‘The existential reality of India is one of immense diversity’. Photo credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto
The Constitution of India was prepared by the Constituent Assembly. The idea was initially proposed in December 1934 by MN Roy, a pioneer of the communist movement in India and a proponent of radical democracy. It became an official demand of the Indian National Congress in 1935 and was officially adopted in April 1936 at its Lucknow session under the chairmanship of Jawaharlal Nehru, who also drafted the Objectives Resolution. The proceedings of the Constituent Assembly reflect the richness of thought that characterizes it. The drafting committee was headed by BR Ambedkar.
‘common brotherhood’
At the concluding session of the Committee on 25 November 1949, BR Ambedkar attracted attention For a reduction in the draft. “The second thing we want is the recognition of the principle of fraternity. What does fraternity mean? Fraternity means the feeling of common brotherhood of all Indians – if Indians are one people. It is this principle which gives unity and solidarity to social life. Gives. A difficult thing to achieve…”
He added elsewhere that ‘without brotherhood[,] Equality and liberty will be no deeper than a coat of paint’; That brotherhood has been forgotten by most in our Constitution and our electoral process, which in turn is reproduced in our hearts and homes. The idea of fraternity is closely linked to social solidarity, which is impossible to accomplish without public sympathy.
Hence along with liberty, equality and justice, fraternity was added to the principles of the Preamble. It is too little discussed, nor sufficiently clarified, that the spirit of fraternity enriches and strengthens the benefits that flow from the other three.
Those in the audience familiar with the history of the French Revolution will probably recall with some trepidation the message of the Fraternal Order of 1792 (‘All governments are our enemies, all peoples are our friends’). Only Acharya Kripalani attracted attention on October 17, 1949 for some implications. He pointed out that the content of the Preamble was not only a legal and political principle but also a moral, spiritual and mystical content: “If we are to use democracy only as a legal, constitutional and formal device, I submit, We will fail.” …. The whole country must understand the moral, spiritual and mystical implications of the word democracy … If we do not do this, we will fail as they have failed in other countries. Democracy will be built into despotism and it will be built into imperialism, and it will be built into fascism. But as a moral principle it should be lived out in life. It does not live in life, and in all its departments it becomes only a formal and legal principle.
a duty
What duties emerge from this? How to put them into practice? The text of the Constitution elaborates on the implications of other principles and the duties arising from them; Not so on brotherhood. In fact, Article 51A on Fundamental Duties, added by the 42nd Amendment in 1977 and amended by the 86th Amendment in 2010, has been deferred except for Article 51A(e), which generally deals with promoting ‘harmony’ of every citizen. and the feeling of common brotherhood among all the people of India’.
This has wide implications and, as Sir Ernest Barker pointed out in one of his seminal works praising the Constitution of India, a distinction has to be made between the psychological fact of common sense and the political principle of fraternity or co-operation. ‘Fraternity is an ambiguous term, which may be used both for feeling and for principle, but is probably more commonly used to denote feeling rather than principle … a sense of loyalty to the state and to the national society The feeling of nationalism is, or should be, controlled feelings.’
In such a discussion, it is useful to remember the difference between being and becoming. Being designates a state, something that remains unchanged over time while becoming designates an event, a change of state, an act of cultivation. As Rajiv Bhargava has argued, ‘there is an urgent need to excavate the moral values enshrined in the Constitution to bring out their relationships, and to identify the coherent or non-coherent worldviews contained within it.’
Three years later, and after some experience of working a nascent democratic system which he had helped to establish (and which led to his resignation from the government due to disagreements on key questions), BR Ambedkar found himself in this difficult position. dedicated to the work. ‘Khudai’, in a lecture titled ‘Conditions for the Successful Functioning of Democracy’, December 1952. Listed earlier were some of the common features: Democracy is prone to change of form and purpose and in our times it aims ‘not so much to curb a despotic monarch as to promote the welfare of the people’. It is a method of government through consultation which without bloodshed brings revolutionary changes in the economic and social life of the people. Certain nuances were listed to bring this about: there should not be clear inequalities in the society, there should be an even opposition, equality in law as well as equal protection of law, and administration and adherence to constitutional morality. The minority should not be oppressed by the majority. Above all, society needs a functioning moral order and a public conscience. The same social necessity existed in BR Ambedkar’s religiosity or dharma, as did his developed religious beliefs.
In each of these cases, the ground reality gives a different reading. Inequalities persist and inequalities arising out of the caste system also persist; Democratic opposition has progressively declined, equality before law does not mean equal protection of the laws, and little regard is given to constitutional morality. Each of Gandhiji’s seven social sins (inscribed on a plaque at Rajghat) fit well into the workings of politics.
an indispensable attribute
India’s existential reality is one of immense diversity. There is also an unfortunate legacy of violence at birth that persists and takes various forms. It is the practice of these principles in all their diversity and the need to act individually and collectively. The feeling of fraternity as an essential virtue is thus indispensable, without being accused of infallibility. It cannot be only in formal form and has to be imbibed individually and collectively. Nor can it be merely a legal or formal enterprise and has what Acharya Kriplani describes as having an ethical and spiritual content. However, a legislative shape for this is yet to be given, beyond the words of Article 51A(e) – a ‘duty’ that purported to go beyond the consequences of non-compliance of other duties specified in the shape of a pious hope. is without This article.
The challenge today is to invest our democracy with this moral content at individual and collective levels. It has to take the form of inevitability; Failure to do so will put us at risk of fragmentation. Its consequences should not be guessed.
Hamid Ansari was the Vice President of India (2007–2017)