A young nation is falling prey to the propaganda of muscular nationalism every single day. The key features of this variety of nationalism are: a narrow identity based on the distortion of history; never-ending search for threat; the abstraction of the state through deifying; and an obsession with becoming ‘strong’. The obsession with becoming strong is rather objective of this variety of nationalism, which originates from deep insecurities, inferiorities, and anxieties of a certain kind. This kind of strength has three popular dimensions to it – a strong (read authoritarian) leader, sophisticated weapons, and security and surveillance state.
Can this variety of nationalism and becoming strong in this manner help India become really strong? The answer to this comes from the following few examples. How many of us organized and agitated when a Supreme Court order came out about two weeks ago to evict more than 1.8 million tribals from there homes, where they have lived for centuries? One can hide behind the veil of due process but that’s cowardice. When an educated middle-class person lacks the capability to engage with the Indian bureaucratic system, forget about a tribal being able to do that in case of rejection of their claim to the land. Is it not nationalism to stand with our fellow citizens to protect their democratic rights? How many of us stood in solidarity with safai karamcharis, Anganwadi workers, ASHA workers, contract teachers, farmers, unorganized sector workers for their rights and demands? Is it not nationalism to have all sections of the society prosper equally well?
Why is nationalism invoked only when it comes to creating a threat of other and buying weapons? Where is it lost when people die of starvation because their biometric details do not match? How does it help those children whose growth gets stunted because of malnutrition? How does it help those children who are in third grade and cannot read first grade level things? How does it help those millions of families who have to bear the out of the pocket expense more than their annual income for health care?
Does such nationalism make India strong which deviates us from the path of taking care of the needs of the person standing at the last mile? Does becoming strong necessarily mean becoming less compassionate and less human? Which kind of nationalism is this which makes you feel proud of buying foreign weapons and your heart does not melt on the misery of your fellow citizens?
For once, think about the promise of the freedom that our forefathers made to our people, that we the people made to ourselves. Have we achieved the goals of justice, equality, liberty, and fraternity? Surely, we are far away from that goal. Can such an India claim to be strong? No.
We have a long way to go. And, we cannot afford to lose that sight.