Epilogue: The Biographies of the Indian Constitution

Summary

Investigate the matter as you will,

blame whomever, as much as you want,

but the river hasn't changed,

the raft is still the same.

Now you suggest what's to be done,

you tell us how to come ashore.

—Faiz Ahmed Faiz, ‘You Tell Us What to Do’

Political theorizing from the periphery demands a certain situatedness of analysis1 – that is, a reconstruction of the specific historical ‘background condition’ or ‘problem space’ of the articulations and formations being theorized. It also hopes to speak to the political lives of those in the periphery, to have some amount of critical purchase for postcolonial political existences. While I believe that many of the conjunctures that this book theorizes are shared across the postcolonial world, ultimately it is a book on India. At a time when both revolution and law seem exiled as political concepts, a book such as this cannot avoid speaking to the political present in the country. All true history, Benedetto Croce said, is contemporary history. The biography of the Indian constitution is no exception. The three main currents of scholarship on the constitution track the three stages in the life of postcolonial India. It would seem that we are now living through a fourth.

The Time of the Nation State

The first two decades following independence were times of hope in the promise of postcolonial development. At home the prominence of Nehru and the Congress remained unchallenged. The Planning Commission was set up to author India's future in five yearly chapters. The large hydroelectric dams and publicly owned iron foundries were ‘the temples of modern India’. Internationally, it was the time of Bandung and Suez. The Third World emerged as both a political idea and a global configuration. At home and abroad, a new world seemed possible.

It was the time of the nation and the state. The postcolonial intellectual scene was dominated by the so-called independence intellectuals, nourished by their hope in and support for the new government. The scholarship on Indian politics from this time reflects this sense of optimism. There was a general consensus across the social sciences (interrupted by occasional critics) on three broad elements: the Congress's ability to genuinely represent and reconcile the various segments of Indian society; faith in a state-led modernization project; and consolidation of a democratic form of government that was able to avoid major social conflicts.