Rakesh Batabyal. Communalism in Bengal: From Famine to Noakhali, 1943-1947. London: Thousand Oaks, 2005. 428 pp. $97.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-7619-3335-9. Reviewed by Anirudh Deshpande Published on H-Asia (July, 2007) For readers unfamiliar with the terms in such as the one witnessed in Gujarat in 2002, are which modern Indian history is usually written, integral to communalism in India. Readers who communalism should be described before the re‐ have not read much of Indian history but are well view of the book is presented. The word commu‐ versed in European and American history can nalism obviously comes from community and easily understand "Indian communalism" with communal which may mean entirely different reference to similar developments in the context things to people in the West. The closest parallels of many European and American countries. Al‐ of communalism in India are racism and anti- though there is another form in which communal‐ Semitism, etc. in the West; while in India commu‐ ism manifests itself in India, called "casteism," nalism makes a person prefer a certain communal communalism in general refers to religious com‐ identity over other secular identities. In many munalism. India, like most other countries, has a parts of the West a position of racial superiority is history of religious conflict going back to the an‐ assumed by many individuals and social groups cient period, but communalism refers to a mod‐ over people of non-European extraction. In both ern consolidation of religious groups and identi‐ instances religious or race identities are internal‐ ties and the politicization of religious organiza‐ ized and displayed by individuals who believe in tion and conflict which began during the colonial myths, which constitute an ideology. The modern period, especially in the nineteenth century. systematic articulation of such myths is called While Indians contend with communalism in communal ideology in the Indian sub-continent. their everyday lives, it must be remembered that Selective history, carefully constructed memories the development of the "two nation theory" lead‐ of injustices, a variety of myths, the role of the ing to the creation of Pakistan on the basis of a state, and violence in multiple forms are the foun‐ mythical and monolithic Muslim nation in 1947 dations of communalism. Social exclusion and and the growth of Hindutva in the 1980s and communal violence ranging from carefully orga‐ 1990s were the most important achievements of nized riots by political formations to pogroms, communalism in twentieth-century India. The H-Net Reviews book under review should be read in this context Noakhali riots, the author deflects the reader's at‐ of communalism in modern and contemporay In‐ tention to Gandhi's highly personalized and great‐ dia. ly publicized struggle against communal violence. This book narrates the rise of communalism Towards the end of the volume, in chapter 8, in Bengal in the short term and tries to define Gandhi's only too well-known sojourn in Noakhali communalism as an ideology. Throughout the vol‐ is highlighted in an attempt to capture the Mahat‐ ume both Muslim and Hindu communalism is the‐ ma's rather touching fnest hour. This is done to orized in opposition to a secular Indian national‐ offer an alternative to the communalization of ism of which the Indian National Congress (in popular psyche in India. However, as the facts Rakesh Batabyal's view) appears as the greatest marshaled by Batabyal inadvertently tell us, by exponent. Politics in Bengal during the 1940s 1946 Gandhi was a spent force in Indian politics. came to be influenced by the Muslim League, Hin‐ Although his moral message would live on in a du Mahasabha, and the Communists at the ex‐ tiny section of inspired Indians, the somewhat pense of an ineffective Congress which, mainly baffling and ill-conceived Quit India movement of due to the rise of Subhas Bose, had split into the 1942 and his recognition of Jinnah as the most im‐ pro- and anti-Bose factions. While communalism portant representative of Indian Muslims in 1944 is defined as an ideology, nationalism in the colo‐ most certainly helped the rise of communalism in nial period cannot be defined easily as its oppo‐ India in the 1940s. These are the important facts site. The author has conceived the entire project informing the rise of Jinnah and the demand for on the basis of drawing a neat line of demarcation Pakistan which readers can easily glean from between communalism and nationalism. The Batabyal's meticulous research. But the problem book gives us a good idea of what communalism of dealing with Gandhi's approach to the commu‐ meant in Bengal during the 1940s, which was nal question remains unaddressed. According to dominated by the Great Famine of 1943 and con‐ this reviewer the distinction between Gandhi as a ditions arising from the Second World War. But it person and Gandhi as the unquestioned moral does not say much about nationalism as an ideol‐ leader of the Congress is more important to the ogy. Since the volume eschews a long-term per‐ historian. It is nobody's argument that Gandhi did spective on nationalism and its complex relation‐ not oppose communalism as best as he could ship with communalism, it fails to answer some within the limits of his world view. Unfortunately important questions. For instance, was Indian na‐ for the people of Bengal and many other parts of tionalism something much more than a striving India, which suffered the consequences of parti‐ for national unity against imperialism? What tion this kind of moral opposition, in the absence were its long-term weaknesses which created the of an organized cadre based fght against commu‐ space for the growth of communal ideologies and nalism, simply was not enough to save them from the two nation theory in India? Why did commu‐ the horrors of communal hatred and violence. Af‐ nalism replace nationalism as the stronger force ter the die was cast and partition became a of the two in people's lives during the 1940s? This ground reality, Gandhi emerged as a symbol of volume is not designed to answer these questions, peace. His removal of himself from the ideological important as they are in the context of rising com‐ site of partition could do little to address the caus‐ munalism in India during the last quarter of the es of communalism in India. Indeed his moral nineteenth and frst half of the twentieth cen‐ leadership of the Congress nationalist movement turies. Instead, after repeatedly underlining Con‐ had also undoubtedly contributed to it. Ultimately gress's helplessness in the face of growing com‐ he could neither arrest the decline of secular na‐ munal frenzy in Bengal in a chapter on the 2 H-Net Reviews tionalism nor take the majority of the Congress not tell us why the Congress was not a force to with him. reckon with among the masses of Bengal in the Ironically, in his fnest hour Gandhi had al‐ 1940s. Why was the peasantry of Bengal alienated ready become irrelevant to the vast majority of from the Congress that had organized mass anti- Indians (and Pakistanis, it may always be added imperialist movements across the country in as an afterthought) in 1946-47. Quit India in 1942 1905, 1921-22 and 1930-32? Unless the story of this and the sterile belated talks with Jinnah in 1944 mass alienation from the Congress in Bengal is re‐ were Gandhi's individual decisions. Was there any counted, it is impossible to fully comprehend how point in virtually conceding Pakistan and denying the Muslim League emerged as the most impor‐ the two nation theory at the same time? The Quit tant party of the Bengali Muslims in the space of a India resolution, it is well known, did not have the few years. If peasant unrest was ultimately articu‐ support of all Congressmen and ended up remov‐ lated in communal ideology, as the author con‐ ing the Congress from the center stage of Indian cedes in a short conclusion (p. 383), why did the politics during the war, while the talks with the Congress fail to address and utilize this unrest in "sole spokesman" ended up enhancing Jinnah's the 1930s and 1940s ? The election results of 1946 stature and legitimizing his communal claims in Bengal (p.218) only expressed the communal even amongst several Muslims who could still be polarization of the Bengalis which took place dur‐ called Congress supporters in 1944. Both instances ing the Second World War--the Congress polled demonstrated serious faws in a movement over only 0.5 percent of Muslim votes in comparison which a single and often momentarily ill-in‐ with the League which got 89.6 percent of Muslim formed patriarch had so much influence. In the votes. Pakistan had been created. Obviously, given ultimate analysis Gandhi's moral authority could the developments during the war years, by 1946 neither substitute nor overcome the collective all "memories of class and communal solidarity failure of the Congress leadership in dealing with against the colonial power were forgotten" in Ben‐ the communal question. gal (p. 383). The fact that communalism grew and secular nationalism declined in Indian politics in‐ Coming to Bengal it is not difficult to observe creasingly since the 1920s is not given due impor‐ that Gandhi was instrumental in getting Bose tance in this volume because of the author's Left- ousted from the Congress and thereby mortally Nationalist paradigm. wounding it. A Congress in disarray, or whatever remained of it after the important leaders had The book comprises nine chapters including been jailed in 1942, was hardly in a position to the short conclusion.