I think the message of the information technology revolution and the rise of the regional parties has been lost on us. We read IT as the dominance of private over public. We read the new success stories in cricket and Bollywood as the rise of small town, as a diffusion of the myth of mobility. But our politicians and bureaucrats still behave like satraps from the capital visiting remote domains when they drop in on Gujarat or Kerala. The message coming from all over India is that Delhi is irrelevant. It might still legislate but its laws make little sense outside.

The danger of Delhi is that it feels an idea is good only if it exists in Delhi. So every tribal academy, research institution, major university has to be in Delhi. Ask yourself a simple question: why is national equal to Delhi when it is in reality an isolated city without even the vision of a cosmopolitan city state? Delhi legislates but it rarely invents, it controls but can hardly create. Every inmate sits with a committee gene in his soul. What Delhi does not realise is that India is seceding and the state does not even know it.

A nation state like India cannot remain intact without a collection of secessions. Secession is a hypothesis we must encourage. It need not be an act of treason, it could be a ritual of renewal. It should be as seasonal as migration.

Any imaginative democracy allows for secession, especially as temporary segmentation. Our notion of the Centre should not demand the fixity of Fevicol. The Centre should be a hypothesis reinvented constantly by the regions. Why should the idea of national be certified by Delhi? I am not denying the need for order, quality and standards. But why should order, control, hierarchy stem from a single source called the capital? Consider a set of simple anecdotes.

... contd.