Edmund Burke defined modern Right-Wing or Conservatives as people who believed in the practical wisdom of institutions, they believed that such wisdom can not be distilled theoretically in equations or binaries. Bharat is the last remaning ancient cradle ever since Mao broke China. We are on our own and we have nowhere to go. Lockdown is a good time to revisit tough concepts.
The sources of dharma in Sanātana system include the Vedas, perception, and the conduct of wise men. Pradeep Chhibber of Political Science dept, UC Berkley, wrote that in conservative Indic traditions the state was not meant to bring social change. Raj Dharm sometimes required the king to look after the poor and the infirm, and build the infrastructure necessary for economic activity and political order. The role was limited to ‘kingly’ duties. It was widely believed that social change must come by the transformation of individuals, not an agency of the state. This view was defended by both Aurobindo and Gandhi.
It contrasts sharply with the writings of others such as Ambedkar and Nehru who advocate using state power to remake society and the economy. Too much history is a curse which often leads great nations to revisionism or revanchism led delusions. We must retrace steps to plan better for the future but we must do it ever so wisely. If we know our scriptures well, we can turn this curse into a boon.
We often forget that constitutions themselves are a product of the culture, they can not dictate new cultures (like VIP culture). The Mahatma's model deified poverty and failed in its objectives because men can not help gods, they can only help themselves. It was a cruel joke. The Mahatma wanted the poor to feel noble about poverty. How Nehru's planned economy experiment turned out is for all to see. Babasaheb was more practical than the two, he believed that the benefits of free market, globalization and liberalisation must reach every last mile and must not be confined to a select few.
The ancients are long gone, we don't have an Aurobindo or a Gandhi and Raj Dharm is simply unattainable because we live in a very complex world that does not believe in Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam as much as we do. A good question to ask at this point is why did the nation of nations agree to come together? The answer lies in events surrounding the Karachi Congress Session (1931). The quasi-legal congress resolution reiterated commitment to Purna Swaraj while introducing fundamental rights and socialistic principles, the resolution was under considerable Gandhian influence as well.
The Bharatiya conservative vision is to advance ideas that promote philosophical wisdom of Bharat, which seeks to secure human dignity, rule of law and true economic freedom. It is much more than a political party named Bharatiya Janta Party. It is a vision to establish what a conservative Whig once called "government of the people, by the people, for the people."
Conservatives believe that the government is not a vehicle of social transformation, that the transformation must come from within the society. They believe that the government's role is limited to that of an enabler, a facilitator and a judge. For instance, the GOP believes that the government does not give us liberty, that liberty is a natural right. When government expands beyond its defined role (defined by little books called constitutions or traditions), people place their liberty into the government's hands.
In his essay 'On liberty', Burke defined modern conservatism because he was opposing the French revolution. He was opposing movements like those of Telangana's guerrillas (1948) and Calcutta's naxalites (1969). Howard Erdman wrote in 1978 that Bharatiya conservatism was a weak political force ‘despite the country’s well-rooted traditions’. We have come a long way, haven't we? Like we know in Bharat, there is ALWAYS more to go. Bharat is a vision fit for a renaissance.
PS: To begin with, can we stop calling ourselves Right-Wing or Conservatives? Can we have a Sanskrit word? These Western concepts need redefinition in Bharat's context.
No comments:
Post a Comment