Jan
6
A culture is the manner of doing things individually, or in an organized manner as a group, which the majority of populace in a particular group adheres with and accepts.
So, culture can be characterized as individual culture, or as organized culture. Yet often, the Individual culture becomes insignificant against the organized culture of the group or society, and when an individual pertains and adheres with his individual approach and manner of doing things, his manner or culture is testified by categorizing him/her or his/her acts as cultured or uncultured. That makes the individual culture insignificant and the individual becomes either a cultured (skilled) person or uncultured (unsophisticated) person.
Socio-political culture of a society represents the methodical organized activities of a society people as a group, which pertains, with the development of socio-political scenario of that society in a particular time period. The noticeable thing is, culture is not a fixed absolute truth, and it keeps changing from time to time. Culture is a dynamic flux where the aspirations of the individuals of the society and the values of the community clashes with each other, providing a middle path of change satisfying both the aspirations and value premises of the youth members and the veterans of a culture. The noticeable fact of this flux is aspirations of the youth or new members often wins over the value premises of old and that brings about a change in outlook of the society and its values.
Indian culture is a vast and historic flux that is evolving, distorting, and reshaping itself searching for the freedom, equality and justice, since the start of the time. Yet, in the making of Modern India, the first genuine effort to unite the Indian sub-continent as a nation to express a dignified culture took place during the evolution of Maurya Empire. Chandragupta Maurya was the founder of the Maurya Empire. He succeeded in bringing together most of the Indian subcontinent, and that is why he was the first genuine unifier and emperor of India.
After the invasion of Alexander on India, Chanakya, the economic-political scholar and teacher of that era, roused as the individual power to bring upon an empire, which could defend India against any further invasion from any foreign power. He overthrew the vast Nand Empire with the help of Chandra Gupta and cultivated a new empire controlling the Indian borders and safeguarding them. Chanakya was more known to be an economic liberal and a liberty-lover who denounced all excessive taxation system of Nand Empire and established new norms. According to Chanakya,
“Taxation should not be a painful process for the people. There should be leniency and caution while deciding the tax structure. Ideally, governments should collect taxes like a honeybee, which sucks just the right amount of honey from the flower so that both can survive. Taxes should be collected in small and not in large proportions”.
Chanakya was a firm believer of self-sustenance and individual rights and the virtue of selfishness.
In Garuda Purana, Chanakya signifies the importance of money and the value money inherits—
1.7: Put aside some wealth in case of future difficulties. Never ask, “Why should a rich man dread hard times?” If Lakshmi, the Goddess of Fortune, decides to go elsewhere, even your savings will dwindle. Chanakya, Garuda Purana
Later on he says about wealth and richness –
5.20. Wealth, which represents Her in this world, never stops moving from one hand to the next. Whenever a clever man becomes rich, others lay schemes for plunder—banks through exorbitant interest rates, governments through constant and excessive taxation, thieves through extortion and common citizens through lawsuits—all conspire to reduce a rich man’s accumulated wealth to zero. Chanakya, Garuda Purana.
It is observable, that with the stability in political culture, Maurya Empire brought-forth a need for Individual liberty and economic freedom too. Yet, the era was feudalistic and Chandra Gupta Maurya established the empire by dethroning and killing Nand Vansh.
The blood-shedding of feudal structure kept Indian plains blood red and Ashoka, the greatest of Indian Emperors followed the same gory culture and killed his own brothers to gain the empire. Yet, historical evidences interprets that Ashoka was the most successful, benevolent and popular emperor.
The kingdom and serfdom continued to rule the Indian sub-continent, struggling within them-selves, involving in bloody wars and fights, and as the organized culture of unity deteriorated, Indian sub-continent again faced foreign invaders in form of Ghauris, Qutubs, and Mughals.
Babar established the Mughal Empire, and Akbar, the grandson of Babar, proved himself as the most significant ruler of Mughal Empire. He again unified India and brought about some major socio-political and religious changes. Yet, because of the similar drawbacks of feudal system and inter-contradictions and fractions, Mughal Empire lost its control and British Empire took hold of India. Indian public was used to the imperialism and serfdom, yet the kings and rulers of India revolted against the British rule, and the first Independence struggle was staged in 1857. The basic change that struggle brought forth was the sense of common citizen of India, to be a vibrant and important part of India. After 100’s of years, the society was now taking a unified facet with a charm of equal responsibility. Yet, this dream of liberty was only against the foreign rulers. In 1857, the common citizenry was still ready to accept the national kingdom of Mughals or some Indian Kingdom again.
Yet the times were changing and it took a little time from a drastic change in socio-political culture of India from that point of time of 1857. Indians rouse against any sort of rulers and kingdom. Obviously, the intellectual touching from foreign world and Indian intellectuals drive towards the reasonability of individual freedom and the democracy strengthened in India. With the establishment of Indian National Congress under the headship of Indian Industrialist Dadabhai Naoroji and veteran leaders like Gangadhar Tilak, feudalism was destined to end in India.
Yet, on the name of Liberty, the national leaders were seeking for political liberty of Indians, and in 1947, Indians did achieved the political freedom with establishment of democratic India. Democracy provided a certain degree of freedom but the battle didn’t ended there. Democracy, being the rule of majority over minority, providing ruling powers to certain class of rulers belonging to politicians, never let the Indians to strive and aspire for Individual freedom. The Organized culture continued to defeat the Individual strides and demeaning the individual culture as “Unsophisticated”. Yet, the aspirations are meant to defeat the outdated values.
Until 1991, Indian government kept a closed organized culture of socialism, unjustified egalitarianism, and governmental indoctrinations. The economic meltdown of 1992 brought forth a further economic-socio-political change and India opted for liberalization of economy. The flux is under constant change, and it is not very far in future when Indian society will start emphasizing the Individual Culture, the culture of freedom, liberty and individual rights over the organized culture. It is a positive evolution, a story of evolving changes in the society merging from socio-political clutches of serfdom to the individualistic aspirations of freedom, self-reliance and Individual rights based on economic freedom as enshrined property rights and culture of Individual voluntarism.
Related Posts
1 viewsNo Responses to “A peek through socio-political culture of India”
Leave a Reply
Vikram Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 7:53 amYour view is pretty North-centric. Also it is primarily an upper caste narrative. I think we have not yet seen the Dalit interpretation of North Indian history and society.
Unpretentious Diva Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 8:01 amwell, there are many South indian groups which claims that Chanakya was South indian.
Also, Chandra gupta Maurya was a Dalit who became emperor of India.
Your knowledge about India is quite limited.
Unpretentious Diva Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 8:03 amAnd as usual, you did not read whole article, one of its part is here.
India in search of freedom, equality, and Justice.
Vikram Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 8:09 am“Your knowledge about India is quite limited.” Absolutely. With atleast 3000 years of very complex history, many many religions/languages/cultures I would have to be a very special person indeed to know a lot about India. That is why I try to learn.
I am not saying that we have not seen a Dalit interpretation of Indian history, meaning an analysis of Indian history by Dalit historians. I did not say that there are no Dalits in your version of history.
I guess my comment is sort of irrelevant to the main points you were trying to raise, so lets drop this thread.
Vikram Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 8:14 amIn the above comment I meant to say, I am saying that we have not seen a Dalit interpretation of Indian history, meaning an analysis of Indian history by Dalit historians.
Unpretentious Diva Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 11:24 amI wonder what makes you believe that I am not a “Dalit”?
A Dalit means “oppressed” or someone belonging to an “oppressed” class of the system.
At present, the general category people, who comes under no group quota culture, are the most oppressed. The government oppressing them by wrongly favouring other groups, castes and religion.
Such acts of illegal, unjust and immoral attitude on part of government surely can not bring any good.
The issue being discussed here is about socio-political view point, it is certainly not at all about social order of the society of middle ages or modern era.
Unpretentious Diva Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 1:10 pm@ rmnWell, as I said earlier, you have full freedom to appreciate or criticize my write-up.
it might have confused you, its quite probable.
Yet, my intentions were pretty clear, which were to summarize the difference and importance of both “organized culture” and “Individual culture” and then to discuss how the possibilities of Individual Culture/Freedom/Rights are evolving in india and what a long time it took to lead us here, where we can talk about individual freedom.
It was not so easy in yesteryear!
gaurav Says:
January 6th, 2009 at 1:19 pmWow ! I will say the wobbling sphere at the end of your blog is wonderful, unfortunately i observed it today only, rest the write-up is very interesting But i really feel the Indian society today has evolved in such a way that Individual freedom is deemed as sin, one is expected to be Kind, Compassionate and emotional in fool-hardy way. Talking more I really feel that in north India JP movement brought a revolutionary change in socio-political culture of this part, yes today it had done nothing for individual freedom but all the political institution flourishing today can easily be seen as having their patronage to that revolution.
I also feel that India is such a amalgamation of diversified culture that generalization will not be apt,without any doubt these were defining moments in India history,but then a walk through India and I found,In kerela Common people were hardly affected by Mumbai terror strikes, isn’t that disconcerting, after godhra the socio-political beliefs in Gujurat has taken a different proportion, courtesy own experience, People Of J&K have quite different socio-political culture belief, so i really believe in these words that “India was created on a dream,the dream of people of such varied culture,tradition and habits living under one roof.”
Quite true. And we the advocates of Individual freedom are also a part of the same roof, and I couldn’t ignore myself and the ilks of me, that is why this write up is all about the cultural change in positive strides for Individual Freedom.
GP Says:
January 9th, 2009 at 6:24 pm“Taxation should not be a painful process for the people. There should be leniency and caution while deciding the tax structure. Ideally, governments should collect taxes like a honeybee, which sucks just the right amount of honey from the flower so that both can survive. Taxes should be collected in small and not in large proportions”.
<<<<<Absolutely correct. I fully agree and I think Govt. of india exactly doing that by ensuring everyone including bigwigs like (Mr. Bachhan ,SRK, Mr. Dhoni and Tendulkar) follow IT rules and pay their share of money (as per tax rules) as societal obligation.>>>>>>
5.20. Wealth, which represents Her in this world, never stops moving from one hand to the next. Whenever a clever man becomes rich, others lay schemes for plunder—banks through exorbitant interest rates, governments through constant and excessive taxation, thieves through extortion and common citizens through lawsuits—all conspire to reduce a rich man’s accumulated wealth to zero. Chanakya, Garuda Purana.
<<<<<I really doubt if Banks were really present in Maurya Samrajya and what exorbitatnt interests rates they were applying to poor rich fellow and also how come common citizens try to extract money from rich guys through lawsuits coz mostly they used to be timid,shy and act as servants(read slaves) of Rich ppl who hardly dare to speak anything against them (Rich and King officials)
(May be exact Sanskrit versus from Garuda Purana which u translated in English as Chankya’s quotes would help to clarify more in this regard.)>>>>>
Destination Infinity Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 12:49 amInteresting point of view. But there are extremes in both individual freedom and also collective freedom. Maybe we have seen the extremes of the collective freedom and are yet to see the extremes of the individual freedom? (By extreme, I mean both good and bad). And, grass is always greeener on the other side of the river!
Destination Infinity
renegade_division Says:
January 12th, 2009 at 2:05 amYou are absolutely right, extreme of anything is bad.
Take for example sex, now we all have see the extremity of non-consensual sex(Rape), its bad, similarly extremity of consensual sex is also bad. Sometimes you just have to grab a girl by her legs and rape her, you can’t always take her consent, that’s going too extreme. What if all the girls in the world started saying no to sex, how will our societies procreate, our civilization will converge and collapse.
Take another example, slavery. Now we have gone too far in eliminating slavery, we have gone to the extreme of making people free, as we all know “extreme of anything is bad”, therefore there has to be something wrong with allowing people to be “born free”. I mean I am not kidding, some people just don’t work without someone enslaving them.
The Middle Vice! | Reason for Liberty Says:
January 14th, 2009 at 12:36 am[…] Often when one stresses over liberty, people start suggesting the dangers of extremes. They claim, we have seen extremes of collective slavery, we may see extremes of individual freedom now and it will not be good. They agrees socialism is bad, they claim capitalism may be bad; hence they […]