By VK Lyngdoh
The editorial “Religion & Politics debate” (ST 23rd March 2024) is timely and appropriate. Karl Marx, the 19th-Century philosopher and founder of Marxism, had a distinct view on the relationship between religion and politics. He famously referred to religion as “the soul of soulless conditions” or “the opium of the people.” According to him religion exists in a world of exploitation and serves as both an expression of distress and a protest against real suffering. In other words, religion persists due to oppressive social conditions. When these conditions change, religion will become unnecessary.
Marx saw religion as a form of protest by the working classes against their economic hardships and alienation. It reflects the suffering of the oppressed and acts as a heart in a heartless world and a soul in a soulless condition. In his critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (1843). Marx stated, “Man makes religion, religion does not make man.” He argued that religion is a product of human society, shaped by material conditions and social structures. Marxist-Leninists view modern religions as “organs of bourgeois reaction,” used for the “exploitation and stupefaction of the working class”. Marxist governments in the 20th century, such as the Soviet Union and China, implemented state atheism. Marx’s perspective on religion and politics emphasizes its connection to social conditions, protest and struggle against oppression. His idea continues to shape discussions on secularism and the role of religion in society.
As far as India is concerned, it is factually correct that the word ‘secular’ was inscribed into the constitution of India through the 42nd Amendment in 1975. However, the motivation behind this inclusion is multifaceted and has been debated over the years. While some argue that it was a genuine commitment to secularism, others contend that it was influenced by political considerations, including appealing to the minority vote bank. The context of the Emergency period and the political dynamics of that time played a role in shaping this constitutional change. Regardless of the intent, the term “secular’ remains a fundamental aspect of India’s constitutional identity, emphasizing the country’s commitment to equal treatment of all citizens, irrespective of their religious affiliations. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has stressed that ‘secularism’ lies in the principle of ‘Sabka saath, sabka vikas’ (Development for all). According to him the party does not discriminate based on religion, caste or community.
In India, the intersection of religion and politics significantly influences electoral dynamics. During elections, political parties often tailor their messaging to appeal to specific religious communities. The choice of candidates, campaign promises, and rhetoric may vary based on religious affiliations. In the 17th Lok Sabha Parliamentary election 2019, voting patterns varied significantly by religious groups. Hindus, nearly half voted for the Bharatiya Janata Party while Congress was the top choice among Muslims, Christians and Sikhs. Congress received 30% of the Muslim votes while the BJP received 19% of their votes. 33% of Sikhs favoured the Congress and 19% for the BJP. The BJP secured 29% of the Buddhist votes and Congress received 24% of their votes. Hindus often perceive their religious and national identities as closely intertwined.
Speaking Hindi and being Hindu are seen as essential markers of Indian identity. This connection influences political choices and voting behaviour. Among Hindus, voting preference varies across regions. In the south, only 19% of Hindus voted for the BJP, compared to around two-thirds in the northern and central parts of India who supported the ruling party. Regional cultural context and historical factors play a role in shaping these variations. Political parties mobilize religious sentiments to consolidate their power base. They organise rallies, religious events, and temple visits to connect with voters. Religious leaders endorse candidates and influence their followers’ voting decisions.
Appeals to nationalism often intersect with religious narratives. Leaders emphasize the protection of religious and cultural heritage. Hindutva, a Hindu nationalist ideology unlike Sanatana Dharma, has been influential in Indian politics. The Supreme Court ruled that politicians cannot seek votes based on caste, creed or religion. This landmark decision aims to prevent the misuse of religious sentiments during elections. However, religion remains a potent force in Indian politics, shaping electoral strategies, voter behaviour and national identity. Balancing secularism and religious diversity remains an ongoing challenge for the world’s largest democracy.
Religion and politics, two powerful forces that shape societies, have a complex relationship. Let us explore different perspectives. Religious rhetoric played a significant role in the United States of America. In 2016, evangelical voters contributed to Donald Trump’s victory, with over 55 percent of weekly churchgoers supporting him. Joe Biden, on the other hand, drew fellow Catholics to his camp. End-times rhetoric has also been prominent. Leaders have rallied adherents through apocalyptic language, emphasizing the stakes of political decisions. Combining religion and politics can lead to consequences that harm societal harmony. These two realms are fundamentally different and should not be intertwined. Merging politics and religion blurs the lines of what is acceptable and what is not. Religion, which appeals to our better angels, can lose its moral clarity when entangled with political agendas. Some individuals find it beneficial to balance their religious convictions with their political views. For example, Senator Mitt Romney cited prayer as a major factor in his decision to vote for the impeachment of President Donald Trump.
In conclusion, whether it is prudent to mix religion and politics remains a matter of perspective. While some argue for separation, others find value in integrating their beliefs. As we approach the general election to the 18th Lok Sabha 2024, these dynamics will continue to shape the political landscape in our country. In his iconic Gettysburg address, Abraham Lincoln uttered the now-famous quote: “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.” These words encapsulate the essence of democracy and serve as a reminder of the fundamental principles on which nations are built: the power and authority lie with the citizens. Essentially this quote emphasizes the importance of a government system that is accountable to its people, represents their interests, and works for their benefit.