reflective of an anti-intellectualism that we have thankfully never had in this country, and which wouldn’t be welcome or useful.

Those banging the drum for Mayawati might pause to consider exactly what price they are willing that our institutions pay in order to create space for an alternative that isn’t really an alternative. And what price their own political presence will pay, too. A.B. Bardhan of the CPI, for example, responsible for first dragging in Mayawati’s name last year as a possible Left-supported PM candidate, needs to stop and think for a moment: has the CPI genuinely learned nothing? They have, after all, supported a magnetic, autocratic, “pro-poor” leader in the ’70s, and it destroyed them as a credible progressive force.

So, then, why this profound unease over criticism? Partly because it’s sometimes difficult to ensure that these claims are not read as re-affirming traditional exclusions. Is it simply that a feverish cult of personality’s always bad — or are you talking about it because of the particular personality that’s the object of the cult? It’s more than possible to both front-and-centre the intellectual part of your movement and reject Brahmin domination, for example — look at the Dravidian parties — but it’s sometimes difficult to attack anti-intellectualism without sounding like that this Dalit woman needs more Brahmin advisors. And, worse, sometimes that may well be precisely what the critic actually means.

So, how to react to paranoia about Mayawati? Don’t join it, for one. And particularly don’t join in the vehemence — nothing rationally justifies that. But don’t think for a single moment that it’s illiberal to worry.

... contd.