AN ANALYTICAL DISCOURSE (Part II)
Abstract
Romila Thapar writes, “Hindu and Muslim communalists had
their organizational bases in the 1920s such as the Muslim League and the
Hindu Mahasabha. Despite it being in essence anti-nationalist, the twonation theory is now effectively not questioned. If anything it is once again
being endorsed by some political parties.”1
It is a stark reality that
emergence of a movement has some philosophical background with a
variety of demands. The best solution to this problem is to redress the
grievances of the aggrieved faction along with a countering philosophy. In
British India, the philosophy of nationalism and democracy paved the way
for majority rule which intoxicated the Hindus who sidelined the Indian
minorities particularly the Muslims and the same is being repeated in
present India while dealing with the minorities. The current wave of the
‘Hindu nationalism’ in India with full force roots in the pre-partition
political set-up about the Muslim League had been crying for decades and
its voice was deemed as conspiracy. Philosophy, ostensibly religious in
nature worked as a pushing force behind the political alignment in British
India. Western philosophy of territorial and religious nationalism is
repeatedly overlooked by many scholars, who take all the political parties
except India’s Indian National Congress as ‘communal,’ fundamentalist, and
perhaps ‘undemocratic’ too. Congress posed to pursue the western
philosophy of secularism; Muslims and Sikhs followed the religious cult of
nationalism. A contest between the religious communities appeared on the
concessions and opportunities propounded by the Raj, which transmuted
nationalism to communalism. Consequently, political leadership worked, in
fact, mainly for their respective communities. Hindus for Hindustan,
Muslims for Pakistan and Sikhs aspired for Sikhistan. Abuse of nationalism
or communalism is best dealt with if change comes and makes its place in
the equation without brutality and violence. Nonviolent movements
represent intellectual contest, rather than physical fight.The Muslims felt
jubilation on the passage of the Lahore Resolution2
on the 23rd March 1940,
which demanded Muslim homeland. The All-India Muslim League set a
clear direction of its struggle but it caused anxiety for the Sikh political
leadership mainly dominated by the Shiromani Akali Dal. The Hindu press
and leaders individually and massively cried against the League’s
partitioning scheme, while the major Hindu political forum, the Indian
National Congress, could not chalk-out an abrupt reaction as a formal
strategy. Mental agony overwhelmed the Sikhs on the idea of Pakistan and
they relentlessly protested against it. Many tried to prove that the Lahore
Resolution reflected a vague plan and Muslim masses did not back the
partition scheme, nevertheless the factual position is that the League was
very clear about its demand and enjoyed the majority’s voice on its back.
This article looks into the responses by the political stakeholders in the
British Punjab to the Lahore Resolution. (This article consists of two parts.
The second part will appear in next issue of Al-Hikamt).
Dr. Akhtar Hussain Sandhu. (2012) COMMUNITARIAN RESPONSE TO THE LAHORE RESOLUTION OF 1940 IN THE BRITISH PUNJAB, Al-Hikmat: A Journal of Philosophy, Volume 32, Issue 01.
-
Views
701 -
Downloads
70
Article Details
Volume
Issue
Type
Language
Received At
Accepted At
