100. POLITICS OF NEGATIVISM
Public life seems to be propelled largely by negative energies. Religious thinkers and psychologists may advise us about the "power of positive thinking" , but in politics it is negative sentiments that seem to move the masses. We notice this right from the front page of newspapers and the news headlines on TV channels. This also seems to be largely a Western legacy.
Western History- chronicle of negativism
[The situation is actually a bit complicated. Both Christians and Muslims believe that their religion alone is the only true religion. But while Muslims run their countries as theocracies, the Christian Church does not control any govt directly. Governments in the West are secular in the sense of being indifferent to religion, while many educated people are not affiliated to any church. However, Muslim immigrants and refugees in those countries do not want to follow the secular laws . This necessarily creates a conflict which unmistakably takes a religious turn. Europe is beginning to regain consciousness of its own Christian heritage, in spite of itself!. This is sure to lead to conflict between the two, as Islam officially believes in Jihad. No pretense of political correctness can wish it away!]
Progress: march of negativity
Public life seems to be propelled largely by negative energies. Religious thinkers and psychologists may advise us about the "power of positive thinking" , but in politics it is negative sentiments that seem to move the masses. We notice this right from the front page of newspapers and the news headlines on TV channels. This also seems to be largely a Western legacy.
Western History- chronicle of negativism
The West reckons its history with reference to the age of Christ. Christ himself said that he came to fulfil, not to destroy. He did not create a new religion. But his followers did. Once they got a foothold in the Roman empire, they became dominant and destroyed the Old religious order that prevailed , and ended the pluralism. Then Islam rose, and with it came the agenda of world conquest. The two religions keep fighting each other, and other religions, in all the regions of the world. Since both sides now have nuclear weapons, this conflict can only end with mutual destruction. "All those that take the sword shall perish by the sword." Matthew 26:52
Bust of Gemanicus disfigured by Christians.
By Alan Salt (Flickr)
CC BY-SA 2.0 Wikimedia Commons.
Bust of Gemanicus disfigured by Christians.
By Alan Salt (Flickr)
CC BY-SA 2.0 Wikimedia Commons.
[The situation is actually a bit complicated. Both Christians and Muslims believe that their religion alone is the only true religion. But while Muslims run their countries as theocracies, the Christian Church does not control any govt directly. Governments in the West are secular in the sense of being indifferent to religion, while many educated people are not affiliated to any church. However, Muslim immigrants and refugees in those countries do not want to follow the secular laws . This necessarily creates a conflict which unmistakably takes a religious turn. Europe is beginning to regain consciousness of its own Christian heritage, in spite of itself!. This is sure to lead to conflict between the two, as Islam officially believes in Jihad. No pretense of political correctness can wish it away!]
Progress: march of negativity
Every movement in the West which is reported under the name Progress is negative in its origin and impact ie it arose in opposition to what prevailed before. Medieval Christianity eclipsed the old wisdom based on Greek insights [ till it was recovered after the Renaissance]. Christianity itself got split in Reformation, with groups opposing one another. Renaissance ended the hegemony of Christian theology as the basis of knowledge. The subsequent age of Enlightenment and scientific revolution ended belief in the soundness of Christian dogma and Biblical authority and historicity.
The cumulative result is that the last two centuries have seen the end of every belief system, authority, hierarchy, and the social and political arrangements based on them: class, marriage and family, mutual obligations and duties, local communities and informal associations, etc.
There were ministers there of all sorts of schisms,
And withered old maids of all sorts of isms.
- Emerson.
Today, if you want to plead for anything, it will in effect be a plea or fight against something else! A simple demand for clean environment will put you in conflict with huge vested interests. In a city like Bangalore, to seek to preserve avenue trees will land you in trouble with the tree-cutting mafia, enjoying official patronage!
Politics is negative
Politics provides a fertile field , powerful players, tempting incentives and maddening rewards. People were incited against monarchy, aristocracy and inherited status and privileges, in the name of democracy. The cry of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of the French Revolution easily degenerated into open violence and bloodshed. Privileges based on landholdings were replaced by a new class of industrialists, traders and capitalists ie by newer forms of privileges. The resultant money power was opposed by sheer political power in the name of many "isms", but the masters who manipulated these isms combined money power with political authority and military might. Stalin and Mao stand as the supreme examples of brutal violence in the name of popular movements. They killed millions of their own countrymen. Then Nazis rose preaching open hatred against the Jews.Millions of Jews were killed. The so called Christian countries did nothing to prevent it. But when it came to political aggression against them, they went to war. The collapse of the USSR has seen many countries rise, and in each one of them there is either ethnic, religious or linguistic conflict. There is conflict in every Muslim country - rather, in every country where Muslims are present in any number. When they have no non-Muslims to fight, they fight among themselves!
Political conflict is about power. All participants aim to capture , or at least share, power. In true democracies, power changes hands through periodical elections, generally peacefully. In dictatorships {middle east, socialist countries like Cuba, etc} this can come about only through coup or death of the dictator. In a sense, such countries are stable ie they do not see much of internal conflict, since opposition is destroyed in course of time.
Negativism and Conflict inherent in democracy!
However, so called democracies suffer from[ or flourish on] conflicts all the time. Power is held by a party for four or five years and they have to seek reelection. The same party may get another term, but it is not certain. Therefore they cannot plan for the long term. This kind of short-term focus itself invites conflict of interest, as during every election, every major issue is debated from various angles. Major shifts do take place ; at the same time some of the old measures cannot be reversed soon, or easily. And then, there are institutions which continue to be loyal to the old establishment. Thus the democracies run on conflicts, and their periodical renewal, though there may not be open violence.
In India we are only too familiar with the heat and dust, sound and fury raised during the election process, often over non-issues.
In most countries people do not vote on merits of the issues but on party lines and loyalties. The electoral mandate in the best of democracies is a fractured one.
W.B.Yeats captured the situation tellingly in his poem:
The Second Coming
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
[This poem was written at the end of the First World War, but we witnessed one more World War, which Christian nations fought with passionate intensity! ]
Refugees and Immigrants: End of Europe?
A sign in Germany!
Right now, most of the Western countries are suffering from a terrible calamity and consequent conflict. This is due to the influx of immigrants and refugees, mostly Muslims, into stable democracies with secular laws.These immigrants are socially and educationally backward compared to the native people. But the real issue is that the immigrants refuse to adopt secular laws and conform to national standards of accepted behaviour. This is the main reason why Britain voted to leave the European Union recently. Germany, France, Italy and others are facing similar problems and may follow soon. So far the govts have been indulgent towards the refugees/immigrants, but local sentiments are rising against them. Leftist elements in the mainstream media portray this as racism, but the truth is that this is genuine people's reaction to unregulated immigration which overwhelms local communities. This is an issue highlighted by Donald Trump in the US recently, leading to his election as President!
India: Muslim invasion and conflict
Religious and social conflicts were introduced in India by the Muslim invasions. India surely had a multiplicity of religious sects and philosophies, but they never fought physically. Kings changed religion, people changed sects, philosophers argued among themselves endlessly, as they still do; but society was stable through all this. But Muslim invasions and rule changed this.
The English seized on this and discovered the way to keep Indians subjected by the policy of "divide and rule". [Divide et impera ]
Leaders Unite
Our national leaders like Sri Aurobindo and Tilak united the people of India by reminding them of their hoary history and culture, their religion and philosophy. For them, India was not a piece of earth; it was Mother , a Goddess, Shakti. But they used the English language to unite the educated of India, and used that language effectively to deal with the British! Earlier Swami Vivekananda had used the English language remarkably effectively to interpret our religion and philosophy to a world audience, and also to educated Indians who were taking to the English medium in large numbers.
These leaders spoke of India's freedom from British rule, but did not preach hatred against the British people.
Politicians Divide!
With the coming of Gandhi, things changed. He appealed to the masses and for this purpose chose to exalt Hindustani at the national level, and the regional languages at the regional level. This created a divide between Hindi-speaking and non-Hindi speaking people. It also created a divide between people speaking different languages often within the same province. This eventually led to the demand for linguistic states, which is the basis of true nationalism in India today. This is a major conflict which Gandhi created.
Gandhi unwittingly created more divisions like this. He constantly spoke of Hindus and Muslims, not of Indians as such. He spoke of Harijans (now, Dalits ) and others. These are divisions which still rule our national politics.
To be sure, Gandhi was not all negative. He is one leader who did lot of positive things, without ever holding any public office . Randolph Churchill is known for saying that it is the duty of an opposition to oppose. but Gandhi taught us that even while opposing, we can do many positive things. He adopted a "Constructive Programme" consisting of measures to improve the economic and social environment, without seeking or depending on govt. patronage. Khadi, Village Industries, Prohibition, Village sanitation, New Education were all parts of the programme. As his main political activity was centred on civil disobedience, which was in the end negative, this constructive programme was a necessary positive initiative. [ In fact, Sri Aurobindo had conceived of many of these measures as part of the national movement during the days of the agitation against Bengal Partition, long before Gandhi entered the scene.] But in the end, the constructive elements did not get much popular support, were considered fads, and were almost all forgotten after Gandhi's demise. It is the divisive elements which have prevailed.
Linguistic States and further divisions!
Politicians have found that it is so easy to unite people against something. It is so easy to divide them, too. Telugu speaking people of the old Madras province wanted a separate state on linguistic lines and Andhra Pradesh was created. Now, politicians found a way out to divide that unilingual state into two! Hindi speaking states like Bihar and UP were also divided!
We Indians have embraced "divide and rule"
heartily indeed. The British fabricated "Aryan invasion" theory without a shred of actual evidence, on the basis of a dubious philology. They divided Indians as Aryans, Dravidians, tribals, etc. Some communities were dubbed martial (who were preferred for the military), some were called thieves, etc. There is no basis for such divisions on the basis of our recorded history, literature, folk memory and cultural traditions, archaeology, etc. Even the idea of pure 'races' is now largely discredited by scientists. Yet, some Indians have taken the myth of Aryan invasion as a religious tenet and the politics and public discourse of Tamil Nad is run on this basis for a century! The irony is that the very word "Dravidian" is Sanskrit and those wise men who swear by the invasion of Sanskrit speaking Aryans do not have a word in their own language to designate themselves!
Indian society is divided officially by the govt on communal lines! While claiming to work for a casteless society, the govt has embraced caste as the standard to dispense favours. Caste consciousness is thus not only perpetuated by official sanction, but it creates demand for more castes to be recognised as "backward". And within each such caste is the conflict between those who have received the benefits and who have not! And even those converting to other religions seek reservation on caste basis!There are political parties run on caste/community basis.
Thus, what we call democracy today is largely a play of negative / divisive forces. One wonders by what magic or alchemy such negativity will produce wholesome societies.
The Making of Man
There were ministers there of all sorts of schisms,
And withered old maids of all sorts of isms.
- Emerson.
Today, if you want to plead for anything, it will in effect be a plea or fight against something else! A simple demand for clean environment will put you in conflict with huge vested interests. In a city like Bangalore, to seek to preserve avenue trees will land you in trouble with the tree-cutting mafia, enjoying official patronage!
Politics is negative
Politics provides a fertile field , powerful players, tempting incentives and maddening rewards. People were incited against monarchy, aristocracy and inherited status and privileges, in the name of democracy. The cry of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of the French Revolution easily degenerated into open violence and bloodshed. Privileges based on landholdings were replaced by a new class of industrialists, traders and capitalists ie by newer forms of privileges. The resultant money power was opposed by sheer political power in the name of many "isms", but the masters who manipulated these isms combined money power with political authority and military might. Stalin and Mao stand as the supreme examples of brutal violence in the name of popular movements. They killed millions of their own countrymen. Then Nazis rose preaching open hatred against the Jews.Millions of Jews were killed. The so called Christian countries did nothing to prevent it. But when it came to political aggression against them, they went to war. The collapse of the USSR has seen many countries rise, and in each one of them there is either ethnic, religious or linguistic conflict. There is conflict in every Muslim country - rather, in every country where Muslims are present in any number. When they have no non-Muslims to fight, they fight among themselves!
Political conflict is about power. All participants aim to capture , or at least share, power. In true democracies, power changes hands through periodical elections, generally peacefully. In dictatorships {middle east, socialist countries like Cuba, etc} this can come about only through coup or death of the dictator. In a sense, such countries are stable ie they do not see much of internal conflict, since opposition is destroyed in course of time.
Negativism and Conflict inherent in democracy!
However, so called democracies suffer from[ or flourish on] conflicts all the time. Power is held by a party for four or five years and they have to seek reelection. The same party may get another term, but it is not certain. Therefore they cannot plan for the long term. This kind of short-term focus itself invites conflict of interest, as during every election, every major issue is debated from various angles. Major shifts do take place ; at the same time some of the old measures cannot be reversed soon, or easily. And then, there are institutions which continue to be loyal to the old establishment. Thus the democracies run on conflicts, and their periodical renewal, though there may not be open violence.
In India we are only too familiar with the heat and dust, sound and fury raised during the election process, often over non-issues.
In most countries people do not vote on merits of the issues but on party lines and loyalties. The electoral mandate in the best of democracies is a fractured one.
W.B.Yeats captured the situation tellingly in his poem:
The Second Coming
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
[This poem was written at the end of the First World War, but we witnessed one more World War, which Christian nations fought with passionate intensity! ]
Refugees and Immigrants: End of Europe?
Right now, most of the Western countries are suffering from a terrible calamity and consequent conflict. This is due to the influx of immigrants and refugees, mostly Muslims, into stable democracies with secular laws.These immigrants are socially and educationally backward compared to the native people. But the real issue is that the immigrants refuse to adopt secular laws and conform to national standards of accepted behaviour. This is the main reason why Britain voted to leave the European Union recently. Germany, France, Italy and others are facing similar problems and may follow soon. So far the govts have been indulgent towards the refugees/immigrants, but local sentiments are rising against them. Leftist elements in the mainstream media portray this as racism, but the truth is that this is genuine people's reaction to unregulated immigration which overwhelms local communities. This is an issue highlighted by Donald Trump in the US recently, leading to his election as President!
India: Muslim invasion and conflict
Religious and social conflicts were introduced in India by the Muslim invasions. India surely had a multiplicity of religious sects and philosophies, but they never fought physically. Kings changed religion, people changed sects, philosophers argued among themselves endlessly, as they still do; but society was stable through all this. But Muslim invasions and rule changed this.
The English seized on this and discovered the way to keep Indians subjected by the policy of "divide and rule". [Divide et impera ]
Leaders Unite
These leaders spoke of India's freedom from British rule, but did not preach hatred against the British people.
Politicians Divide!
With the coming of Gandhi, things changed. He appealed to the masses and for this purpose chose to exalt Hindustani at the national level, and the regional languages at the regional level. This created a divide between Hindi-speaking and non-Hindi speaking people. It also created a divide between people speaking different languages often within the same province. This eventually led to the demand for linguistic states, which is the basis of true nationalism in India today. This is a major conflict which Gandhi created.
Gandhi unwittingly created more divisions like this. He constantly spoke of Hindus and Muslims, not of Indians as such. He spoke of Harijans (now, Dalits ) and others. These are divisions which still rule our national politics.
Linguistic States and further divisions!
Politicians have found that it is so easy to unite people against something. It is so easy to divide them, too. Telugu speaking people of the old Madras province wanted a separate state on linguistic lines and Andhra Pradesh was created. Now, politicians found a way out to divide that unilingual state into two! Hindi speaking states like Bihar and UP were also divided!
We Indians have embraced "divide and rule"
heartily indeed. The British fabricated "Aryan invasion" theory without a shred of actual evidence, on the basis of a dubious philology. They divided Indians as Aryans, Dravidians, tribals, etc. Some communities were dubbed martial (who were preferred for the military), some were called thieves, etc. There is no basis for such divisions on the basis of our recorded history, literature, folk memory and cultural traditions, archaeology, etc. Even the idea of pure 'races' is now largely discredited by scientists. Yet, some Indians have taken the myth of Aryan invasion as a religious tenet and the politics and public discourse of Tamil Nad is run on this basis for a century! The irony is that the very word "Dravidian" is Sanskrit and those wise men who swear by the invasion of Sanskrit speaking Aryans do not have a word in their own language to designate themselves!
Indian society is divided officially by the govt on communal lines! While claiming to work for a casteless society, the govt has embraced caste as the standard to dispense favours. Caste consciousness is thus not only perpetuated by official sanction, but it creates demand for more castes to be recognised as "backward". And within each such caste is the conflict between those who have received the benefits and who have not! And even those converting to other religions seek reservation on caste basis!There are political parties run on caste/community basis.
Thus, what we call democracy today is largely a play of negative / divisive forces. One wonders by what magic or alchemy such negativity will produce wholesome societies.
The Making of Man
Where is one that, born of woman, altogether can escape
From the lower world within him, moods of tiger, or of ape?
Man as yet is being made, and ere the crowning Age of ages,
Shall not aeon after aeon pass and touch him into shape?
From the lower world within him, moods of tiger, or of ape?
Man as yet is being made, and ere the crowning Age of ages,
Shall not aeon after aeon pass and touch him into shape?
All about him shadow still, but, while the races flower and fade,
Prophet-eyes may catch a glory slowly gaining on the shade,
Till the peoples all are one, and all their voices blend in choric
Hallelujah to the Maker 'It is finish'd. Man is made.'
Prophet-eyes may catch a glory slowly gaining on the shade,
Till the peoples all are one, and all their voices blend in choric
Hallelujah to the Maker 'It is finish'd. Man is made.'
-Alfred Lord Tennyson
The good is oft interred with their bones.”