As this issue reaches you, the Finance Bill 2016 would have been tabled in the Parliament. Before the presentation of the budget, Parliament has seen a heated debate on the concept of nationalism. It has been triggered by two unfortunate events occurring in two universities in the country. The first was a suicide by a Dalit student, and the second was the agitation in the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). The way the politicians of all hues have attempted to take benefit of the situation, and politicise both the events causes deep anguish.
One must note that 68 years after we became an independent nation the Parliament is debating the concept of nationalism. Expectedly most of the speeches were politically motivated though some were really thought provoking. In many of the speeches persons were criticised for what they had said at some point of time but the context was not explained. All of us tend to label, very quickly a person by the thoughts, beliefs and sentiments that he echoes. We treat him as national, antinational, patriotic, traitor, secular, pseudo secular, etc. What we must appreciate is that the person may and is entitled to hold various beliefs. We may not agree with all of them. The right to express dissent has been the cornerstone of any democracy. We have had a number of transitions of power in the recent past, which have taken place in a virtually non-violent manner due to this strong foundation of democratic beliefs.
It is in this context that, the events in both educational institutions are disturbing. The entire world is talking of the demographic dividend that India will enjoy on account of its young population. It is in these universities that, the youth of India develop their academic skills which they will use when they step out to earn their bread in this highly competitive world. The diversity of thought makes them mature, and discerning. They learn to accept that there would be people of their own breed who hold different views; at times the diametrically opposite from theirs. Healthy debate and exchange of thoughts shapes their destiny.
It is equally true that, events in these institutions need to be looked at carefully. The youth who are the future do have impressionable minds and therefore one needs to tread with caution. One feels that meeting verbal violence, with some strong action like arrests, detention could have been avoided. Instead it may be more appropriate to reason with the students. They are after all our future. It was painful to see that fisticuffs were exchanged in an arena where thoughts should be.
As for nationalism, it has many hues. History tells us that those who fought in the freedom struggle had serious differences amongst them over the manner in which freedom was to be achieved. All of them contributed their mite, and it would be unfair calling one more patriotic and the other one less.
The same holds good for the array of thoughts and expressions of the youth. It is not necessary that one has to be in total agreement with all the thoughts of the other person. It is possible that one may have serious differences with some of his beliefs. Educational institutions are the ideal place where after a stirring debate, one may be able to change the other person’s beliefs or come around to accepting them. If they are suppressed, this process can never happen.
We as responsible citizens must try and ensure that, purity and sanctity of these educational institutions should be protected. Politicians and other elements will always try to take advantage of the situation and score some brownie points. It would be better if, the discontent is permitted to be expressed. Let the powers that be, give the youth the freedom to commit mistakes as long as those are not fatal to our national fabric. I believe that we have a rich heritage and our nationalism is strong and not brittle, and it will not crumble with a few slogans or posters.
Many times when we interact with youth we find a degree of disappointment with a number of issues. They are restless with the slow pace of development, decision-making etc. It is their youthful energy that makes them restive. Let Parliament debate as to how these expectations can be met rather than making an attempt to define nationalism. I hope this happens. Otherwise, we might be left with the lines of a soulful melody of Guru Dutt’s film “ Jinhe naaz hain hind par woh kahan hain!”
