National Identity

India has remained in the league of developing country for long. One is not sure when it will be in the league of developed countries. Indians are hoping to build India into a super power and the Vision-2020 is geared towards this goal. However, one factor that nags us is the confusion that exists regarding our national identity. We are known for our attitude of craving for recognition from the West or White Race. Unless we get a certification from the West or White race, we term it backwardness. My question is: Will a superpower allow these things?

Can we define what the Identity of a nation is? Does it exist or ever felt in India? Perhaps, we felt it only when we watched India playing cricket. Indians are highly competitive as individuals but a total failure as a team. We resemble the Navgraha with each one of us facing at different directions. We also argue that what every individual see is right and the best and persuade others to accept it.

After all, why do we need a National Identity? How does an Indian identify himself with his country? No answers; because we don’t have one. History says India never remained a country prior to Akbar and hence it has no identity. Whatever it has is a mixture of various cultures left over by the invaders. There is no original Indian per se. All I can say is that our history is a book of distorted stories. With our attitude of craving for recognition from White race, we distorted our history to please them. One had the audacity to compare India to a doughnut with center empty and the periphery being the only identity. Adding insult to injury is, if one opposed such things, they are labeled as Fascists. May be, we the Indians, have allowed one to make such a remark and to an extent our behavior too, supported this argument.

Nation first – is the foundation stone to build a national identity. Our politicians were successful in keeping the people perpetually divided on the lines of Caste, Region, Religion and what not? The formation of third front by a cluster of regional parties who do not have a national ideology, dreaming to rule India is an irony. None of these political parties can express their unbiased views on a public issue like Cauvery water dispute. They knew that doing so would cost their vote bank in either of the States involved. This situation is the result of lack of National Identity.

Do we need a National Identity? Our education system never emphasized on the need of National Identity and hence the citizens did not attempt much to learn that. Thus, the bond that supposed to exist between a nation and its citizen is missing in India. Precisely, this is the reason; we need an identity for our nation – To develop a bond between the nation and its citizens. It is not an antibiotic that can be injected into the system whenever we felt weak. It has to come from within like the natural immune system developed in our body.

National identity is not about jingoism. It is about mutual respect among the citizens irrespective of their social status or any other identity. All are citizens of this country and all of us are equal. This is practically possible only if the respect expressed is mutual. Our civilization always embraced differences reciprocally. Indian philosophy is built on celebrating diversity — from Gods to languages to cultures to traditions.

What is our National Identity? Shall we say Corruption, Lack of civic sense, Me-first-society-last attitude, and son-of-the-soil? These are some of the traits we possess but these cannot be our identities.

Shall we say Secularism? Secularism, literally, is the antonym of Spiritualism or a synonym of Atheism. India is a spiritual country. However, we feel shy in declaring it so. In the Indian political context, secularism has a different meaning altogether. The political pundits, although, claim it meant equality of all religions, it is not practiced in this manner. It is applied in a selective manner. Dual standards are evident from the approaches adapted time and again. It is appeasing one at the cost of another.

While “satanic verses” is banned, book ridiculing Ram & Sita is published by the Govt. When cartoons attacking satirically on Islam are condemned, Hindu deities portrayed in nude is termed as expression of artistic freedom. Hosting an Ifthar party and meeting Imams and issuing fatwa is secular but meeting Shankaracharya is communal. Even the Election Commission, that is supposed to be a neutral office, christened a party that opposed BJP as Secular (Janata Dal Secular). What they wanted to imply by doing this is known to them only.

In short, the secularism in India is selective – means Hindu bashing. If you talk for Hindu, you are labeled communal but you can join hands with leaders of religious groups and claim yourself secular. The approach of the governments in handling the issue of land leasing for Amarnath yatra is a fine illustration to the secular approach in India

So, can we say the secularism what practiced in India is our National Identity? Not at all!

Shall we say diversity? Diversity yes but not fragments. If classifying a person on religious line is a sin, then what do we say on classifying people on caste or regional lines? However, you can do this under the camouflage of social-justice. People cry that conversion takes place because discrimination is practiced in Hinduism. Why can’t the Govt stop the sops extended to the discriminated society once they are converted, if other religions do not discriminate?

In the name of social justice, Hindus are divided. Diversity never posed a problem to Indians in the past. Unfortunately, Independent India brought in the quota system by adapting caste identities. Thus they failed to protect individual’s rights. This divided people and this was exploited by politicians aka vote-bank entrepreneurs. The people are so pampered that politicians are ready to do anything fearing offending these small fragments even it meant at the cost of the nation.

Pity is, in the name of diversity, we focused more on the fragments and we kept on fragmenting ourselves. One cannot have a national identity that fragments the country.

Shall we say Hindutva? This is a phrase coined in by the intellectual mafia of the Indian educated elites. To be precise, there is no such factor present as Hindutva! Our civilization is ages old and is subjected to changes from time and again as to accommodate the social changes happened. Hence, none of us knew its original form. The name Hindu got originated because it flourished on the banks of river Sind. Ours is a Dharma (rules & regulations) and this culture is not created by a single man like all other religions. Dharma is not a religion but a walk of life. Had it been a religion, it would not have recommended changes according to the changes in the society. The smritis explain this very clearly. This reflects our identity of accommodating and respecting the others sentiments. It accommodates all the diversities in the society. Its a pity that less educated ones distorted the real meanings and gave it a wrong meaning. However, the same can be changed.

The need of National Identity is a must at this point of time. I have listed my choices and leave it you to decide which one would suit us. One can differ from my views, after all, Hinduism taught me this – to respect others sentiments. However, we need to arrive at a consensus considering the national interest as the prime factor