During the Indian independence struggle, an ideology known as nationalism emerged. The subject is focused on explaining and highlighting how India has been governed and ruled by various regimes and emperors throughout history. Furthermore, further elaboration on how India has impacted under the Akhand and Emperor Bharata through the institutions of several regions will be listed. In this situation, the Indian definition is founded on nationhood because of its nationalistic expressions and feelings that have been incorporated throughout its history (Chaudhury, 2016). Nationalism in India also shows the degree to which it spanned the subcontinent. This article aims to shed more light on India’s transition to nationalism. For more than a century, as elaborated by the standard examiner newspaper, nationalism in India has proved to have other alternatives point of view on the present, future and past mainly when pan-Indian political force fell away. As described in News bank, India was considered as an indigenous democrat in 2014 when Modi was in power. The narrative also showed how Modi got victory over the supine Congress party as well as his own party. In his time of authority, he was considered as the only nationalist Hindu leader who stood above his party as well as having the popularity of the youth throughout the country (Chaudhury, 2016). Based on the example, Modi did nothing but stanch the coarseness of public breakdown and discourse particularly on the civility of India. He did in a such way when he rode to power back to the majority by refashioning it to the opposition of intellectual and religious freedom which would have taken India back to many decades when allowed to take root.
The first article shows how India plays a separation card due to poor choices. After the relationship between India and China erupted, India formed its society even after being influenced by China. However, Hinduism, as elaborated by the author, was established when the British colonial rule suppressed the Islam framework which caused more than a million deaths and destitution of several people (Dang, 2017). Nevertheless, nationalism in India was more embraced when the Prime Minister Narendra Modi was in power through the Bharatiya Janata Party. It was only through him that BJP rose in the Hindu Nationalism thus getting rid of the constraints of tradition and religion realize of modernity. As seen today, India stability has embedded the policy of China as well as a consolidated foundation built on national awareness through religious nationalism.
Nationalism is not only for the Hindus, but the Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, Sikhs, and Parsis and that is if they put their nation above their personal and religious interests. According to the Economist (Indias newspaper), Nationalism was mentioned to have no ideology that rises from above the caste and religion. In other words, nationalism was meant to be assertive and not aggressive because its supposed to defend the nations security. The article also went ahead to make a comparison between Bharat Rashtra and Hindu Rashtra because some radical elements communalized nationalism (Merchant, 2017). For instance, it is seen by Asaduddin Owaisi where he put his religion ahead of the nations identity particularly to his Muslim vote bank. Actually, it was the reason why Muslims ended up in 70 years of secularism which as a result made them have poor and backward development. However, Indira Gandhi later amended the law by adding socialism and secularism.
Ten years later, Gandhi’s son who was seen to be a decent man delivered a blow to secularism by asking the Muslims whether they wanted a government that would give them physical safety and lack food or a state that would offer a twenty-four hour proper housing, electricity, jobs, and reasonable living (Merchant, 2017). Just as fraudulent version, when India fought for freedom from the British Raj, nationalism deemed to revere. This reaction took place because people who fought for India were nationalist. For instance, both Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel were nationalists. Even Mahatma Gandhi was categorized as a nationalist. The progress of India as seen today was because of their historical division by the Mughal hordes and the Central Asia. India was also understood to have more opportunities because they put aside the section.
Nationalism in this case in India is seen in their blood and veins because the majority of the Pakistan Muslims have Hindu blood, and so are the Indian Muslims. The primary reason for this mixture was because their ancestors converted from Hinduism to Islam centuries ago. Therefore, as the article started defining nationalism, it meant that secularism and nationalism have the same side of the coin (Merchant, 2017). This meant that all nationalists could be secular and for most reasons both nationalism and secularism are seen to harm India.
The article written by Latha Jishnu showed that nationalism was destroying India. Despite the fact that Bharatmata resurrected, the newly Hindu supremacist BJP made most Indians to gasp for air (Jishnu, 2016). This was seen in mishmash mythology where politics and nationalisms were shrewd together to trap India in its saffron chador. Secular thinkers and academics have written articles to show why the country had the reason of rejecting the RSS-BJPs attempts. One primary reason for this action was because the nation wanted to lay down nationalism. They did this by adopting the RSS rhetoric because they believed that what made Modi gain power (Jishnu, 2016). In other words nationalism did not have any benefit to Indians. Instead, it destroyed both the economic and social status of India.
The primary reason for choosing the foreign sources was to get more elaboration on how nationalism had impacted India. As highlighted in the essay, nationalism, when Modi was in power, showed a lot of improvement to India but later changed because the people in power did not care about the welfare of the nation. The hostility between India and Pakistan is that unless India resolved its Islamabads terms, Pakistan would forever remain their enemy. This has made China be Indias rival but also a simultaneous partner due to its behavior.
Nationalism, as seen in the essay, can be useful if only it had a good government. India is an excellent example because it shows how Nationalism aided the nation but later destroyed it due to the wrong use of power. Despite the fact that nationalism blends well with secularism, it still had diverse effects on the economic status of the nation. This is the reason why Indians were given choices on whether they want a government that provides security with no food or the one that includes everything.
Gang, D. (2017). Playing Indian separation card a poor choice. Global Times. Retrieved from http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1062788.shtml
Irfan, A. (2017). Modi: India’s disingenuous democrat. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/modis-polarising-populism-makes-a-fiction-of-a-secular-democratic-india-80605.
Jishnu, L. (2016). Bharatmata’ bonanza for BJP. Dawn. Retrieved from https://www.dawn.com/news/1249778.
Merchant, M. (2017). Freedom70: Why nationalism and genuine secularism have to be two sides of the same coin. The Economic Times. Retrieved from http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/freedom70-why-nationalism-and-genuine-secularism-have-to-be-two-sides-of-the-same-coin/articleshow/60037931.cms
If you like this sample, we will email it to you with pleasure!