There cannot be any debate on liberalism. The constitution of India has laid down very clear rules. Moreover, it is binding on us as bonafide citizens of the largest democracy in the world. Yet, we stumble and fumble when it comes to liberal views and inclusive values.
Here is why. Until today, we have given more importance in our private as well as public life to the Bhagvat Geeta, the Quran and the Bible than the constitution of this country drafted by some of the finest minds and based on refined principles of a modern democracy. We have pursued the constitution when it suits and conveniently ignored it when it doesn’t. There is a pattern in this comfortable acceptance and deliberate ignorance. And the pattern is medieval religious and caste connotations that have gripped our society from the dark ages.
Sadly, we have done everything possible in our might and capacity to fail our constitution when deems fit. We are a failure when it comes to liberal democratic principles. Our tolerance level starts wading once metros become towns and six lanes become two lanes. The idea of India is shattered by the time we reach remote villages in North India when the bi-lanes turn into mud roads.
Adhering to the preamble of our constitution (for now, forget the rest of it) is still a long journey. Our growth from “people” to “citizens” is still in its adolescence. And the “intolerance” debate that is engulfing the nation now is a result of these adolescence adventures.
The point is “ government of the day cannot behave like a teenager high on extremist ideology and radical ideologues. And it is expected to reign in when fringe elements from its own cadre spew venom on national television and in public meetings.
When this government came to power, I was not worried about the “riot tainted” Narendra Modi, nor was I concerned about the RSS. I was apprehensive about the radical fringe of the right. This segment, firmly believes that the NDA is in power because of their relentless efforts towards polarization of the Indian Hindu. They are convinced that their Hindu-Hriday-Samrat Narendra Damodardas Modi has shouldered the prime ministership to convert India into a Hindu Rashtra.
It is not their fault. They have been conditioned in this fashion from decades. They have been indoctrinated for a purpose. Now, they see an opportunity to fulfill that purpose and they desperately want to grab it by silencing any deviant opinion opposing their viewpoint.
The responsibility now lies in the hands of their leadership. The “man ki baat” cannot prefer to be “maun ki baat” when it comes to the radical fringe. An occasional clarification after consistent pressure from mainstream and social media is not enough. If the fringe in infringing upon my liberalism continuously, I expect my prime minister to reprimand them continuously and that too publicly. Because this is not just about an “idea of India”. This is about “my India” and every Indian.
When I interviewed India’s bestselling author of “The Shiva Trilogy” and “The Ram Chandra Series” Amish Tripathi couple of weeks back, he made an interesting revelation. There is no reference of the word “blasphemy” in ancient Vedic India. The word did not exist because the concept did not exist. There was nothing that was considered blasphemous.
What does that tell us? The Vedic India believed in the preamble of Indian constitution much before it was drafted. Nothing was considered as “unquestionable”. You could question anything and everything. No idea, belief, concept was above board. That is the spirit of India.
We will brutally kill this noble spirit if we stop questioning and stop encouraging questions. And the tolerance that we debate these days need not be about some other caste or some other religion; it can very well be about your own beliefs, your own religion, your own faith.
The debate on “tolerance” is healthy when some luminaries feel that India is a growing intolerant country whereas some intellectuals feel that the one billion strong democracy is too mighty to be defined as “intolerant” based on some rare incidents. We should debate that. But we should not convert it into my liberalism vs your liberalism.
We have crossed the phase where one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. We live in an era where there no good terrorism or bad terrorism. In the same manner, there is no good fundamentalist and bad fundamentalist or a good radical view or a bad radical view.
Having said that, are we becoming intolerant? The answer is we were never tolerant. There was never unity in diversity. We always fought with each other. We despised people from another caste. We lit firecrackers outside a Muslim basti when India defeated Pakistan in cricket. Yet, we stayed together because none of us could afford violence. Not Hindus, not Muslims. Not Yadavs, not Dalits. Every time we became bloodthirsty and spilled some blood, the stark reality hit us. Not practical. Not affordable. That’s why we avoided conflict. That’s why we remained calm for most of the time.
But absence of conflict is not an evidence of peace. I am waiting for a day when the maximum of us (it can never be all of us) will consciously decide to follow the constitution of the Indian Republic in letter as well as spirit. Is it too much to ask for in present times?
Pramod Acharya is Editor, Prudent Media
