(Image from Wix)
We had a professor at university who used to constantly blow my mind by saying things that I found extremely confrontational. Honestly, at that point, probably everything appeared confrontational to me. Anyway, there was this thing he used to say: "Nobody ever writes for themselves."
"No? What about journalling?" I argued.
"When you are journalling, whom are you writing to?"
"Nobody."
"Really? One part of you is doing the writing/speaking and the other (future self/past self/some imagined reader) is the one you are writing to. Aayati my friend, if things were so synthesized, you would have never journalled."
Yuck. He was right, I concluded after trying to write to myself but this self business is elusive and I let it go.
Now, as I began writing this piece, I was reminded of what he used to say (the dialogue is of course conveniently structured so as to convey a point and is not our conversation verbatim). You, whoever you are, dear friend/reader will be met by my thoughts that are perhaps not very coherently connected. Still, I hope that the overarching point and sentiment will make their way to you.
Today is 27th January, 2021, the day after Republic day in India, when many celebrate the making of the Indian constitution. It's a thing of great beauty I'm told. I'm a little ashamed to admit but I haven't read it cover to cover. Anyway, what happened yesterday? I am sure through the breadth of the country many things happened- great, good, normal, and awful. But what reached my news consumption and made me pause were three kinds of news:
1) Images, wishes, and sentiments of good-will around the fact that it was India's Republic day
2) Images, snippets of news from the ongoing farmers' protest and the corresponding Tractor march
3) An article entitled "Such people must not be spared"
So, what is the connecting thread for these three different things? Well the obvious one is that they were all incidents within the Republic of India. And they showed to me the nature of both the Nation and the Republic and how some people perceive these words.
When I was in university, I was introduced to this book called Imagined Communities by Benedict Anderson. I didn't follow through with the introduction and turn it into a full-fledged relationship, but I was given a glimpse into the idea inside the book, what Anderson had worked with and it stayed with me: Anderson traces the idea of nation and talks about how nation is nothing but a framework that is created. It does not actually exist. It's not a tangible thing such as the earth beneath our soil. It's not actual physical space, but it is a shared, imagined space and it gains its strength from its shared nature.
So the nation is like that. What about the republic? I'm bringing both these up since I have heard and seen these two words being used interchangeably especially on Republic day. Which is why yesterday I came across posts that were nationalistic in sentiment, despite it being India's republic day. So, what is a republic? I went through a few definitions (this is simplistic since as a thing I'm sure political theory students and researchers can spend a lot of time on this) and the one in Britannica stood out. This is Britannica's definition of republic: "Republic, form of government in which a state is ruled by representatives of the citizen body. Modern republics are founded on the idea that sovereignty rests with the people, though who is included and excluded from the category of the people has varied across history."
I think that last "though" caveat is important as you consider the three kinds of news that reached me.
As government officials got ready for the Republic day parade, farmers who were a part of the Tractor March were attacked by the police. There are static news pieces on Indian Express (i.e. written accounts) and there are videos being circulated on the internet by those who were there.
On Whatsapp and in other places, I saw this alongside messages wishing each other a "Happy Republic Day." Was this perfunctory, I thought? What does this wish contain? What does it mean?
There are farmers in this country who have been protesting for almost five months now. Some of them have been killed. They have been met with physical resistance long before 26th January's tractor march. Why? Are they not a part of this republic, this nation?
Similarly, how strange and disconcerting that some comedians got arrested for joking about religious deities in a very particular space where others had chosen to be to listen to that kind of banter. Are we a step away from being told what to speak and think even in our own rooms, within our own bodies?
The truth is that this happens the moment we are born- it doesn't matter if we are born in a democracy. Subtly we are always told what to think, what not to think, what to do, who to be, whom not to emulate. Sometimes, like in the case of Munawar Faruqui and his associates, we are told with vehemence. And those that are doing the telling have been entrusted with meting out justice, assigned to positions of authority.
Anyway, so where does Benedict Anderson's imagined communities fall within this? Honestly, everywhere. Some people imagine that we are one nation. They do this imagining by recounting stories that strengthen this narrative: soldiers fighting to defend all of us, politicians caring about all of us, religion and language and nationalistic pride binding all of us. But the truth is that there is a stark difference between the wishes for republic day and nationalistic talks, and a movement like the farmers' protest or an incident like comedians getting arrested and the difference is this:
The bond between the farmers is real. That relationship is based on ground reality and that protest is fed and strengthened by tangible, shared, and commonly perceived impact. Is that true for talks of nation? Who talks and who listens? Where is the real relationship-based reality? If there were truly one, would the reality of the farmers, the comedians, and those sharing messages of pride or happiness on Republic day be different for each?
So, these are my thoughts on imagined communities. I think in our desire to belong and bond we always create them. We create them not just through terms like nation or Bengalis or some other groups but we create them when we are silently talking to ourselves, when we are making notes about the world we live in. We are thinking that someone is like us and thus understands us, and someone else, doesn't. So they deserve to be not close to us.
Where it is perhaps inevitable to think in this way, it makes sense to me to at least be mindful of the difference between real and imagined. I invite you to do the same.
コメント