The country lost its maternal immunity late in the sixties with the waning of the founding generation. The losing immunity came of age in the nineties, perhaps its most difficult time lie ahead.
ALEX TUSCANO
The character of a nation is defined by the character of its citizens. The nation today is in search of people who will put nation before themselves, who believe that their destiny is intrinsically linked up with the destiny of the nation; the people who do not want to use the nation to build their destiny but build their des- tiny by first building the destiny of the nation. “Citizenship is an attitude, a state of mind, an emotional conviction that the whole is greater than the part. And that the part should be humbly proud to sacrifice itself that the whole may live”, says Robert A. Heinlein.
“The idea of India” is hotly debated during these days when alternative “idea of India” is being put forward by the contending section of the Indians. They argue that those who are speaking of ‘idea of India’ think India came into existence only after independence. They argue that India existed since thousands of years. But there is
a big fallacy in their argument. This fallacy is because they confuse India as a geographical territory and India as a political entity.
The geographical land called India existed from, not only thousands of years but also from millions of years. The fact is, what existed thou- sands of years ago in the geographical land, now called India, is not the same as what this land has come to be. It is the history that will tell us how this land has evolved from primitive reality to the modern 21st century India.
Before the British arrived in India there were many warlords, kings, and emperors who ruled on difference parts of this land. There was the Maghada empire, the Marathas ruled over huge territory of India. In the south there was a Chola dynasty, Pallavans, Maharaja of Mysore, Haidar Ali, Tippu Sultan. From the coming of the Muslim sultans, Babar, Akbar ruled a huge territory of India. The British arrived in India and they went in war with many of these rulers and defeated them. They made a treaty with some which allowed them to keep their territory under their control but would owe allegiance to the British rules. When the British rulers consolidated their hold on the entire territory of India
it was in their interest to unite the territory of India. Such united territory did not exist before the British rule.
Emergence of Nationalism
During the freedom struggle and with the influence of western education the sentiments of nationalism took roots in India. The leaders of the freedom struggle were looking for an identity of Nation State as the British was a nation state and empire. The idea of Nationalism strengthened the freedom struggle. Under the leadership of Gandhi all people of different origin, cultures, religions and economic classed got united to fight for independence from the British rule.
Hence the idea of India, as we have today, existed from thousands of years is a fallacy. It is only through the rise of nationalism and finally achieving independence from the British rule that India as a Nation state came into being.
The leaders of the freedom struggle searched for the idea of India. The founding fathers of our nation inspire and instill in us the idea of India. There was near unanimity among them about how our nation should be moulded. During the freedom struggle the people of India with every shade of ideology had identified themselves with the Indian National Congress. The manner in which this movement functioned during the struggle for independence indicated what idea they had for the nation that they had laboured to bring forth.
We are a nation that is blessed with many great people who have fought for great values and dedicated themselves to build the nation along these values. We should salute these leaders, Mahatma Gandhi, Babasaheb Ambedkar, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel, Maulana Azad, Jyotiba Phule, etc.
“Men and women in every age and society want to make their own history, but they do not make it in an historical vacuum. Their effort, however innovative, in finding solution to their problems in the present and charting out their future, are guided and circumscribed, moulded and conditioned, by their respective histories, their inherited economic, political and ideological structure. Our past, present and future is inextricably linked to it.
By the very definition of making history is
in the context of our past and our vision for the future. India set on its path, on its own as it were, after independence, i. e., from 1947. But this path has deep roots in the struggle of the people for independence. The political and ideological features, which have had a decisive impact on the post-independence development, are largely a legacy of the freedom struggle.
It is a legacy that belongs to all the Indian people, regardless of which party or group they belong to now; for the force which led this struggle from 1885 to 1947 was not a party but a movement. All political trends from the Right to the Left were incorporated in this movement.” (Bhipin Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee, Aditya Mukherjee, K.N. Panikkar and Sucheta Mahajan, etc.)
The vision for the future of Indian was set
by the Constituent Assembly which with long strenuous deliberation drafted a Constitution for India. At the heart of the constitutional document was the indelible faith in Indian Nationalism. The visionary founders espoused to deliver the promise of freedom to the masses. The primary aim of the constituent assembly was fostering the goal of social revolution and this was matched only by an interest in securing ‘national unity and stability’. The engine of this social revolution emerged from both the press- ing needs of the newly independent country and the Indian National Congress’ long experience of anti-colonial nationalism. The leaders of the Congress successfully transplanted the goals of freedom struggle as constitutional maxims. According to Nehru, ‘Indians did not default their tryst with destiny’. The fundamental rights and the directive principles are the ‘conscience’ of India.
Along the history, in the context of emergency of 1975, and in 1992 the demolition of Babri Masjid, there was increased demand for further democratization and empowerment among the economically and socially deprived.
The founders’ vision of social revolution, national unity, and stability through democracy that formed the ‘seamless web’ continued to both influence and pose problems for their successors. The country lost its maternal immunity late in the sixties with the waning of the founding generation. The losing immunity came of age in the nineties; perhaps its most difficult time lie ahead.
Can India be a great democracy, strong in itself and, in the eyes of the world, when so many of its people are denied the promise of the Preamble? If the constitution of India was the finest expression of Indian nationalism, why did it not enchant two of the most significant communities of India, the Muslims and the Dalits? The Indian nationalists were at the heart of the founding document, the constitution. Such nationalists believed in democratizing power, in accommodating differences and in integrated pluralism and, above all sought to uplift the down trodden through a social revolution.
What are the outstanding features of the freedom struggle? A major aspect is the values and modern ideals on which the movement itself was based and the broad socio economic and political vision of its leadership (this vision was that of a democratic, civil libertarian and secular India, based on self-reliant, egalitarian social order and an independent stand as against the rest of the world.
Democratic ideas and institutions in India: The Indian National Congress was fully committed to and organized on a democratic basis and in the form of a parliament. Having experienced the British authoritarian and despotic rule which did not give any space for freedom of speech and press, the national leaders were whole heartedly committed to drive out not only the British rulers out of the country but also their despotic rule and replace it with democracy, freedom of speech and freedom of press. The national movement did not see the democratic values to be practiced only after independence, but these values were built in the functioning of the movement itself. There were no decisions taken in the congress without thorough discussion and through consensus. Every resolution was put to vote. People were free to disagree and dissent. Mahatma Gandhi even congratulated those who had the courage of conviction to vote against a resolution.
From the beginning the nationalists fought against the attacks by the state on the freedom of the press, of expression and of association. They made the struggle for these freedoms an integral part of the national movement. The defense of civil liberties was not conceived narrowly, in terms of one political group, but was extended to include the defense of other groups whose views were politically and ideologically different. Gandhiji thus writes on the total civil liberty, “Liberty of speech means that it is un-as- sailed even when the speech hurts; liberty of
the Press can be said to be truly respected; only the Press can comment in the severest terms upon and even misrepresent matters. Similarly, freedom of association is truly respected when the assemblies of people can discuss even revolutionary projects.” “Civil liberty consistent with observance of non-violence is the first step towards SWARAJ. It is the breath of political and social life. It is the foundation of freedom. There is no room there for dilution or compromise. It is water of life.” (B. R. Nanda, Mahatma Gandhi - a Biography.)
Nehru was known for his deep commitment to civil liberty. He kept the civil liberty at par with economic equality and socialism. He wrote, “If civil liberties are suppressed, a nation loses all vitality and becomes impotent for anything substantial.” (S. Gopal, Jawaharlal Nehru – a biography vol 1.)
∎
