If I’m not wrong, the debate on ‘Nationalism’ in India began in 2016, after an incident in JNU, where students allegedly raise ‘anti-national slogans’. Things quickly turned into prime time news debate, and after that, the debate has been rapidly increasing and expanding in a very unnatural form.
It is not true that before 2016 there was no debate or discussion on Nationalism. It use to happen, but only occasionally, like when there is a cricket match between India and Pakistan, or on Republic Day or Independence Day. But I don’t remember there being any competitive spirit like there is today.
All of a sudden, when Indian society was struggling to debate about Sedition, Freedom of Expression, Tolerance and Intolerance in India, the debate on Nationalism made its way out, and left everything else behind. Even up to the stage of debate and discussion things were fine, but very soon ‘Nationalism’ turned into a test, and some parameters were marked to clear you. For example, if you chant “Bharat Mata ki jai” and “Vande Mataram” you are a Nationalist. If you don’t say “Jai Hind” or “Jai Bharat” you ‘fail the test’ and are then termed as ‘Anti-National’. These scenes became very frequent in Indian newsrooms last year. And if one of the panelists is Muslim, this test may go to any extent like chanting slogans that criticise past Muslim rulers like Babur and Aurangzeb, and so on.
But all of this didn’t stop there. Some certain elements were added to this ‘test’, like showing your love for the “Tiranga” (tricolour). If there is anything like Republic Day around the corner, you need to put a display picture of the tiranga on your social media accounts. And if you don’t do this, people may judge you for your ‘lack’ of ‘Nationalism’. If you eat beef, you are automatically a State-declared ‘Anti-National’. If you don’t believe in the concept of “Love Jihad” (brought to you by the right wing) and see only love, you are a certified Anti-Nationalist! We have seen people lose their lives when they failed to ‘prove’ their ‘Nationalism’, because of something as simple as what they eat.
I want to term all of this “Imposed Nationalism”. Tagore’s ideas of Nationalism, on the other hand, was very different. He famously said, “I will never allow patriotism to triumph over humanity as long as I live.” But today, we are witnessing just the opposite of that idea.
I don’t have any complaints about or objections to Nationalism, no matter of what form it is. But until and unless it’s demonstrated in a non-violent form and not imposed on people, I cannot appreciate it. But as a Muslim, I hate having to prove my Nationalism at every odd occasion. Maybe this is the reason I’m writing this article, because I’ve gone through the worst of this test after the Pulwama attack. My own people, my own friends started questioning my stand on Pakistan and on this attack. I mean, my answer to these questions should have been very obvious to them. I wasn’t supposed to be asked how I felt about this attack. I felt that this happened because they decided I had ‘failed’ the test of Nationalism. When I condemned the Pulwama attack repeatedly, I didn’t hurl abuse at Pakistan. To do so is something which is against my nature, my friends. That doesn’t makes me less of a Nationalist than you. It doesn’t mean I was less panicked or aggressive than you when you heard the news. But we all have our own ways to react to things. I didn’t react like you, but I’m not objecting to your way of reacting. I also expect you not to impose your choices on me, because this is the actual meaning of a democratic state.