TO BE HAPPY WE HAVE TO FIRST ACCEPT THAT EACH ONE OF US IS DIFFERENT.
In a national context, this becomes even more important.
Pierre Trudeau, who many consider a Visionary including myself, had said this amazingly frank statement about his Canadian citizens,
“There is no such thing as a model or ideal Canadian. What could be more absurd than the concept of an "all Canadian" boy or girl? A society which emphasizes uniformity is one which creates intolerance and hate.”
Now compare this to the writings of MS Gowalkar whose ideas are being made popular in India every passing day.
He wrote that India’s independence in 1947 didn’t constitute real freedom because the founders accepted ‘the perverted concept of territorial nationalism’, which considers all who lives on India’s territory as equal constituents of the nation. He wrote that territorial nationalism is unnatural, unscientific and lifeless hybrid, as compared to the nationalism that is derived from the national culture - ancient and sublime Hinduism.
The suggestion that only a Hindu can be an authentic Indian is an attack to the very ethos of humanity that lives in India. It ends the possibility of a JUST society as majoritarian emotions will marginalise the minority rights.
To this context, Mr Trudeau says,
“The JUST Society will be the one in which the rights of minorities will be safe from the whims of intolerant majorities”.
On a question from a high school student about what happened to his promises of a "Just Society”, he jokingly said, “The next time you see Jesus Christ, ask Him what happened to the just society He promised 2,000 years ago”.
Mr Trudeau firmly believed that “The attainment of a just society is the cherished hope of civilized men. While perhaps more difficult to formulate for groups than for individuals, even the members of majorities — political, religious, linguistic or economic — must know what it is to suffer injustice. My Government is deeply concerned to provide and to ensure increased justice, dignity and recognition to the individual, particularly in an age which is characterized by large governments, industrial automation, social regimentation and old-fashioned laws”.
Mr Trudeau is a nationalist and his love for Canada is well known. But it is based on equality and justice. He brought parliamentary sovereignty to Canada out of UK in 1982. He kept Canada together with his inclusive plural policies when separatism was at its peak.
Even when he had to implement bilingualism (English & French) in Canada he had clarified that
“Bilingualism is NOT an imposition on the citizens. The citizens can go on speaking one language or six languages, or no languages if they so choose. Bilingualism is an imposition on the state and not the citizens.”
He once famously said, “There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation”.
The reason why I thought of Trudeau today is my increasing doubt that India is moving towards majoritarianism, which Trudeau fought till the end, where Muslims and other minorities are not respected. Constant hate has been fed to the innocent minds, even in the times of a world pandemic; and in the absence of a global perspective, sadly, this hatred seems logical and a birth right of the majority.
The ideas of Gowalkar are stemming root like never before. All the three heads of the the country - The PM, the President and the Vice President have learnt their nationalism from the teachings of Gowalkar and RSS. And Gowalkar believed that democracy is a western concept, alien to Hindu culture.
One learned friend tells me recently that constitution was written by humans only. It can be changed and a Hindu Rashtra can be declared just like a secular state was declared in 1950. This surprised me immensely because India was never so frank and open about wanting to be a Hindu Rashtra.
I agree when Gowalkar says ‘territorial nationalism’ is unnatural. Majoritarianism is indeed instinctive and natural in all animal species. That is the reason we needed a constitution to bring in equality, justice and secularism.
Our founding fathers knew that majoritarianism is a recipe for disaster.
Every small region has a majority of some kind. In Assam, Assamese is a majority. Within Assam, in Silchar, Bengali is a majority. India is a Hindu majority but Kashmir is a Muslim majority. Certain constituencies are Muslim majority. Then there are caste majority regions. Who can stop the fire when the animal instinct becomes an acceptable norm? Fanning majoritarianism is simply calling for anarchy, riots and disintegration of united India.
As Mr Shashi Tharoor puts it, “An India that denies itself to some of us could end up being denied to all of us”.
Trudeau had said, “I believe a constitution can permit the co-existence of several cultures and ethnic groups with a single state”.
Like in a marriage to be happy, we say that we have to accept that each one of us is different; we have to say the same for a country to be happy.
Just like territorial nationalism, marriage is also argued by some as ‘unnatural’. But can we even think of killing the institution of marriage? Marriage was the first institution required when humans settled down and stopped being nomads.
TO BE HAPPY WE HAVE TO FIRST ACCEPT THAT EACH ONE OF US IS DIFFERENT.
In a national context, this becomes even more important.
Pierre Trudeau, who many consider a Visionary including myself, had said this amazingly frank statement about his Canadian citizens,
“There is no such thing as a model or ideal Canadian. What could be more absurd than the concept of an "all Canadian" boy or girl? A society which emphasizes uniformity is one which creates intolerance and hate.”
Now compare this to the writings of MS Gowalkar whose ideas are being made popular in India every passing day.
He wrote that India’s independence in 1947 didn’t constitute real freedom because the founders accepted ‘the perverted concept of territorial nationalism’, which considers all who lives on India’s territory as equal constituents of the nation. He wrote that territorial nationalism is unnatural, unscientific and lifeless hybrid, as compared to the nationalism that is derived from the national culture - ancient and sublime Hinduism.
The suggestion that only a Hindu can be an authentic Indian is an attack to the very ethos of humanity that lives in India. It ends the possibility of a JUST society as majoritarian emotions will marginalise the minority rights.
To this context, Mr Trudeau says,
“The JUST Society will be the one in which the rights of minorities will be safe from the whims of intolerant majorities”.
On a question from a high school student about what happened to his promises of a "Just Society”, he jokingly said, “The next time you see Jesus Christ, ask Him what happened to the just society He promised 2,000 years ago”.
Mr Trudeau firmly believed that “The attainment of a just society is the cherished hope of civilized men. While perhaps more difficult to formulate for groups than for individuals, even the members of majorities — political, religious, linguistic or economic — must know what it is to suffer injustice. My Government is deeply concerned to provide and to ensure increased justice, dignity and recognition to the individual, particularly in an age which is characterized by large governments, industrial automation, social regimentation and old-fashioned laws”.
Mr Trudeau is a nationalist and his love for Canada is well known. But it is based on equality and justice. He brought parliamentary sovereignty to Canada out of UK in 1982. He kept Canada together with his inclusive plural policies when separatism was at its peak.
Even when he had to implement bilingualism (English & French) in Canada he had clarified that
“Bilingualism is NOT an imposition on the citizens. The citizens can go on speaking one language or six languages, or no languages if they so choose. Bilingualism is an imposition on the state and not the citizens.”
He once famously said, “There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation”.
The reason why I thought of Trudeau today is my increasing doubt that India is moving towards majoritarianism, which Trudeau fought till the end, where Muslims and other minorities are not respected. Constant hate has been fed to the innocent minds, even in the times of a world pandemic; and in the absence of a global perspective, sadly, this hatred seems logical and a birth right of the majority.
The ideas of Gowalkar are stemming root like never before. All the three heads of the the country - The PM, the President and the Vice President have learnt their nationalism from the teachings of Gowalkar and RSS. And Gowalkar believed that democracy is a western concept, alien to Hindu culture.
One learned friend tells me recently that constitution was written by humans only. It can be changed and a Hindu Rashtra can be declared just like a secular state was declared in 1950. This surprised me immensely because India was never so frank and open about wanting to be a Hindu Rashtra.
I agree when Gowalkar says ‘territorial nationalism’ is unnatural. Majoritarianism is indeed instinctive and natural in all animal species. That is the reason we needed a constitution to bring in equality, justice and secularism.
Our founding fathers knew that majoritarianism is a recipe for disaster.
Every small region has a majority of some kind. In Assam, Assamese is a majority. Within Assam, in Silchar, Bengali is a majority. India is a Hindu majority but Kashmir is a Muslim majority. Certain constituencies are Muslim majority. Then there are caste majority regions. Who can stop the fire when the animal instinct becomes an acceptable norm? Fanning majoritarianism is simply calling for anarchy, riots and disintegration of united India.
As Mr Shashi Tharoor puts it, “An India that denies itself to some of us could end up being denied to all of us”.
Trudeau had said, “I believe a constitution can permit the co-existence of several cultures and ethnic groups with a single state”.
Like in a marriage to be happy, we say that we have to accept that each one of us is different; we have to say the same for a country to be happy.
Just like territorial nationalism, marriage is also argued by some as ‘unnatural’. But can we even think of killing the institution of marriage? Marriage was the first institution required when humans settled down and stopped being nomads.
TO BE HAPPY WE HAVE TO FIRST ACCEPT THAT EACH ONE OF US IS DIFFERENT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
The fun is in knowing how nasty, boring or great fun, it was for you, reading my blog post... Just write in, criticize, praise, add to my thoughts or whatever you feel... it will only add to my perspective.
Thank you for your time. Cheers.