PROSPEROUS INDIA 10

Indian economy at the time of independence

India did not get independence easily as the colonial masters were cunning and brutal. Millions of men and women had to undergo severe pains and endure constant sufferings. Thousands of people had to lose their properties and lives. Even after the first war of independence in 1857, Indians had to struggle for another nine more decades spending all their energies to free our motherland from the clutches of the aliens.

Even before India got independence, her economy remained shattered. The fine balance that existed among the major sectors of the economy namely agriculture, industry and services had collapsed much earlier. Kennedy notes that India’s share of global manufacturing had declined drastically from 24.5 per cent to a mere 1.7 per cent in a period of just 150 years, between 1750 and 1900. India had already become an importer in the nineteenth century, losing her long held status as a premier exporting nation. The destructive policies of the British, their tactful diversion of funds outside the territories and the continuous drain of wealth had made the nation to accumulate debt for the first time in the recorded history of the country. Ultimately, Will Durant notes that the national debt of India stood at 3,500,000,000 in 1929.

Much of the population who were driven out of their vocations became either landless labourers or had to take up menial jobs. As a result there was a heavy dependence on agriculture and allied activities. Maddison notes that at the end of the British rule, the percentage of the labour force dependent on the village economy was 75 per cent for a share of 54 per cent of national income after tax. 17 per cent of the labour force was working as landless labourers and scavengers for a share of just 4 per cent of national income.

The industrial and business sectors were weak. Native industries of different types were deliberately destroyed over the years. Hence the employment opportunities for people in productive avenues were limited. Bimal Jalan notes that the share of workers in agriculture and industry was 75.7 per cent and 11.9 per cent respectively in 1951. As the British denied good opportunities for the natives in services and profession, Indians could not go up in large numbers in these areas.

The quality of life was pathetic. The economic indicators compiled by the Government of India reveal that the life expectancy at birth was just 32.1 years during 1950-51. The death rate (per 1000 persons) remained as high as 27.4. The literacy rate was only 18.3, with the female literacy being 8.9. Education was beyond the reach of the major sections of the society. Most of the English educated Indians were conditioned to think like the westerners aping their ways and means, without a proper understanding of the fundamentals and background of the country.

The economy was very poor and underdeveloped. Gross Domestic Product (at factor cost, at current prices) was Rs.9719 crores during 1950-51. Food grains output was 50.8 million tonnes, for a population of 35.9 crores. The availability of food items for the citizens was much less than the actual requirements. Exports from the country were a mere Rs.606 crores, with imports being Rs.608 crores. The foreign exchange reserves of the country stood at Rs.911 crores.

Thus the Indian economy remained in a very bad condition at the time of independence. One has to keep this in mind to understand the background and study the functioning of the economy in the post-independent periods.

References

1. Paul S Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of Great Powers – Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500-2000, Fontana Press, London, 1988

2. Angus Maddison, The World Economy- A Millennial Perspective, Overseas Press India Limited, New Delhi, 2003

3. Bimal Jalan quoted in Daya Krishna, Golden Age to Globalisation – 7000 years of Indian Economy, Swadeshi Jagran Prakashan, New Delhi, 2002

4. Will Durant, The Case for India, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1930

5. Economic Survey 2009-10, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, 2010

( Yuva Bharati, Vol.38, No.8, Vivekananda Kendra, Chennai, March 2011)

Emerging India Failing State – Economic lessons from the first decade of the twenty first century

Historically speaking, the twenty first century is important to India in more than one way. Beginning from the eighteenth century, for around two hundred years of the second millennium, the country was under the domination of the British. Indians could not do much on their own under the oppressive alien forces. India was suppressed cruelly and her citizens had to face untold miseries. The native systems that had made India a unique nation since the ancient days, with contributions of the highest order in almost all the fields of human activity, had to suffer and die. The country was compelled to do away with and forget the knowledge and expertise gained through experience over many centuries. 

In fact, the Indian economy had to face difficulties from the invading forces for many centuries even earlier. Beginning from the end of the first millennium, the second millennium saw a continuous stream of outsiders pillaging the country and interfering with the native practices that made the country prosperous and peaceful at the same time. Hoards of wealth were swindled out. Different parts of the country were ransacked and many regions came under the domination of outsider- rulers, inflicting serious pain on the native population. 

Indians withstood all the onslaughts with courage and rebuilt the systems to the maximum extent possible, though scars remained all over their bodies. As a result, as the OECD economist Maddison has shown, India was the largest contributor to the global economy even in 1700 with 24. 4 per cent share. It is relevant to know that India’s contribution to the global economy was an astonishing 32.9 per cent during the beginning of the first millennium. The share of India stood at 28.9 per cent a thousand years later, maintaining her position as the most powerful economy in the world throughout the period, followed by China. But things began to change drastically during the British domination, initially through the East India Company and later under the British sovereign rule. 

The native systems that had sustained the economy continuously for hundreds of years were systematically destroyed by the colonialists. Hence at the time of Independence, India was reduced to a poor and underdeveloped country. 45 per cent of the population was living below the poverty line around that period. The industrial and business sectors were very weak. India’s share of trade was very low. The agricultural sector was over populated. Literacy rate was around 17 per cent. This situation led to loss of respect for the country at the international level. 

* * 

With Independence, the country got the opportunity to frame her own economic policies based on the priorities and preferences of her people. It was necessary to formulate an independent policy framework as India had prospered as the most successful economy possessing superior systems of functioning for most of the time in the history. After the country fell into the hands of the alien elements, she could not continue her style of functioning making use of her time-tested native systems, as the motives of the rulers were different. Hence Independence presented the country with a historic opportunity to set things right, rectifying the mistakes of the alien classes that ruled us during the previous centuries, and move forward with a clear vision. But unfortunately the ruling sections did not have a proper understanding of the history of this ancient nation, and so looked outside for ideas to frame policies for deciding the course of action to be followed. Ultimately they chose the socialistic model, conceived in the west less than two hundred years back as a reaction to the circumstances then prevailing there, based on their limited experience and turbulent history. 

Later when the socialistic ideology was discarded even in its own favorite grounds such as the USSR and China, it began losing its appeal. Meanwhile the Indian economy was facing serious difficulties on certain grounds. Hence after about forty years of experiments, the establishment realized that they would not be able to fulfill the objectives with policies based on a flawed economic idea. Circumstances compelled them to look for a change. At that time, history presented another opportunity for the country to formulate policies that would make use of all her potential and make people participate in the progress and share the benefits with joy. 

But alas, the ruling segments once again believed that only the ideologies borrowed from the west would make the country better off. This time they chose the free market ideology as the panacea for the ills affecting the country. It was again adopted without any serious discussion or debate at the national level. The decision on such a vital subject concerning the future of one sixth of the humanity was decided by a few at the top, with the tacit acceptance of the elite and educated. Hence the nation was forced to follow another philosophy born and brought up elsewhere, based on their own narrow views and outlook about the society and the economy. 

As a result, the country still has more than one fourth of the population going to bed without food three times a day. The agricultural sector, which is critical for us, has been facing severe crisis. It is a shame that no tangible steps are taken to revive the sector, even when farmers have been committing suicides. The easy entry of the multinational corporations has forced many of the traditional, small and medium scale industries to close down. Financial markets are increasingly controlled by the foreign institutions. The establishment does not have any clue to decide the future course of action, as the dependent mindset still dominates its thought process. 

* * 

In a period of six decades, India has emerged as the fourth largest economy in the world, with the second highest growth rates. The global economic crisis that devastated most of the richer parts of the world, could not affect India much. Indian businesses have spread to different parts of the world. The corporate sector is in an expansion mood diversifying its activities in distant lands and buying foreign entities, wherever possible. The family based non-corporate sector has silently been contributing a dominant share to the growth of the economy. The Indian economic and business systems are increasingly being recognized the world over as worth studying for emulation. No other country in the world has seen such a turnaround in a period of just sixty years. The country which remained neglected during much of the second half of the twentieth century is now being looked upon as a model for the future. 

What is the reason for such a progress in such a short period of time? How could a country that was decimated by the aliens with brute force make a comeback and emerge as one of the top two promising nations in the very first decade of the twenty first century? How is it possible for a country to move up continuously at a steady and fast pace, even when her policy makers remain confused to identify a suitable policy framework? The answer lies in the functioning Indian systems. 

The economy is family driven, society dominated, highly entrepreneurial and self dependent. The family orientation of Indians makes people save as much money as possible so that the future would be secured. India’s rate of saving was 8.6 per cent of GDP during 1950-51, even when about half of her citizens were starving for food. Compare this with the negative and near zero saving rates of many of the richer countries today. The rates of saving have been continuously on the rise throughout the last six decades, contributing enormously to the growth of the economy. As a result capital formation took place at a faster rate without much difficulty, leading to investments in productive activities. It is only in this context that the Reserve Bank of India has recently noted that 95 per cent of the Indian economy is being financed by the domestic finance. 

The family orientation, combined with the self dependent attitude and the entrepreneurial spirit of Indians, compels them to promote different ventures, however small they might be. As a result, new initiatives are continuously being taken at different levels, making India as one of the most entrepreneurial nations in the world. The types of enterprises that are functioning in the country are of different sizes and varieties. Economic Census 2005 estimates that there were 41.83 million establishments operating under the category of the unorganized sector, providing employment to more than 100 million persons. We have to remember that these are all the units promoted by people from the ordinary and under privileged sections of the society through their own efforts. 

On the other end of the spectrum, there were more than 7, 86,000 companies during 2009, as per the details provided by the central Government. In between these two smaller and the bigger types of organizations, there are millions of small and medium units spread across the country. Earlier the Government of India estimated that there were 2042 clusters engaged in a wide variety of industrial and business activities. The contribution of these clusters in terms of entrepreneurship, employment, output, innovation and turnover is very significant to the economy. It is important to remember that these clusters were developed by the local entrepreneurs themselves, without the involvement of the state and state machineries. Many of these clusters such as Surat and Tirupur are synonymous with their products at the global level. 

For more than a century before independence, India’s rate of growth was either around zero percent or negative. Starting from a very low base, the economy picked up quickly with an average growth rate of 3.5 per cent during the first three decades beginning from the 1950s. The rate steadily increased thereafter to 5.5 per cent during 1980-90, and 6 per cent in the next decade. It averaged more than 9 per cent during 2005-06 to 2007-08, before going down to 6.7 per cent in 2008-09 due to the global economic crisis. The economy started recovering quickly with the growth rate touching 7.4 per cent during 2009-10. There has been a continuous growth over the last six decades, in spite of the confusions and contradictions in the policy making circles. 

* *

We are in a paradoxical situation now. On the one hand, there are serious problems threatening the stability and future of the economy. The ruling establishment does not seem to understand the gravity of the situation and take immediate steps to address the issues. On the other hand, all the international bodies, research firms and think tanks unanimously agree that the Indian economy would continue its growth momentum in future to ultimately over take China and move forward. India is increasingly being looked upon by the rest of the world as a performing economy with a lot of potential for further progress. 

What does this signify? It clearly shows that while India is emerging, it is the state that is failing. This is the lesson we learn after the close of the first decade of the twenty first century. India, with her abundant energy and native strengths, has been constantly struggling to move forward through the hard work and commitment of her citizens, whose roots remain firmly in the tradition and culture of this great nation. But the state, with its colonial mindset and borrowed thinking, continues to fail the country even after sixty years. Is it not time for the state to take stock of its role and rectify its mistakes? 

(Swadeshi Patrika, Vol.16, No.2, New Delhi, February 2011)

PROSPEROUS INDIA-9

Superior economic systems destroyed by colonialists

It is history that the European colonialists interfered with the native functioning systems in different parts of the world, after they entered their territories. As a result the political, economic, social and cultural systems that were functioning in different countries came under attack. India remained a unique country in the world, full of wealth and prosperity, sustained by superior economic systems functioning very successfully for at least five thousand years or more. So India was the “ crown jewel” among all the colonies of the British with abundant resources and opportunities. One of their Viceroys, namely Curzon, made their intentions clear when he declared: “India is the pivot of Empire, by which I mean that outside the British Isles we could, I believe, lose any portion of the dominions of the Queen and yet survive as an Empire; while if we lost India, I maintain that our sun would sink to its setting”.

The East India Company, founded in 1600, gained its entry into India within a few years by establishing its trading post in Surat, through the rights granted by the ruling Mughal Emperor. Over the years the Company became richer and stronger and was able to take control of a few regions in the country. Robert Clive’s victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757 made the Company so powerful, that it ultimately became the ruler. The Company and its officials misused their positions and plundered the resources of the country in every possible way. Widespread resentment against the attitudes and approaches of the Company led to mass uprisings, resulting in the First War of Independence in 1857. Soon India was brought under the British sovereign rule in 1858.

The biggest loss to the country under the British domination, initially through the Company and later through the sovereign Government, was the attacks on the time-tested and well -functioning systems nurtured over thousands of years of experience. The attacks were made continuously and systematically, especially targeting the economic systems. As a result all the different sectors of the economy had to face serious problems, leading to the loss of their original status, which in the process made India one of the poorest countries in the world. 

The Indian farmers, who were known throughout the world for their outstanding knowledge of agriculture and abundant production, could not continue their vocation due to unbearable taxes and unfavorable conditions. Naoroji quoted the narrations of the British officials themselves to prove the pathetic condition of the Indian farmers. One of the officials by name Mr.Giberne who returned to India as a judge in 1840, saw the wealthy farmers in Gujarat becoming poorer in a period of just fourteen years. To quote: “I did not see so many of the more wealthy classes of the natives. …… The ryots all complain that they had money at once, but they had none now.” The attitude of the state was to collect as much revenue as possible even in difficult times, thereby pushing the farmers into debt and poverty. The following words taken from a letter written by John Bruce Norton, an official, to another official in 1854 mentions the condition of the farmers. “Now, it may certainly be said of almost the whole of the ryots, …………, that they are always in poverty and generally in debt.” 

Their taxation system was so oppressive that even a few of their own officials voiced their opinions against it. For example, Frederick John Shore of the Bengali Civil Service had recorded in 1837: “The fundamental principle of the English has been to make the whole Indian nation subservient, in every possible way, in the interests and benefits of themselves. They have been taxed to the utmost limit; every successive province, as it has fallen into our possession, has been made a field of higher exaction; ……………. The summary is that the British Indian Government has been practically one of the most extortionate and oppressive that existed ever in India -- ……….” 

The native industries, that were admired and respected for their products of highest quality throughout the world, were killed by the British within a short period. India, that remained an exporter of textiles for centuries since the ancient times earning enormous surpluses to the treasury, was forced to import from Britain due to their one-sided policies. Even Karl Marx who otherwise supported the British rule in India noted in 1853: “It was the British intruder who broke up the Indian hand-loom and destroyed the spinning-wheel. England began with driving the Indian cottons from the European market; it then introduced twist into Hindostan, and in the end inundated the very mother country of cotton with cottons. From 1818 to 1836 the export of twist from Great Britain to India rose in the proportion of 1 to 5,200. In 1824 the export of British muslins to India hardly amounted to 1,000,000 yards, while in 1837 it surpassed 64,000,000 of yards. But at the same time the population of Dacca decreased from 150,000 inhabitants to 20,000. This decline of Indian towns celebrated for their fabrics was by no means the worst consequence. British steam and science uprooted, over the whole surface of Hindostan, the union between agriculture and manufacturing industry.” As a result the local industries were wiped out leading to the “de-industrialisation” of the country. Millions of artisan families with skills acquired through centuries of involvement in their vocation lost their livelihood and were pushed into land based activities and other menial jobs as there was no place for them to go. This, of course, gave further pressure to the already struggling agricultural sector. 

India was well known for exports since the ancient periods. Experts note that the country has a proud record of at least five thousand years in trade. The important point to be remembered is that India had maintained a favorable balance in international trade from the beginning, resulting in huge accumulation of gold and silver in the country. But all this changed with the entry of the British. India was made to become a net importer. Jawaharlal Nehru made the following observations on the trade practices of the British and their consequences in the country. “It was pure loot. The ‘Pagoda tree’ was shaken again and again till the most terrible famines ravaged Bengal. This process was called trade later on but that made little difference. Government called this so-called trade, and trade was plunder. There are few instances in history of anything like it. And it must be remembered that this lasted, under various names and under different forms, not for a few years but for generations. ”

The destruction of all the critical sectors of the economy, namely agriculture, industry and trade severely affected the overall performance of the country. Besides the other services sector activities also suffered serious blows. The figures provided by Maddison show as to how the share of India in the global GDP went down drastically from the eighteenth century, while that of the UK had increased many times. 

Share of GDP of India and the UK in Global GDP

Year/ Country 

1700 

1820 

1870 

1913 

1950 

India 

24.4 

16.0 

12.1 

7.5 

4.2 

UK 

2.9 

5.2 

9.0 

8.2 

6.5 

The figures show that India’s share of global GDP, which in fact was the highest in the world in 1700, came down to 4.2 per cent in 1950, about one sixth of what it was just before 250 years. At the same time, the share of the U K, whose GDP was less than one eighth of that of India’s in 1700, overtook India in 1913. Studies undertaken during the past few years indicate that it was the stolen wealth from India which was mainly responsible for the “industrial revolution” in the U K. 

The destruction of the native economic systems and the consequent difficulties led to the growth rates of per capita GDP of Indians to almost zero or negative, beginning from the nineteenth century till independence. The above rate during 1913-50 was a pathetic -0.22 per cent. So when India got her independence, she was a poor, illiterate and underdeveloped country. This was not due to any fault in her economic systems. India was made poor, illiterate and underdeveloped as the colonial rulers did not allow the home- grown systems to function, even while bleeding the country of all her resources and imposing alien systems that suited their self interests. As a result the most sustainable and effective economic system ever practiced in the history of mankind, which made India remain a superpower continuously for centuries had become extinct by time the British handed over the reins of the Government to the Indians.

References 

1. Angus Maddison, The World Economy- A Millennial Perspective, Overseas Press ( India) Private Limited, New Delhi, 2003 

2. Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and the Un-British Rule in India, Second Edition, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1996

3. Jawaharlal Nehru, Discovery of India, Penguin, New Delhi, 2004

4. Karl Marx, ‘The British Rule in India’, New-York Herald Tribune, June 10, 1853

( Yuva Bharati, Vol.38, No.8, Vivekananda Kendra, Chennai, February, 2011)

Prosperous India-8

Economic Drain during British Rule

Evidences show that for most of the time in history, India remained a wealthy nation in the world. The sad part of it, however, was that the nation’s wealth was continuously looted for a long period of time over the centuries by the invaders, aliens and colonial rulers. Gold and other precious metals that India had saved in plenty due to her superior economic performance were taken away by the invaders in hordes, while destroying temples, villages and cities and disrupting the socio-economic life of the peaceful citizens. Indian wealth remained a major attraction for many of those marauders who wanted to loot the country since the olden days.

But in spite of all these losses and scars, which were enormous even by conservative estimates, India remained prosperous as her people re-built their lives and the economies around them quickly after each calamity. There were innumerable difficulties and disturbances after each strike. They were not just economic. But the people stood up with pains all over their bodies and faced the situation boldly. As a result India remained to be a wealthy country even in the eighteenth century, in spite of disturbances to her societies, culture and civilization. India Reform 1853 noted: “India had gradually declined in civilization from the date of invasion of Alexander up to the time of the first Mussulman conquest; but we have abundant testimony to prove that, at that date, and for centuries before it, here people enjoyed a high degree of prosperity, which continued to the breaking up of the Moghul Empire early in the eighteenth century.”

So when the Europeans came here, they saw a very rich country, the kind of which they had not seen earlier in their life-times elsewhere. The East India Company through which they entered trade in the seventeenth century earned very high rates of profits for them, as they used all means to extract the maximum from the country. But they were not satisfied with their earnings through trade and business alone. They saw more opportunities in the country and using every trick, ultimately became the rulers of India. The British rule, to use Naoroji’s words, was “the greatest curse with which India has been ever afflicted.”

Dadabahi Naoroji, a nationalist economist, better known as the ‘Grand Old Man of India’, spent about forty years of his life analyzing the Indian economy in detail and exposing the atrocities of the British. His two long essays titled “Poverty of India” appeared in 1876. Later in 1901, his book titled “Poverty and Un-British Rule in India” was published. Many people including Gandhiji acknowledged that they came to understand the extent of poverty of India as a consequence of the misrule of the British only through Naoroji’s works and speeches. He calculated that the national income of British India was rupees 3.4 billion for a population of 170 million for the year 1867-68, thereby showing to the world the per capita income of Indians was just 20 rupees. He compared the per capita income of different countries and showed that India was “the poorest country in the civilized world.”

With the result, the condition of Indians became pitiable and their consumption was meagre. Naoroji underlined this in 1900: “The fact was that Indian natives were mere helots. They were worse than American slaves, for the later were at least taken care of by their masters, whose property they were.” The natives did not even have small sums to celebrate festivals or other important occasions in their lives. Even if they managed it occasionally with whatever little they had, they were accused as spendthrifts by the British. The accusation went to the extent of saying that the major reason for the pathetic condition of the natives was their habit of sharing with near and dears.

What was the reason for India, the country that maintained her superior economic prosperity for the longest period in human history in spite of disturbances over many centuries, becoming a very poor country in a comparatively shorter span of time during the British domination? How did India which was seen as a country of “riches” when the Europeans set their foot here, became one of the poorest on the earth? While summing up the findings of the survey of the conditions of people in the provinces of Bengal and Behar during the early nineteenth century, the British official Montgomery Martin noted in 1835: “It is impossible to avoid remarking two facts as peculiarly striking – first, the richness of the country surveyed; and second, the poverty of its inhabitants?” What was the reason for this paradox? One of the major reasons for Indians becoming poor was the “economic drain.”

Naoroji believed that “the drain was the principal, basic cause of the poverty of the people”. He developed the “drain theory” which emphasized that Britain was extracting wealth from India every year out of the revenues that rightfully belonged to the Indians. Naoroji explained: “This drain consists of two elements - first, that arising from the remittances by European officials of their savings, and for their expenditure in England for their various wants both there and in India; from pensions and salaries paid in England; and from Government expenditure in England and India. And the second, that arising from similar remittances by non-official Europeans.”

How did the drain affect the Indian economy? In the words of Naoroji : “ As the drain prevents India from making any capital, the British by bringing back the capital which they have drained from India itself, secure almost a monopoly of all trade and important industries, and thereby further exploit and drain India, the source of the evil being the official drain.” How much was drained out of India? Naoroji calculated the average drain during 1870-72 was worth 27,400,000 pound sterling. Later in 1905, he declared that about “34 million sterling or Rs.515 millions were being drained out of India every year.” He estimated that during a period of just 38 years between 1835-1872, England must have benefited to the extent of 500 million pound sterling. But these were not the only benefits to the British. The goods that the Englishmen and their industries needed were exported from India out of compulsion, depriving the country the benefits that would have accrued otherwise in the normal circumstances. The effect of the drain was manifold. Naoroji pointed out that “the drain not only cut into the current national savings but even diminished the existing stock of inherited capital.”

Dadabhai noted that no British capital was invested in India during their rule. “India was, throughout, because of the drain, an exporter of capital. Only a part of the drained out capital was brought back in the form of foreign investment.” As revenues were being continuously drained out, there was no addition to the capital existing in India. To quote: “Mainly because India was a net exporter of capital, there was no augmentation of or addition to Indian capital”. While writing about the drain, the noted historian James Mill mentioned: “It is an exhausting drain upon the resources of the country, the issue of which is replaced by no reflex; it is an extraction of the life blood from the veins of national industry which no subsequent introduction of nourishment is furnished to restore.”

It may be relevant to quote the words of Will Durant, who used the strongest of words, to describe the attacks on the Indian economic system by the British. He wrote in 1930: “British rule in India is the most sordid and criminal exploitation of one nation by another in all recorded history. ….. This evidently was not a minor civilization, produced by inferior people. It ranks with the highest civilizations of history, and some, like Keyserling, would place it at the head and summit of all. ……. Those who have seen the unspeakable poverty and physiological weakness of the Hindus today will hardly believe that it was the wealth of eighteenth century India which attracted the commercial pirates of England and France.”

References

1. Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, Second Edition, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, May 1996

2. Will Durant, The Case for India, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1930

(PROSPEROUS INDIA – 8:)(Yuva Bharati, Vol.38, No.6, Vivekananda Kendra, Chennai, January 2011

12-12-2010 உரத்த சிந்தனை-வாசகர் கருத்து

*வெனிசுலா நாட்டில் இருந்து வெங்கடேஷ் ஏன் இந்திய பொருட்கள் உலக சந்தையில் சீனா போல அதிகம் இல்லை என்று கேட்டுள்ளார். சீனாவும் இந்தியாவும் வேகமாக வளருகின்றன என்றாலும் சில வேறுபாடுகள் இருக்கின்றன. சீனா உற்பத்தி துறையில் அதிக முன்னேற்றம் கண்டுள்ளது. இந்தியா சேவைத்துறையில் முன்னணியில் உள்ளது. கணினி மென்பொருள், வாடிக்கையளர் அழைப்பு சேவை, ஆடை அணிகலன் உணவு பொருள் உற்பத்தியில் நமது பங்களிப்பு உலகில் பெருமளவு உள்ளது....

--:சுவாமிநாதன் ,யுனைடெட் கிங்டம்

*நம் நாட்டில் பொருளாதாரம் நன்றாக இருப்பதாக இந்த கட்டுரை குறிப்பிடுகிறது. நான் இதை மறுக்கிறேன் , அதற்கான காரணம் கீழ்கண்ட கேள்விகள் நாட்டில் கரூப்பு பணம் மிகையாக உள்ளது , இது நல்ல பொருளாதாரத்துக்கு அறிகுறியா ? லஞ்சமாக சேர்த்த பணம் வெளி நாடுகளில் இருந்து உள் நாட்டுக்கு எளிதான முறையில் கொண்டு வரும் வகையில் சட்டங்கள் மாற்றபடுகின்றன IPL cricket ஊழல் என்னவாயிற்று ? இப்போது எல்லோரும் அதை மறந்து விட்டனரா ? வெளிநாட்டு பணம் உள் நாட்டில் முதலீடு செய்யும் வகையில் real estate துறை முறைபடுதபடாமல் உள்ளது ...இதனால் கருப்பு பணம் முதலீடு செய்யும் வங்கிகளாக நிலங்களும் வீடுகளும் மாறி விட்டன ..இவற்றின் காரணமாக மக்களின் வாங்கும் சக்தி பெருமளவு குறைந்துவிட்டது....இப்போது மக்கள் கடன் வாங்கித்தான் ஆகவேண்டும் என்ற நிலைக்கு தள்ளபடிருக்கிரர்கள்..இன்னும் இரண்டு வருடத்துக்குள் நம் நாடு மேற்கத்திய நாடுகளை போல் நிலைக்கு தள்ளபடுவதற்கான எல்லா அறிகுரிகளும் தெரிகின்றன... நாங்கள் குடும்பங்கள் பற்றி கூறியுள்ள கருத்துகள் உண்மை ...அனால் காலம் கடந்து விட்டதாக நினைக்கிறேன்.....damage has been done..everybody i talk to now a days is heavily invested in gold or real estate..the ponzi scheme is leading to people leaving normal work life and becoming real estate agents... that's a sign of eleventh hour in drama thats about to end..ராஜா - கோவை

*Dear Venkat, I do have the same concern like you. The reason behind this is China's Economic Policies, for example Economies of Scale (Mass Production) and their Polical Policies. These two are two (strong) extremes in China. Here, India has too much of Democratic and Economic Policies are not sound enough like China. China has vision to keep their product everywhere in the world and wish to dominate the world. India does not have this intention. Almost everyone knows that China does not produce 'good quality' products, but people have 'no choice'. We have to buy. One more reason, Brand name. India is still not 'recognised' as a 'good brand' in the Global Market though we produce quality than China. Because we do not have popularity like China. Our Economist & PM says that we don't want to be no.1 and we will try our best to be 'self-sufficient'. Just being sef-sufficient will not encourage Export. Other reasons, bureacratic policies in India. Setting up a company is not a easy job in India. We have to cut off this Red Tapism. When I was in Singapore, I tried to avoid buying China made Fan. So I bought fans (Usha Brand) from India. That fan also made in China. I was shocked. We need to produce as much as possible. We need to update our Economic, Foreign policies to compete with Global market. I am sure that China and India will dominate the world in this century. USA, UK, France will be out of scene in this century....Balaji - tashkent

*70% of the indian produce is consumed in india itself.where as 70% of china's produce gets exported.that is why we dont see much of "made in india" any where. a very good article..prasanna - சிகாகோ,

*It is true that we not able to see any "india made" in any part of the world as like china. Some time i can see only in the indian food varities at the market. I travelled a lot and i am presently in venezuela, working along with europeans and americans. They usually ask me why this situation, as both india and china are big markets, but not able to see "india made". Why? Did any body have an answer? Venkat...Venkat - carupano,வெனிசு

**மேற்கூறிய அனைத்து தகவல்களும் நிதர்சனமான உண்மை...., உதாரணம் எங்க தாத்தா பாட்டி.. குடும்பத்தையும், தங்கள் உறவினர்களையும், அதன் மூலம் தங்கள் கிராமத்தையும் நன்றாக பராமரித்து வந்தனர்...., அவ்வாறு தற்போது இருக்கும் அரசியல்வாதிகள் யாரும் பிபற்றுவதில்லை..., அதற்க்கு நேர் மாறாக தங்கள் பையில் எவ்வளவு தேறும் என்றே உள்ளனர்...., முன்னோர்கள் சொல்லிய நல்ல வழிப்பாதையை பின்பற்றினால் நாட்டின் பொருளாதாரம் நிச்சயமாக உயர்வடையும்......கணேஷ் - மாலத்தீவுகள்

*இது ஒரு நல்ல கட்டுரை. தெளிவாக எழுதப்பட்டுள்ளது ..நமது மக்கள் தொகைக்கு சேமிப்பே சரியானது ..அமெரிக்காவை போல் வாழ நினைத்தால் நமக்கு பிரச்சினை தான்--தாஸ் - லாஸ்ஏஞ்செலஸ்

-

*மிகவும் சிறந்த கட்டுரை.ரா. வே - திருப்பூர்....

Nobel Prize winner does not mean he has understood everything. Indians are very good at patting themselves at every opportunity. When somebody in the world takes our methods to task we become angry.Our economy is very weak in foundation. Technically we are at the lowest level. I have not seen any "india made" item in any US store but see 90% of the items in stores being made by China. Professors are good for lecturing only, since they have become so for non-performance. We should not live in dreams. If Kanakasabapathy can bag a Nobel Prize, then let him talk. Ravindran-கரண்ட்ப்ரைரிt

உலகிற்கு வழிகாட்டுவோம்

கடந்த முப்பது வருடத்திய பெரும்பாலான மேற்கத்திய கோட்பாடுகள், மிகவும் உபயோகமில்லாதவையாகவோ அல்லது பெரும் தீங்கு விளைவிப்பனவாகவோ அமைந்து விட்டன!' - இதைச் சொல்லியுள்ளது யார் தெரியுமா? பொருளாதாரத் துறையில், 2008ம் ஆண்டிற்கான நோபல் பரிசு பெற்றவரும், அமெரிக்காவிலுள்ள பிரின்ஸ்டன் பல்கலைக்கழகத்தின் பிரபலமான பேராசிரியருமான பால் கிரக்மேன்.

நவீன பொருளாதாரத்தில், உலக அளவில் நிபுணத்துவம் பெற்றுள்ள அவரே இப்படிச் சொல்லியுள்ளார் என்றால், அதற்குக் காரணம் இருக்க வேண்டும். பத்தொன்பதாம் நூற்றாண்டு முதல், உலகப் பொருளாதார அரங்கில், ஐரோப்பிய நாடுகள் முக்கியத்துவம் பெற்றன. அதன் தொடர்ச்சியாக, அவர்களது வழிமுறைகளும், கோட்பாடுகளுமே சரியானவை என, உலகம் முழுவதும் போதிக்கப்பட்டன. காலனி ஆதிக்கமும், ஆங்கிலேயக் கல்வி முறையும், அவர்களின் வேலையை எளிதாக்கின. பின், இருபதாம் நூற்றாண்டில், ஐரோப்பாவின் செல்வாக்கு குறைந்து, அமெரிக்கா உலகின் முக்கியமான பொருளாதார சக்தியாக உருவெடுத்தது. அதைத் தொடர்ந்து, அமெரிக்காவின் அணுகுமுறைகளும், செயல்பாடுகளும் முக்கியத்துவம் பெறத் துவங்கின. உலக வங்கி, சர்வதேச நிதியம் உள்ளிட்ட பன்னாட்டு அமைப்புகள் மூலமாகவும், ஆலோசனைகள் என்ற பெயரிலும், அவர்களது சிந்தனைகள் மற்றும் வழிமுறைகள், பிற நாடுகளில் புகுத்தப்பட்டன.

கடந்த 1980ம் ஆண்டு இறுதியில், சோவியத் ரஷ்யாவில் ஏற்பட்ட நிகழ்வுகளால், அந்நாடு சிதறுண்டு போன பின், சந்தைப் பொருளாதார முறைதான் உலகுக்கு ஒரே வழியென, அந்தச் சிந்தனை சார்ந்த மேற்கத்திய நிபுணர்கள் மார்தட்டிக் கொண்டனர். அவர்களது பல்கலைக்கழகங்கள், சந்தைப் பொருளாதாரம் குறித்த பல புதிய கோட்பாடுகளை உருவாக்கின. அவைகளில் பலவற்றுக்கு நோபல் பரிசுகளும், உலகளவில் அங்கீகாரங்களும், பாடப்புத்தகங்களில் முக்கிய இடங்களும் கிடைத்தன. உலக நாடுகள் எதுவாயினும் அவற்றின் முன்னேற்றத்துக்கு, மேற்கத்திய சந்தை பொருளாதாரக் கோட்பாடுகளைக் கடைபிடிப்பது ஒன்றுதான் வழியென உறுதியாகச் சொல்லப்பட்டது. எனவே, உலகிலுள்ள பிற நாடுகள், தங்களின் திட்டங்களையும், செயல்பாடுகளையும் மேற்கத்திய கோட்பாடுகளையொட்டி மாற்றியமைத்துக் கொள்ளுமாறு கட்டாயப்படுத்தப்பட்டன.

மேற்கத்திய கோட்பாடுகளை அதிகமாகக் கடைப்பிடித்ததன் விளைவாக, உலகின் பல நாடுகள், கடந்த காலங்களிலேயே பெரும் சிரமங்களைச் சந்திக்க வேண்டி வந்தது. உதாரணமாக, 1997 - 98ல் கொரியா, தாய்லாந்து உள்ளிட்ட தென்கிழக்கு ஆசிய நாடுகளில் பொருளாதார நெருக்கடி ஏற்பட்டது. 2002ல், அர்ஜென்டினாவில் பொருளாதார சிக்கல்கள் ஏற்பட்டன. இவ்வாறு உலகின் வெவ்வேறு பகுதிகளிலும், தொடர்ந்து பொருளாதார சிரமங்கள் ஏற்பட்டுக் கொண்டு வந்த போதும், தங்களது கோட்பாடுகளே சரியென, மேற்கத்திய நாடுகள் மக்களை நம்பவைத்து வந்தன. ஆனால், 2008ம் ஆண்டிற்குப் பின் பகுதிகளில் அமெரிக்காவில் தொடங்கிய நிதி நெருக்கடி, வெகு சீக்கிரமே உலகப் பொருளாதார நெருக்கடியாக மாறியது. அது மேற்கத்திய நாடுகளை அதிகமாகப் பாதித்தது. அதன் விளைவாக, உலகளவில் மிகப் பெரிதாக விளங்கி வந்த பல நிதி நிறுவனங்கள், வங்கிகள், காப்பீட்டு நிறுவனங்கள் மற்றும் உற்பத்தித் துறை சார்ந்த கம்பெனிகள், மிகுந்த பாதிப்புக்குள்ளாயின.

பெரிய பெரிய கம்பெனிகள் திவாலாவதைத் தடுக்கவும், வேலை இழந்தவர்களுக்கு உதவிகள் செய்யவும், அரசாங்கங்கள் அதிகளவு தொகையை செலவு செய்ய வேண்டிய நிர்பந்தத்திற்கு ஆளாயின. ஆயிரக்கணக்கான மக்கள், வேலைகளைப் பறிகொடுத்து, வீடுகளை இழந்து பரிதவிக்க வேண்டிய நிலைக்குத் தள்ளப்பட்டனர். தங்களின் பொருளாதாரக் கோட்பாடுகளும், அணுகுமுறைகளும் மட்டுமே சரியானவை எனவும், அவற்றின் மூலமே உலகில் முன்னேற்றம் ஏற்பட முடியுமெனவும் உறுதியாகச் சொல்லி வந்த பல மேற்கத்திய நாடுகளுக்கு, இந்தப் பொருளாதார நெருக்கடி ஒரு பேரிடியாக அமைந்து விட்டது. உலகின் பிற பகுதிகளில், தங்கள் கொள்கைகள் தோல்வியைத் தழுவிய போது, பலவித காரணங்களைக் கூறி வந்த அவர்கள், தங்கள் மண்ணிலேயே சிக்கல்களைச் சந்தித்து வரும்போது, சரியான பதிலைக் கூற முடியாமல் வாயடைத்துப் போய் நிற்கின்றனர்.

பொருளாதார நெருக்கடிக்குப் பின் ஏற்பட்ட விவாதங்கள் மற்றும் ஆலோசனைகள், அவர்களது பொருளாதார சிந்தனைகள் குறித்த பல உண்மைகளை உலகிற்கு உணர்த்தியுள்ளன. ஆலன் கிரீன்ஸ்பேன் என்பவர், அமெரிக்க மத்திய வங்கியின் கவர்னராக பதினாறு வருடங்களுக்கு மேல் இருந்து ஓய்வு பெற்றவர். உலகின் பெரிய பொருளாதார நிர்வாகிகளில் ஒருவராக கருதப்பட்டு, அந்நாட்டின் உயர்ந்த விருதுகள் மற்றும் அங்கீகாரங்களைப் பெற்றவர். அவருடைய பதவிக் காலத்தில் தான், வங்கிகளின் வட்டி விகிதங்கள் மிகவும் குறைக்கப்பட்டன. "நாட்டு மக்கள் சேமிக்க வேண்டிய அவசியமேயில்லை' என, அவர் பல ஆண்டுகளாக சொல்லி வந்தார். அதனால், அங்கு ஏற்பட்ட நிதி மற்றும் பொருளாதார நெருக்கடிகளுக்கு, அவரது அணுகுமுறைகளும் ஒரு முக்கிய காரணம் என குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்டது. எனவே, நெருக்கடி குறித்து விசாரிக்க அமைக்கப்பட்ட செனட் கமிட்டி முன்னால் அழைக்கப்பட்டு அவரிடம் விளக்கம் கேட்கப்பட்டது. அப்போது அவர், பொருளாதார சிந்தனை குறித்த தனது கருத்துக்களில் தவறுகள் ஏற்பட்டு விட்டன எனவும், சந்தைப் பொருளாதார முறைகளில் குறைபாடுகள் உள்ளன எனவும், முதன்முறையாக தயக்கத்துடன் ஒப்புக் கொண்டார். அமெரிக்காவில் வேலையில்லாதோர் எண்ணிக்கை 10 சதவீதமாக உள்ளது. நடுத்தர மற்றும் சிறு வங்கிகள் தொடர்ந்து திவாலாகி வருகின்றன. 2010ம் வருடத்தில் மட்டும், இதுவரை சராசரியாக ஒரு மாதத்திற்கு பத்துக்கும் மேல் என்ற அளவில் திவாலாகி உள்ளன. நிறுவனங்கள் மூடப்படுவதும் அதிக எண்ணிக்கையில் நடந்து வருகிறது.

இதற்கிடையில், கடந்த சில மாதங்களில், கிரீஸ் உள்ளிட்ட சில ஐரோப்பிய நாடுகள், கடன் நெருக்கடியை சந்தித்தன. தற்போது, அயர்லாந்து நாட்டுக்கு பெரிய பொருளாதார சிக்கல் ஏற்பட்டுள்ளது. பல கோடிக்கணக்கான டாலர்கள் செலவழித்தும், பொருளாதாரம் முன்னேற்றப் பாதையில் செல்வதாகத் தெரியவில்லை. நவீன பொருளாதார முறை, மக்களை, தங்களின் விருப்பங்களைப் பூர்த்தி செய்ய முயற்சி செய்யும் தனி நபர்களாக பாவிக்கிறது. இயற்கையான உறவுகளுக்கும், சமூகங்களுக்கும் அதில் முக்கியத்துவம் இல்லை. அவர்களது கொள்கைகள், திட்டங்கள் மற்றும் செயல்பாடுகளெல்லாமே, தனி நபர் சித்தாந்தத்தை மையப்படுத்தியே அமைந்துள்ளன. அதன் விளைவாக, குடும்பங்களும், சமூகங்களும் இரண்டாம் நிலைக்குத் தள்ளப்பட்டன. நுகர்வு கலாசாரம் பெருகி, சேமிப்புகள் குறைந்தன. சந்தைப் பொருளாதாரம் ஆசைகளையும், தேவைகளையும் மிகைப்படுத்தியது. அதனால், கடன் வாங்கி செலவு செய்யுமாறு மக்கள் தூண்டப்பட்டனர். அதிகப்படியான மக்கள் சேமிப்பின்றி கடன் வாங்கியதால், உள்நாட்டு சேமிப்பு மிகவும் கீழே சென்றது. ஆனால், செலவுகள் மட்டும் அதிகரித்துக் கொண்டே சென்றன. எனவே, நிதி நெருக்கடியும், பொருளாதார நெருக்கடியும் உருவாயின.

பால் சாமுவேல்சன் என்பவர், புகழ் பெற்ற அமெரிக்க பொருளாதார பேராசிரியராக விளங்கியவர்; நோபல் பரிசு பெற்றவர். அவரது பொருளாதார புத்தகம், பல லட்சம் பிரதிகள் விற்கப்பட்டு, உலக அளவில் சாதனை படைத்தது. நிதிக் கோட்பாடுகளில், "டெரிவேட்டிவ்'களை உருவாக்குவதில் பெரும் பங்கு வகித்தவர். அவர் சில மாதங்களுக்கு முன்பு காலமானார். தன் மறைவுக்கு முன்பு, 2008ல், அமெரிக்காவில் ஏற்பட்ட நெருக்கடியைப் பார்த்து, தன் பங்களிப்புகள் மூலம், தானும் ஒரு விதத்தில் நெருக்கடிக்கு பொறுப்பாகி விட்டதாக கூறினார். எனவே, மேற்கத்திய பொருளாதார நெருக்கடி, அவர்களது நவீன கோட்பாடுகளின் தோல்வியையே காட்டுகிறது. நெருக்கடி முடிந்து இரண்டு வருடம் கழிந்த பின்னரும், நிலையைச் சரி செய்து, உறுதியான வழிமுறைகளைக் கடைப்பிடிக்க இயலாத அவர்களின் நிலைமை, மேற்கண்ட தோல்வியை உறுதி செய்கிறது.

உலக அளவில், அதிக எண்ணிக்கையில் நோபல் பரிசு பெற்ற நிபுணர்களைப் பெற்றிருந்தும், அமெரிக்கா போன்ற நாடுகள் பொருளாதாரத்தில் வலுவிழந்து, நெருக்கடியிலிருந்து மீண்டு வருவதற்கே வழி தெரியாமல் சிரமப்படுவதற்கு அடிப்படைக் காரணம், அவர்களது சித்தாந்தங்களின் வறட்சியே. இந்த சமயத்தில் நாம் புரிந்துகொள்ள வேண்டிய முக்கியமான விஷயம், நமது பொருளாதாரத்தின் அடிப்படை தன்மையை பற்றியது. எவ்வளவோ சிரமங்களுக்கு இடையிலும் நமது பொருளாதாரம் கடந்த 60 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு மேலாக தொடர்ந்து வளர்ச்சியை கண்டு வருகிறது. அதன் மூலம் உலக அளவில் ஒரு பொருளாதார சக்தியாகவும் உயர்ந்து வருகிறது. இதற்கு முக்கியமான காரணம் நமது கலாசாரமும், அது சார்ந்த தன்மைகளும் தான். நமது கலாசாரம், பண்பாடு மட்டுமல்ல, நமது பொருளாதார கொள்கைகளும் உலக நாடுகளுக்கு ஒரு வழிகாட்டி தான். email: pkspathi@gmail.com

ப.கனகசபாபதி, பேராசிரியர்

PROSPEROUS INDIA 7

                       

Contributions of the highest order made India remain powerful

      

Ancient India was not contented with devising and practising superior economic and socialsystems for achieving material prosperity and secured life for her citizens. Continuous efforts were made by the society to explore different fields, which resulted in constant improvements based on additional inputs and fresh knowledge. As a result the society was driven towards perfection in different walks of life. On the one hand the newer ideas led to the development of innovations and new practices that resulted in more efficient methods of functioning. On the other hand, new insights and thought processes led to contributions of highest intellectual output. Many such practices and contributions were truly pioneering and far ahead of their times.

For one who is not adequately aware of the background and greatness of the country, it will be hard to believe that so many developments had been taking place over many centuries in diverse areas of human activity. It is accepted that the Indus-Saraswathy Civilization is one of the most planned urban settlements of the earliest periods in the world. It is surprising to know that there were private bathrooms in many houses even during those periods. There were also large scale sanitary sewerage and water systems, along with common bath and storage facilities. It only shows the advanced nature of urban life that existed about five thousand years ago. Moreover the inhabitants of the civilization had knowledge of several fields. 

The contemporary Indian gets a feeling that ancient India added value to all the activities with which it was connected. Agriculture was the major economic activity in the earlier days. We could see the use of sophisticated techniques and advanced management systems when we study the agricultural history of India. Experts note that irrigation was developed as early as around 4500 BCE. Artificial reservoirs dating back to 3000 BCE were in existence at Girnar. It is learnt that there were the early canal irrigation systems from around 2800 BCE. All these developments led to the increased agricultural output resulting in the economic prosperity and overall well being of the people. 

When the modern minds look at the India of the earlier years, what surprises us- apart from the economic prosperity and the social systems- , is the list of contributions and achievements in intellectual spheres. All over the world we study how the great empires concentrated on wealth, power and enjoyment, though in the process some of them have also made a few contributions. But India’s output, in different spheres of life , remains extraordinary by any standards in the history of mankind. 

Five thousand years ago, India could explain the nature and principles of the soul, primal matter and its creation. Acharya Kapil, born around 3000 BCE and founded the Sankhya school of thought in the ancient Indian philosophy, was a pioneer in this field. He made extra sensory observations and revelations on the secrets of creation. His outstanding contributions in the field of cosmic studies have made the world recognize him as the father of cosmology. Indians were the earliest to specialize in sophisticated fields such as shipping and aviation involving higher technologies. Acharya Bharadwaj, who lived about 2800 years ago, had in his work Yantra Sarvasa made outstanding discoveries in space science. He explained different techniques to make flying machines invisible to escape from the eyes of the others, to listen to conversations taking place in another plane and to see what was happening in other planes.

In the medical field, India developed advanced techniques in highly specialized areas such as plastic surgery and anesthesia, and Indians were the pioneers in amputation, caesarian and cranial surgeries. Shusrut Samhita of Shusruta, who lived around 600 BCE, is the first ever work describing the surgical procedures and is considered the encyclopedia of surgery. He had explained the details of 300 types of operations and described a number of stitching methods. He had used 125 surgical instruments for operations and performed advanced surgeries including the restoration of damaged noses. A giant in the field of medical science, he is respected as the father of plastic surgery. Indians realized the importance of diet and activities for the mind and body of the individual and the relationship between spirituality and physical health in the earlier days. Charak (600 BCE) explained the concepts relating to human anatomy, embryology, pharmacology and diseases such as diabetes and tuberculosis. He described the medicinal qualities of one lakh herbal plants. His prescription of the ethical charter for the medical practitioners was much before the Hippocratic Oath. 

India understood and explained the principles relating to atoms and molecules paving way for the development of the atomic theory. Western historians acknowledge that Kanad (600 BCE) and other Indian scholars as the global masters in this field. One can go on continuously mentioning about the intellectual contributions of ancient India, as there are too numerous and encompass several fields. But what is important is that these contributions have helped people living in parts of the world enormously to further their knowledge and understanding relating different fields of activities. These contributions have also helped the world to move forward and make progress at a faster speed in different disciplines. Speaking of just one aspect India’s contribution to mathematics, the noted scientist Einstein mentioned: “We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made”. There are many more contributions even in the field of mathematics. 

Of all the contributions of India, several thinkers and scholars all over the world proclaim that the thoughts and inputs relating to life, its purpose, approach towards life and humanity as the most important ones. Nowhere in the world has the human mind and life so thoroughly discussed and analyzed in detail as in India of the ancient periods. Beginning from the earliest texts of India namely the Vedas, many of the monumental works such as the Upanishads and the Bhagawat Geetha concentrate on the meaning and purpose of life and the various issues connected with it. These thoughts have made Indians unique in their thinking and life in India far superior than the rest of the world. 

The intellectual achievements of India had enabled the country to emerge and remain as a powerful nation in two ways. One was to make advancements in different fields such as mathematics, medicine, science, technology, architecture which in turn helped the country to grow further and richer. The other was to make citizens more matured and better human beings, families and societies more vibrant and peaceful. As a result India grew and remained a powerful nation – in a state of prosperity and inner peace - with continuous efforts towards perfection in different spheres of life. 

( Published in Yuva Bharati – Voice of Youth, Vivekananda Kendra, Chennai, December 2010)

Prosperous India-6

A NATION OF SELF– GOVERNING SOCIETIES

Governance remains the most critical issue in the life and history of nations from the earliest days. While it remained a crucial problem in most of the other parts of the world, Indians handled it very effectively through locally developed mechanisms since the ancient periods. One of the most important aspects of India that attracted the attention of the observers, travelers and thinkers from the other parts of the world was the functioning of the Indian society and its peaceful nature. They were surprised to see that the local communities carried on with their activities managing the affairs of their localities, even when the country was engaged in wars. Indian traditions established home grown systems that enabled the citizens to move on even during the times of alien rulers. As a result the economic and other activities went on without interruption helping the nation to produce and create as much as possible. Hence the state of prosperity continued despite disturbances over hundreds of years.

This was in stark contrast to the other civilizations where even when they had wealth and achievements to their credit, the social governance systems were poor. While a small minority enjoyed unrestricted access freedom, major sections of the society had to suffer for there were no proper governance systems. Most of the other civilizations needed slaves to sustain their lifestyles, in spite of an exalted status they enjoyed. So the majority population of their societies had to sustain their lives without even the basic freedom, when their masters were building monuments and the elite sections engaged in higher pursuits.

Experts who studied the Indus - Saraswathi civilization in Harappa and Mohanjadaro note that the society at that time must have been very peaceful; they also point out to the absence of visible signs of the rulers. There were even periods when there were ‘kingless states’ in India. It is important to understand that the local societies were vibrant and as such they were duly recognized by all concerned in those days. History shows that there were Sabhas (assembly of chieftains of groups) and Samitis (assembly of all men in a locality or of a group) which helped the state to govern the local societies effectively. Sometimes these assemblies played a direct role at the larger level. It is said that when the king Dasaratha anointed Sri Rama as his successor, the king summoned the Samiti for ratification of his decision.

It is learnt that during the Buddhist’s period the day to day decisions for governance were taken in village assemblies, though the rulers were the heirs of the royal families and as such they were not elected by the citizens. There was an interesting incident with regard to the village assemblies during the period of the Buddha, which shows as to how the views of the majority worked. Siddharth was the son of king of kapilavatsu, which was the place of Sakyas. In those days the affairs of the state were discussed and decided by the general assembly called Sangh. Every Sankya youth above twenty years of age was initiated into the Sangh. At one point in time, there arose a dispute between the Sakyas and the neighbouring Koliyas over the issue of sharing waters of the river that separated the two states.

The Senapati of the Sakyas convened a meeting to discuss the issue of going on war with the Koliyas. Siddharth opposed the war which was supported by a few. The majority voted for declaring war. Hence the Senapati proposed a motion proclaiming an order calling the Sakya men to take up arms. Siddharth refused to accept it, which was construed by the Sangh as a breach of oath taken up during admission to protect the interests of his people. As a punishment for dereliction of duty as a member, the Sangh sentenced the young prince to exile from kapilavastu. This incident shows the dominant role played by the assemblies in deciding the matters related to them.

The villages used to function on their own without depending on the state. As a result they functioned as ‘republics’ with their own systems of governance. Historians connected with the visit of Alexander mention the existence of a large number of republics during those times. The inscriptions in the village of Uttiramerur, in Kanchipuram district of Tamil Nadu dated around 920 CE demonstrate the existence of a written constitution prescribing the mode of elections to the village assemblies. Found on the walls of the village assembly and written during the reign of Parantaka Chola, these inscriptions show a highest form of the functioning democratic systems at the basic levels about 1100 years ago. The inscriptions describe the method of elections, qualifications and disqualifications of members and other relevant details. It also explains the different committees that were needed for the maintenance of tanks, roads etc and the method of selecting people to manage them. It is significant to understand that the kings themselves nurtured the local self governments and as a result a true democratic set up flourished.

The village republics continued to flourish in spite of invasions and disturbances to the polity and structure of India, till they had to lose their status during the British domination. Sir Charles Metcalfe, the then acting governor-general of India underlined the significance of village communities in Indian life through the following words in 1830: "The village communities are little republics, having nearly everything they can want within themselves, and almost independent of any foreign relations. They seem to last where nothing else lasts. Dynasty after dynasty tumbles down; revolution succeeds revolution….but the village community remains the same. . . This union of the village communities, each one forming a separate little state in itself, has, I conceive, contributed more than any other cause to the preservation of the peoples of India, through all the revolutions and changes which they have suffered. It is in a high degree conducive to their happiness, and to the enjoyment of a great portion of freedom and independence."

The system of panchayat wherein the elderly and wise men of the locality deliberate and decide on issues of local importance is legendary. It is an ancient system unique to our country. Countless number of issues gets solved amicably without much difficulties and time delay at the local levels through the native governing systems such as panchayats. The native systems were largely destroyed during the British domination. The governments that came to power after independence failed to nurture such systems in the true spirit. But in spite of this, it may be interesting to note, different types of native governing arrangements exist even today in different parts of the country.

For example, studies conducted among the fishermen community of pattinavars living along the coastal parts of the eastern Tamil Nadu revealed that their villages function as little republics with a transparent system of governance by people elected for the purpose by the villagers. Major decisions affecting the village and financial matters are discussed and decided in the assembly convened on a fixed day every month. There are established systems for electing representatives, collecting revenues, using funds and managing the affairs of the village. Though the European method of governance has replaced the native methods to a very large extent, one could still notice the self governing spirit of Indians, especially in the rural and distant parts of the country.

The self governing systems of India have enabled the societies to lead a peaceful life, and concentrate their energies on productive activities. As a result the economy progressed and achievements in different fields became possible. Hence we have to understand that the self governing spirit and systems of India have helped the country to move forward even while enabling citizens to lead a happy and secured life.

(Published in Yuva Bharati, Vivekananda Kendra, Chennai, November 2010 issue)