The journey of a small piece of land that we call Goa and its people is deeply complex. We are certainly in post-colonial times but with the end of colonialism we cannot certainly say that imperialism has come to an end. We can notice that places that were former colonies are not free from coloniality. Relations of colonization have ended but colonial relations have not ended. Imperialism has only changed hands. Besides, there appears to be an intellectual imperialism that tries to collapse Goa into a metanarrative of the sunset of colonial empire of the major players of colonization. I resist this tendency and underline the unique experience of colonization as well as liberation of Goa.
Goa’s colonial experience is complex because Portuguese regarded Goa as a province and made into quasi metropole ruled its other colonies in the east from Goa. It is said that when Goa was liberated by the Indian Army, Indian journalists of that time are said to have reported that there were no enthusiastic celebrations in Goa. They were surprised that Goans were indifferent to what will become their destiny. This might be because all Goa-Indian-Nationalists were largely based in Bombay and the Luzo-Indian nationalists formed only a small minority in Goa. the masses in Goa who had been burdened by 450 years of the colonial yoke were slow to awaken to the freedom that was thrusted on them. May be Goans at large who had suffered the longest period of colonial rule could understand what democratic freedom meant.
Some scholars opine that Goa can be an important case study for the failure of nationalist rhetoric to influence people. Hence, Philip Bravo took it upon himself to study the peculiarity of Goa in his ‘A case of Goa: History, Rhetoric and Nationalism’. Goa manifests the nationalist rhetoric on both sides (Indic and Luzo) seemed to have failed to persuade the population of Goa. It seems to indicate the performatic aspects of these rhetoric appeared to have failed to produce their effect.
This failure of the dual rhetoric on nationalism may have several reasons. There were issues of sharing simultaneity. We share simultaneity today across the world. What happens across the world, we instantly become aware. It was not the same when Goa and Goans were under colonization as well as experiencing liberation. The sharing of power between the native Goans and the Portuguese colonizers was a long struggle and saw several seesaw battles as the fortunes of the throne of Portugal were married to it. But in 1834 Da Silva became the first Goan viceroy of the Portuguese state of India. But with the coming of dictator Salazar to power Goa once again seem to have come under severe colonial regime.
Debate of Salazar and Nehru about Goa after India came into its own did not affect Goans. Salazar stood on the historical grounds about 400 years of rule over Goa while Nehru took the geographical path that argued that Goa was a natural part of the mainland India. But here one has to note that both Salazar and Nehru argued that Goa was part of Portugal and India respectively. The Portuguese side saw Goa as the Rome of the East while the Indian side saw Goa a pimple on the face of India. Pimple was seen as a temporary unattractive growth that will have to go with time. Yet it is surprising that both sides failed to persuade Goans in Goa. After fourteen years of fruitless negotiation, Nehru finally abandoned diplomacy and took to military action to liberate Goa.
The conflict between history, geography and two nationalisms was finally settled. The dissonance between Salazar and Nehru and silence of Goa still remains an academic puzzle. It points that nationalism of the Goans stands beyond the rhetoric of both Salzar and Nehru. This is perhaps why Nehru is said to have famously said: Ajeeb hai Goa ke log. It only means that Goans staying beyond the rhetoric of two nationalisms of the two leaders pragmatically chose India. But there was blessing as fruit of the debate. The debate established that Goa after its long separation from India and association with Portugal had developed a distinct culture and Identity. Nehru did agree about the distinct culture of Goa. Perhaps, this realization led Nehru to grant opinion poll to settle the question of merger with Maharashtra in 1968. Rest of course is history. Goa today remains as a gem in the crown of mother India.
