[sacw] Challenges of Pluralism (TOI)

[Harsh Kapoor]

FYI
South Asia Citizens Web
-------------------------------------------------
From: Times of India, Thursday 25 February 1999

Challenges of Pluralism:
Reaching Out to Minority Communities

By MUCHKUND DUBEY

PLURALISM in a society is the presence of more than one cultural identity
among its population. It can be multi-ethnic, multi-religions,
multi-lingual and other multi-cultural categories. India is the world's
most complex and comprehensive pluralistic society, harbouring a vast
variety of races, tribes, castes, communities, religions, languages,
customs and living styles.
Recent developments have enhanced the salience of pluralism and
accentuated its conflictual character. Migrations facilitated by the modern
technological revolution have diluted the character of the nation state and
introduced new diversities and particularities in several societies. The
near unanimous acceptance of basic human rights and the increasing
insistence by people all over the world to exercise them, have made
pluralism more defiant than ever before. In Third World countries, years of
neglect of various cultural communities, at times their brutal suppression,
and the failure of the nation state project to deliver the goods has made
pluralism a major source of tension, conflict and violence. In an
increasing number of cases, cultural minorities are converting themselves
into political minorities in order to seek recognition and protection of
their distinctive identities, claim autonomy and self-governance, and
demand segregation and sometimes even secession.
Economic globalisation has made its own contribution to compounding the
problem of pluralism. It has led to both homogenisation and
marginalisation. Those who are marginalised on account of being outside the
pale of the market are falling back on and consolidating their primordial
identities as a defence mechanism. Among the cultural communities which are
feeling the impact of the homogenisation of particularities, invasion on
local traditions and privatisation of the social and the communal, there is
a strong urge to guard and preserve their identities against these
onslaughts.

Alternative Model

In the Third World, many countries adopted the model of the nation state
during the period of their struggle for independence and after becoming
independent. By now almost all of them have made a perfect hash of it. The
model of the nation state has not enabled these states to solve their
problems of plurality. As these states embarked upon the process of
development, cultural identities got further accentuated because of the
encroachment on them of the development process, its failure to deliver
basic needs at the mass level and the uneven distribution of the fruits of
development. The response of the elites controlling these states was, in
most cases, to make them even more centralised and coercive, thereby
subverting its democratic institutions.
The present pathetic plight of the nation state in the Third World has led
some to suggest the jettisoning of the whole idea of the nation state and
replacing it with an alternative model. But the alternatives suggested are
all amorphous, ambiguous and unworkable.

The nation state pessimism is largely unwarranted. There is nothing
intrinsically wrong about this model. The unifying role that it has played
in history cannot be denied. Besides, the importance of unity in the
present era cannot be gainsaid. All the societies which are leading the
pack today have been propelled to this position mainly by the force of
national unity. This unity is most needed precisely when diversities have
acquired a really complex and defiant character. Moreover, the greater the
degree of pluralism in a society, the greater is the need for unity to
manage it. India is a quintessential example of such a state. If we indeed
accept the desperate remedy of giving up the nation state as a unifying
force and give in to the forces of diversity, we would remain mired in
conflicts for years to come.

Essence of Democracy

There is nothing inevitable about diversities remaining intractable and
hostile to the objective of the nation state. Diversities cannot and must
not be suppressed, ignored or bypassed. To do so would give rise to
resistance, conflict and withdrawal from the nation state. Besides, the
nation state cannot realise its development objectives without harnessing
the rich and creative potentialities of pluralism. Pluralism is thus a
precious asset at the disposal of the nation state.

What has gone wrong in the Third World is not the pursuit of national
integration per se under the nation state, but the manner in which it has
been done. The challenge, therefore, is to manage pluralism without giving
up the goal of national integration and without further emasculating the
state. Cultural pluralism in a society can be best managed in a democratic
framework. Pluralism in a sense can be regarded as the very essence of
democracy.

One must clearly and consciously give up all notions of hitching the state
to the cart of any majoritarian identity. No truly pluralistic state can
embrace the majoritarian ethos as the national ethos, and the predominant
culture as the mainstream culture. If the primacy of the majoritarian
values and culture is accepted, then the minorities are likely to be
marginalised and alienated. Therefore, any desire for majoritarian
dominance must be consciously eschewed.

National identities should not be defined in a narrow or exclusive way.
Minorities should not be excluded in the self definition of the nation
state. Hindu India or Muslim Bangladesh are not viable propositions for
upholding pluralism in these societies. Such a self definition is bound to
alienate the minorities and give them very little stake in the society.

There should be a conscious effort at all levels to reach out to the
minority communities. The members of the majority community should make it
a point to acquaint themselves with the religion, philosophy, values,
language, tradition and practices of the minority communities. These should
be consciously appreciated and cherished.

Firm and Decisive

The state should, in collaboration with civil society, initiate through
the media and the educational system, measures to enable citizens to
overcome ignorance, prejudices and fixed mindsets regarding the
characteristics of people belonging to other communities. Textbooks,
particularly of history, philosophy and social studies, for children and
young people, should be carefully screened to remove from them all
stereotypes and misinformation.
The foundations of pluralism are rudely shaken with every act of violence
against the minority community. Therefore, a pluralistic state should not
put up with acts of violence, aggression and intimidation by one community
against the other, and least of all by the majority community against the
minority communities. In such circumstances, the reaction of the state
should be prompt, unambiguous, firm and decisive. The state cannot afford
to waver, hesitate, prevaricate or delay. It must immediately display its
capacity to act and its absolute firmness of purpose.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/act
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com