Stifling Discourse
In a revealing social experiment, two alumni of a top-tier Hyderabad school, class of 2000, tested the pulse of their peers—urban, educated, affluent Hindus—in a WhatsApp group chat. The cohort was impressive: half were settled in America or Europe, the rest held high-flying IT management roles in India, with former backbenchers turned entrepreneurs or politicians. Expecting robust debate on national issues, the experimenters instead found a wall of silence, exposing a deeper crisis of identity and engagement among India’s elite.
A Muted Response
The experiment began amid the Pahalgam incident, a spark of national tension. Raising it in the chat drew a curt rebuff: “No heavy topics, please.” The group favoured memes, birthday wishes, and nostalgia. As conflict escalated—drones buzzing, missiles launched—the silence persisted. Discussions on terrorism or radicalisation were privately discouraged to avoid “offending” Muslim members. Expressions like “Jai Shree Ram” or “Jai Hind,” even after India’s military triumph, met no response. Criticism of Pakistan’s actions prompted deflections to caste discrimination in India, a jarring false equivalence. This wasn’t mere passivity but a collective psychological shift.
Roots of Reticence
Several forces underpin this silence:
- Post-Colonial Legacy: India’s education, steeped in colonial roots, often exalts Western thought while framing Indian culture as regressive. Many Hindus, conditioned to see their heritage as problematic, shy away from cultural pride to seem “progressive.”
- Guilt by Design: Textbooks and media spotlight Hinduism’s flaws—caste, patriarchy—while sidelining its philosophical and scientific contributions. This breeds unease with even benign expressions of identity.
- Global Citizenry: Many, especially those abroad or in multinationals, embrace a “global citizen” identity, viewing national or cultural pride as parochial. Political correctness trumps conviction.
- Social Risk: In elite circles, being tagged “right-wing” or “too Hindu” invites ostracism. Silence is safer than controversy, leaving truth unspoken.
- Individualism’s Triumph: Economic success has narrowed priorities to careers and personal gains. Civic duty stops at taxes and votes.
- Selective Outrage: While vocal on global issues like climate change or minority rights, the group went mute on India’s challenges, reflecting fear or indifference.
The Polarisation Trap
The rancorous left-right divide fuels this reticence. Both sides savagely target non-alignment, scaring well-meaning voices into silence. Group members, fearing labels like “liberal” or “divisive,” saw expression as a penalty. This polarisation kills nuance, as seen in the group’s retreat to triviality over substance.
A Civilisational Cost
This silence signals a profound disconnection. When India’s brightest hesitate to affirm their cultural or national identity, the nation’s intellectual core weakens. The issue isn’t external threats but the absence of internal resolve. As the experimenters noted, this quiet could become “the sound of decline.”
Breaking the Silence
Addressing this requires reform: education must balance critique with pride in India’s heritage; dialogue needs safe spaces free from ideological attacks; globalism and rootedness must coexist. The WhatsApp experiment was a microcosm of a broader crisis. India’s elite must reclaim their voice—not with jingoism, but with clarity. Without it, their silence risks defining the future.
Comments
Post a Comment