Ram Manohar Lohia’s politics, in thought and practice- a brief assessment
Ram Manohar Lohia born in 1910 in Akbarpur in Uttar Pradesh was one of the rare politicians who strived to uphold the principle of democratisation not only in his principles but also in his practice. Lohia was a student of political economy. The topic of his doctorate thesis was the salt taxation in India, specifically focussing on the Gandhian socio-economic politics. The socialist perspective he acquired during his academic years also translated in his political activism and thought as well.
Upon returning to India, Lohia actively joined the independence struggle. His politics evolved and developed through the national movement and combined Gandhian values with principles of socialism. He was one of the founders of the Congress Socialist Party, a socialist faction within the Congress. Yet as his political journey unfolded, he began to carve his own niche within the socialist thought and ideology which was distinct from both the Gandhian thought and Nehruvian socialism, both of which dominated Congress ideology during the independence struggle and after independence respectively. The dominant ideology in the early years of post-independence period was that of state-led socialism. Nehru had diverged from Gandhian idea of village-led-socialism based on small scale industries and instead opted for a centralised state led model which was focused on heavy industries and modernisation. (Read more on this issue here)
Lohia’s socialism had some commonalities with that of Nehru’s vision but was also distinct from it. Though a strong proponent of state intervention in implementation of socialist agenda, he was not satisfied with socialism being limited to the political economy or state programmes. His desire to bring about change in the everyday culture and the realpolitik of the country through a socialist agenda speaks through all of his writings and politics. His economic beliefs were embedded in principles of frugality, austerity and redirection of funds for larger causes. At the same time he did not align with Communist philosophy either. His views on elitism were not limited to a class perspective but also included issues of caste, gender and communal and linguistic perspectives. With this intersectionality in his point of view, his programme of democratisation was far more holistic than the dominant Congress view or even the mainstream Communist agenda.
Lohia’s political thought emanated from a more empirical perspective than a philosophical one. His socialist ideology was not teleological in nature but rather one which sought to remedy the existing issues and evolve a programme along the way. He was a strong proponent of participatory democracy and continuing process of democratisation. One of the reasons for his disenchantment with the Congress in the post-independence era was what he felt was its increasing alienation with the grassroots and the masses. Thus, he forayed into politics with his own socialist outfit which underwent multiple changes from Socialist Party to Praja Socialist Party to Socialist Party (Lohia) and eventually the Samyukta Socialist Party.
Along with the values of participatory democracy, he had also inherited the discursive traditions of the independence movement. He was one of the few leaders who continued this tradition in post-independence era, a time when discursive democracy was on a decline. He constantly wrote essays, articles, op-eds etc. in which he tried to formulate tenets of his socialist programme and ideology, both of which he wanted to ground in and reflect the Indian political and social reality.
Lohia could not make the socialist agenda as the dominant political programme during his lifetime as his party could not make inroads into the national politics but he did succeed in the formation of the first non-Congress government in Uttar Pradesh along with Bhartiya Jan Sangh (BJS). In retrospect this could be considered as an odd alliance as BJS the predecessor of Bhartiya Janta Party is a strong opponent of the ideology of socialism. Lohia’s rigid anti-Congress stance could be a reason behind this which also speaks a lot about the continuing phenomenon of various political parties claiming to have very divergent ideologies from the BJP or its parent parties or organisation but affiliating with them to form governments in the name of anti-Congressism.
Another line of thought that many socialist thinkers and politicians from the Hindi belt states have inherited from Lohia is his opposition to the linguistic politics of non-Hindi speaking states against the imposition of Hindi. Lohia failed to appreciate the demographic-power-dynamics between Hindi and other languages in India and why many non-Hindi speakers were opposing the agenda to make Hindi as the lingua franca in the country as the latter saw this move as a potential threat to their own mother tongues. Interestingly, the issue has been revived as a point of contentious politics by the BJP in recent times, thus revealing that anti-congressism was not the only point of convergence between Lohia and the rightwing political faction.
Nevertheless Lohia’s influence in creating an alternative politics in Hindi heartland cannot be discounted. In contemporary times, the prominent party and one of the strongest alternatives to the BJP and Congress in UP, the Samajwadi Party claims to be his ideological successor. However, even though Lohia tried to evolve a school of thought and philosophy of Indian socialism, his focus heavily relied on negating the existing political tendencies which he considered as harmful for Indian economic, social and political reality. That’s why he could not deliver a consistent set of ideas which could lay out a vision for socialism in India and the procedure to follow the same. Thus, it has become difficult to measure the success of political practices and programmes of the latter-day socialist outfits in upholding a principled Indian socialist thought.
Lohia’s success lies in his efforts to practice a principled politics and evolving a political thought. Though he himself could not provide a concrete roadmap for the achievement of his ideals and goals, his thoughts can provide a useful reference for those claiming or aspiring to realise a socialist agenda in the country.
