The so-called "socialist" and "secular" polity in India is based on communalism and
communal groupings of the people. The inbuilt communal tinge in the ideological make-up
of the state managers and the ruling class is an inevitable aspect of class rule in the country.
The reluctance on the part of the state managers to subscribe to a philosophy of rationalism,
the basis of bourgeois rule in the capitalist world, a tendency to compromise with the feudal
or the precapitalist social and ideological formations because of the awareness of the narrow
base of the rule, and the imperatives to seek legitimacy make them dependent on the forces
of primoridal allegiances, not only in the majority community but also in all other communities.

The ruling class and the state managers perceive the Indian people in terms of different
communties,castes and communal interests. The entire political system operates within
a framework of aggregation and articulation of communal grievances and communal
demands. This perception is an inalienable part of the ruling ideology in the country as it
mystifies economic realities in the polity and helps the perpetuation of the hegemony
of the dominant classes. This is one of the major reasons for the existence of communalism
and communal groupings in the country.

Secondly, the ruling class has a major stake in the existence and working of communal
organizations in different communities. These organizations divide the subalterns along
religious and communal lines. However artificial the divisions may appear, they effectively
impede the unity of the dominated classes whose political and economic interests are
identical. The ruling class is mortally afraid of such unity as it constitutes the biggest
threat to its rule. The class may pay lip service to secularism, but it has a vested interest
In keeping the people divided. In order to maintain disunity, the ruling class has been
making shrewd and cold-blooded calculations, often forgetting the costs of such ventures.
Assam is a case in point. The root of the, problem, underdevelopment, is ignored and a
solution is sought by hardening divisions---Hindu against Muslim, the indigenous people
against immigrant, the plainsman against the hill dweller, the tribal against the non-tribal,
the caste Hindu against the Scheduled Caste Hindu ( 1 ).
 

Violence associated with simmering divisions strengthens communal feelings which
are channelled through communal organizations. The standard strategy of the ruling class
is to fight one form of communalism with the help of another, both at the inter-community
and intra-community levels. Akali communalism with more extremist Sikh communalism
or Jammat-i-Islami communalism with jamiatul-Ulema communalism are examples.

Thirdly, the existence of communal organizations promotes what is known as the
' Weberian' notion of politics which ensures the validity of the political and economic
system. The system provides equal opportunity to everyone to have his or her share in it.
For the assertion of their claims, the people organize and mobilise themselves on ethnic
grounds. They are made to understand that power is not the domination of one class over
another but is something which is shared by all. They are also assured that the state is
not an instrument of the ruling class but a neutral body which acts as an umpire in the
distribution of justice to one and all. The ' Weberian' notion of politics provides an ideal
situation for the ruling class in which the fact of control and hegemony over the dominated
classes can be concealed. Once this notion is accepted by the people, the idea of changing
the system, or of bringing exploitation to an end or of doing away with inequality becomes
irrelevant. Issues like ethnic identity, share in the spoils and representation in administration
which are the concerns of the educated middle class become the central problems of 'politics'.
Thus the politics of communalism and of communal organizations serves the interests of the
middle classes and not of the people.

Fourthly, communal organizations, which are ultimately in consonance with the interests
of the ruling class, find a conducive situation in which they can successfully function.
The present nature of capitalist transformation of the Indian society is quite congenial
to communalism and communal organizations. The retarded growth of capitalism and
semi-feudal relations in agriculture negate the potential of forging unity of the people
along secular lines. In fact there exists a material basis for pre-capitalist ideologies
like communalism, obscurantism, revivalism and fundamentalism to thrive. Political
organizations which are formed on these bases increase their effectivity by articulating
the genuine demands of their groups like the secular demands of the Akali Dal or the
Muslim organizations, stand on communal violence. In the given circumstances, therefore,
the fact of communalism or communal organizations cannot be wished away.

In addition, the neo-rich, the professionals, commercial bourgeoisie, and the big
land holding interests in different communities, including Muslims, find communal
organizations useful for acquiring social respectability, political importance and greater
economic facilities. The alliance of these groups with orthodox religious leadership pays
dividends as it helps establishing rapport with the rural Muslim masses. Communal
organizations gain immense legitimacy, owing to the compulsions of electoral politics,
as every political party, right from the Communist parties to the B.J.P. seek their support
at the time of elections. The ruling party also does not lad behind in cultivating
some of the communal organisations in different communities.

There are a number of Muslim political groups and political organizations in the country.
Some operate at the regional level like the Ittehadul Musalameen of Hyderabad, and some
at the national level like the Jamaat-i-Islami or the Jamiatul-Ulema-e-Hind. Here we shall
deal with only three Muslim organizations, the Jamaat-i-Islami, the Majlis-e- Mushawarat
and the Muslim League.

The Jamaat-i-Islami (here after the Jamaat)  was established in August 1941 by Maulana
Abul Ala Maudoodi (1903-1979) of Aurangabad. On his initiative 75 persons assembled at
Lahore, among them the Ulema, university  graduates, professionals and a few artisans.
The objective of the Jamaat was the establishment of Deen (religion), which meant the
revival of Islamic values and ideals in the life of the people. Implied in the objective was
the rejection of socialism, democracy, nationalism and secularism. Maudoodi maintained
that the Western notion of democracy, the Bolshevik revolution, fascist regimentation,
and Turkey's deviation from Islam were not satisfactory models. The only ideal state was
an Islamic theocracy. Maudoodi opposed the Indian national Congress and the Muslim
League's policies. He did not agree with the methods and the objectives of the national
movement. But after partition, Maudoodi moved to Pakistan and indulged in the worst
kind of opportunism there in the name of the Quran and Hadith. A separate Jamaat-i-Islami
(Hind) was established in April 1948 with Maulana Abul Lais Islahi as its Ameer (chief).

The root causes of the ills of contemporary society according to the Jamaat are
materialism and this worldliness. The present social structure has no ethical foundations
and what is needed is a religious revolution. Such a revolution can be brought about by
the righteous Muslims who constitute the Khair-e-Ummat the chosen virtuous among the
people. The Muslims, therefore, are not a community, a minority or a geographical entity
but by superceding them are made into a party--- the party of God, Hizbullah.

A society based on materialism produces a civilization which forcibly separates religion
from the state and society. In the non-western world it has created a slavish mentality.
The West and Western civilization have created the false gods of nationalism and
democracy. Nationalism is nothing but national selfishness. It treats man not as a part
of humanity but as a member of a particular country set against other countries. Maudoodi
held that the freedom struggle, which was motivated by the philosophy of nationalism,
was not righteous because the Indian National Congress was politically Indian, a ideologically
communist and culturally Western.

Democracy is undesirable because it considers people as sovereign, while Islam maintains
that God alone can be sovereign. Secondly, it believes in the existence of different political
parties. Islamic polity can permit only one party. Besides adult franchise and political
participation in democracy are not desirable. In the same way socialism was opposed as it
abolishes private property and propagates atheism.

Against the background of the philosophy of the Jamaat, let us analyse its role in Indian
politics. What Maudoodi said before the Court of inquiry in Pakistan is quite relevant here.

Question: If we have this form of Islamic government here in Pakistan, will you permit
Hindus to have their Constitution on the basis of their own religion ?

Answer: Certainly, I should have no objection even if the Muslims in India are treated in
that form of Government as Shudras and malechhas and Manu's laws are applied to them,
depriving them of '", all share in the government and the rights of a citizen. In fact such a
state of affairs already exists in India.

Question: What will be the duty of the Muslims in India in case of war between India and
Pakistan ?

Answer: Their duty is obvious, and that is not to fight against Pakistan, or to do anything
injurious to the safety of Pakistan.

The Jamaat is a rigidly-organized and well-disciplined party. Though it is essentially
composed of the middle class, lately it has made a successful bid to gain the support of
different sections of Muslims especially students and women. Its influence should not be
judged by its meagre membership. In 1967, it claimed to have 1,360 members; in 1974, 2,064;
and in 1980,2,833. The Jamaat disclaims large membership which might become "unwieldly
and inchoate".

The Jamaat has a graded hierarchy in its membership structure; Arkan (adherants),
Ma' waneen (supporters), Muttafaqeen (those who agree) and Muttasirin (those who
are influenced). The strength of the Muttafaqeen is 1,232 and of the Ma' waneen is
36,272. The Jamaat had 13 regional organizational centres in Assam, West Bengal,
Bihar, U.P., Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh,
Karnatak, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. The three centrally controlled areas are Delhi, Orissa and
Andaman. In all, the Jamaat has 436 local units.

The Jamaat has 548 libraries and 388 reading rooms throughout the country. It runs 35
nursery schools, 355 schools, 36 junior high schools and 23, colleges. In additIon, to this,
the Jamaat publishes a vast amount of literature pertaining to Islam and Hadith, not only
in English and Urdu, but also in different regional languages.

The Indian situation, according to the Jamaat, is characterized by immorality, dishonesty,
corruption, inefficiency in short, moral degeneration, which is caused by nationalism.
They should not think in terms of their "national rights" and should give up the idea of
pressurizing political parties because it wIll be of no benefit to them.

The Jamaat believes that the participation of Muslims in the growth of secularism is
" treachery to the Prophet".  Islam cannot be separated from politics.  Secularism
is nothing but " irreligiousness ".  It is not an accident that the Jamaat is close to
Hindu obscurantist organizations.  In one statement, Maulana Abul Lias Islahi, the
Jamaat chief, has said, " We do not deny the value and worth of some of the
slogans of Hindu Mahasabha.  For example, it is against secularism and supports
the incorporation of the religious and ethical values in political life of the people ".
The attitudes of the Jamaat towards the Arya Samaj and the RSS have been
similar.

During the Emergency the leaders of the Jamaat and the RSS found that they could
work together.  According to Maulana Mohammad Yusuf, (then Chief of the Jamaat)
" The physical proximity enabled them to understand each other's points of view;
What was more, it started the normalisation of relations between different communities.
This should be encouraged in order to improve the social climate in the country".
Further the Maulana admitted that " the role of the RSS in the past could not
have been to the liking of the Muslims.  However, responsible leaders of the RSS
are not now adopting a noncommunal attitude ".

One does not know the nature of the misunderstandings between the Jmaat and
RSS leaders.  On the basis of the writings of the leaders of both organizations it
is not difficult to believe that a basis for unity between them already existed.
Even before the Emergency, they could come together.  Each considered the other
the authentic representative of its community, anti-secularism and anticommunalism
were common to both and both favoured the existence of separate religiopolitical
organizations of different communities.

In the political field, the Jamaat lays emphasis on three principles to be followed
by Indian Muslims:

i) Solidarity of the Muslims on the basis of Islam;
ii) Withdrawal from political activities in the country; and
iii) A separate political organization of the Muslims.

The Jamaat feels that solidarity based on Islam alone can be permanent and stable. It shall
make the community strong enough to fight the enemies of God from within and from without.
It shall constitute a force against the present system which denies the existence of God and
life after death. It also means that Muslims should not join any other organizations and
parties because it spells disorganization and disaster.

According to the philosophy of Jamaat, Muslims should not participate in elections
nor should they vote.  Both amount to indulging in un-Islamic activity.

Maulana Abul Lais Islahi envisaged many practical difficulties in the Indian context. Muslim
electoral candidates could not secure the votes of the Hindus, unless they sought the support
of other political parties. But this was not possible because every Indian believes in the
" one theory" . Such an alliance would not enable the Muslim representatives to act as ,
protectors of the legitimate interests of the whole Muslim community. If one decided
to follow the discipline of apolitical party, one ceased to be master of his own will.
 

The Jamaat also argued that the Hindus want to establish a Hindu state in keeping with the
Vedas and the Dharmshastras. Once the Muslims become actual participants in the election
politics of India they may be "irretrievably caught in the midst of party politics and may
not remain as mindful of their religious duty towards their country as they ought to be".
In the seventies, this stance of the Jamaat underwent a change. It accepted the utility of
elections, maintaining that elections were the best way to forge contact with people
and create an impact on them. In 1972 it decided to take part in the panchayat elections
as a first step towards participating in higher electoral bodies

The Jamaat believes that as a religious community and an important political entity the
Muslims should have a separate political organization. It has been working in this direction
from the early fifties but succeeded only in the sixties. With the formation of the
Majlis-e-Musha- warat, the Jamaat got a great opportunity to provide religious orientation to
a number of issues in Muslim politics and operate as a strong pressure group. The Jamaat
acted with a calculated strategy which had the desired results.

The failure of nationalist Muslim leadership was obvious. It was equally obvious that in a
democracy, no minority could claim and enjoy an autonomous status. Therefore the policy
of seeking "protection" and "safeguards" could not be very effective. The Jamaat offered
the alternative that Muslims should accept the injunctions of Islam, wherein lay their
salvation. Muslims were asked not to consider joint organizations of different. communities.
Moreover, the Jamaat advised the national secular parties not to approach the Muslim
masses directly because Muslims who belonged to these parties were not
"the representatives of the millat ".

The Mushawarat was not a single organization of the Muslims. But the Jamaat leadership
was quite enthusiastic about its formation and growth because it wanted to get a broader
mass base and to use Muslim consolidation as a bargaining counter with other political
parties, like the Congress or the Jana Sangh.

The Jamaat's hold on the Muslims should be viewed with grave concern. It is giving birth
to a combination of Islamic fundamentalism and uncompromising hostility to socialism
and democracy. It is promoting an anti-historIcal consciousness and a pronounced
reactionary socio-political and economic outlook in the Muslim community.

The formation of the Muslim Majlis-e- Mushwarat was an important development in the,
politics of the Muslim community. It signified the unity and consolidation of different political
groups which were active at the regional and national level. It was an attempt, on the part
of Muslim organizations, to assert themselves effectively and to influence national parties.

The Majlis-e-Mushawarat is a federation of various Muslim organizations and a representative
of the various schools of thought and non-party Muslim dignitaries.It is composed of the
Indian Union Muslim League, the Jamiatul-Ulema-e-Hind (Mufti Atiqur Rahman group); the
Jamaat-i-Islami; the Tamir-e-Millat; the Itehad-ul- Muslameen; the Muslim Block (MP) and
Muslim Majlis. Representation is also given to the Ahl-i-Hadith, the Shia community, and
the Barelvi School. Mashaiqs and other Muslim dignitaries are also represented.

The objectives of the Mushawarat are :
(1) to enable Muslims to live in accordance with the lofty ideals of Islam and make them
    participate in the national life in a manner in keeping with their status of being the
    Khair-e-ummat;
(2) to forge unity among all sections of the Muslims;
(3) to make all efforts to eradicate communal and other petty prejudices and to promote
     an atmosphere of mutual amity and understanding;
(4) to promote goodwill and integrity among different communities and groups in India,
     and to help the aggressed and the oppressed;
(5) to lend support to all attempts at retaining and promoting the secular character of
     the State;
(6) to promote Muslims to unhesitatingly contribute to the solution of various national
     problems.

The Mushawarat was established under the leadership of Dr. Syed Mahmud in 1964. In
August 1964 he invited about 80 Muslim leaders, belonging to different schools of thought
from all over the country to meet at Lucknow. The object was to discuss Muslim problems
and difficulties. The delegates belonged to the Jamiatul-Ulema, Jamaat-i-Islami, Muttaheda
Mahaz, Dini Talimi Council, Congress Muslim League and other religious schools
of thought.

The biggest factor responsible for the creation of the Mushawarat was the alarming incidence
of communal riots in which the Muslims suffered most. Another reason was the subjection of
Muslims to manifold injustices and prejudices on the cultural, political and economic planes.
The Mushawarat wanted to seek the support of, all parties including the Jan Sangh. It was
hopeful of a change of heart even from the RSS chief Golwalkar. This strategy was opposed
by a section of the Jamitul-Ulema- Hind (Asad Madni group) which held that the Muslims
need not have any common Muslim platform for the redressal of their grievances.

It is true that the Mushawarat evoked a favourable response from the Muslims. In July 1966,
it issued a charter of demands on a nine-point manifesto :

1. Reform of the educational system;
a) moral education and discipline should form part of the curriculum.
b) history books should be revised.
c) books prescribed in schools should be genuinely secular.

2. The system of proportional representation should be adopted for elections
    to the legislative assemblies and parliament.
3. The fundamentals of the welfare state should be the guiding principles in
    formulating the internal policy of the country.
4. Personal Law of the different communities should not be interferred with
    by the state.
5. The mother-tongue should be the medium of instruction in schools.
    Urdu should have the status of the second official language in U.P.,
    Bihar, Delhi, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Mysore.
6. Minority boards should be established consisting of representatives
    enjoying their confidence to look after their interests.
7. The government should preserve and respect those aims and objects of an
    institution which its founders had in mind. The special character of such
    institutions as Aligarh Muslim University, shantiniketan, should be maintained.
8. Religious trusts should be managed exclusively by members of their communities
    without any interference by the government.
9. Steps should be taken to reform society and vices such as untouchability,
    drinking, obscene literature should be prohibited. A country-wide campaign
    should be launched to eradicate neopotism and bribery.

The Mushawarat, however, did not set up any of its members as candidates. It exhorted
the Muslims to vote in favour of any candidate who was free from religious bigotry or any
other parochial or, linguistic taint, and was known for honesty and integrity. The Muslims
were advised to support those whose professions and performance were truly in accord
with democracy and socialism and who subscribed to the tenents of the "Nine-Point
People's Manifesto ."

The Mushawarat did not take into account the party affiliation of the candidates which
made all the difference. It held that elections were not its creed or objective. But taking
into consideration the general mood of the people and their bitter experience under
Congress rule, it minds of the minorities and backward classes. The federation therefore aimed at
safeguarding
the legitimate rights of the weaker sections, achieving harmony and understanding between
the various sections of the people, promoting democracy and secularism and securing social,
economic and political justice, irrespective of caste considerations. It identified such problems
of the minorities as the recognition of Urdu as the second official language in U.P., immediate
restoration of the Muslim minority character of the Aligarh Muslim University, adequate
representation of backward classes, scheduled castes and other minorities on the National
Integration Council, revision of school and college text books on literature, history and allied
subjects, securing the cessation of communal riots, adequate representation. of all the
minorities in all government services, equal opportunities in trade and commerce and
preventing legislation being enacted to enable the government to divert the proceeds of any
religious endowments or trusts to purposes other than those for which they were created.
The fulfillment of these objects would give sufficient weight and strength to these minorities
to become effective in the national life of the country.

The Muslim League is a major political organization of the Muslim community in Kerala.
Essentially a regional party, lately it has made successful head- way in the other parts of
the country, aiming at becoming a truly all-India party and the only political representative
organization of Indian Muslims. The Muslim league is perhaps the only Muslim party which
is successfully responding to the demands of the game of parliamentary politics.

The Indian Union Muslim league was born after the emergence of Pakistan as a separate
homeland of the Muslims. In the forties the Muslim league had demanded Pakistan and got
it. This naturally created a number of problems for the Muslims who chose to remain in India.
It is true that a complete exchange of population between India and Pakistan on the basis of
religion was impossible. In the changed situation what was the future of the Muslim league
in India ? It should be mentioned here that a major segment of the Muslim league leadership
on the eve of partition favoured the dissolution of the party in Independent India. In 1948 the
Muslim members of Constituent Assembly under the leadership of Nawab Ismail Khan
decided by a majority vote to disband the party. But the league leaders of South India did
not agree with Nawab Ismail Khan's view on the future of the party. Mr. Mohammed Ismail
of Madras believed that the continuity of the league as a political institution would be in the
interest of the community. The creation of Pakistan had generated an element of bitterness
and a simmering conflict in the relationship between the Hindus and Muslims In North India
which was terribly affected by the vast migration of Hindus from Pakistan and Muslims from
India.

The situation in South India was different. It provided a congenial atmosphere to the
Muslim league to operate as the political organization of the Muslims. According to
Theodore Wright (Jr.) Islam came to the South peacefully compared to the North. Arab
traders propagated the faith by persuasion and example rather than conquest and force. They
inter-married with Hindu women and produced the Mopalas of Malabar, the Navaitas of Kanara
and lebbais, Marrakayars and Rowthiers of Madras. Secondly, most South Indian Muslims
speak dialects of Malayalam, Tamil and Gujarati, languages of their Hindu neighbours. Thirdly,
except during the brief rule of Hyder Ali and  Tipu Sultan of Mysore, the Sultans of Madurai in
the 14th country, and the Nawab of Arcot in the 18th century, the Muslims never dominated the
South politically. chose to support the anti-Congress formula of Dr. Lohia.

The results of the fourth general elections were not satisfactory from the point of view of the
Muslims. The Mushawarat itself was partly responsible for this situation. Instead of being
instrumental in the promotion of communal accord, the U.P. Mushawarat gave a communal
colour to several issues, like the 1965 trouble at Aligarh and the Urdu issue. It raised the
bogey of "Islam in danger" and that of the culture phobia. The Muslims soon realised that the
new pattern of power was not going to benefit them because of the absence of proportional
representation. Without it, democracy could not be shared with the minorities.

The Mushawarat has never been a full-fledged political party nor has it intended to become
one. But certain ambitious leaders of the Mushawarat were not satisfied with this position.

In April 1968 a separate political party, the Muslim Majlis, was established. It was thrown
open to Indian nationals, irrespective of religion, caste or creed,. who agreed to protect the
religious, political, social, economic and other rights of Muslims and other backward classes.
The declared aims and objectives of the Majlis are to maintain the independence, integrity and
honour of India, to develop self-confidence, unity and tolerance among Muslims, to do away with
untouchability, to try to maintain the secular democratic and welfare character of the State and
to cooperate with the central Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat in matters relating to the well-being of
Muslims.

Dr. A.J. Faridi, its prominent leader, explaining the reasons for the establishment of the Majlis,
argued that the Muslims were living in a "state of perpetual doom" particularly in the Hindi
speaking areas. The problem of retaining the Islamic way of life and dignity, he said, was
directly a political one and ought to be tackled through political channels to bring quick
results.

Dr. Faridi also held that the Muslims' association with other political parties had not had any
satisfactory results. The outcome of joining the Congress had been "a frittering away of the
energies of a section of people which could easily mould the politics of the country into healthier
channels". Besides, the socialist parties ignored the danger of the RSS pseudo-soldiers who
aimed at demoralizing the Muslims and strengthening the reactionary political forces in the
country.

It was also declared that 94 per cent of the country's population should be brought under
one banner, "to end the rule of six per cent caste Hindus who had seized all power and
wealth in the country". Keeping in view this character Dr.Faridi said that the Majlis was a
non-conwnunal party with a communal name.

On October 13, 1968, the All India Federation of Muslims and Scheduled Caste and
Backward classes was formed under the auspices of the Muslim Majlis. This was the
first step taken by the Majlis to forge a political alliance with the depressed classes and
enlist Muslims' support in seeking redress of their grievances. The federation consisted of
the representatives of the Majlis, the U.P. Sikh Dratinidhi Board, the Republican Party, and
the Christian community.

The federation asserted that the Hindu community had established its hegemony which
perpetuated a sense of fear, disintegration and economic dependence in the They remained
self-reliant merchants, fisherman and peasants, and did not look to the government for jobs
and privileges as much as their co-religionists in the North. Fourthly, the Muslim League
leadership of the South was not drained to Pakistan in 1947, in marked contrast to the North.
Fifthly, practically no communal rioting accompanied partition in the South. Lastly, there are
local pockets in Malabar on the coast with a Muslim majority. (4)

The political approach of the Muslim League leaders can be understood if one looks at the
proceedings of the Constituent Assembly. In the Constituent Assembly Mr. B. Poker and
Mr. K.T. Ahmad Ibrahim supported separate electorates for the Muslims at the state as
well as the national level. It was strongly favoured by Chowdhary Khaliq-u-Zaman. The
rationale advanced was that Muslims would be able to send their "true" representatives to
the legislative bodies; their leaders would present the demands and voice the grievances of
the community. This move was opposed by Sardar Patel and a few Muslim members. The
Muslim League members also demanded that if separate electorates were done away with,
every member of the legislature should poll at least 30% of the votes of his own community.
The Muslim League also desired the retention of reservations in the legislative bodies.
They feared that the strength of Muslim legislators would be considerably reduced in the
absence of separate electorates. The Muslim League members in the Constituent Assembly
also vehemently opposed the idea of the common civil code. It was termed as undemocratic,
anti-religious and the imposition of the will of. the majority on the minority. Mr. Mohd.
Ismail also advocated religious education in schools for the children of every religion. The
League leaders also supported the inclusion  of Urdu in the VIIIth Schedule of the
Constitution. Mr. Mohd. Ismail in his speech of 26th January 1950 said, that the
Constitution was defective, regarding the minorities because it did not grant a separate
electorate; there was no reservation for Muslims in government services; no guarantee
for the protection of the Personal Law and no religious education for children in government
schools. These political and cultural issues became the guiding principles of the Muslim
League's functioning in independent India.
 

After 1948, the centre of the Muslim League's activities was Madras. In 1951 the
Constitution of the party, which emphasised the socio-economic and cultural rights of the
Muslims and other minorities was drafted. The need for the promotion of cordial relations
between the Muslims and other communities was also stressed. But what made the League
a respectable pressure group was their intelligent participation in electoral politics. The
political leaders of various parties did not hesitate to ally themselves with the communal
groups for partisan ends. For example, during the municipal elections ot Madras in 1952,
the Congress wanted to enter into an electoral alliance with the League, but did not accept
the League's demand that seats for Muslims should be reserved according to the population.
After 1952 the League successfully indulged in politics of alliances, sometimes with the
D.M.K.and Swatantra Party and sometimes with the Congress and the Communists. It
important to note the Muslim League's attitude regarding electoral politics in  the country.
Unlike other Muslim organi-zations in the country, the League displayed little hesitation and
resistance in participating in parliamentary democratic elections. Thus the League determined
the pattern of Muslim politics in the years to come.

Minority political organizations in any democratic competitive polity have to follow the
principles of compromises and alliances. The compromises and alliances are mostly
pragmatic, if not opportunistic, The League contested elections in Kerala where the
percentage of the Muslim population is 19.50%, Tamil Nadu 5.11%, Mysore 10.63%,
Bengal 20.4%, Bihar 13.48%, Maharashtra 8.40% and U.P. 15.48%. it is also interesting
to mention that the League has no foothold in predominantly Muslim areas like Jammu
and Kashmir and  Lakshwadeep.

There ere nine districts in the country  in which Muslims form more than 50 percent of
population but the Muslim League has political influence in only one district in Kerala.
Another striking feature is that it is articulate and vocal in states where the Muslim population
is  less than 10% with the exception of Kerala because in these areas alone, it can afford the
luxury of raising non issues to mobilise the masses. For example in Bombay, the League
became a force to reckon with at the corporation level. In the assembly elections of 1972
also the League registered a big success. In both these elections the League concentrated
its campaign on the issue of Muslim Personal Law, Bihari Muslims in Bangladesh and the
singing of ` Vande Mataram'.. All these issues raised by the League had nothing to do with
the real problems of , the Muslims in different states. Instead f of politically advancing the
community, the League thrives on the fundamentalist and conservative idiom and harping
on non-issues. The question of the singing 'Vande Mataram' did accentuate tension not
only in Bombay but in other parts of the state. The culmination was the Poona riots in
which the worst sufferers were the poor Muslims.

It is, however, to be noted that the League's participation in the elections paid dividends. In
various states it could make its presence felt and it could play a crucial role in the formation
and the survival of the governments. In Kerala it holds the balance. In Bombay corporation its
role is significant in the establishment of  non-Congress coalitions. It seems that the Muslim
League is interested in sharing power, even at the cost of sacrificing the vital interests of
the community and its own stated principles.

The Muslim League ignores vital facts of the Indian situation and its entire politics concentrates
on the problems of the urban Muslim population. The issues which it raises are those of a very
small section of the community. Its stand to contest the U.P. elections on the Aligarh Muslim
University issue alone, can be mentioned here. It forgets that the overwhelming Muslim population
is rural. Besides, of the 30 districts in the country where the Muslim population is more than 20%
and less than 50% the Muslim League has a hold only in a few districts.

The foregoing account of the ideology and the working of three Muslim organizations shows
that they are mainly concerned with the cultural and religious problems of the Muslim
community. Not that they are devoid of political understanding but they are dominated by
religio-cultural considerations. The emphasis on religion and culture is not accidental but quite
deliberate. These organizations view the Muslims as a monolithic, well-knit and homogenous
community and consequently characterize the religious and cultural problem as identical.
These organizations do not recognise different social and economic classes with contradictory
and conflicting political interests, as that recognition spells disunity and weakness. The leaders
of these organizations consider themselves as the 'true' representatives of the "millat". In this
context their demands for separate electorate should be appreciated.

Secondly, Muslim organizations are basically conservative and fundamentalist in their
ideological postures and political approaches. the manipulation of religion and the religious
idiom reinforce communal identity and solidarity. Of course, religion is used for mobilisational
purposes as well as for maintaining a conservative sway over the masses. These organizations
are certainly closer to other reactionary organizations of the different communities, like the R.S.S.,
the B.J.P. or the Arya Samaj. The `Islam' of these organizations is an ally of retrogressive politics
in the country and it also protects the elitist nature of Muslim politics.

Thirdly, Muslim organizations seem to be concerned with the `symbolic' rather than the
`substantive' aspect of the Indian political system. Their manifestoes betray a deliberate effort
to ignore the economic problems of the Muslim masses. Their opposition to socialism or
communism is the salient feature of their economic doctrine. They maintain that communism
is the greatest threat to Islam and Muslims not only in India but throughout the world, as
spiritualism and ethics do not have any place in the communist system. They also believe
that communism is opposed to human rights and civil liberties. The Muslim organizations
also claim that they do not favour capitalism because it is based. on profit. Islam, therefore,
is the golden mean between capitalism and communalism. Interestingly enough, the concept
of man and society of the leaders of Muslim organizations is very much in keeping with the
philosophy which sustains and promotes capitalism. Muslim organizations hold the individual
as the basic unit of society; private ownership is the law of nature; planning leads to
totalitarianism; economic class considerations are unnatural and artificial; agrarian reforms
and rapid industrialization are unsuitable; and competitive enterprise should be guaranteed.
They also uphold the notion that the government should not interfere in the economic sphere
but merely provide guidance to industrial policy. All these principles are those of the capitalist
system which produce exploitation, poverty, unemployment and inequality. One fails to
understand why communal organizations consider the right to property and competitive
enterprise so sacrosanct if they have the welfare of poor Muslims in mind. It betrays either the
ignorance of the nature of economic systems or a deliberate attempt to make politics
subservient to the interests of the few in the name of Islam.

Notes and References:-
1. See 'Assam', Economic and Political Weekly, February 26, 1983,p.282
2. Report of the Court of Inquiry into the Punjab Disturbances of 1953, Lahore, 1954,
    p.228-23O.
3. See Daawat (Urdu)., April 14, 1982, p.39.
4. Theodore Wright (Jr.), The Muslim League in South India since Independence;
    A strategy in minority group political strategies, The American Political Science Review,
    Summer, 1966, pp.580-1.