Freedom Could by No Means Be Seen as A Finished Product That the Likes of Bhagat Singh And Gandhi Gave Us as A ‘Gift’
By
Avijit Pathak
Sociologist
Aug 13,
2020
Allama
Iqbal’s Sare Jahan Se Achha, Hindustan Hamara used to enchant my soul
when I was at school. Possibly, I was innocent. With wonder and reverence, I
used to look at the pages of my history book; and I loved Bhagat Singh’s
courage, Gandhi’s endurance, Subhas Chandra Bose’s heroism and Nehru’s
charisma. And I imagined the greatness of India.
These days,
I ask myself: Have I lost my innocence — the dream of my childhood? I am not
cynical, yet, I can feel the pain of my wounded consciousness as the grand
ideals of the freedom struggle fall apart. With the process of growing up, I
saw poverty and unemployment, corruption and moral decay, gross inequality amid
the glitz of vulgar affluence, caste hierarchy and communal politics, extremist
movements and encounter deaths, and even the seeds of authoritarianism. And I
began to laugh at the sort of ‘patriotism’ that, say, Manoj Kumar’s films used
to portray. Instead, the social realism as depicted in the films of Mrinal Sen
and Shyam Benegal, the diaries of those whom Indira Gandhi sent to jail during
the Emergency, or the imageries of the 1992 mandir-masjid politics occupied my
consciousness. I lost interest in watching the spectacle called the Republic
Day parade, or listening to the PM’s speech from the Red Fort.
I tried my
best not to fall into the trap of nihilistic despair. Instead, I began to
realise that freedom could by no means be seen as a finished product that the
likes of Bhagat Singh and Gandhi gave us as a ‘gift’. As a matter of fact,
freedom ought to be seen as a continual process of becoming; we must orient
ourselves to carry the spirit of freedom; and we must educate ourselves to see
things clearly, and break the chains of domination as well as seduction — not
violently, but ethically, politically and psychologically. Hence, even though
ours is a free nation, in the sense that through the ritualisation of periodic
elections we elect our own representatives, the freedom struggle is not yet
over. After all, freedom is not easy to live with; and hence, irrespective of
what the ruling regime says, we have to keep our eyes open. We must learn to
demand freedom, and live with it. Freedom is awakened intelligence; freedom is
engaged responsibility; freedom is an art of relatedness; and freedom is the
transcendence of the dichotomies of ‘rights’ vs ‘duties. Freedom is not
ahistorical; yet, freedom is the creative agency to overcome the structural
constraints. In a way, freedom takes us to the domain of possibilities.
And today
as I contemplate, I begin to see a seductive chain of domination in the
propaganda machinery that equates the qualities of leadership with the
psychology of narcissism; and nationalism with some sort of herd mentality that
is desperate in finding and finishing its ‘enemy’. A hyper-masculine saviour
with his spectacular dramaturgical performances, we are told, can ‘save
us’—from Kashmiri terrorists as well as Chinese troops in Ladakh; and it is he
who alone can give us a temple at Ayodhya, and restore the glory of the Hindu
nation. And we—not the reflexive creators, but the captive audience—must clap,
and learn to obey because even the slightest difference from the messiah is
likely to be condemned and stigmatised as anti-national. Conformity is a
virtue; dissent is criminalised; and the magical power of this sort of
hypnotising nationalism makes us forget what we can see if we dare to open our eyes:
the life-condition of a poor Hindu is not fundamentally different from that of
a poor Muslim; the ‘Hindu’ capitalist does by no means shed tears for the
‘Hindu’ proletariat; and the record-breaking height of the statue of Sardar
Patel does by no means eradicate the sufferings of the farmers in Vidarbha who
are often driven to commit suicide. Paradoxically, nationalism as an ideology
in our times, unlike what the champions of the freedom struggle thought about,
tends to become a toxic stimulant. We hate more than we love. We do not create;
we make noise. The gross symbolism, be it the chanting of Jai Shri Ram, or the
display of the surgical strike on television channels, becomes more important
than the honest or silent act of radical transformation or what Gandhi
articulated in his talisman: Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self
becomes too much with you, recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man
(woman) whom you may have seen, and ask yourself, if the step you contemplate
is going to be of any use to him (her).
Furthermore,
it should not be forgotten that in our times, many of us—members of the
aspiring middle class—fail to live with freedom because the cult of consumerism
seduces us. This is a new form of social control. The mythical notion of a
‘good living’ perpetually bombarded on us by the spectacular culture industry
transforms us into consumers. We consume not merely shaving lotion, detergent
powder, diamonds and cars; we consume sex, desire and even politics. And the
more we seek to consume, the more we deviate from what makes us caring,
creative and compassionate. Because of our indulgence with the ever-expanding
market-driven ‘needs’, it becomes exceedingly difficult for us to celebrate
what Tagore regarded as the ‘mind without fear’. Comforts silence us;
atomisation insulates us; and we live with fear—the fear of losing what we
‘have’: a false notion of safety and security.
What a
blend of stimulant nationalism and hypnotising consumerism! Is it yet another
form of colonialism?
Original
Headline: Hypnotising nationalism
Source: The Tribune India
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/freedom-no-means-be-seen/d/122612