Introduction
I think it is not wise for an emperor, or a king, or a president, to come down into the boxing ring, so to speak, and lower the dignity of his office by meddling in the small affairs of private citizens.
-Eruption
My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its officeholders. The country is the real thing, the substantial thing, the eternal thing; it is the thing to watch over, and care for, and be loyal to; institutions are extraneous, they are its mere clothing, and clothing can wear out, become ragged, cease to be comfortable, cease to protect the body from winter, disease, and death.
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
The above quotes of American literary figure Mark Twain holds a renewed significance with regards to the incidents around the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi. Sloganeering of some of the students of JNU along with some outsiders have drawn an unprecedented flak from the state authorities, with Kanhaiya Kumar, general secretary of JNU students’ union being prosecuted with charges of sedition. The state’s reaction has gone against the freedom of expression and speech, right to dissent, has left a nasty imprint on the liberal minds across the world, questioning India’s virtue as a tolerant nation. Custodians of pseudo nationalistic ideas are alarmed about the fact that how citizens living in India could can raise slogans and nurture ideas against India and in favour of further partitions. A large section of the middle class Indians has also been polarized in this debate with the question of tax coming in the fray. This calls for dissection and interrogations of the content of the slogans with reference to the activities of the Indian state.
Questioning ‘India’ – Determining
‘Self Determination’
It is to be noted that the slogans against India, comprises of rants against the Indian state but not against the Indian citizens, flora and fauna. It is within the right of the citizens to question the geopolitics practiced by the Indian state, in a similar way wherein we can question the governance of the state. In this case the right wing cadres are hell bent to keep the geopolitics above critical scrutiny within a mould of jingoism and chauvinism, linking it with the security and sovereignty of India; the paradox lies in the fact that when demands of sovereignty are made and supported for Kashmir, Nagaland or Manipur, it is construed as anti-national despite the popular will the of people in question. Such school of ‘reason bypassing’ thoughts is a continuum of the politics of India’s partition, when excessive geopolitics repeatedly overturned the popular will of people to be stay united, to be independent or to be a part of a certain state. For instance during partition of 1947 when it was decided that territories would be divided on ethno-political lines, Hindu majority district of Khulna and Muslim majority district of Murshidabad fell in Bangladesh and India respectively for the sake of elite considerations. The moot point being that, people are just used as pawn in the game of geopolitics.
The call for Kashmir’s azadi in JNU was followed by Manipur and Nagaland’s azadi in the solidarity march organized by Jadavpur University in Kolkata. We have to realize that as we didn’t want to stay under British colonial rule, the Kashmiris, Nagas and Manipuris may also have an alternate idea of a nation state, independent or maybe as a part of another federal state, it for them to decide, not any outsiders. By upholding the question of self-determination, the slogans of JNU have done a great deal of service by bringing the debate in the forefront. Nationalistic reasonings have led to near closure of partition scholarships, and scholars like Ranabir Samaddar have pointed out the needs to enquire into the contentious national space and specifics of the dialogic situation, as dialogue involves the dual issue of renunciation of force and triumph of reason. The overarching idea of the Indian state receives severe blows in large tracts of northeast frontier, where draconian laws like AFSPA have created a dysfunctional societal regime. As a result any question of reconfiguring territories is met with unkind reactions. A frequent concern among the middle class is the ‘how will the states survive in isolation?’ or ‘wont they be taken over by China?’; well, just like we don’t appreciate any foreign power to comment on our sovereignty or we didn’t appreciate the misplaced British concern the ‘Indians are not fit to govern themselves’, shouldn’t we leave the issues of governance in the hands of the peoples of new sovereignties? If they would like have a future with, lets say China, it’s absolutely their call! One doesn’t needs to bother about the ‘other’ after the ‘breakup’. Partition history has been penned down by several authors, it is also simultaneously necessary to look into how some regions were forcibly inculcated in the Indian union. We must realize that the Hindi-Hindu dominated Indian state’s love for these conflict regions for which it has to spend millions of tax payer’s money is not out of love for the communities living there, but for the natural resources on which they are sitting. In the wake of India’s ‘Look East’ policy, northeast India stares at another round of resource extraction from the region. The benefits are most likely to be reaped by outsiders, with ‘acche din’ and peace bypassing the indigenous communities, which in turn hold the potential for further conflict in the region.
Law, Logics and Subsidy –
Clearing the Troika
For those who are so keen to bring the JNU students to task, like the lawyers in Delhi, for anti India slogans, why don’t they go after people committing anti-Indian sins? Certainly incidents like Dadri, Rohith Vemula, Gujarat pogrom 2002, Kandhamal 2008, Nellie massacre 1983 are the ones which are not only anti-Indians but anti humanitarian as well. The person who orchestrated the Gujarat riots and sat like Nero while Gujarat burned holds the prime minister’s office. As then in 2002, now in 2016 he proves to be an inefficient administrator as Kanhaiya Kumar is heckled under the nose of the Delhi police, a dangerous tendency to bypass the constitution and take law in hand. The attempt of today’s ‘nationalistic’ lobby to create a binary between the JNU students and the Indian army is a pathetic mockery of reason and logic. Bringing in Lance Naik Hanamanthappa Koppad only exposes the futile attempt by a section of the media to deviate the debate of reasons to clamors of nationalism and patriotism. As much sad is the death of the soldiers in Siachen, the role of army behind governance of territories is not beyond question and scrutiny, especially in the conflict zones. Hence equalizing the army with only acts of patriotism doesn’t serve any legitimate purpose with regards to the JNU conundrum. Perhaps the ‘nationalistic’ commentators, who are so bothered about the unity of India may ponder over ways to overturn the communal partition of 1947, so that there is no requirement of manning borders in inhuman conditions like Siachen and jawans like Hanamanthappa Koppad doesn’t succumbs to occupational hazards.
The present central government, which found itself in back foot due to occupy-UGC movements, appointing Gajendra Chauhan as FTII director, Rohit Vemula perhaps had the idea of putting these debates under the carpet through the JNU crackdown. The worldwide condemnation of the government’s action, with personalities like Noam Chomsky, Orphan Pamuk and Marcelo Musto expressing their displeasure, has put the government in the backfoot. However that has not deterred the right wing activists of West Bengal from calling the head of Jadavpur University vice chancellor Suranjan Das, who has refused to call for police in the wake of solidarity march for JNU students, with the same set of slogans raised in the controversial rally of JNU. Propagating the issue of tax behind functioning of JNU is a conscious attempt to evoke the middle class against the ‘anti India’ sentiments; logic being that students enjoying subsidized education should study and not raise voice against motherland. Therein lays the veiled propaganda of feeding the idea of private education, which is already rampant and where degrees are just another costly commodity. Government health facilities are mainly availed by the subaltern class who can’t afford the overpriced private health care. The current regime is hell bent on infiltrating the institutions with right wing ideologues and reconfiguring the role of government investment in favour of private profits. It is surprising that suggestions of noble laureate Amartya Sen is silently ignored both central and state governments, as Sen has repeatedly suggested that nowhere in the world has education and health has prospered in private hands. Those concerned about their tax money invested in JNU, might as well realize that their tax supports the luxury of hordes of politicians, parliament’s canteen, AFSPA in conflict zones as well.
Conclusion
Since the instillation of the present government, the trajectory of incidents has severely questioned the diversity and integrity of the nation. Through events like ‘ghar wapsi’ there is an open and blatant attempt of homogenizing the demography, the tendency being to turn the democracy into majoritarian ethnocracy (dominance of an ethnic community, with attempts to homogenize the ethno-cultural space within a democratic setup). As of now opinions and violence have been carried against the consumption of beef, it might come as no surprise if the next targets are Bengali’s fish or Naga’s pork. Ethno nationalist policy makers arrogate exclusiveness of representing nationhood where not only minorities are victimized, but also free thinkers and member from mixed community who doesn’t fall under the specified ‘nationalistic’ parameters. It is with great apprehension that the free minds of India stare at the remaining days of the present regime. A mature state should rather allow the debate and contestation over the ideas of nation and citizenship instead of suppressing the voice of dissents. The unwillingness to engage in dialogue results in violence and coercion, as faced by the frontiers of northeast India and Kashmir.It is of paramount importance to refer to opinions of nationalism held by Rabindranath Tagore, who penned down our national anthem as well. I share a quote from Tagore’s work ‘Nationalism’ in the concluding notes, which I hope would provoke the readers to further enquire onto the concept of nationalism:
"India has never had a real sense of nationalism. Even though from childhood I had been taught that the idolatry of Nation is almost better than reverence for God and humanity, I believe I have outgrown that teaching, and it is my conviction that my countrymen will gain truly their India by fighting against that education which teaches them that a country is greater than the ideals of humanity."
Snehashish Mitra (Biltu)
Research and Programme Asssistant,
Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group.
Kolkata
