Jayaprakash Narayan's Thesis

THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY April 9, 1960

partly explain why their investiga- ' The authors seem to be convinced debt to Hill, Stycos, Back and their tors were given answers which are that the medically preferred me­ many helpers. They have pioneer­ encouraging to the research work­ thods of contraception offered by ed a way into very difficult territory, ers. "Yes, we only want 2 child­ the clinics are essential for bringing and they have been good enough to ren", "Yes, we think your education down the birth rate. If this is their share their thinking processes as programme was fine". How much conviction they have overlooked the well as their data with all who take were these verbal answers checked fact that the birth rate in their own the trouble to read their book. Any­ by hard facts? Not enough. Pro­ and other Western countries has one who has had experience of this been brought down mostly by the bably also too much reliance was type of field work will appreciate; use of two such "inferior" methods how much labour has gone into this placed on answers given at one or as douching and withdrawal, with study. If they have not got all the very few interviews. People do not condom. The difference is that answers, neither has anyone else. usually reveal their true selves im­ people in the West not only said they They have shown the value of their mediately, and Puerto Ricans no wanted small families when asked approach and their method of work: doubt share with most ordinary by investigators but they were also that it also has weaknesses is under­ rural people an understanding of determined to have small families. standable. It is no easy task to in­ the truth of the saying that "a soft All who arc concerned with the vestigate the social and psychologic­ answer turneth away wrath". population problem are much in al aspects of human reproduction. Jayaprakash Narayan's Thesis Report of a Discussion Rajni Kothari IN discussion-groups and seminars dian genius rather than a mutilated gives rise to excessive concentration in India, by and large, speech- version of an imported political of power. making tends to overshadow genu­ structure. The most important ex­ In place of such a system, J P ine 'discussion' and enthusiasm to ponent of this theme, no douht, is would like India to be organised on present one's own ideas is rarely Shri Jayaprakash Narayan who has the model of a "communitarian so­ matched by receptivity to other also performed the valuable service ciety", a society made of small, people's ideas. Secondly, the view­ of making articulate the hidden pre­ compact, "'optimum" communities points presented arc more or less mises of the Sarvodaya ideal. Be­ where the individual, possessed by a standardised viewpoints. Even fore reporting on the discussion on "sense of community", is also en­ where there is controversy—very the 7'hesis, therefore, it is necessary abled to participate directly in the often there isn't any—the purpose to give here a brief summary of the process , of decision-making and of the discussion seems less to re­ Thesis proper. where the prevailing pyramidal solve the controversy than to dis­ The thesis consists of (1) an ana­ structure is replaced by a system of solve it in high-sounding rhetoric. lysis of the prevailing political sys­ "ever-widening, never-ascending cir­ Thirdly, the value of a discussion- tem in India and (2) the way out. cles" with the individual at the group or a seminar is judged more The author is entirely dissatisfied centre and the country and finally from the brilliance displayed by in­ with the parliamentary system in the whole world at the circumfer­ dividual speakers than by the qua­ general, wherever it exists, more ence. The important task is to cre­ lity or level of discussion. Positions particularly in India. A parliament­ ate this "sense of community", to remain unaltered and every one goes ary government is at best an "elect­ inculcate a philosophy in which the home none the wiser. ed oligarchy". It rules by passive essentially social nature of man is Such a discussion-group met in consent rather than by active parti­ brought into an organic relation Bombay to discuss Shri Jayaprakash cipation. Its evils are centralisation with the "totality", to base human Narayan's thesis: "A Plea for Re­ of power, bureaucratisation of all organisation on the principles of construction of Indian Polity" which initiative, party politics, demago- trusteeship, "dharma" and a volun­ has been in private circulation and guey, manipulation of mass media tary limitation of wants and to evolve has attracted considerable attention of communication, etc. These in­ institutions to suit the "social genius of late, both in India and abroad. herent defects of the system are all of India" so that they may "sustain, The group was organised by the the more accentuated in India be­ revive and strengthen the whole fab­ Indian Committee of Cultural Free­ cause of lack of proper traditions ric of Indian society". dom and met on the 16th and 17th and a conventional code of political More concretely, J P envisages a of March at the Indian Merchants* behaviour, lack of self-governing re­ system in which at the base—or Chamber Hall. gional and professional bodies, an rather at the centre (the symmetry irresponsive and irremovable majo­ I he has in mind is oceanic, not archi­ rity faced by an irresponsible and tectural)—there are the "primary THE THESIS resourceless Opposition, and econo­ communities" more or less of the Discussion on the working of mic backwardness, giving rise to size of the existing revenue ullages. democracy in India seems to be as­ centralised planning and widening These are the "self-governing, self- suming of late a new dimension tentacles of bureaucracy. The root sufficient, agro-industrial, urbo-rural, with the revival of the theme of of the evil lies in the "baffling vast- local communities". Beyond them "indigenous democracy", of a polity ness" and complexity of modern in­ are the "regional communities" in that would suit the needs of the In­ dustrial society which, of necessity, which a number of primary commu-

585 April 9, 1960 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY

DURGAPUR STEELWORKS

586 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY April 9, 1960 nities come together. Similarly, a The criticisms voiced in the dis­ comment, much of which was eon- number of regional communities cussion could be conveniently group­ fused, A large number of partici­ form into the "district communities", ed into six. pants took the position that it was which in turn form the "provincial 1. In defence of parliamentary both impossible and undesirable for communities" and finally there is institutions : all citizens to participate in govern­ ment. Professor Dantwala. Shri the "National Community". A hope The experience of this form of is also expressed that "a day might Kunte and others pointed out that government in India was too limited government was too technical a mat­ come when the. national communi­ to justify the conclusions drawn by ties might federate together to form ter to be handled by untutored mas­ J P. Professor Ham Joshi strongly ses. What was needed was an effi- the World Community". This is pressed the viewpoint that the defects the structure. cient expertise. The function of the in the present system were more in­ people was to throw out a govern­ The manner of conducting busi­ cidental than inherent and the real ment that they did not like. For ness is also simple. At the local problem in India was to build up this, they were provided with the level, there is the "Gram Sabha" of the existing institutions and lay instrument of elections. Parliament­ which the membership extends to all down proper conventions for the ary government was a government adults in the village. The Executive same. Experience of England has by consent. History is full of inst­ of the village is to be vested in the shown that sound local self-govern­ ances where more participating "dram Panchayat" formed not by ing institutions provided ample op­ systems with their referendunis. and elections but by "general consensus portunities for citizen participation plebiscites had played into the of opinion in the Sabha", Failing and given a strong tradition of hands of demagogues and dictators. agreement, the selection is to he by democracy, parties could also be a A government that ruled by con- "drawing lots". At the regional great educative influence. Profes­ sent must always keep its ears close level, the Gram Panchayats will be sor Dantwala made the point that to the ground. Participation must integrated into a uPanchayat Samiti" I lie simultaneous existence of the be limited to a few ; consent, how on the basis of indirect elections present evils on the one hand and ever, must come from a majority. from the Gram Panchayats. Follow­ parliamentary institutions on the ing this pattern—and always on the other at. best established a correla­ 4. Examination of the Commu­ basis of indirect elections — there tion, not a causal scheme. The nitarian Society ; will be the "District Council", the evils, he suggested, are not because Alongside these criticisms on the "State Assembly" and the "Lok of but in spite of parliamentary traditional lines, there were a few Sahha". At each level, the admini­ government. They were more of an others who took a different position stration is to be carried on by "com­ economic and social nature, it on J P's Thesis. They directed their mittees of representative bodies" stems that he hoped that good plan­ criticism on the 'constructive' part which are to be assisted by civil ning and efficient administration of the thesis. While they did not servants and which would be coordi­ could solve these evils. Also among agree with other speakers in their nated in a "Coordinating Commit­ this group was Mrs Taya Zinkin defense of the "status quo' and went tee""". Legislative powers will be who observed, In a truly journalistic some way with J P in his analysis exercised at these various levels on fashion, thai the public reaction to of the existing political set-up in the basis of division of functions and the Nanavati case was proof that India, they had no sympathy for his delegation of powers from the centre democracy was alive in India and remedy. The remedy, they felt, was to the periphery. But in general people were participating in it. in a sense more dangerous than the more power will reside in the village 2. Need for action, not academics: disease. A Communitarian society communities. This is the scheme of would accentuate rather than alle­ The arch-propagator of a tho- J P's communitarian democracy. viate the existing social and econo­ roughgoing if naive pragmatism mic disparities. A Panchayat Haj was Shri A D Gorwalla who repeat- II may well turn out to be a Status edlv stressed the point that the need THE DISCUSSION Society. The doctrine of trustee­ in India was for good men to enter ship and the cull for a voluntary So much for the thesis. Turning politics and drive the bad men out, limitation of wants are bound to to the discussion on the thesis, three to "purify' the polity by permeating strengthen enormously the hands main groups of participants could existing institutions and to end cor­ of the haves who would have more be distinguished: ruption and nepotism by bringing while the have-nots would continue (1) The supporters of J P whose to an end the prevailing power mo­ to be have-nots. Again, J P has con­ principal contribution was to point nopoly. Human nature being what fused centralisation of power with out that the Thesis was a 'cry from it is. party polities cannot be eschew­ largeness of the existing social unit. the soul' of a person greatly distress­ ed. Instead of building up a sound The former is not necessarily a func­ ed at the current drift of politics in democratic Opposition to the ruling tion of the latter. You could have this country; party, men like J P were diverting centralisation of power in Gram national attention to Utopian schemes (2) The apologists of the parlia­ Panchayats—in the hands of the and revivalist ideas. J P's thesis mentary system of democracy who dominant caste -as much as in the was little more than an exercise in State or the Centre. In fact, such considered J P.'s approach as nega­ academic analysis while the need of tive and Utopian; and concentrated pockets of power all the moment was not system-building over the country would introduce (3) Critics who, while they agreed but action. another form of feudalism. The with a part of J P"s analysis of the 3. Consent versus participation : question of centralisation was there­ existing system, vehemently reject­ J P's advocacy of a 'participating fore, more qualitative than quanti­ ed his remedy of a "Communitarian tative. Society". democracy' attracted a great deal of 587 April 9, 1960 THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY

It was also pointed out that it was proper spirit, served interests quite thing that could be taken for granted. wrong lo imagine that party politics different from the ones they were It had to be nurtured and preserved would disappear as soon as the si2e supposed to serve. The creation of from the onslaughts of authoritarian­ of the polity was reduced. The his­ the pre-conditions of democracy was ism. A Communitarian society was tory of Greek city-States—and of the a function, not of institutional Indian Republics of the past which change, but of political education no answer to such a challenge. J P takes as his model—bears enough and of changes in cultural values Ill testimony to the view that local fac­ and attitudes. THE REPLY tionalism can sometimes render the It was pointed out, however, that The discussion ended with J P's polity more important than national underlying J P's faith in village 'summing-up'. He added little to divisions. Indeed, it was possible institutions lay something else. He his thesis. But what he said outside to advance a tentative hypothesis had a mystic notion of what he the pale of his thesis was remark­ that in villages in India where fac­ called the 'Indian genius'. All that able. He was pained to see that few tionalism was rampant, political was necessary, therefore, was to had read and none had understood divisions might perform the import- evolve institutions to suit this 'ge­ his message. He felt very unhappy, ant task of diverting parochial nius'. The important thing was to even "felt like crying" at the way loyalties based on hereditary com­ educate this so-called 'genius' itself. the whole thing was discussed. pulsions toward party loyalties based The values we have cherished for (Many of us could not understand on voluntary association and some centuries are essentially authoritari­ this either!) He was shocked to identification of principles and poli­ an values and we have first to change find how anyone could believe that cies. The hypothesis, of course, them before embarking upon any he would propose anything undemo­ nerds to be tested. large-scale institutional reforms. It cratic. His whole life had been dedicated to the cause of freedom. On the question of atomisation of is significant that even while J P His references to Pakistan's or Egy­ the individual, it was pertinently speaks on the role of education, his pt's experiments with new types of pointed out that the problem in emphasis is in terms of education to polity were so grossly misinterpret­ India was not to return to a new create "a 'spirit of community' with­ ed. But he did not wish to go into organism—as envisaged in J P's out which the whole body politic that. Nor did he intend to reply to Communitarian society—but to libe­ would be without life and soul" the various criticisms raised during rate the individual from the existing rather than in terms of spreading the discussion. He would rather ex- organism. The process of indi­ essential democratic values from the plain his position once again. And viduation had not gone far in our elite to the masses. Thus, said that he did. villages and it was on the realisation these critics, J P tended to equate of a sense of individuality rather democracy with local community li­ J P repeated the general argu­ than in searching for a sense of com­ ving, with formal decentralisation, ment of his thesis, adding, however, munity that the advance of demo­ with elimination of bigness and so that ""deeds, not words" would cracy in this country depended. A on. The whole approach was exces­ prove it. He would have liked to true sense of community could only sively formalistic. It was also obs­ invite the participants to the two be based on the freedom of indivi­ curantist and mystical. villages of Berani and Belsara in duals. The line of progression, On this point, the very concept of Bihar where true democracy .func­ from the viewpoint of individual 'rural democracy' was challenged. tioned, where a Communitarian so­ development, was from primitive The pre-conditions of democracy ciety prevailed and where everyone organism to individuation and then just did not exist in our villages. got his needs fulfilled from a com­ to a reintegration on the basis of Liberty, equality and all the rest of mon pool to which he contributed all freedom and association. Likewise, them were essentially urban ideas, his earnings. He was also contem­ the line of progress for a free so­ generated from urban conditions of plating, along with some others, to ciety was from organism to associa­ living. From there they would start a large experiment in Bihar on tion. A Communitarian society as penetrate into the villages. If we the lines laid down in his thesis. envisaged by J P failed to fulfil recognise the role of intellectuals in (Here was another plan for a either of these criteria. our society as one of spreading model community. But as some ad­ 5. Institutions are not enough : these values, we must also recog­ mirer of J P remarked in the lobby, "Even if he succeeds in his experi­ These critics also challenged the nise the positive role that ur­ banisation could play in the forma­ ment, how many J Ps do we have in very conception of social change India? After all, even England had and political reconstruction found in tion of democratic traditions. 6. Need for a new leadership : one Robert Owen!") the thesis. Change was thought of Jayaprakash left the impression of in it in terms of an elaborate insti­ Finally, the all-important point being distressed and misunderstood. tutional structure that would replace was made that the political prob­ There was a note of urgency in his the existing one, the assumption be- lem in India was that of control, not prefatory remarks to the discussion ing that an ideal institutional set-up community. Power must be con­ on the first day when he had said would solve the crisis in which de- trolled wherever it resides, in Par­ that if only leaders of opinion in mocracy found itself today. Here liament or Panchayat. And this is the country agreed on his scheme, J P was making precisely the same the task of political leadership. What the change could be a "compara­ error as made by those constitutional is urgently needed is the rise of a tively simple affair". Towards the pundits who had hoped that by insti­ new leadership. This was the func­ end of the discussion, he appeared tuting a parliamentary form of gov­ tion, above all, of political enlighten­ to have withdrawn in a mood of ernment, thay would make India ment and constant vigilance. Men resignation from any idea of such democratic. Our experience shows must be lead to feel and fight for an agreement. He would rather rely that institutions, in the absence of a their rights. Democracy is not some- on "deeds, not words". 588