In Lieu of Editorial
Gujarat and Himachal Elections: What Lies Ahead?
The results in the recent assembly elections were almost as expected. Himachal Pradesh, as usual deposed the incumbent government. The Congress lost and gave way to the BJP in this hilly state. On the other hand, the so-called “Modi Wave” showed clear signs of decline, even if we discount the very much real suspicions and apprehensions about tampering of the EVMs and the clearly apparent partisan role of the celebrated Election Commission of India. If we subtract the results of the four major metropolitan cities of Gujarat, namely, Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot, the Congress was the clear winner. The electoral resurrection of the Congress is due to the decreasing base of the Modi Government owing to the anti-people economic measures like demonitization and the GST. Besides these immediate reasons, the long-term reasons of constantly rising unemployment, crisis of agriculture and inflation especially since Modi came to power have played a significant role too. It is natural that since his rise to power, the Modi government has tremendously increased the policies of neoliberalism, onslaught against the working class and lower middle classes and the poor peasants. It was precisely these policies for which the big bourgeoisie of India, with the obvious tacit support of the imperialist capital, had facilitated Narendra Modi’s rise to power. There is nothing surprising in all this. Fascism has always been “the most barbaric dictatoship” of the most reactionary faction of the big bourgeoisie and so is the Modi government.
The aggressive neoliberal policies of the Modi government have been blended and coupled with the pernicious Fascist propaganda and campaigns like ‘love jihad’, ‘gauraksha’, etc. This too is natural and every politically-conscious person knew beforehand that the Modi government will unleash the Fascist lumpen brigades, attack all progressive forces, fan communal tensions, promote and allow lynching, increase the attacks on rationalists, change school and university curriculum to effect systematic fascization of youth, the suspension and destruction of bourgeois democratic institutions and processes even if the shell of bourgeois parliamentary democracy remains and all of this will be done behind the façade of Hindutva Nationalism. This too has nothing surprising in it. Fascism has always been an ensemble of the most pathological forms of religious fundamentalism/racism/xenophobia, jingoism and nationalism, a modern revivalism, rabid anti-progressivism, a romantic upsurge of the ‘mittelstand’ (petite-bourgeoisie) which sweeps away a section of working class too; in short, Fascism has always been a reactionary social movement, instead of being just any right-wing reaction. The Sangha Parivaar and the Modi government has proven this long acknowledged but least understood trait of Fascism once again.
The Modi government has succeeded in combining these two facets or dimensions of the Fascist upsurge precisely due to the third important characteristic of any Fascist upsurge: a cadre-based organization. Indian Fascism has proven to be remarkably effective in developing a cadre-based organization. Through this cadre-based organization, the RSS has infiltrated the Indian state machinary and armed forces as well as bureaucracy and judiciary in a long and protracted process. Similarly, the RSS has percolated the interstices of the Indian ‘civil society’ in a long-drawn process, which began even before the Independence. Thus, the process of what Gramsci calls ‘molecular permeation’ has been long and protracted in the case of the rise of Indian Fascism, unlike its German or Italian counter-part. In other words, the incubation period of Indian Fascism has been long and protracted and consequently, its rise too, has been much less cataclysmic. This too is slowly becoming an accepted argument about the understanding of Indian Fascism.
This protracted upsurge, the long ‘passive revolution’ of the Indian Fascism, demonstrates another quality of all Fascist rise: a particular type of ‘ideological unity’. The basic co-ordinates of this ideological unity is construction of an imagined enemy, the figure of ‘the other’ (in Indian case, it is the Muslim); establishing myths as ‘common sense’; romantic and reactionay millenarianism (apparent in the fantasy of ‘Ramrajya’); pathological nationalism and anti-progressivism and a modern anti-modernism. All these basic features are present in the Indian case too. All these things happen due to the crisis of liberal bourgeois democracy and also the failure of the reformism and revisionism of the social democracy. The fundamental contradiction which leads to the failure of the liberal bourgeois project as well as the social democratic project, is the recurrent economic crises of capitalism, occuring in spirals. Needless to say, in the long-term, it is a downward spiral.
Understanding all these important characteristic features is extremely important to understand the rise of Fascism in India as well as to devise the correct strategy and tactics to counter this Fascist rise. After the results of Gujarat and Himachal elections, the inability of certain “leftists” to understand these basic characteristics of rise of Indian Fascism has led them to a variety of incorrect analyses and conclusions.
One section which can be called the ‘always and naïvely optimistic section’ of “left” was taken aback by the results of Gujarat, in particular. People belonging to this section had claimed that the BJP is going to lose Gujarat and had even started premature celebrations, when the counting of votes was still underway. When ultimately the BJP emerged victorious, though it just crossed the finish line somehow, this naïvely-optimistic section was depressed and began claiming that Fascist BJP won because the results were rigged as the EVMs were tampered. This is contradictory because if one acknowledges that what we are witnessing is indeed Fascism, then being indignant at EVM tampering is childish. It is natural that Fascism will undermine every bourgeois democratic practice and institution, if it does not do away with them altogether. EVM tampering is only a part of this Fascist endeavor. This acknowledgment should have this in-built realization that Fascism cannot be defeated by electoral strategy; becoming euphoric on the electoral victory of non-Fascist bourgeois parties and diving into depression on its electoral victory is a particular kind of naïveté, plagued by the ‘liberal virus’.
Another section claimed that it was not surprising that the BJP won, as there is no ‘viable alternative opposition’ in the elections; but this much is certain that the BJP just won, huffing past the finish line. This is true. However, from this fact, what inference these people draw? That Fascism is on decline! Evidently, they fail to distinguish between the ‘Modi wave’ and Fascism. The former is the particular modus vivendi of Fascism, not Fascism in itself. The ‘Modi wave’ in case of reaching a saturation point, can well be replaced by a ‘Yogi wave’, speculatively speaking. The myopia of these people on the ‘left’ prevents them from seeing the essence and they are eternally stuck at the level of phenomena. Once a Modi wins, Advani becomes a ‘lesser evil’, retrospectively; once an Advani comes at the helm of the affairs, an Atal becomes a liberal, retrospectively; it is not impossible that once an even more reactionary, pathological, and aggressive ‘führer’ personality assumes the leadership of Fascists or even the government, Modi would appear as a liberal to these people retrospectively. As we can see, the analysis of these people is positivist and metaphysical. They fail to see the essence and they fail to see the interconnections.
There is still another section of the liberal “left”, which is still striving to form an aggregative equation of oppressed identities in order to defeat Modi and Fascism. The lacklustre performance of the BJP in the elections was primarily due to the class anger of certain sections of society, even though they were not class ‘politically’ conscious or class ‘politically’ organized. However, people of this section claimed that the anger of the dalits, adivasis, Muslims, OBCs, etc combined to defeat the BJP. It must be remembered that a considerable part of all these sections fo society, with the exception of Muslims (for obvious reasons), voted for th BJP in this election. The pattern of voting demonstrated two kinds of divide: one, the class divide and second, the urban-rural divide, which is partially a derivative of class divide. It was the anger of the poor and middle peasants, the lower middle class and the workers which led to the decline of the BJP. It must be recalled here that a considerable part of the Gujarati workers in the cities are registered as voters in the rural areas. Therefore, there anger was reflected mainly in the rural vote. Despite this clearly visible class character of the voting pattern, this ‘liberal left’/’left liberal’ intelligentsia clings to the idea of an aggregative formula of ‘dalit+OBC+Muslim+women’ as the potent weapon to defeat the BJP. This only benefits and helps the BJP in consolidating the majoritary Hindu community into a majoritarian communal Fascistic fold.
The fourth type of people residing in the “liberal left” territory of India are those who have suddenly become the staunch supporters of Rahul Gandhi and rejuvenated Congress. They have started writing columns in newspapers and websites about the great change in Rahul Gandhi and the Congress, which seems to have suddenly found its game. Their logic is very common-sensical: to defeat the Fascist BJP, tactically we should support Rahul Gandhi, who is, even if for political gains, raising the issues of the toiling masses.The political amnesia of this section is absolute, as politically they have a short-term memory. And the funny thing is that they have consciously decided to have a short-term memory. In other words, they never forget to have a short-term memory! Due to their lack of trust in any kind of revolutionary transformation, they continue to look for the lesser evil and end up facilitating the greater evil. They forget that the poisonous mushroom of Fascism sprouts on the ruins of liberal bourgeois democracy. They harbour the illusion of repelling Fascism standing on the shoulder of some Rahul Gandhi, Mamta Bannerjee (which is even more ridiculous), Lalu Prasad Yadav, or Sharad Pawar.
The final type which is the exact opposite of the fourth type is the one that utterly fails to distinguish between Fascist bourgeoisie and other factions of bourgeoisis. Tragically, a lot of revolutionary communist comrades have fallen victim to this vulgar materialistic and mechanical analysis. Retorting to the people from the fourth type, they immediately start writing on Facebook and WhatsApp: “what difference does it make: the Congress or the BJP, whoever wins, it is the people who lose!”; “Congress itself is Fascist, have you forgotten the Emergency!?”; “It is due the politics of the Congress that Sangha Parivaar grew, so it makes no difference whether the Congress wins or the BJP!” This position is not only non-Marxist but it is also utterly non-sensical. This tantamounts to psuedo radical and childishly “left” demagoguery. Marxist-Leninist position clearly distinguishes between the Fascists and other forms of right-wing reaction and also between the Fascists and liberal bourgeoisie/centrist bourgeoisie/centre-right bourgeoisie. Classcically, India never had a big and effective liberal bourgeois political party; it has a localized and limited impact of social-democratic and revisionist politics. The other bourgeois party which plays the role of the opposite pole of Fascist Sangha Parivaar is the Congress, which itself is a broadly centre-right party with sufficient flexibility and potentiality to travel leftwards, given the need and exigencies. Due to this particular nature of the Congress, the revolutionary communists must distinguish between the BJP and the Congress because this distinction has significant implications for devising an effective strategy against Fascism.
It is imperative to understand the implications of the recent states’ elections in the light of above arguments. There is no doubt that the Modi wave is on decline. The very gesture and posture assumed by Modi during his Gujarat election campaign showed that the BJP is jittery and the old confidence is gone. However, to conflate Modi-wave with the Fascist upsurge would be erroneous and a grave mistake. Secondly, we must remember that Modi regime is the first systematic Fascist regime of India. Similarly, Modi represents the first fully-consummated Indian version of the ‘führer’-cult. Vajpayee’s government had strong Fascist tendencies, however, due to a variety of objective and subjective factors, it was not and could not have become a systematic Fascist regime. Now that Modi-wave, the current mode of life of Fascist rise in India is witnessing the first signs of crisis, we must realize that this particular modus vivendi can be changed. Fascist rise can and does change its sheath so that the content remains the same. Thirdly, we must also remember that a ‘Fascism in retreat’ is no less Fascism. In fact, for all immediate and practical purposes, a Fascism in retreat is much more aggressive and dangerous. If the BJP gets a sense that it might lose the 2019 elections, it will go to its fully, openly Fascist agenda and tactics as was reflected with the revival of the Ram Mandir agenda during the Gujarat elections faced with the first signs of decline of Modi wave. The revolutionary forces must consistently organize the toiling masses against Fascism and capitalism in general, and must rely on their own forces rather than going into a delirium due to bad electoral performance of the BJP. Fourth, we must remember that Fascism in the Twenty-first century is not a phenomenon which will witness a catacylsmic rise and a cataclysmic fall. With crisis becoming the new norm of capitalist system, or becoming much more protracted phenomenon of capitalism especially since the 1970s, Fascism too has become a much more permanent phenomenon of imperialist world in the Twenty-first century, whether in power or not. Even when not in power, the Fascist forces play the role of informal state power of the bourgeoisie in the forms of strike-breaking squads, anti-minority lumpen brigades, social police, etc and now this factor has become particularly important, because in the present capitalist society, no faction or party of bourgeoisie is going to take any action against the bourgeoisie, even if it is in power. In the present phase of imperialism, the parasitism and moribundity has reached such unprecedented levels that all factions of the bourgeoisie require Fascist forces to exist in the society, whether in power or not. In such a scenario, it becomes imperative to educate, train, prepare, mobilize and organize the masses against Fascists, not on an ‘as and when needed’ basis, but on a long-term basis and with regular and consistent political work. Finally, revolutionary forces must be aware of the fact that, with an almost certain defeat in 2019 parliament elections, the Fascists can go to any extent.
There is a need to understand the Fascist rise in the Twenty-first century while keeping in mind the fact that history never repeats itself. A lot of people in the revolutionary communist movement base their analyses of the present Fascist rise in India on strict comparisons with the Italian or German Fascist rise in the early-Twentieth century. Rather than understanding the ideological and political differentia specifica and the historical conditio sine qua non of Fascism as the most reactionary and naked rule of the most reactionary faction of big bourgeoisie in the era of imperialism, these comrades draw columns for tallying every phenomenal expression of Fascism in the early-Twentieth century with the phenomenal expressions of Fascist rise today. This ahistorical approach has prevented them from understanding the fact that every ideology (including reactionary ones) perform a redemptive activity, learn from the experiences of their historical practice and minimize their “errors”. The dogmato-historicist assertion that since the form of bourgeois parliamentary democracy has not been shunned by the Modi regime, therefore, it is not a Fascist regime, but a quasi-Fascist regime OR a reactionary right-wing regime with Fascist tendencies OR a regime which is in the process of becoming Fascist, but it has not become Fascist as yet, etc is an ahistorical determinism. Such argument(s) fail to understand the movement of history.
The recent elections in the states, in particular, in Gujarat precisely show that instead of rejoicing in the relatively bad performance of the BJP, or looking on elections as the sole strategy to counter Fascist forces, we need to prepare for a long and decisive battle; there is no doubt that the current conjuncture presents us with the most opportune time to begin this work, as the current modus vivendi of Fascist rise is facing the first signs of decline and the masses are indignant and much more receptive to revolutionary agitation and propaganda. However, it must be remembered that elections are only one arena in which the revolutionary communists should intervene tactically in order to counter Fascism as well as in order to bring the entire capitalist system to a point of impossibility by presenting an independent political position of the working class in the electoral arena. However, the whole anti-Fascist strategy cannot be reduced to this electoral strategy. It is not just harmful but it would be suicidal to do so. The need to form a united front of the working class among the revolutionary communist forces and building strong social support base among the masses are two important immediate tasks which face the revolutionary communists today. What lies ahead depends on the fact whether we succeed in the above tasks or not.
- Published in Anvil-2, Jan-Mar 2018
