At the just recently concluded Summit of the Powerless organized by Tehelka, an alternative newspaper, under the theme Two Indias One future, Tehelka contributed to the process of getting the various voices on key issues to come together and bring to public expression the perspective of those affected by it. While on one hand prominent politicians and activist sparred with each other, on the other hand ordinary people trying to make a difference were at hand to articulate the pressing needs of survival.
The Summit of the Powerless began just as the Hindustan Times Summit on Leadership was drawing to a close. There was no doubt that these two summits were actually a profound manifestation of how deeply entrenched the idea of the Two India One future is actually being played all over again in a more sophisticated and apparent manner. The question of Two Indias One future was visibly demonstrated in the course of the Summit and it brings to the forefront the vital matter of India’s uncertain future.
Quite aptly, the theme for the Northeast panel discussion was titled On the Map, Off the Mind? The discourse that emerged indicated that even after all these years of shared history, there is very little public consciousness in the Indian sub-continent on the issues of the northeast. In fact by and large, the dominant view still assumes that the northeast is an exotic region riddled with insurgents pursuing an unrealistic goal. Unfortunately, as long as this misconceived assumption dominates the public consciousness, India will never know the northeast.
Hence despite various ongoing dialogue processes at various levels, they are in fact not dialogues, but a dialogue between monologues. And as long as they remain monologues, the yearning for a sustainable just solution remains illusive. There obviously is an imperative need for a shift from a monologue to a dialogue. But how can this shift be made, so long as misconceptions and erroneous assumptions define the parameters of public discourse on both sides of the spectrum?
There is an indigenous proverb which says, ‘If you talk to the other, they will talk with you and you will know each other. If you do not talk to them you will not know them and what you do not know, you will fear. What one fears, one destroys.’ I am afraid that the discourse on the northeast is one of fear and mistrust, and it will not be wrong to conclude that no solution of any nature can be sustained or respected as long as it is founded on fear.
I am of the opinion that in order for the Indian public consciousness to make a shift from a monologue to a dialogue, it needs to heal from the burdens on its own history. For many generations now, it has avoided the painful and liberating task of engaging with its own history and as long as it avoids this task, one finds that each new generation is engulfed deeper in the concept of fear, which perceives that the hammer is the only available tool to engage with differences.
There is no doubt that only a strong India will have the political and moral courage to engage in meaningful processes that results in just and sustainable solutions to the varied problems it is confronted with. For a strong India, it must allow its future to be guided by the critical democratic voices that embraces a shared humanity in which it recognizes the humanity of the other and one that has been made possible after having positively engaged and healed from the burdens of its own history.
