Nationalism, sans some of its ill-effects, has constructive potential to emerge as a powerful push for policy actions and reforms
The concept of “nudge”, presented by Nobel laureate Richard Thaler, is a relatively subtle policy shift that encourages people to make a decision. It is about making it easier for citizens to make a certain choice in their broad self-interest. It is interesting to see how Thaler’s novel change-management concept is being taken forward at such a mega scale in public life in India. That nationalism could be a tool to nudge people for a targetted behavioural pattern is a fresh and interesting revelation. Leveraging it as an influencing tool in policy-making and wider political action is unique. The idea of nationalism in recent times has received traction with a strong intent for mass persuasion and influence in matters of governance and political action. Demonetisation was defended as “action against the nation’s looters.” The Make in India, Digital India, Start-Up India, Stand-Up India schemes were conceived to unlock India’s entrepreneurial potential. An economic reform like the Goods and Services Tax (GST) was sold as “one nation, one tax, one market.” The power sector reforms typified “one nation, one grid (now, water and gas grid have been added).” The payment system is described as “one nation, one card,” while tracking vehicles through a unified command has been touted as “one nation, one tag.” All of these have been espoused with an overt tinge of nationalism. The fervour was even higher in hailing the abrogation of Article 370 as establishing “one country, one Constitution.” The logic advancing the nationalistic line runs like this: For population control, we need to nudge people to opt for a small family. Those opting for fewer children need to be honoured. Choosing to restrict the size of families is an expression of love for the nation. Family planning is thus clearly linked to nation-building. Then, for achieving a $5 trillion economy, we need investment, particularly the private kind. Nudging the active participation of the private sector and corporates is seen as a must. If wealth is not created, it will not be distributed and by extension the poor cannot benefit. So corporates are our nation’s wealth creators. They should be given pride of place. For reviving demand, consumption and creating jobs, we need to support local businesses and industry. So urging people to buy and promote local products, to be “vocal for local” is the need of the hour. This is also the time to boycott foreign (read Chinese) goods. Thus, the clarion call is “Atmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliant India).”
For advancing the proposal of simultaneous elections, we need to nudge the Election Commission, political parties, agents and voters to appreciate the disadvantages of frequent elections that are draining the scarce resources of the nation. Hence, the need for “one nation, one election.” Nationalistic thoughts, phrases and slogans, advanced in the public domain, generally act as an effective nudge to achieve consensus or influence people to rally around the narrative of the State. Nationalism, with its different reflections in nomenclatures such as India, Bharat, Motherland and New India, gives a meaning and relevance to our identity and roots. With an attendant sense of pride, nationalism is seen playing a major part in determination of behaviour, be it economic, social or political, both at an individual and group level. The traction of Atmanirbhar Bharat is the latest example.
There are, of course, some questions in popular debate. Whether nationalism with its big overriding sweep clouds judgment and restricts human choices? Whether it works better for bigger goals only, like national security, sovereignty and so on? Whether nationalism compels people to see everything in terms of competitive prestige? The counter questions posed are many, too. Whether the debate on the negative side of nationalism suffers from prejudices? Whether the dark side is overhyped and exaggerated in India? Whether the debate to undermine, underrate or undervalue the constructive impact of nationalism is driven by political agenda? Surely, we need to guard against the negative effects of hyper-nationalism. Yet, blatantly undervaluing or negating nationalism and its utility seem unfair, too. Between the two extremes, a new approach can be thought through. Given the impact it has in India, nationalism can be pressed as a healthy and powerful tool to enable it to act as a nudge for overall progress.
However, some imaginative tweaks would be needed to be embedded in institutions to mitigate the debated side-effects of nationalism. For a civic nationalism to emerge, without any bias of exclusion and discrimination, our public institutions — social and political — need to introspect and revamp themselves. By nurturing a climate of tolerance, debate and reasoning in all their engagements, they can help foster a healthy nationalistic spirit needed to act as a powerful nudge to achieve national goals. High impact policy actions for economic growth, social progress and 21st Century “aspirational India” require public support, broad consensus and positive energy. Nationalism, with its constructive potential, can surely be pitched to deliver.
(The writer is a former bank executive and writes on education, learning and spirituality)
