The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9862
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Vayutuvan » 05 Jun 2013 09:12

ShauryaT sir ji,

> There are others like Dharmapal ji's works who has made a strong defense of Panchayati Raj
> along with a reinvention of polity based on our conceptions of our awareness of time and space,
> His works are a masterpiece that dissects the issue in a manner that is transformational yet
> eternally Hindu the only other that I have read doing something like this is Gandhi ji. Dharampal ji
> was an early critic of our system, was even arrested by JLN after some critique for 1962. It is these
> type of works and arguments premised on such works that a reasonable alternative model can be
> constructed to "displace" the western inspired constructs. However, if all the discussion does is
> blame this group and that group and come up with a list of 20 to despise, it goes nowhere.

> So far, I was hardly taking this thread seriously, let me start with the works of a
> Gandhian who has
> done much to keep the flame burning. Dharampal.

Could you please educate non-elite "village idiots" like me from whom you want to take away voting rights how the above you posted in SBOB? thread does not contradict your views regarding retiring universal franchise in favor of granting voting rights only to landlords? ... or did I misunderstand your post regarding "yagnya"? Assuming that an "uncultured" village idiot like me does not understand what "yagnya" is, could you please define what it is? If you are unable to come up with such a definition then make it a free variable after quoting your own post - I am a little sleepy and tired right now to dig up that post of yours but am confident you can quote it verbatim as you claimed (IIRC) that you had thought long and hard on the issue. That would set the stage for a very liberal regime under which everybody can have her own definition. I invite you to come up with at least one interpretation of that sentence that would resolve the highlighted parts above.

Peace

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Atri » 06 Jun 2013 02:57

Has this article been discussed here in BRF?

Why Hindu Revivalism Has Had No Distinctive Impact On Indian Economic Policy?

Being a Hindu has always meant adherence to a way of life (that is, a particular social system) rather than to any specific religious philosophy. With no central church or central dogma, Hinduism has no religious fundamentals which can be used to identify or organize a Hindu fundamentalist movement. As many current leaders of the the BJP, which is a successor of the Jana Sangh have emphasized, Hindu fundamentalism is a contradiction in terms.

Equally, there is nothing in Hindu symbolism to link economics and religion. There is a famous ancient text, the Arthashastra, written by Kautilya in the fourth century B.C.E., on statecraft. It is a Machiavellian manual for an absolute ruler. “It deals exhaustively with all topics connected with internal foreign relations, and sets before a ruler the goal of conquest of the world and describes way of attaining that goal.” But Hindu revivalists have not used this text as a source for any of their economic policies.

The current wave of support for the BJP is better described, therefore, as representing Hindu nationalism. This in turn follows a long line of descent from various socio-religious movements which have sought to revive Hinduism in the face of perceived assaults by alien cultural influences associated with the foreign rule under which the Hindus have lived since 1000 C.E., first under the Muslims and more recently under the British. These revivalist movements have by and large sought to cleanse Hinduism of what have been perceived by the reformers and unjustified accretions to its core social practices, thereby making the Hindu social system resilient to more radical demands for change. In modern India it was primarily Mahatma Gandhi who sought such a Hindu revival. It is his ideas (however attenuated), particularly on the economy, which continue to resonate in the minds of the Hindu revivalists and are (at least rhetorically) embodied in their current policy programs.

In assessing the economic impact of Hindu revivalism in modern India, I first briefly outline the characteristics of the Hindu socioeconomic system which was established in the ancient Hindu monarchies beginning in about 500 B.C.E. Second, I discuss how Gandhi sought to refurbish what I have elsewhere characterized as the Hindu equilibrium(particularly its economic aspects) and why his ideas failed to carry the day in the economic policy of independent India. This allows me to move to the third and major section, which traces the vague and essentially incoherent economic policies advocated by the major Hindu revivalist political party – the Jana Sangh and its successor, the BJP. This section also attempts to explain why Hindu revivalism has had no distinctive impact on Indian economic policy, even when the Jana Sangh and its successor, the BJP. This section also attempts to explain why Hindu revivalism has no distinctive impact on Indian economic policy, even when the Jana Sangh was briefly in power as part of the Janata coalition in the mid-1970s.

At the outset it may be useful to provide a brief outline of the evolution, platforms, and constituency of the Jana Sangh and its successor, the BJP. The Jana Sangh was founded in 1951 with support from a Hindu revivalist voluntary organization, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). The Jana Sangh’s principal leader was S.P.Mukherjee, who had left the Hindu Mahasabha (also an affiliate of the RSS) because it did not allow Muslims to become members. In 1977 the Jana Sangh became a partner in the Janata coalition which defeated Mrs.Gandhi’s Congress party at the polls called after the ending of the state of emergency (imposed in 1975). With the disintegration of the Janata, most but not all of the ex-Jana Sangh elements formed the BJP. Among those from the old Jana Sangh who remained in the greatly attenuated Janata Party was Dr.Subramanian Swamy. There has thus by and large been a continuity in the personnel and platforms of the Jana Sangh and the BJP. The Jana Sangh’s main constituency is in the north Indian Hindi-speaking states, though more recently it has established important beachheads in the southern state of Kerala and the eastern state of West Bengal. Its social bases of support are to be found among urban shop-keepers and small businessmen, big rural landlords, and some middle-income and rich peasants. Its party manifestos have emphasized the maintenance of the traditional Hindu institutions of family, caste structure, and law. On economic issues, they have opposed excessive state control over the economy and the development of heavy industry, but have been against foreign aid and foreign investment and in favor of small-scale local business.

The Hindu Socioeconomic System

The twin pillars of the ancient Hindu socioeconomic system were the caste hierarchy and the village community. It was a decentralized social system which did not require either a centralized political power or a church for its perpetuation.The village communities were not completely autarkic, but their trading links were fairly localized. The social system consisted of numerous endogenous hierarchically ranked occupation and often region-specific subcastes (jatis). They were subsumed under the four-fold varna classification, under which there were four broad varnas (castes): Brahmins (priests), Kashtriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (merchants), and Shudras (workers and the rural peasantly). Although this scheme is usually identified as the caste system, it merely provided the broad theoretical framework for Hindu society, with the interweaving of the hierarchically arranged subcastes being the real fabric of the Indian social system. Within the village economy, the relationship between the different caste groups took a particular form. This patron-client relationship, called jajmani in the North, continues to this day. In writing about the social structure of modern-day Indian villages, Srinivas states:

The essential artisan and servicing castes are paid annually in grain at harvest. In some parts of India, the artisans and the servicing castes are also provided with the free food, clothing, fodder and a residential site. On such occasions as birth, marriage and death, these castes perform extra duties for which they are paid a customary sum of money and some gifts of land ….. Although, primarily, an economic or ritual tie, (the caste system) has a tendency to spread to other fields and become a patron-client relationship. The relationship is generally stable and usually inherited. The right to serve is hereditary, transferable, saleable, mortgageable and partible. The jajmani system bound together the different castes living in a group of neighboring villages. The caste-wise division of labour and the consequent linking up of different castes in enduring and pervasive relationships provided a pattern which cut across the ties of caste.

One aspect of the caste system, the third of our elements defining the ancient Hindu socioeconomic system, was a set of distinctive social beliefs which influenced Indian ruler’s attitudes towards trade and commerce. This is the Brahminical tradition, which had looked down upon the merchants (vaisyas) and has been suspicious of the self interested pursuit of profit which underlies operations in markets.

The final element in the ancient Hindu socioeconomic system was a tradition of paying a certain customary share of the village output as revenue to the current overlord, which meant that any new political victor had a ready and willing source of tribute already in place. Given the endemic political instability of ancient and medieval India, the caste system’s vocational segregation meant that war was a game for the professionals, which saved the mass of the populace from being inducted into the deadly disputes of changing rulers. For the latter, however, the ready availability of revenue from customary local arrangements greatly reduced the effort required to finance their armies and could carry on their daily business more or less undisturbed by the continuing aristocratic conflict.

Thus, the relatively autarkic and decentralized village community came to be the primary economic unit of the Indian economy. Together with the caste system it provided stability to a common society over the millennia, in the wake of political instability, foreign invasions, and the periodic ravages of pestilence of famine. But above all the institution of caste, independent of the government and with social ostracism as its most severe sanction, was a powerful factor in the survival of Hinduism. The Hindu, living under an alien political order imposed from above, retained his cultural individuality largely through his caste, which received most of the loyalty elsewhere felt towards king, nation and city. Caste was so strong that, until recent years, all attempts at breaking it down have ended in failure.

Various religious reformers like Kabir have tried. The Sikhs, despite the specific injunctions of their religion, never overcame caste feelings. The Roman Catholic and other converts to Christianity brought and perpetuated their caste prejudices, and even the Muslims with their egalitarian religion, once settled in India, organized themselves into castes. The notion of caste has thus formed the framework for the material life of all the peoples in the subcontinent.

This socioeconomic system succeeded in maintaining an agrarian revenue economy (in the sense of Hicks) which, though stagnant provided for nearly two thousand years an average standard of living probably unparalleled in most other regions and countries over such a long period. India’s economic “failure” only relative when, from the sixteenth century onward, its technological and economic stagnation is compared with what has come to be called the European miracle. By the nineteenth century this relative decline had undoubtedly left India a “backward” country, and it is to the Hindu attempt (initially under British prodding) to overcome this backwardness that we now turn.

There were two types of responses to the seeming threat posed by the British Raj to the Hindu social system. One was a rejection on rationalist grounds of the whole structure of Hinduism, as epitomized by a young nineteenth-century Anglo-Indian called Derozio. The Nehruvian modernists, Westernized elites who have by and large governed India since its independence, are of the same lineage. The other response was to reform Hinduism in keeping with the sacred texts. Raja Ram Mohan Roy and his new Brahmo samaj sect sought to combine the best features of Hindusm with Christianity. By contrast, Swami Dayananda who founded the Arya Samraj mission, and Swami Vivekanda, who founded the Ramakrishna mission, “sought to return to the past on more orthodox and more drastic lines” It is from the more orthodox revivalism that current Hindu revivalism stems.

The purpose of these reformers was to assert a distinct Hindu identity in which Hinduism was to be reformed to cope with the modern world. But there was disagreement about how drastic that reform should be and what should be its primary direction: personal, political, or social.

Gandhi and Hindu Economics

Gandhi provided the most clear-cut outline of a refurbished Hindu society and is, therefore, of interest for our purposes. Like Vivenkanda and Dayananda he sought to revive Hinduism against the onslaught on caste and Hindu society that had been launched by the Christian missionaries and utilitarian reformers in the early part of the nineteenth century. Like them, he sought to affirm the caste system while purging it of certain evils. But for him, even the great curse of untouchability was a matter which Hindu society had to deal with internally and in which other communities had no business. By redefining untouchables ad Harijans (children of God). Gandhi effectively co-opted and annexed these groups (which had been outside the Hindu pale) into Hinduism.

It was in his little book called Hind Swaraj, written in 1909, that Gandhi most clearly set forth his program for maintaining the ancient Hindu equilibrium. This work is an uncompromising attack on Western civilization and an agenda for maintaining the traditional, albeit refurbished, Hindu socioeconomic system. Gandhi saw swaraj (self-rule) “not as a question of who held the reins of government.” Swaraj was a quality or state of life which could only exist where Indians followed their traditional civilization, uncorrupted by modern innovations. The means to this end was “truth force” (sataygraha). He was implacably opposed to Western education, industrialization, and those other modern forces which could undermine the ancient Hindu equilibrium, Above all, even though he was unequivocally against untouchability, he nevertheless upheld the caste system and its central feature of endogamy. He wished to see a revival of the ancient and largely self-sufficient village communities which were an essential part of the Hindu equilibrium.

It is surely not accidental that, in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi launches a diatribe against what he saw as the three major agents of Western civilization destroying India- railways, lawyers, and doctors. The railways, of course, destroyed village autarky, the lawyers symbolized the rule of law, which led to the replacement of custom by contract; the doctors, by reducing the mortality rate, caused the population explosion of the twentieth century. Because of the population explosion, labor was no longer scarce, and the labor control embodied in the caste system was increasingly redundant. Thus, all three Western “agents” were changing the basic parameters of the Hindu equilibrium. Small wonder Gandhi should have been opposed to them*

Gandhian economics is not a systematic body of through. Gandhi’s views on society and the economy were influenced by Tolstoy and Ruskin. Like them he believed that the economy should be founded on morality rather than on conventionally accepted economic principles. He was hostile to modern industrialization and urban produced on a small scale within relatively self-sufficient village communities. He promoted what would now be called intermediate technology, which would use India’s most abundant resource – labor particularly in village industries. Due to his advocacy, hand-spun cloth (khadi), became the uniform of the Indian National congress men and the spinning wheel (charkha) became their emblem. Where the use of heavy machinery was unavoidable, Gandhi wanted the relevant industries to be state-owned for the public benefit.

Though he claimed he was a socialist, much to the chagrin of those who were inspired by the theories of Marx and Lenin, Gandhi disavowed the notions of class and revolution central to those theories. He eschewed the equality of outcomes sought by many socialist, and instead sought an equality of respect for the necessarily unequal but functionally interdependent members of a society represented by the traditional caste system. He was against collectivism, for it suppressed the individual. In its place he hoped to promote his notion of socialist equality by improving the moral fiber of individuals through truth-force. He was in favor of private property and against the redistribution of income and wealth. Rather, he wanted the rich and capitalists to look upon themselves as trustees for society of the wealth their inherent talents (which, he maintained, must always be unequal) had allowed them to acquire. Determined to curb what he saw as the repugnant mass consumption of the West, Gandhi favored a self-imposed austerity whereby individuals would lean not to crave for goods beyond the requirements of their basic needs.

The resulting Gandhian panaceas have formed in important part of the Hindu revivalist economic programs. These include revitalizing the village economy and deemphasizing industrialization; promoting swadeshi (indigenous) technology and relative autarky in relations with the outside world; and accepting the wealthy as society’s ushers who have a moral obligation to help the poor.

The Westernized Indians who formed an important part of the polity, while showing some sympathy with Gandhi’s desire to uphold the traditional system, did not accept his wholesale attack on Western civilization and education. As long as Gandhi’s novel methods of mass mobilization (through sataygraha, that is nonviolent civil disobedience) were seen to be successful in challenging the Raj, his socioeconomic views were tolerated. However, with time, as noncooperation penetrated the localities, the clash of interest, particularly of caste and community, was sharpened rather than softened by Gandhi’s tactics. The double-edged nature of Gandhi’s political technique of mass mobilization became apparent. As the political leaders discarded sataygraha, Gandhi’s hope of achieving his ideals through political action faded. His political party, the Congress, was thereafter taken over by the “modernizers’ under Nehru.

Hindu Revivalist Organisation and Economics

Another revivalist strand runs through the Arya Samaj to the Hindu Mahasabha (HM) (founded in 1921), which absorbed it, and the RSS (a youth wing created by the HM) with its own political affiliates; the contemporary revivalist parties, the Jana Sangh and BJP.

The RSS under its leader, K.B.Hedgewar, came to be based on a more inward vision. What the Hindus needed according to Hedgewar was not a political party of their own, but communal discipline and revitalization. The RSS and its political affiliates, the Jana Sangh and BJP, have espoused a cultural nationalism which identifies Indian-ness with the culture of the Hindus. Given the doctrinal pluralism inherent in Hinduism, the RSS cleverly absorbed some broad ideological understandings; ideas about hierarchy, pollution, and transmigration of Hinduism with “nationalistic concepts adopted from Western political through.”

By emphasizing that many of the Indic religions – Janism, Sikhism, Buddhism-arose as offshoots of Hinduism, and as such are part of the Hindu culture, the “alien” was identified as the Muslims and Christians in India. This cultural nationalism also looked upon the Hindu nation as an organic whole, where different castes serve complementary functions but where “the ideal for caste is revised to emphasize all functions as equal in the sense of being necessary for the social organism.” Thus, the revivalist political parties have been against reserving jobs for the lower castes, which have burgeoned in the secular Indian state since independence.

By separating religion from culture, the Hindu revivalists have sought to incorporate even Muslims into their notion of “Hindu-ness” and have argued against according the Muslims (and other minorities) special treatment. This emphasis on Indian-ness, subsuming the various pluralisms in the subcontinent, has led the political parties of the revivalists to move from the purely communal Hindu Mahasabha toward the more national Jana Sangh and BJP, which admit non-Hindus. The practical goals of the revivalist political parties have “usually included a strong defense, entailing a nuclear arsenal, Indian control of industry, and the removal of preferential quotes for depressed castes as a step towards ending “casteism in general”. The parties have been critical of Western ideologies, both of the liberal, capitalist variety and of the socialist variety, as being divisive and leading to the concentration of power in the hands of either capitalists or the state, and thus destroying that unique organic wholeness that is purported to be the core of Indian cultural nationalism.

Nehruvian Economics

At independence, the “modernizers” in the nationalist movement triumphed, with Nehru-Gandhi’s political heir-becoming prime minister. He was the leader of the secular Western educated Indians who espoused a modern ideology, Fabian socialism. But this Western import ironically provided a new underpinning for India’s atavistic attitudes toward commerce and the market. India set up one of the most dirigiste systems of economic controls with a large expansion of the public sector, ostensibly to foster “socialism”. Slightly more than lip service was paid to some Gandhian economic panaceas – such as the special protection offered to hand-spun cloth and to small-small-scale industries. We cannot here go into the details of the economic impact of the resulting Permit Raj. All that we need to outline are the basic features of position dependence economic policy.

First, the model of development adopted by Stalinist Russia and an extremely pessimistic assumption about Indian export prospects led India to promote the domestic production of previously, imported commodities. In particular, the policy sought the rapid development of heavy industries such as steel, chemicals and machine tools. This heavy industry-biased import substitution strategy was and remains the centerpiece of Indian industrial planning. Second, as agriculture with its myriad producers and special dispersion was not easily amenable to the planners’ desires, it was industry that bore the brunt of the control system of industrial licensing and foreign exchange, price, and distributional controls. Independent India is thus best characterized as Permit Raj. Fourth. an expansion of the public sector to include the so-called commanding heights of the economy, taken to lie in producing basic goods (such as steel, chemicals, machinery), became an important aspect of pubic policy.

There has been a virtual consensus on these fundamental aspects of economic policy across the political spectrum – except during the brief period in the 1960s when the Swatantra party argued against them on free market lines. But Swatantra’s virtual elimination at the polls in 1971 has meant that there has been no political party since then to espouse the free market in India, even though it is now generally recognized that planning has not delivered the promised economic results. Growth has been well below potential and not based on labor-intensive industrialization. Hence, the alleviation of absolute poverty has been meager while the dirigiste system of controls has bred corruption and black markets on a scale that has put the democratic political process (increasingly based on the distribution of spoils) into directorate.

As one recent political historian sums up the current Indian political scene; “It would be folly… to be sanguine about the future of India, to consider that the country is only going through a ‘stage’ in its development, and to fail to recognize grave systemic crisis is in progress”

Single feature of the political movements spawned by revivalism since the nineteenth century has been the desire to revitalize. Hindu traditions and culture by defining and advocating a form of Hindu nationalism.

Jana Sangh and Economics

What of their economic policies only Jana Sangh and subsequently its successor, the BJP, have made some attempt to define their economic policies. The major elements in these policies are an extreme form of economic nationalism combined with elements from Gandhian panaceas and Poujadism., But the differences between the resultant economic policies and those pursued by secular post-independence governments are slight, as we shall see. This is hardly surprising, for economics has been secondary to the Jana Sangh – BJP primary aim of establishing a Hindu nation – state. The revivalists presume that the establishment of such a nation-state will occur not by the articulation and implementation of a specific economic program, but by less precise sociopolitical accepted as an all purpose means to this end.

The economic ideas underlying Jana Sangh – BJP policies are close to those espoused by Gandhi, with the major difference being that unlike him they do not want to completely reject the modern world. This has led to a degree of incoherence unlike Gandhi’s more clearheaded desire to establish a refurbished version of the ancient Hindu equilibrium. The major thinker on Jana Sangh – BJP economic issues was Deendayal Upadhaya. Unfortunately, his ideas were never set down in any systematic fashion. They were set out in a brief volume, published in 1965, But as Atal Behari Vajpayee (past president of the BJP) and Dr.Subramanian Swamy (until recently a leading thinker in the Jana Sangh) testify it is Deendayala’s ideas of “integral humanism” which underlie the Jana Sangh – BJP” position of economic policy. As Vajpayee has put it:

Jan Sangh as a political party had to examine the two existing systems. Jan Sangh as a political party rejected both capitalism and communism because these systems though opposed to each other, lead to similar results in the sense that both result in the concentration of economic power. In capitalism economic power is concentrated in hands of few and in communism it is concentrated in the hands of state… and concentration of economic power leads to dangerous results.

Deendayal’s integral humanism seeks to provide a third path in consonance with ancient Hindu notions of dharma(social order). His panacea: “Swadeshi and decentralization are the two words which briefly summarize the economic policy for the present circumstances.” He advocates the development of the Bharatiya(Indian) technology, which is very similar to Gandhi’s Swadeshi(home-spun) technology. Both are terms for an indigenous technology. But by contrast to Gandhi, who wanted to turn his back to modern technology, Deendayal seems to be arguing for what today is called the appropriate technology that is machines adapted to factor endowments of India with a preponderance of unskilled labour. He also seems to accept Gandhi’s notion of trusteeship. “In [Deendayal’s] terms, man must be encouraged to acquire and save wealth, but then it must be made socially prestigious to giveaway wealth or manage it as a “trustee” for society”. Finally he wishes to add the normal democratic rights which are enshrined in the Indian constitution rights to food, to work, to education and to free medical care.

There is nothing said about the organizational or institutional framework within which such policies could be adopted. Yet it is not difficult to see that ancient Hindu system of relatively self sufficient village communities with patron-client relationships ensuring the rights adumbrated by the above(at the village level) would be one of the viable organizational forms for establishing Deendayal’s vision. It is thus fairly to Gandhi’s vision. But as Gandhi’s it had limited appeal to growing Westernized middle class which influenced policy.

It was left to young Harvard trained economist, Subramanian Swamy, to try and marry the old to the new. In 1969, he prepared a “Swadeshi Plan” which was introduced by Jan Sangh leader A. B. Vajpayee, in budget session of Lok Sabha (lower house of the parliament) in 1970 as an alternative to official plan. Swami openly stated that his plan was based on economic nationalism. It had 5 objectives, “1) 10 percent rate of growth; 2) Full employment; 3) Guaranteed minimum acceptable consumption for all citizens; 4) Total and immediate self-reliance; and 5) Full defence preparedness including manufacture of nuclear weapons” His main aim was foreign aid and foreign investments, which he wanted to cease.

But many of his other economic suggestions were sensible. He advocated relying on the flexibility of the exchange rates to deal with the balance of payments, thereby eliminating import controls; shifting the emphasis of the industries away from heavy capital intensive to “small” labour intensive industries; reducing high marginal tax rates to small savings and to increase tax revenues; and emphasizing agriculture. All these are now recognized by main stream economists as the essential ingredients of a development policy which promotes economic growth with equity in developing countries where labour is abundant.

But Swadeshi Plan had little impact on policy. Like most professional observers, Mrs. Gandhi dismissed it “as devised by a Santa Claus”. Subsequently (after the collapse of the Janata party coalition in late 1970s) Swamy left Jan-Sangh BJP and now he is one of their trenchant critics but he has not given up on devising economic policies which would lead to revival of Hindu nation – on which more later.

In the 1960s, Jana Sangh came to be thought as a party with right-wing economic policies. This was due to the tactical alliance with the Swatantra party. Both opposed Congress party’s proposals for agrarian reform, particularly after the so-called Nagpur Resolution, adopted by the party, which endorsed a program for co-operative farming, “Although Jan Sangh advocated economic policies that were different from the free enterprise program advocated by Swatantra, the party nevertheless adopted a populist rhetoric in calling for a more equitable distribution of wealth”.

This alliance did well in 1962 and 1967 elections. But its electoral eclipse in late 1960s taught Jana Sangh that it could not be seen as associated with a party whose free market ideology was considered by the electorate to favour the haves against the have-nots. In a poor country with universal suffrage and large disparities in income, being charged being against the poor can be electorally disastrous. Hence the populist rhetoric espoused by all Indian political parties. The Jan Sangh’s brief flirtations with free enterprise in the 1960′s were thus motivated more by tactical electoral considerations than by any ideological commitment. When electoral tactics demanded its abandonment, it was jettisoned – particularly as it is conflicted with the critique of capitalism embodied in Integral Humanism.

With Jana Sangh’s entry into Janata Party coalition in 1977, some of the distinctive elements of its quasi Gandhian populism could be discerned in Indian economic policy. But as the constituents of the Janata coalitions were professed Gandhians of some sort who had been brought together by Gandhian and former socialist J. P. Narayan, it is difficult to say that Janata party’s policies represented those of its Hindu revivalist component, the Jana Sangh. Infact even though, Jana Sangh was the largest faction (about 30 percent of Janata’s parliamentary seats), the economic ideas and policies of the Janata were based mostly on the ideas of Charan Singh, the leader of rural peasants. He advocated promotion agriculture rather than large scale industry, a self-sufficient peasantry, and labour intensive small-scale industry. The congruence of Janata policies with some of the policies the Jana Sangh had espoused merely reflects the continuing resonance of the Gandhian ideas across the Indian political spectrum (excluding the communists).

The Jana Sangh while part of the Janata coalition also learned the uses of the broader constituency and thus moderated its communal image further when it re-emerged as the BJP. It now had a Muslim as a general secretary, and Gandhian socialism replaced by Integral Humanism as party’s articulated first principle.

The Janata Party also sought (mostly rhetorically) to reverse the Nehruvian industrial strategy. The main practical manifestation of this desire was policies to protect the small scale and something called the “tiny” sector.This resulted in a policy induced fragmentation of the industrial sector which created in effect an industrial caste system whose economic merits were far from obvious. The implementation of the new industrial strategy did not, moreover, involve any dismantling of Nehruvian panoply of controls and licenses. The Jana Sangh as a part of the Janata coalition thus seem to embrace the consensual in-ward looking dirigisme which has characterized the Indian economic policy. The only added nuance was a greater emphasis on protecting urban small scale producer and rural kulaks through further dirigisme.

The small-sale and something called the “tiny” sector. This resulted in a policy-induced fragmentation of the industrial sector which created in effect an industrial caste system whose economic merits were far from obvious. “The implementation of the new industrial strategy did not, moreover, involve any dismantling of the Nehruvian panoply of controls and licenses. The Jana Sangh as part of the Janata coalition thus seemed to embrace the consensual inward-looking dirigisme which has characterized Indian economic policy. Th only added nuance was greater emphasis on protecting urban small scale producers and rural kulaks through further dirigisme.

The other “new” element of Janata economic policies was the intimation of various direct programs (such as an employment guarantee scheme in Maharashtra and “food for work” programs) to deal with rural under employment. These again can hardly be described as marked departures from the Nehruvian programs. The latter have, at least rhetorically, promised to implement various populist polices to meet so-called basic needs, and have claimed to have a poverty and employment focus since at least the fifth Five-Year plan of Mrs.Gandhi’s government in the early 1970s.

It was Mrs.Gandhi’s son, Rajiv, who tried unsuccessfully to initiate a more radical break with the Nehru model. His stated desire (soon after his large electoral victory in 1984) was to dismantle the permit Raj and tackle the political corruption it had engendered. His embroilment in his own corruption scandals sailed this brief attempt at liberalization.

BJP, Dr. Subramaniam Swamy and Economics

What of the new BJP (the successor to the Jana Sangh)? Does it have any distinctive economic policies? Apparently not. There is an emerging consensus in India for Economic liberalization, but no party has advocated a dash for the free market as has happened, for instance, in Eastern Europe. When asked why not, Mr.Advani, the president of the BJP, honestly stated that there were still no votes in it. The party wants a reduction in the role of the public sector, but it wants to restrict foreign investment to high-technology areas. At the same time it supports populist measures, such as the right to work, and the forgiveness or rural debt. The espousal of this populist egalitarianism is largely tactical, to the extent that it goes against the maintenance of a social system based n Herna Hinanchus. This remains a cornerstone of the Hindu culture virtually all Hindu revivalists have sought to revive.

The BJP’s current economic policies and its justifications for them thus seem very much part of the continuing Nehruvian economic policy consensus in India, namely, to move hesitantly toward some liberalization of the economy but with a predominant role for the state and the bureaucracy. The differences in policy with the Nehruvian model lie essentially in a greater emphasis on the Gandhian features which are already contains in the consensus strategy.

There is, however, one politician Dr.Swamy (an EX-Jana Sangh), Currently president of the Janata party, who has produced as agenda for the revival of the Hindu nation whose cornerstone is the creation of a market economy. He argues that

the adoption of policies which faster rapid economic growth and increasing social justice is vital for national renaissance… The Hindu ethos is based on individualism. If an individualistic democracy is to strong, which is an important dimension of national renaissance, then the economic philosophy of such a society should accord the highest priority to self-employment and secure jobs to faster the spirit of self-reliance. Since the ethos of the Hindus who are nearly eighty-two percent is individualistic, the correct economic policy is one that largely based on the use of the market mechanism. The government [in such a policy] would have a role, no doubt, but it will be primarily to correct market malfunction, promote minimum standards of living, and generally act as an umpire in the interaction between consumers and producers in the market place.

The government would also have the right to intervene in the market to give protection to those who cannot survive unfair competition, give cheap credit to small producers and arrange marketing facilities for farmers and small industrialists. In such an economy, the government will have no right to occupy the “commanding heights,” the concept favored by Nehru and the Leftists. Overall, the government’s major role would be to levy taxation and set interest rates which induce investments that promote employment, to modernize agriculture, and to encourage small industries, such as the government did in Japan. Such an economic policy is not capitalistic or socialist but is the modern update of Gandhian ideas.

Whether Gandhi would have agreed with this is dubious. Nor will most revivalists accept the individualism Swamy espouses. Moreover, Swamy’s agenda still pays lip service to finding a middle way;

The world over, socialism has failed, while capitalism has produced exploitation and social unrest. Thus, we must reject both. Instead we need to rely not on the power of the government, nor on that of capitalists, but to focus power of the human initiative and enterprise to develop by providing the proper freedom and opportunity….. The sixth item on the agenda for national Renaissance is the acceptance of an economic philosophy that is liberal and in which the economic role of the government is limited to providing the physical and policy infrastructure for the market to function efficiently.

Any free market economist would wholeheartedly concur with this. But it seems a long way from the Hindu revivalist economic program that Gandhi laid our in Hind Samraj. Nor does the individualism Swamy extols seem consonant with the traditional hierarchical social system based on caste. But if the purpose of Hindu revivalism is to create a powerful Hindu nation = state, then Swamy is right in realizing that the most efficient means to that end is a full-fledged market economy.

However, having left the Jana Sangh, be is unlikely to see his ideas adopted by the BJP in the near future. What his Agenda for Hindu Renaissance does illustrate, how ever, is the absorptive quality of Hinduism,…. Though beginning with the revivalist dream of setting boundaries and purifying Hinduism, the revivalists have steadily moved toward the consensual policies they find have electoral appeal. Once the desire to refurbish the ancient Hindu equilibrium is recognized as impractical, as it increasingly, has become with the spread of the modern economy and the expansion of the middle class, there is no distinctive set of economic policies left to distinguish a Hindu revivalist program from any other program which seeks to adopt polices which foster economic growth and increasing social justice….. vital for national renaissance.

Elsewhere I have argued that many of the parameters which have sustained the ancient Hindu equilibrium have decisively shifted during the past century. Population growth has ended India’s ancient demographic stability and the need to tie labor down to the land; the Green Revolution has ended village autarky; even the modest industrial growth since independence has replaced custom with the contract in many situations, particularly in the labor market. Meanwhile the growth of Western education and social legislation – which has picked up where Bentinck left off – and the gradual movement of the literary castes into business and commerce and slowly changing long-standing casteist attitudes.

The ancient Hindu revenue economy is thus now being undermined. The impracticality of a full-scale reestablishment of the Hindu equilibrium makes Gandhian economic panaceas look more and more antediluvian and romantic to the electorate. Hindu revivalist parties, therefore, while seeking to uphold Hindu culture, are unlikely to seek a return to ancient economic ways.

Thus, I would argue that, just as there has been no distinctive impact of Hindu revivalism on Indian economic policy in the past, there is unlikely to be a major impact in the future. Nevertheless, the indirect economic consequences of the violence resulting from unleashing religious passions can be dire. As the recent revivalist agitation surrounding the building of a temple on the site of a mosque in Ayodhya attests, when law and order – the basic public good – threatened, there is grave danger that the economic framework will also unravel.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Agnimitra » 06 Jun 2013 12:17

Atri wrote:Has this article been discussed here in BRF?

Why Hindu Revivalism Has Had No Distinctive Impact On Indian Economic Policy?

My 2c: The author focuses only on Hindu 'traditionalism' and 'reformism' and dismisses Hindu 'fundamentalism' as "a contradiction in terms". The author repeatedly identifies Hindutva economics with those of 'traditionalists' and 'reformists' like Gandhi ji, who wanted to re-adjust society to restore some medieval era social "balance". But real Hindutva is fundamentalistic and individualistic (in the sense of Integral Humanism), as Subramanian Swamy points out. The author mentions Swami Dayananda but clearly has no idea of that political-economic philosophy. Swami Dayananda would be a 'fundamentalist, and he extolled modern science, held birth-based varna-jaati interpretation in contempt, and was for social reorganization (varna-vyavastha) based on an educational and training system (rather than social custom or contract) that sifted people by ability and works (guna, karma). Modi and Swamy are Savarkarite fundamentalists. The fundamentalists should take the wheel of Hindutva programme, while tactically carrying the traditionalists and reformists along with them at the grassroots.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Atri » 06 Jun 2013 15:10

Agnimitra wrote:
Atri wrote:Has this article been discussed here in BRF?

Why Hindu Revivalism Has Had No Distinctive Impact On Indian Economic Policy?

My 2c: The author focuses only on Hindu 'traditionalism' and 'reformism' and dismisses Hindu 'fundamentalism' as "a contradiction in terms". The author repeatedly identifies Hindutva economics with those of 'traditionalists' and 'reformists' like Gandhi ji, who wanted to re-adjust society to restore some medieval era social "balance". But real Hindutva is fundamentalistic and individualistic (in the sense of Integral Humanism), as Subramanian Swamy points out. The author mentions Swami Dayananda but clearly has no idea of that political-economic philosophy. Swami Dayananda would be a 'fundamentalist, and he extolled modern science, held birth-based varna-jaati interpretation in contempt, and was for social reorganization (varna-vyavastha) based on an educational and training system (rather than social custom or contract) that sifted people by ability and works (guna, karma). Modi and Swamy are Savarkarite fundamentalists. The fundamentalists should take the wheel of Hindutva programme, while tactically carrying the traditionalists and reformists along with them at the grassroots.



Precisely.. :)

What fundamental aspect this writer (and most of other India watchers - genuine and malevolent) misses is this - Even in traditional village-centric economy of India, villages were NOT isolated.

We had a travelling merchant class with their caravans which roamed around and brought swathes of land under their influence - enabling trading of goods.
We had scores of travelling Sadhu-Sannyasi-tantrik-mantrik types who brought in news from different parts of world
We had travelling brahmins who moved from Mutt to Mutt
We had Pilgrims which did the char-dham and 52 shaktipeethas and 14 jyotirlingas (and in that process connected with entire or partial subcontinent).
We had migrating castes and tribes (like Banjaras, for example) which acted as catalysts for tech-transfer, info-transfer, news-transfer, money-transfer
We had subcontinent wide network of organized criminal brotherhoods (like thugs, Pindaris) which also contributed in their capacity towards connecting people and regions
And finally we had various armies on imperial conquests travelling everywhere and churning the economy as they moved.

All these factors (may be I have missed out on some) ensured that Grama-Swarajya system is not dependent on isolated static village as structural and functional unit of economy. While village was the unit, it was far from (well most of them) being isolated and static. Yes the pace of life was slower than it is today, but then it is expected.

When people interact, that interaction is business. When people are free to interact, there is free business.

MKG (and traditionalist PIF like RSS) did not consider this aspect (MKG more so than RSS). And the writer who singularly focuses on MKG (as the bed rock of modern Hindu thought on economy) misses this important link too. When there is so much mixing, business is bound to happen. Indic thought never put restrictions on people interacting. As long as 15% tax was paid to the enforcer in the region, kshatriyas are more than happy to let other three groups be.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5221
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby ShauryaT » 06 Jun 2013 20:13

Atri wrote:MKG (and traditionalist PIF like RSS) did not consider this aspect (MKG more so than RSS). And the writer who singularly focuses on MKG (as the bed rock of modern Hindu thought on economy) misses this important link too. When there is so much mixing, business is bound to happen. Indic thought never put restrictions on people interacting. As long as 15% tax was paid to the enforcer in the region, kshatriyas are more than happy to let other three groups be.
MKG's critical mistake was his non-approving nature of modern industry and treating money as a vice to be avoided. This is where, I appreciate the Swami Narayan, Jain and Sikh panths quite a bit. They never had this confusion between spiritual growth and the role of money. No wonder, some of the most oppulent temple structures out there are by the Swami Narayan sect. Not unlike the 2000+ majestic structures which did exist and subsequently destroyed by foreigners. Money and Power preserve Dharma not the "lack" of it - said Kautilya.

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2785
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby prahaar » 06 Jun 2013 20:17

@ShauryaTji, very well said. In addition to money, there is also a distaste for arms-industry (especially among many Vaishya and Jain communities). This unhealthy dislike for arms (many times described in tandem with vegetarian + non-violence ethos) has been a bane. The adverse reaction to the naming of ATV as Arihant is a case in point.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 09 Jun 2013 21:22

Shri Narendra Modi' address to BJP Karyakartas after National Executive Meeting in Goa on Jun 09, 2013



Speech starts @0:47:30

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 11 Jun 2013 17:01

Shri Narendra Modi at the inauguration of All India Conference on Livestock and Dairy Development only Speech on Jun 11, 2013


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 11 Jun 2013 17:28

Dr Subramanian Swamy talks about current political situation in India in Hicksville, NYC on Jun 09, 2013


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 12 Jun 2013 18:03

Animal Rights Series

The Bharatiyas have always felt a close relationship between them and animals. So one can expect that in the coming years, as Bharatiya narrative takes hold, there will be a call for better animal rights protection in India.

Here a picture of a scenario which inspires us to be kind to the animals.

Image

Monkey Helps Blind
Two blind people were unable to open a tap of water at RagiGudda temple in India.

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Atri » 12 Jun 2013 18:04

SwamyG wrote:Atri:
I believe not all men are created equal. Some people have apara buddi and drishti. I consider myself to be not one of those. We all can use MB characters (or other puranic characters) to portray our view points or theories. But when it comes down to the chase, the pramana have to be convincing, no? You are attributing reasons/actions to LKA and other people that are not easy to validate. In the absence of validation (even by inference or comparison), we cannot take as pramana the shabda from you or anyone else. Why should we, right? Just because you were right the previous 10 times is no guarantee that you are right now, correct?

I hope you understand I mean no disrespect, but question you and the theories - all good discussion and increase of knowledge onlee.

If I come up with the following story: Sonia after becoming the daughter in law of IG, saw how wretched INC was, and wanted to no role. Alas, things happened, and she was hoisted up at the top. She found the coterie to be dangerous and had full control of the INC and nation. One way she thought was to create so much havoc and create a mindset in aam admi that he would never ever vote for INC. So she created all the corruption scams, and appointed ullus (owl) into the post with an intention to bring down INC from the inside.

Isn't my concoction laughable, because there are so many loop holes and things that we simply cannot humanly verify or does not meet common sense. The point of this stretch is not to equate Advani to Sonia. But to highlight that there is no way to validate the theories. For every counterpoint, the soosai theorists point out that it was LKA's plan and agenda to do precisely this or that.

Give us something to hold on to your ideas :-)


I have already answered you here, Swamy ji - viewtopic.php?p=1468740#p1468740

The entire chain of ideas for you to do puravapaksha analysis on me are in this post.

I am not playing on pratyaksha OR Shabda pramana. I am viewing things not through Saamkhya darshana (window) this time, but through Vedanta and hence am playing on Anumaana (inference), Upamaana (comparison), Arthapatti (postulation) and Anupalabdhi (Non-Cognition) pramanas.

Samkhya is not robust to process my this model.

All the arguments, postulates, comparisons and non-cognitions (as to why is BJP behaving like this since 2009 - that "Maayaa" factor) are int he posts cited in the post above in chronological order. You are right, I am not Shruti so my statement cannot be considered as shabda-pramana. Nor am I direct OR indirect witness to things happening - hence I do not have Pratyaksha pramana (in all three flavors) to present. Yet, I feel something is amiss. So, I have to drop my regular world-view (saamkhya-yoga) and adopt vedaanta to allow me to use three new pramanas which are unavailable in former.

now consider your scenario -

If I come up with the following story: Sonia after becoming the daughter in law of IG, saw how wretched INC was, and wanted to no role. Alas, things happened, and she was hoisted up at the top. She found the coterie to be dangerous and had full control of the INC and nation. One way she thought was to create so much havoc and create a mindset in aam admi that he would never ever vote for INC. So she created all the corruption scams, and appointed ullus (owl) into the post with an intention to bring down INC from the inside.


It seems laughable because you are not seeing it through vedantic window. Hence I said, Samkhya-Yoga is not useful here - It is out of scope for them. What if she is not really that much invested in INC and all she (or her handlers) want is a channel to exert their influence in India for short and mid-term? What if bringing down OR saving INC was never her interest - her primary interest was to save her life and that of her children and make sure they did not suffer the fate of their father, uncle and grandmother? If you read GRR Martin novels of "Song of Ice and Fire" series then Sonia is like Cersie Lannister. :)

If not, it becomes slightly difficult metaphor to explain. Thus, in absence of pratyaksha pramana to validate this, and lack of data and material enough for anumaana and upamaana to lead the charge, one has to seek refuge of Bhagvatpaada Adi Shankara, and make use of Anupalabdhi and then Arthapatti pramanas.

While applying Anupalabdhi pramana, we understand that something is amiss. A rational player of game will not behave as Sonia has in your scenario. Yet she is behaving. Thus applying Arthapatti pramana here, we "assume" or "postulate" that she IS a rational player and that there are other drives OR forces which are being neglected in the course of our study. So, given these two pramanas firmly in place, we then can start cautiously using Anumaana.

What is her background? Where she comes from? What is her chitta-vritti? what is her education? What kind of people is she AND was she surrounded by, when major life-events happened? what were their motives? What was her response? How did she rise to power? What kind of people she usurped the power from? What price did she pay? What kind of people surround her now? what is their character?

Shakti OR Power exists in eight forms according to Hindu Dharma and Artha Shaastras.

1. Tapobala - power owing to long struggle and accumulated experience and gained goodwill
2. Gnyana bala - power of sharp intellect
3. Artha Bala - Power of resources, finances, acquaintances.
4. Shastra bala - Power of weapons - muscle power
5. Jana Bala - Power of public support and popularity
6. Sthaana Bala - Power owing to position
7. Aatma bala - power of one's strong will and resolution.
8. Mitra bala - POwer of allies and friends

Think, how many balas she had in 1998 at her side when she miraculously rose to power and lime-light? Apparently, only Sthaana bala (gandhi dynasty) alone. Was it enough to so spectacularly rise to power? No.. Was there any other bala? - Pratyaksha, Anumana and Upamana pramanas say "Don't know !!". But again some is amiss here - Here again comes Anupalabdhi (acknowledging something is amiss and incomplete and hence it is blocking complete cognition). Then applying Arthapatti pramana we narrow down upon some external and invisible but powerful artha-bala and mitra-bala supporting her, making all this happen. Why? Anumaana and Upamaana says, "Don't know". Again Arthapatti needs to be employed.

This explains just the complexity of situation. (this also explains, why I prefer Nirishwar-vaadi Saamkhya-yoga over theistic vedanta with three pramanas onlee :D). I implore you to abandon samkhya and take refuge of vedanta for grasping this sort of inquiry.

Similar modus operandi can be applied to LKA and his behavior. History and Anupalabdhi shows that he is today a rational player with tapobala, gnyaana bala, aatma-bala and sthaana-bala. Yet he behaved like this. He may have lost jana-bala to NM (or one can say NM inherited LKA's jana-bala and added his own), but yet has other balas at his disposal. Yet his actions in past few days looked irrational. Bring in anupalabdhi and arthapatti here as well. Why did he do it? To become PM? - But he categorically stated that he is OUT of PM race in 2011 and DOES NOT want to be one. So he cannot revert from his stated position (being a rational player) without public demand (jana-bala). But NM has already accepted the LKA's jana-bala in his quiver, so LKA (being a rational player) knows that he won't have a jana-bala and hence won't be able to revert from stated position.

Yet......

So soosai theory is an extension of this "yet" using Anupalabdhi, arthapatti, anumaana and upamaana pramanas combining it with Indrashakti theory.

What that theory is in all its details, I have stated in my previous response to you where I chronologically cited the evolution of idea. Why did I come up with soosai theory, I stated here in this post. I hope I have given you enough to hold on.. It is a Vedantik model.. And Vedanta in the end, assumes that Ishwara exists.. :)

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5221
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby ShauryaT » 20 Jun 2013 02:45

matrimc wrote:ShauryaT sir ji,

> There are others like Dharmapal ji's works who has made a strong defense of Panchayati Raj
> along with a reinvention of polity based on our conceptions of our awareness of time and space,
> His works are a masterpiece that dissects the issue in a manner that is transformational yet
> eternally Hindu the only other that I have read doing something like this is Gandhi ji. Dharampal ji
> was an early critic of our system, was even arrested by JLN after some critique for 1962. It is these
> type of works and arguments premised on such works that a reasonable alternative model can be
> constructed to "displace" the western inspired constructs. However, if all the discussion does is
> blame this group and that group and come up with a list of 20 to despise, it goes nowhere.

> So far, I was hardly taking this thread seriously, let me start with the works of a
> Gandhian who has
> done much to keep the flame burning. Dharampal.

Could you please educate non-elite "village idiots" like me from whom you want to take away voting rights how the above you posted in SBOB? thread does not contradict your views regarding retiring universal franchise in favor of granting voting rights only to landlords? ... or did I misunderstand your post regarding "yagnya"? Assuming that an "uncultured" village idiot like me does not understand what "yagnya" is, could you please define what it is? If you are unable to come up with such a definition then make it a free variable after quoting your own post - I am a little sleepy and tired right now to dig up that post of yours but am confident you can quote it verbatim as you claimed (IIRC) that you had thought long and hard on the issue. That would set the stage for a very liberal regime under which everybody can have her own definition. I invite you to come up with at least one interpretation of that sentence that would resolve the highlighted parts above.

Peace

I remember posting this viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6525&p=1419405&hilit=franchise#p1419405 about universal franchise. If the above is how you read it, then there is nothing more to say.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9862
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Vayutuvan » 20 Jun 2013 06:55

ShauryaT ji, no it is not that post. Allow me to say that I noted your response (ingilipeace is a little constraining, so putting it in Hindi as you have been gungho on it as the link language - "mein ne aapka samadhan pahachan liya" - not sure I remember my dad's drilling into my head of "ne ka prayog" got the lowest percentage in Hindi) and will respond as and when I get a little respite from my work and hobbies.

In any case, as long as you don't want to implement/work towards implementing your ideas in US but the country you are a citizen of, I do not have any issues at the moment but remember "nandO rAja bhavishyati".

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_20317 » 12 Aug 2013 18:44

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6392&start=2920#p1495048

This post set me thinking. And I admit most of it is gut feel right now but I need to get it off my chest.


gakakkad wrote:w.r.t Raghuram Rajan , he advocated Islamic banking in India as per recommendations of sacchar committee ..here's an old article from indian express dated september 2008.

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Ra ... ing/357126

The high-profile committee on financial sector reforms, headed by International Monetary Fund former chief economist Raghuram Rajan, is likely to submit its final report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who is also chairman of the Planning Commission, by the middle of the month.
The committee, which was set up by the Planning Commission to recommend various ways to take the country’s financial sector reforms forward, has included a few points pertaining to Islamic banking. The final report has two pages referring to themes like equity financing in place of charging interest on lending—a key principle of Islamic banking—which is yet to be allowed by the government.


The topic of equity financing is complicated . But I hope his reference to "Islamic Banking" is mere anecdotal w.r.t equity financing and not political..



Actually its very simple. Tick all the template and chances are about 1% that you will end up in litigation, most likely even less. The complications are all essentially in debt and related superstructure. I do not know enough of Radhuram ji to form an opinion. But this just does not agree with what I have learnt and considering the fact that it involves Vaishya dharm, which has been somewhat protected till date it makes me anxious.

Well at least here is how I see things and I would love some education by the members at large:

There is a rationale behind the way Equity and Debt are structured the way they are. The possibility of super profits and dumb losses are actually such that they cannot be realistically be predicted. Its a bit like a doctor saying his ‘patient x will die at y point in time’. Even the looser statement that ‘x will die during the period y to y-I’ or still looser kind that ‘x will die after z years’, cannot ultimately be said. Because x sources all his inputs from a field that is not calculable and then processes it in a manner that is not formula based. Just the same way the life of a group effort also lacks certainty. In the absence of certainty in the arthic world, the world itself overtime recognized the need for a 'promoter' and a 'lender' and evolved the system along this two intertwined pillars. Smart guys like engineers and IT people used this to get rich too, in the process sourcing vast amounts of wealth from mother nature for general good. The lenders on the other hand were also smart people in their own way. They also realized they could not act like promoters and risk everything in their hands at just one or two business which they do not even understand. So they cooperated with promoters for mutual benefits. The relationship was as fruitful as that of the pharmacologists and doctors. It was so strong that even a disconnect with the risk as in case of employee CEOs and disconnect with owned funds as in case of Banks, did not on a net basis harm the economy irrevocably. It could not fail unless some really really dumb guy would somehow rise to the top. Still the structure had enough strength and balance that the rotten eggs would get tolerated by the overall profitablity of the system. This also gave rise to somewhat funny phenomena, where a roll-over is not recognized as a default because people have hope and that hope can be capitalized in the form of a discounted cash flow. And OTOH to phenomena like bulls vs. bears and the whole Economic studies scene which gets talked of as if it is a science. Hell even scientists provide for different kinds of uncertainty. Economists do not feel the need to support their rather vehement claims. Still the economy survived the economist. The kind of accounting effort required to arrive at a reasonable judgement will break everybodies back. Organized government led efforts can do it and smart guys can figure out a good amount of details from the published data but in a lot cases these nuggets of information will get drowned in politically expedient requirements or in obsolete datas or in too much of noise-numbers. And despite this the system survived. Somewhere along the line as the complexity of the system grew and people began fearing the potential of failure, there grew in direct proportion the will to avoid the hard decisions associated with these fears. Despite this escapist tendency the system still worked. Though nobody can really say till what time and in what manner its survival will evolve.

Now this whole system is based on a very crucial POV. Being a view it can always be used cussed or cajoled and other views pushed in. Now notice till the time the west enjoyed an expanding economy they worked on this system. A brutally honest participant of this system will not deny that this system can be seen as a lie too, in certain cases. After all everything is Mithya only :). OTOH a brutally dharmic :lol: participant, will recognize the essential component of this risk bearing activity - the risk is as against time not as against the next guy. The normal portion of the next guy risk, gets taken care of in the normal course. Thousands of years of history on this structure provides enough of data to validate this view. Obviously as against time everything, simply has to fail. The doctor and the world can be very very certain that x will die at some point.

So as it evolved the system is:

Risk of Aboslute loss (‘A’) <-> (‘B’) Possibility of Absolute gain. You have in your portfolio several such simple instruments that can look like vision of dharmic people in Ramrajya or it could equally look like a base lie of a rank bas_a_d.

Zero risk (‘C’) <-> (‘D’) Zero gain except to the extent of time value appropriately amended due to account for peculiarities of the case. This peculiarity is what induces the complexity in the system. This complexity is what essentially justifies Mutual funds, Insurance companies and everything else.

The peculiarity is the vision/lie of the promoter. He is the annadaata or annaharta. You will infact notice that the very basis of a roll-over is that the lender cannot do dick if he enters into the security. Lender himself recognizes this. Lender is the Shakti, the field, the sustenance of a healthy relationship and the vegetable of a sick relationship. Promoter is the Shiva – somebody who envisions out of apparent nothingness and can look like a lie at its worst.

Islamic banking OTOH shifts the onus around. Since (‘D’) cannot be done so the question of (‘C’) for the lender does not arise. Lender has to be ready to replace (‘A’) as soon as the original (‘A’) goes kaput. The Lender is theoretically saved but the fact is that for every 1 successful business, 9 will be dud and the Lender is not going to grow any wiser. Now this seems like an invocation of ‘absolute risk’ and in the normal set up this is bad logic. But this is Islamic Banking with Islamic being prime. This is Islam trying its hands at collective wealth after having addled the collective god and the collective kshtra dharm. US has already seen how widespread the panic is if the field of the lender is damaged.

The very idea of Islamic banking is suited only to somebody who wishes for absolute security but does not care for the collective wisdom. Actually a variant of this is present in what would be called ‘Structured debt’ in the current system too. But that requires skills and is limited to cases where these skills can be economically sourced. So what would you say is the risk associated with an Islamic banking product. There is also a leasing model which mimics this but this again is used in niche cases, not as a panacea. The reality is so stark that the Islamic bankers themselves claim that they are merely repackaging the established system. Even they realize they cannot be serious about it. That is why all Muslims are more than happy to participate in the normal system which binds the world. But who will take the guarantee for the Mutaween and Mullahs.

To my view the world whether Indic or westerns should resist it. FDI in Multi brand seems like a walk in the park compared to this.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RamaY » 30 Sep 2013 21:50



Narendra Modi's speech that brings this thread into National Debate.

Satamanam Bhavati Sri Narendra Modi!

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 08 Oct 2013 13:28

India must declare itself a Dharmic nation. That is the only way we can move forward on may agenda particularly on foreign policy. Basic points to realize:

1. Clamor within secular groups to allow same access to Bangladeshi's as we give to Nepali's.
2. If Bangladeshi's have that right, we can add out Islamic population by 200 million in 30 years time.
3. Same rights will be asked for persecuted Pakistani Muslim communities.
4. If India has 40-50 % Muslims then we will turn into an Islamic state.
5. We must not clamor for a Hindu Rashtra, but consolidate under a Dharmic one.
6. Declaring ourselves a Dharmic Rashtra will clear up our Tibet policy. Call it Occupied Tibet.
7. Clamour for joint control Tibet, India, Nepal over Kailash-Mansarover.
8. Bring Nepal, Myanmar, Bhutan, Thailand, SL into a Dharmic federation grouping. Free visa's, trade sops. Expand that grouping.
9. Encourage minorities in India to associate with Dharmic meme's. Hit hard at excluvist ideological extremists.
10. Do not take away excluvist ideology worship rights, but discourage external funding and expansion. Encourage entry to Dharmic fold.

None of the above will cause major upheaval and can be gently carried out in a decade and half at max. The soft landing to this type of approach is better accomplished with extremely good economic development in all sectors. Practise the concept of 'soft secularism' in the Dharmic Rashtra, where by excluvist ideology adherents are granted equal rights but not the same privilege to propagate and spread. Everyone will understand what India is and wants to be. That must start pronto ASAP to save the country. There is no other option than this. Not one.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3736
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby panduranghari » 08 Oct 2013 18:43

ShauryaT wrote:
Atri wrote:MKG (and traditionalist PIF like RSS) did not consider this aspect (MKG more so than RSS). And the writer who singularly focuses on MKG (as the bed rock of modern Hindu thought on economy) misses this important link too. When there is so much mixing, business is bound to happen. Indic thought never put restrictions on people interacting. As long as 15% tax was paid to the enforcer in the region, kshatriyas are more than happy to let other three groups be.
MKG's critical mistake was his non-approving nature of modern industry and treating money as a vice to be avoided. This is where, I appreciate the Swami Narayan, Jain and Sikh panths quite a bit. They never had this confusion between spiritual growth and the role of money. No wonder, some of the most oppulent temple structures out there are by the Swami Narayan sect. Not unlike the 2000+ majestic structures which did exist and subsequently destroyed by foreigners. Money and Power preserve Dharma not the "lack" of it - said Kautilya.


I would argue that Mohandas was on the right track when he did consider money as a vice.

The integral humanism extolled by various authors seems very close to comfort with Progressive Utilisation Theory of PR Sarkar who make AnandMarg famous or infamous.

PROUT

PROUT is an acronym for PROgressive Utilization Theory, a socio-economic philosophy that synthesizes the physical, mental and spiritual dimensions of human nature. The goal of PROUT is to provide guidance for the evolution of a truly progressive human society.

PROUT is an alternative to the outmoded capitalist and communist socio-economic paradigms. Neither of these approaches have adequately met the physical, mental and spiritual needs of humanity. PROUT seeks a harmonious balance between economic growth, social development, environmental sustainability, and between individual and collective interests. Combining the wisdom of spirituality with a universal outlook and the struggle for self-reliance, PROUTist thinkers and activists are creating a new civilizational discourse and planting the seeds for a new way of living.

A few basic tenets of PROUT are:

Spirituality and Progress
Economic Democracy
Basic Necessities Guaranteed to All
Freedom
Cultural Diversity
Women's Rights
Science and Technology
World Government


IMO this is really a utopian idea. The problem also is compounded that there are certain ideologies who would never permit the implementation of these ideas.

We can conveniently throw that concept into the bin. Unless the whole world becomes dharmik no chance of PROUT becoming a reality.

With regards to the earlier article that Atri ji posted I have a few questions;

Deepak Lal wrote:Population growth has ended India’s ancient demographic stability and the need to tie labor down to the land; the Green Revolution has ended village autarky; even the modest industrial growth since independence has replaced custom with the contract in many situations, particularly in the labor market. Meanwhile the growth of Western education and social legislation – which has picked up where Bentinck left off – and the gradual movement of the literary castes into business and commerce and slowly changing long-standing casteist attitudes.


AFAIR India always had a huge population. Greek travellers have noted this extensively in their writings.
Another thing is did green revolution really happen? Wasn't it due to massive influx of GM crop and insecticides that made the increase in the grain production look like green revolution? Loss of many indigenous crop species which could resist climate changes have left us poorer. Again this is my opinion.
Even today the diamond trade in Mumbai and Surat happens purely on trust. There is no contract. Similarly in Kerala the spice trading happens based on trust. No paper contract. I think the author was spending too much time in MBA course which teaches the American Business Model.

He also goes on to state;
Deepak Lal wrote:Thus, I would argue that, just as there has been no distinctive impact of Hindu revivalism on Indian economic policy in the past, there is unlikely to be a major impact in the future.


What the basis of this pessimism. Is it because the west goes down, so India has to go down too?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 09 Oct 2013 16:22

Dar ul-Secularism & Federalism

Rashtra Manthan has again started so some thoughts from Vanvaas! :wink: This post is in the spirit of Rajiv Malhotra's seminal "Breaking India"!

1) BJP has stated that it supports Telangana as it is in principle in favor of smaller states. This policy may have some merit to it as it is supposed to improve administration. However it is also a policy fraught with risks. If any states come up where the Muslims have a majority or some ideologically anti-Bharatiyata community, then one could expect another Kashmir in the making and should the Center intervene then it would be considered "disrespectful" of India's federal structure. Be as it is in case of Telangana we may not be there or not there as yet.

2) There are some religious connotations in what is happening in Andhra Pradesh. In Telangana an alliance is being set up which includes MIM and since Telangana would be much smaller than Andhra Pradesh, its influence would be larger. The appeasement would continue to grow. In Seemandhra it seems it is up for even larger scale evangelizing. So it seems Ummahism and Churchism are willing to divide the bounty among themselves.

3) Sonia Gandhi is a viceroy for foreign & internal Abrahamic forces and their interests are not bound to Congress. Other parties can just as well cater to these interests. So Sonia Gandhi is primarily looking after these interests rather than looking after Congress's reelection prospects. Congress offers her a good platform but as a national party it becomes difficult to cater to extremist and separatist tendencies which have been generated in some parts of India through it. Then it makes sense to pass on the work of subversion to other strengthened local centrifugal political forces.

3) Such forces could be Ajit Jogi in Chattisgarh, or it could be Samuel Jagan Reddy in Seemandhra. In fact it is made all to look as if it is Congress which is losing as these Congress fragments try to expand their space in these regions, but it remains coordinated strategy. Even Mamata Banerjee's TMC is catering to Ummahite agenda in West Bengal. CPI-M was considered as a party also catering to similar programme but not being under the same control. These are all Maino's B-Teams. They are of course willing to cooperate with BJP if the need arises so that during NDA rule at the Center they can still insulate themselves from Hindutva incursion into their spaces. With the old guard in BJP such cooperation was easier as they respected Dar ul-Secularism. The new leadership in BJP may not be so receptive of allowing the deracination agenda in India and as such their is much much panic with respect to Narendra Modi. So when the talk is that Narendra Modi won't be able to find allies, the reference is to Maino's B-Teams willing to work with Modi.

4) Should Maino's B-Teams give support to Narendra Modi led NDA, it would always be in exchange for him accepting the steady deracination agenda in certain areas and not bringing out any legislation not to speak of constitutional amendments which go contrary to it. This all takes place under the heading of Secularism.

5) Summarizing, some Hindutvavadis who see Congress & the Dynasty as the center of all evil and work out their political calculations accordingly, they too may be missing the forest for the trees. Dar ul-Secularism is a Network and overly concentrating on just Congress would make us miss the various Congress & Lohiaite offshoots and their programs. If monolithic Ghazi or Crusader armies can be reorganized and rebranded into various smaller Jihadi cells & missionary Churches, why can the Congress party not be reorganized according to similar principles of Decentralization, Localization and Radicalization!

6) So the movement towards a Congress Mukt Bharat may in fact be driven not just from the side of forces of Bharatiyata but also by foreign and internal based Dar ul-Secularism establishment.

Disclaimer: This is not about politics or religion. It is about demographic engineering through reworking of India's political landscape.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_22872 » 09 Oct 2013 16:46

RajeshA ji, welcome back, you were dearly missed, thank you for coming back.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 09 Oct 2013 17:28

venug ji,

thanks very much for your kind words! Given too much to BRF and taken too much from BRF to completely leave it! :)

Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Atri » 09 Oct 2013 17:35

welcome back, rajesh miya.. :)

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 09 Oct 2013 18:01

Thanks Atri garu

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9657
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby abhishek_sharma » 09 Oct 2013 20:16

Good to have you back, shriman.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 01:26

abhishek_sharma ji,

thanks for the warm welcome!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 09:34

Misunderstanding on Nature of Religion

The crux of the Indian national problem is religion or more appropriately ignorance about what religion entails. I did try to provide a definition earlier.

Religion is a framework of observance of rituals and rules which accompany one's faith in
  • a particular cosmogony,
  • a particular nature of reality and consciousness,
  • a particular theory of extra-temporal continuation of life,
  • a particular set of non-human entities and extra-temporal laws which oversee cosmology and the human life-cycle,
  • a particular temporal narrative of how this knowledge was introduced into human society, and
  • a number of miracles performed by human participants in the narrative, which underpin this faith.

Any institution which supports the inculcation and the propagation of such a faith system in society and provides services to support the observance of rituals and regulations can be called a religious institution.


I believe many of us here have read Rajiv Malhotra's brilliant "Being Different". I myself found it revolutionary, not necessarily because of the differences Rajiv Malhotra was able to list but because of the very concept of being upfront with listing differences and standing up for them.

One reason Rajiv Malhotra I think failed to capture the differences was because he treated oranges like apples. In the book Rajiv Malhotra basically lists the differences between different varieties of apples because even as he uses the general term "traditions" he still treats these traditions as "religions".

As such many fundamental differences escaped him!

Why are such issues important? Because Secularism treats all "traditions" similarly, even as they are not! It affects political philosophy!

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Agnimitra » 10 Oct 2013 11:04

^^ RajeshA ji welcome back!

Question: In the 10-generation span of Sikh Gurus, where would you say it became a "religion"? According to your definition, were all 10 Gurus part of a "religion"? Or did it begin as one thing and then gradually crystallize into a "religious" form somewhere along that generational spectrum?

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby kmkraoind » 10 Oct 2013 12:23

I think Sri RajeshA should start a blog and post his views, so that it can be circulated in SM for wider reach.

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3736
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby panduranghari » 10 Oct 2013 12:38

kmkraoind wrote:I think Sri RajeshA should start a blog and post his views, so that it can be circulated in SM for wider reach.


+1. He is that Acharya Chanakya of BRF. Insightful posts which are well written and extremely enjoyable to read.

Image

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 14:49

friends,

thanks for the warm welcome! Would try to be deserving of your affection and respect!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 15:03

Agnimitra wrote:^^ RajeshA ji welcome back!

Question: In the 10-generation span of Sikh Gurus, where would you say it became a "religion"? According to your definition, were all 10 Gurus part of a "religion"? Or did it begin as one thing and then gradually crystallize into a "religious" form somewhere along that generational spectrum?


Agnimitra ji,

Sikhism is an interesting phenomenon especially when placed in relation to Islam and Sanatan Dharma. I'll look into this somewhat later but in an analogy, I'll say

1) Sikhism is the chromatical opposite of Islam within a similar outline.

2) Sikhism is the reflection of Sanatan Dharma into a pond made murky by the incursion of Islam in Northwest India and inability of Dharmic forces to respond appropriately.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 15:21

Being Different - Fundamentally Different

Continuing on understanding of Religion

One can look for differences either by assuming that Abrahamic traditions are "Religions" whereas Dharmic traditions are not, or just the opposite. I'll take the former approach considering that the term "religion" has its etymology in West.

Axiom: So Abrahamic Traditions are Religions, while we Dharmics don't have "Religion".

For this we would need to define "Religion" as something they have and we don't and let's try not to keep is about superficial differences.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 16:29

Being Different - Fundamentally Different

1) Abrahamics follow a Push Model while Dharmics follow a Pull Model.

Abrahamics proselytize while Dharmics educate when requested to!

In general we can claim this, however we see that when we go into specific traditions we may need to go a level deeper and start qualifying the nature of push and pull.

Jews for example have neither a Push nor a Pull Model. That is because they consider themselves as the "Chosen People" and the thinking goes that if God has already chosen, then how can there be "Me too" principle, so the Pull Model would not work and if God has made his choice clear, who are the Jews to question Him and go look for people beyond the 'Chosen' and opt for a Push Model?!

Mythological Syncretism, Varnashram Expansion, Sanskritization and Buddhism all represent in ways a certain Push Model, but so does Law, Ethics, Morals, Authority, Light, Day & Night. All these are force-fed to the people, some as forces of nature and some as forces of nurture for a more ordered society.

"kRNvantO vishwam Aryam" can be construed as Push Model.

In light of this how can we claim that Abrahamic religions are Push Models while Dharmic Traditions are Pull Models? It ultimately leads us to the qualification - Pull and Push of what!

I contend that Abrahamic religions are Push Models of Authority whereas Dharmic Traditions are Pull Models of Authority but Push Models for Dharma, i.e. for Meta-Ethics.

Now this is a very apparent difference, however Rajiv Malhotra has not mentioned it. Nothing wrong with it. Just mentioning it to show that the list goes further.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 21:40

Being Different - Fundamentally Different

2) Abrahamic religions impose Competitive Identities while Dharmic traditions create Supplementary Identities

We have lived through Partition so Indians are more than aware how people with whom one shared close bonds of Jāti, language, neighborhood and partly culture turned into enemies simply because they had adopted Islam, another religion. We have seen how Muslim League under MA Jinnah spoke in favor of a Two-Nation Theory and gave reasons for calling the Muslims of the Indian Subcontinent as a different qaum, a different nation as the Hindus.

With Abrahamic religions one receives a completely different historiography in tow which is separate from otherwise the past of the people in the region. One starts to identify with a separate region, with a different authority for dogma and with a different political agenda as espoused by this authority which can be a church, a hierarchy, an establishment, a network, a tribe, a nation or an ideology.

A separate identity thus created is in competition with the requirements of the nation, the ethnic group, the Jāti, the neighborhood, as it follows political directions by the authorities who speak for the transnational community.

Since Dharmic traditions give no political directions which span multiple nations, an identity built around such traditions is always in addition to one's other identities of nation, ethnic group, tribe, etc. and all political input received is based solely on the political interests as defined by that group. Of course, adherence to some Dharmic tradition could influence the conscience but that is a process within the individual itself.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_22872 » 10 Oct 2013 21:43

I feel Dharmic faiths are herbivores while Abrahamic faiths are carnivores.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby johneeG » 10 Oct 2013 22:12

RajeshA saar,
nice to see you back. :D

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 22:24

Being Different - Fundamentally Different

venug wrote:I feel Dharmic faiths are herbivores while Abrahamic faiths are carnivores.


venug ji,

you're right.

3) Abrahamic religions harvest souls while Dharmic traditions harvest knowledge and training for the Ātman, also known as philosophy and spirituality.

Abrahamic religions therefore offer a system of ossified theology which forms the rules of the prison for the soul. One can consider it as a cage or a mousetrap with Salvation (along with material benefits) being the cheese which is dangled. Dharmic traditions offer a system of expandable philosophy and spirituality!

The focus in Abrahamic religions is to bring in the soul into the Church or the brotherhood and to keep it there as a battery to power still more expansion.

As such there is a vast effort in proselytization, strengthening of the faith and community building and work among Abrahamic religions.

Here one would see that Sikhism too has given similar attention to community building and work - Seva as they saw being done among Muslims to strengthen the community's bonds.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 10 Oct 2013 22:29

johneeG ji,

thanks for your warm welcome!

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20937
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Prem » 11 Oct 2013 01:15

Howdy Saar Rajesh ,
The ME religions fixed the God but gave teh social mobility while In India , Dharma assigned all the flexibility to Divine but some how the social mobility got restricted . Sikh Dharma is/ was attempt to blend both and to keep the continuity to nourish the roots.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Agnimitra » 11 Oct 2013 01:25

Jhujar wrote: The ME religions fixed the God but gave teh social mobility while In India , Dharma assigned all the flexibility to Divine but some how the social mobility got restricted . Sikh Dharma is/ was attempt to blend both and to keep the continuity to nourish the roots.

Reproducing this post from Hindu-Sikh relations thread in GDF: viewtopic.php?p=1475945#p1475945

SBajwa wrote:The way I see is like the first nine gurus were part of Bhakti movment! The Tenth Guru (Guru Gobind singh ji) in his last ditched effort created Khalsa

SBajwa ji I consider GGS ji also to be part of the same movement, he expressed devotion in a different mode, wrote in praise of Chandi.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't find the systematic civilizational building (almost de novo from fundamental principles - but continuing the essence) in other parts of that Bhakti Movement as it was in the 10-generation span of the Sikh episode.

Guru Nanak Dev (1469-1539)
Set contours of Fundamentalism, Reformism and Traditionalism - [Triangulating Hindutva: The Fundamentalist, Reformist & Traditionalist]
1. Fundamentalism - Preached the equality of all humans. All people - Indians and non-Indians are equal children of one God. Spoke of Spirituality from the fundamentals upward.
2. Pan-Traditionalism - Traveled extensively throughout what was then the civilized world - India and foreign lands. Had a cross-civilizational perspective. (Setting Sikhi's own Traditionalism in stone would come later below.)
3. Reformism/Revisionism - Spoke against tyranny, social injustice, religious hypocrisy, empty rituals and superstitions.

Guru Angad Dev (1504-1552)
Compilation and Educational iteration -
1. Created Gurmukhi alphabet and started a school at Khadur Sahib to teach children through Gurmukhi alphabet.

Guru Amar Das (1479-1574)
Community-building (society) -
1. Institutionalized the free communal kitchen (langar).
2. Preached the equality of people and also tried to foster the idea of women's equality (quite revolutionary in those times).
3. Tried to liberate women from the practices of purdah (wearing a veil) and preached strongly against the practice of sati.

Guru Ram Das (1534-1581)
Nation-building (politics) -
1. Founded the city of Amritsar in 1574.
2. Standardized Sikh marriage ceremony (Anand Karaj) - very interesting 4 verses sung to place marriage (union of male and female) in context of spiritual and material life.
3. Aggressive preaching - Spread Sikhism in North India.
4. Partial varna-vyavastha - Organized the structure of Sikh society.
5. Yuga-dharma - stressed the importance of Kirtan as a main public form of yajna.

Guru Arjan Dev (1563-1606)
Dharma-sthapana and combined dharma-aarthic mobilization -
1. Compiled the Guru Granth Sahib in 1604.
2. Built the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) (functions as a dharmic cynosure and also an aarthic vehicle - a dharmic and aarthic investment)
3. Started the practice of daswandh (tithe) - contributing one tenth of one's earnings for community purposes.
4. First Sikh Guru to be martyred. Indispensable examplar of being Anchored in faith - Guru Arjan Dev was imprisoned and martyred in 1606 by Emperor Jahangir for not amending the Adi Granth, the Sikh holy book to reflect his views. Guru Arjan Dev was made to sit on a scorching iron plate and had boiling sand poured over his body. Guru Arjan Dev tolerated this pain and sat there chanting hymns.

Guru Hargobind (1595-1644)
Kshatrization and combined brahma-kshatra mobilization (MIC) -
1. Transformed the Sikhs by introducing martial arts and weapons for the defense of the masses.
2. Guru Hargobind put on two swords - one signifying miri (secular power) and other piri (spiritual power).
3. Built the Akal Takht in 1608 at Amritsar in Punjab.
4. Political activism - He was imprisoned in the fort of Gwaliar for one year. When he was released he insisted that his 52 fellow prisoners, who were Rajput kings, should also be set free. To mark this occasion the Sikhs celebrate Diwali (bandi chod divas).
5. Actively hitting back against oppression - Fought four battles with the Mughal rulers which were forcing people to become Muslims.

Guru Har Rai (1630-1661)
Setting Traditionalism in stone, as necessary weight for stability and momentum -
Need clarifications on some of these actions - SBajwa ji, please oblige
1. Continued the military traditions started by his grandfather, Guru Hargobind. - OK
2. The Guru made his son, Guru Harkrishan, the next Guru at the age of only five years. - Why?
3. Defended the integrity of the Guru Granth Sahib by refusing to modify it's words. - OK, traditionalist meme.
4. Made Sikhism strong and popular. - OK

Guru Harkrishan (1656-1664)
(In continuation of the above, I want to understand the circumstances around these 2 generations) -
1. Guru Harkrishan cured the sick during a smallpox epidemic in Delhi.
2. Guru Harkrishan died of smallpox at the age of eight.
3. Before Guru Harkrishan died, he nominated his granduncle, Guru Tegh Bahadur, as the next Guru of the Sikhs.

Possibly, the above iteration demonstrated that the community was self-supplementing and the followers were as instrumental to it as the Guru.

Guru Tegh Bahadur (1621-1675)
Fighting and Protection -
1. Build the city of Anandpur Sahib.
2. Sacrificed his life upholding the "right to freedom of religion". Guru Tegh Bahadur was responsible for saving Kashmiri Hindu pandits who being persecuted by the Mughals, but had to lay down his own life to protect their freedom of religion.
3. Guru Tegh Bahadur was martyred by Emperor Aurangzeb because he would not become a Muslim. Gurdwara Sis Ganj in Chandani Chowk, New Delhi is located where he was martyred.

Guru Gobind Singh (1666-1708)
Moral code and discipline for a mission-oriented group -
1. In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa - dedicated to living by the high standards of the Sikh Gurus at all times.
2. Ended Guruvadi parampara and made Granth Sahib as Guru - effectively trying to transition Sikhi from a Managed to Unmanaged solution. [Priest-craft: Managed solutions vs. Unmanaged customizations]

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15996
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 11 Oct 2013 01:44

Being Different - Fundamentally Different

4) Abrahamic Religions have internal behavioral & social codex while Dharmic traditions abide by an external Dharma, Indian Meta-Ethics

Abrahamic Religions as revelation traditions make the truth claims that God has given a prescription on how to live, the dos and the donts. This makes the behavioral and social codex of Abrahamic religions internal to them as the deduced ethics are subservient to both the Word of God as well as to the whims of the messenger. Also it is not possible to either question the codex nor evaluate it based on any meta principles.

In Dharmic traditions, even though these reinforce the transcendental support for the concept of Dharma, it is made more than clear that even the forms of Supreme are bound by Dharma and the Karmic Cycle. All Sampradayas, Paramparas, Smritis underlie the supremacy of Dharma, regardless of how they may represent the Supreme or the Cosmogony, or man's place in the world. All the Dharmic panths: Aastiks, Bauddhs, Jains, Sikhs, all have differences in their mythology and creation but they all abide by Dharma.

Abrahamic religions neither claim to abide by Dharma, nor have they historically grown out of Dharma, nor have they been certified as being compatible with Dharma.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests