lecture on Globalization / sociology of Globalization 

https://youtu.be/p-TwUMDoFuo

 Lecture on Globalization ( Part 2) 

https://youtu.be/LpOlVbCrHM8

 Lecture on Globalization part 1 

https://youtu.be/tYDHgH_pAc0

Cultural contradiction - Daniel Bell

 Daniel Bell's 1976 "Cultural Contradictions"

Bell begins with a description of consensus between economic, political and cultural forces which are unraveling. The bourgeois economic values of functional and technocratic roles are opposed by cultural values of art and religion, which Bell calls demonic, have resulted in a battleground between the hedonistic middle classes, by which he means conspicuous mass consumers and the working classes armed with concepts of equality and participation have turned adversarial. This situation resonates with Marcuse's economic writings on waste production and waste consumption of useless mass-produced goods and the production of new needs for these markets. Roger Mudd stated in 'The Selling of the Pentagon," 1971, that the middle classes avoided the draft by either going to college or applying for a psychiatric disqualification! 

Bell does not address the nature of the polity. He does not compare different governmental agencies nor depict them in a contest. There is no sense of a conflict between military personnel and bureaucrats; the divided nature of political parties does not implicate the displacement of military veterans by politicians, nor of bureaucrats by military veterans. Bell's unraveled consensus between the economic, the political or parties, and culture has caused the emergence of modernity, or a preoccupation with self-fulfillment, individuality and anti-rationality. The latter referring to instrumental success oriented purposiveness, not apparently to substantive rationality! But, this recourse to modernity does not address the more radical concerns of postmodernity, the sociology of science or technocratic consciousness. Comparing Bell's unraveled consensus to more radical models of social change, namely, ideology, discipline and leadership, indicates that issues of social class discipline, of the relation of party ideology to military and police operations and to the integrity of leaders implies the the problem of cultural contradictions (note not economic contradictions or contradictions in decision-making) is not solved by a new public philosophy.  Bell wants to turns the 'cultural' around to dovetail with political and economic priorities and responsibilities. Thus he is conservative. He does not want to take up the problem of death by government, of government terror. Instead, he has offered a roundabout argument for setting household arrangements and budgets straight, preferably by restricting credit!

"The characteristic style of an industrial society is based on the principles of economics and economizing: least cost, maximization, optimization, and functional rationality. Yet, it is at this point that it comes into sharpest conflict with the cultural trends of the day, for the culture emphasizes anticognitive and anti-intellectual currents which are rooted in a return to instinctual modes. The one emphasizes functional rationality, technocratic decision-making, and meritocratic rewards. The other, apocalyptic moods and anti-rational modes of behavior. It is this disjunction which is the historic crisis of Western society. This cultural contradiction, in the long run, is the deepest challenge to the society." Bell, D. "The Cultural Contradictions of Capital," 1972. The 1976 text is a series of articles emanating from this one.

The basic contradiction is between the social system and the culture. Another way of saying something similar is that there is a contradiction between the Constitution and the the beliefs of the people, e.g. hate and evil. And another way of saying this is that there is a contradiction, an opposition between positivist rationality and substantive rationality, as well as within substantive rationality.

Thinking Indian democracy

Indian freedom struggle is a manifestation of the  misdeeds of British Rule and the quest for justice of millions of Indian.  The struggle for independence was not fought simply for national independence. The establishment of democracy in free India was an important aim of the freedom struggle. It was in view of this goal that is the essence of “constitution of India”. Among all the goals of Indian freedom struggle the establishment of democracy was the most important goal .

 

MacIver once said “Democracy is a form of Government that is never completely achieved … Democracy grows into its being”. It may take a long time before we say, Now India is a democracy in its real sense. Is anything left of that democracy today?  

Democracy means freedom and equality through rule of law. What is happening in India is the radicalization of right wing politics where the rule of law is violated. The voice of dissents is systematically killed. Criticism and Discussion require vigilance on the part of a citizen which in the worlds of J S Mill, is the price of democracy, in other words, Indian has a democracy lacking the spirit of democracy.

 

Judiciary is no more an indicator of a nation's political civilization. With the deep love of right wing political ideology judiciary has given its portative hands of people’s rights. We live in the time of majoritarian democracy. We lack a sense of responsibility particularly the side of the majority with reference to social equality. We can see “dictatorship under the grab of democracy”. Without social and economic equality and the sense of brotherhood that is the essence of Fraternity, Indian democracy may become only a care structure of bureaucratic government without any life in it.  

We are forgetting the teaching of Gandhi and Tagore who taught us 'culture of tolerance and acceptance'. we can see the attack on minorities everywhere. We lack compassion that is the keynote of the sense of fraternity to be fostered in Indian society. Politicization of religion led to the killing of compassion in the root of religion and without compassion there can be no religion. Even Srimad Bhagavata said “ Kamaya duhka taptanam praninam arti nasanam “ means the only desire that lingers in me is to wipe the tears of those that suffer from the anguish of pain .

If Indian democracy has to be the way of life it has to free from the majoritarian rule which is constructing “The other” .That is millions of minorities.

The idea of Local self-government has become insignificant with the Americanisation of Indian democracy. Centralization spells death of democracy, for it means power and initiative are taken away from the people and concentrated at the center. The whole project of decentralization of democracy (73rd and 74th amendments) are unfulfilled . The actualization of Gandhi's dream  is unfulfilled.  Besides this , The rise of  One-party rule  and insignificant opposition are dangerous for the democracy of India .

 

The objective of Independence seems to me incomplete. We can see the degradation of the idea of freedom from communalism, freedom from the unjust system of capitalism. Besides this,  The insignificant land reform , powerless state in terms of privatization , De-socialization of  Principal industries,  WTO effect on policies , in context of neo-liberal development . These are important considerations as far as the impartial  view of the development of democracy is concerned.  

With the rise of media constructed public opinion in terms of fake news and propaganda creates a culture of hate and fear. The narrow growth of cultural nationalism based on fake communitarian belief is to be seen as the emergence of Indian state which is based on the idea of uncommon citizenship. With the rise of the right, the great challenge is to act even to an intellectual without being anti-national.

We can see the differentiation between the discourse of patriotism and the discourse of nationalism.  One is based on love and  peace ,another one is based on fear and anger .Indian struggled for her political independence inspired by her belief in the means  of non-violence, ahimsa and won her freedom with goodwill of all nations. That is why  liberal democracy and cultural  tolerance are the whole mark of Indian democracy. Unity in diversity and diversity in unity are the principles of Indian democracy .

We  can see the missing  discourse of Idea of the nation of  swami vivekananda ,  Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore  that is the idea of Internationalism . History tells us Love based nations make Humanity and vice a versa.But fear based Nations do not make humanity .

 

I hope some day , perhaps in the not very distant future , Mahatma Gandhi , Bhagat singh , Bhim Rao Ambedker , subhash Chandra Bose , Jawaharlal Nehru , Jaya Prakash and Lohiya’s dream  may be fulfilled .

We need a democracy where we should neither be the slaves of capitalism nor fundamentalism. People will be free to express their opinions. Let us replace “my’ with “our” then only we can end capitalism and begin socialism in the context of individual , society and state .

In the concluding remark, I would like to sayy if Indian democracy is really of the people, by the people and for the people , we all are responsible for this state of affairs. I think a nation is sure to die , when the main purpose of it  is hurt. In order to save it's purpose or in order to save the spirit of democracy we, have to inculcate constitutional morality .  we have to be critical towards the government, we have to be aware that we are the masters in democracy, we have the right to question our government for not adhering to certain principles in the constitution of India. We have to acknowledge the fact that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Let there be collective thinking in India and let us all help in the creation of real, working, living, democracy in our country  .