MIGRANT MIGRAINE

Migrants in Mumbai are a cause of migraine for Raj Thackeray and his Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS). Raj Thackeray and company are in like manner giving a severe headache to the rest of the country. His tirade and ensuing violence, against migrants to Mumbai has struck at the root of India’s sense of nationhood. Is there place for such belligerent ethnic chauvinism in a modern society that claims to have become a global village?

No right thinking person would justify violence or a hate pogrom, reminiscent of Hitler’s ethnic cleansing of Semitic Jews from Aryan races. At the same time, it is the duty of conscientious citizens to analyse the root causes of such behaviour, the underlying fears and prejudices, and to seek solutions. To say that Raj Thackeray was seeking cheap popularity to bolster his dwindling political space, would be an over simplification of a complex issue. The fact is that he has gained political mileage and the sympathy of a vast section of people, by playing on their fears – real or imaginary.

Is what is now happening in Maharashtra an isolated aberration in society, or does it find an echo in different parts of the country, and the world? We need to dig deeper to expose the root causes.

In India the most recent cases of ethnic cleansing have been in Assam. The targets of attack are the Hindi speaking Adviasis who work in the tea gardens. They were, together with tea bushes, planted there by the British over 150 years ago. They originally belong to Bihar and Jharkhand. Elsewhere in the North East Marwari and Bengali businessmen are often subjected to extortionist threats by militant tribal groups. Under Article 370 of the Constitution, non-Kashmiris cannot purchase land in Kashmir. A BJP led NDA Government, which was in power at the Centre for 6 years, for all its posturing, could not abrogate this Article.

After Partition, Hindus from Sindh and Sikhs from West Punjab migrated in droves to India. They had no godfathers, and nothing to fall back on. They lived by their wits, and by sheer dint of hard work became a major economic force in North India. Conversely, the Mujahirs who migrated to Karachi from India wrested control of the economy in the land of their migration.

A placid State like Goa was against the establishment of the Konkan Railway, fearing an influx of “outsiders” who would destroy the local culture! Why are migrants perceived as a threat to society and the economy? Is this fear psychosis limited to India?

North America was swamped by white Europeans who drove the native “Red Indians” into reservations. South America was inundated by Hispanics, sending the Incas and Aztecs into the tropical forests. Australia’s Prime Minister has now apologised for the injustice meted out to the aboriginals by the white settlers. The East African economy was controlled by Gujarati businessmen, and the services were filled by Goans. The State of British Columbia in Canada would better be called Punjabi Columbia, with Punjabi being the fourth language there. A good half of the population of Fiji, Trinidad & Tobago, Surinam, etc are People of Indian Origin (PIOs) who were taken there as indentured labour by the British sugar planters. Of late Hindus (Indians) in Malaysia bore the brunt of ethnic chauvinism.

For centuries the Jewish Diaspora were treated as the scum of the earth. Was it just anti-Semitism, or a resentment of their business acumen and economic power? More recently, trade unions in France and England have been distinctly uncomfortable with the likes of Lakshmi Mittal and Ratan Tata acquiring their hallowed institutions. So the fear psychosis is widespread; and Maharashtrian turmoil must also be viewed in the larger picture of the rights of locals vis-à-vis the migrants, and the perennial development vs displacement debate. How do we address these situations?

There is no denying that the migrant always works harder, for lower wages, and yet saves more. This is the psyche of the migrant. UP and Bihar are referred to as the Bimaru (sick) States. Yet the UP Bhaiyas were the hardest workers in the Mumbai cotton mills, and Biharis on the Punjabi tills. The local populace, of whatever hue, always tends to be laid back, and expects more for less. He therefore feels that the migrant is a threat to his economic existence.

Likewise, locals feel that their social milieu will be irreversibly changed by the migrant. Turbans in France, headscarves in Britain, are all perceived as an assault on the local culture. Then there is the political fall out. Leicester and Birmingham in England are mini India’s, with PIOs as the elected leaders. Wouldn’t the local populace resent it? On the other hand Bobby Jindal gets elected as Governor of white dominated/ conservative leaning Louisiana because he is perceived as one of them. He had converted to Christianity and espoused right wing causes. So he was not a threat. He had assimilated himself into the local populace.

This is not true of most NRIs. They tend to become more conscious of their religious identity when outside the country. I recall Jairam Ramesh once saying, that as a columnist, he received the maximum hate mail from NRIs.

Most migrants have forgotten the old adage, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do”. If a migrant asserts his own culture in the land of his adoption, then he is inviting a backlash from the local populace. This is on the level of social relationships. There is also the economic front. Demanding jobs for locals is perfectly legitimate. But it must be understood that a preferential right, also carries an inherent duty to perform. Governments must ensure that the fruits of development first got to the displaced persons. Oil refineries should be close to the oilfields, and thermal power plants near the coal fields. In this way the locals will see the fruits of development, rather than feel the pain of displacement. Medha Patkar was not against the Narmada Dam. Rather, she was concerned for the plight of the displaced tribals. Why should an already prosperous Gujarat gain at the cost of the impoverished tribals?

Finally there is the political angle; that of exploiting vote banks. For years the Congress in Assam used the votes of illegal migrants and Chakma refugees from Bangladesh to capture power. Such short term gains have long term repercussions.

Cutting across social, cultural and ethnic barriers is the human heart. There are an ever increasing number of inter-caste, inter-religious and inter-racial marriages. It is nature’s way of cocking a snook at all forms of ethnic chauvinism. Suddenly everybody is celebrating New Years Day or Valentines Day in India. Diwali is being celebrated in New York. Chowmein has become regular fare at North Indian marriages. Masala dosa is no longer considered south Indian.

Indeed, with the march of time we are truly becoming a global village, in which there will not be much place for the likes of Raj Thackeray. Migrants will no longer be the cause of migraine. May that day come soon.

* The writer is the former National President of the All India Catholic Union, and a Gandhian social activist.