Why Gandhi Must be Resurrected

 "Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's needs, but not every man's greed."

 

It’s a part of the full quote from the letter Gandhi wrote to RM Pearce, in December 1947. The full quote is "God forbid that India should ever take to industrialism after the manner of the West... The earth has enough for everybody's need, but not enough for everybody's greed." Gandhi expressed the idea barely a few months after independence when the country was taking its first few baby steps to stand and walk properly. This quote has since become a popular phrase, highlighting the tension between Basic human needs (food, water, shelter, dignity), and Insatiable desires driven by greed (excess wealth, power, material possessions). He had already seen the ills of frenzied industrialization and was conceiving the country of his dreams.

 

He was a visionary and like a true leader was thinking ahead of time.

 

He was just not clear about the need to avoid the mistakes of the West, but he gave the various ways to avoid it. Gandhi emphasized the importance of simplicity, sustainability, and equitable distribution of resources. He advocated for a self-sufficient economy and criticized excessive consumption. Gandhi's wisdom remains relevant today, inspiring conversations around sustainable development, environmental conservation, social justice, and mindful consumption.

 

The world is now grappling with the tension between economic development and sustainable development. The effects of climate change are real, and, on many counts, its negative effects are irreversible. We have made giant strides since independence. So big are our strides and such restless is our pace that it shows no sign of slowing down to pause and ponder its effect on us.

 

To quote the Science Advances, “Planetary boundaries framework update finds that six of the nine boundaries are transgressed, suggesting that Earth is now well outside of the safe operating space for humanity. Ocean acidification is close to being breached, while aerosol loading regionally exceeds the boundary. Stratospheric ozone levels have slightly recovered. The transgression level has increased for all boundaries earlier identified as overstepped. As primary production drives Earth system biosphere functions, human appropriation of net primary production is proposed as a control variable for functional biosphere integrity. This boundary is also transgressed. Earth system modelling of different levels of the transgression of the climate and land system change boundaries illustrates that these anthropogenic impacts on Earth system must be considered in a systemic context.”

 

October 2nd marks the 155th anniversary of Gandhiji.

 

What we have left of him is his name, a few busts in a few city crossings and memorials in select locations - the current generation is completely detached from him, his life and his teachings. The only time he is resurrected is when a certain section of a certain political thought vilifies him for his personal and political decisions. Movies like Munnabhai MBBS have done more to bring back his values and principles than our successive political satraps and administrations.

 

On his birth month, this article is an attempt to reintroduce his principles and prescriptions to the current generation and evaluate its relevance, especially at a time when we are facing an existential crisis caused by anthropogenic activities. Let’s know what they were and if we can do anything in our personal capacities to live by those principles.

 

A. Simplicity and Minimalism:

 

Gandhi emphasised living simply with bare necessities. His personal belongings could be fitted into a small bag. A few loin clothes, a shawl, a chappal, his watch stuck to his waist, the round-rimmed glass he wore, and a walking stick he used was all that he needed. When Mahatma Gandhi met King George V in 1931, wearing his traditional Indian clothing, a simple loincloth and shawl, journalists asked him if he felt underdressed. Gandhi famously replied: "The King had enough on for both of us."

 

This witty response highlighted Gandhi's simplicity, humility, and commitment to Indian cultural identity, while also subtly critiquing the excesses of Western colonialism. 

 

Sadly, we also have fallen victim to those consumption models and patterns. Our rooms are now filled with more cupboards stuffed with clothes and belongings that we didn’t use in the recent past or are never going to be used in the near future leaving no space for us to use. ‘Do we need to have this’ is a question we must ask ourselves before falling for the temptation of a new dress, a gadget, a car or anything for that matter. The subculture of giving away things we have stopped using has caught on in the West and things like kids’ toys, and cycles are handed down to the ones who need them once one’s child outgrows them. There are apps and WhatsApp groups which aggregate the needs and availability of such things. The idea is to reduce purchases and waste without compromising on lifestyle conveniences.   

 

B. Self-Sufficiency and Localism:

 

When Gandhi started his Swadeshi movement, hatred for foreign goods or foreigners didn’t propel this idea. He wanted all of us to be self-reliant at a personal and community level. Doing your things, growing your food, and helping each other during difficult tasks was what he proposed to make us live with dignity without depending on others at a distance who have turned it into an industry. He was for supporting local farmers and businesses to thrive with local support. When we see grapes imported from countries like Australia and the ones from Andhra or Maharastra sharing shop space giving us an option to choose from; how many of us think of the ‘Food Miles’ each lot carries? We are swayed by its cosmetic appearance and premium pricing. The current trend is to source local produce even if there are cheaper and better options available with the eye to reducing our carbon footprint.

 

C. Non-Violence:

 

The reductionist and mechanistic science and modern-day science taught us to dominate nature and all other living and non-living things around us. Our ancient culture taught us to respect natural elements and animals to the point of worshipping them like Gods. Now in the name of development, we have unleashed a war on mountains, rivers, lakes and seas. The ill effects are now realised in the form of massive landslides, floods in the hills sweeping away human habitations, and our urban habitations experiencing flooding even in moderate rains. When Gandhi talked of Ahimsa, he didn’t mean to be tolerant to external aggression, or internal violence. What he talked of was environmental stewardship and our ethical treatment of all living beings.

 

D. Ethical Consumption:

 

The first line in this article talks about Gandhi's views on the importance of ethical consumption as the resources on the planet are finite and need to be shared equitably with all. He urged everyone to balance Need and Greed because the greed of a rich man to get richer will only rob the poor and weak of their right over the common natural resources.

 

E. Community and Collective Action:

 

With the masculine development models and centralised decision-making being the current characteristic of the Governments, the voices of the local communities are either quelled or bought over. The current society treats demonstrations, and strikes, not only as anti-development but as regressive and anti-national. Gandhi put a higher emphasis on community-level collective actions as a way to influence the government’s policy decisions. Democracy allowed this route for the communities to express their voices. The current climate crisis requires honesty and transparency at the top and collective action and participation of all to ameliorate the ills caused by our development models. Without both ends working together towards a common goal the desirables will always remain unattainable.

 

The current strategic political movement to rewrite history to erase its colonial past, and replace its syncretic cultures, and diversities with a singular-centric culture stands at odds with what our ancient culture taught us and had made it thrive. Gandhi and his teachings have fallen victim to this house-cleaning exercise. With the economy going global many might question the rationale or practicality of many of Gandhi’s prescriptions, but it's necessary to realise how the global business models came crashing down when the pandemic spread like wildfire and brought the countries to a grinding halt. At that time self-sufficiency at the community level provided the necessary spring of resilience to rural India.

 

Those who think that Climate concerns are an exaggeration and those who believe that modern science will find a solution to the problem without their involvement and contribution are for a rude shock. Recent research by the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology after conducting research at the caves of Gupteswar, Koraput and Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh have revealed the interplay of climate factors, strikingly similar to those affecting modern-day monsoons, likely led to the collapse of highly developed Indus Valley Civilization 4000 years ago. They have found that reduced solar radiation, El Nino and many other factors had collectively weakened the monsoon which resulted in the downfall of the civilization. And 4000 years is just like yesterday in the evolutionary timeline.

 

I hope the learnings of the past and evidence of science alert our governors not to waste precious time in hand to repaint the past but to think of the future which doesn’t look good at all for everyone. With the world at the throes of facing another pandemic and the catastrophic consequences of anthropogenic activities; not bringing back the teachings of Gandhi to us and the younger generation will be to the peril of us and our future generations.

 

*

The TradDad must make a come back

I have been watching this Mahabharata between the retired army officers and the serving police personnel. Now, both the parties,  equally important for the society and the country are at war. You see allegations, half-truths, biased opinions and legal wrangles showing no sign of waning. Anyone who is anybody is giving his two cents on the matter after seeing some clip from some source. We also know how a media reportage or an FIR can be designed to grind personal, and political axes.

Where will it end what will be the conciliation or adjudication process to deescalate the matter and penalise the errant party? What are the face savers? And who has that neutrality and social standing to get it done? I don't know.

But I know one thing for sure. The sequence of events offered dozens of opportunities at every stage to break the chain reactions the consequences of which we are suffering. This Mahabharata was preventable at its origins.

Anyone who has seen the videos would pity and question the retired Brigadier father and the serving Major fiancee about their role in playing mute spectators while the thing was incrementally slipping out of hand. Why were they so helpless? Respect for women? Really?

Dear men, when you raise a family and empower your women, be it your wife or daughter, tell them that we must behave according to the situation, ensuring our safety and minimising our risks are our responsibilities. Also tell them that if they declare 'Tu jaanta nahin mein kaun hun', their men and the state are not on a hotline to rescue them when they get drunk, provoke a brawl, and incite potential threats to show their true colors.

A gentleman is not the right man in such a crisis. These men in question could have acted tough, restrained their woman and saved the situation from spiralling into a major crisis.

Be a man to tell your woman when to stop, be that traditional dad and tell your daughter what to wear where, when to drink, where to smoke and when not to. That you have to behave appropriately if you expect respect. Ask them to follow without questioning or seeking its justification. They have to do it because you asked them to do it. Just that. 

You may not get the support of the lady of the house but still do it.

You are risking earning the tag of being an orthodox, a chauvinist and a medieval man. Earn it. Wear it like a crown of thorns. But enforce certain code of behaviours both for your son, and daughter. Empowerment doesn't give anyone the right to be disrespectful. Freedom doesn't mean anarchy.

The traditional dad (TradDad) must make a comeback if we want a safe society both for men and women. The last thing we want to see is the police and army fighting because of a few extra pegs.

This is my belated Daughter's Day thought.

What’s in a name? The cases of Ravenshaw to X

Shakespeare in his play Romeo and Juliet wrote ‘What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’. Deng Xiao Ping said, ‘It doesn’t matter if the cat is black or white; a cat is a cat, as long as it catches mice.’ Both dismiss the importance of external attributes like the name or appearance of a place or person to bring into focus the functionality and substance intrinsic to it.

 

So, what’s in a name?

 

A lot! A loud chorus can be heard. These are the voices of the ones who support it and those who oppose it.

 

Such noises were heard at distant locations in distant states, but never in our state. Recently during a function in Cuttack while discussing the role of the British officer during the Bengal famine whose alleged tactless handling resulted in the death of thousands of people, a top leader of the ruling party questioned why the premier academic institution is still named after him. He stirred a hornet’s nest by asking the intellectuals of the state to debate why the name should not be changed to commemorate a worthy son of the soil.

 

This suggestion triggered a fusillade of exchanges on social media between the ones who support this initiative and the ones who are appalled by even the thought of it. One side can’t tolerate the name of a foreigner associated with the university as he represented the colonial rulers and the other can’t imagine their own identity without their association with the franchise. Many also are suggesting not to waste time in such exercises when much more needs to be done to improve the current condition of the university. 

 

There is another group who just don’t see any reason why such things are initiated when there are other pressing problems to be tackled – they think that this is an exercise in futility as a common man is least bothered about after whose name the institutions are built as long it is serving its purpose.

 

The name change game is not new and is not at all a whimsical act.

 

While taking sides for or against such moves in this case; using all your emotions and logic, it’s necessary to understand why names are changed and what happens when they do – both positive and negative.

 

In the commercial world, it’s called rebranding and there are definite purposes behind creating a new avatar of itself. They hire the best brains to rename and change their logos, the colour they have used to send a new set of signals to declare to the market that they have come of age to stay relevant in the current context and the foreseeable future. We have seen how Twitter was rebranded as X when Elon Musk took over the company signalling their interest. The interests are commercial, and they make no bones about it. But our discussion at the current time is political.

 

Why does a new political dispensation change the name of a place and what are the possible reasons?

 

Ideological and Symbolic Reasons:

 

New regimes often seek to distance themselves from previous governments or colonial powers. Changing names of places, prominent institutions, and legal documents using local languages to break from the past. Names can symbolize a shift in ideology, such as from communist to democratic or from authoritarian to liberal to reflect new values or to majoritarian. Names can commemorate influential figures or movements. They try to restore the honour of the national heroes they think that the previous regimes had wilfully ignored due to political reasons.

 

National Identity and Unity:

 

Name changes can affirm independence and self-governance to assert sovereignty. Changing names can eliminate reminders of foreign domination thus erasing their colonial legacy. We know why there is a section of people who demand the name India be dropped which was coined by the colonial rulers. New names can also emphasize shared identity and citizenship to promote national unity.

 

Practical and Administrative Reasons:

 

Name changes can resolve border disputes or ambiguous territorial designations and clarify territorial claims. Names may no longer reflect the place's characteristics or demographics, and they are updated. We have seen major cities like Bombay, Madras, Bangalore and Calcutta reverting to their original names of Mumbai, Chennai, Bengaluru and Kolkata. Changing the name of a place can have various consequences and implications, depending on the context and scope of the change. There are many negative impacts. Changes can confuse residents and visitors. There was this amusing case when an American pilot chose to fly back instead of landing at Bengaluru as his NOTAM noted the destination as Bangalore. We face similar problems when we find a new name for the terminal we visited a few months ago. Erasing historical names can disconnect people from their cultural roots as it disconnects its evolutionary continuum – their heritage.

 

This can be highly contentious in a country like India where the new majoritarian assertion is pushing the minority communities to the corners. The process of establishing new heroes is often preceded by systematically vilifying and demonizing the already established national heroes with half-truths and half-lies which creates an air of unpleasantness for a long time.

 

Name changes can be a powerful tool for shaping national identity, asserting sovereignty, and signalling a new era. However, they can also be contentious and have significant practical implications as they realign the political and cultural landscape by disrupting it. Name changes can be contentious, especially if they involve cultural or historical significance. It's essential to weigh the reasons for change against potential consequences and engage stakeholders in the decision-making process.

 

The case of India is unique.

 

It was colonized by the rulers of other faiths whose practitioners were always a minority. But despite their small numbers, their control over the power, political process, economy and culture held sway over the culture of our country leading to a liberal syncretic mixed culture at different pockets of its geography. The diversity of the country is in its culture. Its food. Its language, its identity, its dress, its ethos. But despite such diversities, the founders of the nation have done a wonderful job of keeping it together as a nation at the same time allowing regional topicalities to flourish. This liberal inclusive mindset and training have made India acceptable to the global community. If India has made unbelievable strides in a very short time after gaining independence, the role of its openness to diversity can be ignored.

 

But that doesn’t auger well with the new political order which draws its inspiration from a very orthodox cultural outlook. It sees this as a systematic corruption and dilution of our national identity because of our unassertive past. They have the agenda to establish a new order just not limited to politics only.

 

They want to influence culture – impose the majoritarian language, dress, who we worship, how we worship, our values and our ideals.

 

Creating a new history is a strategy to create a new nation that has forgotten its colonial past. Pakistan immediately after gaining independence had attempted that and we know where they are. The name change game is just a tool to start a larger discourse involving many people and cause disruption to facilitate a larger culture shift.

 

Are you interested?

 

*