Press Release (ePRNews.com) - India - Mar 18, 2016 - The word that has as of late been talked about, faced off regarding and quarreled the most is ‘patriotism’. Is the thing that we take after squeezed up and limited or is it excessively slack, making it impossible to join all the remaining details? Is the bigotry leaking in the framework preparing hostile to patriot notion or is it the other route round? Inquiries are numerous however one can’t deny the basic truth that the assortment of conclusions and translations have brought on complexities difficult to bind. The nation needs to guarantee that the idea of patriotism can’t be forced, it’s a privilege thus political quarrel ought not make an interpretation of it into patriotism.
Subrata Roy, the proprietor of Sahara Pariwar and the writer of numerous books including the top of the line Life Mantras discusses his perspectives on the quite warmed issue of patriotism, of patriotism and of the right to speak freely. He said, “In the event that I am requested that characterize the word patriotism’ in one line, I would say it’s synonymous with “performing all authentic and reasonable obligations towards the country according to the need of great importance”. When we discuss the obligation towards the country, it comprises of the welfare of the general population and defending their hobbies, to religiously take after the Constitution with eagerness and truthfulness, and perform our separate parts as moral and honest individuals from the general public.
To understand nationalism, patriotism and freedom of speech, we need to first understand the concept of one’s rights and duties. A sepoy, for instance, is given a gallantry award if he kills the maximum number of enemy soldiers on the battlefield. But if the same sepoy kills a man in his village owing to his personal rift, he is punished as per law.
So, the meaning is simple and absolutely clear: “Rights are given to perform our genuine duties and definitely not to serve our whims, fancies or greed or perform wrongful acts or to come out with wrong expressions.”
In our society most people know their rights very well, but they do not have any sense of duty. Nationalism can only be defined or understood once we are clear about our rights and duties.
Yes, as citizens, we have the right to complain, debate, express our agony, our problems and even fight for our legitimate rights. We have the right to talk about the hazards, the threats to our nation’s progress, but it has to be logical, and not out of our whims and that too in the right forum and in a most respectful way.
To understand the problems in our country, we need to realize the difference between literacy and education. Some highly literate people, the so-called Intellectuals, are absolutely confused and thus are confusing, misguiding the common man and in trying to prove their points they are creating an impression of being superior to others and their philosophy being beyond the reach of the commoner.
What is lacking in them is a proper understanding of the basic truths with which we all are born. Some of these people indulge in a kind of wrong advocacy of nationalism, freedom of speech and patriotism, for despite being highly literate (highly qualified), they lack sound education.
The point I am trying to make is that education is important in life, and not just literacy. We have to remember that literacy (educational qualification) is a factor of the external personality (the material personality) of a human being, whereas education is a factor of the internal personality (the spiritual personality — that is, the internal characteristics of a human being). Literacy only characterizes the external person, but education characterizes the internal personality. And it is the internal personality of a human being that is important. In fact, the most literate person on earth who is not at all educated may turn out to be a failure and an unhappy human being, but the one who is less literate yet highly educated will definitely be a successful and a happy human being. So, I would say that a high level of literacy without sound education is of little importance.
Now let us look at freedom of speech which is our fundamental right, as enshrined in the Constitution. Freedom of speech is definitely our right but when it comes to speaking out, will you abuse or tolerate abuse against your family regardless of the conflict?
Even if you feel that they are in the wrong you shall not resort to abuse or foul language, but shall vehemently protest, while maintaining a level of civility and respect, with a sense of the place you are in, the suitability or unsuitability of time and the people around (a keen observance of sthan, kual and patra). So, freedom of speech should be the expression which is justified, logical and appropriate but which also carries with it a level of respect for the other or for the country.”
To conclude what Subrata says, one can say that for him, nationalism is about having the right conviction that ultimately is driven in the direction of national upliftment. Freedom of speech is undeniably a right but what runs conjointly is a moral sense of the right and the wrong, which may not be penalizable, but which needs to be understood and followed.