kafila
Posted by: *jdevika* | August 8, 2010 Have I Joined the Popular Front?

In the past few weeks, I have been asked over and over again, not always in
jest, if I had joined the Popular Front. I am not surprised. The police
investigation around the violence against the college teacher at
Muvattupuzha has broken all previous records in not only the violation of
human and civil rights, but also in the silence of Kerala’s enlightened
intellectuals. If I recall right, only Nandigram evoked such a dense and
deliberate silence from them. No wonder, anyone who speaks up against the
manner in which the police is being armed and authorized against ‘bad
muslims’ is immediately dubbed a supporter of the Popular Front. But I am
intrigued by this simple question, by which the entire history of that
person’s engagement with discussions around religion and the state is
erased.

Many of the people who asked me this question know that I do have a fairly
long and traceable history of engagement with emergent Muslim intellectual
and political groups on the issue of re-forging modernity and democracy in
Kerala in these times of globalization and Islamophobia. Some of them have
read my writings on Muslim feminism, and my critique of the kind of gender
reformism put forth by some of these groups, which I have argued, go no
further than what was offered by the early 20th century community reformisms
in Malayalee society. They are familiar with my case for Muslim feminism,
precisely one aimed at criticising the kind of gender conservatism taking
shape as reformism in these groups, which would only reinforce the
high-Hindu reformist gender inequality rampant in today’s Kerala. In other
words, they know pretty well that my dialogue with those interested in the
so-called ‘Muslim question’was geared precisely in the opposite direction of
that taken by those members of the Popular Front who committed the violence
and now condone it indirectly. They are also aware of the fact that I am not
alone in these efforts: I am only one of the many academics and
intellectuals who identify with  broadly left political perspectives and who
have tried to initiate such dialogues. Why, then, such a silly question?

I am in dialogue with many organizations — for example, the Kerala Sastra
Sahitya Parishat which is very close to the CPM. Close enough to write in
their publications and speak at their forums. But no one has asked me if I
have joined the KSSP!I think here is where hidden, tacit fear of the
‘Muslim’ surfaces. In the eyes of these folk,KSSP stands for ‘liberal’ and
therefore, to them, Iam in no danger of absorption when I enter into a
dialogue with them. But not so, for the ‘Muslim’. Whether they admit it or
not, to these friends of mine, the ‘Muslim’ can only be illiberal in the
last analysis. Such subtleties have been much exercised recently. Thanks to
our wise and saintly Chief Minister, people are left with no doubt that
while there are ‘good muslims’ and ‘bad muslims’, we need to cross-check
that each of our ‘good muslims’ are indeed ‘good’. In other words, there
seems to be a very high likelihood that the ‘good muslims’ are only
bad-muslims-in-the-waiting and they must be warned sternly enough. There are
easy ways to obtain a ‘good muslim’ certificate: follow an uncouth,
foul-mouthed DYFI leader; join the hordes commanded by Congress strongmen
with Muslim names; join Muslim League in the times of Kunhaalikkutty. These
options are plainly evident to even the blindest bat in Kerala, but many of
our muslims have not been forthcoming. Since they have not opted for these
routes, they must all be secretly with the Popular Front!Therefore at
present, the Malayalee Muslim (who is not of the left or the Congress or the
Muslim League) = Popular Front. J Devika happens to be speaking with just
this kind of (Illiberal-By-Implication) Muslim. And one cannot be in
dialogue with illiberalism, one can only be devoured by it — and therefore J
Devika has been absorbed ideologically by the (Illiberal) Muslim.

In fairness to these people who asked me this question, I must say that the
general tone of the reporting of the ongoing investigation in the Malayalam
press has been below silly-level,indeed, absurd.  There is heavy talk of the
‘alternate courts’ that were allegedly set up by the Popular Front as if
this were a menacing invention discovered by this group. Indeed, this is a
society in which the many Christian denominations, community organizations,
and indeed political parties runs parallel courts and this is common
knowledge. The latest in the news was the ‘auto court’, proudly run by the
CITU in north Kerala, which decided to punish the Dalit woman autorickshaw
driver, Chitralekha! During that debate, there were so many who asked what
was wrong with such an arrangement! However, all this excitement petered off
when the Home Minister announced that the police had no news of these
courts, and that his information was from the media! But no less a person
than the IG,Intelligence, of the Kerala Police said on television (the show
was *Talking Point*, aired in Kerala on 4 July 2010,on the Rosebowl Channel)
that the  discourse about terrorism in Kerala was a creation of the media!
But who cares? Not the political parties, in any case. They have drummed up
Islamophobia nicely, and might as well make the best of it to tide over the
elections!

The police are discovering more and more links each day, on the basis of
books and papers found in the homes of the accused, or the offices of the
Popular Front. My worst fears are indeed coming true : this silliness is
turning into vicious high-handedness. The arrest of the human rights
activist N. M. Siddique of National Confederation of Human Rights
Organizations (NCHRO)  (he had filed a petition before National Human Rights
Commission NHRC about incidents of police high-handedness in the
investigation) on completely trumped up charges, and the raid at the office
of Other Books at
Kozhikode show how malignant the scene has become. Today’s *Hindu
*(Thiruvananthapuram
edition) reported that “the raid was conducted on the basis of seizure of
materials, including pamphlets, from an accused suspected to be involved …
The accused, who was arrested in Aluva, was in possession of pamphlets and
books published from Kozhikode.” It also admitted that
the police said that no incriminating content was found in the material
seized from Other Books. Now, Other Books, which is well-known in Kerala for
publishing the work of authors like Ziauddin Sardar, Fatima Mernissi, and
Amina Wadud, can by no stretch of imagination, be collapsed into the Popular
Front! They have represented an effort to initiate a dialogue on Islam and
modernity that firmly rejects that kind of modernity that US imperialism has
held up to its victims, but also firmly critiques models of Islam that
freezes the interpretation of the sacred text.

Given that this dialogue is vitally important in the present context of the
Muslim community of north Kerala, and given that the dominant left is
infected by short-sighted political realism and hence incapable of postive
action on this front, it is extremely distressing that those groups that
seek to initate it are being hounded thus. The present of the Malabar
Muslims resembles the opportunity that opened up to the lower-caste ezhavas
in late 19th century Kerala. The opening up of the economy to the World
System at that time brought great economic opportunities to section of the
ezhavas, which then translated into community reformism, modernization, and
community  assertion. At present, the Gulf migration since the 1970s has
brought much wealth to sections of the muslims, which is now being
translated into community reformism and assertion. The ezhava community
reformism happened in the context of the emergence of the discourse of the
modernised and secularised savarna Hindu at the heart of the emerging sense
of Indian Nation, and major strands of ezhava reformism drew heavily on the
ideals and models of subjecthood given in it. This brought them some gains,
but certainly not full inclusion within the high-Hindu fold. Andimportantly,
it failed to address the problem of emergent class inequalities. Moreover,
women and their bodies were now identified at the very heart of ‘community
honour’ and respectability.

It was the communist movement that profited from these failings, and indeed,
the ezhavas have been the reliable bulwark of the communist party. However,
this did not mean that a more liberating modernity was thereby forged for
women, at least — community practices were left more or less unscarred by
this association. The Malabar Muslims of the present are similarly trying to
draw on the currently powerful discourse of globalized Islam. This may bring
them some gains, but given that global Islam is indeed infected heavily by
Arab racism, it may not offer full inclusion to the Malayalee muslim (amply
confirmed by the experience of Malayalee muslim workers in the Gulf
countries). Nor will it address the question of emergent class inequalities.
And the placing of women at the heart of the community’s honour seems to be
happening quite rapidly. Clearly, this is a moment that calls for sensitive
and respectful dialogue that draws upon the lessons of history, and one that
must be initiated by those who are interested in mitigating inequality and
injustice within and outside communities.

At present, the CPM has been working very hard indeed to woo the Malabar
Muslims away from the Muslim League and it did seem that they were indeed
succeeding. Yet it is doubtful, despite the fact that the CPM’s mass
organizations have been intervening in cases of unfair divorce and other
issues of Muslim women, whether they have, in this process, produced a more
liberating modernity. Indeed, the modernity that these efforts have upheld
are little more than the early 20th century reformist ideals which have
coalsced at present into Kerala’s unique kind of subtle yet iron-clad gender
conservatism. This is one of the reasons why there was such bonhomie between
the CPM leadership  in the north and many votaries of gender conservatism
among the Muslim organizations there. For the kind of reformism that the
latter espoused, that harped on  women’ s sexual purity, inculcated a deep
distrust of pleasure, espoused gender roles that were either procreative or
pivoted on a very gendered notion of  ‘social responsibility’, are not
really different from the ‘actually-existing empowerment’ within the
organizations of the dominant left. Thus the proponents of the CPM’s ‘Muslim
identity politics’ were keen not to build a modernity that was more
inclusive. They were quite content to recycle early 20th century modernity
and use it to beat down emergent efforts to organize around issues of
sexuality beyond heteronormativity. Maudany was wooed when it was time for
the elections; there was no effort whatsoever to engage with his
representation of Islam. The CPM which is led by people mesmerized by power
and eminently short-term goals, who have no clue about the kind of social
and cultural engagement necessary to sustain a movement that can claim
leftist credentials,is hardly in a position to initiate a dialogue through
which the Muslim community of Malabar may begin to forge for themselves a
modernity that is robust enough the challenge both the  hubris of globalized
Islam and the effete, consumerist ‘modernity’ offered by U S imperialism.
The least they could do, however, is to stop the police from persecuting
people who are initiating precisely such an effort — like the  team that
built Other Books.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to