278 Chapter - VII

CONFLICT OR CONGRUENCE ?

THE ANATOMY OF THE ~IODELS.

Nation-bui~ding is a process of socio-po~itica.1

change - a process of change which is part~y p1ann.ed and

orderly, but conditioned by certain historica:L circumstances

over which we have no contro:L. Hence the comp:Lexity of the

process and a~ o the difficu~ty in exp~a.ining the same.

One of the most significant aspects of the process

of nation-building is that it invo~ves a:Ltera.tions and/or

rep:La.cement of the structures of power a.nd socia.:L cohesion.

Centres of po:Litica:L po~rer are either a.:Ltered in sign~fica.nt

ways (a.s it happened in India. from 1919 onwards a.s the

resu:Lt of the introduction of pa.rtia.:L democracy through the

dya.rcby system), or tota.:L:Ly rep~aced by new ones (as it

happened with the attainment of Independence by India. in

1947), or undergo further a:Lterations (as have been ha.p~ening

in India since Independence, through the operation of

par:Liamentary democracy).

Simi~r:Ly, the socia~ structures of group cOhesion

such as re~igion, caste, tradition~ professions a.nd va~ue

norms too undergo changes which are perceptib:Le over a period

279

of' time • The causes of' such changes , the agents and

directions of' those changes a.s well as the impact o:t such

changes on the po1itica1 processes as such are a.apects

which are comp1ex on the one band, and high1~ pe:rt:inexrt for

the study of' na.t ion-buil.ding on the other.

The significance, the compl.exit~, and rel.eva.nce of' I

attending to the above process of' socio-pol.itica1. change

as an inherent aspect o:t the process of' na.tion-buil.di.ng

voul.d to IS'QmO degree expl.a.in the growing concern :tor the

study of !l@.tion-buil.d.ing a.mong social scientists.

STRATEGY FOR COMPARISON

~is study bas :tocuss,ed its attention on the nation•

bui1ding model.s o:t both aoa.demicians· and ste.tesmen or

po1itio.:U activists, with a special. :focus on the underl.ying

assumptions o:t the same. And therefore, this study is.

concerned with more than one.·: model. of' na.tion-buil.ding. In

anal.ytica.l. terms, one can distinguish here at l.ee.st the

following "mode1s of nation-buil.ding"l

1. ~he one of the schol.are (discussed in

chapter one) ;

2. the one of the l.ea.ders- af the na.t iona list movement,

with further sub-divisions of 1:he same after tl:ae

reformist school., the reviva1ist school., the

conservative or the moderate achool., the extremist

or ra.dical.ist school. and the l.ike (discussed in

ohap,ters: three and four ) ;

280

~. the one of the na.ti ona.l. l.ea.d.ers constituting

the "rul.ing ell te • ef the country at the centre

between 1947 and 1977 (discussed in chapter

three);

4. the one of the regional. l.eaders of Tamil. Nedu

between 1915•1967 (discussed :in chapter four);

5. the one of the regional. J.ea.d.ers. of Kara.l.a

between 1910 and 1957 (discussed in chapter

four ) ;

6. the one of the J.ocal. l.ea.d.ers of Tamil. Na.du

specif:ical.l.y probed in the context of this

s~udy (discussed in chapter six); and

7 • the one of the l.ocal. J.eaders of lreral.a specif:i­

cal.l.y probed :in the context of thia study

(discussed :in chapter s::ix).

The above 11model.s 11 are, however, in the nature of a

cl.as·e. or species which contain sub-cl.assee: or sub-species

within each of thea.

When faced with such a pl.ura.J.ity of nation-building

model.s, one cannot help akking the qu~tion how these model.s

compare with each other. More pertinentl-y, one is l.ed to aak

whether al.l. these model.s are simil.a.r or different, and :if

simil.a.r, under what as.pectlf, and if different, for what-

reasons. In other worda, one is l.ed to find out whether the

pl.ural.ity of the model.s of nation-buil.ding implies al.so a

variety of model.s of na.tion-buil.ding. A further im.pl.ioati on

281

o~ the same, ofcourse, is the question whether there is any

confJ.i.ct between the different model.s of :oation-buil.d.ing

and if so for what reasons. In what follows, an attempt is

made to answer some of the above questi,oms.

The attempt is to make a comparative anal.ys is of

al.~ the above modeJ.s of nation-buiMing. ~ woul.d me~n

taking a singl.e iSsue which is found in many (conceiva.b~y

in all) of the modeJ.S :in question and seeking to ana~se how

thatfoi.eSue has been deal.t with in each of them. A ccmparison

can be made onl.y of one aspect or a set of select aspects

of a particu~ar item or probl.em, and therefore, inorder to

co~are the mode~ of nation-bui~ding under study, it is

necessary first to se~ect either one aspect or a set of

aspectsof nation-bui1ding as a continuing frame of reference.

If a set of aspectsis se~ected, for comparative ana~ysis

here, that might prOVe too unwiel.d.y a prob~em. And therefore,

it has been "':bought expedient to se~ect just one aspect

for purposes of this study, that is the aspect of integration

as it has been dea1t with in all the modeJ.S of nation-

building in question. This aspect has been se~ected s-ince

no mode~ of nat ion-bui~ding w ou~d be worth its name if it

does not tack~e the probJ.em of integration in the po~:ttical.

vommunity.

Nation-building in the New States have been interpreted

as an "integrative revo~ution" whereby primcnodial. s~entiments ,...

and civi~ politics undergo ffU,ndamental. changes. It iS a ~

282

process, in which a. host of probl.ems going unde:r.- references

to "dual." or "pl.ura.l. • or "mul.tipl.e" societies, to "mosaic"

or "composite• social. structures, to "states." that are not

ttn.ations." and. "nations 11 that are not "states", to "triba-

l.ism", "pa.roohia.l.ism", and "commun&l.ism", as well a.s to

Pan-national. movements alJd. to sub-na.tiona.l.isms of va.ri.ouJ:S

sorts come up for so~ution in the attempts :tor forming

coherent societies and pol.ities 1 ~ Even modernity- of a

society has been defined in terms of integration, a.s. for =:::•:.

instance, done by Edward Sb:i.ls who hol.ds that a. modern

society is not just a compl.elii: of modern institutionl!t, but

rather 11a. mode of integration of the whol.e society" or

"e mode of rel.ationship between the center and periphery

of the society", with such impl.ications a.s (a) enta.il.ing

the incl.usion a:f the mass of the popul.a.tion into the society

in the sense that both elite and mass regard themsel.ves l!!tiB

members of the society and, as such, as of a.pproximatel.y-

equlll. dignity, and (b) invol.ving a. greeter participation bY"

the masses- in the va.l.ues. of the society, a moze active rol.e

in the making of society-wide decisions, and a. greater

prominence in the co~ideration of the el.ite2

•

1 • See Clifford Geertz, "The Integrative Revo~utions Primordial. Sentiments and Civil. Pol.itics in the New States", in Cl.ifford Geertz(ed), Ol.d Societies a.gi New States, Nev York, The Free Press af GJ.a.ncae, 1963. For an aPPlication of this model. to interpret the po~itics of Tamil. Nadu, see R.L.Ha.rdgreve, ~e Dravidian Ivlovement, Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1965

Edward ShiJ.s, "On the Comparative Stud:v of the New States", in Ol.ifford Geerts (ed,), ~.cit. p,21

283

1ie absence of integration in the New States has

even been characterised as a Kpre-po~itica~ matrix" o~ a

rudimentary form, reating on fragi~e foundations u;pon whioh

the state itse~f rests. The societies of the new states,

which are constellations of kinship groups, caates, tribes,

feud~tiea or sma~~er territoria~ societies, have been

described as "not civi~ societies", "scarcel.y ab~e thus

far to produce a po~ity that can supp~y the personne~

necessary to run a modern society", ~acking "the affirmative

attitude towards ru~es, persons, and actions that is necessa~

for concensus ". It has a~o been suggested that in such

societies the sense of membership in a nation-wide society

is scant, as are the disp.osition to accept the ~egitimaoy

of the Government and interaction among the different

sectors 3 • II

THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK s THE MODEL OF TEE

ACADEr.UCIA.NS.

As shown in chapter one, the overwhe~ing cone ern

for the study of na.tion-bui..~ding in the new States has been

displ.ayed by scho~rs be~onging to the school. of structural.

functional.ism. An allegiance of l.oyal.ty to a tradition of

3. Ibid. P• 22 For a dis oussion on the different mean&lngs of "Im.tegra­tion", see Myron Weiner, "Pc:;>l.itical. Integration and Po1itical. Devel.opment ", The Annal.s of the .American Academy of Pol.i tical. and Socia.1 Science, 358, 52-64 March, 196.5 •

284

social. a.na.~ysis initiated by Max Weber and Ta.~cott Pe.rso%113,

and a commi.tment to expl.a:i.ning socia~ change in terms of

a p~ural.ity of variab~es have inspired thes.e scho~are to

use such concepts as division of ~bour, socia1 organization,

industrie.l.isation, modernization and soc:io-polltica:L

deveJ.opment for describing a.nd expJ.aining the dimensions of

socia~ change inherent in the process of na.tion-bu:t~di~4 •

As defined by Reinhard Bendix5 , division of 1abour is

a concept referriiJg to a univerea1 s ociaJ. practice whereby

the J.abour performed in a collectivity is e:peciaJ.ieed among

the different sections constituting the same. Such division

O·f ~a bour is aade on the basis OJf some principl.es over a

peri~ of time and the~e ino~ude, sex, age, skil.J., eto ••

The di vie ion of J.a.bour on the bas iS of such princip J.es

over a time constituteSthe social. oz:ganis:ation of a particu.J..ar

society. In combination, these two constitute the social.

functions and s ocia~ structures of a soc:iity. Apart from

these two statio dimensions, there are a~o more dynamic

aspects to be expl.ained, and the concepts of industria~isation,

moderniz~:t__ion az:d ~vel.opm~ have been empl.oyed to clo that

job. ~e concept of industrial.isation refers to economic

changes brought about by a technol.ogy based on inanimate

sources of power as we~~ as on the continuous deve1opment

4. For a definition of these concepts, see Reinhard Bemdix, Nation-Buil.ding and Citizenship, New York, 3ohn Wil.ey and Sons, 1964, PP•4-5•

5. Ibid.

285

of e.pp~ied scientific research. The process of indUStria,.

J.isation is thought of as having two inherent dimensions,

modern:i za.tion and devel.opment. Modernization refers to

aJ.J. those social. and p~oliticaJ. changes aooanpan;y-ing induetri­

al.isation and inol.udes the processes of urbanization,

changes in ooo~ational. structures, social. mobil.ity, growth

of education as weJ.J. a.s political. changes from abSoJ.utist

institutions- to responaibl.e and representative government

a!ld. from a l.a:i.s:sez-faire to a weJ.fare State~ as it took

pl.a.ce in modern. Western Eu.rope. The very prc::c ess of

modernization is aJ.ternativeJ.y oaJ.J.ed al.so sooio-po~tioal.

devel.QPment; but sometimes the concept of moder.nization is

used onl.y to refer to the o~tural. aspects, reserving the

concept of devel.opment to refer t o changes in tl:e eo onomio

and for politioaJ. sphere in a J.ess oomprehenaive sense.

WhiJ.e the above oJ..U.Ster of concepts have been

devel.oped and utiJ.ised to de~ with the broader dimension

of social. continuity and change, the concepts util.ised for

deal.ing with the t~io~l.y political. aiB'peots of a transi•

tional. society have a centra:L concern for the process of

political. unification or integration. It has a.J.ready been

shown how ns.tion-building has been defined as an "integra­

tive revol.ution", :JL.s,sa.ges ooul.d be cited from almost aJ.J.

the writers on nation-buil.ding to show such a concern with

int eg:ration. One or two il.l.ustratio:m:s woul.d be quite enough

286

here. Gabriel. Ali.mond. and Bingham Powell, for instance, have

empl.oyed a cl.uster of four fol.d c oncepta, vim., s"tate-buil.d.ing,

nation-building, participation and distribution, to deal.

with the p:ol.itical. processes of the New States. According

to these authors, State-buil.ding refers "to the Probl.em of

integration and control.", and nation-buil.d.ing refers to "the

probl.em of group identity and l.o;yal.ty", wb:i.l.e participation

is "the invol.vament of members of the society in the decision

making processes of the system" and distribution is "the

problem of the al.l.ocation of goods, se%"Vices, and other val.ues

by the pol.:itical. syetem",6 • The overwhel.m:ing concern with

the probl.em of "integration" is too obvious to need further

expl.ic:itation.

The approach is not different for Reinard Bendix

either. According to him, the point of common reference

in the study of ne.ti on-building and citime~hip is "the

fo:anation and transformation of political. communities

which today we cal.l. nation,o..states. The central. fact of

nation-buil.ding is the orderly exercise af a nation-wide

public authority"• 7 In the opini.on of Bendix, order in a

pol.itical. community can be understood in ~erms of its

oppoa:ite.,~ anarchy. Anarchy is a state of affairs where each

6 • Gabriel. A. Al.mol:ld and G. Bingham Powal.l., Comparative P ol.itics s A Devel.opmental. Approach, Boston; L:ittl.e Brown and Company, 1 966; p .314

7• Reinard Bendix, op.cit., p.18

287

i.ndividua~ or group takes the law into ita hands unti~

ohe eked by momenta.ril.y su;peri or f oroe of an opponent.

Therefore, sane su. bordination of private to pub1io interests

and private prefe~enoes to pub~c decision becomes the

sine qua non of a. po1itica~ community. In the fo:t1llation of

a poJ.itica~ community, the members agree upon at~east an

implicit consensus upon such a subordination of the private

to the pub~ic in an exchange for certain public rights.

This 8iPProximation of in:terests and the evo1ution of some

degree of 'integration' is an inherent aspect of a.:L~ working

re~ations between the ru1ere and the ru~ed. serving as the

corner stone of a. po~itice~ oommunity8

•

Leaving the structure.~ functiona.l.ista aside, even to

the Marxist• or o1ass theorists, 'integration' is the

centra~ concern in politics.~ evo1ution. Revo1utiona.ry

strugg~es of the deprived and exp~oi ted strata. of the society

have as their direct goa~ the e~imination of c~saes --

root and fruit - and the creation of an integrated ohss~ss

oommuxnst sooiety9 • It is in the understanding of the

causes of the absence of integration and of the means for

creating integration that the two s chool.s of socia~

scientists differ among thema:e~ves:.

The mode1s of the structure.~ :f'unot io~ists ha.d a.n

inbui.1t bias towards a. statusquoism or a.n a.-historical.

a. Ibid.

9. See 1 Socia.~ Science, published by Progress Pub1ishers, Mosccw, 1 977 •

288

approaCh, as pointed out in chapter one. The construction

of models; of nation-bui1ding by c1ubbing together attri-

butes of Western po1itica1 systems would imp1y a suggestion

that they are the virtues to be aspired after by the rest

of the wor1d. Implicit1;y, thts woul.d a1so mean a sort of

pre-empting of the future& suggesting that the best has ~

a1ready been achieved,.~ what remains to be done is rep1ica-

t ions of it and not ex:perimente.tions f etr better ones.

III

THE ROOTS OF THE MODELS& THE WESTERN AND INDIAN

PATERNS OF CENTER - PERIPHERY RELATIONS

Whether for scholars or for statesmen, their mode1s·

of nation-bui1ding have deep roots in immediate or remote

historica1 experiences. An anal.ysis of each of the mode1s

in question woul.d bear ou:f this point.

1 • The Western Pattern 1

Nation-bui1ding or more appropriate1y "nation-growth"

in the West was cba.racterised by a proces.s whiCh has come

to be ca11ed as rol.e differentiation and structure.1 specia1i-

sation - a proces:s in which the differentia.1 character of

socia1 functions was increasing1y recognise-d and appropriate

structures for their efficient discharging were systematioa1~

289

iaproved. ~us pub~ic authority and sooia~ rel.at:Lons

came to be increasing~ differentiated as did their appropri-

ate socia~ structures of!. institutions.

10 As recounted by Joseph Strayer , the roots of modern

European States go back to the barbarian regna. or kingdoms

which arose in the period of the co~l.apse of the Raman

Empire and the concomitant migration of peop~es. The usua~

pattern of a regnum, which was far from a State in the modern

sense, was that of a dominant warrior gro'UP, drawn from

several. Germanic peop~es and ru~ing a s.ubjeot popul.ation

which vas Latin or OeJ.'tic or SJ.av. B~t no means did the

.!:!Snum have any resembl-ance to a state - it is doubtful.

whether in the ear~y Mi.dd~e .Ages anyone had a concept ef a

State at a~~. Eventhough some memories of a by-gone govern•

mental. apparatus and public authority of the Roman Emperor

sti~ J.ingered on among the.better-educated members of the

cJ.ergy, there was no popular idea of an im:persona~ continuing

power. As a result, loyalty was to individ.ual.S ar to

families, not to the State as such. This meant that p;ollti-

ca~ p.ower more and more entered the domain of private ~aw s

it was a pesso~possession which cou1d be transmitted by

marriage or divided among hairs. Moreover, being a personal.

affair, polltica1 power was hard to exercise at a distance

or through agents. This resu~ted in a constant tendency for

1oca.J. representatives of the King to became independen-t rulers,

10. See Joseph R. St#ayer, 11 ~e Hist orica1 Experience of Nation­~1ding in Europe 11 ,in Xar1 W.Dautsch and Wi1~iam J.Fo1t•

(eds.),Nation-Bui1ding, New York,Aldine-Atherton,(Fburth­Reprinting), 1971, pp.17-26

290

and thi.s tendency was aggravated by the J.ow J.eveJ. of

economic activity whi oh ma.de each district almost saJ.f-

sufficient.

~hus, even J.ong before feudalism came into being,

its three-fold principles, viz., (a) the en:(phas~ on pal:'SonaJ.

l.oya.J.ty, (b) the treatment of p·ubllc power as; a private

possession, a.nd (c) the tendency to J.ocaJ. autonomy were

existing in the regna whiCh were the intermedia~ between

the Roman Empire and European feudaJ.ism. In a we:y, these

"" ~.8BD tbemeel.ves were to set the stage for 'the evol."t:t ion of

the nation-state system in Europe. Amorphous a.nd ephemeral.,

some of the regna survived, a.:td by so doing, took the first

step in nation-bui.l.d.ing in the West • As these peopJ.es,

occupying oe~a:in area$ for a o J.ong, d4ei.red to go on consti.-

tuting a. certain regnun of their own, there began to be e.

feeJ.ing that they coptitutjd a polltica.J. canmunity that shoul.d

P'reserve its identity a.nd survive far ever. ~he resuJ.t was

the gradual. rise of the skel.etons of the royal. state, resting

upon the bi..-poJ.J.a.r piJ.J.ars of (a.) the institution of judiciary

a.nd (b) a. poJ.itica.J. theory uphol.ding the sovereignty of the

State a.nd the supremacy of secul.a.r power, against a. Church

which wa.a head and foot struggling to assert itseJ.f a.s the

su;p:reme authority on earth.

~e above process of nation-growth in the West,

whereby publ.ic authority and social. rel.ations came to be

291

11 increa.singl.y- differentiated, ha.d some significant aspecte. •

One such was the eventua1 evoJ.ution of the system of

franchise as e. mechanism for reducing the tension between

the pr:LviJ.eged ruJ.ers· and the general. pubJ.ic. In medieval.

Europe, the exercise of authority had given rise to the two

c ompating structures of patri.moniallsm and fauda:L:tsm - govern•

ment sa: an extension af the royaJ. ho'Uf3ehoJ.d eJ3 against

government based on the fea.l.try between J.ended nobJ.es and

their K±ng • This tension between royaJ. authority and the

society of estates was a characteristic of medievaJ. poJ.iticaJ.

J.ife, as was the due.J.ity between state and society in many

Western societies since the ~gin4ing of the present era

in the 18th century, thanks to the emergence of a nation-

wide. market economy based on the capacity of individueJ.s

to enter into J.ega11y binding agreements between themseJ.ves

and the State. As the J.e.tter J.egaJ. and economic deve J.opments

occurred at: a time when public affairs were in the hallds

of a p:riviJ.eged few, a mechanism became necessary for taming

the ensuing tensions, and the extension of the franchise

was the outcome. .As it evo1ved, the system of f'ra.nchise

has been thought of' as a way of obtaih.i.ng p.,opuJ.ar pa.rti cipa ...

tion in public decisions - a practice which has come to be

defined as: the cornerstone ani an ine.J.ienabJ.e virtue of

Westeron democracies.

11 • Reinard Bendix, op. cit. pp • 23-24

292

.As the system of franchise ensured one form of

1egi.time.te rel.a.tions between the "Centre and the Perip,hery"

- geographica11y, structure.1~y, and pereone.1~ - there was

al.so the need for a source of reference on "p,ol.i.tica1 moreJ.ity"

and this was eapeeia1~y important for peop~e who were used to

a Bib1e which served ~ a source of reference for morali~

in genere.1. As the growth of a market economy and the

gra.dua1 extension of the franchise gave riSe to interest

groups and politica1 parties which mobilised peop1e for

co11ective action in the economic and politics.~ spheres, the

social. structure of modern e ociety came to be radically

t:ransfonned. Simu.1taneousl.y, in the sphere of pub~ic authority

access to o£ficie.1 p OSi tiona wa.e gradue.l.J..y separated from

K:i.ngship ties, property interests, and inherited pri.vi1eges,

and as e. resu~t, decision-making at ~egis1a.tive, judi~ia.1,

· and administrative ~eve~ became subject to impezeonal. rul.es •

Eventua.11y, the3e attained e. certain degree of freedom and

autonomy fran the. conste11e.tions of interests in the e ociety.

This was a. process which was; aided, hastened, and inauJ.ated

by the evo1ution of w ••a. F cons:titutiona.J.iem and. the

doctrine of .!eep.aration of p'owers 11 which too serve as the

foundation of Western democracies.

Here was one more significant aspect ... the liberation

of pepu1a.r minds from the ho1d of the Church. Medieval.

European cuJ.ture wa.s based on the belief in a supreme deity,

293

whereaS' in modern European ou~ture, man, s ooiety, and

nature are mostly thought o:f as embodying disooverab~e

~aws constituting the u~t:ilnate reality. ~is oontraat

ha& been spe~t out by Cart Becker, in his book ~

~ H"'venl.:v: City o£ the Eighteenth CentUt"Y Phi~os ophers

(New Haver.n; Ya~e University Press, 19,2, p~47) as

follows s

" In the thirteenth century the key words

wou~d no doubt be God, sin, grace, sa.J.vation,

heaven and the ~ike; in the nineteenth

century, matter, fact matter-o£-faot, evolution,

progress •••••• In the eighteenth century the

words without which no enl.ightened person oou~d

reach a restfu~ conclusion were nature,

t ., ~· t "12 na ure.~ ..~oaw, .~.J.rs cause, reas an ••••••

It is this radio~ change in out~ook which has

o ome to be known as the eeou4risation of Europe.

Thus, in fine, the princip~e of integration in

the Europee.n nations was a formu~ made up o£ £re.nchise

constitutionalism, separation o£ powexe, and seoul.arism.

But there was~re significant deve ~opment, and

that was the princip~e of "federa~ism", as an extension

o£ the princip~ of "separation of powers" in the context

of establishing integration between more than one

na.tiona~ity, B;y federa.l.ism was usua.~l.y meant "an associ-

12. A15 quoted by Reinard Bendix, op. cit. p. 24 --

294

ation of states, which has been formed for certain common

purposes, but in which the member States retain a 1arge

measure of their origina~ independence•13• This term has

been applled. al.:tke to the Au.stro-Hungarian Empire, to the

German Empire of 1871-1918, to the League of Nations, to

the United States of America, and to the Union of South

Africa ... a~~ of them "associations. of States "• but each

differing fran the other in the form which that association

has: taken. But the modern idea of federalism has been

dete:nnined by the association of the United States of America

eventhough the words "federa1" or "federation" nowhere

occurs in the American constitution. Infact, it has even

become oust anary to regard the United States of Ameri oa n&t

on1y as a.n e~1e of federa1 Government, but a1so as the

14 most.,. important and the most successfu~ examp1e •

2. The Indian ~perience :

Be in.g familiar with and s baring the aftermath of the

above process of nation-building or nation-growth in the

Wes:t, it was on1y natura~ that scho~re tning to interpret

the process of nation-bU11ding in the new States with

reference to the Western experience wou1d evo1ve a canceptua~

frame work centred around ro~e differentiation, struotura~

specia1is·ation, s.eparation of powers, oonstitutiona.llsm,

13. K.c. Wheare, Federa~ Government (4th Edition), Oxford University press, ELBS edition, 1971, p.1

11. Ibid.

295

participation etc., and remain uJ.timateJ.¥ caught up in some

sort of "l;>arochia.J.ism" or "provincial.ism "15 • But what iS

more significant .s the fact that the historical. experience

of nation-growth or nation-buiJ.ding in the West was, for

morethan one reason, something J.ike a "model.n or frame at

reference even for the J.eaders of the nationaJ.ist movement

and nation-building in India, just as it was £or most of the

schoJ.a.ra who sought to interpret the process of :n.ation­

buil.d.ing in India.

The nationaJ.ist movement in India essential.ly meant

the struggJ.e of a politically conscious peopl.e to drive out

an aJ.ien p.ollticaJ. authority and to cl.aim for themseJ.ves

the right to decide their own fate. It is significant that

this movement was initiated and led most1y by peopJ.e who

were tra1ned in the J.ega.J. profession within the constitu­

tional. frameworks of the West, which were the mechanisms

evoJ.ved there for minimising the confl.icts between pubJ.ic

authority and private interests. It is not without reason,

therefore, that several. phase~ of the nation13ol.ist movement

were marked by agitations £or constitutional. reforms from

the beginning tiJ.J. the endt this was the main £ieJ.d of

activity for the conservative and moderate sections of the

movement. ~e Gokhal.e school., the Srinivasa Sastri School.,

the Justicites, and most o£ the Congressmen of Tra.va.ncore

and Cochin a.J.J. were carrying on precis eJ.y this canu>aign.

15. See, Reinard Bendix, op.cit. p.10

296

But this shoul.d not b~ind. one to the differences in

the Indian situation. In India, the socia~ structures and

the economic c~ime.te were vast~y different from thosj in

the West at the time of' the nation~ist movementl no Church

and State conf'~icts, no ne.tiona~ bourgeoisies of' a deve ~aped

sort, no homogeneity of race and hng\ll3.ge • Thus even the

"preconditions" of' nation-bui~ding were, in a senl3e, absent

in India. 1-ioretha.n the consciousness of' an identity, the

moving spirit was more a protest against alien ruJ.ere as

such.

Even the pril.imina.ry unification of the peop~e under

a nationa~ist movement was made dif'ficu~t for severa~ reas ons1

Brahmin d anina.tion of' the nationa~ist movement in the ear~ier

phases made it an elitist affair; when this was cba~~enged

and when the nationa~st movement was converted into a mass

movement, it assumed a~so the cha.racteris·tic of a anti-Brahmin

movement, as it happened in Tami~ Nadu, ~eaving the nationa~ist

cause itse~f into the ob~ivion; awareness of socia~ identity

and racia~ domination a~so brought in an e~eme:d; of' racie.:L

conf'~ict, as it evo~ved again in Tami~ Nadu in the non-

Brahmin movement as. we~~ as in the anti-Hindi agitations.

Equa~~Y imp.ortant is the difference in the way can,tek,­

periphery rel..e.tions ev~ved in India. As obs:erved by

Reina rd. Bendix,

" For centuries prior to the modern period,

Indian society has been divided between

297 centres o:f secul.ar political. ruJ.e and

more or J.ess autonomous, rura1 settJ.ements 16 inhabited by vast mass o:f the popul.a.tion 11

Such a situation would suggest the existence o:f a

rea.J. chasm between the actuaJ. centres o:f power -- the

capitals o:f the Empires or even o:f s.maJ.J.er Kingdoms - and

the ruraJ. peripheries. According to A. L. Basham, ".Ancient

India had, however, a system o:f over-l.o4dship which waS

quae· i-:feudal., though it was never :fuJ.ly deve J.op ed a.s- in

Europe and it rested on a different bas iS 1117 • The different ~

basis too needs tol\pointed out '

11 The Indian system differed :from that of

Europe in that the rel.a.tions of overJ.ord

and vasseJ. were not regul.a.rJ.y based on

contract, whether theoreticaJ. or otherwise,

and ancient India had nothing quite c~arabl.e

to the European manor, though institutions o:f

a somewhat simiJ.a.r type were beginning to 18

deve l.op at the very end of our p.eriod 11 •

UnJ.ike in Europe , in India the Vas se.J.s usually

became so by conquest rather than by cent raot and the amount

o:f oontroJ. exercised by the overJ.ord varied greatJ.;v-19 •

A further significant point is that though monarchy

was usuaJ. in ancient India, tribaJ. states aJ.so existed,

governed by oligarchies, and often referred to as "repubJ.ios",

16. Reinard Bendix, op.oit. p.216

17. A.L. Bashsn, ~e Wonder That Was India, Foutana Edition, 1971, p .95

18e Ibid.

19. Ibid.

298

where a large number of persons had some say in the govez-:n-

20 ment •

PJ.uraJ.ity of the ty:pe of polities or the abSence of

un:iformity among them were not the onJ.y differences to be

noted. It is true that several. types of Ste.tes like repubJ.ics,

oligarchies, and moniarchies were prevailing in India in ancient ...J

times, but eventuaJ.J.y monarchy became the order of tle day.

But there was s omethi:ng more e:i. gni£ioants

" The Hindu poJ.ity worked in a society that

had accepted the principJ.e o£ the caste

system, which J.aid down that government was

prima.riJ.y the function and duty o:f the

X's-hatr:tyas, assisted to s cme extent by the

Brahmana.s"2 ~

Neither Isl.amic invasions, nor indigenou.s or al.ien

dynasties covering major p·ortions o£ what J.ater came to be

known as India nor even the nea.rJ.y two centuries o£ ruJ.e

by EngJ.ishmen couJ.d entireJ.y obJ.iterate the above historical.

memories and their impacts upon the m~d o£ the Indian masses

and J.eaders. Centre-perbhery integration in India bas :m ver

been compJ.ete - neither geographically, nor aclministration~

nor emot ionaJ.J.y. Whatever achievements were made in this

res.pect were a.J.ways o£ a partial. nature, incJ.uding the

extension of the administrative system during the emergency

da.ys of 1975-77 •

20. Ibid. p.97

21. A.S. AJ.tekar, State and Gove ent n Ancient Indi ( :3rd revised and enlarged edition , DeJ.hi, MotiJ.aJ. Bane.rsidas, 1972, 0.:377

299

Given the above situation, the signi£icance of the

efforts made by such nationa~ist ~eaders as Dayana.nd

Saraswati (1824-1883), Ba~ Gangadhar Ti~k ( b.1856), and

Iv!ohandss· Gandhi ( 186$-1949), to ~ook into India's own past

in search of a mode~ for a modern India be come c~ars

essentia~~Y it was a futi~e effort, for there never was a

unified or integrated India in the past, even comparab~e to

the one UDder the British ru~e. Whatever mode~ were

a.vai~ab~e were more fitting to sma.~.Je r KingdoiiJ13, and

principalities re.ther than to a mu~ti-l.ingua.~, mu~ti­

racia1, and territoria~y phenomena1 Independent India of

the post-British days. And to that extent, the •mode~" of

these na.ti.ona.1i.st ~eaders suffered fran wha.t cm1d appro­

pri.ate1y be termed as historica1 anal'hronism. In contrast,

the efforts made by 1eaders 1ike Ram Mohun Roy ( b.1772),

Gopa.1 Kr is b.:rla Gokha~e ( b .1866) , and Jawaha.r1e.l. Nehru ( 1889-

1964), to ~ook to the Western experience of nation-building

in the quest far a mode1 for India's own future was more

rea.l.istic because the polltica1 India of the British daye

and the poet-British days had more simi1arities with the

nation-state system of the West rather than with the

amorphous state systems of pre-British India..

300

IV

THE OPERATIVE l-10DEL

~e mode~ of nation-building in India since indepen­

dence ( 1947-1977) , was essentia.l.~y a cont:i.nuati on of the

Ram Mohun Roy • Gokha1e - Nehru tradition referred to above.

It was under this ~erative mode~, discussed in detai~ in

chapter four, that India. cou~ attain a. ~eve~ of p·o~iti~

integration to the point of active support for a common

state, with ofcourse, continuing e'lhnic or c~tura~ cohesion

and diversity, ~eaving the next stage to be attained a.s the

estab~isbment of the coincidence of po~tica~ ama.~gamation

and :integration with the as,simi~ation of all the segmeU; a -

ethnic, re~:igious and ~ingu:istic - to a common hnguage ani

cu~ture. This was a. unique process :for two reasoz:e s on the

one hand, attempts were 1:e ing made to evo~ve indigenous fonns

O•:f po~tica~ institutions (Pancha;yati raj system and the non­

el.ignment strategy, :for instance), and on the other, a criti ca.l.

phase of nation-bui~di1:8 was· inaugurated by grafting on the

above an imported institutions.~ framework consisting of the

representation~ democracy originally evo~ved in the Eng~ish

pollty, a.nd even the strategy of p.lJl.n.ned deve~apment which

wa.S or:i.gina.~~ initiated by the Soviet Union.

The dawn of Independence for India in 1947 mea.nt tl:e

inauguration <1£ a. combined process of State cum nation-buil.d.ing.

Whi~e it was £ina.~ extrication from the British co~onia1

hegemony, it was a~so a break with the ~ega.cies o£ an ancient

301

and medieve.~ past. Whil.e the establishment of e. sewlar

and democratic state marked the successfu~ culmination of

e..R-rt. -I lA Y'!J -a GJeuai;~-~ong natio:ne.~:tst movement, if: a~so imp~i.ed the

acceptance of a new juridic~ identity, through the Constitu-

tion of India, as we~~ as of the major goa~ of State-

buil.d.ing am na.ti on-building that have been breathed into

the Constitution by the ~tter day ~eaders. of the nat:tona~:i.St

movement.

This operative mode~ of nation-buil.ding had two facets,

consisting of demesti.c policies and. foreign po~icies. The.

domesitc po~cies by and large embraced (a) institu&ion~

measurea, such as participatory democr•cy, ru~e of ~av ani

feder~ po~ity with concessions for regiona~ist aspirations

(as· evidenced in the formation of the ~:i.ngu.:istic States, for

instance); (b) &u~tura~ measures suCh as attempts at

secul.a.ris ing p ollties, and a strategy of ec~ecticism for

accommodating the culture.~ conf1icts; and (c) economic

aasures:, such as hve year P4ns, profession of socialism

and a major thrust for industra.~isation. In foreign P·O~icy,

a. basic phi~osophy consisting of s (a.) internationalism,

(b) peacefu~ co-operation, and (c) peacefu~ methode for tm

sett~ement of disputes, •as: adopted, with an ideo~ogica~

commitment to anti-co~on:i.a~ism and liberation strugg~es,

as we~l as to Afro-Asian socialist so~ide.rity.

302

From the point of view of integration, the domestic

poll cies and measures. (p.articipa.tory democracy, rul.e of

~w, federalism, secularism, eclecticism, socialism, and

sel.£-rel.iance through industrialisation) were ideal.l.y

s:uited for its att&:Lmmen-t, if pursued faithfully. But the

:internal. crisis of the very leadership who designed and

executed these p~ol.:i.cie s e.nd measures turned out to ~ the

worst obstacles to their fruition, as evidenced by the

pol.itic&l. developments on the Indian scene duritlg 1975-1977•

The awareness of their £ail.ures and the deepening crisis

l.ed the ru.l.ing front to go in for such strategies as the

20 point programme, which were whatever their propaganda

val.ues, to s c:me extent meant to be an attempt a'b rectifying

the mistakes and minimising the social. obstacl.es that were

neutral.ising the fruits o£ planned development • But the

declaration of the discredited emergency, and the politics

of personalism that £ol.l.owed it, unde:z:m:i.ned the efforts

at rectifications, and even cast a shadow on the til.l. then

operative model. of ne.ti on-buil.d.ing itsel.:f, inaugurating

a new phase of uncertainty regarding not on.l.y the fate of

that mode 1., but al.S o about the goa.l.s o£ na.tion-buil.ding

as 't'lel.l..

303

v

THE REGIONAL PATTER~ 1 THE EXPERIENCE OF TAMIL

NADU AND EERALA

The rather detail.ed survey of the pol.itica.l. swl.es

and national.ist - subnational.iSt movements in Tamil. Nadu

and Kere.l.e. ( chapter- four ) has highlighted certain

characteristicS Of the context and content of nation­

building processes in these two States. The•a coul.d be

brie:fl.y summa.ris.ed here as follows s

1 • The p opul.ar upsurge in Tamil. Nadu under the dravi.dia.n

movement was eesentia.l.l.y inspired by an excessive inward l.ook­

ing, as evidenced by (a.) the oul.t of the Tamil. l.a.ngua.ge,

even going to th.i extent of attributing divinity to it (Tamil.

ha.s been described as "The:iyva Mozh:f•, mea.ni~ "Divine

Language "• and the DMK Government got verees from tl:e Tamil.

CJ.assic Tirukkura.l., quoted inside the State Buses, eo that

the passengers couJ.d easil.y read them), (b) g~ng to the

p,eriod. of the Tamil. Cl.aasics to re-discover an identity

of the Tam:il.e and seeking to assert the same through an

excJ.usion fran other infJ.uences (Tamil. puritanism and anti­

Hindi movements); and (c) partl:;v, even by the demand for

secession in the ea.rl.y stages, and for autonomy in the l.a.ter

stages •

.As: against this "introverb political. cul.ture "•

Xera.l.a presented an "extrovert pol.itical. cul.ture", whiCh

304

was far from i.nvard l.ooking in any excl.ua·sive sen'e. True,

attempts were made to re-discover a Ma1ayal.ee identity

from Itbiba.ae. memories, but this never be came an obsession

a.s it did in Tamil. Nadu. The Keral.a popu1ar upsurge was

made more dynamic by its national.iat outl.ook on the one hand,

and a. concern for aocia.1 reforms mainly drawing inspiration

from Marxian thought. This external. inspiration coupl.ed

with its economic concern was something which was coD.spi.ouous

by ita absence in the Dravidian movement, even conceding

E.V. Ramaswsmi. Naicker•s devotion to Western atheistic

writers: (It never became a. popul.a.r force, a.s Marxism did in

Keral.a). l-ioreover, i:f it was the Tamil. purite.mists who l.ed

the cul.ture.l. J.iterar;,v renaissance in Tamil. Nadu, it was the

Marxist intel.l.ectua.J.s, free from Jilt' narrow puritanism but

more fired by socio-economic revol.utionary a.spi.rationa, that

l.ed the cultural. £lY!L J.i.terary renaissance in Kera.l.a.. As a.

resul.t, when an obsession with the past gl.ories of the

Ta.mil.s (true or mythioa.J.) wae a characteristic of the l.ea.ders

of the Dravidian movement, it was a. concern for rede~ining

the identity of Keral.a. within the framework of the modern

a.nd even gl.oba.l. ideol.ogies of socio-pol.itioal. ra.dica.J.ism that

served a.s the hal.lmark of the l.eaders of the popul.a.r upsurges

in Keral.a..

2. Given the above differences, it is not hard to und.e:r-

a·ta.nd the tJtaditiona.llst bias of the Dravidian movements

neither the Justice Party, nor the Dra.vide. Ka.zha.gam nor 1he

305

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam had any truly revolutionary po1itica1

ideol.ogy worth the name. What each of them had was a bundl.e

of reforms for favouring the non-Brahmina (and mostl.y, as- it

turned out to be, non-Brahmin el.:i.tes) and ~~ disfavouring

the Brahmi~. By failing to present any socio-economic

theories warth the name, these _segments of the Dravidian

movement betrayed their own poverty of unde::r:etanding regarding

the major socio-economic probl.ems: of the day - their doctrine

of state-autonomy being a major exception. But the l.eftist

J.eaders of the popular upsurges in Karal.a were unique for

their revolutiona~ outl.ook, their concern for socio-economic

probl.ems of the day, their ability to interpret the same in

theoretical. terms and to propose thiought out al.terna.tive

approaches for their solution. Whether it was in the sector

of agrarian rel.ations, labour probl.ems, educational. mal.aise,

administrative backwardness, the case was the same.

'. This brings to a next major ~sue • The Dravidian

movement \'faB mostly based on perso~J.ities, despite the ovez-

whelming anti-Brahminism of the earlier phases and the pro-

Dravidianiem and Pro-TamiJ.ism of the later phases. While the

Dra.vid~~ Ka.zhagam was the gl.aring exampl.e r::£ this~ the Dravida

MuD.netra Ka.zhagam did have, in:i.. t ial.ly;, stronger organizational.

arrangements and policy commitments, but in the end, even

this degenerated into personalism as evidenced by the fac~ions

• centred around E. V. K. Sampath, Iu!. Ira.runa.ni.dhi, l-ta:thiazbagaan,.

306

Nedunchezhiyan, Satyavani I~uthu and l"l.G. Ramachandran -

in fact, there came to be as many factions as there were

~eaders • But this was not the case with the ~eftist ~eadere

of the popular movements in Kera~. Even the sp~it of the

~eftists in Kerai.a into different camps were based on

:ide o~ogy, and not personal.i ties, and certe.in~ not at all.

any way comparab~e wi 1:h the State of affaixs among the

Tami~ Na.du ~eaders.

4. Something more needs to be said about the ~eaders of

the popular movements in the two States. In Tami~ Nadu, the

process of mobil.ising the Tamil. masses for national.ist

eub-national.ist causes was initiated and carried out by a

diversity of ~eaderships with distinctive ideo~ogical.

commitments of their own. Thus one can :identify atl.east five

such major agents or streams" of p opu~ movements in Tamil.

Nadul {a) the Congress, within which there were the Raja;).4

faction dominated by Brahmins and the Xama.:raj - Anna.ma~i

P±l.~i faction dominated by nan-Brahmine sti~l. remaining within

the Congress foU; (b) the Justice Party, which had its

gl.or:ious days from 1917 to 1935, and advocating the non­

Brahmin cause; (c) the Dravida Kazhagam of E.V .Ramaswami

Na.icker with a sui generis radical. approach to social. reforms

and Dravidian emancipation; (d) the Dra.vida f<lUllD.etra Ka.zha~e.m

stream of Anna.durai, which l.a.ter brought forth at~ea.st five

307

a.ub-streams centred around : ( i) M. Ka.runa.nidhi.,

(ii) M.G. Ra.ma.cha.ndra.n, (iii) Ma.thia.zhagan, (iv) Sat;vavani.

Muthu (v) Nedunchezhiya.n; and final~ (e) the Communists

theaselves.

The situation in Kera1a was different in this respect

too. Ti11 the formation of the Communist Party Of Kerala in

1940, the major political agent for mobills·ing the masses

for polltica1 actions was the Congress, which was nebulous

no doubt, with a1so communal representation in it by the

Christians, Nairs and Ezhe.va.s, but its major factions were

only two: the conservative leaders (concentrated most~ in

Travancore aDd Cochin) agitating primerly for constitutional

reforms, and the radical leftist leaders agitating not only

for constitutione.J. reforms. in favour of responsible gove:r:"n­

ment, but a1s o for socio-economic refonns in favour of the

peasants, the cultivators, the tenants and such weaker strata

of the society. Here again, the divisi6n was based on

ideologies and poli.cies rather than persona1ities or communal.

organi.satio!JP. After the formation o£ the Communist Party

of !Sra1a, the Congressmen and the Communists were the two

major agents of social. mobilisation, and t ha.t too foJ.J.owing

ideoJ.ogica.J. pol.e.rities. It was only with the spl.it of the

Communists and the Congressmen into further subgroups that

the s:ttus.tion ILDderwent a major change. But eventhen,

the dave J.opment s were in no wa:y c omparabl.e to those in Tami1

Nadu, because the ideo1ogica.1 and issue orientation sti11

308

continued to be e. major baais of the divisions in Xera.~a.

These historic&~ perspectives are impo~ant for

more than one reaa on s they so to say constitute the foi~

for the empi.rioa~ "mode1" or "i.mage" or nation-bui~ding

discussed in chapter six. Without these, the empirioe.~

mode1 or image of nation-bui.~ding under study oa.nnot be

fully understood, and wouJ.d even ~ead to grave distortio~

of the aotua.1 state of affairs. A.:ftera.11, the individua.1

respondents, whose image of nation-bui~ding has been

ana~sed in chapter six, cannot be t ota.~~ eepa.ra.ted, even

for a.na.l.ytioa~ pux-p oses, from their oul.tura~ and hist orioa1

cont..t. And hence the re~evance of even the concept of

"po1itice.~ culture" for image analysis (discussed in detai1

in chapter two) •

But the histories~ perspective is not enough. It needs

to be supported by al.So an appropriate theoretica.1 pers­

pective. And this is sought to be done in the next chapter

(chapter eight) , which is e. disc'UPsion on the po~itics of

na.tion-bui~ding and 1oca1 ~eaderehip from a theoretice.1

p1ane.