What do you think?
Rate this book
India's First Dictatorship: The Emergency, 1975-1977
In June 1975 Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed a state of emergency, resulting in a 21-month suspension of democracy. Jaffrelot and Anil explore this black page in India's history, a constitutional dictatorship of unequal impact, with South India largely spared thanks to the resilience of Indian federalism. India's First Dictatorship focuses on Mrs Gandhi and her son, Sanjay, who was largely responsible for the mass sterilisation programmes and deportation of urban slum-dwellers. However, it equally exposes the facilitation of authoritarian rule by Congressmen, Communists, trade unions, businessmen and the urban middle class, as well as the complacency of the judiciary and media. While opposition leaders eventually closed ranks in jail, many of them-especially in the RSS-tried to collaborate with the new regime. Those who resisted the Emergency, in the media or on the streets, were few in number. This episode was an acid test for India's political culture. While a tiny minority of citizens fought for democracy during the Emergency, in large numbers the people bowed to the strong woman in power, even worshipped her. Equally importantly, Hindu nationalists were endowed with a new legitimacy. Yet, the Emergency was neither a parenthesis, nor so much a turning point but a concentrate of a style of rule that is very much alive today
600 pages, Hardcover
Published October 8, 2020
19 people are currently reading
346 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
March 18, 2021
There are several takeaways from the book. Firstly, that there are big lessons to learn from the Emergency about India as a democracy.
Secondly, when we look at events from afar we tend to be less narrow-minded, as we are now when caught up in the present.
Thirdly, we may argue today in terms of BJP versus Congress and Modi versus Rahul, but politics was not very different then. Indira Gandhi was so powerful a leader that it took the old and the young in her own party, socialists, the right wing and the assorted fringe elements to bring her down. But in less than three years she staged a massive comeback.
While BJP and Modi today are exulting in the slow death of Congress and projecting themselves as the only alternative, the grand old party and Indira were once seen the same way.
Today, many Modi supporters think that he is the best alternative, despite demonetization and below par economic growth, but Indira too was seen as the tallest leader of her time. She was called "the only man in her cabinet!"
The question is are Indians enamoured by authoritarian leaders.
The authors of the book say the use of UAPA to detain so many academics, activists and dissenters today is not very different from the MISA rule of Indira.
Despite the gross excesses Indira Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi committed, neither they nor their acolytes faced punishment. The Janata party government failed to bring them to book.
The book is arguing that the Emergency was not just an aberration, as some apologists like to say. Nor was it particularly a horrendous period, as the BJP and others would like to believe. The illberal aspects of democracy were there then as there are now. The difference is only in degree.
The book points out that most of all those were affected by the Emergency merely tried to escape the conditions than take "the constitutional dictatorship" head-on.
For example, Hindu right leaders like Vajpayee and Deoras wrote to the Prime Minister, agreeing to work with the government than challenge it.
The press, except for Indian Express and Statesman, crawled when asked to bend. The Hindu newspaper's worst record as an independent media was during this period.
Leaders like Charan Singh and Jagjivan Ram were willing to work with Indira to escape jail or for petty benefits.
Though the excesses of the Emergency like the forced sterilization and eviction of the poor and landless from the city affected only some parts of the country, the manner in which the government went about its job showed total disregard for democratic norms. The authors think the response of the opposition and the people, especially in the south, was weak, which raises the question whether democracy is yet to take root in the country's politics even a quarter century after independence.
The larger point of the book is that India as a democracy was fragile and facile then. The values of liberty, equality and fraternity were not internalised by the leaders and the people.
Are we any better today?
Secondly, when we look at events from afar we tend to be less narrow-minded, as we are now when caught up in the present.
Thirdly, we may argue today in terms of BJP versus Congress and Modi versus Rahul, but politics was not very different then. Indira Gandhi was so powerful a leader that it took the old and the young in her own party, socialists, the right wing and the assorted fringe elements to bring her down. But in less than three years she staged a massive comeback.
While BJP and Modi today are exulting in the slow death of Congress and projecting themselves as the only alternative, the grand old party and Indira were once seen the same way.
Today, many Modi supporters think that he is the best alternative, despite demonetization and below par economic growth, but Indira too was seen as the tallest leader of her time. She was called "the only man in her cabinet!"
The question is are Indians enamoured by authoritarian leaders.
The authors of the book say the use of UAPA to detain so many academics, activists and dissenters today is not very different from the MISA rule of Indira.
Despite the gross excesses Indira Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi committed, neither they nor their acolytes faced punishment. The Janata party government failed to bring them to book.
The book is arguing that the Emergency was not just an aberration, as some apologists like to say. Nor was it particularly a horrendous period, as the BJP and others would like to believe. The illberal aspects of democracy were there then as there are now. The difference is only in degree.
The book points out that most of all those were affected by the Emergency merely tried to escape the conditions than take "the constitutional dictatorship" head-on.
For example, Hindu right leaders like Vajpayee and Deoras wrote to the Prime Minister, agreeing to work with the government than challenge it.
The press, except for Indian Express and Statesman, crawled when asked to bend. The Hindu newspaper's worst record as an independent media was during this period.
Leaders like Charan Singh and Jagjivan Ram were willing to work with Indira to escape jail or for petty benefits.
Though the excesses of the Emergency like the forced sterilization and eviction of the poor and landless from the city affected only some parts of the country, the manner in which the government went about its job showed total disregard for democratic norms. The authors think the response of the opposition and the people, especially in the south, was weak, which raises the question whether democracy is yet to take root in the country's politics even a quarter century after independence.
The larger point of the book is that India as a democracy was fragile and facile then. The values of liberty, equality and fraternity were not internalised by the leaders and the people.
Are we any better today?
September 24, 2022
In Mrs Leila Seth writes in her autobiography that her generation of India had just tasted independence from the British a few decades ago and lost it when the emergency was announced. Everyday lives were the same like they were pre Independence. People went about their lives. Back then, it felt like the emergency was the future of the country and it would never change.
Authoritarian leaders have the power to take away our rights in a minute. Knowledge of the Emergency is far more relevant for our times than the struggle for Independence and this book is the only one you'd have to read on the same.
Authoritarian leaders have the power to take away our rights in a minute. Knowledge of the Emergency is far more relevant for our times than the struggle for Independence and this book is the only one you'd have to read on the same.
February 23, 2021
Exceptionally well written. Covering all aspects of Emergency in detail.
June 14, 2022
One of the best Book on Emergency in India. Thoroughly researched book. It is advised to have a basic knowledge about India's history between 1960-1990 for better understaning of the book.
July 1, 2022
One of the most comprehensive books on the emergency.
January 28, 2023
This is encyclopedia on Indian emergency 1975/77. Complete information. Sort of PhD thesis.
July 30, 2021
Its an impressive book that brings together history and political science to unpack a complicated event in Indian political history. Their explanation of the whys and hows and wheres of the emergency is comprehensive and really made me rethink what I had learned in school as well as the assumptions I had about the emergency. My biggest takeaway was that it wasn't a blip in India's quest towards democracy but an intensification of business as usual.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews