The systematic suffocation of civil society by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government over the past nine years has ensured that most governments no longer listen to civil society organizations (CSOs) or movements, either at the pre-legislative stage or in the redressal of loopholes Implementation of government schemes. Given that advocacy is effectively dead, civil society’s ability to shape policy and public discourse is greatly diminished. Because civil society is seen as the new frontier for war and foreign interference, there has been a systematic crackdown on CSOs lobbying for greater constitutional and civil liberties. Therefore, activists, journalists, academics and students have been targeted by a plethora of state apparatuses and non-state actors (who have resorted to online and offline violence and abuse). This has been further exacerbated by restricting the CSO’s access to resources (revocation of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act approval, cancellation of 12A/80-G licences, imposition of retrospective taxes, and imposition of tax on private companies and philanthropists. exerting pressure to redirect funds).
Because the BJP government has re-conceptualized vikas (development) as pursuing big projects rather than the well-being of citizens, civil society is being maligned as disruptive to India’s growth trajectory – and therefore the nation. -Opponent. This points to a serious threat to the integrity of the system as civil society is an essential safety valve for tensions in a polity.
a drastic structural adjustment
All this together with the BJP is leading to a structural adjustment of India’s civil society landscape. The BJP is promoting a ‘new civil society for a new India’ by setting up several organizations of the Sangh Parivar. Besides being the primary recipients of government patronage, CSOs of the Sangh are also major beneficiaries of Corporate Social Responsibility funds (be it in the form of quid pro quo for approvals/licences/exemptions by BJP governments, or one’s guess coercion). I through). In addition, these union institutions have access to and influence over select departments (mainly education, culture, personnel as well as dalit and tribal welfare) in state governments. Apart from its deep programmatic implications (activities related to the welfare of women, dalits, tribals, students, human rights and freedoms are being increasingly shaped by the ideological imperatives of the Sangh), it also changed the landscape of civil society in India Is. All other CSOs/movements are gradually being limited as a result of the financial and political influence that the CSOs of the Sangh can garner. That the effort has not been entirely successful so far is testament to the legitimacy that India’s CSO/movement still enjoys among Indians. Although most civil society actors are aware of the existential threat they face, they have not displayed agility in resetting their standard and operational practices. They are still stuck with the old strategy whose overall utility is rapidly diminishing. Sanctioned, and therefore tidy, protests at New Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, Bengaluru’s Townhall or Mumbai’s Azad Maidan are undoubtedly indifferent to the constituency that activists influence, and keep the flock together. But they do nothing to shape the thinking or action of BJP governments. Similarly, articles/letters, speeches at think tanks/conferences/symposia, and petitions/open letters do not embarrass governments for any substantive reform. Even lobbying legislators to raise issues is ineffective – the central government either does not allow Parliament to function or ignores uncomfortable issues.
Further, progressive CSOs have failed to combine socio-cultural values with the call for welfare/constructive work or protection of constitutional values. As a result, they are unable to reshape hearts and minds, and thus guide mass consciousness. Given that large sections of society have been radicalized (highlighted in a 2017 study by the Center for the Study of Developing Societies and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung), this is a major shortcoming of progressive civil society. Anecdotal evidence from various states suggests that local communities benefited significantly from progressive CSOs/movements, but ideologically aligned with the BJP. This contradiction has resulted in psychological fatigue among key activists, who naturally question the fundamental logic of their work.
need a reorganization
This position is untenable for various reasons. Firstly, due to the financial and structural constraints imposed on them, CSOs/movements are bleeding out conscientious youth who naturally need some financial sustenance. Second, without ongoing support, CSOs cannot positively shape the public discourse or make a tangible impact on the nation at large. And third, with the government deliberately avoiding CSOs/movements, their ability to shape policy is reduced (which adversely affects organizational morale). It does not seem that the BJP government will take any steps to solve these problems. So, what is the way forward for progressive civil society in India?
Faced with a vastly reduced spectrum of options, some progressives will flee to safer avenues; Others may limit their scope of work, and still others may re-align with the BJP. The net result is that civil society will be unable to speak truth to power, elevate the voices of the most vulnerable, enrich policies/laws through constructive feedback, or advance the collective good. This is clearly not in the interest of the people or the national interest. We need to collectively plan an action plan for the future of this sector.
One possibility that may emerge is that youth activists may be inducted into political parties, either within the party organization or in a coalition body. This can create an institutional moral force within parties (which can balance electoral compulsions with moral/human rights considerations). It will provide the parties a layered systemic approach to thorny issues.
Currently, many parties consciously avoid direct exposure to difficult issues that may adversely affect them electorally (a genuine concern due to the potential for the powers that be to manufacture false narratives). This includes supporting the rights of activists fighting for communal disturbances, atrocities against Dalits and women, tribal rights or civil and political liberties. Quite the contrary, if an affiliated civil society organization takes up such issues (both within and outside party organizations), it will ensure that a party remains engaged with real community problems while allowing a permeable wall of separation. An example of this is when the Congress movement (the Gandhian constructive movement) complemented the Congress system (which has always been an electoral and governance machine).
Given the prevailing political climate, CSOs will urgently need to collaborate with other progressive stakeholders (for which they will need to shed their hatred of each other and political parties). Some civil society stakeholders would argue against it, either because they can continue to raise funds and attract global attention if they are troubled. But those isolated examples do not address the systemic battle the region is facing today. In fact, in the near future, the BJP may resort to using the continued existence of these ‘celebrity’ activists as proof of their tolerance of civil society in general. We need to find structural solutions to structural problems. This is our historical responsibility.
In that spirit, private philanthropists and companies need to realize that they are the only lifelines for progressive CSOs today. Yes, it is infinitely easier to support organizations working on ‘soft’ issues that may not invite the wrath of the powers that be. It’s even easier to see the other side. But today’s inaction will directly contribute to the extinction of civil society, arguably the fifth pillar of Indian democracy. Beyond instruments, conscientious Indians must find the courage to work together and quietly invent new ways of cooperation. Only through such a principled alliance can we first protect, and ultimately advance, India’s constitutional idea.
Pushparaj Deshpande is the director of the Prosperous India Foundation, a multi-party platform that advances India’s constitutional promise. He is also the series editor of the series ‘Rethinking India’