The JNU and Nationalism
Ish Mishra
Citation of one actual or perceived wrong, in
the discourse of another undisputed wrong, amounts to its covert justification.
The statement like, “Well this is wrong but there are many other wrongs”, by
implication it objects to condemnation of “this wrong” until all the wrongs
perceived by the author of the statement are condemned. Justice (Retd) Rekha
Sharma’s Selective Condemnations (Indian Express, 25 April
2017) accuses Justice (Retd) AP Shah for being “selective” in the condemnation
of the terror unleashed by of cow-vigilante brand of nationalism, without
condemning sloganeering by JNU students a year ago, “which is clearly
ant-India”, in his MN Roy memorial lecture in Delhi on 19 April 2017 (excerpts
published in Indian Express in 2 parts). The lecture comprehensively
dealt with the various aspects of nationalism by placing it in its historical
context. She agrees with Justice Shah that “at no cost, under no circumstance
should they (the members of various RSS fronts) be allowed to take law into
their own hands ….” But questions the motives of “Justice Shah and others like
him” for speaking out “only when Hindu fringe elements resort to illegal and
violent means in the name of patriotism, cow protection, conversions, etc.”
Diversion from the agenda is tried trick to sabotage a heathy discourse. The
author’s accusation of “Justice Shah and likes” is not for what they say but
for what they do not. Since the concerted attack on JNU last year it has become
an idea and many people get haunted by its specter, on and off. To prove her
point of the “selective condemnation”, “…….. …, why is that when slogans like Hindustan
ki Barbadi tak Jung jari rahegi, jung jari rahegi were chanted at JNU,
these were not condemned? On the contrary there were many apologists for these
sloganeers…..”
It
has been proved that the CD containing “anti-India” sloganeering in JNU
telecast by some channels was doctored. But unfazed by this, the jingoists,
bent on destroying this center of academic excellence, continue ranting about the
same anti-national slogans. So much has been published about JNU since February
raid of the campus that it has transcended from a common noun, institution, to
an abstract noun, the idea. And the ideas do not die, they spread around and
create history, they may be suppressed for a while but not for ever. Indian
Express continuously published for over a month, write-ups ‘standing with JNU’
and advocating the ‘shut down JNU’ respectively, almost on everyday basis. On
the one side are reason and rationality; the culture of healthy debate and
discussion. On the other side are prejudices, lies and rumors with the masala
of chauvinistic, extra-constitutional nationalism without concretely defining
it. Standing with JNU are most of the renowned intellectuals of the world
including Noam Chomsky and Amartya Sen whereas supporters of Shut down JNU are
the likes of Venkaia Naidu. Over 500 JNU products working with prestigious
institutions of higher education like London School of Economics; Oxford;
Cambridge et-al wrote to the Vice Chancellor condemning his act of inviting
Police raid in the campus. The purpose of mentioning this is to point out the
fact that no other university with such a short history has produced such a
large number of academic luminaries. Though not revolutionary or intellectual
attainment yet share of JNU products in the country’s top bureaucracy is more
than substantial.
The
government; the RSS machineries; apologist intellectuals and a section of the
media, particularly electronic, have just this one lie to support their thesis
of JNU being a den of anti-nationalism that all of them untiringly continue
ranting till now, the doctored saga of India’s destruction slogans. I wrote in
my couple of pieces on JNU issue last year that I personally know all the
students accused of sedition and as a responsible citizen and as a teacher
stand guarantee for them that these young scholars would sacrifice themselves
for making India and the world beautiful and not break or destroy it. There is no scope of going into her randomly
linking the slogans of JNU with stones of Kashmir and tragic partition of the
country, for which the author implicitly blames the Islamic communalism,
leaving aside the Hindutva communalism, which was equally responsible for
creating an atmosphere of communal diffidence and hatred that eventually led to
the partition. History is full of evidences of how these reactionary forces
represented by Muslim League and Jamat-Islami on the one hand and Hindu
Mahasabha and RSS on the other respectively, sabotaged the national movement
and evolution of an inclusive nationalism emerging from the anti-colonial
movement and ideology by raising the bogy of ahistorical religious nationalism,
at the behest of the colonial rulers. The RSS ideologue and its longest serving
chief, MS Golwalkar is on record exhorting Hindus not to waste their energy in
fighting colonial rulers but preserve them for fighting communists; Muslims and
Christians. There is also no scope to go
into details of the regressive role of communal organizations and ideologies
detrimental to the anti-colonial nationalism; it is an attempt to put the
records straight on the JNU student’s movement and the bogey of
antinationalism.
The scientific discourses begin with defining
the concepts and the dogmatic ones avoid the definition to be able to interpret
the concept in the desired manner and
delve into abstract rhetoric using complex phrases, jargons and
incongruent, similes and metaphors; make judgmental statements without
substantiation. One of the worst victims of definition-interpretation syndrome
has been the concept of nationalism. There is again no scope to go into the
rise of modern nation state replacing feudal monarchies and that of nationalism
as its ideology, replacing the religion for the validation of the political
authority and how has it been time and again used to crush the democratic ethos
and right to dissent and protest. The noted historian Eric Hobsbawm has defined
nationalism in a constitutional democracy as adherence to the constitutional
provisions. Thus the exercise of constitutional fundamental rights of freedom
to conscience; thought; expression; association and peaceful protest by JNU
students are the acts of nationalism. The extra constitutional criminal acts of
cow vigilante; Hindu Yuva Vahini and the likes are extra constitutional and
hence anti-national. Even ranting of Hindu Rashtra slogan itself is violation
of the very spirit of the preamble of the constitution and hence anti-national.
We are passing through a tragic phase of the history in which the practicing
anti-national elements are authenticators of nationalism that must be halted.
Ish Mishra
Associate Professor
Dept. of Political Science
Hindu college
University of Delhi
Delhi 110007
9811146846
No comments:
Post a Comment