It is impossible to discuss the anti-imperialist struggle and the development of the national movement without a reference to the popular movements of the nineteenth century. Although projected in crudely economic deterministic terms such as dispossession, exploitation, loss of customary rights, decline of handicrafts and the like, these movements highlighted a host of issues related to human dignity, the desire for equality, the anger against the sexual exploitation of tribal women, the treatment of the colonial rulers (including the white planters in the tea gardens, the indigo sector, etc.) and the exploitative practices of the internal exploiting classes (viz. princely rulers, landlords and moneylenders). It is a combination of these factors that led to the movements to contest colonialism.
The middle class, which developed towards the latter half of the nineteenth century, contributed seminally by focusing on the “drain of wealth” and also racism. In fact, the logic of the unresolved contradictions evidenced in the nineteenth century popular rebellions and the articulation of “the drain” of India formed the basis of the strength of the nationalist movement.   

The battle for Independence
Undoubtedly, the three major mass movements were the most vital legacy of the freedom struggle. Thus, the participation of the peasants, tribals, outcastes/Dalits, agricultural labourers, workers, women, people of different communities and the middle class from across different parts of the subcontinent should be noted as a distinct legacy. And here, one of the most highlighted aspects was obviously Gandhi’s role and the focus on the anti-British struggle. With the development of nationalist historiography, one witnesses a sharp critique of colonialism and a focus on “uniting all Indians” in the struggle against colonialism. The effort was also to blur the unresolved set of questions - many of which can be traced to the nineteenth century. Alongside, the bourgeois-led national movement chose to ignore a range of questions that implied engagements with class, caste, gender, communal politics, religious identities, popular expectations of freedom and so on.  

Consequently, if the greatest triumph of the Indian national movement that was led by the bourgeoisie and the “Mahatma” was India’s freedom in 1947, it also implied its greatest defeat if one goes by the partition and its holocaust. At the same time, the ruling class’ visions of a “free India” that was intrinsically associated with the anti-colonial movement, sought to incorporate a “model” of development that demonstrated confidence in independent economic development that relied on the state, and drew its inspiration from “socialism”. It is in these dreams that one also sees distinct footprints of what was supposed to be secularism and the ideas of a secular India.   
It is against this backdrop that one has to assess how the freedom struggle itself provided a historical basis for the development of secularism, as well as certain strains that it was exposed to. A major problem for a colonial society like India was the constant engagement with the “past”. In fact, as a knowledge system it was not free from the interaction with and influence of colonialism at different stages of its evolution. Although its logic oscillated between several complexities, it can be roughly associated with three dominant strands. Besides the perceptions of the “past” in the popular imagination we have outlined, one witnesses ideas that were sustained by a “past” before the advent of colonialism when life was all about “milk and honey” — viz. ideas about India’s “golden age”— that developed a serious momentum over the nineteenth century. Beginning with the demonisation of the Marathas. This shifted to locate the Muslims as “villains”. And, by the 1870s one hears about Muslim rule as foreign rule. This was intimately associated with colonial historiography and was hybridised by internal ideologies that were associated with communal thinking and politics. There was also a third component that made a very serious effort to engage with the past in order to critique colonialism and explore the possibilities of a postcolonial future in a scientific manner. 

The danger of fascistic thinking
It is the second strand that needs to be kept in mind while discussing the problems that developed. Developing with the census operations (1869-1871) and popularised by the indigenous print-culture that had developed this strand gathered momentum with its stress on numbers. The effort to ride the horse of patriarchy and caste purity coupled with a clear denigration of popular culture also focused heavily on polarising communal identities with its repeated rhetoric and concerns regarding the “declining population” of the Hindus. Serious historians point to a spell of vicious Hindi tracts that linked “lustful” Muslims and their efforts to “seduce” Hindu girls in the colonial past - similar to what we ironically witness today — “Love Jihad”.
What is rather remarkable is the manner in which the neo-liberal order sustains this fascist thinking and its backward-looking visions today. This includes the effort to destroy the basic legacy of the freedom struggle that - with all limitations - sought to unite Indians. It also includes efforts to dump socialism that is enshrined in India’s constitution, (mis)appropriate Bhagat Singh and the “Mahatma”, and even trying to invisibilise the latter through the

“Swachh Bharat” campaign.  
Alongside fighting the “unholy trinity” — Macaulay, Madrasas and Marxists — is another typical method of the fascist outfits. 

After all, beyond history and even polemics, how many people would actually believe that ancient Indians were familiar with thermonuclear devises or had planes that could move sideways or were familiar with plastic surgery? Unfortunately, what happens in such contexts is the lack of any desire to acknowledge and appreciate some serious parts of India’s rich scientific past. Thus, there are references to the famous potter families of the eighteenth century who were experts in rhinoplasty, which is acknowledged as the mother of plastic surgery. This was referred to as the “Indian method” as late as the early twentieth century England. Behind this ignorance is the idea of looking down at the low/outcastes and tribals who can unsettle the agendas of fascism. 

After all, it is a well-known fact that social exclusion and the domination of society by the upper castes have fettered the development of science and technology in south Asia. Is it possible to cling on to these positions, or try to move forward in line with what has been identified as the third trend?

It is not enough to merely change the spelling to Odisha (which is phonetically incorrect).Yes, Orissa is in the fast lane. But, we Oriyas now need to keep pace.

(The author is a faculty in the Delhi University department of history)