top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Red Romance

For long, the Naxalite in news was recognisable by the gun. But the more insidious version of Naxalism has never needed a rifle. It has thrived in varsity classrooms and newspaper and magazine columns, fostered by men and women sympathetic to it. These academics and other members of the so-called intelligentsia have long enjoyed their status as ‘respectable dissenters’ even when their politics offered intellectual alibis for Naxals carrying guns. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent...

Red Romance

For long, the Naxalite in news was recognisable by the gun. But the more insidious version of Naxalism has never needed a rifle. It has thrived in varsity classrooms and newspaper and magazine columns, fostered by men and women sympathetic to it. These academics and other members of the so-called intelligentsia have long enjoyed their status as ‘respectable dissenters’ even when their politics offered intellectual alibis for Naxals carrying guns. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent Independence Day warning about “dimaagi Naxals” should therefore not be dismissed as another political label. His larger point was that an insurgency does not survive on ammunition alone. It survives on ideas and people willing to make violence appear morally fashionable. The most revealing feature of India’s Maoist movement was never simply its brutality. It was the strange attraction it exercised over sections of the metropolitan Left elite. The Naxalite with an AK-47 could be transformed into a romantic revolutionary while the policeman he killed became an instrument of an oppressive state. This was not merely naïveté. At its ugliest, it was the intellectual laundering of political violence. The fantasy of the romantic revolutionary has always been seductive. In this narrative, amplified through sympathetic media priding itself on telling ‘truth to power,’ India was not a constitutional democracy struggling with inequality and corruption but an inherently illegitimate state waiting to be overthrown. In the minds of this elite Left, Maoist violence has often been recast as resistance while attacks on infrastructure as blows against capitalism. The armed overthrow of the Indian republic was the liberation they craved for. Some of India’s most celebrated intellectuals have flirted dangerously close to that moral inversion. The issue here is whether intellectual prestige can be used to sanitise an ideology whose practitioners have murdered civilians, policemen and public servants and terrorised some of India’s poorest districts. A university cannot be the place where Maoist romanticism acquires the legitimacy of a fashionable campus cause. Professors who turn armed insurgents into heroic revolutionaries are not merely exercising academic freedom. If they knowingly excuse violence, they are helping to construct the moral vocabulary that makes violence possible. Let’s be clear here. A professor who criticises the Indian state is not a Naxal while a journalist who exposes state excesses is not an enemy of India. But an intellectual who repeatedly excuses, glorifies or rationalises political violence cannot hide behind the word ‘dissent.’ India has paid an enormous price for the Maoist fantasy. Thousands have died. Entire regions were held back by fear while development was obstructed. The people supposedly being liberated were often the first to suffer. The armed Naxal is now being pushed towards extinction. But the Indian republic cannot afford to leave behind the romantic mythology that made the gun respectable. A democracy can tolerate dissent. It should never be expected to tolerate the glorification of those who seek its violent destruction.

India’s Innovation Moment: From Pokhran to Pahalgam, the Power of Self-Reliance

India’s technological journey is no longer just about might, but about meaning where science uplifts society, not just secures it.

On May 11, India celebrates National Technology Day, a date that marks the 1998 Pokhran nuclear tests. But the meaning of this day runs deeper than a memory of a single achievement. It is a time to reflect on how far we’ve come in building a science- and technology-driven society that is inclusive, forward-looking, and scientifically empowered.


This year, the day holds particular significance. Just a few days ago, the nation mourned the lives lost in the brutal terrorist attack in Pahalgam, a painful reminder that peace is fragile and national security must be constantly safeguarded. In its wake, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty in a strategic signal of changing geopolitical posture and launched Operation Sindoor, a firm but measured response targeting cross-border terrorist camps. These events put into sharp focus the need for a strong scientific and technological foundation, not only for defence, but also for national development, environmental stewardship and social progress.


India’s experience shows that technology must not only advance capabilities but also strengthen our capacity for self-reliance and build bridges across sectors and communities. We are a young and diverse country, where many still lack access to modern infrastructure, digital services, and essential amenities. In this context, technology must serve not just the privileged few but the wider public. It must be local, affordable, and meaningful.


This means creating AI tools in Indian languages, developing solar-powered systems for remote villages, ensuring clean water for drought-prone areas, and using telemedicine for underserved populations. It also requires policies that support grassroots innovation and align scientific research with practical, community-level impact.


India has already taken firm steps. Programs like ‘Digital India,’ ‘Make in India’ and the ‘Atal Innovation Mission’ have created fertile ground for inclusive growth. Young innovators are now building drones to help small farmers, developing diagnostic tools for rural clinics, and designing green technologies for everyday use. More than 85 percent of patents filed by Indian institutions in the past five years have come from researchers under the age of 30—a clear sign of our growing innovation potential.


But science cannot focus only on inclusion; it must also be sustainable. India has pledged to achieve net-zero emissions by 2070 and reduce its carbon intensity by 45 percent by 2030. These targets are bold and require technologies that are resource-efficient, renewable and resilient to disruption. From electric mobility and solar expansion to waste-to-energy and smart agriculture, we are seeing encouraging signs. Yet much remains to be done in developing circular models, strengthening indigenous capabilities, reducing dependence on imported raw materials, and expanding domestic research in critical technologies.


India’s nuclear journey has long symbolised its scientific independence. As Mohamed ElBaradei observed in his book The Age of Deception, India’s nuclear programme was guided by restraint and transparency - traits that built our credibility in the global scientific community. Today, our reputation rests not just on defence capability but on public trust, ethical conduct, and institutional openness. We’ve shown this through global contributions in space, vaccines, digital public infrastructure, and affordable healthcare solutions.


As we celebrate our achievements, we must also recognise the challenges. Rapid technological change, if left unchecked, can widen inequality and create new divides. It is vital to strengthen science education, particularly in underrepresented regions. Long-term, curiosity-driven research must receive the same attention as applied projects. We must encourage independent thinking and reward persistence and not just short-term results. And we need to open more doors for women and historically marginalised communities to lead in science, technology, and innovation.


Equally important is the need to bring science closer to people’s lives. Public understanding of science, transparent communication, and informed debate around new technologies such as AI and genomics are essential to ensure that technology serves society and not just markets. We must foster a culture where scientific knowledge is not confined to laboratories but becomes part of classrooms, communities, and public policy.


The Pahalgam attack and India’s measured response through Operation Sindoor underline the critical importance of national security. But as we reflect on these developments, we must also acknowledge that neither terrorism nor counterterrorism offer a sustainable path forward. Both are grounded in confrontation, not construction. In contrast, sustainable technologies address root causes, expand opportunity and build long-term resilience. They remind us that security is not only about military strength, but also about societal stability, trust in institutions and the inclusive power of ideas.


As we mark this National Technology Day, let us remember that Pokhran was not an end but a beginning - a declaration that India would shape its destiny through knowledge and courage. Today, that journey continues. We must move beyond narrow goals and build a future where technology reflects our values, reinforces our self-reliance, responds to our realities, and raises our collective aspirations.


If we stay committed to that vision, we will not only empower India, but also inspire the world.

(The author is the former Director, Agharkar Research Institute, Pune; Visiting Professor, IIT Bombay. Views personal)

Comments

bottom of page