Unlike his other fleeting ideas, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has seriously pursued the ‘Har Ghar Tiranga’ campaign over the past few years, asking citizens to hoist the national flag at their homes around Independence Day. This is apparently aimed at inculcating nationalism in people – particularly the younger generation which may not be fully aware of the freedom struggle. It looks like a noble project at the superficial level but there is more to patriotism than such hollow symbolism.
The national flag or the tricolour symbolises a value system. The values that emerged from the freedom struggle – liberty, fraternity, equality and justice – define the Constitution. The tricolour epitomises not only freedom, but also the idea of India that is woven with these principles. The very concept of patriotism is rooted in constitutional morality. Without this value system, the tricolour loses its lustre and significance. Every Indian has to internalise this message and whoever rules India has to understand it. A political philosophy that contradicts this message fundamentally undermines the Tiranga. Without adherence to this value system, any celebration with the national flag is a sham; a political tamasha that has no purpose or legitimacy.
What is the tricolour without freedom? What is the meaning of love for the tricolour without the commitment to maximise citizens’ freedoms? The flag is not the symbol of government power. It is the manifestation of people’s power in democracy. And democracy isn’t about elections and governments; it is about people’s rights and freedoms.
After 77 years of attaining Independence, has the state maximised people’s freedoms or curtailed it? No celebration of Independence Day shall be meaningful without an honest appraisal. Is Modi ready for that appraisal? Or does he want citizens to close their critical faculties and blindly follow the instructions of hoisting the national flag? Are the citizens ready for an honest appraisal? Can they figure out whether the balance of power structured by democracy has been disturbed or not? Do the people realise the rulers have usurped their power, reducing them to a voting instrument that is rendered invalid after the formation of the government? Patriotism isn’t a mechanical process. Hindi poet Dhumil has succinctly articulated this: “Teen thake huye rangon ko ek pahiya dhota hai/Azadi isi ko kahte hain/ya iska khas matlab hota hai”.
Undoubtedly, freedom has a special significance for the citizens. In a free country governed by the constitutional scheme, why should a citizen worry about marauding gangs destroying his life if he falls in love with a girl of different religion? What has given the government power to selectively label some unions as “love jihad?” Why should a citizen fear lynching because of his eating habits? Why should anybody dictate what one wears? If a political leader decides not to attend a temple ceremony organised by another party or the government, should that invoke charges of being anti-Hindu? Is opposing or criticising a government policy seditious? Is that the scope of freedom in our country? And what’s the next step of this vigilantism? What’s the worst possible form? Nazi Germany gave the answer.
While hoisting the national flag, shouldn’t a citizen wonder why a businessman is earning Rs 1,000 crore in a day when their struggle for survival has become more difficult? While singing and dancing with the national flag, shouldn’t a citizen ask why the father of the man who mowed down innocent farmers continued to be a minister in the Union government? While expressing pride in holding the national flag, shouldn’t the citizens worry about the barbed wire and nails being planted on the road to prevent farmers from reaching the nation’s capital? Should a citizen forget he was assaulted by police for participating in a peaceful protest in the capital? While holding the tricolour, shouldn’t a citizen visualise a democracy where ideas are debated, questioned, accepted or rejected without fear or favour? Can a foolish citizen, incapable of discerning between the good and the bad make a great nation? Mahatma Gandhi, who was the ultimate symbol of our freedom struggle, taught the citizens to speak the truth, to debate and dissent. Crushing dissent is betrayal of the Gandhian legacy. That’s the rejection of the values that the Tiranga flutters with.
On Independence Day, beyond the ritual of buying and flying the national flag, citizens need to introspect. Has the government created an atmosphere where citizens can envision a collective national future of peaceful coexistence? Or must a citizen think separately as a Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, or Christian? Can a Hindu and a Muslim be equally assured of a brighter future in this environment? Can the mindset of an empowered community align with that of an endangered one? Can those eager to celebrate the demise of pluralism think like those desperately praying for its survival? Is there not a divide in the imagination of these two groups of Indians, making a shared vision of the future impossible?
Has the prime minister ever tried to bridge this gap? Or has he contributed to the heightening of anxieties among Muslims through his irresponsible discourse? The prime minister describing a community as “ghuspaithiya” (intruder), and those who produce more children, is certainly not an integrative tone. Union home minister Amit Shah, who often promotes the discriminatory “Alia-Maliya-Jamaliya” narrative, rarely shows empathy for minorities and never attempts to heal the injured self-esteem of Muslims. When was the last time a message of fraternity and healing came from the government?
Democracy is not about a majoritarian bulldozer; it is about the ability to embrace and protect minorities. If the social, cultural and economic subjugation of Muslims has increased, the majesty of the tricolour has diminished. A Muslim is humiliated or assaulted for offering namaz at a public place but the Hindu is free to pursue his religious ritual at malls, in trains and airports,. Will the administration behave in a similar manner if millions of Muslim devotees start causing mayhem on the streets, like the Kanwariyas do? Can we presume the tricolour has failed to protect every citizen? Are there cracks and blots in the beautiful tricolour? What has clouded the glory of the national flag?
At the Constituent Assembly meeting on July 22, 1947, where the tricolour was adopted as the national flag, former Prime Minister Jawaharal Nehru, describing it as a symbol of freedom, had said, “this flag is not flag of Empire, a flag of imperialism, a flag of domination over anybody, but a flag of freedom not only for ourselves, but a symbol of freedom to all people who may see it…Wherever it may go, it will bring a message of freedom to those people, a message of comradeship, a message that India wants to be friends with every country of the world and India wants to help any people who seek freedom…”
The younger generation may not know the struggle and sacrifices behind the freedom struggle – as is reflected in the shameful ignorance of actress Kangana Ranaut who is now a member of Parliament. But they are certainly unaware of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS) staunch objection to the tricolour as the national flag. Even after the tricolour became a symbol of national pride following its adoption by the Congress at the Lahore session in December 1929, RSS founder K.B. Hedgewar urged people to reject the tricolour and continue using the saffron flag.
Addressing RSS workers in Nagpur in 1946 July, his successor M.S. Golwalkar said only the “bhagwa dhwaj” reflects Indian culture in its totality. On August 14, 1947, on the eve of Independence, RSS mouthpiece Organiser wrote, “Even as the people who are in power today because of fate thrust the tricolour in our hands, Hindus will neither respect it, nor accept it. The number three in itself is inauspicious. A flag with three colours will be harmful for the nation and cause negative psychological impact upon the citizens.”
Even later, Golwalkar described the tricolour as “patan ki nishani” (sign of regression). When the RSS was banned in the aftermath of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, the then home minister Sardar Patel had conveyed to Golwalkar that the national flag must be accepted by them as one of the pre-conditions for lifting the ban. Though the RSS doesn’t explicitly oppose the tricolour now, they refused to hoist it at their headquarters for 52 years.
