India@63: 5,000 Years Old

It was again an annual day today (August, 15) which was full of patriotic talks, internet chats, political speeches and rhetorics of India being young at 63. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made it more than obvious as to what does this day mean to people he represents. I would like to draw attention to Manmohan Singh's indifference to the Red Fort ceremony that once captured the imagination of the prime ministers and people alike. As he pulled the rope to unfurl the Tri-colour, a flag that symbolizes Indian brand of patriotism, he forgot even to look up at the Tiranga in salutation. He was more concerned about the business next in hand, that is, to read the speech text given to him. This also explains why he does not care about the programmes and policies after putting them into effect. He forgets to see whether the policies are producing the results they were originally meant to.

Whatever, I was talking about India turning 63 today. I have a serious objection to this concept. To me it's an insult to all those who contributed towards shaping and making this nation but worked in pre-1947 age. If my knowledge of Indian history is correct then the country had a very developed and flourishing urban civilization some 5000 years ago. And, the name "India" owes to none but this very civilization known to us as Indus Valley Civilization. Also, some 9000 years ago, the old India had a well established village community based on settled agriculture at Mehrgarh (Pakistan). To me, calling India a nation just 63 years old is not correct and it betrays the colonial hangover on the Indian psyche. It denounces everything that was Indian before 1947. India did not begin to breathe in 1947. It was very much in shape much much before that.

The known limits of Indus valley civilization is Shortughai near Oxus river to Daimabad in the Deccan. It could have been wider than that as we lack knowledge about the rest. During Chandragupta Maurya and Ashoka India was very much in shape. In middle ages the greatest emperor of India, Akbar the Great and Aurangzeb ruled over India that was bigger than what its present form. Colonial India was certainly divided and divisive.

But when India was freed from foreign rule, the colonial rulers made it believe that it is a New Nation. It can not sustain on its own. True, economically India was lifeless for all practical purpose. But it was not new, rather older than its colonial rulers. But, somehow they convinced the Indian leadership that India lacked courage, spirit, capability and most of all confidence to walk on its own feet, just like an infant can not do anything on its own.

So, now having known that India did not born in 1947, I just can not buy the statement and the argument for it that India is 63. This is ridiculous and an affront to the great civilizations that the country nourished in its past. I hope a civilization, a nation, a people who are at least 5000 years old will not be insulted by terming them 63 year old which need other's help to stand upright.

Celebrating Independence Day is good. A day chosen for the occasion is also good. But that day should be celebrated in a way to remind us that if we stand divided outsiders will take advantage of it to impose a new form of colonialism. This day should keep us beware of such a situation.

Happy Independence Day!