The phrase, “Cultural Nationalism” is an oxymoron at best.

Let me explain.

Culture is ever evolving. It is an entity that is impossible to quantify or even articulate. This is because culture is vast, and it is not amenable to being singularly explained. Culture is also dynamic - it changes at its own pace. Sometimes rapid, sometimes tediously slow. But indeed it changes. And hence, when you explain culture, what exactly will you explain? How do you account for its many versions, changes and perceptions that exist in the minds of people?

For example, when you talk about a place of worship to a foreigner, it is impossible to fully and clearly articulate what the deity stands for, meanings of the rituals - and also explain to them the umpteen ways the visitors perceive the “power” or “influence” of the deity.

You must be familiar with the cultural context in which the deity is placed. Also, the comprehensive survey of rituals. Even if that is done, how do you place the vast differences in the way each devotee perceives and submit herself to the deity?

This is true for artforms, imagined or real histories, monuments etc. Anything that you can pick about the culture is not amenable to summary articulation neither can it be taught by bombarding an outsider with conventional “information”.

Culture has to be imbibed through prolonged exposure and constant interaction with your community. And by nature, this is limited to your immediate surroundings. Whatever national culture you are talking about - is the distilled sum total of a cross section of national life that you have vicariously experienced. More often, national life is too diverse and complex for you to imbibe a reliable cross section of it.

How do you compare between the dietary preferences of Gujarat and Nagaland? Which one gets to represent “Indian Culture”?

So you see, this definition of culture - whatever you make out of it - is a purely subjective choice. And heavily influenced by what you can see - and cannot see.

And there lies its problem with Nationalism.

If culture is so difficult to define, how can it be reconciled with something as concrete as a nation? A nation has a well defined territory, a register of its people and a common set of rules that applies to everyone (at least in theory). How can then be, the amorphous entity that is culture have a central role to play in that project? This line of thought shouldn’t be interpreted as a rejection of culture. Rather, it is an invocation to pursue culture to ferret out its myriad expressions and cultivate a respect towards the diversity of cultures.

This includes a principled understanding that culture is incredibly diverse and it shouldn’t be the sole basis of an identity. For example, people of the same religion will have polar differences in culture. Same caste may mean very different cultural preferences, if they come from geographically distinct regions. Things like migration, modernisation, social media can influence culture. On top of it, culture keeps changing and evolving.

Given the impossibility to accurately retrace life from the past, nostalgic cultural evocations can hardly help us “recreate” a past golden culture. But even this culture would have been subjected to change. Even if we somehow bring it back, what guarantee we possess that it won’t change again?

Here, clearly those who call themselves Cultural Nationalists sadly, possess neither culture nor nationalism. This is because Nations are purely modern concepts. Every nation is unique - and their existence is guaranteed only when they possess polities that are essentially modern. Now, don’t be fooled by “sorry states” that exist in our “modern” world. They are not nations, they are only polities tolerated by geopolitical realities and wanting a national spirit in the people ruled under them.

Whether it be Afghanistan or Sierra Leone, they are hardly nation states. I am not straying into that big debate here.

Anyways, those proponents of “Cultural Nationalism” cannot enact the basics of Nationalism for this simple reason that they will never have a concrete and comprehensive manifesto. This is because culture is amorphous, diverse in reality and has many versions which are tied to ethnicity, period of existence and also documentation, amongst others. Of the many thousand cultures that have existed in India, the ones better documented would have survived more. But then, documentation is also shaped by the language, writers and also replicators. Not to mention the ever changing power equations in the society.

It would be truly agonising for a Cultural Nationalist, if she were to pursue the reality of ‘authentic’ culture. But then, they are blessed with this tool of reductionism. They needn’t explore the real culture. Rather, they would be spoon-fed with a version of culture that is supercharged with pride, appealing to their present day identities and also giving them a sense of purpose.

They hardly understand the nuances of learning and appreciating culture. They will have nothing to do with the music traditions of this country; they hardly understand the inner meanings and ‘plays’ of our paintings and epics. They don’t understand the organic reality of shrines (and also cults) that dot the Indian Sacred Geography - not compliant with their interpretations of religion and culture.

They are immune to the riches that mixing of culture, people and genetics bring to the heart of the nation. Having a perverted view of culture and fundamentally incapable of understanding the lovely, humane aspects of culture, they relegate themselves into brainwashed soldiers of a monotonous view of culture.

How can we classify them as “Cultured”?

They don’t understand that culture is something that gives us the tools to progress beyond a life that was marked by constant blood shed. It helped us realise a life without arbitrary punishments and losses to lead a relatively peaceful life.

Now when they disturb the basics of such a settled, harmonious life by thwarting institutions, sending bull-dozers and filling public life with vitriolic communal diatribe, how can we call them cultured?

They are pseudo-culturists who effectively have no understanding of culture.

They might be happy to call themselves cultured and recite the word “culture” with a thousand political projects they may have. But they don’t grasp that culture is that human quality which helps us progress from brutes to human beings capable of resolving differences, create systems that work for everyone, help every individual develop to their full potential etc.

Cultural Nationalism, quite unsurprisingly, also doesn’t have answers to the following data points (very painful data points), that was highlighted by the National Family Health Survey - 5 and ASER, 2023.

• 5% children below 5 are stunted, 19.3% wasted, 32.1 % underweight
• 1% of children in 6-59 months are anaemic.
• 6-23 months, only 11.3% receive minimal adequate diet. (9.6% in NFHS 4)

In 15-49 years,

• 10 plus year schooling only for 41% women and 50.2% men
• Anaemic - 57% women and 25% men.
• BMI below normal - 18.7% women, 16.2% men.

In 15-24 years,

• 12 years or more education - 34% girls, 35.9% boys
• Anaemic - 59% girls, 31% boys
• Normal BMI only 54.9% girls, 52.6% boys

ASER survey, 2023 -

• Aged 17-18, only 77% could read Class 2 text.
• Only 35% could do division,
• Learning trajectory over 5,6,7,8 classes is relatively flat - little difference in learning levels when a child passes through these classes.

But the “cultural nationalists” are preoccupied with some very predictable themes that merit no mention here. Needless to say, they will not have an answer or plan to solve the above mentioned issues.

Hence, the pseudo-culturists must be called out and exposed. That is one way to reconnect with the better aspects of our culture and discover the truly fantastic bits that would help us negotiate modernity with a grit and enhanced perspective that pseudo-cultarists will never understand. Not in this lifetime.