It is not uncommon to see
people changing the meaning of a word as per convenience. After corrupting the
meaning of secularism, "nationalism" is the next target for
"intellectuals" especially in India. The recent chain of events at JNU
and the aftermath has started the nationalism vs patriotism debate. Many people
have argued that nationalism is dictatorial, divisive, spreads hatred and so
on. They have gone to the extent of equating nationalism with fascism and
Nazism. This is not being done out of ignorance but it is an attempt to
malign the nationalists.
Let's start with the
dictionary meanings. The Oxford dictionary defines nationalism as
"Patriotic feeling". It also gives other meanings as "extreme
form of patriotic feeling of superiority over other countries" and
"advocacy of political independence of a particular country." Further
patriotism is defined by Oxford dictionary as "vigorous support for one's
nation". Let us discuss current debate in light of above meanings of
nationalism and patriotism.
Firstly let us see
whether nationalism is same as fascism/Nazism? The philosophy of Nazism was
based upon racial superiority of Germans rather than superiority of Germany.
Therefore Nazism is not nationalism but the extreme form of racism. Now coming
to fascism, it is derived from Italian word "fascismo" which means
"a bundle or political group". Thus fascism means superiority of
particular ethnic group, and in case of Mussolini's fascism it was Italian
ethnicity. Since Italy as a nation comprised of single ethnicity therefore
Mussolini's fascism was confused with nationalism. Now coming to contemporary
India, it has multi-racial, multi ethnic diversity. Thus Indian nationalism is
neither feeling of racial superiority nor ethnic superiority. From above
arguments we can infer that Indian nationalism is neither Nazism nor Fascism.
The third meaning of
nationalism is advocacy of political independence of a country. So throughout
struggle for independence our freedom fighter aimed at political independence
of India. Thus they were nationalists. By equating nationalism with fascism
aren't we calling likes of Mahatma Gandhi, Bhagat Singh, Bose etc. fascist?
Also, by supporting secessionist demands of Kashmir, Manipur etc. we are
supporting Kashmir nationalism, Manipur nationalism. Can we afford to grant
independence to our border states? Support to these demands exposes hypocrisy
of "intellectuals". On the one hand they label Indian nationalism as
fascism while on the other they label various state nationalism as freedom of
political choices. This shows inconsistency in their interpretation of
nationalism.
What will happen if
people are not nationalists? If a jawan guarding the border loses the love for
the nation that is nationalism he will be neutral to any infiltration or aggression
into territory of the nation. Therefore, hypothetically it will lead to
occupation of the nation by other power. If a diplomat is not nationalist, he
will surrender the national interest in diplomatic negotiations. Thus nationalism
is essential not only to maintain unity and integrity of the nation but also
for growth and development. Let’s not be misguided by the propaganda of
distorted meaning of nationalism. Be a nationalist, Indian Nationalist and
proud Indian nationalist.
