Banned from temples, 250 Dalit families decide to convert to Islam

Like most of the political phenomenon, even the practice of Nationalism is not a static one. It changes with the changing political equations of the political forces and assumes the expressions which are very diverse. As such the phenomenon of Nationalism has a long journey and various state policies in particular have used it for purposes which relate more to the power of the state ‘vis a vis’ its people, power of the state ‘vis a vis’ the neighboring countries among others.

In India there has been a certain change in the practices of the state which have transformed the meaning of Nationalism during last few years. Particularly with BJP, the Hindu Nationalist outfit gaining simple majority, it has unfolded the policies where one can discern the drastic change in the meaning and application of Nationalism in regard to its citizens, particularly those belonging to minority community, with regard to those who are liberal, and with those who stand with the concept of Human rights.

Our former Prime Minister of Dr. Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said that “Nationalism and the "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" slogan are being misused to construct a "militant and purely emotional" idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. Former Prime Minister recently stated this in an apparent attack on the BJP.” The occasion was the release of a book, ‘Who is Bharat Mata’, edited by Purushottam Agarwal and Radhakrishna. This is a compilation of significant extracts from writings of Nehru, and important assessments of and contributions of Nehru by prominent personalities.

Dr. Singh went on to add "With an inimitable style…Nehru laid the foundation of the universities, academies and cultural institutions of Modern India. But for Nehru's leadership, independent India would not have become what it is today," This statement of Dr. Singh has great importance in contemporary times, as Nehru is being denigrated by Hindu nationalists for all the problems which India is facing today and attempts are on to undermine his role and glorifying Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. This is also significant as it gives us the glimpses of what Nationalism meant for Nehru.

As Singh’s statement captures the present nationalism being practiced by BJP and company, the Hindu nationalists, immediately shot back saying that Dr. Singh is supporting the anti India activities at JNU and Jamia and his party is supporting the anti India nationalists. They asked whether Singh likes the nationalism of the likes of Shashi Tharoor or Manishankar Ayer who are provoking the Shaheen Bagh protest rather than making the protestors quiet. Whether he likes the anti national protests which go on at JNU or Jamia? As per them there is no Nationalism in Congress. One more example being cited is the private visit of Shatrughan Sinha who talked to Pakistani President during his visit there recently!

Most of the arguments being used to oppose Dr. Singh are very superficial. What is being referred to; is not opposition to Indian nationalism and its central values which were the core of anti colonial struggles. While ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ may not be acceptable to a section of population, even the book he was releasing has the title ‘Who is Bharat Mata’. What is being stated by Singh is the twist which slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ has been used by Hindu nationalists to frighten the religious minorities.

Indian nation came into being on the values, which later were the foundation of Indian Constitution. Indian Constitution carefully picked up the terminology which was away from the concepts of Hindu or Muslim nationalism. That’s how the country came to be called as ‘India that is Bharat’. The freedom of expression which was the hallmark of freedom movement and it was given a pride of place in our Constitution. It respected the diversity and formulated rules where the nation was not based on particular culture, as Hindu nationalists will like us to believe, but cultural diversity was centrally recognized in the Constitution. In addition promoting good relations with neighbors and other countries of the World was also part of our principles.

JNU, Jamia and AMU are being demonized as most institutions so far regard the freedom of expression as a core part of Indian democracy. These institutions have been thriving on discussions and debates which have base in liberalism. Deliberately some slogans have been constructed to defame these institutions. While Constitution mandates good relations with neighbors, creation of ‘Anti Pakistan hysteria’ is the prime motive of many a channels and sections of other media, which are servile to the ideology of ruling Government. They also violate most of the norms of ethical journalism, where the criticism of the ruling party is an important factor to keep the ruling dispensation in toes.

A stifling atmosphere has been created during last six years. In this the Prime Minster can take a detour, land in Pakistan to have a cup of tea with Pakistan PM, but a Congress leader talking to Pakistani President is a sign of being anti National. Students taking out a march while reading the preamble of Indian Constitution are labeled as anti-national; and are stopped while those openly wielding guns near Jamia or Shaheen Bagh roam freely.

Nationalism should promote amity and love of the people; it should pave the way for growth and development. Currently the nationalism which is dominant and stalking the streets has weakened the very fraternity, which is one of the pillars of our democracy. Nehru did explain that Bharat Mata is not just our mountains, rivers and land but primarily the people who inhabit the land. Which nationalism to follow was settled during the freedom movement when Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism were rejected by the majority of people of India in favor of the Nationalism of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad, where minorities are equal citizens, deserving affirmative action. In today’s scenario the Hindu nationalists cannot accept any criticism of their policies.

Bengaluru, Jun 16: Former prime minister H D Deve Gowda on Tuesday termed as 'disturbing' the violent clash between Indian and Chinese troops in Galwan Valley and said the government should offer a clearer picture to the nation on the border issue.

He sought to know as to how Indian soldiers lost their lives during a de-escalation process and said Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh should come out with a clearer picture.

"Reports coming from #GalwanValley are disturbing. Why did our soldiers lose their lives during a de-escalation process? In national interest, the PM and RM should offer a clearer picture to the nation on the border issue with the Chinese. #LADAKHSTANDOFF," Gowda tweeted. An Indian Army officer and two soldiers were killed during the confrontation with Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley in eastern Ladakh on Monday night, the first such incident in the last 45 years that reflected massive escalation in the five- week border row.

The Army said India lost an officer and two soldiers during the violent face-off, while there were casualties on the Chinese side as well.

Bengaluru, Jan 16: Senior Congress leader K J George on Thursday appeared before the Enforcement Directorate officials here in connection with a FEMA case.

The former minister is being investigated by the ED for probable violation of provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act.

The ED had recently issued summons to George.

Speaking to reporters after appearing before the ED, George said he has answered to the officials' queries and will cooperate further also.

"ED had issued me summons, as a law abiding citizen, I have answered and gave documents to whatever they asked.

Further also if they call me...I will cooperate and provide necessary documents," he said, without divulging any details.

George clarified that no summons has been issued by the ED to members of his family.

"If required they (ED officials) will call me again, and I'm ready to cooperate," the congress leader added.

Last year, the president of the Karnataka Rashtra Samithi Ravi Krishna Reddy had complained to the ED seeking a probe into the alleged money laundering and properties held by George and his family members in the United States.

Responding to a question about a defamation case filed by him against those who have levelled the allegations, George said "Just because ED has called me for questioning, I'm not proved guilty."

"Anyone can complain to agencies like the Income Tax or ED or Lokayukta, but my only objection is with going to the press to project someone as guilty," he said.

"...going to the press with an intention to do a propaganda against me..someone who is in public life-- to project me as guilty is wrong, so I have filed defamation case stating the allegations are false," he added.

George is the third senior Congress leader from Karnataka to face an ED probe after D K Shivakumar and B Z Zameer Ahmed Khan.

Shivakumar was arrested by the agency in a money laundering case and was kept in Tihar Jail, until he got bail in October, while Khan was summoned in connection with the multi-crore IMA group Ponzi scam case.