Influence of the State

The Friendly South Asians...non-resident Indians, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis

Source: https://www.desiblitz.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/British-Asian-Identity-2.jpg

Most non resident south-Asians, say the non-resident Indians and Pakistanis, whom I have known or interacted with, typically do not host any animosity to each other nor do they hate each other's country of origin. They claim to have never had any sort of bad interactions with any Indian/ Pakistani/ Bangladeshi friends of theirs. No doubt, they all share their love for their countries of origin or birth, besides sharing a common passion for cricket, and also a shared love for Biriyani.

The Ever-Bickering resident Indians, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis

I realize however, that when it comes to resident Indians and Pakistanis, both communities almost always grow up with a lot of prejudice against each other. But once, these very residents South Asian become non-resident South Asians, and have had a couple of years of frequent interactions with their Indian/Pakistani/Bangladesh friends, they come to realize that they are no different from each other. After all, they all get to share the same gene pool, and in many cases they are of the same nationality segregated by citienship. Say, Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis - Punjabis afterall!

People (typically the resident Indians and Pakistanis) who think conversations between regular Indians and Pakistanis would be hostile or controversial, happen to be the ones who have never actually spoken directly to their counterparts.

In the Absence of Politics, Conflicts and Rivalry 

Once we remove the barriers artificially created among us due to politics, conflicts and rivalry, we all are left with just brotherhood and a very close genetic connect. And there’s absolutely no reason why it -love - can’t be just there. Even today.

I wonder therefore what makes the the non-resident South Asians so oblivious, unheeding and indifferent to the differences that a regular resident South Asian would otherwise perceive between a Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Indian, stemming from their respective citizenship statuses. Is it the absence of the influence of the State or the absence of the political influences of their respective countries, or perhaps both?

This brings to me question what a state is, and why is it needed at all and what does its absence imply.

Enter the STATE

The frontispiece of the book Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes; engraving by Abraham Bosse

Studies reveal that a state is just another form of human association - albeit a political association. The state is a modern political construction that emerged in early modern Europe, but has been replicated in all other parts of the world within a very short time in the human civilizational history.

Interestingly, for the more ignorant among us (I count myself as one), the state is not the only form of political association. Other examples of political associations include townships, counties, provinces, condominiums, territories, confederations, international organizations (such as the UN) and supranational organizations (such as the EU).

Other human associations may range from clubs to business enterprises to religions, among others. Human beings also relate to one another, not only in associations but also in other collective arrangements, such as families, neighborhoods, cities, religions, cultures, societies, and nations.

A state by itself is not a nation, or a people, though it may often contain a single nation, or parts of different nations, or a number of entire nations. The most important aspect of the state that makes it a distinctive and new form of political association is its most abstract quality- that it is a corporate entity. The state is a corporation in the same way that other conventional corporate entities are - it is a legal person with rights and duties, powers and liabilities, and holds property that accrues to no other agents than itself.

Studies have shown that the state is not there to secure people’s deepest interests, neither does it serve to unify them, reconcile them with one another, nor bring their competing interests into harmony, or realize any important good—such as justice, freedom, or peace.

Therefore in the Absence of the State

Therefore the absence of the state implies that other forms of human associations are not subsumed or subordinated, in its absence. Alternately, in the presence of the state other forms of human associations - families, neighborhoods, cities, religions, cultures, societies, and nations - tend to get or remain subsumed or subordinated.

Why do we Still Continue having the State?

Then why do we still have the political association called the state. This is because, the state is an institution through which individuals and groups seek to exercise power, over other individuals and human groups.

This explains why states like the Pakistani State, the Banglaseshi State and the Indian State exist across a subcontinent that is characterised by similar culture and multiple nationalities. Multiple nationalities like the Punjabis and Bengalis which remain sub-divided across these three sub-continental states.

(The article reflects the views of the writer alone and does not seek to offend any community within or outside India. Its purpose is to purely encourage discussion.)