A New Idea of India

Political thought comes in various colours and hues; some are more pronounced than others. The book supposedly aNempts to articulate ideas that fall on the right side of that spectrum. The contentious debate between its authors and Shashi Tharoor drew me to this book. The book's central argument is that India is a civilisational state based on the rule of law founded on the pluralist ethos of India. The authors argue that India is becoming a nation based on the instrumentality of a sovereign democratic state.

Spanning five chapters, Chapters 1 and 2, 0tled 'India that is Bharat' and 'From Civilisation to a Nation', examine the idea of India and its purported distortion since independence. The authors deconstruct the idea of India at four levels of political consciousness- party politics, public policy, philosophical and psychological. A key argument is that individual rights must be uniform across society, aligning with India's civilisational nature. They opine that "the opposite of secularism is not communalism but theocracy". They say that individual rights and uniformity of their acceptance should be a foundational pillar of statehood. They highlight the failings of the specific Nehruvian policies, which have calcified over 0me. They provide evidence that political power broking has effectively reversed the syncretic nature of Indian civilisation. The ideological fault lines created for political expediency have gnawed away the civilisational nature of India. They propose the politically unpalatable antidote of shi[ing from identity-based to need-based welfare schemes and State support.

The third chapter is the boldest and might interest most readers, "Saving Secularism from the Secularist". The chapter is well cra[ed and deserves a poised reading. The evidence is well presented and skillfully interwoven with the arguments. Even those who fall le[ of centre would do well to come out of their echo chambers to let their arguments disturb their beliefs. They posit that secularism today means favouritism for political ends. They also profess the absoluteness of free speech.

The last two chapters, "Profit is Not a Dirty Word" and "Decolonising the Indian State," are probably the book's weakest. The authors argue to demolish the socialism-laden origins of the Indian economy and, consequently, India's choices as a nation. However, they don't present adequate economic depth in theoretical terms. They argue that welfare politics is a direct outcome of crony socialism, which empowers the State to pick winners and losers based on group iden00es, resulting in decades of stifled economic freedom. The last chapter loses its academic value as it does not present any worthy criticism of the governmental policies. However, they make some valuable suggestions, such as the problems of State capacity and misdirected priorities, stating briefly that "India's problem is having 'State flab' in the wrong places and no muscle in areas that maNer". As a result, this bloated state structure is woefully short on delivery. They make a passionate case for the Indian State to focus its priorities on the critical essentials and leave the rest to private players. They postulate that achieving unbridled economic growth and an individual rights-based approach to society are the pathways to regain India's lost glory. Furthermore, they highlight police posts lying vacant, a dysfunctional judiciary, expansion of the Concurrent list through the 42nd amendment of the constitution, and inefficient PSUs. However, these elements are not necessarily 'decolonising'.

The strength of the book lies in the first three chapters. For all its subsequent minuses, these chapters alone make it a must-read. However, the authors' almost harmonious alignment with the dominant political thought of the day brings their objectivity into question. An academic must present both sides of the coin and allow the reader to choose his preferred side. There are also many dimensions to the arguments that lie unanswered. What is the pathway to the professed idea of secularism? How does one get rid of identity-based politics? Is true speech in its purest form ever possible? Why did le[ist intellectuals dominate India's thinking, and what does that say about our commitment to pluralism?

The book presents a conversation that we must have. The absence of academic he[ across the far-right has probably been addressed in some measure. The book deserves a 4 rating for the first three chapters and a 3 rating for the balance of the book. Overall, it is a book that deserves to be read for its contemporary relevance and distinctive approach if only it were more academically balanced.

My Rating 3.8/5