Dr. Shashi Tharoor in his latest book "The Battle Of Belonging" makes a case for both Patriotism & Nationalism and who should it belong to.
Patriotism, he says is less thought out & more out of sheer - as say, a child would naturally love the mother, notwithstanding her flaws or faults. The mother belongs to the child & vice versa.
One would then, similarly love the country for what it is - naturally, without qualifications but with integrity intact, notwithstanding the defects & differences that may exist within. To him, this is what Patriotism is all about.
Nationalism on the other hand, is the respect for things like country's constitution & all that flows from it – the national flag, democracy, social justice, secularism, etc & the many institutions. That too can belong to the individual.
So far so good & one cannot but appreciate what Dr. Tharoor has offered.
However, he then puts on his political cap.
In his inimitably eloquent manner, he further dissects Nationalism into two types, to perhaps justify the dwindling returns of his party’s long investments in the Indian politics and yet the diminishing prospects.
He labels the above type as “Civic Nationalism” which he very much endorses.
But calls out the supposed rise of a different 2nd kind of “Majoritarian Nationalism", which he laments, as being exclusivist, one that is anchored in ethno-religio-linguistic identity of the state.
According to him, this other type of Majoritarian Nationalism has given rise to a peculiar narrative, where an overwhelmingly large sections of the citizenry have begun to subscribe to an idea, where - the PM linearly equates to the ruling party, the ruling party to the government & the government further to the state itself. So, to disagree with any of the above entities in the chain, means to be opposed to the Indian state itself.
He alleges that the same has been skillfully crafted by the BJP led dispensation at the center, giving rise to a sort of zero-sum game, the binary being - either one sacrifices individuality to fit into the said Majoritarian Nationalist paradigm or else automatically be deemed as an anti-national. He reminisces the days when conventional wisdom meant - that one must always love their country but love their government only when it deserves. He bemoans that the distinction between the country & the government has dissolved.
His longing is for the good old Civic Nationalism, one which supposedly existed in the mindset of the people when his party was in power.
One can understand on why Dr. Tharoor is very popular with the young. It is easy to fall for Dr. Tharoor, if the person is ignorant of his party’s long & chequered background.
Any person not politically astute or seasoned enough to always search for the true intent behind the eloquent words, will begin to subscribe the beautifully narrated idealistic images, that people like him tend to project.
The youngsters haven’t yet discovered a fact - that in theory, there's not much difference between theory & practice. But in practice, there is.
It is rather smug of Dr. Tharoor to portray, that when his party the Indian National Congress was in power, such a Civic Nationalism existed.
For starts. the supposed Majoritarian Nationalism enveloped in what he calls the ethno-religio-linguistic ideology, was not some surreptitious agenda to be triggered later once the BJP wins the election. Rather, it was an open clarion call during the hotly contested election in 2014. The idea of a future ‘New India’ was spelled out with specifics at election rallies. The exact intent was also printed in BJP's manifesto for all to see.
Led by none other than by Narendra Modi himself, the BJP ran a brilliant campaign, on every platform, allowing the people to choose. BJP eventually beat the Congress led opposition and how !
It is a worthy to ponder as to why it was possible, as Modi led BJP once again won a 2ns term in 2019 with the margin of victory being even higher, unprecedented in India !
It means that the people did whole hardheartedly subscribe to the BJP's vision of India at one end & BJP too did deliver on the promises and so was truly appreciated by the people.
In the final reckoning, the realpolitik comes to the fore at the ballet box. And the PM Modi's “India First” type of Nationalism, indeed did capture the imagination of the Indian masses, which Dr. Tharoor contemptuously dismisses as some Majoritarian Nationalistic machination.
At the very core, Dr. Tharoor continues to remain a bad loser.
Dr. Tharoor’s assessment of the prevalent zeitgeist is at best a satire without humour and at worst a bad understanding of the changed winds that the multi-polar world order has thrown up, including that of the Indian imperative.
So let us understand why Dr. Tharoor is so inappropriate in his criticism of what the Modi Sarkar has dismantled and replaced with :
1) Dr. Tharoor did imply that today’s BJP version of Nationalism taking the shape of say a “freedom movement” among the people, may be justified under certain circumstances, like say, when the people are unjustly ruled by an imperialistic power, as indeed was during the British Raj, but now has no role in a free independent India.
For starts, we can wonder if Dr. Tharoor has ever pondered on how history would have unfolded, if today’s version of nationalism existed then - on the day the very first boat from East India Company docked on the Indian shore?
Had that been the case, the British (or for that matter any of the colonial powers like the Danes, Portuguese, or French) would not have been able to rule over even an inch of ground here.
Let us be clear, the East India company didn’t come here with guns & cannons and an army to conquer. They came in for the supposed commercial reasons but eventually creeped in with their evil intentions. They took the unsuspecting people by surprise and later most of the Indian sub-continent got swallowed by the British empire. And that lasted for approximately 200 years, in which, what started as small pilferage, eventually became so blatant & obvious, that the word ‘loot’ got unabashedly added to the Oxford dictionary. The British Raj epoch reduced the people here from one of the most prosperous in the world to one of the poorest.
Thus, to trigger the today-type Nationalism, only once you are conquered, is for people who are not visionaries and bad students of history’s lessons. The current Nationalism is not an aggression against any entity nor an expression of revenge. However, it is a strong defensive moat & an experientially evolved mindset that protects & preserves India’s people, her vast land mass, her resources, her ancient civilizational values & thoughts from direct adversaries and indirect parasites.
Today’s East India company have taken many avatars, like - one sided free trade agreements, tax dogging transnational companies, mega corporate houses & sovereign wealth funds acting as fronts for others, opinion altering media houses, unfair trade practicing e-commerce platforms, hawala transacting entities, foreign NGOs bringing in funds for anti-India activities, predatory foreign loans for projects of national importance, donations used for religious conversions through inducements or arranging project stalling protests through body shopping, organizations protecting terrorists in the name of human rights, spyware embedded cell phone apps, etc - all who are attempting to influence or capture India’s tangible or intangible assets.
The current version of Alerted Nationalism is not soaked in some naive & good-natured morality. It is one of complete awareness, one which welcomes all the above in the form of trade of goods, exchange of services & barter of ideas for mutual benefit but at the same time, ensuring that it is not one-sided or the outside-in type of unilateralism.
Today’s nationalism is a longing for authentic independence !
2) The British throughout their long rule, tirelessly & cunningly worked to erase the good & exploit the bad in our history & cultural heritage, to keep the people ignorant & divided respectively. On one hand they skillfully dismantled the glory & virtues of the ancient India’s grand achievements & culture respectively and on the other, they manipulated the various castes & communities to achieve, what became well known as 'divide & rule' policy of sorts. As a result, people’s cognition of their own past remained stunted rendering them as unconfident in the present & doubtful of their future. They also remained embroiled in fighting each other rather than demand a welfare state from their new British ‘masters’.
Dr. Tharoor needs to acknowledge that the same oppressor’s legacy was shamelessly continued by the ‘Indian National’ Congress.
The Nehru’s recited “Tryst with destiny” remained a speech writer’s speech.
The vision-less policies, instead of dismantling the caste system driven offerings & denials, were on the contrary cemented further in all the government owned institutions. By not making a uniform civil code for the nation, the earliest government ensured scant respect for meritocracy in jobs or education and paved way for perpetual appeasement for religion-centric Muslim community.
The earliest government of India while not neutralizing that evil in their present, also sadly stunted the future development of it's masses through a warped educational syllabus. It is overwhelmingly evident, that they did not wish to resurrect the indigenous school of thought nor language and thus pride in one's very being. Besides some tinkering to appease the Muslim pride & sentiment, where they expanded the scope of study of the Mughal rule in history textbooks through a Saudi born education minister, for most part, they continued with the British legacy of the infamous Macaulay education system. It was a system where one was made to feel that English-ness was the only ticket for escaping poverty, no matter how alien it all was to the Indian way of life & so not mindful of the employ-ability for the over 99% of the population that were rural or vernacular, including the major city proletariat.
Ironically, in words of none other than Mr. Rahul Gandhi – escape from poverty in India became more difficult than ‘the escape velocity of Jupiter’ !
The full-time lip service & little action for six long decades, kept India behind on most parameters and global indices, making it a poster child for poverty. So while many nations moved on to progress, it was proving beyond a doubt that it all was a charade – we got not independence but a neat transfer of power from the imperialistic British to the self-serving multi-generational dynasts. In fact, it was in such a system, where the narrative first-family-equates-the-state became entrenched.
The current version of Inclusive Nationalism is about having a ‘Congress mukt Bharat’, which is not a mere slogan nor a call for alienation of any group, but a metaphor against sham democracy, created by self-serving private limited enterprises.
Today’s nationalism is a longing for true independence !
3) Dr.Tharoor while saying that Patriotism is natural, Civic Nationalism, even if not, can be adopted, like when an immigrant would in a different country, if the host country’s culture is accommodating. He gives credit to the West & cites example of Europe & America from where he draws inspiration.
Sure, the larger group or the majority must make the first move of showing that it is accommodative enough to accept the new or the different but does that alone ever complete the cycle, without reciprocation by an equal measure by the other side? Shouldn’t the other smaller group also not bear the same responsibility, as much in conscience, speech & action? Should the minor not overtly spell out with a sense of gratitude by offering itself as a volunteer in the society, not as an exception but as a rule? Or to avoid a future conflict due to lack of a natural compatibility, should not the leaders of the minority group make a visibly demonstrative & a vociferously loud proclamation - one that guides their youth to assimilate with the mainstream in due course? Or also swear in respect of the institutions, values, emblems & symbols that are representative of the mainstream host’s pride? Or own the nation’s core value system as much, such that there’s no question ever raised from any side, on what takes precedence in case the minor’s personal wants or society’s common needs are found to be at odds? And finally, be the first to scold, correct, counsel or disown as the case maybe, if any member from the minor’s community is found to be in deviance with the above?
Dr. Tharoor must answer the above questions by citing specific overwhelming examples.
If he can’t, he must seriously take into cognizance on what is currently unfolding in the same Western world which he cites as representative of his idea of Civic Nationalism with much alacrity. There, the immigration experiment coming from some universal goody good-ism is failing, naturally if I may.
The Brexit happening out of fear of undesired & incompatible immigrant inflow, France banning the burqa veiled face coverings, America passing laws to extra scrutinize or prevent certain type of immigrants from very selective Muslim countries, the rethink of the immigrant friendly policy in EU, the rise of right wing parties in several European nations, Switzerland capping the height of minarets, Poland openly denying entry of Muslim migrants, etc are also worthy examples on why one-size-fits-all type of universality was wrong to begin with. For the record, India has not done anything even remotely similar, but does get a lot of bad press.
Learned through experience, the so-called champions of free world, are themselves having a rethought & felt the need for stopping or slowing down at least those non-indigenous elements (read ideology or persons) that at best were only wedded to the fruits & not the roots of the host’s offerings and at worst perceived as detrimental to the very being of the host in the long-term.
With the above context, let’s come to the issue of the Muslim Rohingyas who are fleeing from Myanmar & want to take a refuge in India but with BJP not willing to oblige. And let us contrast them with those with those who could qualify under the BJP’s proposed – The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. Both these issue are flagged as Majoritarianism at work.
One must also consider, that unlike the wealthy West, we have since inception, not only have we been financially stressed but as a society, somewhat remained burdened with Hindu-Muslim religious fault lines due to the reasons already enumerated above & perpetuated in the 60 years of misrule by the myopic family dynasts.
With that background & context, we must asses & measure, whom we let in without aggravating the existing problems further. Like every nation in the world, it would only be fair & reasonable that we too accept within our borders, only those communities that are also having a higher cultural affinity, like those mentioned in under the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 & passed by the Parliament of India, so that they turn into contributing assets at the earliest. This is distinctly different from those who are simply running away from some other country, like the Muslim Rohingyas are, with no cultural connect with India.
Unfortunately, those locked in some monk-like morality perhaps working within the confines of some monastery or in the habit to view everything from a political angle, fail to understand the real world’s workable solutions and so are putting both issues on the same platter.
At best, we can offer the Rohingyas a temporary refuge & then put pressure on Myanmar their home country to take them back or ask one of the over 50 plus Islamic republics to adopt them.
The current version of Defensive Nationalism is not just unique to India but is seen across the world, based on actual experiences. In particular, the current version of Nationalism in India, is arising from pragmatic considerations, one which keeps spirit of altruism alive for the displaced while simultaneously serving the Indian state first. It is not what the Congress imagines, a demography altering mechanism for short-term political gains. Evaluated selection is very different from blatant discrimination. The clarion call by the then candidate for PM Modi was “Peace to all & appeasement to none”. People had subscribed to it & overwhelmingly endorsed it & finally we are seeing some meaning in the words printed in the pre-election party manifesto, as they turn into tangible action on ground & in national policies.
Today’s nationalism is a longing for honest independence !
4) Dr. Tharoor’s has been very critical of the now ethno-religio-linguistic majority, which he claims to not give adequate space to the minorities of India. He then talks of some incidents of how cow vigilantism & lynching, etc. by some citizen belonging to the supposed majoritarian group, which has sent a message of fear among the minority. It is time that without sacrificing his admirable capacity to be a wordsmith, he engages in an honest dialogue, away from exceptions & euphemisms. It would serve him better to be more direct.
Dr. Tharoor should also stop quoting the far, few & exceptions by some fringe elements and assigning those attributes to the whole Hindu community by clubing them as a "Majoritarian" group. For the record, PM Modi has himself spoken out against such miscreants. Dr. Tharoor should also address about those whom he speaks for, for what they are : Muslims - a 200 million plus group who happens to be the largest among all minorities but somehow perpetually posturing victim-hood of sort.
Let us asses what the Hindustani-Hindu-Hindi core ideology is & benchmark that with the core ideology of the Muslims.
For starts, the ancient Indic philosophy that later got named as Hinduism, is innate to India & in existence since a few thousand years i.e. even before the Indian state was born. And so obviously, it is not because of the Constitution or the modern law but through civilizational values coming down the generations, that the Indic practices have been seen as far more open to other ideas, than any other known ideologies. The Western world’s modern discovery of Pluralism as a virtue to be imbibed, has been existing here as an innate core value since centuries and so we have no examples of either crusades or a conflict between the state & the place of worship or mass conversion movements originating from here.
Thus, the narrow singular steadfast concepts of the West, such as - The God, The Holy Place, The Holy Book, The Holy Day, etc do not exist among the Hindus. There are no religious authorities or claimants among the Hindus, each is a seeker - based on one’s understanding. So much so, that there was no label given by the people here on what to call themselves. It is the Arabs who recognized the believers of such an open philosophy & gave the land where such people live, a name - “Hindustan” – the Hindustanis, Hindus & Hindi are derivatives from it.
Obviously then, the concepts such as blasphemy, heresy, apostasy & punishment thereof are alien only to India. It would mean that those following any, including the Abrahamic religions are not the "separate" & they too would be acceptable. One can be a Muslim & a Hindustani simultaneously.
It is this Indic philosophy which gives rise to a "Cultural Secularism", one which allowed for the Hindus to accept the Jews, fleeing from religious persecution & to provide them shelter; it allowed for making of one of the earliest mosque in the world i.e. Cheraman Masjid by a Hindu king for the convenience of his Muslim visitors; it allowed for the Ezharappallikal Churches in the first century within the Brahmin community at Malabar Coast, it allowed for a Hindu king to resettle the Parsis who were displaced from Persia including building a fire temple for them & one in which the builder king himself or his subjects agreed to not enter as requested by the Parsi immigrants.
And post partition, as a response to the breakaway Islamic Republic of Pakistan, it was obviously not considered worthy by the same majority-controlled constituent assembly to make India into a Hindu state nor Hindi it’s national language. That is because the core indigenous Indic value system itself was culturally secular - all & any belief or practice, including none at all, is accepted here i.e. if one is seeking peace or redemption or salvation.
By contrast, most countries where Muslims are in majority, there is no Democracy nor Secularism and offering very little space to any minority or even to Muslim women.
And post coming to power, the Modi Sarkar has not passed a single new law that can be considered as one against any minor group or community. If at all, the landmark moves of decriminalization of homosexuality happened during Modi’s era as also the introduction of ten per cent reservation in jobs and higher education for "economically backward" sections in the general category, which was a break from the otherwise caste-based policies of the past.
For the record, the desire for protection of cow as enshrined in our constitution & the beef ban laws were passed by the Congress, BJP merely implemented it by stopping illegal cow slaughter. The ban on triple talaq (long banned in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan) can hardly be called anti-Muslim, when the same is a pro-women measure adding robustness to the Muslim household. The Ram Mandir dispute dates long before the Indian Republic was formed & was settled not though the brute majority in the parliament but by the sound judgement of the honorable Supreme Court of India. All of the above have wrongly been made out to be BJP’s ploys to suppress the Muslim voice.
That should tell Dr. Tharoor enough about the core ideological difference between both & he should routinely expend his energy in educating the virtues of both Democracy & Secularism to the Muslims as they are the only ones that seem to be having as issue with same.
But he won’t, because his conscience is not free of guilt.
It was his party that came out with a biased version of Secularism, one that came at the expense of the Hindu majority, including somewhat cannibalizing their very being. And as if appeasement of Muslims while writing the student history books wasn’t enough, the Congress, continued the British legacy that kept all mosques (& churches too) free of government control, including allowing them to be influenced by ideologies emanating from Mecca (& Vatican), but shockingly the Congress perpetuated a partial government control over thousands of temples of India. Therefore, most of the major Hindu places of worship began to get dilapidated, idols of some got stolen and their compounds or vast surrounding premises turned into land banks for encroachers. That program kept on expanding over the years.
At one end they unfairly took away from the Hindus, on the other end they shamelessly introduced a Haj subsidy for pilgrims traveling for religious reasons to Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Jordan by road, sea or air. For the purpose, many state resources were used up including diverting & allocating special flights by the state-owned Air India, inconveniencing, or depriving the other travelers.
On losing the election, his party declared a national emergency in the mid-70s, shut down the press, attempted forced sterilization to control population, imprisoned political opponents & then replaced the under practice cultural secularism with a constitutional one, when technically the constitution itself was abrogated & democracy suspended. That was done under the aegis of Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed as the president of India, thus ushering in an even more overt state sponsored Muslim appeasement ideology.
It is with this, that the Congress inculcated a feeling of entitlement among the Muslim religious leaders & used them as their campaigning mouthpiece to create vote banks from within the community. Consequently, the stature of the Muslim orthodox clergymen kept on rising, while in parallel the larger Muslim population’s dignity & confidence kept on diminishing.
The most glaring example was overturning the honorable Supreme Court’s judgement in favor of Shah Bano, thus depriving the hapless lady & all future Muslim divorced women of alimony or even basic maintenance cost.
In their last term, sadly a seven-member high level Sachar Committee was established to study the social, economic and educational condition of just the Muslims & no other minorities – a clear signaling to the over 200 million strong & 2nd largest majority, that without government intervention, they are incapable of standing on their own feet.
Adding insult to injury, Dr. Manmohan Singh in the capacity of the PM & himself from the minority Sikh community, blatantly declared that the first rights on India’s resources was with the minorities & in particular the Muslims. Alas, after the humiliating defeat of the Congress, it took Mr. A K Anthony, a senior Congress member to publicly wonder, if the loss to BJP was because Congress had indeed lost its way & itself turned into a “Muslim-Party” !
Thus, courtesy the Congress, the Muslims notwithstanding that they are the 2nd largest majority in India, have remained backward on most parameters.
The current version of Righteous Nationalism is about freeing the society from the clutch of pseudo-secular & celebrating the renaissance of a more authentic one, which is truly natural & innate to the Vedic universalism.
Today’s nationalism is a longing for true independence !
5) Let us assume that the Congress was indeed subscribing to the pure concept of Dr. Tharoor’s idea of Civic Nationalism and that they were seriously attempting to inculcate the same within the masses. Let us also assume that they were reasonably successful at it.
In the final reckoning then, after ruling for most of the first 60 years, what Dr. Tharoor honestly needs to answer – what was the bottom-line result of it all?
One Dr. Joseph Nye, former Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, observes what makes the soft power or the intangible asset of a nation. It is that power which raises its stature and attracts others towards it naturally.
It happens when :
a) Its dominant culture is aligned to the global majority's trends - democracy, pursuit of open trade, fair judiciary, woman's empowerment, pluralism, etc are examples.
b) Its grand culture is effectively communicated - is not opaque.
c) It shows results - uplifting of its citizens.
There is a lot of parallel in what Dr. Tharoor is saying with regards to Civic Nationalism & what Dr. Nye is, the only difference being, the latter completes the loop i.e. talks of the need for effective communication and demonstrative outcome. He doesn’t stop short at just the first conceptual level.
The crowds are distracted and so he further implies that positive benefits can only be realized if focused work is done such that the beneficiaries get the clear message so they get enrolled along the way, including realize & acknowledge when the fruits of the actions have been accrued to them.
Under Congress rule, India remained somewhat of a soft state & kept losing its soft power. Today, the Indian flag is flying high - speaking metaphorically and realistically. Notwithstanding the global pandemic, from lagging on all counts 7 years ago, within a short time, we’re witnessing a vibrant India, one that is on the move & rising fast.
Our soft power among the outer global community is a manifestation of our newfound internal confidence.
Same can be felt though & the testimony of it all can be seen in but not limited to the fact that – The JAM linked leak proof direct benefit to the poor is becoming a case study for the world to emulate; the endorsement of Yoga by almost all nations in the UN was found to be unprecedented; there is a new connect of the Indian diaspora with the motherland now; Indians can now travel to many more countries without visa requirements: the acceptability of our software & hardware products in the export market is rising ; the new invitation to be part of the meeting at the Organization of Islamic Countries is heartening; the beeline of both business & world leaders visiting here in droves is promising; we being removed from the list of “Fragile Five” nations & being added in the list of most preferred destination for foreign direct investment is reassuring, the swelling of our foreign exchange reserves is promising; the rating agency upgrade & significant improvements in Easy of Doing Business Index is rather complimenting; the launch of so many of start-ups & unicorns is speaking for itself; the lead role that we are taking in the Global Solar Alliance is empowering; the huge contribution we are making in providing vaccines to the world is satisfying; the inclusion of India in the new global order under the umbrella of the Quad is enabling; the exponential rise in winners at both regular & para-Olympics is heartening; the potential speed of implementation of projects through the Gati Shakti is rejuvenating; the highest national awards that India's representative PM Modi has received from around the word is our pride.
The current version of Evolved Nationalism is about recognizing that we are indeed progressing & arrived on the world stage. And we march to the beat of our own band & yet get the world to take steps in tandem with us.
Today’s nationalism is a longing for true independence !
In conclusion, before exhorting the Modi Sarkar on what not to do, what Dr. Tharoor needs to do, is to reconsider his position. Instead of all this appealing through rhetoric on why the Modi initiated Hindustani-Hindu-Hindi movement is bad, he should look himself in the mirror, become more contemplative & guide those from within his own party on how to authentically engage the hearts of all Indians.
