Crisis of the “Nehruvian Consensus” or Pluralization of Indian Politics? Aligarh Muslim University and the Demand for Minority Status

Q3 Social Sciences
Laurence Gautier
{"title":"Crisis of the “Nehruvian Consensus” or Pluralization of Indian Politics? Aligarh Muslim University and the Demand for Minority Status","authors":"Laurence Gautier","doi":"10.4000/samaj.6493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on the campaign for AMU’s minority status (1965–1981), at the intersection of student politics and Muslim politics. What started in 1965 as an internal university dispute on student quotas soon transformed into a central Muslim issue. The campaign crystallized mounting resentment against the government and provided a common platform to heterogeneous forces–students, teachers, as well as Muslim organizations of different shades and hues–who all claimed to serve Muslim interests. This campaign thus played a key role in the reconfiguration of Muslim politics in the 1960s. It contributed to the re-emergence of the demand for Muslim minority rights, largely delegitimized after partition. It provided a platform for an increasingly assertive Muslim leadership which claimed to represent the Muslim community. Finally, it constituted a laboratory for issue-based coalitions, which, in the absence of a strong Muslim political party, became a dominant feature of Muslim politics, especially in North India. These changes must be read in the wider context of the post-Nehruvian period. The campaign participated in the emergence of counter-narratives, which questioned Congress’s “hegemonic” discourse on secular nationalism. Through student mobilization and issue-based coalitions, it also facilitated the emergence of contentious voices outside party structures. As such, the campaign participated in the larger pluralization of Indian politics, marked by the erosion of Congress’s dominance, much before the post-Emergency crisis.","PeriodicalId":36326,"journal":{"name":"South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/samaj.6493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article focuses on the campaign for AMU’s minority status (1965–1981), at the intersection of student politics and Muslim politics. What started in 1965 as an internal university dispute on student quotas soon transformed into a central Muslim issue. The campaign crystallized mounting resentment against the government and provided a common platform to heterogeneous forces–students, teachers, as well as Muslim organizations of different shades and hues–who all claimed to serve Muslim interests. This campaign thus played a key role in the reconfiguration of Muslim politics in the 1960s. It contributed to the re-emergence of the demand for Muslim minority rights, largely delegitimized after partition. It provided a platform for an increasingly assertive Muslim leadership which claimed to represent the Muslim community. Finally, it constituted a laboratory for issue-based coalitions, which, in the absence of a strong Muslim political party, became a dominant feature of Muslim politics, especially in North India. These changes must be read in the wider context of the post-Nehruvian period. The campaign participated in the emergence of counter-narratives, which questioned Congress’s “hegemonic” discourse on secular nationalism. Through student mobilization and issue-based coalitions, it also facilitated the emergence of contentious voices outside party structures. As such, the campaign participated in the larger pluralization of Indian politics, marked by the erosion of Congress’s dominance, much before the post-Emergency crisis.
“尼赫鲁共识”危机还是印度政治多元化?阿里加尔穆斯林大学与对少数民族地位的需求
本文聚焦于争取AMU少数民族地位的运动(1965–1981),处于学生政治和穆斯林政治的交叉点。始于1965年的大学内部关于学生配额的争议很快演变成了穆斯林的核心问题。这场运动体现了对政府日益增长的不满,并为各种各样的力量——学生、教师以及不同肤色和肤色的穆斯林组织——提供了一个共同的平台,他们都声称为穆斯林利益服务。因此,这场运动在20世纪60年代穆斯林政治的重组中发挥了关键作用。它促成了对穆斯林少数民族权利的需求重新出现,这些权利在分治后基本上被剥夺了合法性。它为自称代表穆斯林社区的日益自信的穆斯林领导层提供了一个平台。最后,它构成了基于问题的联盟的实验室,在没有强大的穆斯林政党的情况下,这种联盟成为穆斯林政治的主要特征,尤其是在北印度。这些变化必须放在后尼赫鲁时期更广泛的背景下解读。这场运动参与了反叙事的出现,这些反叙事质疑国会关于世俗民族主义的“霸权”话语。通过学生动员和基于问题的联盟,它还促进了政党结构之外有争议的声音的出现。因此,早在后紧急状态危机之前,这场运动就参与了印度政治的大规模多元化,其标志是国会主导地位的削弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal
South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信