I believe that we are all getting into a rut. We are all so sure that we have solutions for all the problems. We have our heroes and villains. We forget that heresy of one age becomes the orthodoxy of another. If any problem does not get solved by pursuing one, supposedly perfect, solution, we do not look for some other solution. The mind-set is the same as that of erstwhile communists. Facts and truths have to conform to our theory.

Let me explain.

The Indian state started with three great principles – Socialism, Secularism and Non-alignment. They are indeed great principles. However, our definition of them made a mockery of these principles.

Socialism meant not just state control, but state ownership – commanding heights of the economy. Individual initiative and entrepreneurship was frowned upon. ‘Profit ‘ was a dirty word. The licence-permit raj that was created made India one of the slowest economies of the world. They called it Hindu rate of growth, for what reason I do not know. They were all secularists. This socialism neither created wealth, much less distributed it. It could only distribute poverty. The long lines for ration, long delay for a telephone, a scooter or a (outdated) car was routine for Indian people. I still remember the curbs on cement production when there was a great demand for it for housing etc. We were planning for an economy of scarcity rather than plenty. Who does not remember Mr. Antulay and his trusts? All this changed when Mr. Narsimha Rao and Dr. Manmohan Singh took a bold decision to liberalise the Indian economy or rather were forced to do it. Not that India has solved its economic problems. But there is hope it will, in a few years. I still remember what Mr. Masani said at that time – that we are not against the ideals of socialism but the methodology.

As far as non-alignment is concerned, less said the better. Its hollowness was revealed when China attacked India and the ‘support’ that India received from other non-aligned countries. Now, of course, it has withered away after the Soviet collapse.

This brings us to the third pillar – secularism.

Secularism has degenerated into anti-Hindu. This has been well summed up by V. K. Sinha, in his piece, Hinduism and Hindutva where he approvingly quotes Arthur Koestler to say “Hinduism has to die, if India has to live” (Freedom First, July-September, 2003). There is no respect for Hindu sentiments, whether it is Hindu Code Bill and Temple trusts (both by a secular state), Cow-slaughter (banned by even some Muslim rulers) or even lighting a lamp to inaugurate a function. However, triple talaq, non-maintenance of a divorced lady is hailed as sacrosanct and has to be accepted to respect the sentiments of the minorities. The real problems of Muslims – that of health and education are of no consequence to them or to the supporters of the Muslim identity. In the name of secularism, there is tyranny by a minority of secularists. Indian philosophy which proclaims that all roads lead to the same goal and all rivers lead to the same sea, is by definition catholic and secular. It accepts, not merely tolerates, other ways of worship. There is scope for change in Hindu tradition and custom since it is not codified for all eternity by one book or one prophet. The concept of Dharma is the basis of Hinduism – that which sustains society.

When I read a series of articles in the Freedom First on the post-Godhra carnage, “ Mera Bharat Mahan “ I realized that whatever has happened has a genesis. We have not tackled the causes of Hindu-Muslim conflict. The Indian State’s policy all along has widened the divide rather than bridge it. Hence, I sent the article, “Hindu-Muslim Divide : Can We Bridge It?“ While nobody can hold a brief on the beastly acts of revenge, I felt we have to go a little deeper into the problem of Hindu-Muslim Divide, its genesis and find a solution to the problem. I believed that your liberal quarterly would publish my piece and throw open its pages for a discussion on the topic. I was a little disappointed when you did not publish it.

Later, I sent it to three leading newspapers. While one regretted its inability to publish it, others did not even acknowledge it. This is how ‘liberal’ our press is. They do not go beyond the conventional wisdom.

You say, politicians have no ‘courage to take right decisions’ and you also say, ‘viewing the problem from different perspectives‘. In what way you are different from these politicians? You are a prisoner of your prejudices just like all others. There is no open mind. We cannot put problems under the carpet all the time. They will continue to haunt us until we confront them.

What India needs is clarity of thought and action which can be done only by taking into account all facts and truths of the present and the past, and chart a course of action for a great future. There is a place for all – majority as well as minorities. The future has to be based on equality and human dignity as enshrined not merely in the Constitution and the Human Rights Charter of the UNO but all also in the Indian tradition, which says we are all sparks of the same divine.

The days of liberals like Rajaji, Gopalkrishna Gokhale and Mahadev Govind Ranade who combined tradition, modernity and liberalism are now over. We are now in an age of radicals who want to uproot the traditions of this country, lock, stock and barrel. Communists have failed in this. The ‘liberals’ will also fail in this task.

Just think it over.

MR. M. D. KINI. is a freelance writer and a former editor of Freedom First.