The Makers of a New India
In one of the engaging books Makers
of Modern India by the illustrious historian Ramachandra Guha, he selects
nineteen individuals who made India’s history and who wrote most authoritatively
about it. Explaining his rationale for his selection of the makers of modern
India, Guha writes that they were not only the most influential political
thinkers of their time, but they were also the most influential political
actors. Making a distinction between ‘thinking politician’ and ‘thinker
politician’, he says that the former contributed to original thoughts and ideas
and acted on their own ideas and reflections while the latter acted on the
ideas of professional ideologues or intellectuals. “Long before India was
conceived of as a nation, in the extended run-up to Indian independence, and in
the first few decades of freedom, the most interesting reflections on society
and politics were offered by men ( and women) who were in the thick of
political action.”
The Freedom Movement has been
rightfully hailed as a movement to free India from the British rule, but more
significantly it was a movement that united the people of this country into one
nation. James Joyce in his Ulysses says:
“A nation is the same people living in the same place.” It brought
people from North, South, East and West of India together to fight as one
homogenous nation transcending the shadow lines of religion, caste, class and
gender. One may agree or disagree with Guha’s selection but there is no denying
the fact that all the nineteen makers of modern India were thinking politicians
known for their original thinking and for actions based on their reflections.
All of them wrote fluently- some in English, others in their regional languages
– and even when they differed in their ideas and beliefs, there was remarkable
civility among them in their writings and speech. They were motivated by a common
selfless desire to free the country from the British rule and establish the
rule of democracy. The love of one’s country and the willingness to sacrifice
personal interests for it guided their thoughts and actions and in turn,inspired
millions of their countrymen to join the Freedom movement in a spirit of
sacrifice. Nation first, the rest later was the guiding principle of the
Freedom Movement.
That is now history. Many of our contemporary politicians belong to the
post-independence generation. India will be celebrating her 68th
year of independence shortly and the oldest minister in Modi’s cabinet( Madam Najma
Heptullah) must have been a seven year old girl when Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru hoisted the Indian National flag and gave his
inspiring speech about India’s tryst with destiny. It is therefore natural that
the Freedom movement is to the current post-independence generation purely of
academic interest sans its inspiring ideals. The ideal of Nation first is for
many of them a romantic (and therefore an abstract and unattainable) ideal, as
they are hooked on to individualism with its belief in the primary importance
of the individual and in the virtues of self-reliance and personal
independence. The modern generation is truly aspirational, guided by the
doctrine that the interests of the individual should take precedence over the
interests of the state or social group. Self-centredness and personal ambition have
taken the place of sacrifice and national loyalty that were germane to the
freedom movement. The gradual unfolding of a saga of corruption, ineptitude,
inefficiency and incompetence after the euphoria of independence had ebbed away
has set the stage for a second freedom movement – freedom from corruption. Anna
Hazare’ movement followed by Arvind Kejriwall’s short-lived foray into
governance has not yielded the desired result. On the contrary, the recent
elections showed that corruption is no longer an issue with the voters. In fact
the much hyped second freedom movement has taken a bizarre turn during the
recently concluded elections to define itself as ‘Congress mukht ’ and ‘ma-beta mukht’ movement. (freedom from
Congress and freedom from mother-son duo)
What went missing in the
second freedom movement that it failed
to inspire the Indian voters- especially the middle class and the youth? There
was nothing fake about India against corruption fervor that seized the common
man a couple of years back, and despite
the huge surge of goodwill towards Anna Hazare and Kejriwall, the movement went
bust. The simple answer is none of the leaders of this movement and none of our
present set of politicians is a thinking politician. Some of them may be
thinker politicians, acting on borrowed and partly understood ideologies of the
past, but there is no one amongst the present crop whose thinking and action
are in sync with a new ideology to subscribe to the nation’s aspirations. The oratory
of most leaders- ghost written or spontaneous-
have nothing new to offer except a repetition of clichéd phrases from quotable
quotes. With the thumping majority the new Government has received today, there
is a real danger to democracy. The main opposition party has been reduced to
such a pass that it cannot even stake its claim to the post of the Leader of
opposition. All other parties are basically regional parties and they are being
wooed with concessions to support the ruling party. If there is no opposition,
it signals the end of democracy. But that is the verdict of the recent election and that has to be respected
even if it leads to one party rule that defies rule of democracy.
India desperately needs thinkers to lift the nation out of the morass
into which it has fallen. We need educated men and women to inspire people to
come together to free the nation from its current intellectual and spiritual atrophy.
We need inspired writers to bring an intellectual and moral revolution very
similar to the inspiration given by Rammohan Roy, Gokhale, Golwalker, Gandhi,
Nehru, Tagore, Ambedkar, Rajaji and others during the Freedom movement. In the
20th century Europe witnessed the Velvet Revolution in
Czechoslovakia inspired by intellectuals like Vaclav Havel. The term Velvet
Revolution is associated with Czechoslovakia's democratic revolution because it
was a peaceful movement ending in compromise, not violence. Havel and his
activist movement had a strategic preference for nonviolent action that captured
the public's confidence and imagination. Havel wrote "I really do inhabit
a system in which words are capable of shaking the entire structure of
government, where words can prove mightier than ten military divisions." Velvet
revolution in the Czech Republic showed that any movement for a clean, honest,
progressive nation can last only if it is founded on a moral and intellectual
base.
The raging debate today about whether one is
to be learned or educated to be a leader is puerile and lacks a proper understanding
of the role of a leader. What was remarkable about the Freedom Movement was it
was pioneered by highly educated people who despite (and also because of )
their mental elitism, connected with the common people and educated them on
principles of Swarjya or self rule, on
the importance of satyagraha or non violence, on the virtue of sacrifice and
above all on the need to speak, act and fight for a cause without enmity or
bitterness against the alien rulers. There was no attempt to ridicule the British
rulers, to mock at them and to generate hatred and anger against them. They won
the freedom for the country with no malice or rancor towards the British and
after the British left our shores, there was no attempt to humiliate them. On the contrary soon after the Independence,
the government of the day requested the British Government to set up the British
Council in India to encourage educational opportunities and cultural relationships
between the two countries. The leaders
were sensitive to the delicate nuances of governance and diplomacy and their
writings and speeches communicated subtle nuances of genteel emotion.
We desperately need such leaders today and it will be foolish and naïve
to think that the educated leaders will prove a failure as they cannot connect
with the masses. In fact our literacy level and awareness level today stand
higher than they were during the pre-independence days. Yet the great leaders in
the past were successful in inspiring the masses. We will remain backward if we
do not educate our people to engage in intellectual debates and make informed
choices at the end. It will be apt to quote Einstein who said that that leaders
should be purposeful persons and not successful persons for a “successful person is one who takes the maximum
from the society and gives the least while a purposeful person is one who gives the maximum and takes the least
from the society.” We need thinkers who can educate our people to differentiate
between these two types of leaders. It is time that our academic intellectuals
move out of their ivory towers and TV
studios where they pontificate on good
governance and leadership and use their knowledge and understanding to educate
and engage people in meaningful discussions and debates. This is the only way
to safeguard our much vaunted democracy where people can argue, debate,
question, analyze and conclude what is best for a sustainable continuation of
democracy.
During 1906-10, Sri Aurobindo wrote a letter on Parliamentary
Democracy.: "Be very careful
to follow my instructions in avoiding the old kind of politics. Spirituality is
India's only politics, the fulfillment of the Sanatana Dharma its only Swaraj…Socialistic democracy is the only true democracy, for without it we
cannot get the equalized and harmonized distribution of functions, each part of
the community existing for the good of all and not struggling for its own
separate interests, which will give humanity as a whole the necessary
conditions in which it can turn its best energies to its higher development. To
realize those conditions is also the aim of Hindu civilization and the original
intention of caste. The fulfillment of Hinduism is the fulfillment of the highest
tendencies of human civilization and it must include in its sweep the most
vital impulses of modern life. It will include democracy and Socialism also,
purifying them, raising them above the excessive stress on the economic
adjustments which are the means, and teaching them to fix their eyes more
constantly and clearly on the moral, intellectual and spiritual perfection of
mankind which is the end".
Democracy does not lie only in
periodical exercise of our franchise, but in our discernment to elect thinking
politicians whose thoughts and actions can inspire the masses. Democracy is not
just subscribing to the elementary principle of governance by those who secure
majority votes, but in keeping a watch on those elected to govern through
constant vigil. We all know the hollow claims of the media that it is the
watchdog of democracy when it has abdicated its neutrality on many occasions and
functioned as a covert paid media. Democracy is simply not governance by, for
and of the people, but by people trained to exercise judgement in their
selection. It is best to remember that a harmonium or a flute cannot by itself
make music, but it is the player who creates the musical notes on the
instruments. We have a paucity of such players and this vacuum can be filled
only if thinkers and intellectuals make people understand the worth and value
of their vote for an intellectual, ethical and moral government. The makers of
a New India will have to come from thinking politicians who will use their
education and knowledge for a revival of a ethical and cerebral nation founded
upon the tradition of selflessness, sacrifice and patriotism(bereft of
jingoism) that was in evidence in the Freedom Movement.
No comments:
Post a Comment