Where Is the India I Grew Up In?

This article is not so much a complaint as a cry of anguish. What is happening to the Bombay,
nay India, I grew up in? As I witness the rising intolerance, tacitly encouraged by the
government, both at national and state levels; as I watch the majority systematically attempting
to dominate and even ignore minorities, without a thought to the latters aspirations and
mounting frustrations; as I lament over the inexorable stripping away of our constitutional rights
of free speech and freedom of expression - in the spurious name of pseudo nationalism; I can
only watch in helpless horror the deterioration of the nations core values and ethics.

To be sure, the India of my childhood and adolescence - dominated by Jawaharlal Nehru and
Indira Gandhi - was far from perfect. Nehru was a towering personality and an inspiring
revolutionary leader, but his grand vision for independent India often lacked practicality. In a
world dominated by two superpowers, his insistence on non-alignment was somewhat utopian. It
was also a bit hypocritical, since his fascination for an idealistic form of socialism led to a
definite tilt towards the Soviet Union. His insistence on India becoming self-reliant was well
meant, but ill thought out in a land that had been exploited and denuded by 200 years of British
occupation. An almost total ban on the import of consumer goods gave rise to a monopoly of
shoddy manufacturing and chronic shortages of almost everything. Those below 40 probably
cannot imagine a country where one had to wait years for a new World War 2 model automobile,
or a telephone connection, but for many old timers like me it was a distressing fact of life. I
remember when getting hold of a bar of foreign Kit-Kat chocolate was considered a major
accomplishment. Most disastrously, Nehrus insistence on going it alone created the bloated,
inefficient, self-serving and corrupt bureaucracy whose vestiges still plague us today - even
during the reign of a progressive Narendra Modi. Indira Gandhi largely continued her fathers
legacy, except for the brief period when power went to her head and she imposed the
unconstitutional Emergency.

In spite of these tribulations, the people for the most part breathed free and easy. I am not talking
about the so-called lower castes who continued to be looked down on and shunned, as they had
been for centuries. In general however, people went about their business happily grumbling
about government restrictions and bureaucratic high handiness; about the sloth and corruption in
government offices; and sundry grievances. There was no internet back then and no Twitter or
Facebook, but people vented their spleen in letters to newspaper editors without fear of being
labeled anti-national, or being picked up by the cops for defamation. Religion entered into the
picture only in the form of corny Sardarji jokes or mocking ethnic traits like mad bawas. It was
received in the sense it was meant; and no one took offense. Lynch mobs were unheard of - and
so was jihad, love or any other kind.

After Manmohan Singh ushered in economic liberalization in the early 1990s, people were
thrilled at the sight of new cars on the roads; at the prospect of being able to buy foreign goods
without patronizing the neighborhood smuggler; and getting a new telephone connection in a
week. Otherwise life went on much as before. After the Babri Masjid demolition, sectarian
violence flared for a while, but soon became monotonous. Besides, it was fairly localized and did
not affect the majority of the population. Even after the BJP assumed power and Vajpayee
became Prime Minister, there was no real apprehension in the minds of the general populace.
BJPs close association with the RSS was known, of course, but it was downplayed and did not
have any significant impact on the daily life of the common man: so nobody bothered about it.
When Manmohan Singh became Prime Minister, nothing really changed until a firebrand
Narendra Modi latched on to corruption in the Congress and created a national furore. In truth,
the corruption was at the top and had minimal impact on the lives of ordinary citizens, but Modi
cleverly managed to demonize the entire party and convinced the populace that it was unfit to
govern. The rest, as they say, is history.

During Congress rule, BJP spokespersons on talk shows stoutly denied that they took
instructions from, or were even influenced by the RSS. After Modis ascension however, the
close RSS association was freely, even proudly, acknowledged. Modi openly identified himself
as a kar sevak; and the rest of the party took their cue from him. The RSS had never made any
secret of their belief that they considered Bharat to be a Hindu nation; and that those professing a
different faith lived here at their sufferance. After Modi engineered a string of victories in state
elections, the RSS felt emboldened to enforce their philosophy.

In a free country, everyone, even political outfits are entitled to hold their views and expound
their philosophy. The problem occours when the said outfit, aided and abetted by the government
of the day, tries to ram this philosophy down the throats of unwilling participants. The BJP/RSS
believe that India is, or should be, a Hindu nation...fine. Let them try to convince the sizable
percentage of the population that does not share their faith, through reasoned arguments. Even a
bit of propaganda would be tolerable. What is not acceptable in a free society is for the ruling
dispensation to turn a blind eye while their cohorts and self-styled defenders of the faith go on
a rampage and indulge in physical violence and even lynching. What is not acceptable is for
these hooligans to be let off with a slap on the wrist after a token arrest - usually prompted by
media pressure. What is not acceptable is for elected state Chief Ministers to pander to a lumpen
vote bank by trampling on our constitutional right of freedom of expression by arresting
individuals for posting something critical of BJP leaders; or by outlawing a commercial movie.

With distressing frequency, we read reports of mob justice, of lynching individuals - usually
belonging to the minority community - for allegedly possessing beef. How can a nation which
has the word secular in its Constitution impose a set of beliefs peculiar to a particular religion
on the entire population? We read about law abiding citizens being coerced to prove their
nationalism and being pilloried by pseudo-nationalists for frivolous reasons like not being
willing to shout platitudes like Bharat Mata Ki Jai. True patriotism has to come from within; it
cannot be forced. Unfortunately, these super-patriots have turned it into a tamasha. What is
equally disgusting is the way political parties of all hues extend tacit support to these vandals; for
reasons that should be obvious. An atmosphere of fear is being created in our so-called
democracy, where creativity and original ideas are being stifled; where one has to think twice
before voicing ones anger or frustration in a Facebook post; where you can be arrested for
merely forwarding a post that the government deems offensive. Is this the freedom our
forefathers fought for?

The Modi era was ushered in with a lot of hope and promise. The people of India soundly
rejected politics as usual, where the interests of the common man were accorded the least
priority. Here, they thought, was a dynamic leader who would shatter the comfort level of
entrenched and self-serving political parties; who would lead the nation in a new and positive
direction. Modi has largely delivered on his promises; by cutting red tape; by curtailing
traditional avenues of corruption; and by displaying a genuine concern for the poor. Without
openly admitting it, he encouraged a cult of personality, but the people forgave him because of
his development agenda that was actually improving their daily lives.

Then came the Gujarat election. Modi began to display signs of desperation highly
uncharacteristic of a self-confident individual. Winning in his home state became a prestige
issue; and somewhat diminished his image as a leader who put his countrys interests before his
own. The development agenda was virtually ignored; and Modi reverted to personal insults on
the opposition, that were reminiscent of the politics of old; which many Indians thought they had
left behind. A case in point is the Mani Shankar Aiyar episode. Aiyar is an established motor
mouth who, in his zeal to prove his loyalty to the Gandhi family, sometimes resorts to
intemperate remarks. He deserved condemnation, but for Modi to make it a caste issue and play
the victim was unworthy of him. So was his ham-handed attempt to paint Aiyar as a Pakistani
agent. This is the sort of behaviour we expect from our run of the mill netas; not from Modi.

So I ask again, where is the India I grew up in? For sure, it was an India where the people
grumbled incessantly; despaired of their politicians; and cursed the bloated and corrupt
bureaucracy. But there was an air of freedom that somehow compensated for the travails. That
freedom is being gradually and inexorably denuded. If we remain complacent, a time may come
when we actually long for the bad old days.