Every constitution in the world has biases in favor of dominant (so-called majority) communities. That is why there have always been pressures to include protective or affirmative measures for culturally and politically oppressed (so-called minority) communities. Indian Constitution has in letter acknowledged this and lays down the framework for state intervention for both material and symbolic redistribution. The Indian Constitution may be amended and much depends on the nature of the governing class, extant power relations and counter-hegemonic mobilization of the oppressed sections.

In that sense the Constitution is not fascist, people are. Indeed, fascist laws may be passed by parliaments and institutions or courts may be used for fascist ends and so on. Any text can be misused including the religious texts like the Quran or Bible. Have not most brutal theocratic-fascist orders legitimized themselves by employing Quranic or Islamic vocabulary?

Dr Ambedkar talked about incremental transformation because he knew very well that the cost of violent movements is always disproportionately borne by the most marginalized communities. Also, a violent change of law or regime does not necessarily bring about sustainable affective or attitudinal change in society. The challenge is to democratize society and dismantle the feudal cultural infrastructure so that the state apparatus may be reasonably controlled and employed for social justice objectives.

In the Indian context, this cannot be attained by strengthening the Hindu-Muslim binary for historical reasons. This cannot be attained by appropriating the critique of Pasmanda/Bahujans and deploying it for elite hegemonic ends by savarna/ashraf champions. Reckless adventurism may be an obvious response of a declining, feudal Ashrafiya class that has still not come to terms with the negotiated character of mass democracies. It cannot be the response of subordinated Pasmanda-Bahujan communities. Jinnah wanted everything on his own terms. Nehru wanted everything on his own terms. As the Partition violence demonstrated ‘My way or highway’ is not a luxury that Bahujans can afford. Jinnah is supposed to have said after the Partition: ““Oh my God, what have I done?” That tone of regret did not help millions of Bahujan-Pasmanda families whose members perished or disappeared in the violence.

It must also be stressed that the Pasmanda Muslims are not only victims of Brahmanism. They are also victims of Syedism. Our issue is not only reservation for Dalit Muslims but the progressive reconstitution of the entire Muslim-Minority space and a change of leadership by countering Ashraf hegemony. Ashraf-led Islamism is not a fiction. The Pasmanda know very well that Islamists cannot take over the State. But at one level Islamism represses the internal reformist voices of subordinated Muslim castes/genders and so on. At another, it creates a legitimating vocabulary for the Hindutva forces. That is why Islamism and Hindutva co-constitute each other and are summoned to serve the hegemonic consolidation of high-caste power. That is why both these forces cannot be an ally in any democratic transformation worth its name. The only solidarity that will work is a pan-religion solidarity of all subjugated castes.

Sharjeel Imam will never understand this because he comes from the landed Muslim Mallick caste that has the self-conception of being Syeds. Kanhaiya Kumar will also never understand this because he comes from the landed Bhumihar caste that has the self-conception of being Brahmins. In fact I think I am wrong. They understand very well what they are doing. Now it is time for the Pasmanda-Bahujans to understand the fallout of the histrionics of these overnight heroes.

Having said that the draconian colonial sedition laws should be thrown in the dustbin and Sharjeel Imam and others confined for dissent must be released immediately.

Author – Khalid Anis Ansari
Source – Facebook

Read also – जानिए पसमांदा मुसलमानो के बारे में