O
NE WOULD HAVE THOUGHT patriotism is
like motherhood. Not much to debate about.
Apparently that’s not true. It is in fact a many-
splendoured thing. Much like a rainbow but
with many shades of grey. I discovered this after
reading the brilliant essays in this issue written by an eclectic
group of 11 intellectuals. We invited them on the occasion of
Independence Day to consider the many meanings and con-
sequences of patriotism, for India today and indeed for India
of the past. By illuminating the many aspects and complexi-
ties of Indian patriotism, we hope to hold a mirror up to the
country at what feels like an inflection point in its history.
It is particularly relevant in today’s environment when
people are routinely being accused of being anti-national,
and nationalism is being confused with patriotism.
Also because we live in interesting times. Across the
world, we are witnessing the resurgence of strong national-
ist leaders who profess love for their country. Patriotism, we
find, is now increasingly veering towards nationalism—an
ideology premised on an individual’s loyalty and devotion
being above the interests and opinions of others.
Patriotism has found a new meaning in India. We saw a
national election which foregrounded nationalism and the
rise of a party. Love for one’s country is a concept that can
be deployed in many ways—to unite or divide, to celebrate
or destroy. When does patriotism turn into nationalism and
when does nationalism become jingoism?
Our Independence Day special, curated by Managing
Editor Kai Friese, offers a salon of stellar writers. In the spirit
of a salon, we have divergent views on the changing nature of
patriotism. It has been looked at from the perspective of poli-
tics, films, cricket, the military, of marketing and of history.
Salman Khurshid, lawyer and politician, says national-
ism is devotion to your own—even sometimes to the detri-
ment of another—while patriotism is striving to uphold the
honour and respect of one’s country even in the face of pain
and deprivation. For filmmaker Meghna Gulzar, on the other
hand, patriotism is a personal emotion, like religion.
Former bureaucrat Gopalkrishna Gandhi elaborates
on why love for the country has a flip side—hate—and why
two emotions in one heart are an unnatural and unhealthy
state for a Republic to be in. Expounding on the nationalist
challenge mounted by the BJP and the invocation of Bharat
Mata, journalist-MP Swapan Dasgupta examines the equa-
tion of national unity with Hindu cultural nationalism.
For popular writer Amish, patriotism is civilisational, a
collective belief in an ancient civilisational way in which we
can imagine India. We are defined not by who we were, but
by who we are: inheritors of a great civilisation.
Marketing professional Rama Bijapurkar explores
how consumer brands continue to celebrate and recogniseIndia’s unity in diversity. Author Ruchir Joshi traces the
transformation of an Indian obsession—cricket—and won-
ders if the game now played by an aggressive, world-beating
side comes with political overtones.
Academic Alok Rai fears the nationalism of ‘New India’
must inevitably entail violence. Former Northern Army
Commander Lt General D.S. Hooda argues that while pa-
triotism is always present at the back of a soldier’s mind, it is
not considered a major factor with which you can motivate
men going into battle. He quotes writer George Orwell on
patriotism: “By patriotism, I mean devotion to a particular
place and particular way of life which I believe to be the best
but have no wish to force on other people.”
Sociologist Arkotong Longkumer highlights the clash be-
tween the ethnic homeland politics of India’s Northeast and
the overarching ideology of Hindutva that professes a unitary
territorial reality at its core. Carnatic vocalist T.M. Krishna
explains why patriotism in its essence is not obedience or
faithfulness but the celebration of questioning and free will.THE NUANCES OF PATRIOTISM and nationalism that
played out this week are a subtext in realpolitik. The NDA
government made an historic decision in dismantling Ar-
ticles 370 and 35A, and reducing the state to two Union ter-
ritories—Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. This is a seismic
shift in the political landscape of the country. Kashmir has
been a festering sore in Indian politics for the past 72 years.
Just about everything has been tried—from insaaniyat to
military force—but nothing has changed. The constitutional
legalities of this audacious act will continue to be debated,
but it has shifted the whole paradigm in this troubled state as
well as in our relationship with our neighbour.
The move is based on the premise that it will bring rapid
economic development to the state. J&K will now be better
integrated economically with the rest of India as previ-
ous restrictions will be lifted. I believe there is no better
integrator than markets. They will bring connectivity, em-
ployment and investment in social infrastructure; overall,
better lives for the citizens of the state. Had this been done
70 years ago, there would have been no Kashmir problem.
However, if the promise of economic growth is not fulfilled
now, we will not only be back to square one but worse. It
also marks a return to the question: what is the government
going to do for the rest of India’s sagging economy?
Enjoy reading this special issue which celebrates the
Indian spirit of inquiry and the freedom to do so. I wish you
all a Happy Independence Day.(Aroon Purie)
FROM THEEDITOR-IN-CHIEF Our Aug. 20, 2018 cover