Imagine a strange alternate history of India.
In this imagined world, the Indian princely states are fully complicit with the British East India Company. The public, too, is content under British rule because the colonial government actively supports their caste privileges. The social hierarchy is stable, the rulers are comfortable, and the ruled see no need for change.
In such a world, what would Mahatma Gandhi have fought against?
Gandhi never fought only the British; he fought fear, inequality, caste discrimination, and moral complacency. Even if people had been happy under colonial rule, Gandhi’s struggle would have targeted something deeper — their acceptance of injustice as normal. His fight would have been to awaken the suppressed mind, not merely overthrow the external suppressor.
Because **when the oppressed celebrate their own chains, the struggle becomes moral and psychological, not merely political.**
---
**India Today: A Similar Dilemma?**
Many people today argue that a similar situation exists in modern India.
A large section of society appears satisfied with a system that, in their eyes, reinforces identity hierarchies rather than challenges them. They feel empowered by power structures that actually restrict their freedoms. In this situation, the people and the rulers have become *bedfellows* — partners in the very process that diminishes democratic values.
And this brings us to the Congress.
---
**Congress as a ‘Court’ Without a Case**
Historically, the Congress party functioned like a court:
* one side was the colonial power,
* the other side was the Indian people,
* and Congress fought to arbitrate in favour of justice — freedom.
This role gave it purpose, energy, and moral legitimacy.
But today, if the rulers and the ruled seem aligned, if the public does not perceive oppression, and if the majority is content with the current system, then Congress finds itself in a strange new role:
👉 **a court with no dispute to resolve**
👉 **a judge with no cause before it**
👉 **a movement without a mass movement**
It starts to look, as you put it, like a **“jobless court.”**
---
**So What Should Congress Fight Against Now?**
If people are happy with suppression, does the struggle lose meaning?
Not at all.
The fight simply changes form.
Just as Gandhi fought social injustice even when society resisted him, Congress today may have to fight for values people do not realize they are losing:
**1. Fight for institutional independence**
Judiciary, media, and law enforcement need protection even if people aren’t demanding it.
**2. Fight for social equality**
Caste, gender, minority rights — injustices remain even when they are socially accepted.
**3. Fight for democratic freedoms**
Speech, dissent, privacy — freedoms often erode quietly, without public alarm.
**4. Fight for economic fairness**
Jobs, farmers’ interests, small businesses, federalism — long-term issues hidden under short-term popularity.
**5. Fight for truth and informed citizenship**
Propaganda can make oppression feel like empowerment.
Rebuilding public reasoning is a political duty.
In this era, the role of Congress cannot be merely electoral —
it must be **educational**, **moral**, and **institutional**.
---
**The New Struggle: Awakening, Not Just Opposition**
When people no longer recognize suppression, the task of a democratic party is not only to oppose the government. It is to make citizens aware of:
* what they’re losing,
* what they’ve normalized,
* and what democratic health truly looks like.
The fight is not against a foreign empire now.
It is against internalized inequality, collective complacency, and the erosion of democratic consciousness.
Freedom is not only taken away by force —
sometimes it is handed away willingly.
And that is where the Congress must rediscover its purpose.
Not as a jobless court —
but as the conscience of a nation that has temporarily forgotten the meaning of justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment