India is hard to define and that makes it a true country. Even though national boundaries cannot be justified, such boundaries are certain to remain for some time, given the unequal growth of various nations. But the question is whether we need to give legitimacy to all those identities of these nations. As we know these are just anomalies of isolation. Some of them small and some of them big owing to political dynamics. Many of them are based on language, religion and tribal identities. However, there are too many faultlines in these countries owing to one strong and central identity and other subordinate identities. India is a true country precisely for these reasons. India means:
- No central tribal identity
- No central linguistic identity
- No central religious identity
My opposition is not that these identities are dangerous or divisive but because these identities are primitive, meaningless and result of ignorance. There is no dignity in living or dying for these identities. Sometimes these identities even put restrictions on selection of mating partners to uphold the identities. Again absurd if one considers the possibility that Homo Sapiens might have mated Homo Erectus.
But other identities based on ideologies should be allowed provided they don't question the idea of India and don't pander to any of the above identities. If these ideologies want to have a say in political and economic sphere they should be allowed to do so either by peaceful means or by violent means. However, financial accountability should be the utmost priority in these things.
If an ideology finds that it can't control the power through peaceful means then it should get money in an open manner to forcefully overthrow the existing ideology of the nation. The tax an individual pays for internal security should come in a separate category. There should be provision for an individual to pay this part either to the ruling ideology or to the opposing ideology. Since only 2.7% of Indians pay their taxes, there should be provision for 'voluntary' basis for others who are not in the bracket. However, voluntary taxes should be accounted. The army or the forces that take care of external threats to India should be independent of the ideology that governs the country and should never intervene for any of the ideologies.
Does it matter if one ideology supports multiparty and the other single party? I think it shouldn't as long as people for mutliparty have the right to rebel against the single party rule and vice-versa. But both these ideologies should get a generational period (30 years) before any lawful violent opposition can be allowed.
- No central tribal identity
- No central linguistic identity
- No central religious identity
My opposition is not that these identities are dangerous or divisive but because these identities are primitive, meaningless and result of ignorance. There is no dignity in living or dying for these identities. Sometimes these identities even put restrictions on selection of mating partners to uphold the identities. Again absurd if one considers the possibility that Homo Sapiens might have mated Homo Erectus.
But other identities based on ideologies should be allowed provided they don't question the idea of India and don't pander to any of the above identities. If these ideologies want to have a say in political and economic sphere they should be allowed to do so either by peaceful means or by violent means. However, financial accountability should be the utmost priority in these things.
If an ideology finds that it can't control the power through peaceful means then it should get money in an open manner to forcefully overthrow the existing ideology of the nation. The tax an individual pays for internal security should come in a separate category. There should be provision for an individual to pay this part either to the ruling ideology or to the opposing ideology. Since only 2.7% of Indians pay their taxes, there should be provision for 'voluntary' basis for others who are not in the bracket. However, voluntary taxes should be accounted. The army or the forces that take care of external threats to India should be independent of the ideology that governs the country and should never intervene for any of the ideologies.
Does it matter if one ideology supports multiparty and the other single party? I think it shouldn't as long as people for mutliparty have the right to rebel against the single party rule and vice-versa. But both these ideologies should get a generational period (30 years) before any lawful violent opposition can be allowed.
3 comments:
The points you mentioned in the early part of the Post are fine. But towards the end did you not fall into utopian fantasies? I wonder.
Identities , ha we will soon have an "unique identification" card- number as well.
Yes that is truly primitive , even a century from now.
I don't think you can call them utopian because they are certainly not about ideal world. Of course, every ideology (the present socialist democracy too) must talk about an ideal world if questioned. I'm only pondering over giving opportunities to all types of ideologies (with certain conditions). Of course, it's impossible.
The identity that I discussed here is 'collective' identity. The unique identification has nothing to do with it.
OH yes my comment on the Unique ,Identity was in jest . And the identities that want to stand out in this country are far too many for comfort
Post a Comment