The genesis of politics has its varied birth throes.An exemplary book of politics cannot be written with a casual addition of pages.It can be composed only with an organized,well thought out compilation of ideology,concern for one's soil and society and above all,as a call for the well being of every sector of its geographical format.Quite often,any ongoing dehumanizing course of events can trigger the sleeping tolerance in collective consciousness and bring like minded people together,to chalk out a plan of resistance against oppression and loss of personal freedom.Consequently a sudden surge of revolt,reverberates as the united voice of urgency and alarm.Soon it becomes the political voice of people and results in the birth of a political outfit. This is what we call politics of necessity.
It was this spirit of political necessity that inspired the origin of the Indian National Congress which was founded in 1885,with the inclusive participation of even a retired British Officer called Allan Octavian Hume along with 71 other founder members.Mahatma Gandhi came much late in the picture,as the 43rd president of the Indian National Congress,succeeding Abul Kalam Azad. But Gandhi was one among those dynamic leaders of the Congress Movement,who exalted the objectives of the party to fulfill national expectations and aspirations,thereby giving a fillip to the freedom movement.
After independence,through successive spells of erosion,the first national party of free India has seen several jolts,starting from the days of Jawharlal Nehru,down to Sonia Gandhi.But the long standing political perception is that the Indian National Congress was born of necessity enfolding the spirit of liberation,to see India breathe the fresh air of independence,retrieved from the clutches of the colonial forces,that invaded India as aggressively as they could.
Though India became independent and established its sovereignity on sound democratic and republican ethos,the simmering religious discontent between the Hindus and Muslims intensified the throes of the birth of independence, through subtle and seroius upheavals, both during the freedom movement and during the straining course of partition,of a huge colonised part of the Asian region,into India and Pakistan.History would have printed its pages of that period,with the blood of hatred and animosity,unleashed by the religious fundamentalism of both the Hindus and the Muslims.
It was during those years of turmoil,the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh was formed in 1925,as a para military volunteer organisation to guard the interests of the Hindus.From then on,it had spread its multi pronged organizational wings of force and power, to protect the Hindu ideology as its foremost priority.The kind of aggressive military training and grooming of its members,made each one of them a soldier not only to be defensive but also to be offensive for the sake of defence.In tune with this kind of martial formulation, aggressive politics came to be viewed as an alternative or corollary to necessary politics.
In other words,politics of aggression, progressed and positioned itself as necessary politics,to save one brand of religion against the other and to make the country to be seen as the soil of one particular religion.Thus politics of aggression became an acceptable phenomenon,besides making religion as an inseparable part of politics.Thereby religious faith got continuously recharged with the political battery or political routine carried on its shoulders,an unloadable religious agenda to the extent of shunning the united face of India.The pan India lungs not only failed to breathe the one India oxygen but also failed to inhale the fact that one India does not mean one religion.
Aggressive politics quite often accommodates imperialistic tendencies as in the case of world's despotic leaders like Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Invasion and expansion are pet theories and gospels of the imperialist mode of governance,which foresees power,as far superior to personal freedom,so as to discipline the folks,to fall in line to its ideology of aggression.
India's political bioscope has recently chosen this kind of aggressive polarisation of issues and individuals in the name of religion,which becomes a personally passionate call for many,who are more oriented in religion than in social values and a proper vision of God.This aggressive politics is running amok to infiltrate into other political outfits and invade them for its own expansion.
When once an institution wrongly envisages infiltration and invasion as the right path,a zeal for aggression occupies its axis.'Trounce and truncate others for your survival'becomes the mighty motto.As per this dictum,if ends could justify the means,everything is right. Besides,conquests are viewed to be possible only through aggressions.If means are superseded by goals,might becomes right.One need not always fight to win one's goals,but yet win them through other means.That is what politics of aggression professes and practises.
Most of the regional parties in India had sprouted from their parent organizations due to difference of opinion or perception of difference in ideology.While the DMK originated following a difference in ideology with its Dravidian Patriarch,the AIADMK was formed on account of difference of opinion between two popular personalities.These two samples of political establishments did not resort to any aggressive approach towards their expansion.They grew and sustained their position by their core ideology or roaring popularity.
The Telugu Desam party was the brain child of a God image,popularised in celluloid mode.Disenchantment of the growing leaders with the Indian National Congress,led to the formation of many political outfits appending the word Congress to their prefixes, in states like West Bengal,Andra Pradesh and Puducherry.State politics in many regions came into being,to fulfill local aspirations. These are just a few images of the Regional Satraps.
However,in a vast and densely populous democracy like India,the legitimate growth of National political parties, depends upon their reflection of national priorities that specify the avoidance of sectarian interests and inclusion of the poorest voices,echoing from every nook and corner of the country,for their due recognition and care,through the protective touch of politics.
Ideal politics is certainly a mirage.But actual politics should exist by its own relevance to the founding principles of democracy,whereby,political parties are expected to grow not at the cost of others,not by making inroads into other parties through unethical means,but purely by the process of adult suffrage or what is now called universal suffrage.As Abraham Lincoln rightly said,"A ballot is always stronger than a bullet".It might be equally true that political aggressions become ashes in their own flames of fire.
============0=============
