<b>Letters:</b> Not inclined to change

In the article, “India’s idiot nationalism” (March 3), Aakar Patel has rightly pointed out that nationalism also resides in the Congress. It is, however, incomprehensible why he equates nationalism in India today with Hindutva. 

Rewind to 1962 when Communist leaders were arrested by the Jawaharlal Nehru government for supporting China’s aggression. Nehru was considered to be a champion of civil liberties. I do not recall that many advocates of free speech demanded an open debate on the issue then.

However, during the heyday of socialism, the Left could lose no debate. If nationalism is a religion, so was socialism and quite a vulgar one at that, considering the Latin origin of the term pointed out by Patel. If Hindutva has no problem with unlawful behaviour today, the Left had no qualms in using methods such as “gherao” — it was not considered an infringement of the rights of helpless officials, if not a tycoon. India is thus rightly said to be a land of many religions and each religion brooks no debate.  

Taking into account the definition of a debate furnished by the columnist, I wonder how many intellectuals in India are truly open to changing their views in the face of evidence. Ignoring those crossing over for material gains or for personal reasons, there are few intellectuals who seem to have changed their views based on debate.

Vijay Nadkarni   Mumbai

Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to: 

The Editor, Business Standard

Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg 

New Delhi 110 002 

Fax: (011) 23720201  •  E-mail: letters@bsmail.in

All letters must have a postal address and telephone number