“The condemnation of the Constitution largely comes from two quarters, the Communist Party and the Socialist Party…. The Communist Party wants a Constitution based upon the principle of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. They condemn the Constitution because it is based upon parliamentary democracy. The Socialists want two things. The first thing they want is that if they come in power, the Constitution must give them the freedom to nationalise or socialise all private property without payment of compensation. The second thing that the Socialists want is that the Fundamental Rights mentioned in the Constitution must be absolute and without any limitations so that if their Party fails to come into power, they would have the unfettered freedom not merely to criticise, but also to overthrow the State. These are the main grounds on which the Constitution is being condemned.”
– Dr Babasaheb B R Ambedkar, Concluding remarks in the Constituent Assembly on Constitution on November 25, 1949
The National Assembly in France, known to be beacon of ‘Republican values’, has thrown a surprising result where the Left coalition, with fewer votes, has secured more seats. The daring decision of French President Macron to call for the snap polls after the main opposition alliance, National Rally led by the ‘far-right’ Marine Le Pen, secured the highest representation in the elections for the European Union has pushed France into an era of unprecedented instability and uncertainty, just ahead of the international event – Paris Olympics. The unfolding events in Europe, in general, and France, in particular, pose a significant challenge to true ‘liberal democracy’ in many ways. Therefore, they should be discussed in a larger context without getting into the complexities of the French elections.
Liberty guaranteed by Constitutional democracy is the cardinal principle of liberalism. ‘Tolerance’ of even unacceptable opinions and ‘Secularism’, where the State is expected to stay away from religious affairs completely, have been the key ingredients of French democracy. In this election, the issues and behaviour of political alliances need a deeper analysis. The three grand alliances of the New Popular Front (Left coalition), the pro-Macron alliance Ensemble (Centrist–liberal Coalition) and National Rally (Rightist Coalition) fiercely contested the first round on the issues of core economic policies and foreign policy vis-a-via Russia-Ukraine war and Israel Hamas War. Besides this, the immigration policy was another critical issue that had brought the rightist coalition to the centrestage with the nationalist agenda. Another group of parties, The Republicans, also supported the National Rally on this issue, which led to a clear edge for the nationalist Coalition in the first round of elections. The liberals who get carried away with the Left agenda immediately decided to drop their campaign against the Communists and concentrate the campaign against the rightists. The New Popular Front also reciprocated and together withdrew 200 candidates to avoid the anti-right coalition votes. The result is naturally shocking with the hung Assembly. The exact outcome Left always like to have is to discredit the electoral democracy. For them, anarchy is the pre-condition for revolution.
Islamists coming in extensive support for Communists for their pro-Hamas and pro-migrants stand are another critical feature of this election. Putting religious identity above national interests has been the typical psyche of Islamists, and the Communists always provide an intellectual cover for the same. Both ideologies essentially do not believe in electoral democracy. It is another story that Islamists do not allow Communists to exist in the countries they rule, as happened in the case of Pakistan, and the Communist regimes follow the same strategy as can be seen in China. The real problem lies with the liberals who fall prey to this Islamo-Leftist propaganda and allow them to be the mascot of illiberal values.
The American experience where neo-Left academicians systematically created the false narrative of Islamophobia after the 9/11 terror attack or in Bharat, the’ minorities under attack’ narrative called out by the Leftists and propagated by the liberals falls under the same category. In reality, it weakens electoral democracy and gives rise to fundamentalist, illiberal tendencies. The Left NGOs taking funding from the capitalists create the ground for certain narratives; academia and media provide them with intellectual justification, and Islamists, with their numbers, manipulate the democratic space to spread undemocratic practices. Free speech is curtailed, public places get restricted, crime against women is normalised, and cancel culture prevails as who is to be labelled as ‘fascist’, ‘rightist’ and ‘anti-Constitution’ is decided by this cabal.
Dr Ambedkar was clear and categorical in denouncing both ideologies as anti-democratic. Instead of cancelling the nationalists due to Left propaganda, liberals need to urgently revisit their core values and how far they can afford to tolerate intolerance in the name of tolerance. To save the democratic space, we need Dr Ambedkar’s clarity about Islamist and Communist ideologies and their possible impact on democracies.
Comments