Sathyam Commentary
3 February 2001
Tamil Nation & the Unity of India
"...The break up of India, if it comes
will not come from the efforts of
tamilnation.org.
It will come despite our efforts. It will
come from a failure of political leaders in India to openly recognise that
India is a multi national state - and recognise the enduring wisdom of the
words of Pramatha Chaudhuri: "...It is not a bad thing to try and weld many
into one but to jumble them all up is dangerous, because the only way we can
do that is by force. If you say that this does not apply to India, the reply
is that if self determination is not suited to us, then it is not suited at
all to Europe. No people in Europe are as different, one from another, as
our people. There is not that much difference between England and Holland as
there is between Madras and Bengal. Even France and Germany are not that far
apart."... We, for our part, recognise that Tamils are Indians. We are
Indians because we are Tamils. And, if we were not Tamils, we would not be
Indians. Again, if there were no Bengalis, no Marathis, no Kannadigas, no
Tamils (to mention but a few of the peoples of the Indian subcontinent),
there would be no 'Indians'. The unity of India will not come simply
by English speaking 'Indians' speaking to each other in English...Those concerned to secure the unity of India will need to adopt a more
'principle centred' approach towards struggles for self determination
in the Indian region. "
Ravishankar Dixit a visitor to
tamilnation.org
wrote on 25 December
2000
"(Your) site has very good subject matter which reflects the superior quality of
the intellectuals in Tamil society. But alas, I am an Indian and I cannot see a part of India going
off. I cannot see why Tamilians need a separate Tamil Land.... Every language has its
own self-respect, its own greatness. I don't know why Tamilians are so touchy when it comes to their language. Look at Kannada for example (it is my mother
tongue) or Marathi. Kannadigas number some 50 million and Marathis a little over 90 million. Do you think we
do not have enough number of people to ask for our own Kannadanadu or
Marathisthan? Or do you think we do not have that right because our cultures and languages are less supreme than Tamil, for
which reason we have to be a part of India?... So, just learn
how to live together and respect other languages and cultures. Just learn to
mingle peacefully with other people. Uphold the dignity of India. Without the
name of India, Tamilians will be dirt cheap. It is because of the greatness
that is India, Tamilians also are having a piece of the cake. If they want to
opt out, they will be eating pieces of shit..." (see also
Response by Ravishankar
Dixit, 16 February 2001)
We are moved to respond.
More than 80 years ago, in 1920,
Pramatha Chaudhuri wrote an article titled
"Bengali Patriotism". It appeared in the well known Bengali monthly, Sabuj Patra
(Green Leaves), which he edited. Pramatha Chaudhuri spoke as a Bengali
and wrote in Bengali, but that which he so eloquently said would apply equally to the
Tamils, the Marathis, the Malayalees, and the other nations of the Indian sub continent.
Chaudhuri described the various people of India as
different "nations" entitled to national self determination. According to him
the possibility of harmony and co-operation was much more, if this separateness was
recognised rather than denied. He declared that the unity of India will not come from the efforts of "minds bred
on English textbooks" and insisted that that unity will be built only on the foundation of
"provincial patriotism".
It was Mark Twain who once remarked that reports of his death were greatly
exaggerated. Reports during recent years of the disintegration of India may also be
greatly exaggerated. Nevertheless, the challenge that India continues to face (with
increasing urgency) is the task of telescoping two different processes which are at work.
On the one hand, after the departure of the colonial ruler in 1948, we have seen the
emergence of the separate national identities of the Indian sub continent, seeking
recognition and demanding equality, in the fullest sense of that term - not dissimilar to
the emergence of the nations of Europe in the aftermath of the Industrial Revolution in
the 18th and the 19th centuries.
On the other hand, we live in the 21st century, at a time when the increasing
inter-dependence of states has led to the growth of regional economic and political
communities. The same states who warred with each other in Europe to assert their separate
interests, have felt the need to pool their sovereignty within the framework of a larger
European Community.
True inter-dependence will come only between those who are independent. Pramatha Chauduri's writing
(in the 1920s) remains essential reading today for all us
who regard ourselves as Indians and who are concerned to secure and protect the unity that
is India. He said:
| "To be united due to outside pressure and to unite through mutual regard are not
the same. Just as there is a difference between the getting together of five convicts in a
jail and between five free men, so the Congress union of the various nations of India and
tomorrow's link between the peoples of a free country will be very different. Indian
patriotism will then be built on the foundation of provincial patriotism, not just in
words but in reality." |
A stable unity will emerge only when New Delhi acquires the vision and the strength to structure a polity where the different
peoples of the sub continent (including those in the island of Sri Lanka)
may freely associate with each other in equality and in freedom. The price of
failure, will be the disintegration of the Indian state because, in the years
ahead, the
political awakening of the different peoples of India will continue to gather momentum
- and this will be unstoppable.
If democracy means the rule of the people, by the people and
for the people, then it also means that no one people may impose their rule on
another. It is this appeal to democracy which has given national movements their enduring
appeal.
It will be futile
for New Delhi, Canutelike, to order the rising tide of nationalism to recede. The rising
tide of Kashmiri nationalism will not recede in the years to come. Neither will Assamese
nationalism recede - on the contrary, these nationalisms and others will grow from year to
year.
If the disintegration of India comes, it may come with the same seeming suddenness of
the collapse of the centralised Soviet state - because the seeds of disintegration
have had several decades to germinate, underground and in fertile soil. It will come because of the failure to learn the lessons of the two
world wars - lessons which led to the formation of the European Union. It
will come because of a failure to understand the underlying reasons which
contributed to the break up of the Soviet Union - a break up, which showed,
Gorbachov (amongst others) that too little too
late was not enough.
The real political question is not one of separation or division but one of
determining the terms on which different nations may 'associate' with one another in
equality and in freedom - and
this is the issue that
the 21st century will have to confront.
And, here we need to understand that the growing togetherness of the Tamil people,
is but a step in the growth of a larger unity. The words of Sumantra Bose in
Reconceptualising State, Nation and
Sovereignty merit attention:
| "The clash between the ever-increasing clamour of
claims to nationhood and aspirations to sovereignty, on the one hand. and the persistence,
indeed consolidation, of visions of a monolithic, unitarian, and indivisible statehood, on
the other, certainly represents one of the most striking contradictions, and one of the
most fundamental moral and ideological conflicts, of our times...
Demands for 'national selfdetermination' are in one sense, therefore, also a struggle
for a higher form of democracy....The poetical and philosophical vision that is required
today has been eloquently articulated, ironically enough,
by radical Tamil
nationalists ('chauvinists' and 'separatist terrorists', according to the official
wisdom)..." |
It was a vision that was spelt out in
Tamil
Eelam, Kurds & Bhutan in July 1985, and
articulated
on behalf of the Tamil national movement at Thimpu in August 1985, more than 15 years
ago:
| "... we are not chauvinists. Neither are we racists.
The
togetherness of the Tamil people is not the expression of an exaggerated nationalism. We
do not say that our language is the sweetest in the world but we do say that our language
is sweet to our ears. We do not say that our culture is the oldest in the world but we do
say that it is a culture of great antiquity and that it has made a rich contribution to
the world. We do not say that our thinkers are the most influential that the world has
known but we do say that their thoughts have left the world with a greater understanding
of itself. We do not say that we are the chosen people but we do say that
we, too, are a
people, and that we are entitled to live our lives in the way we choose.
The growing togetherness of the Tamil people,
is but a step in the growth of a larger unity. We know that in the end, national freedom
can only be secured by a voluntary pooling of sovereignties, in a regional, and ultimately
in a world context. ... we recognize that our future lies with the peoples of
the Indian region and the path of a greater and a larger Indian union is the direction of
that future.
It is a union that will reflect the compelling and inevitable need for a common market
and a common defence and will be rooted in the common heritage that we share with our
brothers and sisters of not only Tamil Nadu but also of India. It is a shared heritage
that we freely acknowledge and it is a shared heritage to which we have
contributed and from which we derive strength..." |
It is this vision which has directed our
efforts in cyberspace during the past several months: And it was this vision which
also led to the caution in Culture
and the Tamil Contribution to World Civilisation:
| "The effort to acquaint the world of the important
contributions of Tamil culture, is not the expression of an exaggerated nationalism. Tamil
culture is a culture of great antiquity and it has made, and will continue to make, a rich
contribution to world civilisation. At the same time, Tamils have gained, and continue to
gain, by their interaction with other peoples and other cultures - particularly those of
the Indian sub continent. No people are an island unto themselves..." |
The break up of India, if it comes, will not come from the efforts of
tamilnation.org. It will come despite
our efforts. It will come from a failure
of political leaders in India to openly recognise that India is a multi national
state - and recognise the enduring wisdom of the words of Pramatha Chaudhuri:
| "...It is not a bad thing to try and weld many into one but to jumble them
all up is dangerous, because the only way we can do that is by force. If you say that this
does not apply to India, the reply is that if self determination is not suited to us, then
it is not suited at all to Europe. No people in Europe are as different, one from another,
as our people. There is not that much difference between England and Holland as there
is between Madras and Bengal. Even France and Germany are not that far apart. If some
of our politicians shudder at the mention of provincial patriotism, it is because their
beliefs smack of narrow national selfishness." |
We recognise that Tamils are Indians. We are Indians because we
are Tamils. And, if we were not Tamils, we would not be Indians. Again, if there
were no Bengalis, no Marathis, no Kannadigas, no Tamils (to mention but a few of
the peoples of the Indian subcontinent), there would be no 'Indians'. The unity of India will not
come simply by English speaking 'Indians' speaking
to each other in English. Pramatha Chaudhuri
said it all more than eighty years ago:
| "You have accused me of "Bengali patriotism". I feel bound to reply. If it is
a crime for a Bengali to harbour and encourage Bengali patriotism in his mind, then I am
guilty. But I ask you: what other patriotism do you expect from a Bengali writer?
The fact that I do not write in English should indicate that non Bengali patriotism
does not sway my mind. If I had to make patriotic speeches in a language of no part of
India, then I would have to justify that patriotism by saying that it does not relate to
any special part of India but that it means love for India as a whole. In a language
learnt by rote you can only express ideas learnt by heart..." |
It is not that we are unmindful of the importance of securing a
strong and united India. But the strength and unity of India lies not in the nuclear bomb, but in its
peoples.
Nuclear capability will not guarantee unity. The nuclear bomb did not prevent
the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the non-nuclear
states of Latvia, Estonia and Georgia. There is a need to understand that
a people's aspiration for equality and freedom is an energy which is in many
ways more potent than that contained in a nuclear bomb.
There are those (including Marxists) who would assert that conflicts between peoples will
be assuaged by economic growth. But, economic growth will not happen
unless the different peoples of India are energised to work together
to achieve their shared aspirations. Peoples speaking different languages,
tracing their roots to different origins, and living in relatively well defined
and separate geographical areas, do not somehow 'melt' and disappear - and, in
any case, a
'third world' economy will not provide a large enough 'pot' for the 'melting' to
take place. It is no accident that a Gujerati does not stand for election
in Tamil Nadu, or a Tamil in Bengal, or a Marathi in Kashmir - and there is a
need to recognise and address this political reality.
Those concerned to secure the unity of India will need to adopt a more
'principle centred' approach towards struggles for self determination in the
Indian region. A myopic approach, even apart from anything else, may well
encourage the very outside 'pressures' which New Delhi seeks to exclude.
Those truly concerned to secure the unity of India may need to attend more
seriously to the words of Julius Nyerere, an
ex President of Tanzania and one of Africa's most respected
elder statesperson, in an interview reported in the
New
Internationalist, January/February 1999:
| "It seems that independence of the former
colonies has suited the interests of the industrial world for bigger profits
at less cost. Independence made it cheaper for them to exploit us. We became
neo-colonies. ... The majority of countries in Africa and the
rest of the South are hamstrung by debt, by the IMF. We have too much
debt now. It is a heavy burden, a trap. It is debilitating. We must have a new
chance. If we doubled our production and debt-servicing capabilities we would
still have no money for anything extra like education or development. It is
immoral. It is an affront. The conditions and policies of the World Bank and the IMF are to enable
countries to pay debt, not to develop. That is all! Let us argue the
moral case. Let us create a new liberation movement to free us from immoral
debt and neo-colonialism. This is one way forward. The other way is through
Pan-African unity...
Kwame Nkrumah and I were committed to the idea of unity... I did not
believe in these small little nations. Still today I do not believe in them.
I tell our people to look at
the European Union, at these people who ruled us who are now uniting...."
|
It is this vision of an Indian Union, of free and equal nations, which will continue to direct our work and we repeat:
| "...The growing togetherness of the Tamil people,
is but a step in the growth of a larger unity. We know that in the end, national freedom
can only be secured by a voluntary pooling of sovereignties, in a regional, and ultimately
in a world context. ... we recognize that our future lies with the peoples of
the Indian region and the path of a greater and a larger Indian union is the direction of
that future. It is a union that will reflect the compelling and inevitable need for a common market
and a common defence and will be rooted in the common heritage that we share with our
brothers and sisters of not only Tamil Nadu but also of India. It is a shared heritage
that we freely acknowledge and it is a shared heritage to which we have
contributed and from which we derive strength..." |
And the words of a Gujerati and an Indian, Mahatma Gandhi will
continue
to inform our actions:
"Whatever you do will be insignificant,
but it is very important that you do it."
Response by Ravishankar
Dixit, 16 February 2001
Though my mail to you contained a
few obscenities for which I owe apologies to you, you have elucidated a
concept that is very relevant in a very tolerant tone. Thanks for such a
maturity.
Mr. Nadesan Satyendra's commentaries and opinions are thoroughly
compiled and presented as a reaction to my outburst. There is a very
conscious effort on your side to make me understand things that I might not
have. But, I am an Indian and I repeat that. I uphold that which is Indian
basically. A Tamilian is not basically un-Indian. He might even represent
the whole sub-culture of the South India.
According to me, Tamilian separatism stems from a deeply rooted
psychological reason which can be applied to a mass. Tamil language for
example, is loud (not being offensive here). If five languages are spoken
simultaneously, Tamil is the one which can be recognized immediately. Tamils
have a distinct taste for strong colours like deep red, dark green and dark
orange. Tamils are the ones who showed nationalistic fervour when Kannadigas,
Telugus, Malayalees and others in South India were virtually sleeping.
Tamils are the ones who stand apart in a loud way. As I gather through my
limited Tamil knowledge, Tamil has extreme words for even milder substances,
strong intonations; the usage of 'ta' and 'ra' which are considered to be
harsh consonants are the most easily identifiable phenomenon of Tamil.
The reason behind this elaboration is to analyse the mass-psychology of the
body of Tamil people. I am not even a poor student of history or geography
or even literature, but as a common Indian who has a sensibility whose
wavelength matches that of common-Indian-sense, I have my own opinions and
thoughts regarding this effort of a Tamil Nation. With this background
knowledge, what I feel is that Tamil culture has a deep and very edgy
sensitivity. This sensitivity has become the reason for the willingness to
'stand apart', 'show to this world' and 'stand up and in front'. There is
this wretched question of Brahminism and
Non-Brahminism in Tamil Nadu too. Iyers and Iyengars who by and large
make up most of the opinion-building and pathfinders of ideologies are
shunned away by the non-Brahmin society. Iyers and Iyengars do have to be
extremely canny, smart and opportunistic in Tamil Nadu to get what they
want. While the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu are extremely touchy about
being proud Tamilians, others hate them. While they hate others, they
would not go as far as to belittle the Tamilness which is essentially the
same factor that forms their ideological inclinations as those of the
non-Brahmins. The issue of Brahmins and Non-Brahmins is not such a mangled
one, in say, Karnataka or Andhra or even Maharashtra (where I believe
Brahministic superiority sways its head in a vulgarity unseen
anywhere).
This sensitivity has been carefully nurtured by the Cholas, Cheras and all
others. Tamilnadu is on the eastern side of Karnataka. Karnataka which is
the western demon to Tamilnadu has been built upon the ideologies of the
13th Shankaracharya of Sringer Mutt Vidyaranya (again a Brahmin!). Tamils
see Kannadigas as their evil twin, since they are towards their west.
Kannadigas are the traitors, cunning people holding the flowing water and
the slayers of Tamil kings. These curious insights towards the animosity
grown within the Tamil psyche have been carefully grafted by the political
ideology of exclusivism, Tamil-supremacy propaganda and the almost
ridiculous EVP anti-Rama agenda of yore. The chequered mass-mentality
of Tamil Nadu is extremely difficult to rationalize. The extremely
intelligent Tamil, the supremely hard-working Tamil, the highly sensitive
Tamil is also the most vulnerable to chauvinism. This chauvinism is encashed
by the political hegemony of the state. Tamil political agenda are in no way
different than say that of Bihar's politicians or Gujarat's.
The history of Sri Lankan Tamils that has been presented here in this site is no different than a biased, opportunistic, populist,
mass-sympathy-encashing propaganda.
The atrocities against Tamils are ofcourse
condemnable, but at the same time, it is the headlong attitudes of the Tamils that make them easy targets everywhere they go.
Less on an ideological side, my own experiences with Tamils have been a mixture of extremely calm, serene and friendly reach-outs to irritating and most discouraging encounters of
chauvinistic attitudes.
As I told you, I am not even a student of history. I just rationalize things with common sense and with the knowledge that I get from reading and observation.
Thanks for the elaborative insights into the ever-surprising Tamil mind though!
Though I never hope for a separate Tamil nation to exist, I always wish all Tamilians to live in a way that is dignified and with their own cultural identity respected by everyone in India. That can only happen when Tamils stop feeling too touchy and sympathetic about themselves and commingle their aspirations and ambitions with that of the common, less-fortunate (and culturally inferior according to Tamils) states (like
Karnataka, Kerala or up Bihar).
Good luck.
Thanks.
Our Response: There is one matter to which we may usefully respond -
and that is the view that you have expressed that the
matters presented in this site are 'biased, opportunistic, populist,
mass-sympathy-encashing propaganda'. The Oxford English Dictionary defines
propaganda as 'any association, systematic scheme or concerted movement for
the propagation of a particular doctrine or practise' and to the extent that
we are concerned to propagate our stated mission
of nurturing the growing togetherness of the Tamil people, it is perhaps
right to say that it is engaged in 'propaganda'. But it is in this 'neutral'
sense of the word 'propaganda' and not in a pejorative sense, that we would
describe our efforts. We seek to present the matters relevant to the
history,
language, literature,
culture,
suffering
and aspirations of the Tamil people (living
today in many lands) in a fair and
truthful
manner, and the extent to which we have succeeded (or failed), is ofcourse,
a matter that visitors to the website will
judge for themselves.
At the same time, we have often asked ourselves
why
it is that we write and we have found
Sundara Ramasamy's reflections in this regard helpful. We do not agree that 'it is the headlong attitudes of
the Tamils that make them easy targets everywhere they go'. Here, a fair
minded perusal of
Sri Lanka's Broken Pacts and
Evasive Proposals may prove useful.
"One of the essential elements that must be
kept in mind in understanding the Sri Lankan ethnic conflict is that, since
1958 at least, every time Tamil politicians negotiated some sort of
power-sharing deal with a Sinhalese government - regardless of which party
was in power - the opposition Sinhalese party always claimed that the party
in power had negotiated away too much. In almost every case - sometimes
within days - the party in power backed down on the agreement." - (Professor
Marshall Singer, at US Congress Committee on International Relations
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific Hearing on Sri Lanka November 14,1995)
Chauvinism is
the expression of an exaggerated nationalism.
tamilnation.org
is not chauvinist. We do
not say that we are better than other peoples. We say that we are as good as
- and that we too, are a people, and have made and will continue to make a
rich contribution, as such people, to the
one
world to which we all belong.
|
