Nationalism Is a Dishonourable Social Construct
Two thought-provoking pieces by Yogendra Yadav and Suhas Palshikar made for a fascinating debate on the texture and trajectory of Indian nationalism.
Yadav argues that the rich legacy of Indian nationalism from our freedom movement which was about 'belonging without othering' and unity sans uniformity, has been overwhelmed in the last decade by a Nazi version that upholds national interest over individual freedom and identifies the government with the nation. But he also blames the liberal, secular elite for the regression in the pristine nationalist spirit, charging them with a 'deracinated cosmopolitism' that ignored the cultural and spiritual undertone, because of which they lost touch with the common man.
Palshikar is emphatic that nothing can mitigate the virtual dismantling of nationalism by the current regime through practice and ideology which, he believes, is not backsliding 'but a resolute replacement of Indian nationalism'. He contends that excoriating the secular-liberal elite as abettors for the crisis in Indian nationalism, as Yadav has done, is to attach significance to a marginal force. Of much greater import were the deep fissures that were evolving in the late 19th and early 20th century between an inclusive Indian nationalism and its phoney alternative that was 'rooted in othering and instrumental unity without genuine belonging.'
To add my twopenny bit, notwithstanding the toxic faith-based majoritarian nationalism germinating on the side, our nationalism was not in a bad place until the 1980s. Yogendra Yadav may turn up his nose at my lived experience of an that was pluralistic, inclusive and grounded in democratic values where we didn't need to prove our Indianness or be judged by the clothes we wore or the size of our eyes; nor did we feel the need to tamper with historical facts or denigrate our freedom fighters in order to craft an alternative Hindutva nationalist vision.
I remember an unselfconscious nationalism, respectful of religion but not obsessed with it, a milieu where our patriotic instincts were fired up by the histrionics of 'Mr Bharat' Manoj Kumar and the dulcet tones of Mohammad Rafi and Lata Mangeshkar. There was no deliberate fostering of deep cultural and spiritual traditions but that 'shallow modernity and deracinated cosmopolitanism' worked very well for us. If only we could get back that nationalist spirit.
In debating Indian nationalism – good and bad – these two public intellectuals have broached a subject of the greatest significance. It has turned the world upside-down, particularly in the last decade.
The nationalism that we witness today is the depraved patriotism of the mob. In truth, nationalism has been commandeered to legitimise all forms of bigotry. In the crazy world that we live in, the insurrectionists who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, are released and hailed as nationalists whereas the protestors in Los Angeles fighting for justice against the authoritarian Trump regime are hounded as anti-nationals.
It is necessary to draw a distinction between nationalism and patriotism in terms of the emotive quality of loyalty to the nation. Nationalism invokes blind support for everything the country does –a syndrome that incites aggressive assertion and a lust for power, whereas patriotism is tolerant, humane and critical of actions that are destructive of the values that the country cherishes.
Is it any wonder then that the world's great minds were not enamoured of nationalism?
H.G. Wells condemned nationalism as 'a monstrous can't that has darkened all human affairs.' He believed that our true nationality was mankind.
Rabindranath Tagore was no devotee of the constrictive tendencies associated with attachment to the nation which he viewed as 'holding up gigantic selfishness as the one universal religion.'
Dr B.R. Ambedkar was wary of a nationalism 'that is at once a feeling of fellowship for one's own kith and kin and an anti-fellowship feeling for those who are not one's own kith and kin.' He warned that loyalty to the nation was endangered by competitive loyalty to religion, to culture and to language.
The iconic revolutionary Bhagat Singh represented a nationalism that was the very antithesis of what's being practised today. His nationalism was anchored in his atheism and signified much more than driving out the British. It meant ridding our society of the evils of casteism, untouchability and communalism. Sadly, today he is glorified but his revolutionary nationalism that was centred on the oppressed and the poor has been overwhelmed by one that is cruelly majoritarian and focussed entirely on the needs of the privileged.
'Where guns boom'
Today's nationalism bears an eerie correspondence with the German experiment of the 1930s that played on the fears and prejudice of the majority. The most obvious similarity is between the Nazi doctrine of nationhood based on an exclusive ethnic German-Aryan homogeneity and rabid antisemitism vis-a-vis our indigenous fascist mobilisation constructed on a deviant interpretation of religion and morbid hatred of the Muslim. And just as Hitler expanded his enemy list of Jews to include communists, Catholics and liberals, the current regime has gone way beyond targeting Muslims and Christians as the archetypal 'Other', to branding all dissenters as the 'ant-national, tukde - tukde gang'.
Prime minister Narendra Modi has been given the credit for bestowing the name 'Operation Sindoor' to the military operation post Pahalgam, so clearly his camp followers think it's a great appellation. But how blasphemous to bestow an offensive military campaign with the moniker of 'sindoor' which is so sacred to the institution of the Hindu marriage, especially for the woman. It is as inappropriate a name as the one given by the USA to its largest non-nuclear explosive weighing 9,800 kgs, labelled 'the mother of all bombs'. That great humanist, the late Pope Francis was outraged: 'A mother gives life and this one gives death…What's going on?'
The fig leaf of national interest and security have been used by this Government as a pretext for the furtive secrecy surrounding the Pahalgam horror and the aftermath. The nation is still in the dark about the murderers, the intelligence failure, the number of our planes shot down and fate of the pilots, Jaishankar's self-defeating forewarning to Pakistan, Trump's alleged intervention, our suicidal foreign policy that has all our neighbours gunning for us and a lot more. The bizarre decision to keep Operation Sindoor alive is clearly intended to avoid owning up to failure on multiple fronts.
Arthur Miller had observed that 'when the guns boom, the arts die', but with Operation Sindoor it is not the arts but truth that has got buried. The nationalist fervour gripping the country has confused and equated loyalty to the nation with fealty to the government, though crafty ones like Shashi Tharoor have used it for their own self-serving purposes. Nationalism is the subterfuge for officially sponsored propaganda, downright falsehoods, jingoism, moral grandstanding and for treating dissent as anti-national. Modi's flurry of ' goli khaao' speeches following the ceasefire, are testimony to this ugly manipulation of nationalism.
Look at what nationalism has spawned across the world. The likes of Zionist nationalist Benjamin Netanyahu and MAGA white racist Donald Trump – post-modern versions of the Fuhrer and Duce – flaunt the badge of nationalism to wreak death and suffering. Let's all agree that Howard Zinn was spot on when he observed: 'Nationalism – that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder – is one of the great evils of our time along with racism and religious hatred.'
Mathew John is a former civil servant. Views are personal.
This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
24 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
‘English is not barrier, but bridge': Opposition criticises Amit Shah for remarks on languages
Several Opposition leaders on Friday criticised Union Home Minister Amit Shah for saying those who speak English in India will soon feel ashamed. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi remarked that English is 'not a barrier, but a bridge', and said that the language provides employment and boosts people's self-confidence. He alleged that the Bharatiya Janata Party and its ideological parent, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, did not want poor children to learn English 'because they don't want you to ask questions, move ahead, and assert equality'. Gandhi said that in today's world, learning English is as important as learning one's mother tongue. अंग्रेज़ी बाँध नहीं, पुल है। अंग्रेज़ी शर्म नहीं, शक्ति है। अंग्रेज़ी ज़ंजीर नहीं - ज़ंजीरें तोड़ने का औज़ार है। BJP-RSS नहीं चाहते कि भारत का ग़रीब बच्चा अंग्रेज़ी सीखे - क्योंकि वो नहीं चाहते कि आप सवाल पूछें, आगे बढ़ें, बराबरी करें। आज की दुनिया में, अंग्रेज़ी उतनी ही ज़रूरी… — Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) June 20, 2025 In a similar vein, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP Kanimozhi told Shah that 'the only thing to be ashamed of is imposing your will on the people and trying to destroy the pluralism of India'. Kerala Education Minister and Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader V Sivankutty remarked that no language was higher or lower, PTI reported. 'Each language has its own importance,' Sivankutty said. 'English, as an international language, is an important means of knowledge and communication. It can only help in the progress of the country.' Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP John Brittas accused the mainstream media of suppressing and underreporting Shah's statement. He speculated that this was 'likely due to external pressures and direction that came as an afterthought, as the remark could have triggered significant backlash'. Shah's remarks In a video shared by news channels on Thursday, Shah was quoted as saying the creation of a society in which those who speak English in India would feel ashamed was not far away. 'A complete India cannot be imagined with aadhi-adhuri [incomplete] foreign languages, that can only happen with Indianness, with Indian languages,' Shah reportedly said at a book launch event in New Delhi. He also called Indian languages 'jewels of our culture', adding that without them, 'we cease to be Indians'. The home minister's comments on Thursday come against the backdrop of several state governments and regional parties accusing the Centre of imposing Hindi through the National Education Policy's three-language formula. On Tuesday, the Maharashtra government issued an order making Hindi a 'generally' taught third language for students from Class 1 to Class 5 in Marathi and English medium schools. The Opposition in the state has accused the BJP-led government of trying to erase Marathi identity through the move. Tamil Nadu too has repeatedly opposed the three-language formula in the National Education Policy. The state government said it would not change its decades-old two-language policy of teaching students Tamil and English.
The Print
29 minutes ago
- The Print
New Delhi-Dhaka must reimagine ties as ‘strategic necessity for collective growth'—Bangladesh envoy
Riaz in his speech touched upon the soft dimensions of India-Bangladesh ties—language, culture and education. With thousands of Bangladeshi students studying in India, and an organic exchange of ideas and people across the two countries' 4,096-kilometre shared land border, he said the bilateral relationship was not merely geopolitical but personal. The remarks come at a time when ties between New Delhi and Dhaka have been tense for months. New Delhi: Bangladesh and India must reimagine bilateral and regional cooperation, not as a legacy of the past, but as a strategic necessity for collective growth and resilience, said M. Riaz Hamidullah, Bangladesh's High Commissioner to India, during a wide-ranging speech at the neighbouring country's belated national day celebration in New Delhi Thursday evening. 'Our collaboration cannot be judged solely by the memoranda signed or the meetings held,' he noted. 'We aspire for a peaceful and prosperous neighbourhood that upholds universal values while also protecting national interests.' 'Bound by shared geography, shared ecology, and a shared linguistic and cultural heritage, our two peoples embrace each other with respect and dignity,' Riaz added. 'Not just because we share the largest land boundary; our people engage organically, not merely as a matter of choice.' He further asserted that 'Bangladesh's ties with India are historic, deep and multilayered. Bangladesh is open and engaged with India to address diverse issues of the present and future'. Riaz noted that bilateral trade between India and Bangladesh grew in double digits in the fiscal gone by and said Dhaka sees the India-Bangladesh partnership as an engine for broader regional development, referencing the sub-regional energy agreement through which Nepal has begun transmitting 40 megawatts of electricity to Bangladesh via the Indian grid. 'These mutually gainful tasks are already in place,' Riaz said. 'It is this understanding that asks our two nations to reimagine bilateral and regional cooperation, not as a legacy of the past, but as a strategic necessity for our collective growth and resilience.' Highlighting Bangladesh's priorities under its chairmanship of the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), Riaz said Dhaka looks forward to 'reinvigorating the regional cooperation agenda'. The envoy underlined the country's commitment to democratic values, calling democracy one of the founding ideals that inspired Bangladesh's liberation. He spoke of the current political transition under way in Dhaka, where an interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus is expected to hold free and fair elections early next year. He further emphasised that the future of Bangladesh lies in transformation: empowering the young to define their destiny and build a democracy that is not only electorally functional but socially inclusive. Riaz ended on a personal note, recounting his meeting last month with Raghu Rai—the Indian photojournalist who documented the Bangladesh Liberation War and was awarded the Padma Shri in 1972 for his powerful imagery. 'His work captured our agony, our struggle, and reminded me that the humanism of 1971 still binds us,' he said. 'Today, some of the war veterans from 1971 are with us in this hall. Their sacrifices must never be forgotten.' 'The friendship between Bangladesh and India must continue to fly forward, rooted in history, yet reaching ambitiously into the future,' Riaz concluded. (Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui) Also Read: After Operation Sindoor, why India must keep an eye on Bangladesh too
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Canadian intelligence agency confirms Khalistani extremists in Canada
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) has acknowledged the presence of Khalistani extremists operating from Canadian soil, stating they use the country 'as a base for promotion, fundraising, or planning of violence primarily in India.' The findings were detailed in the CSIS Public Report 2024 released on Wednesday, which also emphasized that only a small group of individuals are considered Khalistani extremists. The report was released shortly after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi met Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on the sidelines of the G7 summit. The leaders agreed to work toward mending bilateral relations, which had deteriorated following the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in 2023 — a Canadian national designated a terrorist by India. Accusations by former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau alleging India's involvement had led to a major diplomatic standoff. Clarifying Canada's stance, the report noted that non-violent advocacy for an independent Khalistan is not treated as extremism under Canadian law. However, it flagged politically motivated violent extremism (PMVE) as a concern, particularly from Canada-based Khalistani extremists (CBKEs), a phenomenon present since the mid-1980s. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Undo Highlighting India's long-standing concerns, the report referenced New Delhi's view that Canada has historically been a safe haven for anti-India activities, especially in light of the 1985 Air India bombing and related terrorism in India. While no CBKE-related attacks occurred in Canada in 2024, the report noted that 'real and perceived Khalistani extremism emerging from Canada continues to drive Indian foreign interference activities in Canada.' The report also addressed the Canadian government's and RCMP's ongoing investigation into Nijjar's killing, stating that 'links between the Government of India and the Nijjar murder signal a significant escalation in India's repression efforts against the Khalistan movement.' Live Events Additionally, the report referred to the first phase of the Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference (PIFI), which began in March 2024. It alleged that both Indian and Pakistani officials engaged in foreign interference, with Pakistan aiming to counter India's growing global influence. The report concluded by recommending sustained vigilance regarding India's 'continued foreign interference' in Canadian affairs.
