Dr. Forqan Uddin Ahmed :
Colonial powers did not survive for centuries by force of arms alone. They brought with them different ideas and doctrines. According to their own needs, they created a group of so-called privileged classes in the colonized areas who acted as close allies of the rulers. The doctrines created by the rulers promoted their superiority and the inferiority of the colonized people. As a result, the educated class in colonial education never stood up against the rulers and accepted the colonial reality as normal. For example, mention may be made of Lord Meckle, the guru of colonialism. Without knowing any Indian or Arabic language, he commented at that time; “All the native literature of India and Arabia is worth as much as the books arranged on a single shelf in a good European library”. The indigenous privileged class believed such comments and saw the British rule as a mission to ‘civilize’ the ‘barbaric’ India.
So when Meckley declared – “We are sure that India cannot have a free government, but India can have the very next best thing – a strong and ruthless despotism”, the ‘gentleman’ class was not shaken. English-born political and intellectual leaders like Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Rabindranath Tagore, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Nawab Abdul Latif, Syed Ahmad Khan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah could not dare to challenge the British rule. None of them wanted an independent India, rather they sacrificed in the name of Swaraj, Autonomy, Responsible Government, Dominion Status etc. From Titumir’s Struggle, Faraji Movement, Nil Rebellion to the War of Independence of 1857, neither the upper or privileged classes nor Muslims had the support of anyone. The people of the privileged class played a role in suppressing these ‘rebellions’ by being allies of the British. Both the Congress and the Muslim League were mainly feudal and bourgeois-led. The leaders of both the parties were afraid of the mass movement because once the common people woke up, their existential crisis would begin. Today there is no colonialism but the colonial mind remains and neocolonialism has arrived.
Neocolonialism is the continuation or re-imposition of imperialist rule by a state, usually a former colonial power over another nominally independent state, the former colony. Neocolonialism takes the form of economic imperialism, globalization, cultural imperialism and conditional aid to influence or control a developing country instead of the previous colonial methods of direct military control or indirect political control hegemony. Neocolonialism differs from standard globalization and development aid in that sense it typically results in a relationship of dependence, subservience, or financial obligation towards the neocolonialist nation. This may result in an undue degree of political control or spiraling debt obligations, functionally imitating the relationship of traditional colonialism. Neocolonialism frequently affects all levels of society, creating neo-colonial systems that disadvantage local communities. Upon gaining independence, some national leaders and opposition groups argued that their countries were being subjected to a new form of colonialism, waged by the former colonial powers and other developed nations.
Bangladesh gained independence in 1971. Like many other countries in the world, it emerged as an independent sovereign state after being ruled by colonial rulers for a long time. The characteristics that literature acquired under colonial conditions, like many other things, changed a lot after independence. As the literature of a newly independent country is forced to bear the marks of colonization on its body, it is also affected by the post-colonial environment. That is why it can be seen that the literature of the post-colonial states of modern times has its own characteristics which are different from the literature of other states. All those features of Bangladeshi literature can be observed more or less. From this point of view, the literature that we refer to as the literature of Bangladesh is very political. But not in a straight line, just as the politics of post-colonial Bangladesh progressed in a crooked way, the dynamics of Bangladeshi literature is also spiral.
As a result, a dichotomy has arisen in the question of what should be the governance structure of the independent Bangladesh state after independence, what should be its cultural character. In such a situation, it is natural that the literature of Bangladesh will fall into a kind of vortex and become complicated. It actually happened. But surprisingly, it is true that the writers of Bangladesh did not fall into the trap of such delusional ideology. In our thoughts, words, behavior, habits, sociality, conscious-subconscious, the colonial influence still exists in a latent or overt way. The colonial rulers created severe social inequality by creating a few capitalists in the country.
Today’s neo-colonial powers and ‘globalization’ are exacerbating that inequality in the name of ‘liberalization’. The 1960s are often identified as the origin of globalization. But essentially, globalization originated with European explorers in the sixteenth century. Thus, colonialism and globalization started together and are complementary to each other.
Globalization contrasts with nationalism. Again new colonialism in the name of globalization is giving shapes to autocrat nations. On the other hand, neocolonialism and globalization are complements to each other. Neocolonialism is one of the main barriers for democracy and development.
However, Bangladesh’s people acknowledge that development must be revamped by a truly democratic approach based on the true spirits achieved by our glorious Liberation War in 1971 and employing the energy and devotion of its people who can make development sustainable.
(The writer is former Deputy Director General, Bangladesh Ansar & VDP).
