The Hindu civilisation today stands at a crossroads. While it has been continuously and severely buffeted over the past three centuries by competitive civilisations from across the globe, for the first time it is left without a single sovereign government to speak for it in this world, even as it is being demographically marginalised and intellectually immobilised while the government in its own homeland of Bharat deliberately detaches itself from it. Ironically, this is happening just after the six year reign of the BJP-led government, which means that while this government failed to set in motion any irreversible movement towards a Hindu Rashtra (definitions discussed), its very existence helped consolidate a plethora of disjointed anti-Hindu forces that now rule the roost. The fact that we allowed this to happen makes it obvious that certain critical elements were left untouched by our thought processes, some fundamental underlying streams were not sensed by our intellect. It is the objective of this article to try to extract these missing links between conceptualisation and actualisation, which was discussed in the first part published in the issue dated December 14, and then suggest corrective steps for the future, which is discussed now. The first part tried to define the concept of a Hindu Rashtra on the basis of the understanding of the progenitors of that phrase, and then analysed why the BJP-led government failed to advance the nation on the path leading towards it. In the light of that insight, in this second part it tries to elucidate what a future Hindu-oriented government should do, to enable movement towards the Hindu Rashtra that is sustainable and irreversible. It is felt that this is the right time to discuss and take a stand on these concepts, when a potential pro-Hindu government is not yet in power at the centre.
Revisiting the basics
The first part of this article started from the generalised principle of equilibrium of dynamical systems (represented by the Le-Chateliers? principle, for example, in the physical sciences), which may be stated as ? if a system is in equilibrium and then one of the parameters of the system is altered, either the other parameters will shift to adjust to this change or the altered parameter will be compelled to return to its value as prevailing at the original equilibrium.
Next, it considered our Hindu civilisation and its receptacle, the Hindu nation, as a dynamical system in equilibrium under balance of five different forces (or parameters). The concept of Hindu Rashtra was objectively defined as an alternate state of equilibrium of our Hindu civilisation, variant from the present state. And among the five different parameters that maintain the present balance, the first tends to drive the system towards this Hindu Rashtra and the rest tend to resist this attempt so that the current equilibrium is maintained. These five parameters were lucidly described. The first parameter we will term as the inductive force (and call its components the inductive forces), and the rest we will term as reactive forces.
The first part of this article then discussed how the BJP'scoming to power for the first time at the Centre in 1998 effectively altered one of the parameters of the existing equilibrium (the first parameter, i.e. amplified the inductive force), bringing the other parameters of the equilibrium automatically under strain ? either they should shift to adjust to a new equilibrium in conformity with the change, or the changed parameter should be compelled to return to original conditions. And then it described in some detail what really happened.
The altered first parameter was unable to generate sufficient momentum to shift the existing equilibrium towards the alternate equilibrium of the Hindu Rashtra. The other parameters of the system were in combination (i.e. working in sync) too powerful to be altered, and true to the principle of equilibrium of dynamical systems, these compelled the changed parameter to return to its original value. And the BJP was removed from power.
But this insight will be of limited value if it does not reveal a feasible path from the current state of equilibrium to the alternate equilibrium of the Hindu Rashtra. In other words, if the first parameter changes analogously again (i.e. the BJP comes to power at the centre again), what should it do to be able to generate sufficient momentum to shift the existing equilibrium towards the alternate equilibrium of the Hindu Rashtra? This is the question that we set out to answer in this part.
From the sequence of logical development it would be clear that this post-power-acquisition exercise in relative-momentum-augmentation will have two major components, namely, how to strengthen the first parameter, and concurrently how to weaken the other (reactive) parameters.
In this part we shall focus on the first aspect, i.e. how to strengthen the first parameter, under conditions that the BJP has acquired power at the Centre as before. The second aspect, i.e. weakening of each of the four reactive forces, is a sensitive strategic issue which we will leave for a third discussion when the conditions have actually changed, i.e. the BJP has indeed acquired power at the Centre.
The original question which we set out to answer, i.e. what should the inductive force do to be able to generate sufficient momentum to shift the existing equilibrium towards the alternate equilibrium of the Hindu Rashtra ? can be turned around and posed differently ? what should the BJP do so that a gang-up of all opposing forces do not push it out of power again? In other words, purely from the BJP'spolitical perspective, this tries to formulate what should be done so that its hold on central governance becomes much more stable and self-sustaining.
A couple of clarifications before getting into the core subject. First, when we talk about post-power-acquisition exercise in relative-momentum-augmentation ? exactly who or what will be the agents that will perform this exercise? The answer: in generalist terms, people who are committed to a Hindu Rashtra; and in specifics, a BJP government at the Centre assuming its thought processes are closely aligned with the first parameter?coupled with committed individuals at the grassroots who permeate the whole of the national society?in other words, effort from above coupled with effort from below (with the society in between; no hierarchical implication here).
Second, all the steps discussed below have completely bypassed the issue of choice of economic approach ? whether free-market policies, or some form of socialism, or Integral Humanism; this article focuses on factors that are independent of, and likely to be common to, any type of economic policies. Having said this, as one reads through the steps, it will start becoming clear that certain types of economic policies are more consonant than others with the suggested directional changes. In fact, it will be found that the different individually-presented steps are mutually reinforcing, e.g. step one will automatically facilitate step four, and that is but logical since they are all leading to a harmonious and stable system ? namely, the alternate equilibrium of the Hindu Rashtra.
Strengthening the inductive forces
The first parameter essentially deals with mapping the core values of the Hindu civilisation into the practical life of the Hindu nation. Such a mapping will be associated with certain visible corollaries, and six of the most important among these are described below.
Establishment of a genuine national language?Sanskrit
To start with, one has to note that no nation or civilisation has ever achieved anything on the face of this earth standing on the shoulders of a foreign language. Be it China, Japan, Russia, France or the English-speaking countries, or even small ones like Austria, Finland and Israel ? the foundation of their progress is a language that is genuinely their own. Conversely, nations that have tried to depend on a foreign language have necessarily lost their way?Nigeria, South Africa, Bolivia and Philippines are examples from around the world. There is not a single exception to this rule. There is no way India can be an exception.
Among all the Indian languages, Sanskrit is the only one that can qualify to be India'sown original and unique national language. It rings with India'score civilisational values. Its relationship with all the Indian languages is either that of mother or aunt, i.e. has either given birth to that language or has significantly enriched it. Its script is common to half of India. It continues to feed, and in turn is fed by, all of India'srich regional languages ? unlike English which seeks to gradually destroy all of them. It is equidistant from all local languages thus preventing local jealousies and passions.
The critics who talk of ?English is the global language?, the ?scientific language?, ?Sanskrit difficult to implement? and ?should have been done in 1947, not now?, are all either motivated in favour of English, or if not, are simply trying to hide their heads, ostrich-like, in sand. Let us address each of these arguments individually.
First, there is nothing like a ?global language?. Anyone who has travelled through the vast stretches of the world outside the English-speaking countries will realize that. When it comes to international conversations, we can have translations and in any case, we are not forgetting English.
Second, talking of ?Scientific Language?, even today much more state-of-art research is conducted in non-English languages than in English. The Europeans, using French and German, are more advanced in aerospace than the Americans; the Japanese in electronics and automobiles; the Germans in heavy industry; the Russians and French in mathematics. We are not even aware of the research and developments under progress in these countries. We have been hitched like zombies to look at the world through Anglo-American filters. And consequently, our techno-scientific products are only mediocre ? first in practically nothing, also-ran in many others. We are buying thousands of crores of defence technologies from the Hebrew Israelis, heavy industry from the German Austrians, electronic goods from the Finns, and yet we say that we are scientifically advanced because of English!
Then there is the third category who say??difficult to implement today?, or ?could have been done in 1947, but not possible in mid-stream?. Here the question is ? how many years will India survive? If you have not thought about it, then first think. If twenty ? then better to migrate now (to the country of your emotional loyalty). If fifty, then ask your children to migrate. But if five-hundred, then does it matter one bit what is a little easy or difficult today, if it positively transforms our nation for as long as it lives? Why should we build four-lane concrete national highways ? is it not difficult? Why should we talk of interlinking of rivers ? is it not extremely difficult? People who build nations and civilisations should not get carried away by such arguments.
The absence of our own language has denied generations of free Indians of a reference frame standing on which they can observe developments around the globe through neutral eyes, with confidence and self-esteem, and measure their own standing against it. It has robbed us of our sense of identity, our ability to independently evaluate the value of anything on this earth. It has ensured that slowly but certainly, so slowly that it is unobservable to an individual within the time-scales of human life, that our Hindu civilization disappears from the face of this earth. And with it the future of humanity disappears too.
Just as concrete national highways cannot be built in a day, Sanskrit cannot become the national language in a day. For actualisation of Sanskrit as the effective national language, a ten-year plan and roadmap should be made and meticulously executed so that Sanskrit becomes the language of central administration at the end of that period. Furthermore, in another five years (fifteen in total), it becomes the language of technology and research. Regional languages should flourish in the states, in close companionship with Sanskrit. English should be placed where it deserves ? yet another foreign language, most likely the foremost among them. The mentioned period of ten-to-fifteen years should be the period of internal preparation for the change-over.
(To be continued)