Content area
Full Text
To conflate the two very different concepts is mischievous and politically motivated
J Sai Deepak in a recent article (‘The “Majoritarianism” slur’, June 22) argues that “majoritarianism” is used to gaslight Hindus and makes a case for majoritarianism. Further, he proposes that since Bharat, historically and civilisationally, has always been Hindu, constitutional morality too should be located in this civilisational context. In other words, it is okay if court judgments abide by and uphold majoritarian interests, faith and morality. These unabashed Hindu-first arguments are not new, but given Sai Deepak’s intellectual standing, his article falls short on reasoning, substance and “good faith”.
First, JSD begins with a conceptual error. His definition of majoritarianism — “as that form of legitimate political authority which expresses the will of the majority” — conflates a principle with its perverted form. The bottom line of a democracy is that it represents the majority will. The majoritarian principle becomes the basis to form governments, make laws and policies. However, once laws/policies are made, the processes of implementation and the principles of justice are not (or should not), in any democratic set-up, subjected to majority will tests. If it did, we would not have had the judgment that decriminalised homosexuality, or the Sabarimala verdict that granted temple entry for women of menstruating age.
In other words, while processes in a democracy are governed by the majority...