Indian Anarchists - Das Gupta

8/12/2019 Indian Anarchists - Das Gupta

1/10

Indian Political Science ssociation

Indian AnarchistsAuthor(s): Nitis Das GuptaSource: The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 59, No. 1/4 (1998), pp. 106-114Published by: Indian Political Science AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41855762.

Accessed: 09/02/2014 16:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Indian Political Science Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

Indian Journal of Political Science.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.232.242.247 on Sun, 9 Feb 2014 16:06:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41855762?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41855762?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsa


2/10

.ti

Indian Anarchists*NitisDas Gupta

Etymologicallythe term anarchism' comes fromthe Greekword 'arkhos' which means a ruler;and literally nterpretedhe termmeanswithout n 'arkhos' or a ruler.Two interpretationsre possiblehere.Since there s no ruler, narchismmaybe regarded s a negativecondition of unruliness. But a positive meaning is also possible:following Woodcock we could say that in the anarchist societyindividualswill getthemselvesharmoniouslyntegratednto thesocialsetting in such a way that 'rule becomes unnecessary*for thepreservation f order.1Under such positive conditions all forms ofgovernmentnd authority ecome redundant.Anarchism s thusto bedistinguished rom narchy.Indian Anarchists

In the last one hundredyears a cohesive school of thought,initially defined by Vivekananda, had developed in India. 'Aconceptualconsensus' binds themembers f this school so far s theirinterpretationsf the socio-political realities are concerned. TheresemblancebetweentheseIndian thinkersnd theWestern narchistshas promptedmanyto call the former s Indian anarchists.Accordingto Dalton , these ndianthinkersmayappear quite dissimilar ntermsof their tylesof thought, ut theyexhibita clear consensus in theirideas aboutpoliticsand power,humannature nd thegood society, herelationship f the individual to the state,thevalues of freedomandequality, emphasis on consensus rather than conflict,co-operationrather hancompetition nd about 'a methodof change thatrelies onmoralexampleand suasion rather hanviolentrevolution r legislativereform*.rominentmongthe Indian anarchists,withVivekanandaastheirpioneer, are Aurobindo Ghose, RabindranathTagore, M. K.Gandhi,Vinoba Bhave andJayaprakash arayan.Dalton is of the opinion that India's ideological tradition srepresented y these ndian anarchist hinkersemerged in responsetothecrisis of values introduced yBritish mperialismn thenineteenthcentury'.The British onquest of India was not only political; it was

Dr. Das GuptasHead,DepartmentfPolitical cience,Gurudas ollege,Calcutta.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/10

IndianJournal fPolitical cience 107

also theeconomicconquestof feudal ndia into capitalist ne. But theBritish impact on India not only led to the transformationf theeconomic anatomy of the Indian society but also to its socialphysiognomy. morallybankrupt eople reelingunder hepressureofreligious orthodoxy,obscurantism and casteism had to face thechallengesof themighty ocio-political deas ofAmericanand Frenchrevolutions,ike liberty, qualityand fraternityn the one handand thescientificand secular spirit of enquirybom out of the EuropeanRenaissanceon the otherhand.The Indian anarchists faced this mightychallenge of theWestern houghtnd ideas by proclaiming hesuperiorityf the ndianspiritual owerto theWesternmaterialpower-the formermphasizingthe nternalspect andthe atter n the external orm f a phenomenon.The backbone,thefoundation,nd thebedrockof India's national ife,Vivekanandadeclared is its 'spiritual genius' which is farsuperiortotheWestern lorificationfpoliticsand commercialism.Accordingto Vivekananda,thespiritual radition f Hinduismcalls for resistanceto the legalised oppressionof State. Thus takingrecourse o Hindu spiritual radition. ivekanandaopposed the Britishimperialisttatethat uled ndia. As Vivekanandasays, The veryword'Sannyasin' means the divine outlaw and since 'it is freedom lonethat s desirable ...it is not law thatwe want butabilityto break law.We wantto be outlaws. 3Further, hese anarchist hinkers pposed thechallenge of theBritish imperialismby drawing their inspirationfrom the Hindu

tradition f political thought,which was pluralist n orientation. heHindu political thinkers id not conferon the rulerthe arbitrarynddespoticpower.The rulerwas an integral artofa highlydifferentiatedand uncentralizedocial order.The IndianKingwas no Sultanwith thesole obligation fsatisfying ispersonalcaprice. t has been mentionedby F. W. Thomas in the CambridgeHistory of India that it is asguardianof the social (including domestic and religious) order anddefenceagainst anarchical oppression thatthe king is entitled o hisrevenue; failing to performthis duty, he takes upon himself acorrespondinghareof thenational in .4In thisconnection n eminentndianhistorianR. C. Majumdarhas made an interesting bservation.He remarked hat the scope ofactivitiesof the state in ancient India was all-embracing.Dr. R. c.Majumdarwrote Althoughthe statewas totalitariann its scope of



4/10

108Indian Anarchistsactivities, t did not adopt the totalitarianmethod in carrying ut itsfunction. greatdeal of initiative nd executivepowerwas left o localassemblies as well as religious and social corporations, nd on thewhole therewas a fargreaterdegreeof decentralizationfpowersandauthority han we see at the presentday .5 Anotherfamous IndianhistorianBeni Prasad made a similarcomment hat hestate n ancientIndia was saturated hrough nd throughwith the principlesof whatfor onveniencemaybe called federalism nd feudalism nd therewerea number of corporations nd associations, religious, economic andsocial, 'whichenjoyed fairdegreeof autonomy'.6Each grouphad itsown dharma (duty)which was not determined y theruler and withwhich the atter ould notgenerally nterfere.he authorityf thekingwas regulated yhis own specificdharma.

In thisway Vivekananda and his fellow travellers'hostilitytowards xcessivepoliticsandpowerstemmedfrom he Hindupoliticalphilosophy. They detected the dichotomy between the politicalcivilizationofthe West and thespiritual nd moral civilizationof India- the former ependingon the state and the latteron the societyforguiding heactivities fthepeople.

Tagore emulated Vivekananda's formulationwhen he said,England relies on the state for everything, rom the relief of thedestitute o the religiouseducation of thepublic; where our countrydepends on thepeople's sense of duty .7 Five years later, n HindSwaraj (1909). Gandhi accepted the basic distinctionmade betweensociety and state, and India and the West. Declaring all westernpolitical power as 'bruteforce', Gandhi eulogized the ancient ndianSocietywhere Kings and swords were inferior o thesword of ethics',and people enjoyed an organic social existence in small villagesindependentlyf the abuses of political institutions.8n anotherplaceGandhi commented, The State represents iolence in a concentratedform. he individualhas a soul, butas thestate s a soulless machine, tcan never be weaned from violence to which it owes its veryexistence . Aurobindo,following these thinkers' anti-state rend ofthought,xplainedclearlyhis conceptof decentralization s a means tothwart he excessivepower of the state He thus advocatedthathumancommunities hould be formed n 'one essentialprincipleof naturediversitynunity'.9

Vinoba Bhave and JayaprakashNarayan as membersof theIndian anarchist chool shared with theirpredecessors,Vivekannada,Tagore, Gandhiand Aurobindo a feelingof distrust nd suspicion for



5/10

IndianJournalfPolitical cience 1 9

theStateauthority.f the atter eveloped a feeling f contempt or hemightyBritishRaj', the former ntertainedhe same feelingfor themammoth tate structure f independentndia. Vinoba opined thathischerished ideal of sarvodaya does not mean good governmentormajority rule, it means freedom from government, it meansdecentralizationof power .10 What people really need, Vinobabelieved, s to become aware of their wn inner trength,nd that heycan only do so if theysolve some of theirproblemsforthemselves.Jayaprkash accepted the basic distinctionmade by the IndianAnarchists etweensocietyand state and he relied not on thepoliticalprocess, but on thepower of thepeople ('lok-sakti') forushering noverallchangesin thesociety.For theproper xercise of lok-sakti',hewantedthat owershouldrest t thegrass-rootsevel and he framedhiswhole scheme of decentralized ommunitywith thisprimary bject inview in his two treatises amedA Plea forReconstructionfthe ndianPolity ndSwaraj forthePeople.Preservation by Reconstruction

The Indian anarchists eactedto the crises of values introducedbyBritish mperialism otonly throughdeological opposition-whichwe have been discussing hitherto-but also through change andadjustment.n otherwords, hese ndian thinkersought opreserve heIndian deological traditiony allowing necessaiy changes in its ideasand attitudesfollowing the interactionwith the Western thought.Aurobindovery appropriatelyummedup the basic motives of thesethinkers s preservation y reconstruction ,.e., thedevelopmentofformsnotcontradictoryf the truths f life which the old expressed,but rather expressive of those truthsrestated, cured of defect,completed .11Dalton gave some glaring examples of 'preservation byreconstruction'and two12 of them may be cited here. (1) TheUpanishadsmakecorrespondencesmongthree asic conceptsofman,God, and freedom Brahman, heAbsolute, s seen as identicalwiththehuman oul,theAtman. heSelf,and withSelf-realisationomes mukti,Spiritualfreedom, elease from ll bondage. Vivekananda adopted theessential elementsof thisposition.Spiritualfreedommeant,forhim ,theultimate xpansionofthe humanself whichbrought ealisation ofone's identitywith the absolute, and with all mankind. ButVivekananda attempted o incorporate he modernWesternview ofpolitical and social freedom into the traditional ndian theoryofSpiritualfreedom He assertedthat man must have freedom n lower



6/10

IndianAnarchistsrealms, .e., social and economicfreedoms tc.,to achieve thespiritualfreedomof the highest. It is to be noted here that Vivekanandapreserved heUpanishads' viewpointthatthe spiritual freedom s thehighest, y reconstructinghewhole idea.

(2) Spiritual quality, nthe ense that ll men arethought artsofthedivineAbsolute,was explicitthroughouthetraditionalwritings;perhaps toccurredmostnotably nAdvaita Vedanta and theBhagabatGita. It was upon this spiritualbasis thatmodernthinkers ried toconstructn idea of social andpoliticalequality.Gandhicommented, Ibelieve in therock-bottom octrine fadvaita andmy nterpretationfadvaita excludes totally any idea of superiorityat any stagewhatsoever. believe implicityhat ll menare bom equal.Resemblance with Western Anarchism

Ostergaardhas shown thatstrongparallels exist between theideas of Indian and Western narchists.13 oth thegroups ook to themodern tate with ts claim to a monopolyof the legal instruments fcoercionas a great mpediment o a free,co-operative ocial order inwhich men reallypractise self-government.horeau proclaimed, ....That Government s best which governs not at all. 14 In the samemanner Aurobindo expressed his hostilityto State or Government.Aurobindo remarked hat he centralproblem ies in theveryprincipleof the tate,which n itsfascist, ocialist,or democratic orms romotesnotmerely tyranny f themajority'butworse, tyrannyf thewhole,of the self-hypnotisedmass over its constituent roups and units',15usuallyorchestratedya smallelite ofdemagogicpoliticians.

Secondly, in theirconception of the abrogationof privateproperty which is theforemostonceptionofa free ociety there salso close agreementbetween the Indian and Western anarchists.Accordingto the atter, s in thefamily, o in society,propertys to beheld in common, each contributingccording to his capacity andreceiving according to his needs. Similarly, in Jayaprakash'sreconstitutedolity, ach primaryommunity ould havepossession ofthe naturalresources includingland thatfall withinits boundaries.Otherresources,that are unevenlydistributeduch as forests,minesetc.wouldhave tobe sharedbyall bycommonagreement.16Thirdly, nother mportantondition f a free ociety, tressedbybothWestern nd Indiananarchists like, is decentralisation. ocialpowermustbe widely dispersed ftyrannynd exploitation re to be



7/10

IndianJournalfPolitical cience 111

avoided. For the 19th entury narchists-communists,his conditioncould be achieved if the local communes were regardedas the basicunitof social organisation. njoyingcomplete utonomywithregard oits internal ffairs, t would be linked on a federalbasis with othercommunes at the regional,national and supranational evel for theadministration f business involvingrelations with other communes.Gandhi's and Jayaprakash's ommunitarian emocracy s composed ofinnumerable illages. Life will not be a pyramid, heybelieved, withthe apex sustainedby the bottom,but it will be an Oceanic circlewhose centrewill be the individual always ready to perish for thevillage,the atter eadytoperishforthe circle ofvillages,tillat last thewhole becomes one lifecomposedof individuals .17Differences from Western Anarchism

The similarities etween ndian and Western narchists' ocialand political thinkingre to be viewed as skin-deep, namuch as thyentertainedundamentallyifferentpinionson severalvital ssues.Firstly, he most obvious difference s their espective ttitudeto religion. Most Western anarchists have followed Bakunin incouplingGod and the state,and rejectingboth for the same reason:their enial of thesovereigntyf the individual.On the otherhand,anunshakeablefaith n God andtheprimacy fspirit onstitutehe coreofthephilosophy f the ndiananarchists.However, t s necessaryto addthat heir eligiousopinions reundoubtedly atholic n character.Secondly,theethical absolutism f Indian anarchists rovidesastark ontrast o the ethical relativism sually pursuedby the Westernanarchists.Gandhi,following he doctrineof means and ends, alwaysadvocateda strict dherenceto certainhumanvalues and standards fconduct. On the otherhand,most Western narchists,ike Kroptokin,have attemptedoproviderational nd naturalistic oundations or heirethicalcodes.Thirdly, o the Indian anarchists,non-violencepresented tselfas 'a categorical imperative',not as a rule to be adopted on rationalutilitarian rounds.On the otherhand,mostof the Western narchistsbelieved in violence. Even those Western anarchistswho have been

pacifists, nsteadof treating on-violenceas 'a categorical mperative'as their Indian counterpart id, have usually tried to justifynon-violenceonpragmatic rounds.Fourthly,the Western anarchists have hardlybeen able to



8/10

IndianAnarchists ^ ^

preparea positivealternative rogramme r a plan of action for socialorganisation.But Gandhi,Vinoba and Jayaprakashndeavoured and ina large measure .succeeded in doing so. In historical retrospect,anarchism n the West appearedessentially s a movementof protestThe anarchists ttacked, often n themostbrutaland directmanner,thevalues and institutionsfthe established ocial and moralorder .18The Indiananarchists,ike Gandhiand J.P., gave an alternative chemeof social and political organisationbased on the ideas of voluntaryservice, cooperation and decentralisation. Further, the Westernanarchistsfailed to develop, Bondurantpointedout, and non-violenttechnique like the Satyagraha as defined and practisedby Gandhi.Bondurant ommented, The GandhianSatyagrahineed not wait untilthe state is abolished before he acts upon his principleof voluntaryassociationandopposition oauthority .It is quite natural that the two anarchist groups shouldfundamentallyiffer n somebasic matters s their espective houghtsemergedin two altogether ifferent istorical ituations.The Western

anarchist theorywas the product of the impact of machines andindustry n a peasant and artisansociety in the nineteenth enturyEurope. Therefore he values the Western anarchists ndeavoured todemolish were those of the increasinglypowerful,centralised andindustrialised tate. On the otherhand, the Indian anarchisttheoryemerged in response to the crisis of values introducedby a foreignimperialism n nineteenth enturyndia. The Indian anarchistsdrewtheir nspiration rom heHindutradition f political thought o resisttheonslaught fthesocio-political deas of the mperialistountry.The stronghostility hich ndian anarchists ikeVivekananda,Aurobindo,Tagore and Gandhimanifested owards the state could beattributed o their historicalcircumstances- heir thoughtobviouslygrew up in oppositionto the British aj and theexploitativenature ofthat mperialpower.Their East vs. West' theoryndicates hat hiswasthe case. However, as we move now to the Indian anarchists ofindependent ndia and watch how they continue their ideologicaltradition,we feel that thepresenceof the British s not a necessarycondition for the survival of Indian anarchism. Indeed, the Indian

anarchist radition otonlysurvives, t flourishes n independentndia,enjoyingthesupport f such stalwart hinkeis s JayaprakashNayaranand Vinoba Bhave. The enduringpirit nd content f this traditionnthepost-independence eriod n India maybe attributed,ccordingtoDalton, first, o thestrengthf itsdevelopment uring he nationalist



9/10

IndianJournalfPolitical cience 11

period, second, to the continuing presence of a centralised stateauthority,nd third, o thehighqualityand independent pirit f thosetheoristswho haveperpetuatedt .20

Rcferenccs1 G. Woodcock,AnarchismAylesbury, ngland:Waston and VineyLtd., 1975),p. 8.2. DennnisDalton, The Ideologyof Sarvodaya: Concepts of Politicsand Power in Indian Political Thought , n Thomas Pantham andKennethL. Deutsch,eds,Political ThoughtnJUodernndia (NewDelhi; Sage Publications, 986), p. 275.3. Swami Vivekananda,Complete Works,Vol. 5 (Calcutta: AdvaitaAshrama,1960),p. 289.4. F. W. Thomas,Article n The CambridgeHistory of India, vol. /.ed. E. J.Rapson (Delhi: S. ChandandCo., 1955), p. 443.5. R. C. Majumdar,AncientIndia (Delhi: Motilal Banarassidas,1960), pp. 143-144.6. The State in Ancient ndia (Allahabad: The Indian Press Ltd.,1074), p. 386.7. RabindranathTagore, 'Society and State', in Towards UniversalMan (London: Asia PublishingHouse, 1961). p. 52.8. M. K. Gandhi, Collected Works vol. 10 (Delhi: Publications

Division,GovernmentfIndia, 1963),pp. 37-38.9. Aurobindo, deal ofHuman Unity,n The Human Cycle, The IdealofHuman Unity and) warjmd Self-DeterminationPondicherry:SriAurobindoAshram,1962), p. 560.10. Vinoba Bhave,Harijan, 15. 12. 51.11. Aurobindo,TheRenaissance in ndia (Pondicherry: riAurobindoAshram,1951),p. 6.12. Dennis Dalton Indian dea ofFreedom (Gurgaon:The AcademicPress, 1982), pp. 11-12 and 17-18.13. Geoffrey stergaard,ndianAnarchism:The Sarvodayamovement' n David E. Apter ndJamesJoll, ds,AnarchismToday (London:MacMillan, 1971) pp. 150-159.



10/10

Indian Anarchists * ^

14. HenryDavid Thoreau, Civil Disobedience', in Waiden nd Civildisobedience New York: Norton ndNorton,1966) p. 224.15. Aurobindo,The deal ofHuman Unity, . 678.16. A Plea forReconstructionfthe ndianPolity Varanasi: AkhilBharatSarva Seva Sangh, 1959), p. 57.17. Harijan,28. 7. 45.18. JamesJoll,The Anarchists London: Eyreand Spottiswoode,1969), p. 12.19. JoanV. Bondurant, onquestofViolence TheGandhianPhilosophy f Conflict.Bombay: OxfordUniversity ress,1959),p. 183.20. Dalton,n. 2, p. 286.

Indian Anarchists - Das Gupta

Documents

Transcript of Indian Anarchists - Das Gupta