Questioning The Concept Of ‘Nationalism’
By Arnab Roy Chowdhury21 November, 2006
Countercurrents.org
The sudden upsurge of the flurry debate on our national song “Vande Mataram” has brought into the limelight two very different questions, both are uneasy and debatable. They are as following- 1) Is religion greater than a country or a nation? And 2) Is ‘Nationalism’ a matter of personal choice? While I am not inclined to comment on the first, if we focus on the second, then presenting the writer’s view my answer will be ‘yes’, practicing ‘Nationalism’ is a matter of personal choice. Well, the question itself is a clever booby trap; the answer has to be a thought-provoking diffusion.
If we refer the oxford dictionary, the meaning of the word “‘Nationalism’” is-
Nationalism {speaker} noun [U]
1 the desire by a group of people who share the same race, culture, language, etc. to form an independent country:
Scottish Nationalism2 (sometimes disapproving) a feeling of love for and pride in your country; a feeling that your country is better than any other
Here both the meaning is problematic, considering the first, because it inherently means ----‘Nationalism’ can’t be neutral; it has to be homogenous, creating a one-dimensional ‘melting-pot’ identity. The second meaning of course creates a chasm between ‘we’ and ‘they’ and creates ‘know-it-all’ chauvinistic patriarchs.All forms of ‘Nationalism’ implicitly or explicitly depend upon the solidarity of a majority and exclusion of a minority. It works along with some form of terrorism, generally funded through state apparatus such as police, military or party funded through cadres. It socio-culturally pervades through polymorphous hegemonic forms such as culture, language, ideology and of course religion, which are used to justify violence. It borders upon chauvinistic principles; be it the case of Italian Fascist ‘Nationalism’, racist ‘Nationalism’ such as Nazism, Muslim religious ‘Nationalism’ of the Middle East, the ethnic ‘Nationalism’ of Turks and Balkans or the more sophisticated British and American ‘War-Nationalism’, they are all the same in their bloody past.
It is in particular weak historical moments, which contextually gives rise to these forms, like the defeat and humiliation of Germany in the First World War gave rise to the monster called Adolf Hitler. That is why nationalist politics plays on the feelings of resentment and revenge, it nurtures deep old wounds in the collective memory of the society, it never let the people forget its anguishes, by repeating those viciously. It freezes historical misgivings in timeframe, and then refers to those as benchmarks, as if history has never existed before or ceased to after that particular incident. It stunts the mental development and hampers maturity, and to fool an immature mind, is then an easy job. It is very problematic indeed for the growth and development of humanitarian concerns in a free world.
In case of India, the problem is not with Indian ‘Nationalism’ or Pan-Indian Identity as such (as long as it maintains a Multicultural front), but with the variety of identity politics that is being played generally by the ‘saffron-brigade’ and particularly by the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) in this case. Their brand of ‘Nationalism’, about which they are shouting from the seventh heaven, is essentially ‘Hindu Nationalism’. Which is in fact communalism garbed in a new rhetoric .It rests upon the pillars of intolerance, hate politics, fundamentalism, parochialism and have all the aforementioned characteristics of ‘Nationalism’. That is to say, while loving ones country and Patriotism is not a choice, ‘Nationalism’ is a matter of personal choice, in the same way as it is true for political and ideological choices. The point is, a ‘Nationalism’ based on a liberal, flexible, multi-dimensional and tolerant Identity is fine, but its affiliation with the Hindu brand (or any sectarian brand) will prove fatal, as the unholy collusion of the famous Gandhian social worker Mr.Sunderlal Bahuguna with the BJP party in case of the Tehri Dam agitation has already proved for Indian Environmentalism.
Therefore singing ‘Vande-Mataram’ may be an exhilarating experience for many of us, but it can’t be the scale to gauge ‘Nationalism’. The saffron Brigade has time and again come up with various ploys and designs to put various questions framed in ‘game-theoretical’ situations to the minorities, which are infact done to rejuvenate their waning influence in their heartlands. A humble advice to them is, perhaps speaking about more humanitarian issues and issues of grave concerns such as the displacement and devastation of Narmada Valley by the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) or the Pokhran Bomb-Blast will gain them more votes from unexpected quarters. Had they been done so, they might have increased their vote banks more steadily in unexplored territories, for which this kind of narrow and filthy politics is not needed.
Arnab Roy Chowdhury is a University Grants Commission-Junior Research Fellow in Sociology
Email: [email protected]
Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Get CC HeadlinesOn your Desk Top