After all, who is an anti-national?
Exploring the true meaning of the term through my first novel
For over nine years, India has being ruled by a Hindu nationalist political party, which has promoted its ideology of Hindu-Indian supremacy through policy, politics and propaganda. It has been incredibly successful in projecting itself as the ultimate champion of Hindu culture and religion, and the one and the only bulwark against internal and external enemies of the Indian state.
While of course there have been real threats to our culture and religious symbols, and the geopolitics of the Indian subcontinent continues to remain volatile, a sustained high-pitch campaign which catapults the party and its leader as the ultimate saviour of the masses needs to ‘manufacture’ such threats and enemies in order to keep fear alive and keep deriving political dividends time after time. Such artificial creation of enemies reached its crescendo during the first term of the party in office, between 2014 and 2019, when it started labelling any whisper against the government as one being against the country, and therefore, anti-national. The term started getting tossed around as loosely as a pack of mint, which robbed it of its real meaning and gravitas which it deserved.
All of this made me think deeply: who is an anti-national anyway? It was important to find an answer to this question, for myself more than for others, so that I could see through the cloud of misplaced allegations and misaligned priorities. Luckily, I found just the right place to crystallise my thoughts. In the third act of my debut novel ‘Fireflies from the Future’, an entrepreneur making electric cars is charged with sedition when scores of soldiers die in an accident near the border involving his company’s vehicles. Set in contemporary India, the entrepreneur is naturally labelled anti-national no. 1, slapped with insults and put on trial to decide his punishment. It is during his defence in that trial that he elucidates who an anti-national really is. Below is an excerpt from his speech which, unsurprisingly, holds true even today:
“Who is an anti-national? Which traits or qualities do one need to possess to be called an anti-national? We can try to answer this dicey and difficult question perhaps by first answering, ‘Who is a nationalist?’ Who should be called a nationalist? One who loves his country? One who hates the enemies of his country? One who puts the interests of his country before everyone and everything?
“A country is an amalgamation of people, sustained together by institutions, connected together by infrastructure and protected from external forces by its military. So, if one loves his country, then by corollary he must also love these constituents that build the country. I think it is a fair extrapolation to make. People: A nationalist must be someone who treats his fellow citizens with dignity and civility, even those whose views do not reconcile with his own, unless their views advocate violence and suffering. Institutions: A nationalist must be someone who admires, respects and works towards strengthening the foundational institutions that have built this nation brick-by-brick over decades and which run the nation every day. The institution of democracy. The institution of justice. The institution of a parliamentary system of governance. The institution of The Reserve Bank of India. The Constitution of India. The Indian Penal Code. These structures deserve respect, adherence, and constant, careful deliberation to make them stronger and more resilient every day. Infrastructure: A nationalist must be someone who treats the buses and trains and rivers and drains and schools and hospitals of his country with civility, because when these crucial amenities work efficiently for the people, is when our productivity is boosted and the growth of the nation’s output is accelerated. Military: A nationalist must be someone who advocates a capable military installation on his country’s borders, respects the valour and sacrifice of its soldiers, and recognizes its role as the guardian of each of the above constituents of the country without necessarily preceding them in priority.
“With these definitions in mind, we can tell who a nationalist is and thereby, who an anti-national is. A person who cheats a fellow citizen for money, power or fame is an anti-national. A person who bribes the officials of an administrative unit in order to get away with his illegitimate deeds is an anti-national. The person who accepts such bribes is also an anti-national. A person who believes in and actively works towards achieving a dictatorial form of government in the country is an anti-national. A person who thinks it is okay to take law into his hands and punish a fellow citizen for an alleged crime is an anti-national. A person who spits on the road or defaces the walls of a compound or throws garbage into the river or tries to disrupt the functioning of the country’s rail and air services is an anti-national. A person who thinks that spending on defence and military is a waste of money is an anti-national. A person who proposes war as the first and only solution of all evils without considering the eventual loss of lives of our soldiers is an anti-national. A person who incites violence and hatred against fellow citizens by utilizing the faultlines in our history to promote his political interests is an anti-national. A person who asks questions from the government of his state or country is a nationalist. A person who refuses to proclaim his love for the country by shouting or raising slogans is not an anti-national. A person who doesn’t vote is an anti-national. A person who votes in an anti-national is an anti-national. A person who contributes to the wealth of his country by building companies based on the rules of the land is a nationalist. A person who builds companies by subverting the laws of the land or by secretly lobbying its lawmakers is an anti-national. The people who damaged the brakes of the Army’s Krit vehicles on the night of September 6 with an intention of framing Vidyut and me and which resulted in the martyrdom of our soldiers, those people are anti-national. People in the auto industry who create artificial barriers in the advancement of electric cars in the country while the citizens reel under lethal levels of pollution and global warming, those people are anti-national.”
Writing this was cathartic. It provided me with a useful test to judge any alleged anti-national activity taking place in my country.
As a nation, we desperately need to set our priorities right, away from empty rhetoric and false enemies, towards things that actually make a difference.
(Fireflies from the Future is available on Amazon. Do check it out.)
