A nation that espouses ‘vasudaiva kumbakam’ (oneness of the world) is facing challenges to foster the ideal of fellow-feeling at home.

Seventy-five years ago, when India set out on a long march to fulfil the promises of the freedom struggle and accomplish the task of nation building, the first issue was to preserve, consolidate and strengthen India’s unity.

Indian unity and solidarity, it was realized, was not to be taken for granted. It had to be strengthened by recognizing and accepting India’s immense regional, linguistic, ethnic and religious diversity. It was to be further fostered by acknowledging and accommodating the countrymen’s multiple identities. The project of fraternity was daunting, yet key to India’s peace, progress and prosperity.

Ambedkar’s vision of India 

Dr B.R. Ambedkar held that political democracy cannot last unless there lies at its base social democracy. By social democracy he meant a way of life which recognizes liberty, equality and fraternity as principles of life. They form a union of trinity in a sense that to divorce one from the other is to defeat the very purpose of democracy.  

Elaborating on the uniqueness and importance of fraternity, he said: “Fraternity means a sense of common brotherhood of all Indians -- of Indians being one people. It is the principle which gives unity and solidarity to social life”. He went to the extent of saying that, “without fraternity, equality and liberty will be no deeper than coats of paint”.

Legacy of freedom struggle 

The legacy of the freedom struggle was rich. The broad social consensus on the values of nationalism, secularism and democracy was an endowment the free country received, on which the path of nation-building was to be charted. The consensus on the practice of non-violence during the national movement also contributed to the creation of a temper of democracy.  

Discussion, debate and persuasion, backed by public opinion, was stressed for advancing social and political change as opposed to glorification of mistrust, animosity and violence. The major political parties did not insist on uniformity of opinions within their ranks. They tolerated and encouraged different and minority opinions. In fact, dissent had become a normal part of political dialogue and communication.

Sadly, the tradition of consensus and reconciliation that was expected to guide and steer the project of fraternity was found to erode during the very early part of the post-independence era. Language, caste and communal riots generated a lot of negative energy and, in the process, depleted much of our social capital. The initial optimism for unity and a sense of nationhood, born out of the freedom movement, mature political leadership and constitutional spirit, started waning.

Political degeneration 

In this overall degeneration of mutual trust and social cohesion, the biggest casualty was erosion of credibility of political parties, political leadership and political institutions, with their negative multiplier effects pervading India's social and economic life. Inter and intra-party instability, intense mudslinging, infighting and factionalism within parties and absence of long-term political programmes have been the common maladies. 

Further, unlimited populism have not only been diverting political debate from programme and policies to peripheral issues but many are also unabashedly stoking ill-will and animosity, relying on sensitive and divisive issues of religion, caste and regional chauvinism, to garner votes.

A sharp decline in the quality of Indian polity has now further led to many negative currents. Important national issues and programmes are seen from the partisan lens of politics. As the old framework of consensus through debate and discussion is largely unutilized or bypassed, and no new appropriate forms of consensus has evolved, all kinds of street protests have become common scenes.  

Dharnas, bandhs, blockage of roads, rioting, wanton violence, mob lynching, attack on private and public property, patronized, overtly or covertly, by political parties of various hues, are now almost the order of the day. Not only educational and military institutions, even constitutional bodies are witnessing encroachments of dirty politics. All these are vitiating social fabric and public life.  

Political parties are gradually turning out to be the weakest link in our political system and, more often than not, a barrier in social solidarity.

Social media negativity 

The amplifying power of social media coupled with absence of its accountability have provided a fertile ground to create divisions and fissures in society. Misinformation, disinformation, outrage, hate speech, fake news -- all are in full play through the medium. Actors of all walks of life, particularly having political affiliations and associations, are enacting their roles actively, often vicariously. In a country where sense of entitlements and rights overwhelm responsibilities and duties, where people are still unaware or unmindful that freedom of expression has certain well-meaning caveats, the noise and outbursts on the social media are easily overpowering sanity, pervading toxicity in social relations.

The question is why an ideal so enshrined in the preamble in our Constitution has got a short shrift in public discourse and imagination, in contrast to liberty and equality? Why fraternity has failed to gain a privileged expression and attention in political manifestos, programmes and activities?

A few reasons seem obvious. The principle of fraternity requires from us a sense of duty and responsibility as opposed to rights, privileges and entitlements. This may appear an onerous task for most people. Further, the idea of reciprocity, solidarity and social bond does not sit well with individual goals in a predominantly materialistic, market-driven modern life.  

It may also be a case that unlike equality and liberty, which seem attainable through political, legal and constitutional means, fraternity doesn’t seem to have any clear and well-defined institutional frameworks for it to get traction and realized.

Value of fraternity 

This is the problem which Acharya Kripalani, the well-known Gandhian and socialist, could sense early. He saw the Preamble not as an embodiment of mere legal or political principles but moral and spiritual guidelines. He argued that if certain indispensable values are considered only as constitutional or legal mandates, we will fail to achieve them.  

Instead, he characterized these values as morals that every citizen should strive to adopt. Introducing the value of fraternity as a corollary to democracy, and elucidating the spiritual dimension of fraternity, he famously said: “It means that we are all sons of the same God, as the religious would say, but as the mystic would say, that there is one life pulsating through us all, or as the Bible says ‘We are one of another’.” 

Kripalani emphasized that fraternity must be lived by us all — in private, public, commercial or political life alike to ensure the success of our Constitution.

The next quarter century leading to hundred years of our independence, is going to be critical. The strides we have painstakingly made in economy, science and technology, space, entrepreneurship and governance would now have to be leapfrogged to meet the aspirations of our billion-plus people. This task is collective and requires collaboration at all levels.

Clearly, for making fellow-feeling as a way of life, we have to recognize the major sources, platforms or trigger points of discord and enmity. First, all the political parties must sit together and have a broad consensus on the key issues with a national perspective. Secondly, accountability of social media needs to be fixed urgently. Thirdly, we must focus more on issues and activities which demonstrate commonality and collectiveness. 

Sports, music, space science, yoga, valour of Indian Armed Forces, Indian Constitution, national anthem/song/tricolor and inspirational personalities could be some arenas surrounding which we can build bridges and deepen cohesion.  

Virtue signalling 

Fourthly, the government and the ruling party, as a key stakeholder in the project, must do virtue signalling through right actions and legal frameworks to promote our diversity and plurality.  

Lastly, a sense of fraternity must be internalized and displayed by us all - in private and public alike, and also at all times, good or bad. 

The challenges in the path of the fraternity project are many. But we must overcome them, as it is on the pillar of fraternal relations that a well-functioning and healthy democracy rests.
                                                     
(The writer is a former bank executive and author who writes extensively on contemporary issues. Views are personal. He can be contacted at rkrishnasinha@hotmail.com)