1. The author argues that nationalism in India is often propagated by politicians to distract from domestic issues and consolidate power, rather than unite people. True nationalism respects India's diversity and ensures prosperity for all. 2. Many contributors to India's freedom struggle and cultural heritage are unknown or forgotten. Figures from all religions, genders, and social groups made sacrifices but a narrow version of nationalism promotes only certain identities. 3. India still faces significant issues of poverty, hunger, and inequality despite recent economic growth. True nationalism requires upholding democracy and rule of law to protect all citizens' rights and development.

1. 1
The Myth of an anti-national India
Shantanu Basu
The current virulent propagation of nationalism in the wake of the Pulwama incident reminds me
of Arthur Schopenhauer’s (Essays and Aphorisms) prophetic words, “Every miserable fool who
has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which
he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus
reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.” Why do I recall Schopenhauer?
Nationalism in its widest sense creates an unreal vision of oneness of religion, language and
literature, indeed culture, caste, creed and territorial definition of a geographical area; those that
do not comply are outliers, fit for extermination. By its inherent machismo, nationalism is
misogynist, brazenly racist and sectarian and often fatally violent (remember the Jews,
Armenians, etc.) in final conclusion. There is nothing wrong in possessing a sense of national
pride. Indeed, the Peace of Westphalia (1645) was the starting point of nationalism that
witnessed the emergence of the modern nation-state in Italy and Germany, for instance, over two
centuries later. Nationalism then presupposes that the unification of a people within a defined
territorial jurisdiction, a people proud of their achievements in all walks of life. A belief they
believe, or are made to believe by manipulative politicians, that ought to be propagated within
and without a nation’s domestic frontiers. National self-respect, as defined by avaricious
politicians, is but continuation of this inherent belief in ‘superiority’ that holds alternatives in
utter contempt. Violation of national boundaries of nation-states certainly merits the strongest
defensive reaction. However, when that is imbued by politicians with undue nationalistic fervor,
it is projected as a national obsession. Dovetailing of domestic compulsions with foreign policy
is often a cyanide-laden cocktail, as Germany, Italy and Japan disastrously consumed in World
War II. Yet these nations rose from the ashes like the Phoenix in the next 75 years, about the
same as India’s independent existence.
Recall Hermann Goering’s remarks, “We have slowly begun to create unity from the chaos of
parties. Today these old parties play only a comic role………………Now that the Reich once
more firmly controls the individual provinces, the German people must be forged into a similar
unity. ………...they (national parties) had become too dulled to worry about the nation’s fate.
There was no point to it. Everything was too dismal, too tragic, the desperation was too great.
And then, suddenly, the movement came, tearing through the clouds, suddenly there was light
again, the sun shone. Hundreds of thousands, even millions, of people suddenly woke up. The
scales fell from their eyes and they saw something wonderful. They suddenly saw how a
movement that had been insulted, outlawed, estranged, took the light in its hands. They were
happy to see a new spring coming that would change everything. There was new joy, new hope.
A faith that had been buried, that had been soiled, came alive……confidence, loyalty, discipline,
faith, and hope: These are the pillars on which this movement must rest, because this movement
has become the bearer of this powerful idea.” (“Nationalismus und Sozialismus: Rede auf der
NSBO in Berliner Sportpalast am 9. April 1933). Germany and Japan’s war efforts, their
quantum advances in military and scientific technology, education, health, employment,
industrial production, etc. justifiably created the aura of an invincible nationalism. For a decent
job, a roof over the head and a better life, personal liberty and economic fortunes could be

2. 2
momentarily mortgaged. Nazi Germany fulfilled nearly all their promises in just six years, i.e.
1933-39. However, what of India?
How many ‘nationalists’ have heard of Ram Mohan Roy’s successful efforts to ban Sati and
child marriage (in tandem with the British Governor General William Bentinck), remember
Bhagat Singh but forget Savitribai Phule or Pritilata Wadedar, that it was Germans and British
Indologists like William Jones, James Prinsep and Max Mueller that broadcast India’s rich
cultural heritage to the world and whose sterling contributions remain firmly etched in world
history and institutions like the Asiatic Society and the Indian Museum? Likewise, how many of
us are able to recite Bankim Chatterjee’s Bande Mataram with its Sanskrit intonations, or know
that only the first verse of Tagore’s Jana Gana Mana was adopted for our National Anthem or
that the first design of our national flag was designed by a Mumbai-based Parsi woman called
Madam Cama in 1907 (the Parsis originated in Persia)? Just how many of us have heard of
Dwijendralal Roy, Kazi Nazrul Islam, Saadat Hassan Manto, and a myriad other littérateurs
whose songs and books rallied nationalistic support against a the oppressive colonizer? Or of
John Mortimer Wheeler had Indian assistants like Rakhal Das Bannerjee that discovered
Harappa and Mohenjodaro in 1921-23? Similarly, how many have heard of Anandibai Gopalrao
Joshi and Kadambini Ganguly, India’s first female doctors in the late 19th century? Or the
Boroline that we use even today is a product of the freedom movement? Or the facts of our rich
cultural and political heritage (dating back to the mahajanapadas in c. 600 BCE) that have acted
as the greatest unifying glue (e.g. the Sufi movement)? Or that our animal slaughterers are
Muslim, tanners Hindu and traders Gujarati Hindus? The list of India’s unknown heroes and
heroines whose cumulative sacrifices won our freedom from colonial yoke is worn by each
Indian on his/her sleeve. Being Hindu is one thing; to imbibe and propagate the inclusivity of
Hinduism (as distinct from an aberrant Hindutva) and economic and social progress are the
unique and stellar tests of nationalism, as much as it is the constitutional duty of a government to
assure India’s cosmopolitan view of life.
Has prosperity reached our shores that should fire our existing nationalism, indeed our national
pride? The Global Hunger Report, 2017, gives India a score of 31.4, neighboring Bangladesh
scoring higher at 26.40 and Nepal at 22. In absolute terms 189.70 million Indians (71% of South
Asia) were estimated to be hungry while per capita food consumption (KCAL per capita per day)
for India was 2354 against a developing country average of 2683 and 3439 for developed
countries in 2010. Hunger had its invariable fallout on labor productivity. In 1990, India’s land
productivity at 719 was higher than China’s 457 while the figures for labor productivity were
624 and 472 respectively. India retained its land productivity till 2013 but its labor productivity
was bested by China with a figure of 1128 against India’s 951. Overall, India ranked 97/118 in
the Global Hunger Index, abomination for one of the world’s largest economies. With rising
imports of several agricultural commodities, expenditure on agriculture to agricultural GDP in
2014 was a negligible 5.94% when compared to China’s 23.56%. Even Bangladesh spent
11.08%. China also spent 0.62% on agriculture as a percentage of agricultural GDP against
India’s abysmal 0.31% on agricultural R&D. India overtaking France to emerge as the world’s
sixth largest economy recently only reflects the successes of crony capitalism and consolidation
of oligarchies, via their networks, not a squarer meal for an indigent Indian. Nor is Purchasing
Power Parity a lesser evil since three Washington apples for a French family at breakfast are not
the same as rice and wild root soup, onion, green chilies and salt for a hungry Indian family,
vacant space being filled with untreated water.

3. 3
Where the Rule of Law becomes dysfunctional, different sets of laws apply to the privileged and
the unprivileged; the life, liberty and property of citizens are insecure; the distinction between a
vendor and the State vanishes; poverty mitigation creates billionaires while the indigent masses
remain deprived; and the crassest opportunism, corruption and nepotism become alibis for
elections and governance, democracy ceases to exist. The lines of distinction between the Left,
the Right and the Socialist-Liberals are obliterated by their grossest individual and collective
political opportunism. The minuscule clutches of conscience that tenaciously survive are
decimated and reduced to irrelevance in opportunistic games of thrones. All proclamations of
democracy become the grossest falsities, yet remain the most potent camouflaged instrument for
oppression of unquestioning Indians. That is when democracy transmutes into mockocracy. The
third stanza of TS Eliot’s The Hollow Men aptly portrays the Indian landscape:
This is the dead land/This is cactus land/Here the stone images/Are raised, here
they receive/The supplication of a dead man's hand/Under the twinkle of a fading
star.
Indians are justifiably proud of their rich heritage and remain fiercely loyal to India, lest any
political dispensation makes us believe otherwise; outliers remain an exception in all political
systems. We won our democracy after a 200-year struggle and losing several million lives,
probably not far inferior to the combined body count for the two world wars. Yet few remember
or are even aware of our sacrifices. The preservation of a democratic and inclusive nation is not
something that is negotiable for us Indians against ‘nationalistic’ and cowardice-ridden politics
of corrupt self-aggrandizement that is the surest sign of being anti-national, harking back to
Schopenhauer’s prophetic words. (1495 words)
The author is a public policy analyst and commentator