The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

Sovereign nations protect their distinct cultural foundations while still upholding an inclusive vision of governance. The same principle should apply to India. The ‘Universal Oneness Celebration’ event that was recently held in New York City attracted criticism that was only to be expected from certain obvious quarters who chastised the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for having an allegedly ‘exclusionary vision’. In a free society, one can always express a personal opinion on the...

min read

The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

Sovereign nations protect their distinct cultural foundations while still upholding an inclusive vision of governance. The same principle should apply to India. The ‘Universal Oneness Celebration’ event that was recently held in New York City attracted criticism that was only to be expected from certain obvious quarters who chastised the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for having an allegedly ‘exclusionary vision’. In a free society, one can always express a personal opinion on the effectiveness with which the stated ideology or philosophy of any organisation is being implemented on the ground. However, labelling an organisation that considers ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as its core belief as having an ‘exclusionary vision’ is curious, to say the least. We are living in a world of different sovereign countries, each with its own history, cultural identity that acts as a foundation for nation-building and, of course, its own international borders and immigration policies. It is interesting to see how different countries look at the cultural identity and ethos that shape them, and how they protect the foundation on which they stand while still championing their own ‘inclusive vision’. Illusion of Contradiction Take France as an example. The principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity were born out of the French Revolution. They serve as the guiding star for France. Many other countries in the world have also adopted these principles and drawn inspiration from them. Such noble principles, however, are never sufficient to define the foundation of a sovereign country that differentiates it from others. While Liberty, Equality and Fraternity are held in high regard in France, the French language is the foundation on which France stands as a sovereign country. As it is often said, language carries with it not merely its grammar and vocabulary, but a whole culture of its own. Approximately 13 percent of the population in France has a mother tongue different from French. It is noteworthy how France looks at its cultural foundation — the French language — vis-à-vis the spirit behind the principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity enshrined in its Constitution. Article 2 of the same French Constitution explicitly states that France has only one official language — French. From time to time, there are demands to grant official status to other minority languages, but they face tremendous political and legal resistance and are shot down. Other languages are denied even ‘co-official’ status because this is perceived as a direct threat to the deeply rooted ideology of the centralised linguistic unity of France. It goes a step further. There is a concerted, systematic effort to preserve the ‘purity’ of the French language and fight the ‘invasion of English’, called Franglais. It is mandatory under the law, including the Toubon Law, to use the French language in government publications and workplaces, and to include a French translation if any English slogan is used even in a commercial advertisement. Similarly, although Italy recognises a few ‘minority languages’, its official national language is only one — Italian. The approach taken by Germany or Japan is broadly the same. One cannot but wonder whether the same critics of the RSS would call an approach taken by France ‘exclusionary’. The fact is that every sovereign country has its own cultural foundation, which is the cause of its very existence. Countries go out of their way to ‘exclusively’ protect and preserve that cultural foundation. That does not mean, however, that France exclusively belongs only to the majority population whose mother tongue is the same as the national language. Nor does it mean that the State will treat its citizens differently based on their mother tongue, or give preferential treatment to the majority community over linguistic minorities. It is in this perspective that one needs to look at the civilisational ethos dating back thousands of years that forms the foundation of the Indian subcontinent, and the historical context of events that led to India being born as a present-day sovereign country in 1947. How India should treat its cultural foundation is no different from how France, Italy, Germany or Japan should do it. Needless to say, neither India nor any of these other countries discriminate against certain citizens when it comes to governance and the rule of law. There is no contradiction or ‘exclusionary vision’ whatsoever in the approach taken by France, and the same should hold true for India as well. Contextual Similarity As far as the United States of America is concerned, neither any particular language, nor any religion, nor any ethnic origin independently defines the cultural foundation of that country. And yet, there is certainly an ‘American culture’ that defines the country and acts as its foundation. People from all over the world, with very different backgrounds, have migrated to that land and ‘American culture’ has assimilated them. Although it may be difficult to define it very clearly, there is certainly ‘Unity in Diversity’ in American culture. The country calls itself ‘a melting pot’. It goes out of its way to protect this attribute through uniform civil laws that apply to all citizens regardless of their religion or ethnicity. Not everything was just and fair in American history. However, American culture and its democratic ethos not only allow open discussion and debate on what was wrong, but also encourage action on the ground to correct historical wrongs. Former President Bill Clinton summarised it well in one of the presidential debates when he said: “There is nothing wrong in America that cannot be corrected by what is right in America.” When it comes to immigration, whether for tourism or work, the US perhaps has been the most open country for several decades. Its policy towards even illegal immigration has been very soft. It has realised, however, that all this is being taken for granted by many countries and even deliberately misused. Any legitimate attempt, in the larger interest of the country, to change and tighten that policy and stop illegal immigration and settlement invites severe criticism. With that criticism, ironically, an otherwise very open and welcoming country gets painted as being very rigid and intolerant. This specific aspect of American culture, and the criticism it faces, has a clear parallel with the civilisational ethos that forms the foundation of India. Indian culture has also assimilated people from many parts of the world for centuries. It too has its own ‘Unity in Diversity’ that is not very easy for many to define and appreciate. It also welcomes open discussion about historical wrongs and makes a sincere attempt to correct them. The accommodating and welcoming nature — the ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ psyche — implicit in Indian culture has also been deliberately and rampantly misused. Any attempt to enforce the law of the land invites the same criticism that the US faces. Needless to say, India, like the US or any other country, would and should go out of its way to protect its cultural foundation. Doing so can be termed an ‘exclusionary vision’ only as part of a motivated agenda, if not an absolute unwillingness or inability to grasp and respect the cultural foundations of different countries. There is a need to refine and temper the definition of the so-called ‘exclusionary vision’ for it to make sense in a world of sovereign nations that want to legitimately protect their individual identities in different ways. In other words, the very definition of ‘exclusionary vision’ itself needs to be more ‘inclusive’ in more ways than one. Given its history, the US perhaps is the best country to appreciate what it means to espouse ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as an inclusive ideology. It is also the best country to appreciate the fact that attempts to prevent the deliberate misuse of an inclusive ideology cannot be termed an ‘exclusionary vision’. (The writer has worked in the Information Technology sector. Views personal.)

‘Zakir Bhai was a bridge who connected generations, genres

Aditi Pai

Feb 13, 2025

3 min read

Updated: Feb 14, 2025

There’s a treat awaiting music lovers on February 16 as 3 Sur 3 Taal – Sangeetmay Tihai will offer a day-long musical fiesta. Organised by Pancham Nishad and the Yashwantrao Chavan Centre, it’s a celebration of Indian classical music and a tribute to the legendary Ustad Zakir Hussain. In an interview with ‘The Perfect Voice’, Shashi Vyas, founder of Pancham Nishad, which organises music events across the city, talks about the event and whether classical music continues to enjoy popularity among the young audiences.

What is the concept of 3 Sur 3 Taal?

Teen Sur Teen Taal is a simple yet profound celebration of the essence of Indian classical music. The idea is to bring together three fundamental aspects—Kanthswars (vocal music), Swarvadyas (melodic instruments), and Taalvadyas (percussion)—and present them in a way that resonates with both seasoned listeners and new audiences.

Indian music has always been a confluence of melody, rhythm, and voice—each playing an integral role in shaping its beauty. This event is a heartfelt pranaam to Zakir Bhai, a musician who embodied the very soul of rhythm, yet always saw music as a seamless unity of all its elements. Through this, we wish to carry forward his vision—where the tradition remains strong, yet young talent is given the wings to take it forward.

It is believed that this idea was conceptualised by Zakir Husain and you.

The seed for 3 Sur 3 Taal was planted many years ago in one of my conversations with Zakir Bhai. We would often discuss the need for a space where emerging musicians could blossom while staying deeply connected to the roots of tradition. It was an idea we both cherished, but as life would have it, our schedules never allowed us to bring it to life together. Last year, when we lost Zakir Bhai, it left a void that can never truly be filled. But his music, his philosophy, his warmth—those remain. And so, I felt that this was the time to bring 3 Sur 3 Taal to fruition, not just remembering him, but as a continuation of his belief that young musicians are the future, and they must be nurtured with love and respect.

Who are the key artists performing in this day-long programme?

This event is a celebration of young musical brilliance, and we are blessed to have some of the most promising artists performing. Among the tabla soloists, we have Vivek Pandya, Ishaan Ghosh, and Yashwant Vaishnav—each one carrying forward the rich legacy of rhythm with incredible dedication. On the melodic side, we have the mesmerizing sitar of Mehtab Ali Niazi, the soulful flute of S. Akash, and the deeply evocative sarangi of Momin Khan, and in the vocal segment, we will be enchanted by the voices of Aniruddha Aithal, Armaan Khan, and Gandhar Deshpande, who are each bringing their own interpretation of our musical heritage. Guiding the spirit of this event, Yogesh Samsi will share his reflections on Zakir Bhai’s contributions, giving us all a deeper insight into not just the music, but the man behind it."

What was Ustad Zakir Hussain’s biggest contribution to Indian music?

Zakir Bhai was not just a tabla player—he was a bridge. He connected generations, genres, and geographies. He brought the tabla to the world stage, not by changing its essence, but by revealing its universality. His biggest contribution was his ability to make rhythm feel like a conversation—whether it was a complex tihai in a classical concert, a dynamic exchange with jazz legends, or a simple kaida that he would play with such joy that even a child would be drawn to it. But beyond the music, it was Zakir Bhai’s humility, his warmth, and his ability to make every artist—young or old—feel valued. That is his true legacy. He showed us that mastery is not about being the best, but about giving your best, with love and sincerity."*

How can we draw more young people to classical music?

The beauty of classical music is that it is timeless. The challenge is not in making it relevant, but in making it accessible. Zakir Bhai always believed that young minds must experience music, not just listen to it. If we create spaces where they can feel the energy of a live performance, interact with artists, and immerse themselves in the joy of sur and taal, they will naturally be drawn to it. We must also celebrate young talent, encourage new voices, and most importantly, present music in a way that speaks to today’s generation without compromising its depth. That is precisely what '3 Sur 3 Taal' – Sangeetmay Tihai aims to do—build a bridge where tradition and youth walk together, just as Zakir Bhai always envisioned.

The show starts at 9 AM on February 16 at the Yashwatrao Chavan Centre, Nariman Point and is free for all to attend.

The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

‘Zakir Bhai was a bridge who connected generations, genres

Recent Posts

Comments