known to be berths for economically weaker section. After passing the HSLC examination in 1975 from the Shakti Ashram Higher Secondary School of present Kokrajhar district, he went to Cotton College for college education. He completed B. Sc. from the Cotton College with honours in Physics and pursued M. A. in same subject in Guwahati University and completed in 1986.  The first magazine he edited as editor was the mouth piece of the Guwahati city wing of ABSU namely BIDANGSHRI in 1977-78. In the years 1978-79 he became the President of the undivided Goalpara District All Bodo Students’ Union (GDBSU). The famous anti-foreigners’ movement spearheaded by the All Assam Students Union (AASU) was in the rhyme of era at that time. Being one of the Cottonians he got opportunity to observe closely the situation how that Assam Movement originated and streamlined to the mass people of Assam. According to his feeling expressed time to time the growth of strong and new Assamese nationalism was the sole reason of resurgent Assam Movement and the issue of foreigners’ infiltration gave an ample opportunity to build up such nationalist ideology. ‘Assam for Assamese’ and ‘Assamese was those, who speak Assamese language’ were the popularly voiced mottos of the then Assam movement, which actually had panicked the minds of ethnic communities of Assam and U. N. Brahma was not exception to that.  In the 1980 he edited one weekly Bodo news magazine namely “Orkhi” published from Kokrajhar, which was published to raise the voices of Bodo youths in the form of youth power to resist the growth of opportunist political power within tribal. He ventilated strongly his philosophy and destiny of Bodo people through scientific logic and analysis. In the 1983-84 he was the Vice-President of the ABSU and at that period he was in the Guwahati University Hostel and AT-9 hostel also for some times. Guwahati University Hostel, being an epicenter of Assam Movement, was completely dominated by the AASU leaderships and U. N. Brahma lived there under that situation for the couple of years. But he had the advantage to follow the course of Assam Movement and analyze the problems and prospects of the same from the closed distance. 
 In the late 80s Bodo as well as the tribal politics was let down to such a level by some vested interest corners, they almost had lost even self confidence to survive as the nationality. Their political entity was abridged by the national and regional political course of established Isms. Maximum tribal leaders gave up the political aspiration of tribal for autonomy or statehood in the wave of power politics. As a result, there seemed to be a severe breakdown of dynamism in tribal politics and their struggle for existence. But U. N. Brahma revived that dynamism and hope by reviving Mass Movement for the Tribal Homeland that is called now Bodoland for the plains tribal people of Assam. Tribal societies, especially Bodo society were completely in the turmoil ridden house, where they had been separated into many pieces by the ruling clique in the names of wider nationalism, regionalism or universalism.  Those conditions of the tribal people, mainly the single largest group Bodos, stimulated the minds of U. N. Brahma to jump into the tribal movement leaving aside all individualistic way of life.
He became the 8th President of the All Bodo Students’ Union (ABSU) in the 18th Annual Conference of the Union held at Rowta Chariali of present Udalguri district on the dates of 29th to 31st May, 1986. Just after taking over the leadership of ABSU he announced for the political movement for the Separate Statehood for the plains tribal people of Assam. There were no such places in Assam where he did not travel and held meetings with public or organizations representing various ethnic communities. Each and every districts of Assam never left untouched because he wanted to build up popular opinion in favor of Bodoland movement. Students’ bodies of Mishing, Karbi, Lalungs, Rabha, Dimasa, Garo and socio-economic bodies of those communities had been consulted widely about the justification of the movement. Even organization like AASU, the then Koch Rajbongshi Kshatriya Sonmiloni (KRKS) and many others ethnic bodies had also been consulted before the practical movement started. Following the Bodo movement there was a simultaneous assertion of Autonomy movements of Lalungs and Rabha communities though the same was not visible in the case of Mishing during that period. Assertive Karbi & Dimasa movement for Autonomous State was at its peak of the momentum already, Dr. Jayanta Rongphi was in the command of the movement at that time. Dr. Ronouj Pegu, on the sideline of the Bodoland movement, had also developed Autonomy movements for the all ethnic tribal group of people living in Assam. But there was a diminutive layer of differences between movements of Dr. Pegu and U. N. Brahma as because former never favored the bifurcation of Assam. Significantly, in the backdrop of the anti-foreigners movement led by AASU, more or less all communities except high caste Assamese, extended moral support to the Bodoland movement. Inscription of popular slogan like ‘Bhai-Bhai’ (all brothers) brought all communities closer to the movement and that was strategically most effective approach of U. N. Brahma in making movements successful. On the other hand ‘Bodos of the world unite’ slogan was scripted by him to bring all Bodo groups of people living all over the world together and that practically worked in point of fact. Due to that movement the thinking of Bodo people of all corners streamlined under same discipline. Among the Bodo itself there were vast varieties of tones and accent of language, which were not understandable to each other. But that movement totally removed that gap because a massive interaction made them closer to understand each other.  The Bodoland movement was closely observed or followed from many angles for some positive or negative reasons because that had awakened new consciousness amongst tribal people, which was totally in latent state of position.  
Mass Movement for the Bodoland was formally declared on 2nd March, 1987 at Kokrajhar through a Mass Rally. Before that on the 1st January, 1987, the ABSU, under the leadership of U. N. Brahma, first submitted a 92 point charter of demand to then Chief Minister of Assam and extended liberal opportunity to settle the Bodo problem to the Assam Government. Because, out of 92 point charter of demands the demand for Bodoland was placed at last and rest were socio-economic, land, infrastructure development and educational problems, which could be resolved effortlessly. But politically prejudiced then AGP Government paid no heed to the cry of the Bodo people and pushed them to the agitation. The same memorandum was submitted to Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India and to Buta Singh, the then Home Minister of India on 24th February, 1987. Further on 30th February, 1987 the same was submitted to the then President of India Giyani Jail Sing. The cluster of demands revolved around mainly three political issues – (i) creation of separate state (earlier demanded as Union Territory) on the northern bank of the river Brahmaputra, (ii) creation of regional council for non-Karbi people living in Karbi-Anglong (later changed and demanded for inclusion of Boro Kocharis of Karbi-Anglong into ST (hills) list) and (iii) creation of autonomous region for the Bodo people living on the southern bank of the river Brahmaputra.  The charter of demand was the document of past and present condition of Bodos in Assam and their future vision as they desire to be.
The echo of historic Great Mass Rally at Judges Field of Guwahati still heard because it was the first ever people’s gathering at the heart of Guwahati where the U. N. Brahma first aired the slogan Divide Assam 50:50. That day is remembered for another big reason also that the first martyr of Bodoland Movement Lt Sujit Narzary died on that day. On the 10th November, 1987 about 1500 odd movement activists assembled at Boat Club of Rajpath, marched from India Gate to Rafi Marg up to the front of Parliament House and the demand for Bodoland was raised in the national capital. Lt. Rajiv Gandhi the then Prime Minister of India and Dr. Balram Jakhar the then Speaker of Lok Sabha met the delegation led by U. N. Brahma and received memorandum on demand of Bodoland. It was the first show of strength of the Bodos in the national capital Delhi and nation came to know about Bodos and their struggle for homeland (separate state of Bodoland today). Next day in all leading national dailies and some international media the colourful rally was publicized with front page coverage and colourful photos of famous Bagurumba dance of Bodo damsels mesmerized the nation as a whole. From that day the course of interactions with national and international media began and Bodos as a community could step in the wider forum.
The ‘Bodoland’ nomenclature was practically finalized through its historic Annual conference held from 18th to 22nd December, 1988 at Bashbari under Parbatjhara Sub-division of present Kokrajhar district (erstwhile Dhubri). Before that the proposed state was known as ‘Homeland’ or ‘Tribal Land’ because the movement leaders had a plan to bring all tribal groups together in the movement before finalization of that.  Upendra Nath Brahma was invited to New Delhi by the then President of India R. Venkataraman for talk on 18th January, 1988 on the backdrop of big Mass Rally organized on 4th of same month at  the KDSA field of Kokrajhar town. That rally was really wave changer because it is still memorable for the reason that the flood of people bumped up the movement to a different level.   After that total 33 phases of agitation was launched including 1000 hours Assam Bandh, which was called off after the of invitation for the first Tri-Partite Talk received and held on 28th August, 1989 in New Delhi on the Bodoland tangle. Mr. Prafulla Kr. Mahanta, the then Chief Minister of Assam represented the state, Mrs. Rajendra Kumari Vajpayee represented the centre and U. N. Brahma led the 40 member delegation team in the talk. During the talk he strongly argued as to why the creation of that state was a must and how that was not against any of the national interest. At the end of the talk he successfully could convince the central Government that an inclusive and long term process of initiative to resolve the Bodo problem is needed in the Governments. He also cited the situation how the entire North Eastern states had to suffer due to Bodo movement and so how important was it to bring about immediate solution to that.
During that time Subhash Ghishing’s Gorkhaland movement, Laldenga’s Mizo movement and Tripura’s Kok-Borok movement were at their prime stage of achievements. Upendra Nath Brahma had followed all those movements from close track theoretically and practically. The magnitude of Mizo sufferings during their liberation movement wounded his heart very deeply and he always cited those instances in his many speeches. He had the full sympathy and moral support to Kok-Borok’s movement because they also belonged to same Bodo stock and like Bodos in Assam they also have been subjected to suffer in their own land. In the 1987 once he went to Darjeeling and met Subhash Ghishing to know about their movement. Gorkhaland movement occupied limelight in the nation due to many reasons and one of those was moderate militancy movement grown by Ghising. But he never supported any secessionist movement guided by the anti-India notion; he was true nationalist Indian, who chosen to remain on the path of non-violence. Even he popularized the Gandhian thoughts among the Bodo youths and taught them that Gandhian thoughts generate invincible will power to win over any struggle for rights and privileges. But irony of the situation is the Bodoland  movement also witnessed a moderate violence like Gorkhaland due to over suppressive measures meted out by the Government.
While the Tri-Partite Talk reached its 5th round of U. N. Brahma was at his last stage. At that time Ram Vilas Paswan of V. P. Singh Government was in charge of Bodo issue and he was greatly impressed by his dedication and commitment. In the last part of 1988 itself he underwent treatment at Cooch Behar but it was CMC, Vellore that actually diagnosed Cancer. An operation was done on the shoulder to prevent the further infection of the disease there but could not prevent as expected. Taking in view his deteriorating health condition he was taken to Mumbai Tata Memorial Cancer Hospital for better treatment. But he could not survive long because by that time the disease reached last stage. When he was at death’s door his Mother Lepsri Brahma also passed away and his colleagues could not inform him about that because of his critical condition. As death keeps no calendar he also breathed his last at 1:32 P. M. of 1st May, 1990 inside the ICU of the Hospital. Perhaps he was also on the row, just after his beloved mother, to walk towards the heaven because his responsibility on earth was over. Message of his death sent a shockwave to the Bodo heartland and in other areas also as because he was regarded as new Messiah for down trodden communities of India. Bodoland movement was just at its maturing stage and his death had brought a sense of uncertainty among the mass people about the future of movement. There is a saying that “time and tide wait for no men” but in case of Upendra Nath Brahma he could not wait for the time to see the mellowness of the movement.
                                    (The author traveled with U. N. Brahma till his death. He also worked in many capacities within ABSU and became the president in 1996 to 2001. In 2002 he got elected to Rajya Sabha. Mobile No-9435127258)


Wednesday, 15 November 2017

BUILDING OF TRIBAL AS A COMMUNITY: A CONTAGIOUS PROCESS

BUILDING OF TRIBAL AS A COMMUNITY: A CONTAGIOUS PROCESS
                                                                                                                          -Urkhao Gwra Brahma
The emergence of the Nation-State is the fundamental raison-d'ĂȘtre (underlying principle) of emergence of concept of the Tribe or Tribal. People or group of people, who resisted the joining larger nation-state entities are labeled as tribe or tribal. The main stream concept is based on nation-state, those who rule the state forming a certain nation is the ‘conventional’ or ‘mainstream’. Those who don’t rule any nation-state and also unwilling to come under the rule of outsider are unconventional or non-mainstream group of people.  The people or groups of people, who are labeled as tribes, normally don’t rule any larger state and therefore, they never become part of mainstream. Off-course, at the modern age those non-mainstream or tribal group of people have also become ruler of many states even in India also and that very concept has not yet been re-defined, whether now those ruling tribes have become a part of the component of already  mainstream group of people or not.
The term ‘Tribe’ believed to be originated around the time of Greek City-State and early formation of Roman Empire. The Latin word ‘Tribus’ was transformed to the word ‘Tribe’ meaning a group of persons forming a community and claiming descent from a common ancestor. “They have distinct root of origin, common tradition and characteristics, common faith and believe in certain religion, common traditional cultural practices and somewhere common language too. Due to gap in development they are shy to have contact with advanced group of people and maintain isolation in living from others.” Of course, these factors were only an analysis of the conditions found in some particular time periods pertaining to particular group of people. When the constitutions of the modern world stepped into ancient social system and framed certain definition of tribal for the administrative conveniences, the division of conventional or unconventional group begun with its modern version. Later those divisions had been converted to legal criteria for recognizing particular groups of people as tribal and present tribal are administered by that law of criteria.
Freedom is what we all inherit it from the moment our lives begin; it is also the basic human instinct to live, act and move free everywhere and every time. The civilization has given birth to the present law and system; a section of privileged people created the Nation-State concept and they declared themselves to be the ‘mainstream’ of the human society. On the other hand people known as tribal are declared as non-mainstream or uncivilized by them and as such they had been placed under the pigeonhole of tribal. It is the colonial rulers who first began the establishment of nation-state and rule over the local uncivilized people as they interpreted. In the time of Kings and Kingdoms the term mainstream and non-mainstream were hardly found in any word stock as because only the terms ‘Kings’ and ‘subjects’ existed in the glossary of Kingdoms. But colonialist invaders used to travel with the power of civilization and imposed categories upon the invaded people for their convenience of rule. The colonial British ruled India, institutionalized entire social system streamlining them to the concept of governance and administration founded on the basis of certain constitutions. They gave the names of caste, community and nationality according to the conditions found at that time and these are accepted as the opportunity and privileges today by the people. They are praised for their initiative for creating certain exclusive provisions in the constitutions for the tribal with the development purpose though they are said to be inventor of category of people. As for example from the 1937 onward the ‘Naga Hills District, North-East Frontier Tract, Lushai Hills and North Cachar Hills’ had been declared by them as ‘Excluded Area’ under the Province of Assam. These are the root of origin of present day Tribal Autonomy in North Eastern region and also rest of India. Freedom of mainstream is a WILL to rule over other by exerting their power and freedom of non-mainstream is WISH to be free from any kind of such rule. So we can define that the conflict of two kinds of freedoms divided the human society into ‘conventional’ and ‘unconventional’ that was re-interpreted again as ‘mainstream’ and ‘non-mainstream’ later. After being categorized the freedom of the tribal people remained limited within the technical descriptions given to them by the constitutional laws in terms of their social, economic and political rights. But the self pretended mainstream group of people created boundless freedom for them with regard to their right to development, social status, economic & political privileges and knowledge.
Colonial ruler transformed the lands of tribal into commodity, which can be sold, bought, occupied and transferred too for the benefits. But for tribal, land is a part of culture based on which, their livelihood stands, folk-tales, folk-songs and dances originates. Further, the Tribal has no classes based on economic definition or category of people in group as defined by any constitution. It is the family or group of family, forming community transmissible to one to another generation, with inherent tradition. Therefore, there can be no negotiation in interpretation of conceptual definition.  They belong to distinct linguistic, cultural and historical tradition as community. They are also known in the history for practicing philosophy of ‘Live-and-Let-Live’ in every sphere of life, which means co-existence but without giving up their inbuilt traditional identity. We have SCs and OBCs group of people now in the country but like tribal they don’t have inherent and contagious tradition. They are just an economic class having no distinct language, culture and historical tradition.  History never ignored that fact also that anywhere if invaders had been resisted first, then it was from none but the tribal people because they never agreed to be ruled by any outsiders and fought for homeland with might. Even in maximum case they fled their homeland in a group if defeated, to maintain their freedom and community identity from the domination of invaders.  But tribal use to loss battles, their lands were engrossed because invaders came with fire-arms and trained military might in counter to their bows and arrows. From the year 1772 to 1914, as per the records about dozens of tribal revolts against British colonial rule can be traced back for the rights over land or payment of wages in India.   In the Middle East India many Satyagrahas took place in 1930 against the restrictions of tribal’s land rights imposed by the colonial rulers. Those Satyagrahas succeeded many times over the colonial rulers later and land reforms followed with the framing new land laws. The Bodo Kocharis in Assam used to work in the Tea Garden since the Assam Company started Tea Plantation in 1840 and after. In 1848   Kachari Coolies revolted against the defaulter in their payment of wages, they even Gheraod the superintendent of Assam Company and demanded payment of three months defaulted wages and accordingly the Assam Company had to bow down before the agitating Kachari Coolies. From that revolt payment of wages were never been kept defaulter by the tea company and regarding that a renown historian Dr. Guha said –“they were able to secure an assurance for no more default in payment of wages in future.”  Those incidents had encouraged tea laborers of other parts of the Assam also to fight for their timely payment of wages.

The definition of tribal has been converted to a procedural process from the natural process after the modern constitutions came into being. As in India the President, under the Art-342(1), specifies the Tribal or Scheduled Tribe by public notification through the consultation with concerning Governors of respective states. Further, the Parliament is empowered to notify any new group of people or community and also to de-notify any existing group as the tribal. Meaning is clear that status of Tribal is not permanently fixed for any specific groups of communities only. It is ever changing, subject to the consideration of the parliament according to the demands and circumstances. Our Parliament is constituted by politicians of the country and therefore, the whole procedure of making or not making tribal have become completely a political process today.  The power of the President and the Governors is restricted to the notification of decision taken by politically elected Governments. Art-330, Art-332, Art-338, Art-339, Art-342(1) &(2)- and other related articles are the principal provisions relating to identification and specification of any group as tribal, right of reservation of seats in Parliament and Assembly and setting up of Commissions by the President of India for the welfare of the tribal. On the other hand Sixth Schedule of the constitution provides Autonomy to the Scheduled Tribe for self rule over certain specified scheduled areas inhabited by them. If something was assembled truly for the tribal in the constitution as their rights then it is the Sixth schedule provision where tribal culture, tradition, language and their identities are clearly recognized. The provisions also specify the land area or territory and powers, where they are given to be developed and enjoyed for their interests. Even the customary laws, if any tribal have been practicing in their community lives, are also legalized in the modern law system by that scheduled.
But many things have already been liberalized for the convenience of the majority community in the Sixth Schedule system also in the process of development of the constitution. As already said the status of the tribal is not permanent, existing may not have been de-notified so far in the North Eastern states but some new have already been notified. Critically challenging issues for the existing Autonomies are coming up due to such liberalization in the process. The parliament, in exercise of its power, keeping on enlisting new groups of people into the directory of STs entitling them same rights and privileges as enjoyed by old groups. The ST communities, to whom Autonomies were dedicated at the time of formation, has been put into the process shifting their rights to new tribe from them in a gradual manner. When any tribal up-rise or unrest is noticed in any state, their power is attempted to be watered-down by adding new stream of tribal because the provision has been used as the tools to control totally their course of lives. One of the fundamental principles for any group to be identified as the ST is their way of maintaining distinct ‘tradition’ and any kind of interpolation of meaning may take the whole concept itself to a great predicament only. The parliamentary process is seems to be so  constrained by the political situation to keep on changing the list of ST and its related criteria today and in near future several new groups  are likely to be granted that status. Having looked into that development, time is not too far that the original tribal communities go for demanding a new constitutional initiative to categorize separately the existing STs as the ‘Original Tribe’ or ‘Indigenous Tribe’. Constitution also will have to be so designed to create an exclusive provision to protect and preserve the original tribe with regard to their culture, tradition and land as a part of constitutional obligations.  As the reason the new groups of STs will keep on emerging and old group of STs also will remain, a conflict over power sharing may be the regular course of development in between new and old, which may not be healthy development for our democracy.  In view of the present development of the human civilization the concept of tribal will be passing through a massive ad-libbing for the convenience of the running politics. Indian polity itself is distancing itself from the past truth of the making of constitution, the way how it was built up and the process how the communities had been developed. It is more massive in state level as because they are least bound by the past of the constitution and its historical process, that the way how it has reached the present stage today. No national or provincial governments have the rightful explanation of the fact that as to why so many groups are becoming so enthusiastic to be tribe after the elapse of 70 years of our independence also, which stoutly defies the government’s frequent claim of development. Rather, very often and very un-reluctantly it is claimed that, the growth of numbers of tribal communities either by way of admitting new groups or by way of maintaining natural growth of their population, is a part of development process.
A revolutionary change in the lives of tribal people as a whole and other backward group of people in a different way should be brought about to achieve the true development age. The constitution has the legacy to protect and preserve the true indigenous tribe in a different and exclusive way and the nation builders need to start thinking about creating special space in the constitutions for them.  The same also has the legacy of giving justice to other backward groups of people or community and they also should be treated in a different way to bring up their lives in the development cycle at par with the other developed group of people. Right to equality under Article-14 of our constitution should not be interpreted in the Judicial Courts only; rather it also should be applied properly in the area of social, economical and political spheres of tribal lives.