Name:
anurag gangal
Email:
anuraggangal@yahoo.com
URL:
http://120874649.home.icq.com/index.html
City:
jammu,
ProvinceorState: jammu and kashmir
Country:
India
Age:
43
Other:
i am a Reader/Associate Professor in politi cal science in jammu university,
India.
Comments:
Professionalisation of politics is needed for establishing mor permanent peace
in human minds,action and among nations in the world.
Professional politics is needed in this century.It requires dedication of
revolutionaries like Mahatma Gandhi, Mao, Lenin,Marx and others.
Otherwise,Hiroshimas and Nagasakis may always be there.In this age of technology
only a great sense of professional discipline,training,education and
establishment of a systemic carving out of prospective
political leadership can save coming generations for posterity. Amateurism and
adhocism of previous century has no takers today.Exceptional dedication
,devotion and training pave their way towards charismatic mass appeal.The
professional help of political scientists must be sought in this matter. They
can help establish precedents and set trends.Afterall politics is the domain of
political scientists at large.Isn't it?
Despite inherent uncertainty of politics, its omnipresence and ubiquitous nature
can never be put aside. "Politics" is a highly specialized field of
activity.Such a specialized field must not be left to the mercy of self-styled
political leaders emerging either overnight or almost from-no-where in the
history of their own peculiar political experience. The need of the hour is
well-embedded political niche of properly equipped political scientists and
their commitment,dedication,devotion and determination. Political knowledge and
discipline of a political scientist must become the raging path-finder. This is
necessary to grasp the true meaning of politics. Politics must never be
misunderstood as highly manipulative activity replete with
corruption,violence,exploitation,terrorism,extortions and murders upon
murders-of precious human lives and values-for POWER for ever more POWER. THIS
IS NOT POLITICS AT ALL.POLITICS IS POWER AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR THE ULTIMATE
!
END OF SARVODAYA OR WELFARE OF ALL.
.
Diehard politicians of today will never agree for their professional training
and education. For them ,their experience and rendezvous with life are
providing real ground for lifetime training and dedication. What we need today
is a "practical-idealist" approach quite like that of Gandhi.
This is necessary at all levels of planning,formation, legislation,
execution, judiciary,and policy-making.All such aspects need to be examined with
a meaningful participation of political scientists. This appears to be the
only recourse "for cities" to have their long-over-due
rest from their widespread EVILS.
Politics is there not merely by virtue of modern politicians and their political
parties etc.The theory and practice of politics is in reality an exclusive realm
of political scientists.However,the current perversion of
"politics-as-it-is" does not depict the reality.Indeed,"Untill
political scientists and trained political actors are rulers or the rulers and
governors of this world take recourse to wisdom-of-political-scientists,cities
will never have rest from their perversion of politics today."
" 'Beware the fury of the patient man,' John Dryden had warned three
hundred years ago. Unfortunately, the ruling authorities have excellent reason
to ignore that piece of ancient wisdom."
Mahatma Gandhi,however,is more in favour of delving deep into the realities of
life. He does not support the present-day university system of higher
learning .This is his position in essence.For him ,simple and an activist
approach to life leads to real depths of knowledge. Life must not depend
so much-as it is today-upon acquisitive instincts but on self-restraint,Aristotlean
mean/balance and widespread normalcy in socio-political order emanating
from the individual. Hence
-- for ulterior reasons - - if we do away with Gandhi in
the absence of larger belief in nonviolence,truth,
nonstealing,nonpossession and brahmcharya etc. , even then it is the
following main concerns which are likely to dominate human minds throughout the
twenty-first century:
i) limits to growth
ii) impact of information technology upon man
iii) over-production of conventional/other weapons
iv) over-exploitation of natural/other resources and ever widening consumerism
v) professionalization of terrorism and similar acts
vi) modern technology,enviromental pollution,human survival
vii) preservation of depleting resources
viii) preserving political-ecological balance for a normal life with
little socio-political tensions
ix) religion of equality and humanity and not merely rituals
x) preserving dignity of man
xi) quality of life without degenrating aspects of modernity
As such Gandhian "practical-idealism" is going to be the
real IN thing of human rationality and vision in the twenty-first century.
Whether we want it or not Mahatma Gandhi will be there -- either in
name or in deeds of the generations to come.No "commitments" can run
away from this reality.[5] Priorities of our commitment must change
knowingly.Indeed, "commitment" is always necessary for becoming a
professional activist in any area of life.Gandhi has always been an activist and
a political worker . His philosophy or "way of life" is also primarily
derived from his lessons of life and "experiments" through diverse
experiences. Most of the present-day political leaders,however, are not
able to learn so much from their life.Maybe because Politics is currently
considered more as an instrument of subversion,exploitation and
manipulations instead of the Gandhian sarvodaya or welfare of all.
Sarvodaya is not possible when almost every nook and corner of world politics
is having A POLITICAL LEADER by virtue of birth, criminal
activities,money power or sheer bullying of the gentle and weaker lot.It
is happenig among nations also .Gandhi had unmistakably foreseen this
predicament in his Hind Swaraj in 1909. In this booklet, Gandhi characterizes
modern civilization as a "disease" and "a nine days wonder".
Even around the time of his assassination on 30 January 1948 -
specially just about two weeks earlier-Gandhi said , "this (modern)
civilization is such that one has only to be patient, and it will be
self-destroyed." Given the present-day widespread
"balance-of-terror"- with its plans for mutual assured destruction(MAD)
even outside the purview of the erstwhile "cold war" today --
disintegration and destruction is continuing . We have it from so knowledgeable
a source as
Jan Tinbergen's Report to the Club of Rome : "in the rich
countries there is growing concern about the conservation of non-renewable
resources and . about how to keep the world in a stationary state."
In the above mentioned contexts, a beginning has to be made. For Gandhi ,
"one step is enough" to start an effort.
The world into the twenty-first century is going to realize its past follies of
giving the reigns of politics to "Tom,Dick and Harries"
from time to time. Politics as an activity and as a discipline is at the apex of
Aristotlean, Hobbesian, Marxian and Gandhian phenomenology. There is an
oft-quoted phrase in English: "Let fools contest for forms of
government." Indeed, if matters relating to government are left to
"fools" then who will govern! Therefore, a first step in this
direction must be high degree of commitment to politics by the modern political
scientists. Political leaders must seek their help in every related area
regularly. Political scientists must extend specially designed courses and
training programmes to politicians -- obviously on a voluntary basis in the
beginning. Such a first step can bring the modern "Bizarre
Politicians" nearer to realities of a normal political order away from
manipulations and extortions etc. After all, the !
company one keeps is also very important.
The twenty-first century has numerous other predicaments, perversions and
emerging perspectives, namely, high conflict orientation of society and
politics, technologicalized human creativity, the forgotten missing link between
two hithertofore apparently separate concepts of conflict and cooperation
and George Orwell's idea of a "THINK POLICE" in future !
Alongwith this there is also the larger question of global degeneration of our
combined "global village". These are the major five directions
of challenges before humanity today.
The first challenge is in the area of the prevailing Darwinian and functionalist
notion of conflict, especially, the particular way in which man is generally
trained, over several past centuries now, to THINK on certain given lines of
thought. This view of conflict/war is based on Heraclitus's noted
aphorism : "War ( or conflict ) is the father of
all things ."The basic principle here is that " as there are
contending elements in nature, so there are conflicting ideas and interests
among men .To Darwin . conflict is a constant phenomenon and the cause of
evolution." [6]
Johan Galtung has, however , presented a very interesting
tenor of "A Gandhian Theory of
Conflict" in David Selbourne(ed.), In Theory and in Practice : Essays
on the Politics of Jayaprakash Narayan. [7]
For him , "What makes Gandhi different from other thinkers . is his
insistence that there are no barriers among men which the goal of
integration cannot transcend . an integration directed against
no one, but rather . an integration for humanity.
Moreover, Gandhi is optimistic about the prospects for approaching, if not
completely realizing, the ideal here in this world.
In the case of compromise, Gandhi very often spoke in favour of it even at
points where it seemed as if the struggle could be won, all grievances
redressed , and the claims of a campaign of satyagraha met in full . Such
readiness to compromise can only be understood in the light of Gandhi's belief
that the point is not to 'win' the conflict , but so to proceed in the entire
struggle that the best possible basis for post-conflict life is established . A
general inclination in favour of compromise , however ,does not imply any
willingness to engage in compromise over fundamentals ." [8]
This is clearly a departure from the prevailing and widespread
Darwinian as well as functionalist mode of thought . Accordingly
there are enough repulsions , wars, struggles, contradictions,
disagreements, confrontations, opposition and conflicts in Nature. For
Gandhi, each conflict is merely the result of uncalled for imbalances occurring
through diverse human interactions. How can it be the basis of "all
things" then? The real questions are: How can these imbalances be
prevented? How imbalances occur? What is the real basis of human nature in
its interactions from within and from without ?
Nature lives more by attraction , inherent mutual love and peaceful
orientations for Gandhi . Other things are largely resulting from
misconceptions drawn on the basis of ages old continuous
search for modernity in terms of ephemeral
additions of information upon every latest piece of iformation
- mainly numerical piling up and "loading/downloading". Gandhi
is for permanent knowledge and truth. As such, each conflict is an opportunity
for its "creative resolution" for peace and wholesome
development. [9]
Hence, for Gandhi,"Conflict was a challenge (which) offered (greater)
possibilities of contact. with whom you stand in an interesting and significant
relation." Such creative understanding of conflicts (and not just
functional cooperation from moment to moment) is likely to become the foundation
of the ensuing century. It is already scientifically seen, in above mentioned
analysis, that how modern technological world is !
going towards a logical end of having created a Frankenstein for itself in
the form of uncontrolled surging ahead of technology today.
The only saving grace for us here is in an interesting answer of 346 members out
of 378 members of the American Psychological Association. The question: "Do
you hold...there are present in human nature ineradicable instinctive
factors that make war between nations inevitable ?" About 91%
0f members replied "NO".
This answer reflects the essential elasticity and teachability of
man's mind.It all depends upon the training of human mind ,body and
spirit from the very beginning .We are teaching ourselves -till now-- the
conflict-prone Darwinian and functionalist syndrome. We all need to go out
of this rut. T.H. Pear, J.P. Das, J.R. Anderson and, even earlier,
Sigmund Freud are a few noted psychologists of the previous and
current centuries - among several other contemporary academics - who
believe in the basic need of keeping a balance between
aggressive and loving instincts of man . Otherwise, for them,
conflict will alway!
s be the outcome. Excess of "love" and
"aggression" both lead to situations of
conflict and war .
A general notion about human thinking is that no earthly force
should ever try to control it for such an act would be in gross violation
of the current and established democratic norms .Yet
even the modern democratic life-styles and education are
deliberately being "implanted" into the minds of homosapiens!
Is it not indoctrination? Or is it "education"?WHY
CAN'T THEN A GANDHIAN WAY OF LIFE SHAPE
THE FUTURE OF OUR PROGENY? This will be more optimistic
and fruitful way of carving out our more peaceful and
brighter prospects.We have interestingly already seen that what
Gandhi has said earlier is being proposed by
the modern-day saner elements also.Actually,the
socialists,Marxists,capitalists and several others are in reality
talking in a Gandhian vein. Isn't it there a global vision emerging
here ?
The functionalist and Darwinian conceptions of conflict and
cooperation consider these two aspects as
mutually opposite realities (as if the twins shall never meet!) .
While, in the Gandhian way of life, there is a link between these two apparent
opposites. This link is to be seen in the
"self-restraint" and need of a balanced or normal life.
Therefore, conflict and cooperation are not like two separate parallel
lines of geometry. They are mutually and
positively interlinked.
What afterall is this normal life in a Gandhian
vision ? Answer to this question is clearly available in
the major eleven points on page two of this research
article.Even otherwise this article is replete with
the conception of a Gandhian normal
socio-political order.
The twenty-first century is still in its phase of infancy. It is
growing despite a vast multitude of
technology related problems. On the one hand, the world
is getting "connected" into becoming a global village while on the
other hand, there is " internautian" phenomenon of privacy
versus information-explosion.Similarly, there is also a very
well-known "captive-mind" thesis of Syed
Hussain Altas vis-à-vis modern education and
on going endless automation leading to
degeneration of human brain cells due to
technological-product-radiation, over-exposure and under-utilization
etc. These are but a few examples of the "unfolding" of the
present century. In view of these realities, Mary E. Clark and A.K.
Saran are interested in "new modes of thinking" and
for a real "metanoia".
This metanoia involves grass-root movements and
root-and-branch transformation of current direction
of man's t!
hinking . Such action and thinking,however,would not involve massive
efforts towards "de-technologicalization" and
"de-industrialization".
In contrast to aforesaid possibilities, our present century is racing towards
"intercontinental integration and regionalization" of global society
and politics. The European Union is apparently one of the first to go in this
direction by attempting to evolve common currency, security,foreign policy
and by upgrading the European Parliament. George Orwell had
foreseen this type of division of the world into
three major continents under the overall governance of
a " think-police". This think-police -- obviously through
technological modern tools of audio-video paraphernalia - is supposed to
police human thinking in George Orwell's 1984 . As such,
widespread expansion, compression , technological and global
integration alongwith a possibility of an
optimistic though logical metanoia appear to
be expected trends of the twenty-first century.Of all these
prospective happenings,only those can be regarded as creative whi!
ch make the concerned imbibe and assimilate the spirit of the
Gandhian way by applying it meaningfully to the
contemporary situation .
Some socio-political experimentation may be sought for securing a better future.
".a small, autonomous Centre should be established, preferably by
non-governmental public effort, charged with the following tasks: one, promoting
Gandhian thinking through creative and holistic research; two, designing and
conducting an educational programme in Gandhian thinking for voluntary novices;
and, three, devising and conducting a programme for educators in Gandhian
thinking. . The Centre will take only a small number of students who evince a
minimum competence and real keenness to be initiated into Gandhian htinking and
Gandhian way. Their material needs will be met during the programme, but no
inducements or attractions will be offered. The method of education will be one
that makes sufficient demands on students for self-education. Dialogue,
discussion, meditation, thinking and guided reading, lectures too, if necessary,
may be mentioned here as educational d!
evices to be used in the Centre. This is only by way of illustration.
Different methods may be followed for individual students. The idea is to keep
the system as flexibly structured as may be consistent with the discipline
required for the effictiveness of any serious educational enterprise.
The aim of this educational programme will be to create maieutic design and a
moral support-system for metanoia. The students will gradually experience a
transformation of their mind, a turning away an turning towards, of their
consciousness, a change in the centre of their thinking. A change in their
character is bound to follow. . It should be clearly understood that in so far
as an educational programme of this kind is at all successful, the
graduate (will have to be a very determined person to succeed in life). .
it is through .(patience) of such graduates that a Gandhian,that is, a normal,
ethos may slowly come to be formed."
Indeed, "new modes of thinking" are the real requirements of
the twenty-first century.
Which way should we go ? It is for us to decide. The world is already going in
one particular direction of ever higher degree of technological
advancement. Despite this, the modern technology has not yet touched the
level of refinement of having created a human-being : full of life and
vibrating with energy through medulla oblongatta. Only birth, live humans, death
and blood are perhaps a few areas where modern technology has not yet been able
to enter fully. Everywhere else it is there today. How long this current surging
ahead of high technology can continue? Such technology by nature is ephemeral
in essence for what it maybe today; tomorrow it may become obsolete.
A basic poser here is how long can we continue and sustain ourselves
vis-à-vis hyper-dynamic modern technological perspectives? Is it merely a
question of sustenance? Can we go even beyond the problems of survival and
sustenance? Can't there be a global technological world resting on true freedom
and dignity of the individual without any type of fear and terror?
References and Notes
[1]
Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze, The Amartya sen and
Jean Dreze Omnibus(Oxford University Press,New Delhi:1999); see specially India:
Economic Development and Social Opportunity, p. 87, the third portion of this
omnibus volume.
[2]
Immanuel Wallerstein and Others,Open the Social
Sciences,(Vistaar,New Delhi:1997). Another aspect of this reference number two
also needs further explanation relating to the real meaning of politics.
"Ecology" literally means "planetary housekeeping" and not
merely environmental and other types of pollutions. "Politics" is an
all inclusive master science with its continuous concern for establishing
hormony in socio-political system at different levels from local to global
prrspectives. That is why political science cannot but enter the
"political-ecological" for proper grasp of reality today. See also:
O.P. Dwivedi, "Political Science and the Environment",International
Social Science Journal (Canada:1980),p.377; Vandana Asthana, Politics of
Environment ,
(New Delhi:1995). In the modern interdisciplinary age, political science
must put more emphasis on studies such as highly systematic explorations
in
political-ecology, political-sociology,political-economy,political-psychology,
political-anthropology and political-history etc.For this purpose, opening up of
The Deparment of Political Interdisciplinary Studies can also be initiated at
the behest of the University Grants Commission(UGC) in all the recognized
universities interested in such an exercise.
[3]
Robert Jackson and Georg Sorensen,Introduction to
International Relations ,
( Oxford University Press,New York:1999 ). See also Mary E. Clark, Ariadnae's
Thread: Search for New Modes of Thinking,( St. Martins Press,New york:1989 ).
Jag Preet Singh, "The Political Ecology of India", M.Phil.
Dissertation submitted to the University of Jammu(Department of Political
Science),Jammu on
05 June 1998 ( the World Environment Day ).
[4]
Kanti Bajpai and Harish C.
Shukul(eds),Interpretting World Politics:Essays
for A.P.Rana,( Sage&Vistaar,New Delhi : 1995 ). Ronald
J. Terchek,
Gandhi:Struggling for Autonomy ,(Vistaar,New Delhi:2000 ) . S.C. Gangal and
K.P. Misra(eds),Gandhi and the Contemporary World:Studies in Peace and War,
(Chanakya Publications,New Delhi:1981).Ashish Kothari,Understanding
Biodiversity: Life,Sustainability and Equity(Orient Longman,New Delhi:1997).
[5]
Sumi Krishna,Environmental Politics:People's
Lives and Developmental Choices (Sage/Vistaar,New
Delhi:1996);Vandana Shiva,Ecology and Politics of Survival:Conflicts Over
Natural Resources in India (Sage/Vistaar,New Delhi:1991).Also Anurag Gangal,New
International Economic Order:A Gandhian Perspective,(Chanakya,New Delhi:1985).
[6]
Krishanlal Shridharani,War Without
Violence:A Study of Gandhi's Method and its Accomplishments(London:1939).
Charles Darwin,The Origin of Spices by Means of Natural Selection or
Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life(London:1968);Johan
Galtung, "Pacifism from a Sociological Point of View",The Journal of
Conflict Resolution,(1959) No. 3,p.67. See also Johan Galtung,
"Gandhi's Views on the Political and Ethical Pre-condition of a Non-violent
Fighter",Pran Chopra(ed.),The Sage in Revolt: A Rememberence(New
Delhi:1972),p.203.
[7]
Johan Galtung, "A Gandhian Theory of
Conflict",In Theory and in Practice:Essays on the Politics of Jayaprakash
Narayan,(Oxford,Bombay:1985).
[8]
ibid.pp: 100-101.
[9]
UNESCO Yearbook on Peace and Conflict
tStudies:1980(Connecticut:1981),
pp-145-165. Ibid. ; Op. Cit. n.7.
Quincy Wright,A Study of War,Vol.
1.(Chicago:1942),p.27;Karl Mannheim,Man and Society(London:1942),pp.122-123.
T.H.Pear(ed.),Psychological Factors
of Peace and War(London:1950),p.162;J.P.Das,The Working Mind:An Inyroduction to
Psychology,(Sage,New Delhi:1998);J.R.Anderson,Cognitive Psychology and its
Implications(W.H.Freeman and Company,New York:1995).
Joan V. Bondurant, Conquest of
Violence( Princeton:1958);also her another book (ed.),Conflict:Violence and
Nonviolence(Chicago:1971).
G.N.Dhawan,The Political Philpsophy
of Mahatma Gandhi
(2nd edition),(Navlivan,Ahmedabad:1957); S.C.Gangal,Gandhian Way to World
Peace(Bombay:1960); Op.cit.n.4.
A.K.Saran, "On the Promotion of
Gandhian Studies at the University Level",S.C.Gangal and
K.P.Misra(eds),Gandhi and the Contemporary World,
(Chanakya,New Delhi:1981),pp.-177-200,esp.-189,190.
E.F.Schumacher,Small is Beautiful(New
York:1973); Ivan Illich,Deschooling Society(Harmondsworth:1973); Arne
Naess,Gandhi and the Nuclear Age(London:1960).
A.K. Saran,Op.cit. n.14. See also:
M.K.Gandhi,Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule(Ahmedabad:1939).
Mary E. Clark,Ariadnae's
Thread:Search for New Modes of Thinking,
(St. Martins Press,New York:1989).
Note: More stress here is being put on showing how even the so-called non-Gandhian
(not admirers and followers) authors of our present-day world are thinking on
somewhat Gandhian lines.