A GANDHIAN VIEW
Anurag Gangal
Reader, Department of Political Science,
Jammu University,
Jammu-180006, India.
Despite inherent uncertainty of politics, its omnipresence and ubiquitous nature can never be put aside. "Politics" is a highly specialized field of activity. Such a specialized field must not be left to the mercy of self-styled political leaders emerging either overnight or almost from-no-where in the history of their own peculiar political experience. The need of the hour is well-embedded political niche of properly equipped political scientists and their commitment, dedication, devotion and determination. Political knowledge and discipline of a political scientist must become the raging path-finder. This is necessary to grasp the true meaning of politics. Politics must never be misunderstood as highly manipulative activity replete with corruption, violence, exploitation, terrorism, extortions and murders upon murders-of precious human lives and values-for POWER for ever more POWER. THIS IS NOT POLITICS AT ALL. POLITICS IS POWER AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR THE ULTIMATE END OF SARVODAYA OR WELFARE OF ALL. POLITICS, AS SUCH, IS PEACE. THIS, INDEED, IS THE WELL KNOWN GANDHIAN CONCEPTION OF PEACE.
It is apparent that diehard politicians of today are not likely to agree for their professional training and education. For them, their experience and rendezvous with life are providing real ground for lifetime training and dedication. What we need today is a "practical-idealist" Gandhian approach to peace. This is necessary at all levels of planning, formulation, legislation, execution, judiciary, and policy-making. All such aspects need to be examined with a meaningful participation of political scientists. This appears to be the only recourse "for cities" to have their long-over-due rest from their widespread EVILS.
Politics is there not merely by virtue of modern politicians and their political parties etc. The theory and practice of politics is in reality an exclusive realm of political scientists. However, the current perversion of "politics-as-it-is" does not depict the reality. Indeed, "Until political scientists and trained political actors are rulers or the rulers and governors of this world take recourse to wisdom-of-political-scientists, cities will never have rest from their perversion of politics today."
"'Beware the fury of the patient man,' John Dryden had warned three hundred years ago. Unfortunately, the ruling authorities have excellent reason to ignore that piece of ancient wisdom." [1] Politics means ecological settings of man and society and even much beyond. Any imbalance and ignorance is a very serious threat to a normal and peaceful world order. As such, along with the current rage of information explosion and craze and fashion for the latest, more important is going for knowledge and wisdom that rest in virtues and values. There is a general phenomenon quite popular among modern academics. It is that they regard the present system of university-education and institutions of higher learning/deemed university as storehouses of knowledge. [2]
Mahatma Gandhi, however, is more in favour of delving deep into the realities of life. He does not support the present-day university system of higher learning .This is his position in essence. For him, simple and an activist approach to life leads to real depths of knowledge. Life must not depend so much-as it is today-upon acquisitive instincts but on self-restraint, Aristotelian mean/balance and widespread normalcy in socio-political order emanating from the individual. [3] Such ideas for the followers of Gandhi are known as the Gandhian view of life .When similar ideas are extended by others without reference to Gandhi then they are generally not called Gandhian. Yet Mahatma Gandhi's relevance anent pertinent questions and their answers does not increase or decrease.[4] Hence -- for ulterior reasons -- if we do away with Gandhi in the absence of larger belief in nonviolence, truth, nonstealing, nonpossession and brahmcharya etc. , even then it is the following main concerns and development paradoxes which are likely to dominate human minds throughout the twenty-first century:
i) limits to growth
ii) impact of information technology upon man
iii) over-production of conventional/other weapons
iv) over-exploitation of natural/other resources and ever widening consumerism
v) professionalization of conventional and nuclear terrorism and similar acts
vi) modern technology, environmental pollution, human survival
vii) preservation of depleting resources
viii) preserving political-ecological balance for a normal life with least possible socio-political tensions
ix) religion of equality and humanity and not merely rituals
x) preserving dignity of man
xi) quality of life without degenerating aspects of modernity
xii) above mentioned threats to local, national, regional, international and global peace
As such Gandhian "practical-idealism" is going to be the real IN thing of human rationality and vision in the twenty-first century. Whether we want it or not Mahatma Gandhi will be there -- either in name or in deeds of the generations to come. No "commitments" can run away from this reality. [5] Priorities of our commitment must change knowingly. Indeed, "commitment" is always necessary for becoming a professional activist in any area of life. Gandhi has always been an activist and a political worker. His philosophy or "way of life" is also primarily derived from his lessons of life and "experiments" through diverse experiences. Most of the present-day political leaders, however, are not able to learn so much from their life. Maybe because "politics" is currently considered more as an instrument of subversion, exploitation and manipulations instead of the Gandhian sarvodaya or welfare of all.
Sarvodaya is not possible when almost every nook and corner of world politics is having A POLITICAL LEADER by virtue of birth, criminal activities, money power or sheer bullying of the gentle and weaker lot. It is happening among nations also .Gandhi had unmistakably foreseen this predicament in his Hind Swaraj in 1909. In this booklet, Gandhi characterizes modern civilization as a "disease" and "a nine days wonder". Even around the time of his assassination on 30 January 1948 - especially just about two weeks earlier-Gandhi said, "this (modern) civilization is such that one has only to be patient, and it will be self-destroyed." Given the present-day widespread "balance-of-terror"- with its plans for mutual assured destruction(MAD) even outside the purview of the erstwhile "cold war" today -- disintegration and destruction is continuing . We have it from so knowledgeable a source as Jan Tinbergen's Report to the Club of Rome: "in the rich countries there is growing concern about the conservation of non-renewable resources and … about how to keep the world in a stationary state." In the above mentioned contexts, a beginning has to be made. For Gandhi, "one step is enough" to start an effort.
The world into the twenty-first century is going to realize its past follies of giving the reigns of politics to "Tom, Dick and Harries" from time to time. Politics as an activity and as a discipline is at the apex of Aristotelian, Hobbesian, Marxian and Gandhian phenomenology. There is an oft-quoted phrase in English: "Let fools contest for forms of government." Indeed, if matters relating to government are left to "fools" then who will govern! Therefore, a first step in this direction must be high degree of commitment to politics by the modern political scientists. Political leaders must seek their help in every related area regularly. Political scientists must extend specially designed courses and training programmes to politicians -- obviously on a voluntary basis in the beginning. Such a first step can bring the modern "Bizarre Politicians" nearer to realities of a normal political order away from manipulations and extortions etc. After all, the company one keeps is also very important.
The twenty-first century has numerous other predicaments, perversions and emerging perspectives, namely, high conflict orientation of society and politics, technologicalised human creativity, the forgotten missing link between two hitherto fore apparently separate concepts of conflict and cooperation and George Orwell's idea of a "THINK POLICE" in future! Along with this there is also the larger question of global degeneration of our combined "global village". These are the major five directions of challenges before humanity today.
The first challenge is in the area of the prevailing Darwinian and functionalist notion of conflict, especially, the particular way in which man is generally trained, over several past centuries now, to THINK on certain given lines of thought. This view of conflict/war is based on Heraclitus's noted aphorism: "War (or conflict) is the father of all things."The basic principle here is that "as there are contending elements in nature, so there are conflicting ideas and interests among men .To Darwin … conflict is a constant phenomenon and the cause of evolution." [6]
Johan Galtung has, however , presented a very interesting tenor of "A Gandhian Theory of Conflict" in David Selbourne (ed.), In Theory and in Practice : Essays on the Politics of Jayaprakash Narayan. [7] For him , "What makes Gandhi different from other thinkers … is his insistence that there are no barriers among men which the goal of integration cannot transcend … an integration directed against no one, but rather … an integration for humanity. Moreover, Gandhi is optimistic about the prospects for approaching, if not completely realising, the ideal here in this world.
In the case of compromise, Gandhi very often spoke in favour of it even at points where it seemed as if the struggle could be won, all grievances redressed, and the claims of a campaign of Satyagraha met in full. Such readiness to compromise can only be understood in the light of Gandhi's belief that the point is not to 'win' the conflict, but so to proceed in the entire struggle that the best possible basis for post-conflict life is established. A general inclination in favour of compromise, however, does not imply any willingness to engage in compromise over fundamentals." [8]
This is clearly a departure from the prevailing and widespread Darwinian as well as functionalist mode of thought. Accordingly there are enough repulsions, wars, struggles, contradictions, disagreements, confrontations, opposition and conflicts in Nature. For Gandhi, each conflict is merely the result of uncalled for imbalances occurring through diverse human interactions. How can it be the basis of "all things" then? The real questions are: How can these imbalances be prevented? How imbalances occur? What is the real basis of human nature in its interactions from within and from without?
Nature lives more by attraction, inherent mutual love and peaceful orientations for Gandhi. Other things are largely resulting from misconceptions drawn on the basis of ages old continuous search for modernity in terms of ephemeral additions of information upon every latest piece of information - mainly numerical piling up and "loading/downloading". Gandhi is for permanent knowledge and truth. As such, each conflict is an opportunity for its "creative resolution" for peace and wholesome development. [9] Hence, for Gandhi," Conflict was a challenge (which) offered (greater) possibilities of contact… with whom you stand in an interesting and significant relation." Such creative understanding of conflicts (and not just functional cooperation from moment to moment) is likely to become the foundation of the ensuing century. It is already scientifically seen, in above mentioned analysis, that how modern technological world is going towards a logical end of having created a Frankenstein for itself in the form of uncontrolled surging ahead of technology today.
The only saving grace for us here is in an interesting answer of 346 members out of 378 members of the American Psychological Association. The question: "Do you hold…..there are present in human nature in eradicable instinctive factors that make war between nations inevitable?" About 91% 0f members replied "NO". [10] This answer reflects the essential elasticity and teachability of man's mind. It all depends upon the training of human mind, body and spirit from the very beginning .We are teaching ourselves - till now -- the conflict-prone Darwinian and functionalist syndrome. We all need to go out of this rut. T.H. Pear, J.P. Das, J.R. Anderson and, even earlier, Sigmund Freud are a few noted psychologists of the previous and current centuries - among several other contemporary academics - who believe in the basic need of keeping a balance between aggressive and loving instincts of man . Otherwise, for them, conflict will always be the outcome. Excess of "love" and "aggression" both lead to situations of conflict and war. [11]
A general notion about human thinking is that no earthly force should ever try to control it for such an act would be in gross violation of the current and established democratic norms .Yet even the modern democratic life-styles and education are deliberately being "implanted" into the minds of homosapiens! Is it not indoctrination? Or is it "education"? WHY CAN'T THEN A GANDHIAN WAY OF LIFE SHAPE THE FUTURE OF OUR PROGENY? This will be more optimistic and fruitful way of carving out our more peaceful and brighter prospects. We have interestingly already seen that Gandhian ideas without bringing in his name are being proposed by the modern-day saner elements also. Actually, the socialists, Marxists, capitalists and several others are in reality talking in a Gandhian vein, at least, in the ultimate analysis. Isn't it there a common global vision emerging here in Gandhi's "practical-idealism"?
The functionalist and Darwinian conceptions of conflict and cooperation consider these two aspects as mutually opposite realities (as if the twins shall never meet!) . While, in the Gandhian way of life, there is a link between these two apparent opposites. This link is to be seen in the "self-restraint" and need of a balanced or normal life. Therefore, conflict and cooperation are not like two separate parallel lines of geometry. They are mutually and positively interlinked. [12]
What after all is this normal life in a Gandhian vision? Answer to this question is clearly inherent in the aforesaid major twelve points of this research article. Even otherwise this article is replete with the conception of a Gandhian normal socio-political order. [13]
The twenty-first century is still in its phase of infancy. It is growing despite a vast multitude of technology related problems. On the one hand, the world is getting "connected" into becoming a global village while on the other hand, there is " internautian" phenomenon of privacy versus information-explosion. Similarly, there is also a very well-known "captive-mind" thesis of Syed Hussain Altas vis-à-vis modern education and on going endless automation leading to degeneration of human brain cells due to technological-product-radiation, over-exposure and under-utilization of natural human creativity etc. These are but a few examples of the "unfolding" of the present century. In view of these realities, Mary E. Clark and A.K. Saran are interested in "new modes of thinking" and for a real "metanoia". [14] This metanoia involves grass-root movements and root-and-branch transformation of current direction of man's thinking . Such action and thinking, however, would not involve massive efforts towards "de-technologicalisation" and "de-industrialisation".
In contrast to aforesaid possibilities, our present century is racing towards "intercontinental integration and regionalization" of global society and politics. The European Union is apparently one of the first to go in this direction by attempting to evolve common currency, security, foreign policy and by upgrading the European Parliament. George Orwell had foreseen this type of division of the world into three major continents under the overall governance of a " think-police". This think-police -- obviously through technological modern tools of audio-video paraphernalia - is supposed to police human thinking in George Orwell's 1984. As such, widespread expansion, compression , technological and global integration along with a possibility of an optimistic though logical metanoia appear to be expected trends of the twenty-first century. Of all these prospective happenings, only those can be regarded as creative for world peace which make the concerned imbibe and assimilate the spirit of the Gandhian way by applying it meaningfully to the contemporary situation . [15]
Some socio-political experimentation may be sought for securing a better and more peaceful future. "…a small, autonomous Centre should be established, preferably by non-governmental public effort, charged with the following tasks: one, promoting Gandhian thinking through creative and holistic research; two, designing and conducting an educational programme in Gandhian thinking for voluntary novices; and, three, devising and conducting a programme for educators in Gandhian thinking. … The Centre will take only a small number of students who evince a minimum competence and real keenness to be initiated into Gandhian thinking and the Gandhian way. Their material needs will be met during the programme, but no inducements or attractions will be offered. The method of education will be one that makes sufficient demands on students for self-education. Dialogue, discussion, meditation, thinking and guided reading, field work and lectures too, if necessary, may be mentioned here as educational devices to be used in the Centre. This is only by way of illustration. Different methods may be followed for individual students. The idea is to keep the system as flexibly structured as may be consistent with the discipline required for the effectiveness of any serious educational enterprise.
The aim of this educational programme will be to create maieutic design and a moral support-system for metanoia. The students will gradually experience a transformation of their mind -- a turning away and turning towards, of their consciousness and a change in the centre of their thinking. A change in their character is bound to follow. … It should be clearly understood that in so far as an educational programme of this kind is at all successful, the graduate (will have to be a very determined person to succeed in life). … it is through … (patience) of such graduates that a Gandhian, that is, a normal, ethos may slowly come to be formed." [16]
Indeed, "new modes of thinking" for world peace are the real requirements of the twenty-first century. [17] Which way should we go? It is for us to decide. The world is already going in one particular direction of ever higher degree of technological advancement. Despite this, the modern technology has not yet touched the level of refinement of having created a human-being (despite cloning): full of life and vibrating with energy through medulla oblongata. Only birth, live humans, death and blood are perhaps a few areas where modern technology has not yet been able to enter fully. Everywhere else it is there today. How long this current surging ahead of high technology can continue? Such technology by nature is ephemeral in essence for what it maybe today; tomorrow it may become obsolete.
A basic poser here is how long can we continue and sustain ourselves vis-à-vis hyper-dynamic modern technological perspectives? Is it merely a question of sustenance? Can we go even beyond the problems of survival and sustenance? Can't there be a global technological world resting on true freedom and dignity of the individual without any type of fear and terror? Until we go beyond the rut, the Gandhian conception of peace cannot become lifetime "practical-idealism" of our age. Wither world peace? It is not difficulty to see and perceive. "When can we begin to act?" is the question of essence. How long this shying away is possible? Establishing Gandhian link between our needs for Knowledge, Information, Technology and Peace is the top priority today. Nothing else can succeed.
References and Notes
[1] Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze, The Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze Omnibus (Oxford University Press, New Delhi: 1999); see specially India: Economic Development and Social Opportunity, p. 87, the third portion of this omnibus volume.
[2] Immanuel Wallerstein and Others, Open the Social Sciences, (Vistaar, New Delhi: 1997). Another aspect of this reference number two also needs further explanation relating to the real meaning of politics. "Ecology" literally means "planetary housekeeping" and not merely environmental and other types of pollutions. "Politics" is an all inclusive master science with its continuous concern for establishing harmony in socio-political system at different levels from local to global perspectives. That is why political science cannot but enter the "political-ecological" paradigm for proper grasp of reality today. See also: O.P. Dwivedi, "Political Science and the Environment", International Social Science Journal (Canada: 1980), p.377; Vandana Asthana, Politics of Environment, (New Delhi: 1995). In the modern interdisciplinary age, political science must put more emphasis on studies such as highly systematic explorations in political-ecology, political-sociology, political-economy, political-psychology, political-anthropology and political-history etc. For this purpose, opening up of The Department of Political Interdisciplinary Studies can also be initiated at the behest of the University Grants Commission (UGC) in all the recognized universities interested in such an exercise.
[3] Robert Jackson and Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations, (Oxford University Press, New York: 1999). See also Mary E. Clark, Ariadnae's Thread: Search for New Modes of Thinking,( St. Martins Press, New york:1989 ). Jag Preet Singh, "The Political Ecology of India", M.Phil. Dissertation submitted to the University of Jammu (Department of Political Science), Jammu [India] on 05 June 1998 (the World Environment Day).
[4] Kanti Bajpai and Harish C. Shukul (eds), Interpretting World Politics: Essays for A.P.Rana, (Sage &Vistaar, New Delhi: 1995). Ronald J. Terchek Gandhi: Struggling for Autonomy, (Vistaar, New Delhi: 2000). S.C. Gangal and K.P. Misra (eds), Gandhi and the Contemporary World: Studies in Peace and War, (Chanakya Publications, New Delhi: 1981). Ashish Kothari, Understanding Biodiversity: Life, Sustainability and Equity (Orient Longman, New Delhi: 1997).
[5] Sumi Krishna, Environmental Politics: People's Lives and Developmental Choices (Sage/Vistaar,New Delhi:1996);Vandana Shiva, Ecology and Politics of Survival: Conflicts Over Natural Resources in India (Sage/Vistaar,New Delhi:1991).Also Anurag Gangal,New International Economic Order: A Gandhian Perspective,(Chanakya,New Delhi:1985).
[6] Krishanlal Shridharani, War Without Violence: A Study of Gandhi's Method and its Accomplishments (London: 1939). Charles Darwin, The Origin of Spices by Means of Natural Selection or Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life(London:1968);Johan Galtung, "Pacifism from a Sociological Point of View", The Journal of Conflict Resolution,(1959) No. 3,p.67. See also Johan Galtung, "Gandhi's Views on the Political and Ethical Pre-condition of a Non-violent Fighter", Pran Chopra (ed.), The Sage in Revolt: A Remembrance (New Delhi: 1972), p.203.
[7] Johan Galtung, "A Gandhian Theory of Conflict", In Theory and in Practice: Essays on the Politics of Jayaprakash Narayan, (Oxford, Bombay: 1985).
[8] ibid. 100-101.
[9] UNESCO Yearbook on Peace and Conflict tStudies: 1980(Connecticut: 1981), Pp-145-165. Ibid. Op. Cit. n.7.
[10] Quincy Wright, A Study of War, Vol. 1. (Chicago: 1942), p.27; Karl Mannheim, Man and Society (London: 1942), pp.122-123.
[11] T.H.Pear (ed.),Psychological Factors of Peace and War(London:1950),p.162;J.P.Das,The Working Mind: An Introduction to Psychology,(Sage, New Delhi:1998);J.R.Anderson,Cognitive Psychology and its Implications(W.H.Freeman and Company, New York:1995).
[12] Joan V. Bondurant, Conquest of Violence( Princeton:1958);also her another book (ed.),Conflict: Violence and Nonviolence(Chicago:1971).
[13] G.N.Dhawan,The Political Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi (2nd edition),(Navlivan,Ahmedabad:1957); S.C.Gangal,Gandhian Way to World Peace(Bombay:1960); Op.cit.n.4.
[14] A.K.Saran, "On the Promotion of Gandhian Studies at the University Level", S.C.Gangal and K.P.Misra (eds), Gandhi and the Contemporary World, (Chanakya, New Delhi: 1981), pp.-177-200, esp.-189,190.
[15] E.F.Schumacher, Small is Beautiful (New York: 1973); Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society (Harmondsworth: 1973); Arne Naess, Gandhi and the Nuclear Age (London: 1960).
[16] A.K. Saran, Op.cit. n.14. See also: M.K.Gandhi, Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule (Ahmedabad: 1939).
[17] Mary E. Clark, Ariadnae's Thread: Search for New Modes of Thinking, (St. Martins Press, New York: 1989).
Note: More stress here is being put on showing how even the so-called non-Gandhian (not admirers and followers) authors of our present-day world are thinking on somewhat Gandhian lines. This research work was Web Published in http://www.mcpr-bhu.org/Conflict%20Resolution.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment