For a plural society, like the Indian, there can be no option such as ‘unity’ or ‘diversity’ because both have to co-exist in a single framework. Liberal values have been adopted in the constitution to facilitate the promotion of tolerance and cultural co-existence. And that was believed to be the ideal relationship for the minorities in the ‘nation’. The present dilemma can be sorted out only if cultural, linguistic, regional and religious differences are not treated as something suspicious for the national unity, as a conflict between the majority and minorities, and if there is no dichotomy between unity and diversity. It is in this sense that ‘secularism’ needs to be understood. Secularism cannot be a goal of democracy or of social justice. It is only a method of achieving the same, a method of good governance for a plural society, like the Indian. Minorities have to get incorporated into the public life of the nation as citizens and not just as dependent minorities. They have to ensure that they no longer remain clients of this or that political party but emerge as partners in sharing the power in the nation.
There are no reviews yet.