In Solidarity with Prabir Purkayastha: A Message to the Youth
Romila Thapar
or reload the browser
THESE days I often think back to my first association with the anti-colonial national movement. In the 1940s, I was a teen-ager in school. This was in Pune, where the action was, at that time. We would rush through homework and go to the prayer meetings of Gandhi.
A foundational change was expected in Indian society. We, who had for centuries been subjects of diverse kingdoms, and then of a colonial state, were slowly mutating into citizens of an independent nation-state. It was to be a new kind of society – in which every citizen had equal rights, rights that were recorded in the constitution, which constitution, therefore, had to be protected.
Our understanding of citizens’ rights was such, that if brought into practice, the basic needs of every Indian would be guaranteed. Our society had to be one that would ensure these rights – rights to food, water, shelter and employment. Added to these were health care and education and, above all, the rights to social justice, social equality, and the right to dissent.
Seventy-five years have gone by; we are still waiting for these rights to materialise for every Indian. I can only repeat the questions that many raise in conversation. Are we still asking what kind of society we want? If we agree that it must be a democratic society with equal rights for all Indians, do we aim for uniform laws acceptable to all citizens, irrespective of the diverse identities that individuals may cling to? Also, when an elected representative from one party defects to the opposite party, is this conforming to a democratic system?
Another question: How do we express ourselves? We lead complicated lives and our self-expression has to be clear. Education is very important as the starting point in understanding the right to free speech and, implicitly, to encourage the asking of questions. Free speech is not merely the right to say anything one wants to, but rather, it is the right to stop those who prevent others from speaking. As for asking questions, let’s not forget that if knowledge has to advance, then we have to question existing knowledge and the practices based on it.
We are familiar with the two basic patterns of education – one follows the question-answer catechism. Both question and answer are provided to the child to memorise, without her understanding why she has to do so. Intellectually vibrant societies dismiss this as a non-starter. The other pattern, is when the one being educated is told to think about the subject from all points of view, assess these, and defend the most convincing one. Why are we frightened of introducing this intellectual pattern into our education system?
This was the foundational system that prevailed across the world in earlier times – in India, China, Greece. In India, it was the common method of discussion. First, the opponent’s view was analysed, then that of the person disagreeing with this view, and finally through this debate, a solution was sought. If we are trying to revive Indian ways of thought, this would be fundamental. But unfortunately, we are not aware of our intellectual traditions, nor are we really interested in knowing them.
Some of our impressive intellectuals are in jail, from where they cannot express themselves leave alone write for the public. People such as Sudha Bharadwaj, Anand Teltumbde and more recently, Prabir Purkayastha, have been silenced. They are men and women who have given much thought to the formulation and problems of Indian society, as is evident from the books they write. They should therefore be involved in media debates with those holding divergent views. Why are lawyers, academics, writers, poets, journalists and intellectuals of various kinds, incarcerated without trial, unable to publicly discuss the visions that we all have of the kind of society we want?
This question is not for me to answer. The answer has to come from those of you who will be the makers of Indian society in the near future. Who is going to bring about the society that we want? Why is it still so distant? It is a legitimate question that we should all be concerned with. It is a question on which we must express our views if we are free citizens of India, with the rights that citizens should have.
People of my age tried, but did not succeed in establishing the society that would have implemented the rights of free citizens. These are the actions that make for a good society. I can only say that it is now up to those of you who are young, to insist on open debates formulating the society we should have, and make this a reality.
or reload the browser
or reload the browser
