Category Archives: Theory

Capitalism, Debates, Movements, Theory

Whither Social Movements? Exploring the Problematic and Action Strategy: Soumitra Ghosh

4 Comments

Guest post by SOUMITRA GHOSH

The context

One of the biggest and most visible problems plaguing the anti-capitalist social movements of today is the statist framework which conditions, shapes and governs their thoughts and actions. Thus the political praxis which should ideally be moored in a post-capitalist (hence post-state) vision of society, is seldom reached, and the movements are stuck in the morass of extremely limited actions informed by their purely normative and emotive thoughts about how the present society should function. The war-cry of justice is aired, millions take to the street demanding it, yet this ‘justice’ is rarely explained in terms of the real and the grounded. It is taken for granted that the state will be transformed from its overtly pro-capital avatar to a more radical one by this means or another because the movements want it to change: what is forgotten is that history has seen hundreds of experiments with such ‘changed’ states—each one of which failed in the long run, and led to a more coercive rule of capital.

Also, today’s social movements are non-violent and democratic, which in reality means that they prefer working within the framework of parliamentary democracy, and where that is absent, fight for it. Once again, the history of the institution of parliamentary democracy is forgotten: willy-nilly, it’s ignored that historically—more so going by today’s neo-liberal situation—such democracy is intrinsically linked with capitalist production systems and the hegemony of capital in both our societies and polities. Continue reading Whither Social Movements? Exploring the Problematic and Action Strategy: Soumitra Ghosh →

Bad ideas, Debates, Education, Government, Identities, Images, Mirror Worlds, Theory

Partha Chatterjee on Partha Chatterjee – An Interview with an Impostor: Partha Chatterjee

18 Comments
Partha Chatterjee (a)
Partha Chatterjee (b)

Guest Post by PARTHA CHATTERJEE

Continue reading Partha Chatterjee on Partha Chatterjee – An Interview with an Impostor: Partha Chatterjee →

Debates, Theory

Lessons from Scotland for South Asia: Satya Sagar

15 Comments

Guest Post by Satya Sagar

Though ‘No’ finally trumped ‘Yes’ and the United Kingdom stayed ‘united’ the recent referendum for Scottish independence holds several important lessons for both votaries of separatism as well as national unity everywhere.

It also raises many questions, chief among them being, on a planet run by corporations and shaped by tsunami-like capital flows, do terms like national ‘independence’, ‘unity’ or ‘sovereignty’ have real meaning anymore? An even more fundamental question would be whether the nation-state, in its current form, has any future at all or not?

Coming to the lessons first, among the most obvious is the fact that it is possible to hold a referendum on independence peacefully, without a single shot being fired or spilling a single drop of blood.This has been hailed as a triumph of democracy and rightly so too.  How many countries around the world, which call themselves democracies, can muster the guts to allow a section of their citizens to exercise their right to self-determination through a simple vote? Continue reading Lessons from Scotland for South Asia: Satya Sagar →

Capitalism, Debates, Excavation, Theory

Ideas to Occupy Economics – A Note on Michal Kalecki: Pranjal Rawat

3 Comments

Guest post by PRANJAL RAWAT

A revolution of sorts is on the cards for the students of economics amidst a great surge of international support for radical restructuring of the subject and its pedagogy. From the politically incorrect ‘Non-Autistic Economics’ movement to the Post-Crash Society in Manchester to the Jadavpur University Heterodox Economics Students’ Association (JUHESA) in Kolkata we see an underlying common theme. The narrowness of the neoclassical economics is being criticized. Take for instance what the preamble of JUHESA has to say about Neoclassical Economics, “Students have rightly found it appalling that a theory which could neither predict nor suggest remedies to the biggest recession in more than half a century, continues to be taught as the sole approach to economic analysis the whole world over.” This so-called revolution will remain just a source of media income and wash over without changing much, unless scholars of economics take it upon themselves to destroy the inertia and raise arms against the old order. Revolutions exists only in retrospect, the rest is all popular gossip. For that purpose, it would do well to draw strength from the life and work of Michal Kalecki (1899 – 1970), a post-keynesian economist, whose work has remained relevant for a period longer than it took for American economy to recover from the Great Depression only to crash in the Great Recession. Continue reading Ideas to Occupy Economics – A Note on Michal Kalecki: Pranjal Rawat →

Debates, Politics, Theory

Religion, Modernity and Politics – Some Reflections on ‘Secularism’

18 Comments

I am grateful to Ravi Sinha for his post responding to the question of religion and politics that arises out of the brief exchange between Subhash Gatade and myself on Subhash’s post some time ago. Much has happened since the first draft of this response was written and with the advent of Narendra Modi as prime minister, ‘secularism’ too is back in public debate with renewed vigour.

Meanwhile, with Shiv Visvanathan entering the debate, flogging the long dead secularist horse, sections of the liberal and left intelligentsia seem to have gone into a tizzy. Shiv’s argument merely restates in 2014 what political analysts like Ashis Nandy had been saying at least since the mid-1980s and it does so without its nuance. The long and short of this argument is that secularism is the creed of a deracinated English-speaking, West-oriented elite which cares little about the beliefs and ways of thinking and being of the majority of their compatriots. (See also Visvanathan’s piece in Economic and Political Weekly, May 31, 2014, on ‘Narendra Modi’s Symbolic War’)

Somewhere between the two poles of the fast-dwindling tribe of the Leftist gung-ho secularist and the breast-beating liberal, the possibility of a serious debate dies a quiet death. The 1980s-1990s debate on secularism had raised all the important questions about secularism and its problematic practice that Shiv Visvanathan’s piece raises but which, it seems bypassed a whole generation of Leftists who either still seem to find it scandalous to relate to religion or are suddenly discovering their alienation or worse, the virtues of religiosity. Needless to say, such a rediscovery, in the face of political adversity is not likely to be anything more than instrumental use of religion.

The issues in 2014 invite us to revisit and indeed, go beyond what the earlier debate allowed for. Continue reading Religion, Modernity and Politics – Some Reflections on ‘Secularism’ →

Capitalism, Debates, Left watch, Movements, Politics, Theory

Capital, Growth and Molecular Socialism

3 Comments

A slightly modified version of a talk delivered at the Conference on ‘Democracy, Socialism and Visions for the 21st Century’, 7-10 March, at Hyderabad 

Today we stand at a moment of history that is very different from the conjuncture at the turn of the 1980s and onset of the 1990s, which marked the collapse of actually existing socialism and the eventual victory of neo-liberalism. ‘Capital’ looked victorious and invincible and everything that was associated with socialism stood discredited. This is no longer the case today. The struggle for a new kind of left imagination, for a re-signification of the idea of socialism, is now evident in large parts of the world. The neo-liberal emperor has been revealed to have no clothes. Many neoliberals, incidentally, still live in the 1990s, sincere in their belief that History had come to an end at that moment. Simply because twentieth century socialism stood discredited, it was assumed that that meant the end of popular struggles and challenges to capital’s domination over the world. Today, two and a half decades after the collapse of socialism and the victory of neoliberalism, the latter stands challenged as perhaps, never before. 

The difficulty however, is that while the spirit of the Left animates struggles and movements, an actual programmatic vision is still not quite in sight.  The weight of dead generations still weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. Revolutionaries have long conceded defeat and accepted that capitalism is the only salvation and that they too must build capitalism wherever they are in power, even if rhetorically, they still hold on to the idea of transcending capitalism. The problem has little to do with the intentions of the revolutionaries; it is fundamentally a matter of a vision that is predicated upon the productivist and ‘progressist’ imagination of the past three centuries or more. In our contemporary everyday language, we could even call it the growth-fetishist vision – a vision that fails to differentiate between cancerous growth of capital on the social body, and the all round improvement in the lives of ordinary people. The fact that twentieth century socialists too remained captive to that vision is perhaps the reason they could not pose any serious challenge to capital.

Productivism and Progress

This productivist imagination was put in place over a few centuries through the conjunction of a range of new bodies of knowledge – moral philosophy, Lockean political theory and political economy – later economics. At one level, the twentieth century socialist imagination too partook of the fundamental assumptions that lay behind this modernist vision and sought to defeat capitalism on its own ground. That was an impossible task. It was impossible for it never radically questioned the fundamentals of the new capitalist creed, namely economics. Economics was and remains a discipline constituted by capital and ‘socialist economics’ is, strictly speaking, an oxymoron. For, apart from the ecological imperative, to which I will turn in a moment, the discipline was fundamentally hostile to all but bourgeois forms of property and production. Continue reading Capital, Growth and Molecular Socialism →

Culture, Debates, Language, Politics, Theory, Violence/Conflict

भगत सिंह और आज का नौजवान: अपूर्वानंद

3 Comments

कभी कभी हर समाज में ऐसे क्षण  आते हैं जब उसे अपने अस्तित्व के तर्क की पड़ताल करनी पड़ती है. उस समय वह अपने किन बौद्धिक संसाधनों का प्रयोग करता है और किन स्रोतों से तर्क की सामग्री जुटाता है, यह  काफी महत्वपूर्ण है.क्या एक समाज के रूप में भारत के लिए अभी ऐसा ही कोई क्षण उपस्थित हो गया है? एक ऐसा तबका है जो भारत नामक किसी एक सामाजिक इकाई के बौद्धिक औचित्य को ही नहीं मानता. उसकी बात जाने दें.भारत अभी भी अनेकानेक लोगों के लिए एक यथार्थ है जिसकी अपनी भावनात्मक और बौद्धिक वैधता है.वे उसे बार-बार समझने और अपने लिए आयत्त करने की कोशिश करते हैं.इस क्रम में वे किनकी ओर  देखते हैं? Continue reading भगत सिंह और आज का नौजवान: अपूर्वानंद →

Capitalism, Debates, Government, Politics, Theory

Decolonization of the Mind

9 Comments

Our modernity is incomplete, our secularism impure, our democracy immature, our development  arrested and our capitalism retarded: ask anyone trained in the social sciences, economics in particular, about what ails India today and you can be sure of getting one or all of these answers. And you can go on adding to the list of more and more things ‘we’ lack. We did not have ‘history’, we do not have social sciences – and of course, we do not have theory/ philosophy.

Everything, in other words, is about our ‘backwardness’ and our need to catch up with the West. And seen through the lens of social science, most of the world looks like this – living ‘inauthentic’ lives, always ever in the ‘waiting room of history’, to steal historian Dipesh Chakrabarty’s suggestive phrase.

In the world view of our state elites, this is actually a form of what one could call, paraphrasing Sigmund Freud, ‘Capital-Envy’. The ‘realization’ that ‘we do not have it’ can be a source of serious anxieties. That is what lies behind the current frenzied desire to ‘catch up’ with the West. And generations of feminist scholarship has challenged this unquestioned Freudian  assumption that the penis is the norm and not to have it, is Lack. Perhaps women do not want it? Freud never conceived of this as possible. Indeed in today’s world, there are many men who claim that they feel they are women trapped inside male bodies. Generations of scholarship has made us realize that the aura of that grand universal theory actually rested on the fact that it did not just describe the sexes; it produced the sexual norm itself.

The vision that propels our political elites and their parallel numbers who write in the media today, is something like that fantasy of Freud. The anxiety produced by this awareness of the ‘primordial Lack’, is what drives them today towards what has been the most violent phase of development in our entire history. Violent uprooting of populations from their land, often at gunpoint, coupled with the most ruthless plunder of our common resources by unscrupulous corporations – all this and more has been going on with the state elites looking on ‘benignly’. For they seem to know something ordinary mortals do not – that all this is but the necessary price to pay for becoming ‘modern’ like them. Continue reading Decolonization of the Mind →

Bad ideas, Theory

In Memory of a Puppy/ Ek Pillay Ki Yaad Mein

19 Comments

puppy-modi Continue reading In Memory of a Puppy/ Ek Pillay Ki Yaad Mein →

Capitalism, Debates, Politics, Theory

End of Postcolonialism and the Challenge for ‘Non-European’ Thought

3 Comments

A lively debate has been going on lately in Al Jazeera, following the question posed by Hamid Dabashi in an article provocatively titled “Can Non-Europeans Think“? Dabashi’s piece, published earlier in January this year was a response to an article by Santiago Zabala, Research Professor of Philosophy at the University of Barcelona. Zabala’s article, entitled “Slavoj Zizek and the Role of the Philosopher”, was actually on an entirely different issue, as will be evident from the title. Zabala attempts, in this article, to read in Zizek’s persona and oeuvre, the possible implications for the philosopher as such. He dwells on Zizek as a figure who is at once a philosopher and a public intellectual – a role not very easily available, according to him, to academic philosophers.

If most significant philosophers become points of reference within the philosophical community, he says, “few have managed to overcome its boundaries and become public intellectuals intensely engaged in our cultural and political life as did Hannah Arendt (with the Eichmann trial), Jean-Paul Sartre (in the protests of May 1968) and Michel Foucault (with the Iranian revolution).” Zabala explains this rare ability/ possibility by invoking Edward Said on the ‘outsider’ status of the intellectual and by underlining the direct engagement of the thought of such philosophers with contemporary events. He says:

These philosophers became public intellectuals not simply because of their original philosophical projects or the exceptional political events of their epochs, but rather because their thoughts were drawn by these events. But how can an intellectual respond to the events of his epoch in order to contribute in a productive manner?

In order to respond, as Edward Said once said, the intellectual has to be “an outsider, living in self-imposed exile, and on the margins of society”, that is, free from academic, religious and political establishments; otherwise, he or she will simply submit to the inevitability of events.

Read the full essay here at Critical Encounters.

Capitalism, Debates, Frontiers, Left watch, Politics, Theory

Partha Chatterjee on Subaltern Studies, Marxism and Vivek Chibber

28 Comments

At the recent Historical Materialism conference held in Delhi from April 3-5, a panel was organized with great fanfare – an official panel by the HM editors – around Vivek Chibber’s new book Postcolonial Theory and the Spectre of Capital. This panel was billed to be a decisive refutation of Subaltern Studies and Postcolonial theory, not only by the chief  theorists and organizers of Historical Materialism but by many other Indians – most of whom in any case have little more than a religious faith in ‘Marxism’ and understand little of Marxism and its history.  There was glee all around and one came across the hurried announcement of a Centre for Marxist Studies that was to host further events around this book against the demon that Chibber had apparently slain. After all, Chibber  was backed by the likes of Slavoj Zizek, Robert Brenner and Noam Chomsky, all of whom  had  endorsed his book as the death knell to  Subaltern Studies and Postcolonial theory. The glee was to be short-lived.

On April 28, at the New York conference of Historical Materialism, the organizers made the mistake of inviting Partha Chatterjee (a representative of a spent force, already buried at the Delhi HM Conference!) to debate the new star on their horizon. The meticulous demolition of Chibber that followed, embarrassed even his most ardent supporters, who had hoped to see the redoubtable Partha vanquished in person. And Chhibber, let our marxist brethren note, is reduced to finally accepting that he is more inclined towards contract  theory than towards Marxism!

Partha, whose years of meticulous engagement with Marxism can hardly be taken on cavalierly by any upstart on the horizon, calmly tore Chibber’s claims to shreds. Many supporters of Chibber’s book have, in social media, glumly  described the 28 April event as a great setback to their cause…

Here is Partha in debate…

Bad ideas, Language, Politics, Right watch, Theory, Violence/Conflict

तार्किकता, भावुकता और फासिज्म

1 Comment

 28 फरवरी को याद करने पर अब कहा जाने लगा है कि यह नकारात्मक स्मृति है और इंसानी फितरत के मुताबिक़ हमें आगे बढ़ना  चाहिए. हिन्दुओं को, खासकर गुजराती हिन्दुओं, यह नागवार गुजरता है कि उन्हें  बार-बार 28 फरवरी , 2002 की याद दिलाई जाए. आखिर गुजरात में 2002 के बाद पूरा अमन है और वह विकास के मार्ग पर एक दृढसंकल्प मुख्यमंत्री के नेतृत्व में संकल्पपूर्वक बढ़ा जा रहा है और वहां के मुसलमान भी अब कुछ और बात करना चाहते हैं.

दरअसल भुलाने और आगे बढ़ जाने की शुरुआत 2002 में ही हो गई थी. 28 फ़रवरी से राज्य-संरक्षण में शुरू हुए मुसलमानों के कत्लेआम ने भारत के उद्योगपतियों के एक हिस्से को भी झकझोर दिया था. लेकिन कुछ समय बाद ही पूंजीवाद के तर्क ने मानवीयता की कमजोरी पर विजय पा ली और उन्होने नाराज़ मुख्यमंत्री से क्षमायाचना करके गुजरात की प्रगति में उन्हें हिस्सा लेने की इजाजत माँग ली  थी. सार्वजनिक रूप से उन्हें गांधी और पटेल से तुलनीय बताया जाना अब अटपटा भी नहीं लगता, बल्कि उलट कर कहा जा सकता है कि गांधी और पटेल में  ऐसे कई गुण नहीं थे जो गुजरात के ह्रदय-सम्राट में पाए जाते हैं , इसलिए यह तुलना वस्तुतः इन दोनों के प्रति पक्षपात है. पूंजीवाद के मूल अंतर्राष्ट्रीय चरित्र ने अंततः युरोपियन यूनियन को अपनी मानवीय हिचक को किनारे करके गुजराती यथार्थ को कबूल करते हुए कारोबारी नज़रिया अपनाने को प्रेरित किया. यह संभव नहीं था कि आर्थिक निवेश के ठोस आकर्षक आमंत्रण को   न्याय के अमूर्त आग्रह  के चलते ठुकरा दिया जाए. Continue reading तार्किकता, भावुकता और फासिज्म →

Empire/ Imperialism, Identities, Mirror Worlds, Movements, Politics, Theory

Theories of Oppression and another Dialogue of Cultures: Ashis Nandy

11 Comments

This is the text of the Ambedkar Memorial lecture delivered by ASHIS NANDY at the India International Centre on 14 April 2012, under the auspices of Ambedkar University, Delhi.

It was published in Economic and Political Weekly, July 28, 2010

Every generation likes to believe that it is living in momentous times, witnessing the death of one world and the birth of another, negotiating what pre-war Bengali writers used to grandly call yugasandhikshana, the moment when two epochs meet. This generation of Indians too believes that it is seeing such changes and even participating in them. Perhaps they are. However, I shall argue here that, along with transitions in society and politics to which they like to stand witness, there are transitions in cultures of knowledge and states of awareness of which they may be gloriously innocent. And they perhaps try to protect that innocence. The categories we deploy to construe our world images are parts of our innermost self and to disown them is to disown parts of ourselves and jeopardise our self-esteem. Even when we struggle to shed these categories, they survive like phantom limbs do in some amputees. Or perhaps they survive the way one of Freud’s three universal fantasies, the one about immortality, does. When you imagine yourself dead, you are still there, fully alive, looking at yourself as dead. Continue reading Theories of Oppression and another Dialogue of Cultures: Ashis Nandy →

Debates, Identities, Language, Theory

Corruption and Political Correctness: A Severe Case of Intellectual Laziness: Meera Ashar

12 Comments

Guest post by MEERA ASHAR

Ashis Nandy has been called, rather, accused of being, many things—sociologist, historian, political theorist, public intellectual, philosopher, psychoanalyst, leftist, centrist, right wing, Dalit, Christian, Brahmanical, casteist (he describes himself, more poetically, as an intellectual street fighter and reason buster)—but ‘politically correct’ has never been one of them.

This time, Nandy’s political incorrectness has cost him more than before. As in the past, he has been attacked by politicians and the popular media for presenting his analysis of social phenomena—for doing his job well. The response of the Indian intelligentsia to Nandy’s threatened arrest by the right wing government of Gujarat in 2008 was markedly different from the response now. The difference this time, of course, is that Nandy has not offended the right people. He is seen to have betrayed the marginalized. This time, he has been unfashionably politically incorrect. The similarity between the two episodes is the ‘freedom of speech’ brigade, which has dutifully stood by Nandy. But I shall turn to them later.

Continue reading Corruption and Political Correctness: A Severe Case of Intellectual Laziness: Meera Ashar →

Identities, Politics, Theory

‘भारतीय विचारधारा’: मिथक से यथार्थ की ओर

3 Comments

[An edited version of this review of Perry Anderson’s ‘Indian Ideology‘ (Three Essays Collective, October 2012) appeared in January edition of Samayantar]

the-indian-ideologyअपनी किताब‘ द जर्मन आइडिओलोजी’ (रचनाकाल 1845-46) मार्क्स एवं एंगेल्स इतिहास की अपने भौतिकवादी व्याख्या का निरूपण करते है। किताब की शुरूआत 19 वीं सदी के शुरूआत में जर्मनी के दार्शनिक जगत पर हावी हेगेल की आदर्शवादी परम्परा एवं उसके प्रस्तोताओं की तीखी आलोचना से होती है जिसमें यह दोनों युवा इन्कलाबी चेतना एवं अमूर्त विचारों पर फोकस करनेवाले और सामाजिक यथार्थ के उससे निःसृत होने की उनकी समझदारी पर जोरदार हमला बोलते हैं। इस ऐतिहासिक रचना से नामसादृश्य रखनेवाली पेरी एण्डरसन (थ्री एसेज़, 2012) की किताब ‘द इण्डियन आइडिओलोजी’ का फ़लक भले ही दर्शन नहीं है, मगर अपने वक्त़ के अग्रणी विचारकों द्वारा भारतीय राज्य एवं समाज की विवेचना की आलोचना के मामले में वह उतनी ही निर्मम दिखती है।

आज की तारीख में भारतीय राज्य एक स्थिर राजनीतिक जनतंत्र, एक सद्भावपूर्ण क्षेत्रीय एकता और एक सुसंगत धार्मिक पक्षपातविहीनता के मूल्यों को स्थापित करने का दावा करता है। उपनिवेशवादी गुलामी से लगभग एक ही समय मुक्त तीसरी दुनिया के तमाम अन्य मुल्कों की तुलना में – जहाँ अधिनायकवादी ताकतों ने लोकतांत्रिक प्रक्रियाओं एवं संस्थाओं को मज़बूत नहीं होने नहीं दिया है – विगत साठ साल से अधिक समय से यहां जारी संसदीय जनतंत्र के प्रयोग को लेकर वह आत्ममुग्ध भी दिखता है। इतना ही नहीं अक्सर यह भी देखने में आता है कि भारतीय समाज की विभिन्न गैरबराबरियों, जाति-जेण्डर-नस्ल आदि पर आधारित तमाम सोपानक्रमों के विभिन्न आलोचक भी भारतीय राज्य की  इस आत्मप्रस्तुति/आत्मप्रशंसा से सहमत हुए दिखते हैं। मगर यह बेचैन करने वाला सवाल नहीं पूछा जाता कि भारतीय राज्य के तमाम दावों एवं वास्तविक हकीकत के बीच कितना तारतम्य है ? अगर दावों एवं हकीकत के बीच अन्तराल दिखता है तो उसे हम परिस्थिति की नियति कह सकते हैं या उसकी जड़ें शासकों के आचरण में ढूंढ सकते हैं। Continue reading ‘भारतीय विचारधारा’: मिथक से यथार्थ की ओर →

Culture, Debates, Identities, Language, Left watch, Theory

Satyashodhak: Brahminical Manoeuvre: Madhuri M. Dixit

11 Comments

Guest post by MADHURI M. DIXIT

G. P. Deshpande’s play Satyshodhak is currently being performed in Maharashtra and Delhi and has received positive reviews in print and electronic media1 .It is praised for portraying Jotiba Phule’s life and work, its relevance for dalit emancipatory politics and also for the participation of the Pune Municipal Corporation’s workers as actors. There is a mood of celebration and a congratulatory back patting tone in the appraisal of a supposedly qualitatively different production. In addition to that, the writer has claimed that the production means a ‘successful and meaningful experiment of political education’ 2 of the workers/actors who are dalits. However, the flaunted success of the play and claims about its political import are belied by a performance that offers a very brahmanised Phule. It is very interesting to see that the author claims ‘a meaningful experiment’ of political education of the workers by offering them a pro-upper caste version of Phule. The very choice of producing a play about Phule in 2012 after a shelf life of twenty years 3, the writer’s articulated positions regarding it and the knowledge of Phule delivered through it, involve, I suggest, an upper caste cultural politics embodied in the brahman friendly figure of Phule.

Continue reading Satyashodhak: Brahminical Manoeuvre: Madhuri M. Dixit →

Excavation, Left watch, Politics, Theory

MEGA, the recovery of Marx and Marxian path: Sankar Ray

16 Comments

Guest post by SANKAR RAY

In sharp contrast to the scenario of the unprecedented debt-driven crisis of neo-liberal world economic order, a new era of radiant expectations seems to open up for Marx-followers and Marxists around the international project, Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe or complete works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (MEGA) and it’s hitherto ‘unexplored Marx’. MEGA , a collation of original texts is ‘the historical-critical edition of works of Marx and Engels’, an imperative ignored during the 20th century by official Marxists. Fifty-nine out of 114 volumes , have already been published. The MEGA editorial board, following prolonged debate decided to put together the whole of 164 volumes of original manuscripts in 114 volumes.

A critical approach to history  is essential for scholarly inquiry. Yet  scholarship alone isn’t enough where an enterprise such as this is for it also requires unbiased collation and editing. The development of Marxist studies had been throttled due to widespread vulgarisation which had dominated Marx studies from the 1890s to the end of the 20th Century. Early Marxists like Franz Mehring and Vera Zasulich – and Rosa Luxemburg – adopted a more critical approach which is a essential for the ‘Marxist temper’. Marx’s prescription, de omnibus dubitandum (doubt everything), wasn’t meant to be just a quotation. Unfortunately, Lenin and his followers often deified Marx. Lenin’s words – “Marxism is omnipotent, because it is true” – is one such instance as if Marxism represents the end of philosophy. Continue reading MEGA, the recovery of Marx and Marxian path: Sankar Ray →

Capitalism, Debates, Left watch, Politics, Theory

Life After Capitalism? A Document From Another Time

15 Comments

The French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser, who perhaps reflected most on the question of ‘ideology’, once wrote that “ideology moves, but with an immobile motion that keeps it where it is”. Althusser did not make any claim about the truth or falsity of ideology. At a certain level, ideology undoubtedly refers to something that is real or true. What interested Althusser instead, was the relationship of ‘ideology’ to what he called ‘science’ – namely, that critical activity, which continuously works to take knowledge forward. Science, according to him, always lived by focusing on that which it did not know; ideology on the other hand, was that which remained with the obviousness of the already-known. Every new question that a science poses is effectively subsumed by ideology to give us something that we already knew. That is why science, he believed, was always  pursued, beseiged and occupied by ideology and had to continuously struggle to free itself from its grasp in order to live.

The CPI(M)’s ‘Draft Resolution on Some Ideological Issues’ prepared by the party for discussion and adoption at the party’s 20th Congress that began in Kozhikode today, is truly an ideological document in Althusser’s sense. It claims to move with the times and update the party thought apparatus but in reality, moves in order to stay where it is. It works to relentlessly re-present all the difficult questions of our times as if they were already known to the founders of something called ‘Marxism-Leninism’.

Continue reading Life After Capitalism? A Document From Another Time →

Bad ideas, Capitalism, Centre watch, Countryside, Debates, Ecology/Environment, Government, Identities, Metropolis, Politics, Theory

The Many Uses of a U.P Election

10 Comments

I live in Noida, which is the child of an extra-legal union between Delhi and Uttar Pradesh. Noida is not-quite Delhi, not-quite U.P, not quite itself on most days. Living in a cusp has several advantages, however, the main one being that one can look either way, up at Delhi and right down over U.P’s scruffy head. I found myself doing both in the recently-concluded U.P election. Curiously it seemed, for Delhi people, U.P’s 2012 elections were flush with new meaning. For decades the favourite whipping boy of Delhi, U.P had overnight become its favourite gap-toothed angel. For Pratap Bhanu Mehta of the Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research, the U.P election was a historic battle between empowerment and patronage, the future and the past, performance and rhetoric, sincerity and cynicism, and (this is my favourite) ‘rootedness over disembodied charm’. Mehta believes that while voters ‘carefully assessed’ candidates through the ‘prism of local circumstances’, they were no longer prisoners of their identity. Most confounding is Mehta’s view of democracy, “In a democracy, where you are going should be more important than where you are coming from”. These U.P elections “redeemed that promise” according to Mehta, since they were “without a trace of community polarisation: no one felt on the edge or under siege, all could exercise options without being unduly burdened by the past.”

Continue reading The Many Uses of a U.P Election →

Debates, Everyday Life, Government, Politics, Theory

Politics, ‘Political Society’ and ‘the Everyday’

1 Comment

Politics, ‘Political Society’ and ‘the Everyday’

 Book Review 

Lineages of Political Society, by Partha Chatterjee, Permanent Black, Ranikhet, 2011. Pages: 278, hardcover, Rs 750.

 

Lineages of Political Society

 Over a decade ago, political theorist Partha Chatterjee embarked on what was a novel journey in the history of political thought in India and perhaps, in the postcolonial, non-Western world. Bringing together the results of decades of his own intellectual engagement with Indian politics and the question of subalternity in particular, Chatterjee began articulating a concept that has now acquired wide currency: his concept of ‘political society’. ‘Political society’, in Chatterjee’s hands, was a way of recuperating a sphere of politics that had been a permanent source of anxiety for theorists of Indian (and postcolonial) modernity and democracy – the vast domain that existed outside the designated spheres of modern politics, where the untutored masses made claims on the state and formed their own associations and organizations, unmindful of the formal grammar of rights and citizenship. A crucial part of what defines activities in this domain is ‘illegality’, or, at any rate, non-legality, where the state itself places the law in suspension in order to recognize the claims of the governed. Thus for instance, squatting by the poor on government land that is strictly speaking, encroachment in legal terms and can never acquire the status of a ‘right’, is nevertheless allowed by governments to continue through the recognition of some kind of moral claim of the poor on governments and society at large.

Continue reading Politics, ‘Political Society’ and ‘the Everyday’ →

Bad ideas, Debates, Empire/ Imperialism, Language, Politics, Theory

Le Grande Triptych Humanism: Brinda Bose and Prasanta Chakravarty

4 Comments

Guest post by BRINDA BOSE and PRASANTA CHAKRAVARTY

Haruki Murakami’s much-hyped IQ84 that released worldwide in translation a couple of months ago is (Our) Big Fat Japanese Novel, three volumes in one. Closer home, Amitav Ghosh is in the process of completing the definitive South Asian Maritime Novel in trilogy. Young, prize-winning, promising writers from around the world – New Zealand, Malaysia, Bangladesh – are pledged to regale us with long large narratives that will tell us everything we ever wanted to know about their cultures, societies, lives – in trilogies and quartets. Intriguing? Indeed. Coincidental? Perhaps not.

Even as new literary canons are continually in consolidation, interrogation and re-formation, Franco Moretti – acclaimed, revered, preeminent theorist of the Novel and World Literature (which enjoy an odd synecdochic relationship) – has systematically constructed a blueprint for ways to appreciate the worth of such a grand, if loose, canon as World Literature by a particular reading technique he calls ‘distance-reading’.

Continue reading Le Grande Triptych Humanism: Brinda Bose and Prasanta Chakravarty →