Write a note on challenges of Pluralism : Reaching Out to minority Community.
Answer – Pluralism is 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 homogenization and marginalisation. Those who are marginalised on account of being outside the pale of the market are failing back on and consolidating their primordial identities as a defence mechanism. Among the cultural communities which are feeling the impact of the homogenization of particularities, invasion of local traditions and privatisation of the social and communal, there is a strong urge to guard and preserve their identities against these onslaughts.
Alternative Model of Pluralism – 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 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 centralized 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 the need for unity to manage it. India is 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 can not realise its development objectives without harnessing the rich and creative potentialities of pluralism. Pluralism is thus a precious asset at the disposal of 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 sense can be regarded as the very essence of democracy.
One must clearly and consciously give up all notions up 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 marginalized 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 region, philosophy, values, language, traditions 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 mixed 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.
