 "Trump tariffs")
The nationalist label is a bit like Rashomon: it can be interpreted differently, depending on where one is standing or coming from. It means different things to different people, and almost everyone is certain they are the only ones who have it right. It is in that vein that we can read today's columns, from Trump's tariffs to Manoj Kumar's redoubtable oeuvre that set the original template for nationalistic fervour. Read on.
Our columnist Mihir Sharma points out that all populist leaders have one thing in common: that only they can solve the nation's problems, problems that the older regime had created to keep the common people down. They do so in the face of both common sense and conventional wisdom, tossing aside experts' opinions willy-nilly. The leader embodies the aspirations of the people and will risk it all, no matter how foolhardy his decisions might be, in the service of national honour. The author notes that such populists are an invariable feature of democracy, but countries are lucky if these leaders don't do too much damage by their decisions.
Shyam Saran notes that Trump's tariffs create a geo-political space for other powers to expand their influence, foremost among them China. It is in India's national interest, he writes, to form new arrangements based on its own economic power paradigms, particularly in its immediate neighbourhood. India needs to to secure its own periphery, execute its policy of 'Neighbourhood First' and become the chief engine of growth and a security provider for all its neighbours.
Devangshu Dutta writes about another angle of nationalism, this one somewhat more academically oriented. In the post-WWII scenario, American welcomed the best and brightest from Europe, Russia, China, even Iran, recognising that academic firepower could carry it to greatness. Now, that scenario has been flipped, with many in academia seeking to leave the US as the Trump administration hollows out academia. While an opportunity exists for other nations to boost their scientific programmes using American minds, India, he notes, is poorly-placed to exploit this because of a lack of funding and restrictive norms on granting visas for research, not to mention shackles on academic freedom.
Shekhar Gupta looks back on Indian cinema's original nationalist, Manoj Kumar, who passed away on Friday. For years, Manoj Kumar's films captured the zeitgeist of contemporary India even as he practically defined what it meant to be patriotic, a good citizen, self-sacrificing, and a paragon of virtue. His self-created oeuvre had an outsize influence in promoting the idea of India - or Bharat, as his favoured screen name was - through the years of war, socialism, marked by unemployment, inflation, ration shop lines. It was the Emergency that finally halted his momentum, making way for another child of that: the Angry Young Man. Mr Bharat is gone; unfortunately, he has left behind no worthy successor, his gentle patriotism replaced by a hard nationalism centred around 'ghar mein ghus kar maarna'.
Kanika Dutta is amazed at the phenomenon that the Netflix show 'Adolescence' has become across India. Clearly, parents with kids are taking note of this story set in faraway Liverpool because of the outsize role social media is starting to play in children and young adults' lives. In Britain, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who watched the series with his teenage children, has suggested it be shown in schools to spark “critical” conversations. While Indian schools are unlikely to do so, the series should at least provoke introspection by middle class parents about gendered attitudes, especially among those who replace real-world parenting with digital nannies.
