 |
| A group of Mizos performs a traditional dance. A file picture |
Recently, the Church in Mizoram discussed what it considers the ill effects of population control on the Mizos. This microscopic minority, with a population of roughly nine lakh, feels that the family planning programme propagated by the government is not in consonance with the teachings of the Bible.
Church elders aver that Mizos need to increase their population lest they disappear from the face of the earth. But this thinking is not peculiar to the Mizos.
Most of the tribes of the Northeast feel that they need to have bigger numbers to stave off influx from the plains. They feel they need the numbers to keep interlopers at bay.
However, what has triggered the population debate is a growing realisation that numbers are an important leverage in a democracy.
Indeed, India’s democracy is all about numbers. Constituencies are created on the basis of population. Naturally, a smaller population means lesser representation in Parliament.
Mizoram, for instance, has only one MP. The Northeast has a total of just 14 MPs.
This number is not big enough to influence government formation at the Centre. Besides, the 14 MPs are further fragmented by party politics. In Parliament, they do not vote en bloc precisely because they have their respective party whips to adhere to. States like Uttar Pradesh have more MPs than the entire Northeast put together.
What heightens the population dilemma in the Northeast is the propensity of every ethnic group to feel they are unique in terms of their historicity, culture, race, customary practices and so on.
Also, it has been visibly demonstrated that the ethnic group with larger numbers tends to dominate over others with smaller populations. The bigger majority has more MLAs, hence their demands are more readily addressed.
The Hmars, Brus and other minor tribes in Mizoram, for instance, experience a sense of deprivation and feel slighted by the majority Mizos. These are the political underpinnings of every state in the Northeast.
Another factor that lurks in the minds of all ethnic groups is the Tripura syndrome. That the “tribals in Tripura have been reduced to a minority in their own homeland” is an overused slogan. Still, it has caught the popular imagination of every tribe in the Northeast. No one has cared to delve into the historical predicaments that have made Tripura what it is today.
But Tripura has served as a convenient tool for political mobilisation by all tribal leaders who thrive on populist slogans and who do not mind whipping up xenophobia by playing the communal card.
In Meghalaya, the popular slogan of the Khasis reverberates like this — “If we are not careful, we shall be reduced to water carriers and wood cutters serving under somebody”. The adage is an excerpt from a popular Khasi bard,
Soso Tham, whose aim was, perhaps, to exhort his compatriots to diligence while also remaining vigilant against forces that threaten to appropriate the resources of the Khasi people.
Soso Tham’s verses have often been quoted out of context to endorse what is often not the best of Khasi behaviour.
Recently, there was a very curious development in Meghalaya. The chief executive member (CEM) of the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, H.S. Shylla, announced a reward for any woman giving birth to more than 16 children.
Naturally, there were a few claimants. Each mother was awarded Rs 16,000, meaning Rs 1,000 per child, as a one-time gift.
The amount was disbursed at a public function. There was not a whimper from the government or from any of the women NGOs. Shylla’s contention was that the Khasis are today less than a million in population.
They needed to increase in numbers to offset the migrant Muslim population that is growing by leaps and bounds (no statistics cited, no empirical data given).
Population growth is a direct assault on women’s reproductive rights.
In an enlightened age, where discussions about who actually owns the women’s wombs are taking place across the world, Meghalaya certainly lives in the dark ages. Obviously, the women who have given birth to 16 children or more cannot be said to have any kind of awareness on the health hazards of frequent childbearing. Each time a woman goes into labour, she is putting her life on the line.
A man who sees nothing wrong in allowing his wife to conceive 16 times or more is surely not much different from a beast. Also, how can a normal family living in the backwaters of Meghalaya, where the basic necessities of life are beyond reach, hope to provide for 16 kids?
Giving birth to kids is just one part of the problem. The bigger and more frightening part remains that of nurturing them and providing for their needs. Providing education to 16 children is no laughing matter. Only those who wear the shoe know where it pinches. India’s family planning programme is essentially aimed at providing a quality life to children that are born. Meghalaya’s streets are today littered with kids who sell betel nuts and cigarettes to passersby.
According to Child Line, an NGO dealing with, among others, street children, the number of such kids is increasing and this is a cause for concern. The government has, so far, done nothing to put those children in school. Their parents are too poor to think of their children’s welfare. While not all streetkids will ultimately turn antisocials, some may become so, not because they choose to but because of the predisposing circumstances.
The Church in the Northeast certainly does not accord women the status of a constituency whose voice matters. Church policies are in the main formulated by elderly males who do not think out-of-the-box but merely perpetuate patriarchal values. Mizoram is one state where women’s voices are muted, even in the social and political domain. Actually, the Church is expected to provide leadership in all spheres but it has not.
Even today, the Church is in many ways gender blind. That is why it is easy for church leaders to make pronouncements about the need for a baby boom without taking into consideration the national priority of family planning, in view of dwindling resources. Having a large population may be politically feasible but it does not guarantee quality of life. How does a large population steeped in poverty and ignorance help the cause of nation building? Human resources must be measured by the contribution they are able to make towards the economy and society. Already, in a state like Meghalaya, we are witnessing largescale landlessness among the rural poor.
These are tribals belonging to a society that used to be egalitarian and where community land was accessible to every family for settlement and subsistence agriculture. Today the customary practices that protect families from regressing into poverty are rapidly eroding. Families are no longer safeguarded by clan affiliations or protected by communitarian values.
The market intrusion into the tribal economy and society has ushered in a new milieu. In this new milieu, private accumulation of wealth is considered a virtue while sharing of resources is considered foolhardy. Rapid urbanisation is actually a phenomenon created by the exodus of the landless poor to urban centres. Shillong is a good example.
