In this context the names of Ashok and Akbar may be cited. Both these emperors regarded India as one radon and tried to establish their suzerainty over the entire land and succeeded also in this aspiration to a great extent.

But during the periods of these two emperors also there were a few states whose rulers considered themselves as entirely independent and were prepared to sacrifice anything for their freedom. When the English people established their empire in the country the entire land became one political unit. Even then many rulers of the native states within the British jurisdiction used to maintain their own administrative systems. However, some people nurtured the idea that India is not one nation, but a group of various nations.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

This vicious thinking led to the partition of the country in 1947. As a result, we are facing a number of problems. If this kind of thinking is encouraged in anyway, our attempts for national integration will receive’ a great set­back. In fact, it was because of this kind of vicious thinking that we had to undergo sufferings at the hands of foreign invasions for a number of times in the past.

2. Various religions:

In our country there are followers of many religions, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh etc.,-and the followers of the respective religions are citizens of one country. Some are in majority some places whereas some are in minority at other places and some are in minority in all places. Riots have occurred in the name of religion and an apprehension about the same is always felt ‘it was on the basis of religion that our country was partitioned in 1947. A feeling of opposition between Hindu and Muslims and between Sikhs and Muslims is always present directly or indirectly.

Under this opposition, there is no feeling of common brotherhood.

3. Several castes:

There are several castes in our country. Hindus, Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishas and Sudras consider themselves separate from each other. Many people forget the national interest before the interest of a particular caste.

People of a particular caste feel that their rights are being ignored. In many places dominance of a particular caste is generally maintained and in employment the people of that caste are given preference against others even who happen to be more suitable, fusains universities, colleges and educational centers are notorious for Savoring persons of a particular caste in case of admissions and employment. It is sometimes seen that a vice- chancellor of a particular caste generally prefers persons of his own community in making various kinds of appointments some heads of educational institutions show their preferences on the basis of regionalism in appointments and admission. Some colleges are known as Brahman colleges, some as Kshatriya, and as Vaishas and some as Kayasthas, some as Muslim, some as Hindu and some as Christian. If there happens to be a minister of a particular caste, the rumor is spread about him that he is finding various vacancies from candidates of his own caste or region. In elections candidates for various constituencies are chosen on the basis of dominance of a certain caste in the area concerned. It is seen that many are elected as M.

Ps. and M.L.As on the basis of caste and communities.

Thus many things are being done on caste basis. No national integration is possible, unless the attitude of caste preferences is discarded.


Some political parties:

Some political parties in our country do not appear to be helpful in our efforts for national integration. Janata Dal (A), Janata Dal (B), Congress (I), AIDMK, D.M.

K., Shiv Sena, Muslim League and Bharatiya Janata Party, Samajvadi Party, Samajvadi Janata Party and Bahujan Samaj Party are not at one on various national issues. Any attempt for national integration is opposed by some party on certain grounds. The Mandal Report, in a way, has further led to national disintegration. Various political parties are in agreement with regard to Mandal Report recommendations. But so much dissension has surfaced on this issue that many young persons have committed self-immolation. Each party appears to be keen for ensuring its vote-bank.

All parties strive to form government at the centre or in some state. No political party appears to keep national interests at heart sincerely. In fact, each one tries to maintain its hold on some particular issue, but none appears to be thinking for the nation. It is true that in a democracy there have to be a number of political parties, but crafty diplomacy of letting down some party creates a bad blood and it can never have a salutary impact on the nation as a whole.

5. Various states:

From administrative viewpoint our country is divided into various stales. After the achievement of independence our central government conceded the demands of certain groups for forming new states on the basis of languages. As a result, we have now Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and some others which have been particularly formed on regional pressures.

These various states formed on the basis of languages and other vested interests have some kinds of disputes amongst them and some are opponents of others. In many matters Bengalis are opposed to Biharis and vice-versa. Similarly, opposition is found in Maharashtra’s and Gujaratis. People of one state harbor a natural feeling of dislike for people of another state on certain grounds. Some people want that more persons from their region should get government jobs. This position can never be helpful for national integration. It is true that there are persons in one country who regard the national interests above anything else.

But there are many people, who want to determine certain policies on regional basis. There can be no national integration unless this attitude is discouraged.

6. Many languages:

In our country many languages are spoken by the people. There are some people in the country who do not like the language spoken by some people. Because of this situation, some people want to have English as the state language at the centre. In the Constitution Hindi has been accepted as the national language on the ground that it is spoken by the majority. It had been laid down in the Constitution that after 15 years, i.

e., by 1965 Hindi in Devanagari script will be accepted as the sole language of the state for the government working at the centre. But when 1965 approached, there were riots in certain parts of West Bengal and in some areas of Madras (now Tamil Nadu). So at some places the slogan of “Remove Hindi” was advertised and somewhere the slogan against English was used. Regarding the medium of instruction at the various levels of education, now regional languages have been accepted as the medium of instruction.

Now the question has also come up of teaching a number of languages at the High School stage. Thus we find that the problem of language has become a stumbling block in our national integration.

7. Cultural Differences:

Some people are of the view that Indian culture is not an independent culture. They think that it is a mixture of Arab culture, Dravidian culture, Arya culture and British culture. The supporters of this misleading nation want to spread dissension in society. This is true that our Indian culture is made up of many sub­cultures. But this is true about any culture on earth.

One culture influences another, simply because people travel from one part of the world to another. But our Indian culture is our own culture. This has incorporated some of the elements of other cultures, but it has maintained its own special characteristics. That is why a person nurtured in Indian culture is at once spotted in any part of the world. Therefore we must believe in one Indian culture. The lack of this belief will be fatal to our national integration.

8. Economic inequalities:

Economic inequalities are placing obstacles in our national integration. In our country there are some people who do not have their daily bread. Quite contrary to this some have so much money that they do not know how to spend it.

This type of economic inequality is harmful for our democracy. For success of democracy, it is necessary that the economic inequality is not so great as to develop dissatisfaction. Therefore in the interest of national integration we shall have to remove the existing economic inequalities.

9. Lack of able leadership:

For national integration able leadership is necessary, because it is an able leader who can wipe off the disruptive forces and bring the people on the right track. We lack in skillful leaders. Now there are very few leaders who are acceptable to the entire country. Today we find leaders on the basis of caste, language, religion, class and region.

Such leaders think about their own interests and not for the nation. These leaders will always be harmful to national integration.

10. Social inequalities:

Due to caste system, economic inequalities and various religions we are facing social inequalities. People belonging to various castes, classes and religions think of their separate society and in festivals and certain functions they want to keep themselves separate from others. This type of attitude is not helpful for national integration.

11. Lack of proper education:

Education plays a very important role in national integration. But the existing system of education is not conducive to national integration. Our education was originally organized by the Britishers.

Today the same cannot be suitable. After independence some changes have been made in education, but they have not been quite adequate. In the educational system of each state national viewpoint appears to be lacking. In the text-books teaching of biographies of local leaders is more emphasized. In fact, the children should also be taught biographies of great persons in various walk of life who has worked for the entire country.

So in the reorganization of education we have to emphasize those points which may lead to national integration.

12. Lack of impartialities in selecting persons for different services:

It is generally seen that in selecting persons for various services impartiality is not observed. The Union Public Service Commission appears to be successful in its working up to some extent. But according to some persons its weaknesses are perceptible at some places. If the chairman of the Selection Committee belongs to U.

P. he is likely to show a tilt towards candidates from U.P. If he happens to belong to Tamil Nadu, he may show the same tendency for candidates of his own region. We do not mean to say that this lack of impartiality is always there. But if the feeling for national integration is lacking there will be no impartiality.

In selection of candidates for smaller services partiality is quite perceptible. The Punjabi officer tries to appoint his peons and clerks from the Punjabi group. The Bengali or Maharashtrian officer does likewise. This feature is seen with regard to chief officers hailing from various states so much so that a vice- chancellor of some U.P.

university belonging to a certain community has been spotted out for appointing peons and clerks of the university from his own community. Some chief ministers and his colleagues in some states, too, try to appoint persons for various posts from their own areas this vicious tendency has spoiled the cause of national integration.