Bodhi Ramteke and Sagar Kamble
The controversial Electoral Bonds and Gupt Daan: Another step towards Brahmanical supremacy
In the heart of India, where the roots of all modern achievements are traced back to the stories of mythologies and ancient times, there is a new political reality about power, secrecy, and the dark dance of gifts waiting to find its roots in the glorious past. It is the controversial electoral bonds that have stirred the Indian democratic discourse. But is this really a new phenomenon? No! India’s modern-day electoral bond counterpart resonates with the age-old tradition known as Gupt Daan, or anonymous donation. The old tradition of anonymous donation gave rise to new forms in political-private sector relationships, and the right-wing discourse has yet to embrace it as a sacred concept rooted in its glorious past.
Launched with supposedly noble intentions, these bonds promised a way for individuals and corporations to support their chosen political parties secretively, deceiving the eyes of the public. Although the Supreme Court recently came up with the landmark decision to ban these bonds as a threat to the very foundation of democracy, there is another historical phenomenon that is not discussed. Although wrapped in modern-day corporate lobbyists’ glomerating covers, these bonds reinforce a hierarchy where the wealthy and powerful dictate political discourse. Interestingly, the whole electoral bond funda resembles the concept of Gupt Daan (anonymous donations), which has been nurtured by the Brahminical norms of the priestly class. The same class of people controls the religious-based systems and designs the dynamic of the Raj Dharma of politics. This Dharm Satta and Raj Satta amalgamation revolves around a particular group that stays decriminalised yet gains benefits, as secretively as the Gupt Daan.
The tale of the electoral bonds and Gupt Daan stands not just as a critique of practice but as a mirror to society. It reflects the enduring influence of Brahmanical norms on India’s political sphere, where the religious and the political are inextricably linked and controlled by the same social group. The flow of money, like the flow of sacred offerings, shapes the contours of power and governance, with history replicating itself. These bonds have been instrumental in empowering the upper-caste ruling class in India, regardless of their political affiliations. The introduction of the anonymous donation system through electoral bonds in 2017-2018 was purportedly intended to align with the traditional concept of Anamik daan or Gupt daan, where priests, i.e., Brahmins, historically benefited. However, this system of electoral bonds has further strengthened the ruling class in the social hierarchy by providing them with a mechanism for anonymous donations, thereby perpetuating and reinforcing their caste supremacy.
Electoral Bonds Resemble Anamik Daan or Gupt Daan
If the religious donation is intended to be anonymous and without any benefit to the donor, then there are no tax advantages associated with such contributions, and no record of the donation is kept. Consequently, the entire economy surrounding the Daan operates beyond government oversight or documentation. The funds collected by temples represent a significant unrecorded economy of charitable giving, where donations are neither documented nor attributed to specific donors.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, in the book Revolution and Counter-Revolution, explained how there are rules in the Manu Smriti that are aimed at benefiting Brahmins financially. One such provision is Dakshina, which is the fee a Brahmin charges for performing religious ceremonies. Since Brahmanism involves many rituals, this becomes a significant source of income for Brahmins. The religious significance attached to Dakshina ensures regular payment. But Manu wanted to give the Brahmins the right to recover fees. Manu also discouraged offering sacrifices with inadequate fees, warning of negative consequences like the loss of senses, honour, and other blessings. Moreover, Manu excused Brahmins who took action to recover their fees, even if it involved killing. Another provision, Daan, involves the king giving gifts to Brahmins, ensuring a steady income for them.
Nobody can perform religious rites except a Brahmin, and the performance of religious rites requires the payment of fees; the Brahmin alone can be the beneficiary of the Daan system, which assigns an obvious monopolistic power under the guise of religious-based systems. Anamik Daan, or Gupt Daan, refers to the practice of making anonymous donations to temples or religious institutions, often associated with virtue and social prestige. Similarly, electoral bonds allow individuals and corporations to donate to political parties anonymously, shielding their identities from public scrutiny. Just as the donor’s identity in Anamik Daan or Gupt Daan remains undisclosed, electoral bonds obscure the source of political funding, perpetuating opacity and secrecy in the political sphere. This anonymity raises concerns about accountability and transparency, as it enables vested interests to influence political decisions without public oversight.
Both electoral bonds and anonymous temple donations can be viewed as corrupt methods of influencing decision-making processes. In the case of Anamik Daan or Gupt Daan, the anonymity of the donor allows for the potential misuse of funds and manipulation of religious institutions. Similarly, electoral bonds provide corporations and wealthy individuals with a means to exert influence over political parties and policies, often prioritising their own interests over those of the general public. This corruption undermines the integrity of both the political and religious systems, eroding public trust and exacerbating inequalities.
When funds are sucked up through formally enforced ritual fees, the priestly class looks to tap the untapped wealth. Also, a direct acceptance of the unethically accumulated wealth of private actors could affect the piety and moral affliction of the priestly class. The anonymous donation provided a safe channel to transform another untapped philanthropic drive among humans and instituted it as Gupt Daan within the priest-controlled temple economy. As such, this opened up a room for accepting funds from people who had accumulated wealth in unethical or morally unacceptable ways. Such sustainable philanthropic instruments worked well with the temple economy due to the religious-based advantage and immunity self-assigned by the priestly classes. However, the modern form of electoral bonds had to undergo the scrutiny of the constitution’s democratic lens. Interestingly, it failed to adhere to the people’s constitution. The most interesting part of the story is that the same social group is still holding the normative powers, and their mediocrity is weakening the Indian democracy through right-wing endorsements.
This whole conundrum has shaped the characteristics of political theology in India. How do religious beliefs and customs influence practices in politics, and what moral guidance does culture provide in politics? The influence of Brahmanical religious-based norms extends beyond the mere act of making anonymous donations to temples; it permeates the very fabric of society and shapes the way power and influence are wielded in both religious and political contexts. In traditional Indian society, Brahmins held a powerful position as custodians of religious knowledge and religious authority. Their role was not only religious but also social and political, as they often served as advisors to kings and rulers, wielding considerable influence over governance and decision-making.
Influence of Brahminical Religious-based Normativity
This hierarchical structure, rooted in Brahmanical norms, established a system where those in positions of religious authority held significant sway over societal norms and values. Similarly, electoral bonds reflect a societal norm where political power and influence are concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy individuals and corporations, mirroring the hierarchical structure prevalent in traditional Brahmanical society.
The influence of Brahmanical religious-based norms can be seen in the reverence accorded to political leaders and parties, akin to the veneration of gods and goddesses in Hindu mythology. Just as temples serve as centres of worship and pilgrimage, political parties become the focal point of allegiance and devotion for their followers. This cult-like devotion to political leaders and parties perpetuates a culture of unquestioning loyalty and obedience, reminiscent of the unquestioning reverence afforded to religious authorities in traditional Brahmanical society. In his final address to the Constituent Assembly of India, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar conveyed that in politics, the practice of bhakti, or hero worship, leads inevitably to degradation and, ultimately, to dictatorship.
The influence of Brahmanical religious-based norms permeates both electoral bonds and traditional practices of anonymous donations to temples, shaping the way power and influence are wielded in society. It is an example of the interconnectedness of religious (priestly) normative power with the economic and political spheres. It is a specific phenomenon in the context of India, where religion intersects with economic activities and, thus, political power.
Harmful to constitutional Democracy in terms of power nexus and dislocated legitimacy
Electoral bonds threaten constitutional democracy, undermining its fundamental principles and eroding public trust in the democratic process. One of the most significant concerns is the creation of a power nexus between corporations and policymakers, wherein wealthy donors wield disproportionate influence over political decisions. By allowing corporations to funnel undisclosed funds to political parties through electoral bonds, the democratic process becomes susceptible to being captured by special interests, effectively sidelining the interests of ordinary citizens. This anonymity breeds grounds for a disproportionate sway held by wealthy donors, essentially distorting the democratic dialogue and marginalising the voice of the average citizen.
In juxtaposition, a look across the G7 nations unveils a mosaic of political funding practices, each attempting to strike a precarious balance between public good and private interests. For instance, the United States’ political funding model, with its Super Political Action Committees, exemplifies the extensive reliance on private donations, highlighting the immense influence of corporate and interest group spending. Conversely, countries like Canada, with its stringent caps on individual contributions and a prohibition on corporate donations, strive for a system where political influence is not merely a commodity for sale. Similarly, despite their leaning towards private donations, Germany and the UK maintain certain safeguards through transparency requirements, aiming to preserve the integrity of their democratic processes. The comparison with G7 countries underscores a critical narrative: the struggle for a democratic equilibrium where political funding mechanisms do not undermine but rather reinforce the principles of transparency, accountability, and equal representation. The scenario painted by electoral bonds, with their veil of secrecy, emerges as an aberration in this quest, fostering a power nexus that distorts the democratic ethos by privileging undisclosed corporate influence over the public interest.
The challenge, therefore, is to realign the political funding mechanisms, akin to some of our G7 counterparts, to ensure that the democratic dialogue remains inclusive, transparent, and, above all, accountable. Addressing the critique of electoral bonds involves not just regulatory reforms but a reimagining of political financing that champions the principles of democracy. It is about restoring faith in the political process, where the electorate feels genuinely represented, and where the integrity of democratic institutions is not just a norm but a practice. By fostering an environment of transparency and accountability, we safeguard the core of constitutional democracy, ensuring that it remains by the people, for the people, and, most importantly, transparent to the people.
~~~
Bodhi Ramteke is a lawyer and an Erasmus Mundus Human Rights Scholar, University of Deusto, Spain. His email ID is bodhi.ramteke@opendeusto.es and his handle on X is @bodhi_ramteke). Sagar Kamble is a research scholar in political theory. His email ID is sagarkamble.mumbaiuni@gmail.com
Artwork by Kuffir.
