State Democracy and civil society Romal Singh MAD18121
“The Ideas Of India” by Kilani S
Kilani wrote a book called "the ideas of India" in which the introduction of the book tries to capture the idea of modern state or the politics of India. The central argument is mainly encircled in rights of individual, opportunities, liberty, the idea of secularism and equitable society which is enshrined in the constitution of India ( by the elite, nationalist constitution maker) and the worst part is the modern states are failed to reach the benchmarks of the constitution.
It gives the glimpse of a vivid picture of the history of India after 1947.It gives a sense of, how the past Generation made a great effort to make a dent on the shinning picture of secular India.
This article put me a position where I have to take a look back to the instances where the political leaders have moulded the national identities for their own good and later its aftermath effects are so heavy on the shoulders of every citizen.
Kilani argued how the political leaders fought against the brutal administrator of her majesty but later on, when it comes to rule the country by the Indian hilariously they have adopted the same way of administration, and political ideology.
After 1947 many nationalist or a Hindu nationalist thinks it’s a time for the nation-building they have a notion that they will rule the world once again in the same way their country have ruled in the past( They thought that its their time to make modern state) so our leaders (our first prime minister was somewhat attracted by the socialist ideology and little bit capitalist) so he stressed much on mixed economy he did lots of experiments like the industrial revolution, strengthening the economics and many more, this notion really arouse the enthusiasm and ambition in the middle class and the poorer section, but it didn't give a satisfactory result, it becomes more worse, sometimes it makes me a little bit anxious because our first policy on health comes after1980( we somehow forget the basic requirement of people), but for the sake of development our state focus more on the infrastructure and helping the industries to flourish, which somehow affected the larger masses, they have to abandon their land, livelihood everything, there are many examples (like Sardar Sarovar dam etc.) to support my argument. Let's talk about the green revolution, did really helps the larger masses of people? I think not at all, only the big farmers redeem this opportunity, the marginal farmer was and still in the distress and trap in the debt, the production of grains has risen(in 1966) but the people don't have the money to buy the 2 square of meals, the modern state failed to change their living standard( they tried but they missed to reached the grass root level), the next experiment was rapid urbanisation due to which people are migrating to big cosmopolitan city to make their life easier but they again traped by the newly formed evil, and again modern state failed to do any things for them.
Above discussion, maybe sound biased if we don't talk about the achievement of our nation, we have built a better constitution and judiciary system where everyone's voice is heard, it’s a nation where everyone lives in peace according to the Definition of modern freedom and liberty as compared to other nation, where many industries have been flourished and still growing, giving them(middle class) lots of opportunities, but again my critical sense stop me to emphasise, I agree that development has done a lot of good deeds to people but in the meantime it gives a negative reaction to the larger section of India.
The notion of Development is totally subjective; depend on which side of the dam you are living. Right now we are living in a kind of ecosystem where the Muslims are somewhat dominated by the majority and we the intellectuals often forget their roles in nation building (in history and present). There are many instances where the past generation has dented the picture of secular and peace-loving India like (Demolition of Babri Masjid, Gujrat riots, Muzaffarnagar riots, etc.)
Now the question arises why we have chosen European type "modern development" which has done nothing good to our country?
The answer is our political Leaders our constitution builder (elite nationalist and Hindu nationalist) who developed the constitution from the reference of European ideology because they(Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar, Saradar Patel) all get the education from the renowned institution where their way of thinking or you can say their way of seeing the world becomes limited and they lost the sense of Indianness, they omit or neglected the fragrance of Indian culture and moulded every exotic sense of Indianness into the terms of modern artefacts.
On the note, I like to conclude that yes i agree the modern state has failed to achieve its goal which was enshrined in the constitution but Being an optimistic person I can say that the world is always evolving every minute to better so I can assume that one day the dents, voids in the shinning picture of India will be filled.