The Death of the Republic as we know it.
This article originally appeared in CRI content has now been subsumed in The views expressed here are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors of

“ This is the way the world ends . Not with a bang but with a whimper”
-T.S Eliot

A state is the consensus of its people. It signifies a government established if not by the people, but definitely a governing consensus. A constitution is an expression of that consensus and therefore forms the basis of the state and government of the country.

The Constitution of India is therefore an expression of the prevailing consensus of the Indian state, and the idea of India as exemplified at the times of our independence.

Today, the Indian constitution is nearly 60 years old. It is more than middle aged in terms of human existence and it is slowly devouring itself and its children.

Its greatest success is that it formed a framework of governance for a period of 60 years and unless fundamentally changed, it is destined to last a decade more at the most. This is substantially a long tenure by the measurement of rules of Indian governmental structures. Remember the Greater Mughals lasted just about a 120 years ( excluding the break of the Suris) , the East India Company barely a 80 years as a governing entity and the British Raj 90 years from the time the British Sovereign assumed direct rule over her Indian dominions.

Along the way, the Indian Republic has changed its character from essentially a liberal democratic value free constitution aspiring to be a liberal state to a state which has its credo as “Secularism and Socialism”.

Possibly these two words which were specifically rejected from the original draft of the Constitution makers, since they had inkling as to what it could lead to.

Babasaheb Ambedkar in the debate about insertion of the words “ Socialism” and “Secularism” in the Constitution , in the Constituent Assembly on 15th November , 1948 said :
“ In the first place the Constitution, as I stated in my opening speech in support of the motion I made before the House, is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State. It is not a mechanism whereby particular members or particular parties are installed in office. What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether. If you state in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall take a particular form, you are, in my judgment, taking away the liberty of the people to decide what should be the social organisation in which they wish to live. It is perfectly possible today, for the majority people to hold that the socialist organisation of society is better than the capitalist organisation of society. But it would be perfectly possible for thinking people to devise some other form of social organisation which might be better than the socialist organisation of today or of tomorrow. I do not see therefore why the Constitution should tie down the people to live in a particular form and not leave it to the people themselves to decide it for themselves. This is one reason why the amendment should be opposed.”

However in the 1970’s , in the heady attempt to replicate the Soviet Union within us ,we went about killing that consensus , that very fine balance , in order to create the universal , proto atheist, forced egalitarian, planned state . The leaders who went about trying to turn India into the USSR, besides living in a fool’s paradise ended up exacerbating the fault lines in the constitution, which the Constituent Assembly had attempted to cleverly paper over.

Today we are paying for those errors in judgment at the time of the formation of the Constitution and for that lost decade of the 1970s , when we as a people fell under the spell of a Hitlerian dictator , who changed the consensus in which the state was governed , and what it wanted to be , to satisfy her petty objectives . The Indian state has not recovered from it till today. She was the Indian Republic’s own Aurangzeb, to the Babur of India’s first Prime Minister. The Indian Republic reached it’s height during her reign and her reign was also the start of the slow decline of the Indian Republic, which is now disintegrating with precipitous rapidity.

The present Constitution is actually “two constitutions”, the first from 1947 to 1971 and the other from 1971 till today. Each of the two constitutions being fundamentally different from each other .The most problematic part with both , is that both rejected any innate Indic tendencies on the belief that any Indianess , was too backward and too traditional and both wanted to be progressive , while the first wanted to be a liberal democratic constitution , the second a socialist state . However both had one thing in common, they wanted to radically alter the face of India, by leaving out it’s past through social engineering.

The consensus around the idea of India is unraveling rapidly as indeed those who knew Bharatvarsha knew it would. The unraveling is a good thing. We should look forward to the day, when the Secular Socialist Republic is sent to the graveyard, since I doubt that those who are behind it would want to give it a cremation since that would be too backward, too regressive and too traditional.

This is even more important since the Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic as we now know it has been the engine of oppression directed against people who believe in values of the Sanatana Dharma . It is another matter that this has been disguised in the name of everything from Socialism, to Gandhiism . Infact they have used the name of the Mahatma to bring the most anti-Dharmic legislation and the most horrendously socialist laws, against the very grain of what he stood for.

The Indian state as we all know continues to be dominated by the Europeanised elite which inherited the government from the British Raj. To them the Indian state has been their property by inheritance and by their birthright simply because the state was willed to them by the British at their departure. They have tried every trick in the book to retain their hold on the levers of power, especially in the 1990s and 2000s, when their hold on power has increasingly become tenuous, by utilizing the media as a vehicle to stage their large scale intrigues.

However it is heartening to note, that the very foundations of the idea of India are under challenge, and the Republic shows signs of disintegration.

The strange entity called the Socialist Secular Republic which has become the “idea of India” has been under some strain from some time, and, for the first time it is showing signs of fatigue.

The idea of India is a foreign monstrosity and ideology of the greatest vindictiveness towards the dharma of the majority of the people. It is in itself a continuum of the rulers of India for the last thousands of years , who have held the majority of the people and their customs and traditions in contempt , and whose endeavor was to bring fundamental and long lasting change to the way of living of the people of the country , whether it be to turn them Muslim or whether it be to turn them European or progressive .

However the history of Bharatvarsha would tell you, that none of them succeeded in their mission and so will this attempt fail. Yet, in the process it will inflict untold misery on the people of India and Bharat.

History points out to the fact that we have been responsible for the foreign rulers that have ruled us for long periods of time in our history. We have as a people co-operated with the rulers , installed them on their thrones , not resisted them when they have damaged our way of life , our mandirs and our traditions , and only when the regime became oppressive and started openly taking us for granted , then , we have taken to open rebellion .

The rulers so used to taking our obsequiousness for granted, are surprised with the vehemence we oppose them. They almost tend to treat it as a breach of the contract of governance on our part, as if it is our lot and our dharma to be oppressed.

Yet , when the rebellion comes in the name of protecting the true way , our way of life , the Dharma which we all hold dear ,then it is like the whirlwind , it is violent and it sweeps all in it’s path . It destroys the structures and systems of the oppressors and the foreign rulers, remember the Marathas, remember the First War of Independence.

In this context, the Socialist Secular Republic is more and more looking like an oppressive foreign regime that we are used to , a regime fundamentally opposed in it’s very basis to Sanatana Dharma , a regime which is bent on changing our way of life and a regime which wants to destroy us when we resist , remember the Mughals and the British if not through force , then through intrigue and propaganda .

It seems that the present “State” is on it’s last legs , when it is being inexorably being drawn to it’s destruction by an urge to continue to be in power and the rising conflict with the ways of the people who refuse to change or give up their unenlightened lives , ways and customs . Resistance to the “idea of India” is growing everywhere, Jammu, Orrissa , Karnataka , Uttarakhand , the struggle against the ephemeral “Hindu Communalists” has become the long twilight of the Indian state , just like the struggle with the Marathas was with Aurangzeb , and the struggle with Gandhi became for the British Raj.

The problem with the Indian state is it cannot retrace its steps and do things differently and it cannot go back on the fact that it governs vast people who are completely opposed to its worldview. Aurangzeb, realized this and tried to convert the entire state into Islam by force, the British realized the same and they tried to convert the entire people through killing their educational institutions and replacing it by theirs, and the present Indian state, which has tried to destroy the old cultures, by repeating it through the media , that the ways are backward and oppressive . The Indian state is coming close to the tipping point, when the consensus will implacably turn against it, and from then on , the end is just a few steps away.

The final clash which comes eventually between the foreign rulers and the people of Bharatvarsha is again looming as it always has in the history of Bharatvarsha . It is like the eternal battle of Mahabharata which has to be fought in every age. A battle which always ends in the setting up of Dharma Rajya , since Bhagwan has said in the Bhagwad Gita :

“Paritranaya sadhunam vinashaya cha dushkritam. Dharma sansthapanarthaya sambhavami yuge yuge.” (Bhagwad Gita 4:8)

A warning however we should keep in mind : The Mahabharata teaches us that no war brings about the end of oppression , just that the victors with the best of intentions slowly become the oppressors without even realizing it . It is for this reason, we have had a series of foreign rulers, who have come in when our resistance to and the oppression of our oppressor have exhausted each other . It was like that for the Mughals and the British. Even at the time of independence from the British, Gandhivaad (being an interpretation of Sanatana Dharma) was the ideology of resistance to the British and to that end it succeeded in resisting the British and bringing British Rule to an end . However in the process, we took the help of the Liberal Democratic ideology of the West and installed it as the ruling ideology of the Indian state, because, we thought we needed it, just like we thought that we need the British before them and the Mughals even before them. Also like it has happened for time immemorial, this foreign ideology then became the instrument of violent oppression of us and our ways of life, and today we are forced to rebel against it and resist it.

In future, therefore we should remember this lesson from our past. We know that the battle will come. It will be joined. We know that the oppressors for once and for all will be finished. But, we have to be very careful, that we don’t create our own pet Frankenstein in the process.

(Satyananda is a friend of CRI)