Development & Environmental Responsibility
The Subcontinentals have been indeed blessed with fertile lands, water and a conducive climate. It is no wonder that one finds the Subcontinent teeming with people.
But the population pressure on the land and resources is immense. In 1947, the population of the Subcontinent was around 473 million. In 2010, the population is already around 1645 million. In 2050, the population would be over 2405 million.
How do we propose to provide housing, transportation, food, water, clean air, schools, recreational facilities and ensure an ecological balance on the Subcontinent? That is the main challenge for us! On the other hand we hear of global warming, the melting of Himalayan glaciers and the rising sea water levels.
Global warming could have serious repurcussions on the monsoon season on the subcontinent, putting at risk something on which we have depended all these years and taken for granted. If the glaciers melt away, our storage of fresh water would be gone, fresh water that has flown through our rivers through the millenia. As the sea water levels increase, low lying areas in Maldives and Bangladesh would be inundated by the sea water, and there would be even less land available to the people.
So what can be done? On the subject of environment, there is a passionate difference of opinions on the issues of dam construction, but at a more general level the difference is between those who want to solve problems for millions and those who want to contain the damage done to the environment and existing habitats while doing so. All approaches have their upsides and their downsides. One can only point out that the solutions we propose have to deal with the needs of a population of around 2.5 billion people, has to preserve the wild life, forests and ecological systems in the region and has to cope with the changing climate and depletion of our resources.
Whichever water management solution one decides on, it has to fulfill certain requirements. It should put a stop to floods in one part of the Subcontinent and drought in the other. Floods and drought should become a phenomenon of the past. One should be able to move water from one end of the country to the other, should need be acute in one end or the amount too much to handle. This means one needs to support a Subcontinental River Linking Project (SRLP), linking all rivers for water transfer as well as for navigation. It is however important to hear the message of the critics as well, and to build the SRLP accordingly, so that a minimum of damage is done to the environment and human habitats, and also does not increase seismic activity due to dam building. We need to utilize our fresh water resources optimally. Nothing that the rivers bring down need to be allowed into the seas, neither fresh water nor silt. The salinity of the seas would stay in balance as the polar ice caps continue melting.
The second project that we should start in the Subcontinent is to increase the Water Catchment Area, which includes both water reservoirs for collecting rain water, but also increase in forest and vegetation cover, so that rain water does not simply cause flooding but rather replenishes our ground water levels. The ground water levels need to be replenished across the Subcontinent, so that the land can sustain agriculture and human habitation.
The third project that needs our attention is that of water cleansing, of sewage water processing and recycling. For a population of around 2.5 billion people one would have to create a very resilient water management system.
Another water management project that deserves our attention is land reclamation from sea. As the sea water levels increase, much of Bangladesh would be under water. The Subcontinent cannot allow this to happen. We should look into solutions which have already been successfully tried in countries like Netherlands and UAE.
One has to face the biggest challenge head on and that is the human itself and his needs. 2.5 billion people cannot live the way people lived earlier – in villages, in single story buildings living off the land, each family with its own farm. Village life in individual houses is a luxury only a few can really afford. The Subcontinent would have to become urbanizied to accommodate so many people. One should consider compact metropoles, each with sometimes around 35-40 million inhabitants. If one has to ensure that the cities are living organisms with business areas, industrial areas, shopping streets, recreational facilities, schools, sports facilities, etc. catering to such a big population, one would have to make everything much more compact taking up less land area. This means the cities have to grow vertically, rather than horizontally. These cities need to be energy efficient, clean, green and well-planned. We need to learn our lessons from the various advanced countries with high population densities and learn from their experiences with mega-cities, countries like Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Netherlands, etc.
All in all, we are talking about a massive transformation of the Subcontinent, and it is to be feared that there will be much uprooting of people. We need to have a system in place, which compensates displaced people systemetically and always fairly providing for them alternate residential opportunities, while providing them comprehensive support throughout the process.
Perhaps the biggest facility that caters to the people and takes the biggest amount of space is agriculture. Even though biodiversity is good, to support such a big population, we would be forced to move to crops which require less water resources and less fertilizers, etc. which increase the toxicity of the soil. One should also consider trapping all the silt that comes down the rivers, and using it for soil and land reclamation.
We should also start exploring the possibility of managing farming as huge cooperatives and more business-like. Small farms and agricultural plots may not provide the efficiency the Subcontinent needs to feed everybody. One way would be for many farmers to put their lands together and create a cooperative, each farmer having shares in the cooperative commensurate with the land he brings into the cooperative with factors such as quality of soil, connection to irrigation, etc. weighed in. The cooperative can then hire farm labor to work on the land, labor which can of course be sourced from the farmers or share holders themselves. Such huge cooperatives could sell some of the produce back to the farmers at a discounted rate, while the rest is sold in to the market. This would allow the cooperative to get professional management people, more technical help, and most importantly cheaper seeds and cost-effective machinery.
Last but not least, we have to turn our passion to saving the biodiversity of the Subcontinent. We need to increase and improve our conservation programs with better management, more scientific research, better surveillance, more staff, more security. The humans have become the coronation of all beings on the planet. This gives us the responsibility to consider all other species to be under our protection. It is important that we protect the various ecological systems and wild life, so that our children also get to see the wonders of the world.
Summarizing, the Subcontinentals would have to find a good water management solution, to prevent floods and drought, we would have to replenish our ground water table, and our water quality needs to improve. We would have to concentrate human habitations into mega-cities, so that a lot more land can be freed up for forests and agriculture. And we need to make agriculture a lot more efficient.
A Pan-Subcontinentalist would take active interest in recycling, in energy-conservation, and would make the effort to take an active interest in the conservation of at least one ecological system in the Subcontinent or at least one species. Pan-Subcontinentalists see that many of the environmental challenges can only be solved we the whole Subcontinent puts their minds to solving them together.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
IX Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Women’s Empowerment
Women’s Empowerment
All too often one sees that the Subcontinent has failed to protect the rights and status of women. Nothing could be more disastrous for a healthy society.
A man who misbehaves with women, with his wife, with the other women in the family, women employees, is basically a hollow man rotten to the core. He has failed to understand the healthy dynamic that should exist between a man and a woman. Only a confident man can ‘manage’ a confident woman. Once one starts treating women contemptuously, it is a sure sign that one has no confidence to speak of. Only the cowards bully the weak and the meak.
God has endowed women with the miraculous gift of birthing a child, and the procreation of mankind is a responsibility they bear to a large extent. But the question whether the woman wants to fulfill that responsibility provided circumstances allow her, is an issue between her and the One who charged her with the responsibility - God. Nobody else gets to veto this personal decision making. The woman’s body is her own. It is for the woman to decide with whom she wants to bear her children, when she wants to bear children and how many children she wants to bear. Others can express their desires but she takes those decisions.
It is also important, that man does not impose his will on a woman’s body against her will. Women and their bodies endowed with the gift of procreation, of pregnancy, deserve to be treated with respect. Any violation of the bounds and limits set by a woman on her body and modesty is a violation of the highest order.
It is one thing for a man to bind, to tie his honor to the women around him, in his mother, aunts, cousin sisters, sisters, daughters, wife or even girlfriend. It is his decision to make his honor captive to the behavior and decisions of the women, but the women are not captive to his honor. Should a man feel hurt in his honor, purportedly due the behavior of the women, he is free to make decisions on what his stance to the women shall be, but he has no authority to intimidate, threaten, bully or physically hurt the women, nor is he allowed to retract from legal obligations he may have towards these women.
Another social evil one often comes across is when men consider women to be their property. Nothing can be more sickening to see a society so degenerate where a human being can be considered the property of someone else be it through slavery or through marriage, which instead of capturing the spirit of a union between a man and a woman, ends up being akin to slavery.
All crimes against women need to be always investigated and if found guilty, the culprits need to be given severe punishments. Moreover the education imparting proper respectful treatment of women, should start in the family and school.
Women gift mankind with progeny, however treating a woman as simply a baby producing facility would do grave injustice to her potential as a human being. Women need to be given just as much space in the society to realize their dreams as any man. It should be considered inappropriate to ever want to tie down a woman, only as a housekeeper, as a baby factory & caretaker, or as a sex toy. Just as men, women too have the impulse to contribute to society through productivity, services, creativity, through their ideas and industriousness. They too want to explore and experience the workplace outside her home. This impulse cannot be chained. In fact society should encourage such contribution and benefit from it.
Jugglling children and career is a challenge every working mother knows and career women contemplate. Considering the fact, that society needs both new children being born and women tending to their careers, it is imperative that state supports such women with laws which protect their rights in the workplace, which enables them to take parental leave, etc. Here there is a need to support both women and employers, so that employers do not discriminate against women when giving jobs.
The healthy respect of the woman is essential for the development of a healthy society. If boys learn “repression” of others while still young by exercising it on their sisters and mothers, then they will look upon bullying as a legitimate tool of life, and those who go for bullying are often unwilling to invest time and energy in learning and working. Furthermore in a marriage market where the women are educated and sometimes highly qualified, the men would have to also excel in order to show themselves as desirable and as prospective candidates for friendship or marriage. Much more would be expected of men also, which will enable the society to excel as well. Besides the emotional aspects of marriage, one would be bringing in meritocracy as well into the equation instead of mediocrity as was the case till now.
The education of the girl child should as such be made an opportunity in the society. In conservative areas, one can entice parents to send their daughters to school by offering them girls only schools. In poorer areas, one can additionally offer free rations to the parents for sending their daughters to school. However the general preference should be for co-education schools, because then boys and girls get used to the presence of the other gender at a very early age and do not develop psychological complexes when dealing with the other gender. They also learn at an early age how to treat the other gender respectfully.
Pan-Subcontinentalists see a marriage as a partnership of equals, where each comes to the help of the other, where decisions are taken together and where one treats the other with respect. A Pan-Subcontinentalist would also never show favoritism to his son(s) over his daughter(s) on the basis of gender. A Pan-Subcontinentalist, if a man, would treat all women with respect and dignity. If and when, a Pan-Subcontinentalist sees some crime being committed against women, he will show moral courage and try to stop the crime. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would try to educate society to treat its women with dignity. At the workplace, a Pan-Subcontinentalist will not discriminate others based on their gender.
So educated and empowered women are essential for a thriving society in the Subcontinent.
All too often one sees that the Subcontinent has failed to protect the rights and status of women. Nothing could be more disastrous for a healthy society.
A man who misbehaves with women, with his wife, with the other women in the family, women employees, is basically a hollow man rotten to the core. He has failed to understand the healthy dynamic that should exist between a man and a woman. Only a confident man can ‘manage’ a confident woman. Once one starts treating women contemptuously, it is a sure sign that one has no confidence to speak of. Only the cowards bully the weak and the meak.
God has endowed women with the miraculous gift of birthing a child, and the procreation of mankind is a responsibility they bear to a large extent. But the question whether the woman wants to fulfill that responsibility provided circumstances allow her, is an issue between her and the One who charged her with the responsibility - God. Nobody else gets to veto this personal decision making. The woman’s body is her own. It is for the woman to decide with whom she wants to bear her children, when she wants to bear children and how many children she wants to bear. Others can express their desires but she takes those decisions.
It is also important, that man does not impose his will on a woman’s body against her will. Women and their bodies endowed with the gift of procreation, of pregnancy, deserve to be treated with respect. Any violation of the bounds and limits set by a woman on her body and modesty is a violation of the highest order.
It is one thing for a man to bind, to tie his honor to the women around him, in his mother, aunts, cousin sisters, sisters, daughters, wife or even girlfriend. It is his decision to make his honor captive to the behavior and decisions of the women, but the women are not captive to his honor. Should a man feel hurt in his honor, purportedly due the behavior of the women, he is free to make decisions on what his stance to the women shall be, but he has no authority to intimidate, threaten, bully or physically hurt the women, nor is he allowed to retract from legal obligations he may have towards these women.
Another social evil one often comes across is when men consider women to be their property. Nothing can be more sickening to see a society so degenerate where a human being can be considered the property of someone else be it through slavery or through marriage, which instead of capturing the spirit of a union between a man and a woman, ends up being akin to slavery.
All crimes against women need to be always investigated and if found guilty, the culprits need to be given severe punishments. Moreover the education imparting proper respectful treatment of women, should start in the family and school.
Women gift mankind with progeny, however treating a woman as simply a baby producing facility would do grave injustice to her potential as a human being. Women need to be given just as much space in the society to realize their dreams as any man. It should be considered inappropriate to ever want to tie down a woman, only as a housekeeper, as a baby factory & caretaker, or as a sex toy. Just as men, women too have the impulse to contribute to society through productivity, services, creativity, through their ideas and industriousness. They too want to explore and experience the workplace outside her home. This impulse cannot be chained. In fact society should encourage such contribution and benefit from it.
Jugglling children and career is a challenge every working mother knows and career women contemplate. Considering the fact, that society needs both new children being born and women tending to their careers, it is imperative that state supports such women with laws which protect their rights in the workplace, which enables them to take parental leave, etc. Here there is a need to support both women and employers, so that employers do not discriminate against women when giving jobs.
The healthy respect of the woman is essential for the development of a healthy society. If boys learn “repression” of others while still young by exercising it on their sisters and mothers, then they will look upon bullying as a legitimate tool of life, and those who go for bullying are often unwilling to invest time and energy in learning and working. Furthermore in a marriage market where the women are educated and sometimes highly qualified, the men would have to also excel in order to show themselves as desirable and as prospective candidates for friendship or marriage. Much more would be expected of men also, which will enable the society to excel as well. Besides the emotional aspects of marriage, one would be bringing in meritocracy as well into the equation instead of mediocrity as was the case till now.
The education of the girl child should as such be made an opportunity in the society. In conservative areas, one can entice parents to send their daughters to school by offering them girls only schools. In poorer areas, one can additionally offer free rations to the parents for sending their daughters to school. However the general preference should be for co-education schools, because then boys and girls get used to the presence of the other gender at a very early age and do not develop psychological complexes when dealing with the other gender. They also learn at an early age how to treat the other gender respectfully.
Pan-Subcontinentalists see a marriage as a partnership of equals, where each comes to the help of the other, where decisions are taken together and where one treats the other with respect. A Pan-Subcontinentalist would also never show favoritism to his son(s) over his daughter(s) on the basis of gender. A Pan-Subcontinentalist, if a man, would treat all women with respect and dignity. If and when, a Pan-Subcontinentalist sees some crime being committed against women, he will show moral courage and try to stop the crime. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would try to educate society to treat its women with dignity. At the workplace, a Pan-Subcontinentalist will not discriminate others based on their gender.
So educated and empowered women are essential for a thriving society in the Subcontinent.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
VIII Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Equal Opportunity and Meritocracy
Equal Opportunity and Meritocracy
As long as monarchies and colonial occupations ruled over the Subcontinent, mostly everything revolved around the requirements of the rulers. To a large extent it still does. But as people become sovereign, the state has the responsibility to look after its citizens, all its citizens. However this does not mean that the State needs to look after the citizen from birth to grave, but the State has to ensure that all its citizenry get an equal opportunity to realize its potential. The implication here is to give every child an opportunity to avail of school education. In fact, it has to be a duty of the state, society, family to get each child to go to school.
The problem is that schools are unequally good. The teachers in all schools are not required to show excellence in their profession. In some government schools, the discipline amongst teachers even is abysmal, and they don’t feel the need to show interest in their work, as they know their government job is secure.
The State should not be in the business of teaching at all. They should leave that all to private schools. The private schools do it professionally. They compete with each other and are very aware of their reputation. The State should however be intensely involved in ensuring that these private schools fulfill all the basic requirements of curriculum, hygienic facilities, and other standards.
Each child in the Subcontinent, be he poor or rich, should be supported by the State in his school education. One model would be for each child to get a schooling account – similar to a bank account. Distinguishing on the basis of economic need of an individual child would be administratively prohibitive. Besides one wants to give each child the feeling that the State is there for each one of them. Every month a particular amount of credits is deposited in the account of the child, and a registered private school can avail of these credits as school fees. For some schools this may be sufficient, for others, who offer a lot more facilities and are generally considered better, these credits may not suffice, and the child’s family may have to pay more, if the family can afford it.
Moreover all school fees above a certain amount need to be taxed by the State. This would allow the State to plough money from the rich to the poor, and thus partially finance the program.
Such a model would give the child the flexibility to choose a day care center, a primary school, a secondary school, or a senior secondary school of his own wish. Children who show promise in school through various evaluations, or through state-wide school-level competitions, can be given, an extra stipend. More important is that the quality of education and commitment of the teachers would rapidly increase.
Moreover schemes like Mid-day Meals can still be continued, where every school, in this case there will be private only, would need to offer their own Mid-day Meal program, and the State pays for the Mid-day Meals of the needy children. Of course, any non-needy child also can have the option to register for this school scheme, only they would have to pay from their own pocket. Best would be when external contractors are used for cooking the meals, and then delivering to schools. Depending on attendance, a needy child should also be able to get some dry rations for the family. This would increase the acceptability amongst the poor families to send their children to school.
Only if children are given an “equal” opportunity, can a society with a social conscience truly embrace meritocracy. Meritocracy is not an option. For a society to move forward it is a must. But if merit becomes a function of the affluence of one’s family, and their ability to send the child to school, then it loses its claim as being the only factor for consideration in the choice of someone for some college seat or job position.
Also in a society based on Meritocracy, there should be no scope for favoritism, nepotism. One should always take the candidate, who is most deserving.
The Pan-Subcontinentalists have a social conscience and are fully committed to see, that all children in the Subcontinent receive the opportunity to learn in school and that too on a full tummy. Also the Pan-Subcontinentalists want to see that in institutions of higher learning, politics, government departments, public sector, and even private companies, the most deserving candidates, the candidates showing the most merit are taken.
Only this can ensure that the Subcontinent nurtures a society, which is educated, and ensures that the Subcontinentals get the best service in the world, that the Subcontinent progresses more rapidly, for it is the mission of the Pan-Subcontinentalist to ensure that the Subcontinent is the best place to be!
Friday, January 14, 2011
VII Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: People are Sovereign
People are Sovereign
The Subcontinent belongs to its people, to all its people. The people are Sovereign. The Subcontinentals decide the Subcontinent’s Laws and Policies and their Representatives who should channel people’s will in formulating them and implementing them.
The Subcontinent’s destiny is bound to Democracy. There is no other system, which can survive and prosper in the Subcontinent. In India it is a tried and tested system. Only democracy can legitimize the rulers.
There would be those, who say they want to live by God’s Laws and not man-made laws. Theoretically one can live by God’s Laws, the problem is however that it becomes the responsibility of the clergy to mediate between God’s laws and their implementation in a temporal setting and they neither have the objectivity, nor the expertise to accomplish that. They also exhaust their resources in analyzing, interpreting and debating God’s Law, that all concern for those who will be subjected to the Law, is easily overlooked. Moreover it is nigh to impossible to find a single acceptable interpretation to God’s Law, that the matter grinds to a standstill. So it becomes impossible to make God as the sovereign of the state, as one ends up making the clergy the sovereign.
At the most, God can be a sovereign over one’s heart, and through the channel of a citizen’s religious conscience can determine the outcome of the political process of the state.
Neither can a Monarchy, a Military Dictatorship or a One-Party Dictatorship determine the course of India’s Destiny. Only the Subcontinentals can determine the destiny of the Subcontinent.
It must be ensured that from the representatives of the people, there is absolute transparency, except maybe in cases of national security, and absolute accountability, and at all times there needs to be a constant reevaluation if the present framework of curbs and checks suffice to produce clean governance. Not just as representatives of the people, but as politicians as well, their assets and their campaign funding need to be made transparent. There needs to be besides the legal and administrative framework of checks and balances, also an interest on the part of civil society to organize themselves in NGOs and to try to investigate the truth.
Another weakness of the election system in the Subcontinent is that it is based on the Westminster model, where the candidate first-past-the-post gets elected. This skews the representativeness of the candidate. A two-stage model would be much better suited. The first two winners of the first election cycle in a constituency, in case none wins over 50% of the votes, would have to test their mettle in a second election cycle shortly after the first one.
There is also a need to establish a culture of one-on-one debates among the two front runners, and they should debate with each other why the one is a better candidate than the other. Depending on the size of the constituency, the debate may be aired live or not.
The democratic credentials of the representatives have to be supplemented by the democratic credentials of the political parties themselves. The right to stand as a candidate in a constituency should also be determined through an inner-party election for the candidature. Also all functionaries of a political party need to be elected by the rank and file of the party.
The Pan-Subcontinentalist is wedded to democracy, and despite its flaws, the Pan-Subcontinentalist sees it as the only available credible model. The Pan-Subcontinentalist also wants to ensure that he gets the best candidates to stand up for election and the representativeness of the candidate once elected is maximum.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
VI Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Protect Cultural Wealth
Protect Cultural Wealth
The Subcontinent has played the stage for the birth and growth of a very rich culture and civilization. It has been the cradle of many Empires, much Spiritual Exploration, many Scientific Advancements and an enormous amount of Cultural Diversity.
It is this cultural wealth that gives new generations their anchor, their moorings. It is not only our inheritance from our forefathers, but also out debt to our progeny. The cultural heritage of the whole Subcontinent regardless of era it came up in, regardless of religious background in which it developed, regardless of region it was born in, belongs to all Subcontinentals. For the Pan-Subcontinentalist this is more precious than his personal wealth.
Time, poverty, neglect, greed and robbery have been ravaging much of our cultural heritage. This is in fact a matter of utmost shame for the whole subcontinent, because it is happening before our very eyes and we are acting indifferent to it.
It is imperative on Pan-Nationalists to show care for our heritage, by increasing awareness about it, by taking their families around to see the old splendor, by mobilizing their neighborhoods to establish perimeters around various cultural sites, by assisting Archeological Survey of India and other bodies in caring for the treasure, by banning people from taking these treasures abroad.
There have of course been cases, where some groups have deliberately destroyed our cultural heritage – the Bamiyan Buddhas come to mind. Perhaps that what cannot be left alone in its original location due to prevalent political and security conditions, can be moved to a more safer and less controversial location. Accepted, that it would have been difficult moving the Buddhas, but where possible, the option should be availed of. Anyway those whose agenda it is to destroy culture and sometimes even remove all traces of it, should be crushed without mercy, for they attack the very core of the soul of the Subcontinent.
Culture however lives not only in old buildings. Culture is everywhere in diverse forms – music, singing, dancing, films, cartoons, festivals, etc. Culture is the creative expression of people. However culture in general has come under attack by several religious minded groups - be it banning music or be it vandalizing shops selling Valentine cards. Culture cannot be suppressed. Pan-Subcontinentalists swear to put a stop to any intimidation of Subcontinental society by such groups.
It is not just high-culture that needs protecting. In the Subcontinent we also have a multitude of languages, tribes with their own peculiar customs and beliefs. Due to homegenization, these cultures are dying off. It is imperative, that these cultures be protected, that tribes should be able to pass on their customs and workmanship to the next generation, and the state should support this. One needs to give the smaller cultures the necessary Lebensraum to survive and prosper. The more diversity there is, the richer are the Subcontinentals. Those cultures, which cannot be saved, they should be recorded, and the cultural wealth passed on to and integrated into the mainstream.
The Pan-Subcontinentalist swears to pass on his own family-specific culture but also the general Subcontinental culture on to his progeny and those under his guardianship and responsibility.
The Subcontinent has played the stage for the birth and growth of a very rich culture and civilization. It has been the cradle of many Empires, much Spiritual Exploration, many Scientific Advancements and an enormous amount of Cultural Diversity.
It is this cultural wealth that gives new generations their anchor, their moorings. It is not only our inheritance from our forefathers, but also out debt to our progeny. The cultural heritage of the whole Subcontinent regardless of era it came up in, regardless of religious background in which it developed, regardless of region it was born in, belongs to all Subcontinentals. For the Pan-Subcontinentalist this is more precious than his personal wealth.
Time, poverty, neglect, greed and robbery have been ravaging much of our cultural heritage. This is in fact a matter of utmost shame for the whole subcontinent, because it is happening before our very eyes and we are acting indifferent to it.
It is imperative on Pan-Nationalists to show care for our heritage, by increasing awareness about it, by taking their families around to see the old splendor, by mobilizing their neighborhoods to establish perimeters around various cultural sites, by assisting Archeological Survey of India and other bodies in caring for the treasure, by banning people from taking these treasures abroad.
There have of course been cases, where some groups have deliberately destroyed our cultural heritage – the Bamiyan Buddhas come to mind. Perhaps that what cannot be left alone in its original location due to prevalent political and security conditions, can be moved to a more safer and less controversial location. Accepted, that it would have been difficult moving the Buddhas, but where possible, the option should be availed of. Anyway those whose agenda it is to destroy culture and sometimes even remove all traces of it, should be crushed without mercy, for they attack the very core of the soul of the Subcontinent.
Culture however lives not only in old buildings. Culture is everywhere in diverse forms – music, singing, dancing, films, cartoons, festivals, etc. Culture is the creative expression of people. However culture in general has come under attack by several religious minded groups - be it banning music or be it vandalizing shops selling Valentine cards. Culture cannot be suppressed. Pan-Subcontinentalists swear to put a stop to any intimidation of Subcontinental society by such groups.
It is not just high-culture that needs protecting. In the Subcontinent we also have a multitude of languages, tribes with their own peculiar customs and beliefs. Due to homegenization, these cultures are dying off. It is imperative, that these cultures be protected, that tribes should be able to pass on their customs and workmanship to the next generation, and the state should support this. One needs to give the smaller cultures the necessary Lebensraum to survive and prosper. The more diversity there is, the richer are the Subcontinentals. Those cultures, which cannot be saved, they should be recorded, and the cultural wealth passed on to and integrated into the mainstream.
The Pan-Subcontinentalist swears to pass on his own family-specific culture but also the general Subcontinental culture on to his progeny and those under his guardianship and responsibility.
V Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Embrace of All Subcontinental History and Strive for Truth
Embrace of All Subcontinental History and Strive for Truth
Subcontinent’s history has rivers of blood flowing through it. Our civilized psyches have been scarred with slashes from our barbarity. The pain is deep, and it is kept simmering through our hatred. But even hatred is taboo, because we are brothers, and co-travelers of the same destiny. We, Subcontinentals, have all been partners in self-mutilation. But if history has torn us, it has also forged our mettle, our identity. We cannot escape history or ignore history. All we can do is to embrace history.
Our identities are tied to various ethnicities, various ideologies, various historical events, various historical personalities. These define us and rightly so. If we derive our sense of belonging and pride from the above, why are we not willing to accept the dark chapters as well of the concerned historical events, ideologies, groups and personalities? Are we so 2-dimensional, that regret would add a facet to our thinking, that our personalities would collapse under its weight? Are we rather willing to carry the burden of culpability and shame of our history on our souls dressed up as denial and pride?
For if we do that, we are shutting the doors for our intellect, through which enlightenment should come. We would be unwilling to learn the lessons. We would skew our personalities so much, trying to justify the unjustifiable. To some extent we are free to form and mould our own identities. There where there is a choice, we ourselves choose which historical associations we want as the building blocks to our identity, but once we choose these, we should accept both their glowing aspects as well as their shaming aspects; we should publicly acknowledge those shaming chapters of history; we should not be hesitant in expressing our regrets at the shameful turn of history; and we should not hesitate in drawing lessons from such chapters.
For those aspects of identity, over which we have no control, which we inherit as part of our birth, again we should enjoy both the glowing pride such history infuses in our breasts and lament the list of criminal charges that may cling to such history. One can again cope with this inheritance of guilt, by turning it inwards and tormenting one’s own soul with it, or by confronting it, acknowledging it and repenting it. Repentance is the only way for one’s soul to escape the torment, for the soul to feel its strength and for it to taste life as it should taste – as free.
The Subcontinent needs both pride in its history but also reconciliation. Only Truth, Regret and Repentance make Reconciliation possible. A Pan-Subcontinentalist would derive pride from his identity and from Subcontinent’s history where ever possible, but would also be open to regret and repentance, where history requires it of him. A Pan-Subcontinentalist’s soul would be uncaged, unchained, unburdened by History. The Pan-Subcontinentalist will embrace History with all its warts. This would allow him to both be firmly anchored in his Identity but also to be in peace with it. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would in his own way thus contribute to Peace in the Subcontinent.
When talking about History, it is also important that one has the courage to dig for the Truth. The Truth should prevail! Satyamev Jayate! There are people however, who however want to twist History to their agendas, to make it fit their ideologies. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would fight against this trait and would always stand for the Truth, come what may! For the Subcontinental to evolve, he needs to learn how to face the Truth about the region, about his History.
The Pan-Subcontinentalist basks in the glory of Subcontinent's history, contributes to the healing of History's wounds, and seeks Truth hidden in History's drapes.
Subcontinent’s history has rivers of blood flowing through it. Our civilized psyches have been scarred with slashes from our barbarity. The pain is deep, and it is kept simmering through our hatred. But even hatred is taboo, because we are brothers, and co-travelers of the same destiny. We, Subcontinentals, have all been partners in self-mutilation. But if history has torn us, it has also forged our mettle, our identity. We cannot escape history or ignore history. All we can do is to embrace history.
Our identities are tied to various ethnicities, various ideologies, various historical events, various historical personalities. These define us and rightly so. If we derive our sense of belonging and pride from the above, why are we not willing to accept the dark chapters as well of the concerned historical events, ideologies, groups and personalities? Are we so 2-dimensional, that regret would add a facet to our thinking, that our personalities would collapse under its weight? Are we rather willing to carry the burden of culpability and shame of our history on our souls dressed up as denial and pride?
For if we do that, we are shutting the doors for our intellect, through which enlightenment should come. We would be unwilling to learn the lessons. We would skew our personalities so much, trying to justify the unjustifiable. To some extent we are free to form and mould our own identities. There where there is a choice, we ourselves choose which historical associations we want as the building blocks to our identity, but once we choose these, we should accept both their glowing aspects as well as their shaming aspects; we should publicly acknowledge those shaming chapters of history; we should not be hesitant in expressing our regrets at the shameful turn of history; and we should not hesitate in drawing lessons from such chapters.
For those aspects of identity, over which we have no control, which we inherit as part of our birth, again we should enjoy both the glowing pride such history infuses in our breasts and lament the list of criminal charges that may cling to such history. One can again cope with this inheritance of guilt, by turning it inwards and tormenting one’s own soul with it, or by confronting it, acknowledging it and repenting it. Repentance is the only way for one’s soul to escape the torment, for the soul to feel its strength and for it to taste life as it should taste – as free.
The Subcontinent needs both pride in its history but also reconciliation. Only Truth, Regret and Repentance make Reconciliation possible. A Pan-Subcontinentalist would derive pride from his identity and from Subcontinent’s history where ever possible, but would also be open to regret and repentance, where history requires it of him. A Pan-Subcontinentalist’s soul would be uncaged, unchained, unburdened by History. The Pan-Subcontinentalist will embrace History with all its warts. This would allow him to both be firmly anchored in his Identity but also to be in peace with it. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would in his own way thus contribute to Peace in the Subcontinent.
When talking about History, it is also important that one has the courage to dig for the Truth. The Truth should prevail! Satyamev Jayate! There are people however, who however want to twist History to their agendas, to make it fit their ideologies. The Pan-Subcontinentalist would fight against this trait and would always stand for the Truth, come what may! For the Subcontinental to evolve, he needs to learn how to face the Truth about the region, about his History.
The Pan-Subcontinentalist basks in the glory of Subcontinent's history, contributes to the healing of History's wounds, and seeks Truth hidden in History's drapes.
IV Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Religious Freedom
Religious Freedom
A Subcontinental can be a Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, Jew, Animist, Atheist or something else. Every Subcontinental chooses his religion for himself. There is no compulsion in religion. Every Subcontinental can preach any religion he wishes to others. Nobody ought to stop him from doing that. Between the various religious communities, between religious sects, an attitude of mutual respect, consideration, tolerance and genuine friendship and trust should reign.
It is the duty of every Pan-Subcontinentalist to fight for the right of every Subcontinental to practice and preach any religion of his choice. That said, it is also a duty of the Pan-Subcontinentalist to fight for freedom from Religious Merchants, who act to divide people of the Subcontinent, to impose themselves on other people and to decide the freedoms and duties of the common man. The Subcontinent has seen very severe divisions in the name of religion. That makes it mandatory upon each Pan-Subcontinentalist to approach Religion with a some healthy scepticism.
There are Religious Segregationists. They will tell you that people of the faith they purportedly claim to represent, cannot mingle with the followers of another faith, they cannot live with followers of another faith. They will give various excuses ranging from racism to paranoia. They will tell you that they are racially superior perhaps based on some genealogical lineage, or some general physical attributes. They will play the victimhood complex card, and tell you about the threat emanating from some other religious group, again by quoting history selectively or by dishing out fabricated lies. They will tell you, the other religious community is unclean because of some customs and habits, or even due to poverty. They will tell their religious laws do not allow a co-habitation. These people are catering to one’s ego, one’s fears, one’s socially-honed sense of asthetics, one’s ignorance of one’s own religion.
Then there are Religious Fascists. They want to control the lives of others – what they are allowed to say, what they are allowed to do, how they are allowed to dress, how they are allowed to think. Often they coerce people to relinquish all association to their age-old customs, which preexist their conversions to the new faith. They are also the ones eager to use barbaric means to make people accede to their diktat. All this they do in the name of religion. Neither are these religious fascists willing to allow somebody to change his religion if he finds their interpretation of it suffocating. It is the duty of the Pan-Subcontinentalist to win back religion from the throes of these religious bigots. The religious bigots should be given only two choices – migration to some place outside the Subcontinent where his views would be acceptable and can cause no harm to the Subcontinent and its people, or migration to some place outside the World of the Living.
There are also Religious Uber-Passionists. They are of the view, that if their sentiments are hurt, they have the right to take the law into their own hands, and to bring barbaric justice to whoever they think partook in “blasphemy”. Saying or doing something against some prophet, emissary, symbol, name or edict of God, as understood by some religion, is at the most a crime against God and it is up to God to punish the person. Blasphemy is not for adjudication by civilized humans. What however can be adjudicated is speech, writings, or signs which ‘‘with deliberate and malicious intention’’ insult the religion or the religious beliefs of any class of citizens.
Religious Sexists are those who discriminate against women citing scripture. In fact discrimination does not really capture the atrocious behavior some religious groups show towards their women, which can range from constraining their freedom to stoning them to death. There needs to be an awareness, that it is not for Men to lord over the lives of Women, and no religion is made for Men only or for his Lordship over Women, except occasionally perhaps in a symbolic or a formal sense, but with no practical intention.
The most problematic however are the Religious Warriors. The use of a militant wing by some religious community or religious organizations can only be justified if there is a history of unprovoked violence against the group, when the religious group has an established policy of neither inciting violence nor committing aggression upon others, and if the militant wing is trained to cooperate with state security authorities, use minimum force and use force only for the defense of the religious community. But there are of course also religious militants who use violence, aggression against others because others simply belong to a different religious group; or when they consider it their religious duty to use intimidation, bullying, aggression, violence against others; or when they have no qualms about subverting the state through violence; or when they consider the slightest provocation, a provocation where there was no physical harm to their community, as sufficient grounds to commit aggression onto others; or when they first provoke others, and then upon a similar response from others, see it reason enough to escalate, to use terror or dispropotionate amount of force onto others. Such religious groups are a danger to society.
Religious Segregationists, Religious Fascists, Religious Uber-Passionists, Religious Sexists and Religious Warriors are all elements which desecrate religion and its name. These are the snakes which are constantly infusing venom into the arteries of society, all in the name of religion, all through the veneer of respectability, all by constantly abusing their position and responsibility as representatives and scholars of religion. As long as these elements exist, they will always remain a potent threat to the dignity of women, freedom of own religious community, security of other religious communities, and ultimately to the viability of a Unified Subcontinent.
It is imperative upon the Pan-Subcontinentalists to first recognize all these elements and then to fight their poison. First and foremost, it is the responsibility of Pan-Subcontinentalists of the same faith to stand up to these elements, but in the end all Pan-Subcontinentalists share this responsibility. The Pan-Subcontinentalists can start by giving them some friendly advice to change their ways and agendas; by questioning their religious interpretations and their methods; by enlightening the public by demasking them; by using all avenues of law to clamp down on them; and by confronting them head on, with the use of force if necessary. There should be no mistaking: all these elements have to be crushed one way or another.
In whichever system they have gained a foothold, one must consider that there are vested interests in ensuring that this religious hardline system prospers. These vested interests may be part of this system, they may be from the same country or they may be from abroad. One must be on look-out, if these vested interests are outside the subcontinent. However and Whereever these vested interests may be, the Pan-Subcontinentalists should ensure their defeat.
One thing the Pan-Subcontinentalists have to be always cognizant of is that religion promises paradise in after-life, but Pan-Subcontinentalists want more than that, they want to have a paradise on the Subcontinent itself, not just for themselves, but for their children, their grand-children and for the whole of their blood-line, not in after-life, but in this life itself, and promises of some paradise in after-life is something too little, especially because it is just a promise, a promise by some merchants of religion of questionable integrity.
A Subcontinental can be a Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi, Jew, Animist, Atheist or something else. Every Subcontinental chooses his religion for himself. There is no compulsion in religion. Every Subcontinental can preach any religion he wishes to others. Nobody ought to stop him from doing that. Between the various religious communities, between religious sects, an attitude of mutual respect, consideration, tolerance and genuine friendship and trust should reign.
It is the duty of every Pan-Subcontinentalist to fight for the right of every Subcontinental to practice and preach any religion of his choice. That said, it is also a duty of the Pan-Subcontinentalist to fight for freedom from Religious Merchants, who act to divide people of the Subcontinent, to impose themselves on other people and to decide the freedoms and duties of the common man. The Subcontinent has seen very severe divisions in the name of religion. That makes it mandatory upon each Pan-Subcontinentalist to approach Religion with a some healthy scepticism.
There are Religious Segregationists. They will tell you that people of the faith they purportedly claim to represent, cannot mingle with the followers of another faith, they cannot live with followers of another faith. They will give various excuses ranging from racism to paranoia. They will tell you that they are racially superior perhaps based on some genealogical lineage, or some general physical attributes. They will play the victimhood complex card, and tell you about the threat emanating from some other religious group, again by quoting history selectively or by dishing out fabricated lies. They will tell you, the other religious community is unclean because of some customs and habits, or even due to poverty. They will tell their religious laws do not allow a co-habitation. These people are catering to one’s ego, one’s fears, one’s socially-honed sense of asthetics, one’s ignorance of one’s own religion.
Then there are Religious Fascists. They want to control the lives of others – what they are allowed to say, what they are allowed to do, how they are allowed to dress, how they are allowed to think. Often they coerce people to relinquish all association to their age-old customs, which preexist their conversions to the new faith. They are also the ones eager to use barbaric means to make people accede to their diktat. All this they do in the name of religion. Neither are these religious fascists willing to allow somebody to change his religion if he finds their interpretation of it suffocating. It is the duty of the Pan-Subcontinentalist to win back religion from the throes of these religious bigots. The religious bigots should be given only two choices – migration to some place outside the Subcontinent where his views would be acceptable and can cause no harm to the Subcontinent and its people, or migration to some place outside the World of the Living.
There are also Religious Uber-Passionists. They are of the view, that if their sentiments are hurt, they have the right to take the law into their own hands, and to bring barbaric justice to whoever they think partook in “blasphemy”. Saying or doing something against some prophet, emissary, symbol, name or edict of God, as understood by some religion, is at the most a crime against God and it is up to God to punish the person. Blasphemy is not for adjudication by civilized humans. What however can be adjudicated is speech, writings, or signs which ‘‘with deliberate and malicious intention’’ insult the religion or the religious beliefs of any class of citizens.
Religious Sexists are those who discriminate against women citing scripture. In fact discrimination does not really capture the atrocious behavior some religious groups show towards their women, which can range from constraining their freedom to stoning them to death. There needs to be an awareness, that it is not for Men to lord over the lives of Women, and no religion is made for Men only or for his Lordship over Women, except occasionally perhaps in a symbolic or a formal sense, but with no practical intention.
The most problematic however are the Religious Warriors. The use of a militant wing by some religious community or religious organizations can only be justified if there is a history of unprovoked violence against the group, when the religious group has an established policy of neither inciting violence nor committing aggression upon others, and if the militant wing is trained to cooperate with state security authorities, use minimum force and use force only for the defense of the religious community. But there are of course also religious militants who use violence, aggression against others because others simply belong to a different religious group; or when they consider it their religious duty to use intimidation, bullying, aggression, violence against others; or when they have no qualms about subverting the state through violence; or when they consider the slightest provocation, a provocation where there was no physical harm to their community, as sufficient grounds to commit aggression onto others; or when they first provoke others, and then upon a similar response from others, see it reason enough to escalate, to use terror or dispropotionate amount of force onto others. Such religious groups are a danger to society.
Religious Segregationists, Religious Fascists, Religious Uber-Passionists, Religious Sexists and Religious Warriors are all elements which desecrate religion and its name. These are the snakes which are constantly infusing venom into the arteries of society, all in the name of religion, all through the veneer of respectability, all by constantly abusing their position and responsibility as representatives and scholars of religion. As long as these elements exist, they will always remain a potent threat to the dignity of women, freedom of own religious community, security of other religious communities, and ultimately to the viability of a Unified Subcontinent.
It is imperative upon the Pan-Subcontinentalists to first recognize all these elements and then to fight their poison. First and foremost, it is the responsibility of Pan-Subcontinentalists of the same faith to stand up to these elements, but in the end all Pan-Subcontinentalists share this responsibility. The Pan-Subcontinentalists can start by giving them some friendly advice to change their ways and agendas; by questioning their religious interpretations and their methods; by enlightening the public by demasking them; by using all avenues of law to clamp down on them; and by confronting them head on, with the use of force if necessary. There should be no mistaking: all these elements have to be crushed one way or another.
In whichever system they have gained a foothold, one must consider that there are vested interests in ensuring that this religious hardline system prospers. These vested interests may be part of this system, they may be from the same country or they may be from abroad. One must be on look-out, if these vested interests are outside the subcontinent. However and Whereever these vested interests may be, the Pan-Subcontinentalists should ensure their defeat.
One thing the Pan-Subcontinentalists have to be always cognizant of is that religion promises paradise in after-life, but Pan-Subcontinentalists want more than that, they want to have a paradise on the Subcontinent itself, not just for themselves, but for their children, their grand-children and for the whole of their blood-line, not in after-life, but in this life itself, and promises of some paradise in after-life is something too little, especially because it is just a promise, a promise by some merchants of religion of questionable integrity.
III Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Unity of the Subcontinent
Unity of the Subcontinent
The Subcontinent is India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Mauritius, Myanmar, Afghanistan, Tibet.
The Subcontinent can however unleash its full energies and magic only if it is united and consolidated again. Subcontinental Unity is not simply a slogan, it is our destiny. The Subcontinent is one living organism. When cut, the whole Subcontinent will bleed, and that is what it is doing today.
It is one thing to have multiple administrative areas on the Subcontinent. That in itself does not violate the Subcontinent's Unity. But segregative ideologies and inviolable borders do violate the unity.
Some day the Subcontinent has to be united and it is the vow of each Pan-Subcontinentalist to see to it that it does, and once it does, the Pan-Subcontinentalist will fight to keep it united. The Pan-Subcontinentalist will not rest till the borders come down and the fences are uprooted.
Borders, fences and walls can at most be used as a temporary mechanism, to keep away Subcontinentals who have devolved into barbarity from harming the more stable parts of the Subcontinent, or they can be used to regulate people overly desperate to migrate due to economic hardships or disasters from overwhelming the capacities of other regions. Otherwise there are no reasons for borders or fences.
The Subcontinent should either bring civilization to barbarized Subcontinentals or should try to otherwise neutralize their capacity to harm others. The hands of those, who are victims of barbarity and on the front-line of war against barbarity, ought to be strengthened. The Subcontinent should also not shirk from its responsibility to help those, who are desperate or lack hope of economic upliftment. All should be done to hasten the speed of bring down borders and fences.
Any Subcontinental should be able to travel from Tibet to Sri Lanka, from Baluchistan to Myanmar without the need of any visa, any document, any restriction or any checks. Where ever he goes, he will be made to feel at home and welcome, he will be made to feel amongst his own. The mountains of Afghanistan would be Subcontinentals to climb and so too would be the beaches of Unawatuna of Sri Lanka to dive.
Any Subcontinental should be able to travel anywhere in the Subcontinent, he should be able to live anywhere in the Subcontinent, should be able to study anywhere in the Subcontinent, should be able to work and do business anywhere in the Subcontinent, for the Subcontinent is his Home.
The Subcontinent is India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, Mauritius, Myanmar, Afghanistan, Tibet.
The Subcontinent can however unleash its full energies and magic only if it is united and consolidated again. Subcontinental Unity is not simply a slogan, it is our destiny. The Subcontinent is one living organism. When cut, the whole Subcontinent will bleed, and that is what it is doing today.
It is one thing to have multiple administrative areas on the Subcontinent. That in itself does not violate the Subcontinent's Unity. But segregative ideologies and inviolable borders do violate the unity.
Some day the Subcontinent has to be united and it is the vow of each Pan-Subcontinentalist to see to it that it does, and once it does, the Pan-Subcontinentalist will fight to keep it united. The Pan-Subcontinentalist will not rest till the borders come down and the fences are uprooted.
Borders, fences and walls can at most be used as a temporary mechanism, to keep away Subcontinentals who have devolved into barbarity from harming the more stable parts of the Subcontinent, or they can be used to regulate people overly desperate to migrate due to economic hardships or disasters from overwhelming the capacities of other regions. Otherwise there are no reasons for borders or fences.
The Subcontinent should either bring civilization to barbarized Subcontinentals or should try to otherwise neutralize their capacity to harm others. The hands of those, who are victims of barbarity and on the front-line of war against barbarity, ought to be strengthened. The Subcontinent should also not shirk from its responsibility to help those, who are desperate or lack hope of economic upliftment. All should be done to hasten the speed of bring down borders and fences.
Any Subcontinental should be able to travel from Tibet to Sri Lanka, from Baluchistan to Myanmar without the need of any visa, any document, any restriction or any checks. Where ever he goes, he will be made to feel at home and welcome, he will be made to feel amongst his own. The mountains of Afghanistan would be Subcontinentals to climb and so too would be the beaches of Unawatuna of Sri Lanka to dive.
Any Subcontinental should be able to travel anywhere in the Subcontinent, he should be able to live anywhere in the Subcontinent, should be able to study anywhere in the Subcontinent, should be able to work and do business anywhere in the Subcontinent, for the Subcontinent is his Home.
II Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals
Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals
The basis of any nationhood is the bonding between the people. If this bond is healthy, the nation will be healthy. The nation has to be seen as the big family.
In the Subcontinent we have many apparent differences – racial, ethnic, religious persuasion, caste, subcaste, class, political leaning, etc., still we are all children of the same Subcontinent. That what divides us also binds us, weaving a tapestry of unimaginable richness and plurality. Our ancestors were born from the womb of this land, and their ashes and bones are mixed with the very soil and water of this land. Our geneology has strong and deep roots in this land. In the Subcontinent, the history would always be alive and give us comfort and warmth and tell us of our identity.
That makes us Brothers. That makes us equal in birth and belief. That makes us bound with the bonds of Subcontinental Brotherhood. And Brothers should respect and love each other.
Our strength is in unity. Together we are unbreakable. Together we are strong. Together we earn the laurels, together we mourn our losses, and together we lick our wounds, and together we rebound.
The world will respect us only as much as we respect ourselves. There is still residual shame within the hearts of the Subcontinentals. It is shame of colonization, it is shame of religious conversion, it is shame of thousands of years of untouchability, and this shame has twisted our thinking. In order to escape this shame, we try to identify ourselves with the colonizer, with the missionary and the ghazi, with the higher caste, and as a means to underline our distancing from this shame, we adopt the same methods as those of the colonizer, the converter, the casteist. We wear the clothes of the colonizer and worship his skin color, we try to be more pious than ghazi, we treat the castes considered below one’s own (rather low) caste with contempt.
We have to let go of this deep-seated shame, let go of the feeling of inferiority and to see that our roots are strong and deep. We have to open our eyes and see, that we are the most beautiful people on earth. We have to realize, that we need not prove ourselves to God and to please God by doing his work; if we keep our hearts clean, he will come and live there on his own. We should realize that caste is a label and not a hierarchy.
It may be the case that one feels a stronger affection towards one’s ethnicity or sub-nationality, to those of the same religious persuasion, etc. That is natural. However one cannot allow that to color one’s views to an extent, that one shows favoritism towards those of the same ethnicity or discrimination towards those of other subcontinental ethnicities. The bond of Brothership of the Subcontinentals demands a more enlightened perspective.
The Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals also demands a more tribal perspective, where the tribal lines are drawn at the Subcontinent. At the same time as we feel closer to each other, we need to also be aware of who are not our brothers. To our Brothers, we owe affection, respect, courtesy, consideration, tolerance, non-discrimination and warmth. To others, we owe the same, but not necessarily of the same degree. The degree of social dues we owe to others can be shown by the following hierarchy:
1. Pan-Subcontinentalists
2. Subcontinentals
3. People from neighborly countries, who are considered as extended family to the Subcontinentals
4. People from neighborly countries, whose nations are friends of the Subcontinent
5. People from further away, whose nations are friends of the Subcontinent
6. People from further away, whose nations are neutral towards the Subcontinent
7. People who are unfriendly towards the Subcontinentals
8. People who are hostile towards the Subcontinentals
9. People who have Subcontinental blood on their hands
10. Ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism
The ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism are the segregationists, the traitors and the deniers of the Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals.
One also has to look at the ideological resistance to accept Pan-Subcontinentalism historically. Just because one does not believe in Pan-Subcontinentalism, does not make him an enemy. It just means, that we are still living in an era of ignorance, an era of narrow-mindedness, an era in which the spirit of Brotherhood has not been liberated in his heart. One needs to give each soul the time to receive and embibe the message of Brotherhood.
The ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism would be the elites of various ethnicities, who have acquired vested interests in seeing the Subcontinent fragmented, elites who use the false ethnicity-based nationalism to cordon off their own enclave in the Subcontinent and consider it their feudal property, elites who profit from closed societies and markets, elites who quarante their own people in order to lord over them. These elites need to embrace the enlightenment of the Subcontinental Brotherhood, and to look for new ways to consolidate their preexisting influence; or these elites need to be overthrown.
The elites will tell you, that their ethnicities cannot live together with other ethnicities of the Subcontinent for some reason or another, they will manufacture lies of past conflicts or present them to you selectively or distort the historical truths, or they will tell you that reconciliation is impossible. These are segregationists with vested interests.
There will be others, who will be working for outside powers, and not let the unification and consolidation of the Subcontinent proceed at their behest, as the outside powers feel threatened by the emergence of a powerful Subcontinent. These are traitors.
There will still be others who will directly attack the foundations of Pan-Subcontinentalism, because of their prejudices or their misplaced ideological loyalties. These are deniers.
If the segregationists, traitors and deniers do not relent and make way for Pan-Subcontinentalism to realize itself, then they are to be considered enemies and should be crushed without remorse.
The basis of any nationhood is the bonding between the people. If this bond is healthy, the nation will be healthy. The nation has to be seen as the big family.
In the Subcontinent we have many apparent differences – racial, ethnic, religious persuasion, caste, subcaste, class, political leaning, etc., still we are all children of the same Subcontinent. That what divides us also binds us, weaving a tapestry of unimaginable richness and plurality. Our ancestors were born from the womb of this land, and their ashes and bones are mixed with the very soil and water of this land. Our geneology has strong and deep roots in this land. In the Subcontinent, the history would always be alive and give us comfort and warmth and tell us of our identity.
That makes us Brothers. That makes us equal in birth and belief. That makes us bound with the bonds of Subcontinental Brotherhood. And Brothers should respect and love each other.
Our strength is in unity. Together we are unbreakable. Together we are strong. Together we earn the laurels, together we mourn our losses, and together we lick our wounds, and together we rebound.
The world will respect us only as much as we respect ourselves. There is still residual shame within the hearts of the Subcontinentals. It is shame of colonization, it is shame of religious conversion, it is shame of thousands of years of untouchability, and this shame has twisted our thinking. In order to escape this shame, we try to identify ourselves with the colonizer, with the missionary and the ghazi, with the higher caste, and as a means to underline our distancing from this shame, we adopt the same methods as those of the colonizer, the converter, the casteist. We wear the clothes of the colonizer and worship his skin color, we try to be more pious than ghazi, we treat the castes considered below one’s own (rather low) caste with contempt.
We have to let go of this deep-seated shame, let go of the feeling of inferiority and to see that our roots are strong and deep. We have to open our eyes and see, that we are the most beautiful people on earth. We have to realize, that we need not prove ourselves to God and to please God by doing his work; if we keep our hearts clean, he will come and live there on his own. We should realize that caste is a label and not a hierarchy.
It may be the case that one feels a stronger affection towards one’s ethnicity or sub-nationality, to those of the same religious persuasion, etc. That is natural. However one cannot allow that to color one’s views to an extent, that one shows favoritism towards those of the same ethnicity or discrimination towards those of other subcontinental ethnicities. The bond of Brothership of the Subcontinentals demands a more enlightened perspective.
The Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals also demands a more tribal perspective, where the tribal lines are drawn at the Subcontinent. At the same time as we feel closer to each other, we need to also be aware of who are not our brothers. To our Brothers, we owe affection, respect, courtesy, consideration, tolerance, non-discrimination and warmth. To others, we owe the same, but not necessarily of the same degree. The degree of social dues we owe to others can be shown by the following hierarchy:
1. Pan-Subcontinentalists
2. Subcontinentals
3. People from neighborly countries, who are considered as extended family to the Subcontinentals
4. People from neighborly countries, whose nations are friends of the Subcontinent
5. People from further away, whose nations are friends of the Subcontinent
6. People from further away, whose nations are neutral towards the Subcontinent
7. People who are unfriendly towards the Subcontinentals
8. People who are hostile towards the Subcontinentals
9. People who have Subcontinental blood on their hands
10. Ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism
The ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism are the segregationists, the traitors and the deniers of the Brotherhood of the Subcontinentals.
One also has to look at the ideological resistance to accept Pan-Subcontinentalism historically. Just because one does not believe in Pan-Subcontinentalism, does not make him an enemy. It just means, that we are still living in an era of ignorance, an era of narrow-mindedness, an era in which the spirit of Brotherhood has not been liberated in his heart. One needs to give each soul the time to receive and embibe the message of Brotherhood.
The ideological enemies of Pan-Subcontinentalism would be the elites of various ethnicities, who have acquired vested interests in seeing the Subcontinent fragmented, elites who use the false ethnicity-based nationalism to cordon off their own enclave in the Subcontinent and consider it their feudal property, elites who profit from closed societies and markets, elites who quarante their own people in order to lord over them. These elites need to embrace the enlightenment of the Subcontinental Brotherhood, and to look for new ways to consolidate their preexisting influence; or these elites need to be overthrown.
The elites will tell you, that their ethnicities cannot live together with other ethnicities of the Subcontinent for some reason or another, they will manufacture lies of past conflicts or present them to you selectively or distort the historical truths, or they will tell you that reconciliation is impossible. These are segregationists with vested interests.
There will be others, who will be working for outside powers, and not let the unification and consolidation of the Subcontinent proceed at their behest, as the outside powers feel threatened by the emergence of a powerful Subcontinent. These are traitors.
There will still be others who will directly attack the foundations of Pan-Subcontinentalism, because of their prejudices or their misplaced ideological loyalties. These are deniers.
If the segregationists, traitors and deniers do not relent and make way for Pan-Subcontinentalism to realize itself, then they are to be considered enemies and should be crushed without remorse.
I Law of Pan-Subcontinentalism: Love the Subcontinent
Love the Subcontinent
There is no love above this love of land! Even if there is any other love that competes with it - the love of Family, the love of God, the love of Freedom; that love can never be in opposition to this love. Even if your heart is pulled by your other affections, the love of land stays the anchor in your life.
The land is holy because it has sustained and nurtured thousands of generations of our families. It is on this land, that they have been born, they have been nurtured, they have grown up, they have been loved, they have loved, they have toiled, they have laughed, they have cried, and they have again become one with its soil. It is this land, where we have grown from beasts to men, where our ancestors gained their wisdom.
Its mountains, its plains, its rivers, its trees and forests, its very air say that they are your home, the home of your lineage, and may be the home of your progeny also.
Love the land enough, and God will get his share. The mandirs and masjids, gurudwaras and girjaghars, stupas and pagodas, muths and deras, all stand on this land. It is through bowing and meditating on this land, that we touch God. Love this land which holds God's houses.
Those who forbid you to love the land, the land of the Subcontinent, tell them they have lost your eyes and ears.
There is no love above this love of land! Even if there is any other love that competes with it - the love of Family, the love of God, the love of Freedom; that love can never be in opposition to this love. Even if your heart is pulled by your other affections, the love of land stays the anchor in your life.
The land is holy because it has sustained and nurtured thousands of generations of our families. It is on this land, that they have been born, they have been nurtured, they have grown up, they have been loved, they have loved, they have toiled, they have laughed, they have cried, and they have again become one with its soil. It is this land, where we have grown from beasts to men, where our ancestors gained their wisdom.
Its mountains, its plains, its rivers, its trees and forests, its very air say that they are your home, the home of your lineage, and may be the home of your progeny also.
Love the land enough, and God will get his share. The mandirs and masjids, gurudwaras and girjaghars, stupas and pagodas, muths and deras, all stand on this land. It is through bowing and meditating on this land, that we touch God. Love this land which holds God's houses.
Those who forbid you to love the land, the land of the Subcontinent, tell them they have lost your eyes and ears.
Pan-Subcontinentalism - The Preamble
Pan-Subcontinentalism is the Nationalism of the Indian Subcontinent. The adherents of Pan-Subcontinentalism, the Pan-Subcontinentalists identify themselves with the whole Subcontinent and pledge their loyalties to a movement to establish a political union of all ethnicities at home in the Subcontinent over an area encompassing Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Tibet. Once established, the Pan-Subcontinentalists’ loyalty would lie with such a Civilization-State.
In the Indian Subcontinental Union, the People would be sovereign and it would be ruled according to the principles of democracy. It would be structured as a federation of states based on linguistic and administrative divisions. The Union would have a strong center.
Pan-Subcontinentalism is also a Nationalism based on certain principles, principles which will help both the establishment as well as the preservation of such a large democratic political union. Just as important is the nature of society, that should flourish in such a union – it should be based on equality, freedom to practice and preach religion, communal peace, tolerance, celebration of diversity, decency, respect for privacy, spirituality, freedom of thought, free movement, openness, caring, social conscience, good neighborliness, moral courage, respect for law and citizens’ rights, justice, press-freedom, opportunity for all, thirst for knowledge, scientific inquisitiveness, spirit of exploration, creativity, good work ethic, healthy living, sustainable development, equitable growth and environment-friendliness.
Pan-Subcontinentalists swear to fight ethnic and religious segregationists, fascists, uber-passionists and warriors, and to not allow them to control, radicalize and rip apart society. Pan-Subcontinentalists swear to fight all groups with vested interests in disunity or instability of the Subcontinent, using all means available, peaceful if possible, violent if necessary.
Pan-Subcontinentalists swear to contribute to the creation of an ecologically sound, an economically developed, a scientifically advanced and a militarily strong Indian Subcontinental Union.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)