Would you call a person who’s travelled the globe, a Global person?
Would you call a person known worldwide a Global person?
Would you call a person who has ‘contacts’ all over the world a Global person?
Would you call a person who runs a business that has a presence in many countries a Global person?
Would you call a person who is listed in the Forbes 100 (wealth, influence, etc) a Global person?
The list can go on and we’d probably pick one or more of the above, selectively.
That’s because the criteria can’t be static. For example, Pablo Escobar was “known” all over the world – a drug lord who all but ran Columbia – wouldn’t get classified as a Global person in my book even though his “exports” of drugs went to every nook and corner of the world. But this piece isn’t about drug lords nor is it about the definition of a Global Personality.
It’s about a new kind of Global People. In a world that is now considered a Village because of the advent of TV, Internet and Financial Meltdowns or Terrorism sourced in one part affecting the others – interconnected beyond description. Interconnected beyond families that are going nuclear – the other way!
The new kind of global people I’m talking about is the Indian. Living in India. Probably never travelled outside her village, city or state. The Global Indian.
How else would you describe a people who are governed by the oldest political party in their land that is in turn run by an Indian of Foreign Origin? The Indian National Congress was the spear head of the freedom movement that the Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi led successfully.
Indians have been governed for centuries by invaders. They’ve been used to having their foreign rulers naturalise themselves into the Indian or quit. I know the purist historian could have arguments against this, but bear with me. I’m not writing history nor attempting to portray Indian history. I’m talking about a future that hasn’t been recognised by Indians.
The Indian is the Hindu, the Christian, the Moslem, the Jain, the Sikh… and I can go on as you well know. It’s no small wonder that even though Sonia Gandhi nee Maino who was born in Italy and married into India’s “First Family” has been the Supreme Leader of India’s oldest and (mostly) largest political party. She inherited the mantle and has now become the longest serving leader of the INC.
Sure, many Indians had and probably still have reservations about having an Italian born Indian as Prime Minister. But that is perhaps partly due to Sonia not having “publicly” given up her Italian roots. How can she? Why should she? Doesn’t the Indian American continue to keep in touch with their Indian roots?
The INC was all but decimated early in Sonia’s reign and she has also presided over its resurrection. Her critics say it’s only because she carries the Gandhi name. That’s only because her critics don’t have anything else to ‘throw’ at her except her ‘foreign’ origin and her name.
Perhaps the cost of the Indian not recognising his own Globalness is that they have imposed a curtain on Sonia keeping her from taking the center stage in full public glare – becoming PM when every single leader of any political party has become, when they won the mandate.
The cost is obvious: Indians have had to endure a puppet who has neither the vision nor the charisma to lead a people, let alone a complex people like The Indian.
In the US they celebrate a migrant achieving a high office. That’s a good lesson to learn. Is it time India celebrates its own greatness in naming Sonia Gandhi its official and apparent Leader? It will take some doing, but the Global Indian can do it. Not the “educated – but – narrow-minded” Indian.