By Aparna Pande
This article appeared in Indolink on August 15, 2007
There are three candidates standing for the post of the Vice President of India. Instead of focusing on their credentials stories in the print and electronic media have so far focused on their religion.
The Father of our Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, when asked his views on who should be made President had once opined: ‘a Bhangi girl’. His point was that symbols matter in public life. A ‘Bhangi girl’ as president would have symbolized the inclusiveness of Indian democracy, with the weakest and poorest being the head of the nation.
If we look back in history Akbar is considered the greatest Mughal emperor not only because of his tolerance but also because he consolidated the empire by resting it on the shoulders of both Hindu and Muslim nobles. Akbar built the foundations of the empire by incorporating the erstwhile Hindu Rajput rulers into his own government in various parts of the country. Symbolism was clearly helpful. A tradition soon emerged whereby after his coronation, every Hindu Maharaja went to the Mughal court for a ’tilak’ from the Mughal emperor as confirmation of the coronation.
The British too used symbolism to facilitate their rule over India. The East India Company gained the title ‘Company Bahadur’ from the very people it subdued and it employed Indians to fight Indians. The Mughal emperor was kept on the throne as long as it was felt that he was a useful symbol for preventing any uprising against foreign rule. The British Raj (the title itself a symbol) rested not just on military power but on the support of the princely states and the ‘brown sahibs’.
Symbols are important because they instill a sense of association with the person who is leading us or has inspired us. They draw our minds and hearts to something noble or sacred and therefore inspirational. Symbols must not only inspire but also unite. Symbols that divide and address themselves to small groupings are in the long run divisive.
During the National Movement Indians took up the symbol of ‘Ganesha’ from Bal Gangadhar Tilak and of tying ‘Rakhees’ from Rabindranath Tagore. The ‘charkha’ and ‘khadi’, advocated by Mahatma Gandhi were adopted by Indians because they were symbols of national pride and dignity of labor.
All they required was simple living on the part of Indians, not any observance of particular rituals. ‘Non-cooperation’ with the British and ‘boycott’ of foreign cloth again were embraced by the masses and elites because they symbolized pride in oneself as well as peaceful resistance to the colonizer.
The widescale espousing of Gandhiji’s concepts of ‘ahimsa’ and ‘satyagraha’ lay in their being in tune with the ancient Indian civilization and our concepts of ‘dharma’ and ‘satya.’ The Mahatma made it a point to wear loin cloth, spin khadi, keep fasts and speak in the local languages not only because he believed in simplicity but also because he wanted to send a message to the people and Indian politicians. The ‘Gandhi cap’, ‘Nehru jacket’ and the white kurta-pyjama worn by the politicians might be a source of laughter for some comic strips but the message behind them was the same: “Remember, the masses are important.”
After Independence, certain policies with an appealing symbolic value have found a ready audience. Nehruvian socialism found acceptance among most sections of society, even the private sector, because it could be traced to the deep-rooted Indian concepts of providing for the poor and the giving of charity. Non alignment was again a policy which had broad appeal both because India (and Indians) considered they were different from other nations and because there was a resistance to be part of global power games.
India is a vast country with a total area of 3,287,590 sq km. We have over 350 languages and over 1650 dialects. Among the minorities in India the largest minority is its Muslim populace. Over time, Indian culture and Indian civilization have benefited immensely from Muslim influence in every field be it language, art and architecture, economy, politics and society. The fact that the Muslims are a numerical minority has not changed the reality of Indian Muslims’ contribution to the nation’s history.
Recent reports by governmental as well as non-government organizations indicate a lack of economic and social progress among Indian Muslims in recent decades. Indians are proud that very few Indian Muslims have been involved in acts of terror around the world. We are also proud that the leading nuclear scientist in India, Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, and one of the leading businessmen in the country, Azim Premji, are both Indian Muslims. The majority of the community, however, still has a long way to go.
At the time of Independence, Indians had several role models to choose from — Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Azad among them. Most of the role models were Hindu and, except Gandhi, were modern in their outlook. The leading businessmen and academics were also mainly Hindu. Indian Muslims had fewer role models such as Maulana Azad or Zakir Husain, a significant segment of the Muslim leadership and population having been lost through partition.
The Indian Muslims needed a Nehru with modern thinking, with emphasis on science and technology and with a desire to break with the past and move to the future. They also needed a Gandhi to ensure that they do not forget their traditions and their cultures. They looked to Azad who tried to combine both but he was not there for long enough and there was no one after him to continue his tradition.
As independent India turns 60 years old, the nation is reflecting on its modern history and accomplishments. Symbolism is the essence of mass politics and one can understand the need to represent the various communities of India at the level of its leaders. However, maybe what we also need to do is to look for other leaders within the Muslim community, businessmen, academics, sportsmen, and project them as the symbols of a new and growing India.