Games of Daze/Infomagic - Games of Daze (Summer 1995) (Disc 1 of 2).iso/x2ftp/books/yee/gandhian.rvw

Text File | 1995-02-25 | 12.9 KB | 231 lines

     title: Gandhian Utopia
          : Experiments with Culture
        by: Richard G. Fox
 publisher: Beacon Press 1989
  subjects: anthropology, history, India
     other: 330 pages, bibliography, index
   summary: did Gandhi matter?  can individuals change history?

_Gandhian Utopia_ is an account of the origins, authorship and history
of the complex of ideas associated with Mohandas Gandhi.  As well as
providing an account of a major strand of modern Indian history, Fox's
book also deals with theoretical issues in the social sciences, and in
particular with the relationship between individuals and culture in
historical change.  This review takes the form of a detailed summary
because, while I feel _Gandhian Utopia_ deserves close attention, I do
not feel competent to assume an evaluative stance towards it.

--

Fox seeks to achieve the anthropological goal of "getting the native
point of view" by using the epistemological framework of his subject,
Gandhi, "to constitute this volume's format and theoretical design."  In
doing so he also hopes to answer the postmodern critique of ethnography
better than he feels the suggested postmodern solutions - polyphony,
reflexive and dialogic ethnography, and so on.  (He accepts that his
"culture history" is still a fiction, but hopes it will avoid some of
the fictions of ethnography.)  Gandhi's epistemology disowned the
concept of the integral individual and replaced it with a "discontinuous
personhood".  Gandhi viewed cultures as changing through collective
experiments, and cultural innovation as occurring only in the context of
people's resistance to and struggle against cultural meanings.  Fox
discusses these ideas in the light of the similar theories of other
thinkers, in particular the distinction drawn by Ricoeur (following
Mannheim) between utopia as what shatters order and ideology as what
preserves it.  (Fox seems to share with these thinkers that progressive/
teleological bias that is the heritage of Marxism - change is only
*really* change when it is in the "right" direction.  Hence his refusal,
later in the book, to grant Hindu nationalism the status of utopia.)

Next comes a look at "Gandhian utopia", as a "dream of a future India,
perfected on the basis of its presumed ancient culture."  Fox presents
this as an "anonymous and ahistorical set of cultural meanings", rooted
in an ideal of an "essential India".  Critical elements of Gandhi's
vision included: sarvodaya - spiritual well-being for all and individual
discipline (especially in such matters as consumption) as the
underpinning of national strength; swadeshi - serving neighbours first;
satyagraha - non-violent resistance (not passive resistance or pacifism,
but a principled rejection of violence from a position of moral
strength); trusteeship - the rich are trustees of their wealth for the
good of all; bread labour - opposition to dehumanising technology; and
panchayat raj - the village as central institution, with government by
consensus of leaders.

The major theoretical issue tackled in _Gandhian Utopia_ is the
relationship between individuals and culture in history, and the role of
individuals in cultural change.  Associated with this are contingencies
of authorship and authority.  In a brief account of the "great men vs
cultural determinism" debate the latter is seen as dominant in the
anthropological tradition.  In contrast Gandhi assumed "neither an
integral individual nor a determined culture", and argued that
"individual and culture are constantly interlinked by confrontation and
struggle".  The theory of culture change Fox finds closest to this is
Bhaskar's transformational model, where "the intentions and actions of
individuals, as they bounce off the existing culture and society, can
either reproduce or transform that culture, in ways usually unintended
by individuals."  This is tied in with Gouldner's attacks on traditional
ideas of authorship.  The resulting conception of a "culture history" is
"tested" by applying it to the history of scientific innovation.

--

Although Gandhi rejected modernisation and the West, Gandhian
utopia, like the other strands of Indian nationalism, was a response to
the impact of the world on India.  Fox's sources and inspirations here
include Wallerstein's "world system", William's "hegemony", Said's
"Orientalism" and Terdiman's "conflicted intimacy".  Gandhian utopia is
seen as a form of affirmative Orientalism within the Orientalist
hegemony of the world system, one in "conflicted intimacy" with the
negative elements of that hegemony.  Comparisons are made with other
instances of cultural resistance to the world system.

Gandhian utopia did not appear out of a vacuum; there were others
confronting that same Orientalist hegemony.  Affirmative Orientalism
involved Westerners as well as Indians, and people such as Edward
Carpenter, Thoreau, Tolstoy, Ruskin and Annie Besant had a significant
influence on Gandhi.  Among the most important forerunners of Gandhi
were a group centred on Bengal that included Swami Vivekananda, Margaret
Noble (sister Nivedita) and Sri Aurobindo.  They shared with Gandhi a
belief in the essential spiritual nature of India, opposition to
modernisation and stress on an organic society.  However they were also
also involved in revolutionary movements, and Aurobindo's "expedient
passive resistance" lacked satyagraha's moral commitment.  Another group
of nationalists, centred on Bombay and London, was split between those
favouring modernisation and Westernisation and revolutionary cultural
nationalists like Bal Tilak and Shyamji Krishnavarma.  Gandhian utopia
was constructed as an alternative to these that rejected both
Westernisation and violent revolution; its most important original
component was satyagraha.

Gandhi left India for South Africa in 1893 as the result of an early
"experiment" with British rule that went awry.  It was in South Africa
that he began his association with civil disobedience, and coupled it to
moral commitment to form satyagraha as a weapon of mass protest.  Gandhi
maintained his authority over the resulting movement (and in particular
his "authorship" of satyagraha) by protecting it against "misreadings",
and in doing so enhanced his own reputation.  When he returned to India
in 1915 he was forced to reauthor satyagraha and to adapt it to new
circumstances; fear of extremist protest was reducing his support among
Indian nationalists.  Early experiments involving support of tenants
against British landlords had positive outcomes.  But an attempt to
intervene in disputes between mill owners and labourers involved him in
direct class struggle, and he was ambivalent about the results, fearing
the lack of discipline of the lower classes.  This was to dissuade him
from class-based politics and an appeal to the impoverished, and to turn
him instead towards action against the British Raj.  This lead to the
major successes of satyagraha in the Salt March and Quit India
campaigns.

Fox now asks a critical question - what difference did Gandhi and
Gandhian utopia make to Indian history?  Both his successes and his
failures had consequences for Indian independence and independent India.
Important successes included non-violence (the relatively bloodless
British withdrawal from India), class conciliation and the avoidance of
peasant militarism, and the building of a strong voluntary movement.
Failures included the the spread of religious intolerance (and
especially the partition with Pakistan), the partial "hijacking" of
Gandhian utopia by Nehru and Congress, and the ideological transplant of
Gandhian utopia in the interests of the rich peasants, the urban middle
classes and big business.  Even these failures were only partial, and
while Gandhi was alive those seeking to turn Gandhian utopia to their
own ends had to deal with his personal authority.

--

The last part of _Gandhian Utopia_ looks at the inheritors of Gandhi's
legacy and the history of that legacy up to the present.  After Gandhi's
assassination in 1948 Vinoba Bhave was his principal heir, and he formed
the Sarva Seva Sangh to coordinate the activities of Gandhian workers.
Vinoba represented the more spiritual side of Gandhi's programme, and in
particular he rejected "harsh" satyagraha.  In this he was opposed by
Rammanohar Lohia, who sought to turn satyagraha into a weapon of class
struggle.  Vinoba was helped in this confrontation by government
subsidies, and became dependent on Congress support.  Vinoba's most
important experiments were "khadi", or home-spun cloth production, and
"bhoodan", or voluntary land reform.  The former became an unprofitable
enterprise kept alive only by subsidy, while the latter relied too much
on the acquiescence of landowners and was a general failure.  Vinoba, as
a result of his unworldliness and the "mildness" of his experiments,
effectively assisted Nehru and Congress in their "hijacking" of Gandhian
utopia in support of their political interests.

Around 1970 Indira (Mrs.) Gandhi gave up the hijack of Gandhi's legacy
in favour of a class-based popular appeal.  This set the scene for a
revival of Gandhian utopian experiment.  Jayaprakash Narayan (J.P.) was
originally a Marxist but embraced Gandhian utopia and became a follower
of Vinoba soon after Gandhi's assassination.  He became disillusioned,
however, with the failures of bhoodan and the mildness of Vinoba's
approach, and moved back towards activism.  His long term goal was
"total revolution", or the complete reworking of Indian society along
Gandhian lines.  But he failed to seize control of the Sarva Seva Sangh
from Vinoba and this complicated his claims to Gandhian authority and
obliged him to seek mass support elsewhere.  He supported, and gradually
asserted his authority over, student protest movements in Bihar, but
outside that state he never manged to mobilise much of a following and
had to rely on the support of the organised opposition parties.  The
Bihar experiment was ended in 1975 by the declaration of emergency and
subsequent suppression of protest by Mrs. Gandhi.

Fox now looks at the history of Hindu nationalism and its intertwining
with Gandhian utopia; he sees the conjunction of the two as a contingent
result of history.  The Janata party was formed by a coalition of social
democratic, centrist and Hindu nationalist parties, all claiming a
Gandhian character and employing J.P. as their link to Gandhi.  It was
successful in the 1977 elections, but three years later it fell apart
(as a result of disputes over affirmative action policies) and Mrs Gandhi
returned to power.  As part of her crackdown on opposition, Mrs. Gandhi
repressed the followers of J.P. and reauthorized Vinoba as the spiritual
head of the Gandhian voluntary movement.  Gandhian utopia became
peripheral to politics, with those parts of it that continued to be
important being subsumed within Hindu nationalism.

Modern Hindu nationalism contains much that is derived from Gandhian
thinking.  Recently forms of non-violent protest have been employed by
upper castes opposing reservations for the lower castes.  The
nationalist goal of the creation of "Hindia" - an essential India built
around Hinduism - shares with Gandhian utopia the vision (derived from
affirmative Orientalism) of India as different but not inferior to the
West.  Other common elements include support of decentralisation and
stress on the avoidance of class conflict and subordination of the
individual to the community.  The major difference lies in the narrow
religious and sectarian focus of Hindu nationalism; its intolerance of
Muslims and other minorities and opposition to affirmative action run
directly counter to Gandhi's beliefs.  Hindu nationalism has reduced
Gandhian utopia to an ideology deployed in caste/class conflict, both
against the formation of a capitalist class and against Muslims and the
lower castes.  Nevertheless, Fox sees the possibility of a new utopia
growing out of this ideology, and suggests the career of Deendayal
Upadhyaya as a plausible forerunner of such an event.

--

_Gandhian Utopia_ covers a vast amount of material.  Not only is Gandhi
is an extremely complex subject, but the theoretical issues raised
include some of the most important in the social sciences.  I certainly
didn't agree with all of Fox's methodology or conclusions (and few
readers are likely to, as his viewpoint is distinctive), but I feel they
deserve close consideration.  It is as a meeting between anthropology
and history that _Gandhian Utopia_ really stands out.  Students of
modern Indian political history should find _Gandhian Utopia_
provocative.  Anthropologists will find the focus of study on the life
and ideas of a single person unusual, but they will also find much that
is familiar; since the issues considered are important to anthropology,
it is to be hoped they will give Fox's book the attention it deserves.

--

%T     Gandhian Utopia - Experiments with Culture
%A    Richard G. Fox
%I     Beacon Press
%C     Boston
%D     1989
%O     hardcover, bibliography, index
%G     ISBN 0-8070-4100-9
%P     x,330pp
%K     anthropology, history, India

Danny Yee ([e-mail])
4 January 1994