In Goa, the past decade has seen the rise of religion in politics, in quite a blatant manner
Given Goa’s religious divides, it can be hazardous to offer a comment on religion. Is that one reason why, till very recently, the newspapers hardly ever reported on religion? Maybe they didn’t see it as news. Or, if they do, they just stated the bare facts, and did not do any comment or interpreting. This is the trend, mostly, till this day.
The American sociologist Robert S Newman, who has studied many areas of Goa, including the uniqueness of its religions, was perceptive when he suggested that religion seldom features in the Goan media. This, even though it still continues to play a huge role in the daily lives of the people here.
Added to this is the fact that religion can easily get politicised in a place like Goa. Politics were suffused with communalism ever since the first universal suffrage-based election of 1963 held in Goa. For sure, this was also true even for a long period before that.
While the Church did not dominate Portugal throughout its past centuries, as many in Goa like to simplistically believe, the State and Church had a love-hate relationship at different points of history.
But it’s recent connect has been rather controversial.
This history, of the 20th century, is one which many of the older generation of Goans know. For instance: António de Oliveira Salazar, who ruled Portugal as the head of the Estado Novo regime from the 1930s to the late 1960s, had a complex but close relationship with religion -- particularly with Roman Catholicism. While religion played a central role in his vision of the Portuguese nation, it would however not be accurate to call him a theocratic ruler.
It has been said that Salazar’s regime was confessional, Catholic-inflected, and authoritarian, but not theocratic. Religion served to reinforce a hierarchical, conservative order, and Catholicism was essential to the regime’s moral legitimacy. But the Church was subordinate to the State, not the other way around.
Oddly enough, using this reality from the past, more controversial attempts are justified even today.
Now, the boot is on the other foot. In Goa, the past decade has seen the rise of religion in politics, in quite a blatant manner. Since the 1960s the division was more subtle, and soft-communalism was the norm. More recently, the use of religious rhetoric in politics has become all that more open.
Underway these days in Goa has been the Sanatan Sanstha’s 25th anniversary event. This paper (The Goan) has editorially commented on it (May 19, ‘Sawant’s Sanatan event attendance raises concern’). Its writing is a rare piece of contemporary journalism which highlights what are the risks of political involvement at the very top (the chief minister’s, two ministers’ and the North Goa MP’s) in such an event.
Other media comment has mostly been scant or bare bone reporting. It includes ‘business as usual’ reporting on the event. Just reporting on the same as if it was another political event, filled with speeches and points of view.
Stephen JA Ward in ‘Ethics and the Media’ (Cambridge University Press) reminds us: “The rise of intolerant groups using media to publish images and stories about vulnerable groups creates a special problem for media ethics. Extremism leads to serious media harm, including unjustifiable profound offence. The more that extreme messages are circulated, the greater likelihood that citizens, frustrated by slow-moving moderate politics, may adopt more extreme “solutions” to complex problems. Dialogic
democracy wanes.”
To be fair, the Sanatan itself started out as a group focussed on spirituality. I knew a few of its early members who were into religiosity and devotion, even religious chanting. How exactly it evolved into a group making political statements needs some study, obviously.
As of now, it represents the more radical, fundamentalist edge of majoritarian politics -- less electoral, more doctrinal and at times accused of being conspiratorial. It seeks not merely political power, but religious domination and cultural purification.
For instance, it even sees secularism and democracy as Western and anti-Hindu constructs that must be replaced by divinely ordained rule. Or, if this is a misreading of its position, it has not clarified on the same.
The Sanatan’s relationship with the BJP and other electorally-dominant Hindutva networks has been complex. The Sanatan has not been directly affiliated with the RSS or the BJP, though its ideology overlaps with some aspects of majoritarianism and anti-secularism. It is seen as being more on the fringe, more extreme and theocratic than the BJP. Some BJP (and MGP) leaders have defended the group, or avoided condemning it, may be to avoid alienating hardline voters. At the same time, the group’s alleged ties to violence, which the group has denied, have made it politically awkward for the BJP in Goa and parts of Maharashtra.
Public memory is short, and the slow wheels of justice can sometimes mean that we forget recent history. In a recent book titled ‘I Am On The Hit-List’, the American journalist Rollo Romig tells the story that emerges from the assassination of journalist Gauri Lankesh.
To get another point of view, it might be worth to listen to a long podcast, which gives insight about issues most seem to have forgotten, and the shape this took in the Gauri Lankesh case. The investigations into the case are particularly telling, listen here: http://alturl.com/bjnot
When religion goes ultra conservative, its approach needs to be understood and debated. Especially what this means for the future of our societies.
