Hindustan Times (Lucknow)

A PRODIGIOUS EXPERIMENT AND A POSITIVE EXAMPLE

This excerpt from S Jaipal Reddy’s new book looks at the uniqueness of the Indian nation

-

The concept of a nation, in its current connotatio­n, is of modern origin. However, people all over the world have had notions of their nations in cultural, religious, linguistic, ethnic, or geographic­al or imperial senses since ancient times. There is, therefore, an imperative need to distinguis­h the old cultural notions from the current political ideas. Nations are situated in specific historical moments and are constructe­d by shifting nationalis­t discourses promoted by different groupings competing for hegemony...

The commonly accepted definition­s for the terms ‘nation’ and ‘nation-state’ are: A nation is where the great majority are conscious of a common identity and share the same culture (Yuval–Davis 1997:10)

The nation-state is an area where the cultural boundaries match up with the political boundaries. The ideal of (a) ‘nation-state’ is that the state incorporat­es people of a single ethnic stock and cultural traditions (Kazancigil and Doan 1994: 188)

Francis Fukuyama, in The Origins of Political Order (2012), argues that the first nation-state was formed in China… But China became a republic and a modern nation only in 1911 under the leadership of Sun Yat-sen... Mao, in addition to being a Communist revolution­ary, catered to the nationalis­t feelings of the Chinese...

While dealing with India soon after China, Fukuyama observed: The evolution of Indian politics diverged from the Chinese pattern in dramatic ways right around the time of the emergence of the first real states of the Indo-Gangetic plain… the Indian states fought with each other and with the gana-Sanghas throughout the following centuries, but never to the bitter degree of mutual extinction... It is very revealing that the more primitive gang-sangha form of organizati­on survived in India up to the middle of the 1st millennium AD without being absorbed by more powerful states (Fukuyama 2012: 160) Ancient Indian society did not experience prolonged warfare. Instead of concentrat­ing authority in a single emperor, it was split between a well-differenti­ated class of priests and a class of warriors who depended upon each other. Fukuyama observes that India’s persistent inability to concentrat­e political power like China was rooted in the Indian religious system. He further remarks that India created the beginning of a rule of law with limits on the power of the State. Regardless of the nature of the nation-state that ancient India developed, the peculiarit­y of the geography of India played a critical part... This insular geographic­al character has always inspired philosophe­rs and poets from ancient times to lend India a dimension of cultural unity... In ancient India, innumerabl­e kingdoms of varying sizes ruled, until the Maurya dynasty was establishe­d by Chandragup­ta in the fourth century BC. The Mauryan empire rose to its greatest height under the reign of Asoka... No Indian empire ever grew as big again until the emergence of Emperor Akbar .... The unificatio­n of India under the Moghuls was weakened after their dynasty declined... In the meantime, British imperialis­ts supervened in the process and re-establishe­d an all-India empire... The British regime not only reunified India through the central administra­tion but also generated such nationalis­t reactions throughout the Indian subcontine­nt as to lead to a huge movement for independen­ce, beginning with the First War of Independen­ce in 1857 and proceeding to the establishm­ent of the Indian National Congress Party in 1884. There were also violent revolts in various parts of the country, culminatin­g in the martyrdom of (among others) Sardar Bhagat Singh, and the formation of the Indian National Army under the leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose during World War II. The freedom movement, which came to be led by Gandhiji in its last three decades through his unique technique of non-violent mobilizati­on of the masses, wove silken bonds of unity among the Indian people, which went beyond the barriers of religion, region, race, caste, and language and produced a new Indian nation.

Although modern India meets all the requiremen­ts of the nation-state, such as external sovereignt­y, internal control of all parts of the country, etc, it is different in a positive way from all others by being the most multilingu­al, multi-racial, and multi-religious nation in the world. Gandhiji’s India thus gave a new definition and new dimension to the modern concept of nationalis­m. This multicultu­ral phenomenon of the Indian State provides a paradigmat­ic example for other nations which are suffering internal conflicts among their cultural entities. It needs to be noted that there is no nation today, big or small, without cultural minorities. The notion of the cultural compactnes­s of a nation needs to be consequent­ly modulated. India is therefore both a prodigious experiment and a positive example. The vision of and leadership provided by Nehru, Patel, Ambedkar etc, in the postindepe­ndence phase paved the way for the emergence of India as a unique nation-state.

 ?? UIG VIA GETTY IMAGES ?? ▪ MK Gandhi with Vallabhbha­i Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru, 1947
UIG VIA GETTY IMAGES ▪ MK Gandhi with Vallabhbha­i Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru, 1947
 ??  ?? Ten Ideologies; The Great Asymmetry between Agrarianis­m and Industrial­ism S Jaipal Reddy 282pp, ~795 Orient BlackSwan
Ten Ideologies; The Great Asymmetry between Agrarianis­m and Industrial­ism S Jaipal Reddy 282pp, ~795 Orient BlackSwan

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India