Journey of a 60-year-old republic |

Journey of a 60-year-old republic
By Tushar Gandhi Jan 24 2010
Tags: Opinion
Tomorrow, we will be a 60 year-old repu­blic. On this day, 60 years ago, we ado­pt­ed our Constitution. It took a lot of collective effort to arrive at what was then the perfect Constitution for a newly liberated nation. Our founding fathers took gre­at care to create a document that would serve everyone eq­ually and fairly. The docume­nt addressed the needs of ev­ery group that comprised a diverse amalgamation of the privileged and those who enjoyed none, the various religi­ous groups and their need to maintain their distinct identities, the discriminated gender and the vast number of poverty-stricken, illiterate Indians. The Constitution has stood us in good stead for 60 years, but six decades is a long time, changes occur and to accommo­date those changes, the systems must also evolve, and so should our Constitution.

We are a 60 year-old republic, but have our democratic institutions and practices be­en audited honestly and sincerely? Some will say that el­ections are people’s audit in a democracy. This may be true in many democracies, but in India, we don’t have free and fair elections. Elections are rigged and unfairly conducted. Many people will object, but take a look at how political parties manipulate elections. Candidates are selected based on the caste mix of the consti­tuency, not on ability but ‘win-ability’. Political parties have the caste equations perfected for every constituency, so a candidate from the influential or ‘vote bank’ caste wins.

Since there are no debates in Parliament and Bills are pa­ssed with negligible participation from people’s representatives, the ability of the member of Parliament to understand the Bill and then vote, is not essential. This is how our democratic system is rigged.

We call ourselves a democratic nation, but in 60 years, we have never had a referendum on any issue. At present, Andhra Pradesh is burning on the issue of a separate Telangana. Why is the government dithering and allowing the iss­ue to become vitiated? Why isn’t it holding a referendum on Telangana? Let the people, who are directly affected by the move, vote and decide.

There are demands for oth­er smaller states, too. Let the­re be a nationwide referendum on whether these dema­nds should be accepted and smaller states created. Then, based on the results of the refer­en­dum, constitute a states re­organisation commission and let it carve out smaller states.

People’s representatives, bu­reaucrats and the judiciary are constantly attempting to snatch away citizen’s rights. Take the example of right to information (RTI). In a demo­cracy, why should anyone be permanently protected from RTI queries? On issues that are confidential, the questioner can be told that it cannot be answered. Why keep someone permanently immune to qu­es­tioning. Isn’t that undemocratic? On the one hand, we ta­lk about the need for transpa­rency, and on the other, we pro­tect people behind ‘privileges’.

For too long our judiciary has been shielded by the provision of ‘contempt of court’. People questioning the judiciary have been bullied into silence with the threat of ‘contempt’ proceedings. Why sh­ou­ld the system of delivering justice be thus protected? Th­ere have been many instances of intentional miscarriage of justice, why can’t it be expos­ed and challenged just like ev­erything else in a healthy, fun­ctional democracy? Why are­n’t judges punished when they act illegally and immorally? With the number of cases of corruption at the highest levels in our justice system coming to light, one wonders if justice in India is free and fair any more.

Our founding fathers realised that the persecuted cl­ass of our untouchables and other lower castes were not equipped to be able to stand on equal terms with the upper castes, so a time-bound incentive of reservations was introduced. Let no one misunderstand this, but BR Ambedkar was convinced that after 10 years of reservations in education and jobs the persecuted and deprived classes would be able to hold their own in our democracy.

Sixty years have passed since the equalising incentive was introduced but there is no equality. Post-‘Mandal’, reservations, which have become a tool for electoral gains, are becoming a tool for fragmenting our nation on caste lines. Sh­ouldn’t there be a healthy debate on the efficacy of reservations, and why they haven’t ac­hieved the results that Ba­basaheb was convinced wou­ld occur within 10 years?

In a healthy democracy, why should there be any unchallengeable holy cows? It’s time that an honest, unselfish and sincere audit of our de­mo­cracy and democratic machinery is conducted. Why can’t citizens be trusted to be mature enough to vote on issues that vitiate and weaken the fabric of our nationhood? At 60, shouldn’t we now truly become a democracy?

I leave you, with the words of the Father of our Nation, “You may get the finest constitution that is conceivable... It will be worthless, if there are not men and women fit enough to work that constitution.” Young India; September 15, 1927.

Indian Republic Day Military Parade

Brief History,Geography and Government in India

One-third the area of the United States, the Republic of India occupies most of the subcontinent of India in southern Asia. It borders on China in the northeast. Other neighbors are Pakistan on the west, Nepal and Bhutan on the north, and Burma and Bangladesh on the east.

The country can be divided into three distinct geographic regions: the Himalayan region in the north, which contains some of the highest mountains in the world, the Gangetic Plain, and the plateau region in the south and central part. Its three great river systems—the Ganges, the Indus, and the Brahmaputra—have extensive deltas and all rise in the Himalayas.

India is a Federal republic.
One of the earliest civilizations, the Indus Valley civilization flourished on the Indian subcontinent from c. 2600 B.C. to c. 2000 B.C. It is generally accepted that the Aryans entered India c. 1500 B.C. from the northwest, finding a land that was already home to an advanced civilization. They introduced Sanskrit and the Vedic religion, a forerunner of Hinduism. Buddhism was founded in the 6th century B.C. and was spread throughout northern India, most notably by one of the great ancient kings of the Mauryan dynasty, Asoka (c. 269–232 B.C. ), who also unified most of the Indian subcontinent for the first time.

In 1526, Muslim invaders founded the great Mogul Empire, centered on Delhi, which lasted, at least in name, until 1857. Akbar the Great (1542–1605) strengthened and consolidated this empire. The long reign of his great-grandson, Aurangzeb (1618–1707), represents both the greatest extent of the Mogul Empire and the beginning of its decay.

Origins of Salwar Kameez

In the hinter lands of Central Asia, which was then under the domination of Iranian and Turkish people; Salwar kameez as an expression of Indian ethnicity made its presence felt for the very first time. The general habit of the Iranian and Turkish people were putting in baggy trousers whilst drawing it tight with strings. Research says that this pattern was indeed the progenitor of today’s salwar kameez. Thus this era actually states the origin of salwar kameez.
Amidst its royal grandeur, enigmatic feel and feminine charm salwar kemeez breathes the sighs of history. With its roots deeply seated in the antiquities of medieval India, the origin of Salwar Kameez still carries the rich sartorial chronicle amidst its fall, stitch, luster and feel.

Ethnicity And Ethnic Fragmentation

The primordialist explanation cannot explain the development of new identities out of the melting pot. Manipuri society is the collectivity where the primordial attachments of the ethnic groups had been melted down. In order to understand the ethnicity and ethnic fragmentation, we have to look for a new paradigm that will enable us to answer the question of ethnic formation, ethnic interests, ethnic fragmentation that took place during the colonial and post-colonial periods of the Third world.

Circumstantialist explanation

Fredrik Barth, a student of Edmund Leach, took ethnicity as a type of social process in which the notions of cultural differences are communicated. Barth was influenced by Edmund Leach’s Political System of Highland Burma (1954). According to Barth and other members of this school, the changing identities of ethnic actors are because of rational choice. The ecological, economic, political circumstances make it the instrument. So, ethnic group is rather self-ascription, subjective group.

A larger section of Bishnupriyas fled away from Manipur along with a good numbers of the Meiteis (including the Pangal) to Assam, Tripura and Bengal (specially the places, now in Bangladesh), at the wake of Burman occupation and atrocities in 1819. The Burmans installed puppet kings in Manipur and occupied the state for seven years. Out of fear of the tortures inflicted, many Manipuris fled westwards. The Burmans killed thousands of Manipuris and had decimated the population of the state to one-third. Those who fled away settled in various places in these foreign countries and had been living there for about one century. However, they had a strong sense of oneness with the Manipuri identity and had preserved the age-old traditions.

New Ethnic Groups Creation

During the 19th century, new ethnic groups were created by European colonial governments in order to facilitate ruling their new indigenous subjects. This was the case in Australia and over much of Western North America where there had been small, independent bands of foraging societies. The bands were combined into larger political units by government officials in order to simplify the control of them. Indigenous leadership positions, such as chiefs, were created for peoples who previously did not have the concept of a leader who could act and speak for their societies.
Map of European colonies around the world in 1938--Belgian, British, Dutch, French, Italian, and Portuguese

European colonial empires in 1938

Similarly, the colonial powers forced diverse ethnic groups to see themselves as being part of larger nations with common ethnicity. This was the case in India, Malaysia, New Guinea, Indonesia, the Philippines, and much of Africa. In part, these new nations were created to facilitate control.

Some ethnic groups have been created by themselves for the rational goal of gaining political and economic power. It has been suggested that this was the case with Latinos in the United States. Until the 1960's, their identity was mostly as distinct Mexican American, Cuban American, and Puerto Rican groups. Since then, a feeling of shared cultural identity as "Hispanics" has been fostered by Latino leaders. At the same time, the significant cultural differences between these groups have been underplayed in order to reinforce Latino unity. As new Central and South American immigrants arrived, the Latino ethnic group redefined itself to incorporate them as well. Even Portuguese speaking Brazilians have been included. The creation and recognition of a homogenous Hispanic identity was fostered by the national government. The term "Hispanic" was actually created by federal bureaucrats working under President Nixon in the early 1970's.

Process Of Ethnic Identification

African Americans are not unique in having a relentless negative image of themselves portrayed in the popular media. Mexican Americans, Arab Americans, and some Southeast Asian groups are also experiencing it to some degree. In fact, most minority groups in heterogeneous societies like the United States have had a similar experience. Even European immigrants, such as the Irish in the 19th century, were commonly portrayed in the press as being dirty, stupid, alcoholic, and violent. Before the Civil War in the southern states, Irish immigrants were hired for construction jobs that were considered too risky for black slaves because they were monetarily valuable, unlike the Irish. Even as late as the mid 20th century, unemployed Irishmen in the Northeastern U.S. were at times faced by signs saying "No Irishmen need apply."


The unfavorable portrayal of African Americans still continues today, to some extent, with TV news programs focusing on black gang violence, welfare mothers, and relatively poor performance in school. After generations of images reflecting this view, many African Americans came to define themselves negatively. It was not a mere coincidence that the "black power" political movement of the 1960's created the catch phrase "black is beautiful." This was a conscious effort to counter negative images with a positive one.

What is relation between class and ethnicity?

Each culture has it's own class system, some very well defined, and others (like in the US) not very clear at all. However, this happens amongst all ethnic groups that I am aware of, to greater or lesser extents.

Where differences happen is when the culture of one ethnic groups comes to dominate another. 300 years ago, Arabs and blacks in Africa captured blacks, and sold them to Europeans, who took them primarily to the Americas. Thus, a white person would be in a higher class than black one, automatically. This held true for a long time, and some still think that way today. In the same way the Japanese dominate the Ainu, a white aboriginal trip in Northern Japan. And so one. There are many examples. In Bermuda, British whites are on top, the Portuguese merchants are the middle, and blacks are at the bottom.

But, these are due to the histories of domination, and are by accident, not ethnicity. I do not think you can make a connection between the two that holds universally. Perhaps in one country or areas, but somewhere else, the situation might be reversed