Chapter IV Part III
The
business of the State
Sri Aurobindo was specific that the State
has not only its shortcomings but a designated limit beyond
which its real utility ceases. The State idea can neither offer
a pervasive force of collective development nor a panacea for
all problems of co-operative action. He lists the business of
the State in accordance with the contemporary idea of socialism
and as long as the State ‘continues to be a necessary element in
human life and growth’ (indicating that the State too can be
surpassed by an enlightened, intuitive spontaneity of
higher-order anarchy):
a.To provide all possible facilities for
co-operative action,
b.To remove all disabilities and obstacles
that that interfere with co-operative action,
c. To remove all really harmful waste and
friction in collective life though it has to be acknowledged
that ‘a certain amount of waste and friction is necessary and
useful to all natural action’,
d.To remove avoidable injustice,
e.To secure for every individual a just and
equal chance of self-development in consonance with
nature(temperamental characteristics and personality variables)
and one’s extent of powers( achievement motivation, technical
skill, professional expertise, intellectual acumen).(The Ideal
of Human Unity, pg 283)
Individual freedom
However, this socialistic duty of the State
can be jeopardized by ‘unnecessary interference with the freedom
of man’s growth’ (Ibid). In fact, it is not only the State
functioning but any sort of co-operative action that can be
harmful if the individual has to be immolated at the altar of a
communal egoism. Thus if a community is bent upon to maintain
its cultural identity due to historical reasons like prolonged
injustice, then it could go to illogical extents to subordinate
individual aspirations within the community or sub-State so that
its agenda is not compromised. That is how when such communities
take up prolonged agitation in forms ranging from week long
strikes and bandhs ( as in the contemporary agitations of the
Gorkha community in the hills of Darjeeling ) to terrorism (as
in the present tribal areas of Afghanistan), the first casualty
is the education of students whose individual contributions
could have been torch-bearers of progress. The same rule can
apply in a different perspective to communities which appear to
be politically, socially or culturally stable. Such a community
would show a knee-jerk reaction if its peace, security and
contentedness are disturbed by an ‘impatient individualism’
disrupting the monotony of a settled harmony. After all, ‘it is
the individual who progresses and compels the rest to progress;
the instinct of the collectivity is to stand still in its
established order. Progress, growth, realization of wider being,
give his greatest sense of happiness to the individual; status,
secure ease, to the collectivity’ (Ibid, pg 284).
That the individual actually compels the
rest to follow has also been acknowledged, albeit with
reservations by hard-core communists. A paradoxical situation
arose as Marxist historians were speculating how Mahatma Gandhi
could influence the masses. Some believed that as an
after-effect of the 1917 Russian revolution, the masses had been
revolutionized by their own experience, a phenomenon which was
utilized by Gandhi. Not all could agree. It was an undisputed
fact that Gandhi’s individual charisma stirred the Indian masses
in a way that was unique. Lenin assessed Gandhi’s contribution
in a positive way in the discussions of the 1920 colonial thesis
of the Communist International and advised Communists in India
to unite with the Gandhi-led anti-imperialist movement while
remaining independent and critical. This was remarkable as they
simultaneously held Gandhi ‘wrong’ for many reasons, viz. his
absolutization of non-violence, his belief in God, his lack of a
scientific theory of social evolution, his downplaying of
class-struggle. (Mohit Sen. An autobiography. Abridged by
A.K.Sahay, National Book Trust, India,2007, pg 395).
Future directions
The conflict between individualism and
collectivism cannot be resolved unless the collectivity
transcends its present physical and economic character and
evolves into a self-conscious collective soul. Till then the
ideal of human unity remains a chimera. In the meanwhile the
march of forces is expected to lead towards a broader external
or administrative unity in order to prepare and accustom the
mind-set to an increasing commonality. In 1915-1916, Sri
Aurobindo wrote that this broader unity through State machinery
could take two forms:
(a)
‘a grouping of powerful and
organized States enjoying carefully regulated and legalized
relations with each other’, a speculation that became a prophecy
with the formation of the European Union; and
(b)
‘ a substitution of a
single World-State for the present half chaotic half ordered
comity of nations, -- be the form of that World-State a single
Empire like the Roman or a federated unity’, a visionary
trajectory that yet remains to be worked out (The Ideal of Human
Unity, pg 284).
However, this
administrative unity cannot suffice unless there is evolution of
the collective soul in the matrix of social consciousness.
Something ‘more profound, internal and real’ has to manifest to
make human unity ‘really healthy, durable or beneficial over all
the true line of human destiny’ (Ibid). If this does not happen,
history will repeat itself in newer circumstances, the same
mistakes (the likes of which led to the World Wars) can again
occur, and we have to start afresh with a new reconstructive age
of confusion and anarchy. We can still avoid that painful ordeal
‘by subordinating mechanical means to our true development
through a moralized and even a spiritualized humanity united in
its inner soul and not only in its outer life and body’ (Ibid).
Date of Update: 18-Nov-11 - By Dr. Soumitra Basu
|