Romila Thapar may now be senile but she has always been consistent in her stupidity. She writes in Scroll.in.
The period just after Independence saw the continuation of earlier debates on defining India as a secular, democratic nation with a national identity that included all Indians.
Nonsense! There was massive ethnic cleansing. Muslims and Communists were slaughtered mercilessly if they wagged their tail. Kids may have won prizes for Debating but, if they were smart, they got a Government job or emigrated.
We were no longer colonial subjects but were free citizens, and could claim the rights invested in citizenship and in accordance with our constitution.
Romila's elder brother, Romesh may have believed so. But the Govt. of Madras banned his Leftist magazine 'Crossroads' in 1949. When he got this reversed by the Bench. Nehru & Co promptly brought in the First Amendment. It turned out the citizen had no rights which could not be taken away by some amendment to the Constitution.
Our national identity as Indians, included all who lived in India – irrespective of religion, language, caste or ethnicity –
though wealthy Muslims were harassed by the Custodian of Evacuee (later Enemy) Property. Many- like Rushdhie's dad- took the hint and emigrated. Rushdie's dad was smart enough to first get British citizenship before moving to Pakistan which is why Salman still owns property in India.
and rightfully claimed equal status. Establishing a secular, democratic nation was our aspiration. We faced many problems but we persisted, even though the persistence had glitches.
A democratic nation does not feature political dynasties. Incidentally, Romesh got very cozy with Indira in the early Seventies.
This may in part explain why today, 75 years later, these rights of citizenship and the concept of identity have yet to be established.
Modi & Co have a clear concept of their identity. Modi has asserted his rights as a citizen to become PM even though he is from a modest background.
Some Indians in authority, seem averse to India being a secular democracy.
While others think democracy means that the son of a PM whose Mummy was PM and whose grandad was PM, should be PM.
Therefore, poverty and unemployment prevail,
Thapar thinks that there is no poverty or unemployment in 'secular democracies'. If so, India has never been secular.
nationalism is being replaced by religious majoritarianism,
That happened in 1946. Hindus voted for Congress which Gandhi described, in 1939, as the 'High Caste Hindu' party, while Muslims voted for the League.
freedom of expression is increasingly disallowed,
Romesh wasn't allowed it in 1949 itself! Romila, on the other hand, showed great courage in defying Indira during the Emergency. I'm kidding. Chance would be a fine thing.
the rights of citizenship have faded,
compared to when? The Emergency? Or UPA, during which Hindu Nuns were sent to jail on trumkped up terrorism charges?
and the security implicit in being a citizen is denied. How do we fulfill the aspirations of the national movement for Independence?
Modi is fulfilling the aspirations of the Hindutva fighters for Freedom. But this is only because he is good at governance. That requires team work and unflagging diligence.
That is the question we should be asking.
It is the question for which Modi has given a sensible answer. Thapar & Co. have not. In this screed, Thapar is saying 'if India becomes secular then poverty and unemployment will disappear. Thus if we all convert from our ancestral religion to 'secularism' then everybody will have a nice job and enough money to live comfortably.' This is sheer magical thinking.
No comments:
Post a Comment