A secular phenomena with all the trappings of exotic religiosity

Re: Is India headed the right way?, by Francois Gautier by Rich on Tue 06 Feb 2007 10:44 AM PST Profile Permanent Link

I certainly agree with the author’s sentiment that India needs to develop a critical solvent to resist the streamed capitalism and cultural nihilism of the neo-liberal corporatist project of globalization. It maybe desirable to participate in a global economy and exploit the transfer of western scientific and technological know how by supplying a massive work force (standing reserve) of decently trained low paid workers and enjoy the benefits of an economy growing at 8% . (Although the actual poverty rate in India is only decreasing at a rate of 1%, so there still is a critical 7% gap) But the wholesale adoption of the most profane aspects of western cultural values is indeed troubling as is the displacement of the indigenous value systems and wisdom traditions of India. I would also agree with the author, that the spiritual traditions of India could supply one of the main ingredients in any critical solvent of resistance, to the culture of nihilism, however I am also concerned by his characterization of Indian cultural affinity.

For example in the following statement: “Instead of feeling first Indians, they feel they are first Muslims and then Indians, first Dalits and then Indians, first Christian and then Indians.“

The author’s omissions here speaks louder then his declaration. What about including in this list upper caste Hindus, who see their own groups self-determination through the vision of the chauvinist Hindu ideology of Thackeray or Modi?

The author fails to mention that it is not only the lower castes, Muslims and Christians that follow their own narrowly determined politics of self-interest, but also middle and upper caste Hindus whose identity is tied to caste or group exclusivity. In fact, as I understand it the problem with the multiple claims of self-interest groups in India is a direct result of the deficient mythological “caste system” of Hinduism.

Politics in India today is all about ones own group or caste interest, be it Yadav, Thakur or a hundred others. In fact, caste is one of the chief determining factors in casting ones vote. This is also a major reason India suffers the political chaos or corruption on a massive scale, because the politics of caste or group identity does not proceed with the national interest in mind. Rather this form of politics only concerns the specific concerns of the interest group or caste. As a result the main promise that the politics of caste makes is not for the country’s welfare, but to deliver as many government jobs as possible to their own particular caste members. V.S. Naipaul’s book called India a Million Mutinies Now (1991) explores the problems of group identity in India.

Here is a quote “The liberation of Spirit that has come to India (since 1947) could not come as a release alone. In India with its layer below layer of distress and cruelty, it had to come as a disturbance. It had to come as rage and revolt. India was now a country of a million little mutinies”

The psychology of division in India is much more complex then any definition can provide that merely equates it as a reaction against Hinduism.

Another quote that Gauthier makes which I find troubling is: "Today, even the Sikh community feels it wants to separate from its Hindu brothers and Christian and Muslims are encouraged to look down upon Hindus.”

Well is this author speaking as an apologist for Hinduism or for the nation of India?

It seems that his main assumption is Indian nationalism equals Hindu nationalism. Here I would argue that he is mixing up differing logical types of identity. India is a secular nation, Hinduism is a cluster of religious traditions. The nation of India as it exists today is as much a product of European social constructions as it is indigenous traditions (e.g. the nation of India which was created in the 20th century is not identical with the cluster of religious traditions stretching back millennia known popularly as Hinduism). It is an error to equate Indian national interest with a Hindu-centric polity.

Therefore when the author states: ”India should become the spiritual leader of the world.” The meaning for me is certainly not identical with Sri Aurobindo’s vision of India as the “guru of nations”, rather Gauthier’s statement seethes with an Orientalist sensibility which fuses what is essentially a secular phenomena with all the trappings of exotic religiosity. rc