80th Independence Day Of India
Whenever
we celebrate the anniversary of Independence, a natural question arises in our
minds: have we truly understood the meaning of freedom, or have we become so
entangled in the search for its true essence that the complexities surrounding
it are only growing larger?
When
the country celebrates the 80th anniversary of Independence, it becomes even
more important to understand the true meaning of freedom. What are the
contradictions that have changed the very meaning of independence? And why has
the growing fragmentation of society made the experience of freedom
increasingly unsettling?
The
words of Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, still seem to echo today. He
believed that the true meaning of freedom would be realised only when the
welfare of the person standing at the lowest rung of society was ensured. But
is the person at the bottom still not exploited? Has his suffering been reduced
merely to a source of votes? These are questions that point directly towards
the failures of leadership and make us wonder whether freedom has truly
acquired meaning from the perspective of the common citizen.
The
period of the freedom struggle must have been filled with far greater hope than
the present. At that time, there was only one measure of the struggle—the
freedom of the country. People from every section of society participated
together. The social divisions we witness today were not such formidable
barriers. Casteism, communalism and regionalism had not become forces capable
of dividing society into countless groups.
Many
great sons and daughters of the nation willingly sacrificed their lives. Many
others devoted their entire lives to the cause of freedom. Their paths may have
been different, but their objective was the same: the freedom of India.
But
what kind of social environment have we created after Independence? It bears
little resemblance to the spirit of the freedom struggle. Even after eight
decades of Independence, those in power have struggled to find lasting
solutions to the problems of people at the lowest levels of society.
For
the common citizen, there often seems to be little choice but to wait and
watch. The painful question remains: will their hopes and dreams ever be filled
with the colours of happiness? Or will the strings of those dreams continue to
remain in the hands of politicians who are immersed in corruption, promote
nepotism and leave no opportunity to divide society merely for the sake of
power?
India
has the distinction of being the world’s largest democracy. Its leaders often
take pride in this achievement on international platforms. But how often do we
seriously ask why, despite such a long democratic journey, we have failed to
make the common citizen truly empowered?
Why,
after such a long journey of Independence, do millions of ordinary people still
struggle for basic necessities such as food, clothing and shelter? At the same
time, how have many leaders who grew up in the same democratic system
accumulated enormous wealth? How has black money allegedly found its way into
accounts and assets abroad? And does such wealth not raise questions about
whether the hard-earned money of ordinary citizens has been misused?
Governments
have repeatedly announced schemes in the name of the common citizen, often with
great publicity. But why is there so little attention to the more important
question: how much of the benefit of these schemes actually reaches the people
for whom they were created?
How
has the machinery of corruption within the government system become so deeply
entrenched that those operating within the system often appear to move upward
on the ladder of development, while the common citizen continues to remain at
the bottom?
Should
political parties not also be held responsible for this situation? Governments
have often treated the common citizen primarily as a means of securing votes
rather than as the central beneficiary of democratic governance. As a result,
the ordinary citizen continues to remain far removed from the benefits of
democratic development.
As
political parties have grown in number and influence, their political
strategies and priorities have also changed. Regionalism, casteism, religious
polarisation, communalism and dynastic politics have increasingly been used as
tools of political competition. In many cases, the pursuit of power appears to
have taken precedence over the larger interests of society.
The
situation becomes even more disturbing when people with criminal backgrounds
find space in political life. Such developments can further weaken the
direction and quality of democracy.
If
this environment is not addressed, we may create a political class capable of
fragmenting society even more deeply. The consequences for the common citizen
in such a scenario are not difficult to imagine.
At
the same time, it would be unfair to deny that India has made its mark on the
world in many ways. The country has addressed several external challenges,
strengthened its international standing and emerged as an increasingly
influential global power. Yet the internal challenges facing society also
demand urgent attention.
The
most important task is to empower the common citizen—to ensure access to
quality education, provide adequate clothing, and secure a roof over every
family’s head. Governments need to undertake much more comprehensive work in
these areas.
There
are several examples within the country that reveal how political thinking can
change when personal or political interests are involved. Ideological positions
often appear to shift depending on where political or economic benefit lies. At
such moments, the concerns of the common citizen can easily be pushed aside.
The
growing dependence on reservation as a political instrument also deserves
serious and balanced consideration. The real challenge is to ensure that the
genuinely disadvantaged person—the individual actually living at the bottom of
society—receives meaningful opportunities and support.
If
governments seriously understand the depth of these challenges and address them
with honesty, transparency and commitment, a wider transformation of society
remains possible.
Those
who participated in the freedom struggle understood the meaning of Independence
in a very different way. Their sacrifices were not merely for political
freedom; they envisioned a society in which freedom would bring dignity,
opportunity and justice to every citizen.
Only
when the interests and dignity of the person standing at the lowest rung of
society are genuinely protected can we claim that the promise of Independence
has truly been fulfilled.
That
would also bring us closer to the vision associated with Mahatma Gandhi—that
the real success of freedom lies in ensuring the welfare of the most vulnerable
and the most disadvantaged person in society.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment