Samaj: July 2006 Archives

Socio-economic units will not only have to fulfill peoples social and economic needs, but also their cultural aspirations. Culture denotes all sorts of human expressions. Culture is the same for all humanity, though there are differences in cultural expression. The best means of communicating human expressions is through one's mother tongue, as this is most natural. If people's natural expression through their mother tongue is suppressed, inferiority complexes will grow in their minds, encouraging a defeatist mentality and ultimately leading to psycho-economic exploitation. Thus, no mother tongue should be suppressed.

The task for this paper is to locate the works of Shrii P. R. Sarkar in a range of classification schemes and at the same time to make these schemes themselves problematic. In general, we find Sarkar's works exemplary for the following reasons. In terms of economy, his work is strong on both growth and distribution dimensions. Sarkar is also eclectic in his theory of political-economy drawing on market and regulatory mechanisms. Alienation is a result not of private property but of the concentration of wealth and of the location of the self in a materialistic paradigm. Sarkar's Prout manages to satisfy survival, wellbeing, identity and freedom needs. Market models are strong on freedom but weak on wellbeing (especially at the periphery). Local "small is beautiful" models are strong on survival, wellbeing and identity but weak on the freedom dimension. Sarkar also takes an eclectic model of epistemology having a range of ways of knowing the world. He also takes a layered "deep and shallow" view of the nature of reality. Finally, and this is the centerpiece of the argument, Sarkar's social theory combines linear, cyclical and transcendental dimensions, thus avoiding cultural exploitation and fatalism, and accentuating ancient, modern and postmodern constructions of the social and the economic.

India achieved its independence in the year 1947. Bengal was divided into two parts. Did the aspirations of Bengal find their fulfillment? Did the politically-shattered, economically-devastated Bengal find justice from the new rulers of Delhi? Could the Bengal that had been the colony of the British raise its head with sovereign dignity? Before analysing post-independence Bengal, however, it is essential to elaborate on her socio-cultural background. How could the people of such an advanced civilisation have tolerated ruthless exploitation and oppression for such a long period of time? In any society, people's aspirations and hopes, dynamism and fighting spirit, and their social, economic and political structures all develop on the foundation of that society's cultural heritage. So at the outset let us look at the cultural evolution of Bengal.

Human life is the most developed and final stage of animal life. The speciality of human life is that it has dharma. In animal life there is no dharma.

Civilization is a collection of usages, manners, etiquette, formalities, ideologies and love. The culture of the entire humanity is the same, but civilization varies from society to society.

Human civilization is created in, and moves along, river valleys. Like a river, human civilization also has three stages--hill stage, plain stage and delta stage. From the hill stage, it moves to the plain stage and from the plain stage to the delta stage. A civilization starts in the hill stage, develops in the plain stage, and matures in the delta stage.

In 1613, when a British company by the name of the East India company was granted permission by the Mughal emperor Jehangir to start their trading activities, nobody imagined that the British would one day rule India. Starting from the West coast they gradually established their centre on the East coast and in Bengal. Bengal was then under Mughal rule. In 1717, Murshid Kuli Khan was appointed as the Subadar (administrator) of Bengal. At this time, Bengal was for all intents and purposes independent, though nominally it was under Mughal rule. In 1756, after the death of Nawab Alivardy, Sirajuddaula, who succeeded him, was the last independent ruler of Bengal. Lord Clive was then the governor of the East India Company in Bengal. Lord Clive hatched a conspiracy with the commander in Chief of Nawab's army, Mirjafar, and defeated Sirajuddaula in the battle of Palashii in 1757. After this victory, the British aggressively expanded their domination of India.