top of page
Search
Writer's pictureAshutosh Pandey

Single National Identity: An Idea



The ruling party has recently made a number of initiatives to advance the notion of a "unique" national identity for Indian individuals. This is evidenced by the focus placed on policies like "one nation, one language," "single" national test for admittance to central universities, "one nation, one health card," and others. Residents of other States have met these measures with "strong resistance," and it is only logical that they have been seen as an attempt to impose the dominant culture on the "regional identity" of people. As a result, individuals from several States took to the streets to cast doubt on the value of their own regional culture and the role it plays in the broader "identity" issue.


These events have reignited the search for a contemporary Indian identity that would appropriately reflect the ‘collective histories’ of the citizens in this country.


India is a very varied and multiethnic country. While the nation's rich diversity in terms of history, culture, biodiversity, landscapes, etc. has been viewed as one of its key strengths, it also presented a significant challenge for the nation's founding fathers to balance the stark "regional differences" in favour of forging a "common" national identity. The people of the subcontinent were forced to rediscover and take pride in their common heritage as a result of their shared struggles and recollections of a cruel colonial past. It was recognized and highlighted by many poets and scholars alike, that in spite of the evident diversities, there is a similar running thread across cultures and regions, and there are perceptible similarities in the way of life, values and norms shared by people.


Following independence, India was envisioned as a "Union of States" where the unique history, customs, and quirks of each individual culture were given the constitutional respect they deserved. It was hoped that the vast regional and cultural diversity would be absorbed by the "civic identity" that the constitution encouraged, which was founded on the beloved values of liberty, equality, fraternity, justice, etc. In this perspective, the construction of a national identity was based on a "assimilating logic" and was viewed as a "melting pot" where the apparent disparities in ethnicity, religion, culture, and race would be absorbed by a citizen's shared identity.


The construction of this ‘civic identity’ was important because the vast diversity that spans the length and breadth of India needed a ‘cohesive construct’ to overpower the subcultural differences.


It was believed that this construct needed to be spread and promoted in order to give the fellow countrymen a sense of unity. Thus, at best, the Constitution's modern principles and particular cultural beliefs came together to form India's national identity. For an Indian, the concept of "concentric identities" was an unavoidable reality, and individuals choose to highlight their regional and national identities depending on the situation and what was appropriate.


An open Pandora's box of concerns, scepticism, and resentment has resulted from the ruling dispensation's attempts to suppress this apparent reality of "concentric identities" for an Indian and instead promote a "core identity." Because the promise of the "Union of States" was always founded on equal bargaining, an exchange of ideas, and conversation, the "unilateral" attempt to question, challenge, and redefine the concept of what it means to be an Indian has, for all the right reasons, met with "collective" resistance.

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page