Can India ever make its version of Rule Britannia?

Amongst patriotic songs, I doubt there would be many in the world that would rival the famous Rule Britannia! in pomp, splendour, and sheer patriotism. Rule Britannia has it all: a proud, imposing melody, an affirmation of its fundamental values, religious overtones, upfront intent to dominate, and an in your face superiority complex that would undoubtedly make today's politically correct Britons cringe with embarrassment. It arouses a type of upbeat nationalistic pride that is rare to find in these days of pacifism and globalisation when national identities are said to become less relevant. It can raise goosebumps even on the arms of foreigners. I find it amazing a nation blessed with such an arousing patriotic song could choose the relatively plain God Save the Queen as its national anthem, which could be as representative of a tiny non-descript kingdom as of an erstwhile empire.

I have often thought about whether India can ever lay claim to a national song that arouses the same kind of cultural pride. I believe the India we know today never will, as a very different kind of patriotism dominates there. Considering patriotism has its etymology in patria, or fatherland, it is perhaps more etymologically appropriate to describe patriotism in India as matriotism. India is always a motherland, a mother, Bharat Mata.

One can easily discern two distinct strains of patriotic expression. At the first level, there is matriotism, the Vande Mataram type, the patriot sentimentally relates to his land of birth as a provider, and nourisher, and cherishes her as a son. This stage of patriotism can exist in isolation, with no need for an external stimulus. This sort of sentiment easily ties in with the next stage of a more militaristic patriotism, or nationalism, where the patriot vows to protect his motherland with his blood. At this stage, an external opponent is needed to repel or to defend from. The third stage, which has been absent in India in recent millenia, is when nationalism rises to imperialism and patriotism is related to the subjugation of or domination over other nations. At this stage of nationalism, which would now be decried as imperialism or even colonialism, there is little room for a mother, or motherland. A mother can give birth, nourish, and be defended, but an invading or subjugating mother doesn't make for romantic imagery in a patriarchal world. It is probably at this point that the fatherland comes to play.

The fatherland variety of patriotism has been more prominent in Europe. The Germans, traditionally a proud marital race, still refer to their land as the Vaterland, as do many Europeans. As indicated earlier, the Latin word for fatherland patria is the basis for the word patriotism in English and virtually all European languages.

About India, it can be said that the pacifist culture of non-violence and Gandhism has led to a deplorable dearth of militaristic nationalism. Since violence is abhorred under the Gandhian ethos and not even promoted for self-defense purposes, militaristic nationalism is restricted to the military, who are expected to risk their lives only to defend existing borders and not cross them, or at least retreat back to them after the war, even if it ends in victory. The Kshatriya culture is dead in India outside the military.

As a result there is a corresponding dearth of nationalistic songs that arouse a more jubilant, dominating kind of patriotism as opposed to the tear-jerker types that we have in abundance.

The closest we have are some songs from Bollywood war films, and even they are heavier on the matriotism, or else focus on camaraderie of troops and their missing home etc. For example, we have Desh Mere from The Legend of Bhagat Singh, with its lyrics of defiance and rebellion. Being made for Bollywood films, these songs are ultimately intended for a particular scene in a film and are not very general. In most cases, they depict the independence struggle, when an enslaved nation was trying to break its colonial chains, or else the defensive wars post-independence, where India neglected to use its huge military victories to demand significant reparations or even territory in Kashmir which has been illegally occupied. As such there have been no events in the last 1000 years of Indian history that could inspire unfettered nationalistic pride of the Rule Britannia kind.

To make an Indian Rule Britannia, Rule Bharata, one must either go back tens of thousands of years into the past, and glorify the unification of Bharatavarsha under Emperor Bharat, which was the last time a united India ruled the waves, or else imagine the future when a reawakened (or resurrected depending on your point of view) Bharata will arise, and again be a dominant force in the world, shining effulgently once again in its ancient wisdom and heritage...

Tibet and Ahimsa

For someone following the Tibetan struggle for independence for a while now, the latest spate of violence was a major shock and an alarm bell of sorts which seems poised to revolutionise our perceptions of the Tibetan issue and the nature of the conflict. The world had almost taken it for granted that the economic and military might of China had for all practical purposes sealed the struggle and crushed the rebellion. Even otherwise, the Tibetans were too peaceful to rise up in arms, to abandon their Buddhist faith of non-violence, and 'stoop' as low as to resort to violence. Or so we thought.

This recent outburst of violent protests now begs the uncomfortable question the largely politically correct media and intelligentsia avoids: Would Tibet have ever received the international attention it is receiving now had it not resorted to violence? Had it continued on the much celebrated path of non-violence and forgiveness, of ahimsa and क्षमा (forgiveness), quietly suffering, would the world be listening to Tibet's anguished voice? Would China have been forced into damage control and started the PR exercise which it is doing now?

The Dalai Lama is a highly respected spiritual figure in the West and his message on non-violence is widely touted to be the answer to world peace and inner happiness. Yet today, even the most devout ahimsa-follower has to admit that violence has finally done for Tibet in one day what non-violence couldn't do in half a century. The world has woken up to Tibet, but only by Tibet abandoning the message of its undisputed spiritual head.

These lingering questions remain to be answered by the Dalai Lama and other devout ahimsa believers, especially Indians and the Indian establishment: Is this violence on the part of the oppressed Tibetan people acceptable as a form of self defence or is violence in all forms a sin? While His Holiness the Dalai Lama has not endorsed the violent actions of his followers in his homeland, he hasn't condemned them either, and it will be interesting to see if he does either as events unfold.

This outbreak of violence in the most non-violent of lands, Tibet, should bring about discussion about the legitimacy and morality of violence in Buddhism and general ethics, in the context of self defence. Most of the world's religions endorse violence as a last resort for the protection of sovereignty and as a self defence. Lord Krishna Himself led the Mahabharat war to uphold dharma. Buddhism on the other hand, along with today's fashionable ideologies, however, in particular Gandhism and various left-wing ideologies, demonise all forms of violence, and Tibet ought to feature prominently in any arguments either justifying or attacking these views.

Would the Buddha today also tell his Tibetan followers to quietly endure their pain with ahimsa and shun violence? We know with near certainty that Mahatma Gandhi would. The venerated father of modern ahimsa had advised the Jews to non-violently resist the Holocaust, and present themselves to the Nazis to be killed until the Nazis finally felt ashamed and repented. One could say the Tibetans have effectively heeded the Gandhian advice, for want of any other alternative, and the results are there for all to see. The Tibetan race is on the path to cultural annihilation. It will not be very long before the Tibetan language is extinct, and the centuries old traditions of the fabled Himalayan nation get condemned to mere footnotes in history books.

The sad truth is that such ideology has weakened another proud people, and we all know that today there is no hope of Tibetan autonomy or religious rights before Tibet as we know it is extinct. No 'force of truth' has the political courage to stand up to China, especially at a time when the US is on the brink of a recession , and the world is looking to China to keep the world economy afloat.

The noble dharma and the middle way is all but defeated yet again.