PrintFriendlyOne of the most important contributions of Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya was his formulation of the Integral Humanism in 1965. It was presented as an ideological framework for the all-round development of Bharat based on the foundations of our time-tested value systems and experiences. From underlining the need to ‘think about our national identity’, to emphasizing that the ‘foreign ideologies are not universal’ and to pointing out ‘That progress of man means simultaneous progress of the body, mind, intellect and the soul of a man’, it covers the different aspects impacting our lives and our nation.
It also contains an economic philosophy derived on the basis of our age-old culture, experiences and approaches. This paper presents briefly as to how the macro-economic views presented as a part of Integral Humanism have come true during the last sixty years and how the economic and business models based on the Bharatiya systems are important for us to attain the status of Viksit Bharat.
At the time when Integral Humanism was presented, the Western economic ideologies namely, capitalism and communism remained the two ‘universal models’ applicable to all the countries in the World. During the cold war period, different countries in the World were grouped into three categories. The First World led by the U.S. and the Second World led by the U.S.S.R were considered as the role models for the rest to follow, depending on their political inclinations and economic approaches. India was categorized as one that belonged to the Third World, which included the underdeveloped and developing countries. Most of those countries like Bharat were colonies to the Western powers earlier.
After we got Independence, our policy makers got the freedom to frame policies based on our own backgrounds and the ground realities. But the ruling establishment opted for the Western ‘socialistic approach’, disregarding the opinions of leaders like Gandhiji. As a result, the state had failed to frame suitable policies and use the full potential of the independent nation. Hence we could achieve only lower growth rates, averaging around 3.6 percent during the initial three decades.
Bharat is a nation of great civilizational backgrounds with thousands of years of proud history and pioneering achievements of the highest order in diverse fields of life. We also remained as an economic super power continuously for several centuries since the ancient periods, Studies show that we excelled in all the different sectors, namely agriculture, manufacturing and trade. But during the later centuries, we were made to forget our past, brain-washed to believe in the alien systems and imitate their approaches.
When both the capitalism and communism were at their peak, Deendayal warned that both of them suffered from serious limitations. We have to remember that both originated in the West based on their limited experiences during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In their scheme of things, they do not take into account the family, social, spiritual and the higher aspirations of people when they discuss economics. They feel that economics is separate and hence has no connection with the other aspects of life.
Deendayal said that “Both these systems, capitalist as well as communist, have failed to take into account of the Integral Man, his true and complete personality and aspirations. One considers him as a mere selfish being hankering after money, having only one law, the law of fierce competition, in essence the law of the jungle; whereas the other has viewed him as a feeble life-less hog in the whole scheme of things, regulated by rigid rules and incapable of any good unless directed. The centralization of power, economic and political, is implied in both. Both, therefore, result in dehumanization of man.”
Ultimately we have witnessed the collapse of both capitalism and communism during the last four decades. As such now there are no ‘universal models.’ Even the multilateral agencies such as the IMF and the World Bank, that have been advocating these models for many decades, have accepted that these models are no longer applicable to all. So now there is realization that it is better for each country to follow its own model.
Different studies conducted during the recent decades in many countries provide many significant leads with regard to study of economics. Many studies, even in the Western countries, indicate the influence of culture, family, societies and other ‘non-monetary’ factors in economic decision making. The introduction of ‘Behavioral Economics’ in the West as a subject of study is a result of such impact. But in Bharat we tend to look at everything from a holistic and inclusive perspectives since the ancient periods.
Besides, there have been studies on Bharat that provide a completely new picture of our economy. Studies by the noted British economic historian Angus Maddison on the performance of different economies in the World during the past two millennia clearly reveal Bharat as the most powerful nation in the World with a GDP share of 32.9 percent during the beginning of the 1AD years back. Moreover, we remained as one of the top two economies in the World till the beginning of the nineteenth century, with Bharat at the top during majority of the period. It is now an established fact that Bharat remained a prosperous and functioning economy till the British destroyed it systematically beginning the nineteenth century.
The field studies conducted during the past three decades in different parts of the country reveal that our functioning economic, business and management systems are unique. They clearly show that the families, societies and culture exert a huge influence and drive our systems. When we study the performance of the economy and businesses post-1947 from the field levels, we come to know that it was largely influenced by our native approaches and local initiatives.
The major reason why we remain largely unaffected by the global forces, even when they seriously impact the other countries, is our strong fundamentals that are unique to our nation. This is also the reason why Bharat has been continuously moving ahead, in spite of the confusions and contradictions at the policy making level for more than six decades after Independence. So our native functioning systems are different from that of the text book theories of the West, in spite of the educated and policy making set ups remaining largely unaware of the ground realities.
Now we are witnessing a new set of paradigms in operation during the last ten years and for the first time the policies of Bharat are being framed for us and by us, without the influence of outside forces. Several schemes introduced over the past decade targeting different sections of the society and the critical sectors, such as ‘Jan Dhan’ and Make In India’ have transformed the lives of our people and the economy. ‘Antyodaya’ remains the bedrock of Modi Govt. As a result, more than 250 million people have come out of poverty, while the country is fast moving ahead.
While concluding his four-day lecture series on Integral Humanism on the 25th of April, six decades ago at Ramnarain Ruia college in Mumbai, Deendayal noted- “With the support of the universal knowledge and our heritage, we shall create a Bharat which will excel all its past glories, and will enable every citizen in its fold to develop his manifold latent potentialities, It is a state in which Nar (Man) becomes Narayan (God) May God give us strength to succeed in this task.”
Thankfully, we have a Government whose policies are nation-centric, based on our own experiences, inherent strengths and the ground realities, besides a clear vision to take the nation forward. Our achievements are highly encouraging and give us a new hope, but we still have many challenges to face and responsibilities to fulfill. Our objective is the all-round development of the citizens and the overall progress of the nation. It is time to go forward with confidence for ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’ to attain our vision of ‘Viksit Bharat’ in the years to come.
Author
(The views expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the position of the organisation)