by Gopalkrishna Gandhi
The 1st Three Bharat Ratnas were: C.V.
Raman, S. Radhakrishnan, C. Rajagopalachari.
Three
Indians were decorated with the Bharat Ratna in the very first year — 1954 —
that the civilian awards were instituted: the elder statesman, Chakravarti
Rajagopalachari, the vice- president, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and the Nobel
laureate, C.V. Raman. No one said at the time that all three were south Indian,
all three Brahmins. Their pre-eminence was manifest. They accepted the
decoration with respect and went about their work according to their lights.
All three had a Calcutta connection. CR had served as the first governor of
West Bengal, the other two had taught, with distinction and dedication, at the
University of Calcutta. "Om krato smara kritam smara", the Isha
Upanishad tells us. The work alone is to be remembered, the work alone.
It is
instructive to see, on the anniversary of our Independence, what these men had
to say in the midst of and, indeed, from the very heart of their work, about
their country, their people.
CR was
a prisoner of the raj in 1921. Holed up in Vellore Jail, he could have been
bitter about his jailors, about the imperial power. He could have looked
forward to swaraj as one might to a dreamlike goal. But no, he did something
that surprised his contemporaries then and surprises us now.
He wrote in his jail diary:
"We all ought
to know that Swaraj will not at once or, I think, even for a long time to come,
be better government or greater happiness for the people. Elections and their
corruptions, injustice, and the power and tyranny of wealth, and inefficiency
of administration, will make a hell of life as soon as freedom is given to us.
Men will look regretfully back to the old regime of comparative justice, and
efficient, peaceful, more or less honest administration. The only thing gained
will be that as a race we will be saved from dishonour and subordination."
(This
was a full quarter century before Swaraj was attained.)
Radhakrishnan
was a member of the constituent assembly on the midnight of August 14/15, 1947
when, with Jawaharlal Nehru, he made a speech of surpassing value. Reminding
the nation of "our national faults of character, our domestic despotism,
obscurantism, narrow-mindedness, superstitious bigotry", he said almost exactly what CR had said 25
years earlier.
In Radhakrishnan 's words:
"Our opportunities are great but let me
warn you that when power strips ability, we will fall on evil days… From
tomorrow morning — from midnight today — we can no longer throw the blame on
the British. We have to assume the responsibility ourselves for what we do. A free
India will be judged by the way in which it will serve the interests of the
common man in the matter of food, clothing, shelter and the social services.
Unless we destroy corruption in high places, root out every trace of nepotism,
love of power, profiteering and black-marketing which have spoiled the good
name of this great country in recent times, we will not be able to raise the
standards of efficiency in administration…"
(That
was said at the very moment free India was born.)
I do
not have access to any comment made by CV Raman on the eve of Independence but
the following observation of CVR's to young Indians is an agnatic cousin of
CR's and SR's:
"Success can
only come to you by courageous devotion to the task lying in front of you and
there is nothing worth in this world that can come without the sweat of our
brow. I can assert without fear of contradiction that the quality of the Indian
mind is equal to the quality of any Teutonic, Nordic or Anglo-Saxon mind. What
we lack is perhaps courage, what we lack is perhaps driving force which takes
one anywhere. We have, I think, developed an inferiority complex. I think what
is needed in India today is the destruction of that defeatist spirit…"
Today,
those three Bharat Ratnas would have been saddened to see their apprehensions
and prognoses coming true. Generalizations are wrong but who can deny that
efficiency of administration is not India's best introduction? Who can deny
that our elections have brought us a great stature in the world but have also
brought corruption? And where is the doubt that the power
and tyranny of wealth — CR's startling phrase — rules
the land?
Power, political and monetary
power, outstrips ability by a long measure. And corruption
in high places — Radhakrishnan's astonishingly prescient
expression — has disfigured the image of our public life.
As for
the sweat of the brow, Raman's ideal, that has long since ceased to be valued,
especially in oneself. The concept of hard work, of service, of what used to be called pride
in one's work, is now an
archaism. Except in our gifted artisans who survive miraculously, in our armed forces, in the body of farm labourers across the country and in a few remarkable
professions like those of nurses and teachers, `work ethic' is a national casualty.
We seek to derive the maximum
advantage from the minimum effort.
There is a mentality, widespread if not omnipresent, which sees the plodder as
a fool, the successful shirker as clever. It only follows that the man or woman who is honest with money is
regarded as naïve, to be pitied and the crook who gets caught making illegal
money as unlucky.
It is
the honest
politician, by which I mean one
who does not encash files, sell favours, turn opportunities of service into ATMs; --- and there still are
many of those, who keeps us in hope.
It is,
likewise, the exceptional official, doing the work of a hundred, who
keeps the administrative machine from collapsing.
Thank god there are
some such exceptional men and women, still, amidst us.
But by and large, the surface density of
work-shirking, responsibility-dodging, blame-shifting, back-biting,
tale-carrying and, alas, palm-itchy laggards has swelled beyond belief.
What we are, the
State is.
Radhakrishnan
also spoke of intolerance.
This
trait takes many forms but nowhere more seriously than in politics. Ironically
and paradoxically, the
denominationally intolerant are being projected as administratively able.
Those with a questionable secular
integrity are said to be men of unquestionable financial integrity.
The first three Bharat Ratnas foresaw more
than ordinary mortals can. But even they could not foresee the
self-contradictory piquancy of our predicament today.
The liberal Indian,
the Indian with a secular conscience, an innately democratic instinct, a value
for civil rights, is shown up as effete (weak & powerless), a political pansy, whereas the macho rattler of sabres (swords), is
offered to the nation as its saviour.
A country with its work
ethic weakened, its abilities outstripped by narrow self-interests, and its
domination by the power and tyranny of wealth well-nigh
complete, is easily persuaded to say `give us a benign dictator' . Fascism
(govt. under a dictator) comforts the sloth of mind, the slow of thought, the
valuationally sluggish. Fascism excites the timid, the languid and the bored.
And so
we are seeing rise in the very heart of a democratic but languorous India a
poison plume of the most corrosive intolerance.
In the
coming years, we should be agonizing about what kind of flag will be unfurled
on the ramparts of Lal Quila — the great national Tri-colour or one with a
skull and crossed bones sewn behind it.
No comments:
Post a Comment