No one is willing to accept politics built around either “pro-’71” or “anti-’71: Nahid Islam
Stating that “after ‘24, a new political reality and a new generation of people emerged—those who participated in and won the battle of ‘24,” National Citizen Party (NCP) convener Nahid Islam has said, “We have crossed over from ‘71 and arrived in ‘24.”
He further said, “Those who now seek to revive the politics of “for or against ‘71” want to drag the country back into an outdated political framework…. No one is willing to accept politics built around the binary of being either “pro-’71” or “anti-’71.””
Nahid Islam wrote this in his Facebook status in English today, Friday. Below is his Facebook status:
‘71 and ‘24
We have said it before—’24 is the continuation of ‘71.
The aspirations of ‘71—equity, dignity, and justice—were reaffirmed through the anti-discriminatory and democratic uprising of ‘24. While Mujibism tried to insert ‘71 into an Indian narrative, thereby compromising our national sovereignty and interest, ‘24 reclaimed the true spirit of independence, sovereignty, and the Liberation War. It was a united fight against authoritarianism, fascism, and domination—driven by the hope of a democratic and egalitarian Bangladesh.
After ‘24, a new political reality and a new generation of people emerged—those who participated in and won the battle of ‘24. We have crossed over from ‘71 and arrived in ‘24.
Those who now seek to revive the politics of “for or against ‘71” want to drag the country back into an outdated political framework.
But we wanted a new start from ‘24—one that would build a new political culture based on the values and aspirations born out of the uprising.
Defeating Mujibism and all other forms of authoritarian and fascist forces is our responsibility to unify and democratize the state and society.
This generation has already moved beyond ‘71.
No one is willing to accept politics built around the binary of being either “pro-’71” or “anti-’71.” ‘71 will remain in history—as a foundation of the state, a principle to be respected—but it will no longer dominate political legitimacy. ‘47 will be remembered similarly, with historical reverence, but not as a tool for political manipulation.
This doesn’t mean we won’t discuss or debate those events—rather, in this new political reality, we can finally resolve our historical questions.
Politics must now be based on the values of ‘24.
Those who want to return to ‘71 are denying the new political reality of ‘24. The uprising of ‘24 served as a form of atonement for many political forces through their participation. But that atonement will lose its meaning if they or we regress into old ideological politics. It is our responsibility to prevent the resurgence of outdated binary frameworks in our political landscape.
It should be remembered that ‘24 was never about revenge. Those attempting to weaponize it as an act of retaliation have misunderstood its very essence.
‘24 is a space for national unity and reconciliation.
Its spirit lies in building the future—a future that must be shaped through consensus, compassion, and collective responsibility, not through cycles of retribution.