Mahatma Gandhi on "Foreign Imports"

An interesting extract which suggests Gandhiji's views on Foreign Imports :

"Q . What is your opinion about the importation of foreign goods other than cloth into India ? Are there any foreign commodities which you would like to see immediately under prohibition ? What do you think should be the nature of India's foreign trade in the future ?

A. I am more or less indifferent with regard to trade in foreign goods other than cloth. I have never been an advocate of prohibition of all things foreign because they are foreign . My economic creed is a complete taboo in respect of all foreign commodities , whose importation is likely to prove harmful to our indigenous interests .This means that we may not in any circumstance import a commodity that can be adequately supplied from our own country . For instance I would regard it a sin to import Australian wheat on the score of it's better quality but I would not have the slightest hesitation in importing oatmeal from Scotland , if an absolute neccesity for it is made out , because we do not grow oats in India . In other words I would not countenance the boycott of a single foreign article out of ill will or a feeling of hatred. Or to take up a reverse case , India produces sufficient quantity of leather , it is my duty therefore to wear shoes made out of Indian leather only , even if it is comparatively dearer and of an inferior quality in preference to cheaper and superior quality of foreign leather shoes . Similarly I would condemn the introduction of foreign molasses or sugar if enough of it is produced in India for our needs . It will be thus clear from the above that it is hardly possible for me to give an exhaustive catalogue of foreign articles whose importation in India ought to be prohibited . I have simply indicated the general principle by which we can be guided in all such cases. And this principle will hold good in future too as long as the conditions of production in our country remain as they are to-day"

Young India , 15th November ,1928 ; p.381 : Under the title " The Students Interrogatories"

Oatmeal from Scotland !!!.....there is no differentiation even between primary and secondary goods......Have we got Gandhi wrong by reading "Hind Swaraj" too literally without considering what he actually and practically meant ? More on that later.

Bipin Chandra Pal on Swadeshi

Swadeshi was formulated in the heat of the Movement for Independence . There were various strains of interpretation of what was meant by Swadeshi outside the promotion of Indian goods and prohibition of foreign goods.

In his book " Swadeshi and Swaraj" Bipin Chandra Pal , one of the founding ideologues of the Swadeshi Movement and a member of the famous "Lal ( Lala Lajpat Rai ) , Bal ( Bal Gangadhar Tilak ) Pal ( Bipin Chandra Pal) , had this to say :

"Policy of Patriotic Politics in India

And in the view of this conflict of interests between the Government and the people of India ,the policy of Indian patriotic politics ought to be the old Liberal policy of laissez faire , that is , restrict the Government to their primary policies only.

Let the Government take care of the person and property of the people . Let them do nothing more ; and let everything else be done by the people , by their own exertion , independently of the Government ; because beneficient work that a despotic Government does increases the hold of despotism upon the affections and allegiance , if not the affections and allegiance , upon the acquiescence , of the people . In that lies the strength of despotic rule . And if a despotic government has had acquiescence of the general population of the country , liberalism , freedom . progressive politics is impossible of attainment in the country . Therefore , our policy is a policy of laissez faire ; and by insisting upon this policy by restricting the Government to it's narrowest possible limits , to discharge of those duties which it is bound to discharge , because it imposes taxes on us , by restricting the activities of the Government to the primary functions of grating protection to the people of this country , we hope to develop the spirit of self sacrifice , the spirit of self reliance , and the spirit of self determination in the people , and by this means we hope to attain the ideal of Swaraj."

Lala Lajpat Rai has a different take .....but for now that is a different story.....

State of West Bengal v. Committee for the Protection of Democratic Rights : A short case review .

The present judgement has been delivered by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain ,on behalf of the bench comprising of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran, Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.Sathasivam and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal.

The Back Ground of the Case

The case arose out of the famous Garbeta incident , when goons of the Communist Party of India ( Marxist) murdered some non Communist political workers while they were conducting a meeting . One person managed to escape and the police after great amount of delay lodged a complaint . On huge amount of public pressure the Director General of Police of the state , directed the matter to be taken up the CID . However , a writ was preferred in the High Court by the Respondents praying that the Hon’ble High Court direct investigation of the crime by the CBI since the people did not have confidence in the investigation as most of the accused were supporters of the ruling party . The Hon’ble High Court in it’s judgment went on to direct that CBI should take over investigation of the said crime , which was appealed by the State of West Bengal by the present SLP .

When the matter appeared before the Supreme Court , two sets of decisions were placed before the Court namely Management of Advance Insurance v. Gurudasmal , as contrasted with Kazi Lhundup Dorji v. CBI . The bigger and broader question was offcourse as to whether any High Court can direct investigation of any purported crime by the CBI , which was established by the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 , and it was apparent that there were conflicting decisions regarding the same.

The Court therefore referred the matter to the Hon’ble Chief Justice , who in turn constituted the present constitutional bench to go into the matter and the constitutional questions arising therefrom .

The Contentions raised by the Parties :

The contention of the State of West Bengal was that :

“ Shri K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the State of West Bengal, referring to Entry 80 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India; Entry 2 of List II of the said Schedule as also Sections 5 and 6 of the Special Police Act strenuously argued that from the said Constitutional and Statutory provisions it is evident that there is a complete restriction on Parliament's legislative power in enacting any law permitting the police of one State to investigate an offence committed in another State, without the consent of that State. It was urged that the Special Police Act enacted in exercise of the powers conferred under the Government of India Act, 1935, Entry 39 of List I (Federal Legislative List) of the Seventh Schedule, the field now occupied by Entry 80 of List I of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, replicates the prohibition of police of one State investigating an offence in another State without the consent of that State. It was submitted that Entry 2 of List II which confers exclusive jurisdiction on the State Legislature in regard to the police, the exclusive jurisdiction of a State Legislature cannot be encroached upon without the consent of the concerned State being obtained.”

The Union of India however contended that :

“ Shri Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Solicitor General of India, appearing on behalf of the Union of India, submitted that the entire approach of the State being based on an assumption that the alleged restriction on Parliament's legislative power under Entry 80 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and restriction on the power of the Central Government under Section 6 of the Special Police Act to issue a notification binds the constitutional courts i.e. the Supreme Court and the High Courts is fallacious, inasmuch as the restrictions on the Central Government and Parliament cannot be inferentially extended to be restrictions on the Constitutional Courts in exercise of their powers under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution as it is the obligation of the Superior Courts to protect the citizens and enforce their fundamental rights. Learned counsel vehemently argued that the stand of the appellants that the exercise of power by the Supreme Court or the High Courts to refer investigation to CBI directly without prior approval of the concerned State Government would violate the federal structure of the Constitution is again misconceived as it overlooks the basic fact that in a federal structure it is the duty of the courts to uphold the Constitutional values and to enforce the Constitutional limitations as an ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.”

The Conclusions of the Court :

The Court was pleased to state point wise as to clearly what it had said :

“ i)The fundamental rights, enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, are inherent and cannot be extinguished by any Constitutional or Statutory provision. Any law that abrogates or abridges such rights would be violative of the basic structure doctrine. The actual effect and impact of the law on the rights guaranteed under Part III has to be taken into account in determining whether or not it destroys the basic structure.

(ii)Article 21 of the Constitution in its broad perspective seeks to protect the persons of their lives and personal liberties except according to the procedure established by law. The said Article in its broad application not only takes within its fold enforcement of the rights of an accused but also the rights of the victim. The State has a duty to enforce the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and impartial investigation against any person accused of commission of a cognizable offence, which may include its own officers.In certain situations even a witness to the crime may seek for and shall be granted protection by the State.

(iii)In view of the constitutional scheme and the jurisdiction conferred on this Court under Article 32 and on the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution the power of judicial review being an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution, no Act of Parliament can exclude or curtail the powers of the Constitutional Courts with regard to the enforcement of fundamental rights. As a matter of fact, such a power is essential to give practicable content to the objectives of the Constitution embodied in Part III and other parts of the Constitution. Moreover, in a federal constitution, the distribution of legislative powers between the Parliament and the State Legislature involves limitation on legislative powers and, therefore, this requires an authority other than the Parliament to ascertain whether such limitations are transgressed. Judicial review acts as the final arbiter not only to give effect to the distribution of legislative powers between the Parliament and the State Legislatures, it is also necessary to show any transgression by each entity. Therefore, to borrow the words of Lord Steyn, judicial review is justified by combination of "the principles of separation of powers, rule of law, the principle of constitutionality and the reach of judicial review".

(iv) If the federal structure is violated by any legislative action, the Constitution takes care to protect the federal structure by ensuring that Courts act as guardians and interpreters of the Constitution and provide remedy under Articles 32 and 226, whenever there is an attempted violation. In the circumstances, any direction by the Supreme Court or the High Court in exercise of power under Article 32 or 226 to uphold the Constitution and maintain the rule of law cannot be termed as violating the federal structure.

(v) Restriction on the Parliament by the Constitution and restriction on the Executive by the Parliament under an enactment, do not amount to restriction on the power of the Judiciary under Article 32 and 226 of the Constitution.

(vi) If in terms of Entry 2 of List II of The Seventh Schedule on the one hand and Entry 2A and Entry 80 of List I on the other, an investigation by another agency is permissible subject to grant of consent by the State concerned, there is no reason as to why, in an exceptional situation, court would be precluded from exercising the same power which the Union could exercise in terms of the provisions of the Statute. In our opinion, exercise of such power by the constitutional courts would not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. In fact, if in such a situation the court fails to grant relief, it would be failing in its constitutional duty.

(vii)When the Special Police Act itself provides that subject to the consent by the State, the CBI can take up investigation in relation to the crime which was otherwise within the jurisdiction of the State Police, the court can also exercise its constitutional power of judicial review and direct the CBI to take up the investigation within the jurisdiction of the State. The power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away, curtailed or diluted by Section 6 of the Special Police Act. Irrespective of there being any statutory provision acting as a restriction on the powers of the Courts, the restriction imposed by Section 6 of the Special Police Act on the powers of the Union, cannot be read as restriction on the powers of the Constitutional Courts. Therefore, exercise of power of judicial review by the High Court, in our opinion, would not amount to infringement of either the doctrine of separation of power or the federal structure.”

Interestingly the court put a caveat in the end :

“In Secretary, Minor Irrigation & Rural Engineering Services, U.P. & Ors. Vs. Sahngoo Ram Arya & Anr. (2002) 5 SCC 521, this Court had said that an order directing an enquiry by the CBI should be passed only when the High Court, after considering the material on record, comes to a conclusion that such material does disclose a prima facie case calling for an investigation by the CBI or any other similar agency.We respectfully concur with these observations.”

A few Observations :

The case in many ways is a momentous one , in any manner it lays down the principle that there can be no fetters on the judiciary to do complete justice and the Supreme Court declares itself as a bulwark against the excesses committed by the state or those enjoying power.

In many ways the Supreme Court reiterates a principle which is enshrined in our fundamental rights and is natural human right , i.e. the right to life and the right to remedy for breach of fundamental rights . In the course of upholding fundamental rights , the Court has held that mere technicalities of law should not be a barrier to get justice.

The Court in someways it seems was of the opinion that to do justice it is important that justice is seen to be done and in many cases the impression that the state agencies are biased towards the Government is a regular and apparent fact , and therefore those at the receiving end of the excesses of the state are very skeptical as to the justice that they may receive at the hands of the state agencies . It is rightly so.

However there seems to be a niggling worry . It is well known that the CBI is a hand maiden of another Government , that of the Centre, and allowing the CBI to investigate crimes in which the state government or those associated with it are accused , leads to two types of results , clearance of those close to the ruling party at the centre and the harassment of those against it . No doubt that the Supreme Court is aware of the same , however it is indeed strange that there seems to be no observation or guidelines about it , which needed to have been laid down and laying down of which would have done immense service to federal structure of the country .

Epilogue :

It is interesting indeed that the matter about the atrocity at Garbeta comes out now , just when the Communist Government in West Bengal is on the verge of being deposed by the people whom it had held in thrall through the use of violence and terror . It is important that those involved in the incidents at Garbeta and the other incidents like Nandigram be brought to justice so that the gory and violent history of the Communist regime in West Bengal can come to an end and those responsible for inflicting mass violence on innocent people only on the ground that they held a different ideology , be brought to justice and be made answerable for their crimes . I am sure a fair investigation , would lead to the very top , sadly , going by the history of the CBI , I doubt that the investigation would either be fair or transparent and it is rightly feared that the actual directors of the incidents like Garbeta and Nandigram may actually get away......... and there lies the danger of it all.

Rabindranath Tagore and Swadeshi Economics

We heard a lot about Rabindra Nath Tagore being the foremost of Indian "liberals"at the now famous Bangalore colloquium on Indian Liberalism . I also presented a paper on the ideas of Gurudev Rabindra Nath Tagore about 'Swadeshi' at the National Council Meeting of the Swadeshi Jagran Manch . I therefore thought I would put up a short posting about the ideas of Gurudev Rabindra Nath Tagore about Swadeshi or his attempt to formulate and answer the same question , that is , what would be an Economic system with Indian characteristics ?

Gurudev Rabindra Nath Tagore’s idea of Swadeshi

The Mahatma and Gurudev ( incidentally they gave the titles to each other ) came from different worlds , one was the foremost intellectual of the world and India , and the other the foremost revolutionary , and that coloured their perspective of the world , India and the Swadeshi movement , which both of them contributed immensely . While Gandhiji gave leadership and voice to the movement . Gurudev brought his entire intellectual acumen to formulate the vision of the Swadeshi and Swaraj Movement . It was therefore only right that independent India’s national anthem should come from the pen of Gurudev Rabindra Nath Tagore.

His thoughts on Swadeshi and Swaraj :

Gurudev believed and wrote in his famous essay “ Swadeshi Samaj” that it was important that the country be made truly ours and he believed that it was important that it should be won over not from foreigners but from our own inertia and indifference .

Gurudev wrote that India’s conception of nationalism should be fundamentally different from that of the West and India should not blindly replicate the thoughts of western societies , since the entirety of the idea of nationalism in western terms was not a comfortable fit for Indian society . He always stressed that the path of development for India must be chosen by India alone . Interestingly he took the example of Japan which followed the Western example and therefore lost the inheritance of her own unique culture . Gurudev was of the view that the freedom that the people in India talked about in the west was a false freedom and the freedom in the west was a manufactured one since it did not actually allow freedom of the mind .

He wrote that the root of the improvement of India was the liberation of the villages from the “shackles of helplessness and ignorance “ and he believed that even if one single village be so liberated such would be an example to the rest of India , which would inspire the rest of the country . According to Gurudev , one of the methods to spread awareness and free the helplessness which so pervaded the existence of the villages , which was so famously quoted and replicated through out the country , even tot his day in his essay the “Swadeshi Samaj” was to hold “ Swadeshi melas” , melas or fairs where most of the people of the villages congregate without any doubt and suspicion , since that would keep politics out of the process of emancipation of the villages and the poor villagers would be able to express to their leaders their real needs and wants . As he famously wrote in Swadeshi Samaj :

“ If the leaders of the country abjure empty politics , and make it their business to give new life and objectives to these melas , putting their own heart into the work and bringing together the hearts of Hindus and Muslim , and then confer about the real wants of the people – schools , roads , water reservoirs , grazing commons , and the like – then the country will soon awaken”

He wanted the melas to be also the source of education for the villagers through the process of jatras , kirtans , recitations , bioscope , lantern shows etc., that is make political , social education available to the villagers in a manner which would be accessible to them .”

Gurudev however believed that there should not be wholesale rejection of the west , as the west had much to contribute, but Indians should try to synthesise the good points of the west with the better points of Indian society , without either blindly accepting or rejecting the west and he stressed that to reach true emancipation Indians as a society will have to look into itself for emancipation :

“ When we have made India our own by applying all our powers for the good of the country , the British in India will have to come to terms with us . So long as we are prompted by individual or social folly to act inhumanly towards our own countrymen , so long as our landlords regard their tenants as their personal property , so long as the strong continue to trample on the weak as part of their ancient privilege ,and the higher castes look upon the casteless as worse than beasts – we shall fail to draw out the better qualities in the British and shall ourselves remain ignored and humiliated.

At every turn – in her laws and customs , in her religious and social institutions – India today deceives and insults herself . That is why the meeting of East and West on our soil fails to attain fulfillment. The contact yields nothing but pain . Even if we succeed in pushing out the British by one means or the another , this pain will be there ; it cannot go until an inner harmony between the two is achieved . Then alone will East and West unite in India ; country with country , race with race , knowledge with knowledge , endeavor with endeavor. Then alone will the present chapter of India’s history come to it’s end and a new one start – one of the noblest in the story of Man”

To this Gurudev therefore suggested the means of education , presciently he notes “ Those nation of the world who are now in fighting trim , rely on their strength on the education of the masses of their people . The present age is the age of the trained mind , not of blustering muscle. And everywhere in the East , to say nothing in Japan , educational institutions have been made available for the people at large. So long as our masses remain bound to blind tradition it is hopeless for us to expect to make any move forward”.

Gurudev laid down the objectives of the leadership as “ Our scriptures tell us that the worship of Ganesha ,the Lord of the Masses , must come before all other worship . In the service of our country our first duty must be to work for the welfare of the mass of it’s people—tomake them healthy in body and mind , happy in spirit , to foster their self respect , to bring beauty to their daily work , their daily life ; to show them the way to strive together , in mutual respect for mutual welfare” . In other words to cultivate a sense of community and purpose for the uplift of the masses of India..

Gurudev also clearly believed that there are no easy ways to arrive at his Swadeshi Samaj , and therefore his famous attack on the spinning of the charkha as a solution to India’s problems in his oft quoted essay “The Cult of the Charkha”. He suggested that instead of merely spinning the Charkha the stress should be to organize the people for the purpose of Swaraj . He also spoke out against the boycott of foreign goods stressing saying that the argument for boycott should not be made merely ritualistically but on sound economic arguments , which seemed to be missing at the height of the Charkha spinning movement.

Gurudev’s view of a non antagonistic vision of nationalism and Swaraj

Gurudev realized that the world was moving towards universal brotherhood as distinct from the purely business based commercialized globalization which he warned against . He warned presciently that no country can remain in isolation as he says “ From now onward , any nation which takes an isolated view of its own country will run counter to the spirit of the New Age , and know no peace. From now onward the anxiety that each country has for it’s own safety must embrace the welfare of the world” and he strongly recommended that Swaraj should be found in mutual forgiveness and not be merely an exclusive idea for India against the entire world , once India becomes free.

The lessons from the Gurudev for the future :

It is therefore crucial and important that while formulating the idea of Swadeshi which the Gurudev and Mahatmaji were so attached to , we also explore the nuances which Gurudev asked us to explore so that Swadeshi does not only remain a mere political movement and slogan and becomes something more , that is the true idea of emancipation of the millions of the poor and starving in India , specially those from her villages , who are the very basis of India’s economic structure till the present day.

Hindu Economics by Professor M.G. Bokare

There is a very interesting book that I came across a few days back by Professor M.G. Bokare , one of the founders of the Swadeshi Jagran Manch . It explores a very nuanced idea of markets and free markets under Indian / Bharatiya circumstances . Professor Bokare has a lot of very interesting ideas including making out the point that the Western Capitalist system is not as "free" as we think it is . The reason why I bring this in the public domain is in part inspired by the discussions which I had in a fantastic colloquium on The Indian Liberal Tradition in Bangalore or Bengaluru and the National Council Meeting of the Swadeshi Jagran Manch at Raipur which I had the privilege to attend. All of us may not agree with everything in the book , but it is worth reading for the new interpretation which it gives to the old problem of how to have a market system with Indian characteristics . I suggest that everyone reads the book " Hindu Economics" to draw their own conclusions. I only sort of enclose a short summary :

Hindu Economics by Professor M.G. Bokare

The first edition of the now famous work of Professor M.G. Bokare “ Hindu Economics” was published on 19^th February , 1993 now nearly 16 years from the present date . It in many ways is the seminal book based on which an argument for an alternate to the present economic scenario is made, and , rightly so . However , it does seem apparent that the dissent from the present economic scenario remains as it was then “on paper” . We as a movement of nationalists are far away from actually devising policy and or methodology to actuate the visions of a “third way”.

The context of “Hindu Economics”

Hindu Economics is clearly a post communist book . It has to read as such . The context of the book is clearly written from the point of view of a disillusioned or if not disgruntled communist . It is written from the experience of having seen communism collapsing right in front of ones eyes and living through that being a communist . Yet interestingly it is not written to either euologise the conceptions of communism under the name and guise of “Hindu Economics” as it was natural to expect , nor was it written as a disclaimer to “socialist ideology” as could have been very well the other option . It was written almost presciently about the short comings of western economic thinking and the need to find solutions to problems on Indian lines .

A short paragraph about Professor Bokare

Professor Madhukar Govind Bokare was born to a poor family in Wardha , near Nagpur in Maharashtra , in the year 1926. He was educated at the Craddock English High School at Wardha , and subsequently studied at the G.S. College of Commerce . He was deeply influenced by both Gandhian ideas and Communist ideology , as was quite common in those days . He was closely associated with the communist movement and was actively involved in the organisation of farmers specially cotton farmers in the cotton growing areas of Vidharbha in Maharashtra . After a long association with the communist ideology and being unable to rationalize the contradictions within the Communist movement , Professor Bokare , became it’s trenchant critic .However his experience of working with the farmers of Vidarbha had also taught him that laissez faire economics does not work . Subsequently he came to write a series of books , whereby he took on the very concept and flaws of western economics in the form of a number of path breaking books like :

1. Hindu-economics (Eternal Economic Order) (First edition 1993, Second edition 2009)
2. Islamic Economics (1995)
3. The Economic Theory of Sarvodaya (1985) (English)
4. Sarvodayacha Arthik Siddhant (Translated in Marathi by Prof. N B Vaidya of Nagpur) 2005
5. Reassessment of Marxism (first edition 2006, second revised edition 2006)
6. Let the Fittest Survive (2007)
7. Gandhivadi Arthashastra (in Marathi- 2008)
8. Expenditure-Based-Income Tax
9. Stagflation-Its cure
10. Swadeshi Economics- Principle and Practice
11. Farmers’ Problems and Solution – in Marathi. (Edited by Prof. N B Vaidya)

He also went on to become the Vice Chancellor of Nagpur University and became attached to a number of educational institutions . He was the founding Convenor of the Swadeshi Jagran Manch on 22^nd November , 1991 and was responsible in formulating the basic principles of the Manch as well as attempting to create an ideology of alternative economics which though grounded in the ideology of India / Bharat / Hindu philosophy , yet was not hostage to it . He died in the year 2001 , having laid the seeds of a robust economic ideology based on Hindu thought

Hindu Economics – the book .

The book can be divided into two major parts and to my mind two distinct parts , one theory and the other a clear and as erudite an attempt to practicalise the theory which was formulated in the book .

The first part was by Dattopant Thengadiji , who wrote a foreword called “ Quo Vadis” ( latin for “Where are you going ?”)which attempts to crystallize thoughts of Hindu / Bharatiya economics in precise and specific policies and which I think should be the basis of another writing / article . In many ways , the long foreword was altogether a different book and an independent treatise in itself on the conception of Bharatiya Economic Theory and it’s practical application to India .

The second part of the book was the book now famously known as “Hindu Economics” written by Professor Bokare , on the theory of economics which would be inspired by the eternal ways of India .

The ideas of Hindu Economics

Professor Bokare touched on a number of issues in the course of his famous book . This article will try to summarise a few broad concepts which he tried to formulate in order to create an alternate economic philosophy based on Hindu concepts .

Professor Bokare clearly believes that economics cannot be compartmentalized in clear boxes like in the west and has to be read as part of the society and it’s norms in which it exists , like the ancient Indian thinkers .

It is apparent from a study of the book that Professor Bokare also did not believe in a command economy where the state is the deliverer of economic benefits . He was also of the view that competition was crucial in an economy and formal equality was a dead end.

The three greatest contributions of Professor Bokare however was his trenchant criticism of western economies failure to curb prices , his theory of a taxless society and his theory of interest free banking .

On the first , Professor Bokare was of the view that western economic systems , though it sings paens to competition yet within it’s structures creates hidden and apparent monopolies which were responsible for hiking of prices and these monopolies will have to eliminated so that the prices keep on falling instead of keeping on climbing higher as they do today . He said that this was in accordance with the Hindu conceptions of economic well being so as to ensure that all benefited from the economy and the benefits of the economy does not get concentrated in the hands of the very few . Professor Bokare demarcated a number of clear monopolies in western economies , some of the clear ones he was of the view was Intellectual Property and Joint Stock Companies , which were responsible for monopolies instead of promoting competition , which would benefit the common customer .

The second was his concept that the tax burden had to be severely reduced , since that would be the only way through which further production can be incentivised , which would result in greater employment of the people . He believed that the tax burden should be progressively reduced .He is of the view that the budget is to be financed by printing notes , that is through deficit financing.

The third was his concept that it was incumbent upon the state to provide interest free loans to all people , since this would help in incentivising production and setting up and creating wealth , without imposing a huge burden on those creating wealth . In a very interesting observation Professor Bokare actually observes that this will actually help in the diffusion of technology and encouragement of self employment and give people a real and valid option of being an entrepreneur .

Some of the other ideas that Professor Bokare discussed in his book were :

(a) the theory of self employment : he says that the best way to have an efficient economy would have to be based on a large number of self employed people since as he so rightly points out that incase most people are self employed and therefore not dependent on others , therefore there is very little chance of class conflict within society . He is of the view that the self employed worker / farmer does not exploit any one and is not exploited by anyone. According to him this is the fundamental difference between a Hindu Economy and Western methods of analysis of economies whether capitalist or socialist. What is most notable however is that he presciently observes that this Hindu Economy is self sustaining no doubt , but at all times it is subject to the political system ( Raj Niti) and the punitive legal system ( Danda Niti) not having swerved from the path of Dharma.

(b) A very interesting suggestion of making the workers owners of the company , by allowing them to hold the shares of the company and ensure that the said shares always remain with the workers and are not owned by people who do not have a stake in the company . He was clearly therefore against the stock exchange and the dealing in shares.

(c) A very interesting thought that a Hindu economy will be family based and being family based will be inherently limited to extension of the family and will not have the downsides of the western “capitalist” market system .

(d) He calls for a strict implementation of the laws and regulations and a very thorough rigorous enforcement of laws even with the help of an active secret service , something which he believes is essential to have a functioning Hindu economy .

(e) He also calls for application of appropriate technology in the economy , which he says would be a direct result of a family oriented economy.

His immediate suggestions for short term measures :

He suggests some immediate measures to change the course of the economy :

(1) immediate scrapping the laws which create monopoly that is joint stock companies , intellectual property laws and trade unions .

(2) the norms of Niti Shastra should be made to permeate all society specially the judiciary .

(3) Disregard of rules , laws and regulations should be immediately penalized .

The Impact of Swami Vivekananda on Constitutional Interpretation by the Supreme Court of India .

The impact of Swami Vivekananda on the political process and the ideology of the country has been profound , some of the definitive socio-political cases of the Supreme Court of India quotes Swami Vivekananda quite profusely.

The Court has used Vivekananda to interpret the Right to Equality and reservation for the Scheduled Castes in Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh (Rly.) v. Union of India,[1] by Justice Krishna Iyer.[2] . The Court has also quoted Vivekananda to justify the reservation given to Schedule Castes in State of Karnataka v. Appa Balu Ingale [3] as well as to justify the reservation policy of Other Backward Castes ( OBCs) in the most famous Indra Sawhney v. Union of India[4] ( also known as the Reservation Case ) .

The Court has used it for the purpose of interpreting the define what Education is under the Right to Education in P.A.Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra[5].

The Court has also delved into Swami Vivekananda’s philosophy in great detail and depth to interpret the question of Article 30 , that is the ambit of who is a minority religion and therefore who is entitled to get protection of Article 30 as a religious minority under the Constitution in Brahmachari Siddheshwar Sai v. State of West Bengal [6] The Supreme Courts observations on Swami Vivekananda and his philosophy and vision can itself be the basis for another article , but it should suffice to say that the Court very aptly rejected the application of the Rama Krishna Mission being the Mission founded by Swami Vivekananda himself to claim minority religious status by saying that they were an integral part of the Hindu world view . The Supreme Court infact has relied on Swami Vivekananda to define what is religion in Narayan Dikshitulu v. State of A.P.[7] Interestingly the Court in Shastri Yagnapurudasji v.Muldas Punardas Vaishya [8], concluded that after the teachings of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda , “ Hindu religion flowered into it’s most attractive , progressive and dynamic form”

The Court has used his philosophy to enunciate the need of the Courts to be sensitive to injustice in Balbir Kaur v. Steel Authority of India[9] and on the rights and duties of teachers in Avinash Nagra v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti[10] as indeed the nature and meaning , responsibility of being a citizen of India and the duties of those in government in Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes Officers Welfare Council v. State of U.P.[11]

The Court has relied on Swami Vivekananda to define Socialism in the Constitution and the Welfare State and it’s inspiration in Murlidhar Dayandeo Kesekar v.Vishwanath Pandu Barde[12] and Dharwad Dist. Literate Daily Wages Employees Association v. State of Karnataka.[13]

A quote from Vivekananda was also the first line in the famous judgment of Justice Verma in Ismael Faruqui v. Union of India [14]( also known as the Babri Masjid Judgement) , when the Court refused to entertain the reference of the Union of India as to the Bill relating to the Acquisition of Certain Areas in Ayodhya . Infact the quote about Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi being great Hindus while their teachings and life being example of great tolerance made out famously in S.R.Bommai v. Union of India[15] , so as define the conception of Secularism in India , being not antithetical to religion but of tolerance , is now an oft quoted almost legal principle by the Court .

The Court has even relied on him in the famous Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[16] to establish the right of freedom of movement being an integral part of the right to life , and to interpret freedom of expression in State of U.P. v. Lalai Singh Yadav [17].

The presence of Swami Vivekananda in the interpretation of the Constitution is surprisingly large for a person who died in the year 1902 , nearly 45 years before India achieved it’s independence , and nearly 48 years before the Constitution was brought into effect and India became a Republic.

---

[1] (1981) 1 SCC 246

[2]In paragraph 78 and 79 , Justice Iyer says : “Let us be sure of the social facts. Mark Twain cynically remarked once: “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.” By that token, let us scan the status of the SCs & STs, the result of reservations in habilitating them into State services and the depressment impact on efficiency by supersession of meritorious seniors. It is a fact of our social history and a blot on our cultural heritage that 135 million men and women, described as SCs & STs, have been suffering as “suppressed classes”, denied human dignity and languishing as de facto bonded labour. They still are, in several places, “worse than the serf and the slave” and “their social standard is lower than the social standard of ordinary human beings” (Ambedkar). Tortured, violated and even murdered the saga of the SCs & STs is not only one of economic exploitation but of social ostracisation. Referring to the sorrows of the suppressed shudras (what I prefer to call the panchama proletariat) Swami Vivekananda demanded shudra Raj and refuted the incapabilities of the groaning untouchables:

“Aye, Brahmins, if the Brahmin has more aptitude for learning on the ground of heredity than the Pariah, spend no more money on the Brahmin’s education but spend all on the Pariah. Give to the weak, for there all the gift is needed.... Our poor people, these downtrodden masses of India, therefore, require to hear and to know what they really are. Aye, let every man and woman and child, without respect of caste or birth, weakness and strength, hear and learn that behind the strong and the weak, behind the high and the low, behind everyone, there is that Infinite Soul, assuring that infinite possibility and the infinite capacity of all to become great and good. Let us proclaim to every soul: ‘Arise, awake and stop not till the goal is reached’. Arise, awake!626”

To make democracy functional and the republic real the social and economic personality of these backwardmost sections had to be restored. From this angle, the ancient injustice on the shudras among the shudras has to be liquidated by effective equalising measures. Power, material power, is the key to socio-economic salvation and the State being the nidus of power, the framers of the Constitution have made provision for representation of these weaker sections both in the legislature and the executive.”

[3] 1995 Supp (4) SCC 469 para 19

[4] 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217 para 14 , 17

[5] 2005 (6) SCC 537 ; para 88

[6] 1995 (4) SCC 646

[7] 1996 (9) SCC 548 ; para 28 , 39 : It is essential to note what the Supreme Court said in paragraph 39 : “

Swami Vivekananda in his lecture on “Religion and Science” incorporated in The Complete Works (Vol. VI, 6th Edn.) had stated at p. 81 thus:

“Experience is the only source of knowledge. In the world, religion is the only science where there is no surety, because it is not taught as a science of experience. This should not be. There is always, however, a small group of men who teach religion from experience. They are called mystics, and these mystics in every religion speak the same tongue and teach the same truth. This is the real science of religion. As mathematics in every part of the world does not differ, so the mystics do not differ. They are all similarly constituted and similarly situated. Their experience is the same; and this becomes law.”

In Vol. II, 9th Edn. at p. 432, Swamiji said that:

“There are two worlds: the microcosm and the macrocosm, the internal and the external. We get truth from both these by means of experience. The truth gathered from internal experience is psychology, metaphysics and religion; from external experience, the physical sciences. Now a perfect truth should be in harmony with experience in both these worlds. The microcosm must bear testimony to the macrocosm and the macrocosm to the microcosm; physical truth must have its counterpart in the internal world, and internal world must have its verification outside;”

Swami Vivekananda in his The Complete Works, Vol. 1, 11th Edn. at p. 366 said that:

“The foundations have all been undermined; and the modern man, whatever he may say in public, knows in the privacy of his heart that he can no more ‘believe’, believing because it is written in certain books, believing because people like him to believe, the modern man knows it to be impossible for him. There are, of course, a number of people who seem to acquiesce in the so-called popular faith but we also know for certain that they do not think. Their idea of belief may be better translated as ‘non-thinking carelessness’. This fight cannot last much longer without breaking to pieces all the buildings of religion.

* * *

Is religion to justify itself by the discoveries of reason, through which every other science justified itself? Are the same methods of investigation, which we apply to sciences and knowledge outside, to be applied to the science of religion? In my opinion this must be so, and I am also of opinion that the sooner it is done the better. If a religion is destroyed by such investigation, it was then all the time useless, unworthy superstition; and the sooner it goes the better. I am thoroughly convinced that its destruction would be the best thing that could happen. All that is dross will be taken off, no doubt, but the essential parts of religion will emerge triumphant out of this investigation. Not only will it be made scientific — as scientific, at least, as any of the conclusions of physics or chemistry — but will have greater strength, because physics or chemistry has not internal mandate to vouch for its truth, which religion has.”

Swami Vivekananda in his The Complete Works, Vol. VI, 6th Edn. at p. 81 said that:

“Religion deals with the truths of the metaphysical world just as chemistry and the other natural sciences deal with the truth of the physical world. The book one must read to learn chemistry is the book of (external) nature. The book from which to learn religion is your own mind and heart. The sage is often ignorant of physical science because he reads the wrong book — the book within; and the scientist is too often ignorant of religion because he, too, reads the wrong book—the book without.”

Again in his The Complete Works, (Vol. V, 8th Edn.) pp. 192-93, he says that:

“The basis of all systems, social or political, rests upon the goodness of men. No nation is greater or good because Parliament enacts this or that, but because its men are great and good. ... Religion goes to the root of the matter. If it is right, all is right. ... One must admit that law, government, politics are phases not final in any way. There is a goal beyond them where law is not needed.... All great masters teach the same thing. Christ saw that the basis is not law, that morality and purity are the only strength.””

[8] AIR 1966 SC 1119.; para 37

[9] 2000 (6) SCC 493 ; para 8

[10] 1997 (2) SCC 534 ; para 10

[11] 1997 (1) SCC 701 ; paras 14 -18.

[12] 1995 Supp (2) SCC 549 ; para 3

[13] 1990 (2) SCC 396

[14] 1994 (6) SCC 360 ; para 1.

[15] 1994 (3) SCC 1 ; para 182.

[16] 1978 (1) SCC 248 ; para 72

[17] 1976 (40 SCC 213 ; para 16

James Tooley : The Beautiful Tree : The Law of Public Education and the Indian system

I came across the latest book by James Tooley called the “Beautiful Tree” wherein Tooley advocates private participation in public education . Tooley claims that he was inspired by the book by the same name , by another famous Indian , the Gandhian , Dharmapal .

In chapter 11 he discusses the history of the present education system in India . This is the crux of his book and a very interesting essay in itself :

Tooley starts by quoting Dharmapal’s quotation from Gandhiji , where Gandhiji came down heavily upon the Government schools and said that universal education was not possible in the said method and said that the only way possible for universal education in India was through the “old model” of the village schools and school master .

In a very lengthy chapter he discusses as to how the British carried out a survey of schools in the 19^th Century and were surprised to find that instead of having very little education , India had a large number of schools and very large parts of the Indian population was being educated in the said schools and these schools catered to all sections of the society . The British were so surprised that they undertook a study of the funding of these schools and found out to their surprise that the funding was completely private . He says however the said statistics were criticized by some other Britishers and he names Phillp Hartog and William Willberforce who thought that the quality of these schools were very low since they were responsible for the Indians being “deeply sunk , and by their religious superstitions fast bound , in the lowest depth of moral and social wretchedness” . Tooley says that Karl Marx believed that the biggest tool of history was the English education of India . As for payment the British believed that the schools were bad because the teachers were badly paid and there was no adequate” school houses” , thereby leading to laying down of specific regulations as to what constitutes schools and the guidelines that it may have to follow . The British acknowledged clearly that the courses in the schools were more practical applicable than even the schools in Scotland and even recommended the use of the methodology in England itself . The method was brought into Britain under the name of the Madras Method , wherein senior students were given responsibility to educate junior students and was a stupendous success . He says that Dharmapal mentioned the man who took the system to England in his book, a certain Dr.Andrew Bell . He said the British in response tried to reform the indigenous schools by getting some teachers educated in formalized westernized education and setting up westernized schools and failed . He says that the reasons for the failure were (i) there were never adequate people interested to teach in village schools from outside the village (ii) it was apparent that in the new schools of the British ,closeness to the bosses mattered and not teaching capability , (iii) the new schools deliberately contrary to the intention of the scheme were only concentrating on the education of Brahmins and the elites (iv) there was no adequate supervision of the schools , and (v) the schools were designed for much larger group than the inadequate and inefficient private schools and hence there were very few of them making it very difficult for the students from distant villages from attending them .

Then came Macaulay : who came in initially as President of General Committee of Public Instruction for the British Presidency at Calcuta . He was of the view that the indigenous education system and education itself was worthless and the object of the education in India was to “promote European literature and sciences amongst the natives of India and all funds to be dedicated to English education alone” . He then went on to devise the extensive public education system which exists in India till the present date . This resulted in reducing education amongst the people in general as apparent from even statistics available from that time . Tooley says that evidence of this has parallels from England of the same time which was dominated by private schools and it was that what got most people educated and not public / government schools . He also quotes Gandhi who specifically mentions that the Government School system would not be able to attain universal education in India and advocated a return to the village school master model .

Tooley then calls the modern educationists “Modern Macaulays” who believe what suited the European elites best suited the rest of the world also .He says that this is not only true for India and be examples he illustrates that how it is true for the rest of the world . Tooley ends this chapter be stating “private education” for the poor means championing a return to the cultural roots of the people .

The reason I recommend a reading of this book is not to endorse the ideology or the content what Tooley may be saying though that may well be true , but I find it interesting as it shows how the British used law to destroy the older system of education so as to impose their own and how that system still continues to the present day .