Problem of Indian Nationality

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

The subject of the present thesis has a living interest. The last word upon it cannot be said yet and I do not pretend to be able to say it.

Indian nationality is a topic of current politics, and has been casually discussed as such in several magazines, journals and hand-books on India. Bevan's Indian Nationality, Besant's India -A Nation, Pannikar's Indian Nationalism do not rise above the topical quality. An attempt is made in Risley's People of India to understand the problem in the light of history and political philosophy. A similar attempt, more systematic, is Gilchrist's Indian Nationality. The last-mentioned work contains valuable suggestions, opinions and views which I have often had occasion. To refer to in the following pages. I am indebted to Prof. Gilchrist specially for the convenient and compendious expression, Unities of Nationality, which I have adopted and used frequently in this work.

All discussions about Indian nationality, as it appears to me, have proceeded hitherto on wrong lines. The conception of nationality itself is wrapped up in a confusion of ideas. I hope my exposition of Nationality in the present work will help a little. Towards clearing up this confusion. I have tried to look at the whole problem from a new point of View.

The prevailing misconceptions about the relation of the 'unities to nationality have been, to my mind, largely responsible for the current erroneous views on Indian nationality. The historical back-ground has never been sufficiently regarded and scrutinised. But in my opinion the key to the whole problem lies hidden there. Whether my point of view is right or wrong is not for me to say, but it has at any rate the refreshing virtue of originality.

The approaches to the subject of the present thesis are mainly beset with two-fold difficulties. In the first place, it rests on an assumption or postulate which has not yet been universally accepted; in the second place, it is so hedged round with thorny political passions and prejudices that a detached academic perspective becomes difficult of attainment. It is necessary therefore to grasp and comprehend these difficulties clearly and firmly at the very threshold of our treatment. If we had to deal with the problem of nationality in a country like Germany, France or England, our task would be comparative- ly easy. For in most of the European countries, nationality is an accomplished fact, it is the palpable evolved product of a long course of historical circumstances. An enquiry into its basis, meaning and development would, under this condition, resolve itself more or less into an historical enquiry. It would be necessary only to pursue the clue steadily through the unfolding chapters of history. But with regard to the problem of Indian nationality, the case is altogether different. Here the certitude of historical facts and circumstances is wholly wanting. We have to grope our way, often blindly enough, through the tangled promiscuity of causes, conditions and tendencies, some of which make a fitful appearance in Indian history, others find expression in Indian philosophy and literature, while still others have to be fished out of the obscure depths of what MacDougall calls the 'group mind. But these are difficulties inherent in the treatment of the problem of nationality in relation to India. The difficulties enumerated above are of another order and they affect the very fundamentals of our treatment.

Any treatment of the subject of Indian nationality must needs proceed on the assumption of the possibility or probability of such a political entity as Indian nationality.

**Contents and Sample Pages**