India, fascism and Mr.Narendra Modi. A brief dialogue with Dr. Jerrold Atlas

Response 2
Dear Dr. Atlas,

Thank you for the serious and detailed response to my remarks about poet Manash Bhattacharjee’s thinking on pride, fascism and India. I do agree that Mr. Bhattacharjee’s focus was not India, but I thought the context was.

Incidentally, the breaking news from India is that Mr. Modi’s party will be in power for the next five years.

As to our discussion, you say we ‘choose’ but may get ‘mislead’. I think human choices are never voluntary.

Imagine me watching the Olympic Games. I see an Indian winning a shooting competition. Tears well in my eyes if I am able to connect with him as a fellow Indian. I might also say: ‘I am proud of him!’ I am sure I did not choose to cry. It was involuntary. This could be an instance of pride in its most elementary and personal form, uncontaminated by malice or enmity.

But, the question is, how did or could I connect with him? The answer could be, I was conditioned into feeling so. I would also say that pride of all kinds comes only through conditioning; it is manufactured and manipulated, which would certainly take thinking and planning, may be of the kind Mr. Bhattacharjee will not acknowledge.

We may never know to what extent the ‘manipulator’ leader and the ‘manipulated’ followers were themselves conditioned. But, once conditioned,  thinking may become absent or minimal. Then it may be a trance. Pride then will manifest as ‘my country, right or wrong’ at the national level; ‘my group, right or wrong’ at the group level; and at the personal level just as a transient, private feeling of ‘glow’. Politics is primarily concerned about pride at the national and group levels, not at the personal level.

Following the analogy of ‘handsome is what handsome does’, pride could be what pride does. If it is used to incite hatred or to start wars, they are what pride really is. At the national and group levels, it is identifiable only by what it generates: exclusivism, exceptionalism, jealousy, hatred and aggression. It has, indeed, been exploited by states and groups that were fascist. But, it has been used also by states and groups that were fighting fascists.

I also think, the ‘us – others’ differentiation is built into our ‘system’, perhaps, as a mechanism for survival. Overcoming it, be it through faith, or reasoning, or catharsis, is certainly desirable, but is not happening. The votaries of Hindutva, for instance, are seen chanting old Sanskrit ‘mantras’ like ‘Vasudhaiva kutumbakam’ (the whole world is one family) and ‘Lokah samastah sukhino bhavantu’ (may the people of the whole world be happy) while practising ‘othering’ of a most vicious kind. That is human behaviour as we see on the ground, not as we might wish.

“There is no thinking in fascism, but there is reason”. “Neither pride nor hatred needs thinking”. “Fascist reason is historical pride and hatred masquerading as reason”. These are Mr. Bhattacharjee’s words. I would submit that each one of them, like ‘there is reason but no thinking’, could have some more rigor.

If I may repeat, pride certainly needs ‘others’. It is born of an impulse to feel ‘special’ through comparing and contrasting with others. But in real human situations, which are what, among other disciplines, history also tries to understand, pride has been used to belittle, subdue and annihilate the ‘other’. In this process, the ‘other’ automatically becomes the ‘enemy’. Your question, “Must we do that”, may therefore be more an expression of concern than a question seeking a solution.

As to Mr. Bhattacharjee’s definition of history, it is a pot shot. Cynical definitions about history are legion, but one will be able to engage them only if one knows that the view under discussion is an informed one.

I am worried I am sounding pretentious, even cynical. Sorry. I am poor in feeling poetic sensibilities. I should evolve further.

Suzarin

May 16, 2014

Response 1
Dear Dr. Atlas,

Fascism is an abomination, whether it is of the Nazi brand or of the Hindutva brand. But, I firmly believe that India will not become a fascist state or a military dictatorship in the foreseeable future. Between 1975 and 1977, under Indira Gandhi, there was a brief spell of authoritarianism. But, the institutions of democracy have only become stronger in India ever since.

I have a few reservations about some of the other points mentioned in the article. [Fools of Fascism, 14 May 2014, By Manash Bhattacharjee, Truthout | Op-Ed]. Mr. Bhattacharjee says: “Pride and hatred are not necessarily tied to each other. You don't need to hate another country to have pride in your own.”  This, I feel, is a profound wish one can only preach.

I believe, and I believe history proves, that pride needs an adversary, real or imagined. It can be an individual or a group of a different religion, language, culture or ethnic group. Pride cannot sustain itself without an ‘enemy’. 

The case of the ‘Aryan’ pride in Nazi Germany is too well known to merit a recount. The case of the Hindutva programme is not much different. The meme of ‘Mother India’, the motif of 'swastika’, the invocatory song ‘Vandemataram’, the presiding hero Lord Ram, the demand to make ‘Devnagari’ script of Sanskrit the national script, the demand to restore or reconstruct pre-Muslim place-names and temples, and use of expressions like “Hindu race’ and “Hindu Dharma” were carefully chosen to highlight the ‘us – they’ distinction; ‘us’ the Hindus and ‘they’ the Muslims. But an appeal to pride need not automatically lead to fascism.

I have also some difficulty with Mr. Bhattacharjee’s idea of who thinks and who does not. Statements like “There is no thinking in fascism” lack balance. ‘Thinking’ is not the preserve of only those who agree among themselves. If, on the other hand, ‘thinking’ ought to mean applying a universally accepted way of reasoning based on every available or possible information, at least I would plead my inability to claim I think. Extreme reduction of such
complex issues may produce catchy phrases but would only confuse more.

“And what is history? It is the unending craving for conquest, for power, for humiliating others.” is yet another instance of Mr. Bhattacharjee’s preference for sensationalism. History is much more than that.

The relationship between ‘corporates’ and governments, not fascist governments alone, is certainly a matter of great concern. But linking it with a possible emergence of fascism in India is a little far-fetched. It is already known that ‘corporates’ were involved in most of the corruption cases the Government of Dr. Manmohan Singh was mired in. And, it was not a fascist government!

Suzarin
May 16, 2014