No matter what allegations are levelled against the Bharatiya Janata Party — and there have been several of late — it can rarely, if ever, be accused of possessing a scientific temper. The party and its leaders do not, of course, shy away from claiming an affinity for science and its application — while the former Union minister of human resource development, Murli Manohar Joshi, had pushed for the inclusion of Vedic astrology as a ‘scientific discipline’ in university courses, the prime minister, Narendra Modi, had told doctors in 2014 that the Hindu deity, Ganesh, was proof that cosmetic surgery existed in ancient India — but that does not necessarily mean that such an affinity actually exists. The most recent claims in support of ‘science’ came from the Haryana chief minister, Manohar Lal Khattar, who defended the stand of village kangaroo courts or khap panchayats of not allowing people from the same gotra to marry on the grounds that it genetically ‘weakens’ the generation.
Such a stance ought not to be surprising. Even though the Supreme Court has, on two separate occasions, declared khap panchayats and their attempts to terminate a marriage between two consenting adults illegal, these extra-judicial bodies — which openly encourage the practice of ‘honour killings’, most commonly carried out against couples who marry outside their caste or religion — continue to hold great sway in rural India. This is possible on account of the tacit support of the State; in fact, when the Rajasthan assembly passed a bill against honour killings last year, the BJP-led Opposition objected to it on the basis of tradition and cultural practice, thereby directly upholding the power of khap panchayats to intimidate and threaten citizens’ personal liberty. Can Mr Khattar’s defence of unreason under the guise of ‘science’ — especially when the scientific basis of his assertion is highly doubtful — be considered any different? After all, the systematic demolition of the scientific temper in India ought to qualify as one of the BJP’s unquestionable legacies, with the State’s methodical targeting of inclusive, pluralistic education in academic institutions, the encouragement of irrational statements made by politicians and, more ominously, the silencing of voices leading rationalist movements and upholding critical thought. Civil society must zealously resist the push to use ‘science’ as a front for furthering a regressive and repressive agenda.
