Sunday, 19 August 2012

THEY GRUMBLE: Pen, Papers & Pad


‘Why did you not invite us?’ ‘We worked day and night!’
 they grumbled – pen, papers and pad.

I was settling back after a busy day. The book release function went on so well. The invitees who turned were all praises. I released my work ‘The Bible & The Church’ on 16 August, 2012. It took me some years to bring it out. It was actually incomplete. At times books are released without a good finis because the writer is forced to meet the deadline. This was no exception. Yet, I envisioned a grand release function. Days of planning, preparation and hard work made it a mega event.  Many put their hands together to make this event a grand success. During the function, I thanked people who supported the work. I gradually led the crowd to understand the making of the book, its relevance and the people who proposed and pushed this project on me. In a way, it was truly a justification. In a climate of mounting criticisms, I had to defend the rationale of the book.

Generally, my contemporaries discredited the work as repetitive and foolish. If summarized the critique goes something like ‘What is the credit in retyping the whole Bible, the Dogmas and the History of the Church, re-printing it, in the pretext of making it one’s own?’ They have a point. Nevertheless, it is good to have a work of one’s own. We can personalize and arrange it to meet our needs. I had resources. I went for it. It will sure contribute to people around.

Everything ended well. The invitees left after a tasty lunch. The eatery was bit cramped. Everyone had a mouthful and more. Quite contrary to my normal behaviour, I chose not to carry my pen, papers and pad today. Actually if not for my pen, papers and pad the silent companions of every writer nothing would materialize. They make my thoughts come alive in a paper, give them shape, write them, rewrite them until they crystallize make plain the message. They are so close to the book as I am; the authour. Today I needed them not. I have the book. My pen, papers and pad got me what I wanted. I needed them not. I confined them to my room. I locked them up. It’s funny, somehow my security guard spontaneously sat down to watch over them. I did not want them trespass the book release function. It is the day of books, real books. Pen, papers and pad they do not belong here.

My heart overwhelming with joy and satisfaction I returned to my room at the end of the day. When I clicked open my door, I found my pen, papers and pad scattered all over grumbling.

‘We worked day and night for the book.’ 
‘Why did you not invite us for its release?’, asked my pen, quite bold in a protesting demeanor. 
I was confused. ‘Why them?’ I asked myself. 

They aren’t books. Usually people do not listen to them. Those who live in the mercy of others lose their voice. Their looks grim and sad, their faces swelled up in anger and disappointment today they sought no mercy but justice. I feared facing a strike. They would but dare to make one. They depend on me for their existence.  

I had to complete the book I had released just the previous day. I had to write, rewrite until I reached a good finis. My pen, papers and pad once again took an active part in my life. I went for my classes the next day. I study theology in Don Bosco Theological Centre, Kavarapettai – an initiative of the Salesian Province of Chennai, India. It was inaugurated on August 16, 2012.


Friday, 10 August 2012

A SUMMER in SHANT MANAS - April, 2012



An Interaction at Shant Manas
Walking in and around the streets of Madurai and the surrounding villages meeting people, visiting monuments, facilitating serious discussions, extending hands to noble causes (promoting positive mental health), listening to inspiring sharings, acquainting with strangers (Hijrahs / Trans-genders) in the month of April; the summer this year was simply tough, memorable, tiring, beautiful and ‘great’.

It was enriching to acquaint with new friends with a very inspiring life; interesting, aesthetic and historical places to relax; broad, open and fresh concepts to reflect. They have challenged me to reconsider my frame of thought regarding the contribution of the non-christian-ordinary-people in the transformation of the society. Despite my familiarity with genuine freedom fighters, social activists and social workers in India, it never occurred to me that they could be around me. So it was the case regarding mental health. These days taught me a lot. It was tougher than textbooks.

Interacting with a Service User (not seen in the photo) in his house
Initially I was in Madurai, to learn about the mental health (Psychiatry). I was placed in a non-profitable NGO called Shant Manas which promotes mental health in the villages towards the eastern borders of the city.  I had a live-in learning experience walking into the lives of people with mental illness, common mental disorders, and learning disabilities; the social stigma that haunts them and the improper remedies proposed in their surroundings. The experience changed my attitudes and perceptions towards the mentally ill. I gained new insights into mental illness – its causes, remedies, duration, complications etc. Most fundamental among them was their right to be respected as human beings suffering from some sort of brain dysfunction, which can be treated like any other physical illness. Further it helped me break the myth of superstitions and black magic regarding mental illness popularly prevalent in both the literate and illiterate of India.

Besides the subject matter, the NGO challenged me to alter the vertical, top-bottom, institute centered methodology of functioning in our work for the poor. Instead it proposed a horizontal, dialogical, egalitarian, people-centered method of functioning. The NGO calls the patient as ‘service user’ and treats them in their natural family setting in contrast to the traditional method of treatment in seclusion. Added to these learning experiences, I cherished my friendship with the volunteers working there: Bhuvana mam, Vignesh, Arun, Vanny etc.

My visits and interactions with transgenders had a transformative effect. They helped me broaden my horizon. The allowed to glimpse into their world-picture, form of living etc. Hoping to get reach out to them some time in future.
A Discussion about the Traditional Treatments for the Mentally Ill

 
A Volunteer presents the Rehabilitation Programme for the Mentally Ill



Friday, 3 August 2012

ECONOMIC INEQUALITY What, Why and the Way Out in the Context of Indian Political System




One of the thoughts that crowd, an average Indian mind today, is the question of inhuman poverty still prevalent in our country. We are alarmed at the select stories of starvation deaths, farmer suicides, gender discrimination, communal prejudices and the inhuman living conditions of the poor in urban areas, reported by the censored mainstream media. The whole truth, on the other hand, is actually disgusting. According to the human development report 2011, 53.7% of Indians suffer deprivation in health, education and basic sanitation that go to make a decent living for a human being. J Dash, the director general of National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) in his report for the year 2009-10, notes that 60% percent of rural population live only with Rs. 35/- and Rs. 66/- per day in rural and urban areas respectively. What could it probably get them? At the most food, clothes and some sort of habitat. Much worse is the stories of Dalits and Adivasis, the faceless minority in India. Probably they constitute the 10% identified as the poorest by the recent NSSO report, who make a living in rural and urban areas with less than Rs. 15/- and Rs. 20/- per day.  It is a mystery how the contradictory phrases ‘one of the fastest developing countries’ and ‘one of the world’s most under developed countries’ go well to present a complete picture of our nation. Are there two Indias?

In their article, “Putting Growth in Its Place” Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen render a scholarly treatment of the subject ‘economic inequality’ by presenting the problems, their causes and plausible remedies in the context of our multi-party democracy. We shall present their insights consecutively under the titles what, why and the way out.

‘What’: The Problem

The Indian economic problem is not poor economic growth. The growth estimates of per capita income and GDP of our country are exceptionally high and are on the rise since 1990s. The growth rates – 7.8% in 2002-03 to 2006-07 & 8% in 2007-08 to 2011-12 – are marked as the second highest in the world next only to China. India needs rapid growth, as the income per capita ($3,560/-) is insufficient to produce a reasonable standard of living. We are actually doing well in terms of economic growth. But, the fruits of the growth are not equally shared by all. Dreze and Sen write, ‘indeed, even today, after 20 years of rapid growth, India is still one of the poorest countries in the world’. The fact is validated by the World Bank data which lists India as one of the last outside Africa as regards the social indicators - basic sanitation, health and education. I quote,
[O]nly five countries outside Africa (Afghanistan, Bhutan, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea and Yemen) have a lower “youth female literacy rate” than India (World Development Indicators 2011, online). To take some other examples, only four countries (Afghanistan, Cambodia, Haiti, Myanmar and Pakistan) do worse than India in child mortality rate; only three have lower levels of “access to improved sanitation” (Bolivia, Cambodia and Haiti); and none (anywhere—not even in Africa) have a higher proportion of underweight children. Almost any composite index of these and related indicators of health, education and nutrition would place India very close to the bottom in a ranking of all countries outside Africa.

The scholars further point the seriousness of the problem by noting how despite the indication of decent income per capita India is doing bad compared to its South Asian neighbours Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and China. In the scholars’ have attempted to rank South Asian countries in terms of growth and development, with the available data as per the year (roughly) 2010, except the high scores in the income per capita India stands last almost in every other social indicator that measures development: life expectancy, underweight children, child immunization, infant mortality, under five mortality, mean years of schooling and accesses to improved sanitation. According to the figures citizens of the rising super power meet death while their Asian neighbours continue to live.

‘Why’: The Causes

Dreze and Sen, primarily, point to the basic misconception of development as mere economic growth, as the root for the miserable living standards in modern India. “Demands of development” they write, “go well beyond economic growth. Indeed economic growth is not constitutively the same thing as development, in the sense of a general improvement in living standards and enhancement of people’s well-being and freedom. Growth […] can be very helpful in achieving development.” They term it as ‘growth mediated development’. Our country has precisely failed here. Hence a great number continue to be affected by ill-health, undernourishment and other deprivations irrespective of the ‘successful’ shift in economic policies in the 90’s. Bangladesh for example with only a half of our income per capita has overtaken India in terms of basic social indicators. We have failed to convert our economic growth to yield integral development. The public revenue generated by fast economic growth has not been equally distributed for the welfare of everyone especially the poor in the nation. Naturally, then the growth has been enjoyed by a small group. This in turn has resulted in the wide rich and poor divide – economic inequality – in our nation. As far as the economic life is concerned, there truly exist two Indias. 

Moreover with such lopsided idea of development, we have staged riots against our environment, destroyed the culture and livelihood of poor Adivasis by involuntary displacement. Everything is being done in the name of development. But authentic development conserves environment our resource, and assures the well-being of everyone, never the opposite.

Second, democracy functions only by the force of participation by the people in the elections, demands and policies. Participation is done through public discussions, debates, conscientious strikes and most importantly by politicization of the issue at hand. The poverty of our participation nevertheless, is vivid in our democracy. This is worsened by the intrinsic imbalance in the economic and political power founded on the good old discriminations on the basis of caste, class and gender. The authours give the examples of our media and parliament: Not even one of the 315 editors and other leading members of the printed and electronic media in Delhi surveyed recently by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies had belonged to a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe; Lok Sabha is male dominated. Definitively we are not well placed to address the concerns of the poor and the vulnerable. ‘The rural issues get only two percent of the total news coverage in national dailies’ goes a recent study on rural-urban disparities. Thus we find a massive neglect of the interests of the unprivileged in our governance. This implies, I quote, “disregard for agriculture and rural development, environmental plunder for private gain with huge social losses, large-scale displacement or rural communities without adequate compensation and the odd tolerance of human rights violations when the victims come from the underdogs of society”. The public policies therefore, are mostly controlled by and directed to the significant minority, with a meager proportion to the poor. They write,
However, the rhetoric of inclusive growth has gone hand in hand with elitist policies that often end up promoting a two-track society whereby superior (‘world-class’) facilities are being created for the privileged, while the unprivileged receive second-rate treatment, or are left to their own devices, or even become the target of active repression – as happens, for instance, in cases of forcible displacement without compensation, with a little help from the police.

‘Way Out’: Reasonable Solution

Dreze and Sen propose two solutions: first, growth mediated development; second, a comprehensive approach in public policies. They explain the former as skilful use of the opportunities provided by the increasing public revenue.  In this respect they invite us to take lessons from China as it makes much better use of the opportunities offered by the economic growth to expand public resources for developmental purposes. For instance the government expenditure for health care in China, taking into consideration its higher population and income per capita, is four times that in India. As a result it has higher values for most social indicators such as life expectancy (73 years in China - 64 years in India), infant mortality rate (16 per thousand in China and 48 in India), and mean years of schooling (estimated to be 7.6 years in China – 4.4 years in India) than India. In this comparison, there is a tendency to escape pointing to the inefficiency of our multi-party democracy in contrast to the autocracy in China. The authours affirm that we can achieve such social policies by strong political will in our country. I quote “using democratic means for remedying inadequate coverage of public healthcare, non-extreme undernourishment, or inadequate opportunities for school education demands more from democratic practice – more vigour and much more range.”

Second they invite us to adapt a more comprehensive approach in social policies to eradicate poverty in India.  The existing approach offering assistance to the people on the basis BPL and Conditional Cash Transfers (CCT) which they think enables them to meet the requirements for the basic living conditions. Their ineffectiveness have been proved by the persisting grand scale poverty in India. BPL is non-reliable and unjust as there is an ever present danger to exclude the deserving poor with unrealistic poverty line such as Rs. 27/- and 30/- in the recent past. Moreover, it divides the public who in unity and strength can demand their right standard living conditions. The method of monitory assistance CCT, as an alternative to creating opportunities through public services would not improve the living conditions of the poor. The cash received would not serve in a place where there is no opportunity to convert them into a standard living condition.  The authors therefore, propose a comprehensive approach in social policies that assures a universal provision of essential services such as health, education and sanitation. They argue that it was the power of comprehensive approach that has given rise to the high social indicators of Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Himachal Pradesh in India.

Conclusion

In the context of mounting criticism about the growing economic inequality and poverty in India, the article rendered a clear statistical presentation of the problem and its causes - the misunderstanding of development as mere growth, the imbalance of power and poor democratic practice. However, unlike the other contemporary scholars who either end up cynic or give cursory suggestions for improvement the situation in India, the ‘vigorous democratic engagement’ through public discussion, and debates on development related matters suggested by the authours, is realistic and promising. The strong point of the article was the sustained belief in the effectiveness of the multi-party democracy despite its limitations and hope for a better India. 

A critical summary of
Dreze, Jean and Amartya Sen. “Putting Growth in Its Place: It has to be a Means to Development, Not an End in Itself.” Outlook Nov 14, 2011 http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278843 accessed 13/07/2012.





INSIGHTS FOR A BETTER INDIA interview with an Amartya Sen Reader

 Initiatives of every state, ultimately aim at the well being of the society. It is always measured by the quality of life of its individuals. Since independence, India as a nation has been ‘working’ at it. Given the present scenario, increasing momentum of the rich-poor divide and failing light of our governance (secular democracy), there are serious doubts whether we are running on the right track. Hence, here we do an elementary conceptual clarification in the light of the writings of Amartya Sen, on the subject. Right understanding at least would point us the right direction. We have chosen, Sen precisely because he aims at a holistic development of the society, by eradicating poverty, inequality, violence, and injustice; most importantly, because he is an enlightened-impartial-insider. He knows best the on-going struggle between the system and situation of our country.






1. Overall impression of our country, with industrialization, increasing urbanization, and westernization in education, culture, economics and life-style, is that India is growing into a good future. But there are hick-ups in such pride at the face of the miserable poor Indians. It is becoming clear that there is something wrong with our development projects. What is true development? Can a development neglect a group of people?

 Development is not mere economic growth. It is narrow to identify development with the growth of gross national product, with the rise of personal incomes, with industrialization, with technological advance, or with social modernization. This does not downplay their role in achieving development, but they are not all. Growth is not the same thing as development. Development, on the contrary, is a process of expanding the real freedoms that people enjoy like the freedom to live, to make a livelihood, to enjoy good health, to express one’s opinion, to become literate, and to pursue happiness. Economic growth are important means to expanding this freedom but it is also determined by social arrangements, political freedoms, protective security, civil rights etc. Hence development is larger and more holistic project than economic growth. Development is development of all people, no exclusion or exclusive agendas. It is built on equality and justice.


2. There is a great stress on freedom. It looks development is all about freedom of the people. We are free, aren’t we? Explain.

One that surprises people about Sen is the connection he draws between development and freedom. We are so used to development identified with economic growth, and freedom reserved for the memories of the ‘struggle for independence’ and ‘moral action’, Sen’s explanation seems queer.  Whenever Sen speaks about freedom he speaks about the real choices a person can make to lead the kind of life one has reasons to value. The choice necessarily involves dynamics between individual entitlement and socio-economic-political system. Freedom thus, becomes the quintessence of our life. One who suffers poverty is economically unfree, the oppressed minority experiences denial of religious freedom, the illiterate, impoverished, the dispossessed, those who suffer malnutrition, are similarly unfree in different areas that together contribute to a quality of life. They are intrinsically related and affect one another. Development therefore requires the removal of major sources of unfreedom: poor economic opportunities, repressive systems, neglect of public facilities, irresponsibility, corrupt governance etc.


3. In this process of development what is the role of the state and the individual?

The state would provide adequate social opportunities (and awareness about the quality of life) with which the individual can effectively shape their destiny and help each other. He is not mere passive recipient but an active agent of transformation.


4. The problem precisely is the ‘unjust functioning of the state’. With democracy the development project of post-independent India is limping compared to our neighbours (South Korea and China). We are almost tempted to follow their example.  Is democracy effective for development?

Our doubts are based on the working style of democracy in India. Much needs to be done to make it work for the integral development of the ordinary people. Regarding the question about the effectiveness of democratic system, we need to make plain that true development is about enhancing the real freedoms. In this sense, development cannot but be achieved only in a democratic system. This is proved in the strong inclination of non-democratic nation to institute democracy. It is true that Indian democracy has been less effective in eliminating undernourishments, illiteracy, poverty and infant-birth mortalities compared to China.  The blame is not on the system but in our participation. ‘In a democracy’ Sen writes, ‘people tend to get what they demand and more crucially, do not typically get what they do not demand’. If we note the post independent democratic India does not have a record famine unlike the colonial India. The secret is the public discussion and politicization that revolves around the issue. Such uproar has to be done with regard to poverty and other related regular maladies. This, however, requires deeper analysis and systematic work.


5. Democracy in the context of rising communalism in different parts of India is frightening. Ultimately it is a majority rule. With growing communalized election campaigns unlike the past, the future of minority in India is bleak. Would minority in India survive a fascist democracy?

Democracy is the answer for fascism. While on the one hand there is the danger of sectarian politics, it does not go through at all times and in all places. In states like Orissa and Gujarat the communal hatred, violence and politics has been accomplished due to the suppression of media and the critics through a sort of autocratic governance. It is important also to note the low literacy rates in these states (with poor formation of mind) hence have become easy prey to the communal agendas. Amidst all that menace, there were storis of protection and defense of minority by people with sound mind. Sen would always note that democracy is not majority rule, it is tolerance, respect and equality. Hence tolerance towards minority views and criticisms is an integral part of democracy. Fascist democracy is a contradiction, it is not democracy.


6. Involuntary displacement in the name of development despite their dissent and protest has become the ‘Indian style’ of economic growth in the modern world. In the name of development we have bulldozed several tribal traditions, cultures in our country.  Can we paralyse a group in the name of wellbeing of the country?

People’s participation is crucial to development. As mentioned earlier, the individual is an active agent in the process of development. Freedom to express one’s opinion and defend the concerns is a capability. Therefore every economic development project that could possibly result in a severe damage to the livelihood of the people of the locality, more so their tradition, culture and land, it has to be done only with their informed consent. The people directly involved should be part of the decision about what should be chosen: the project or the tradition, culture and land. Deciding otherwise does jeopardizes the very goal of development.


7. Has Sen written anything about the socio-economic situation in India, recently?

Yes. Outlook has an essay “Putting Growth in its Place” jointly published by Sen and Jean Dreze, Nov 2011. May be we can read some excerpts from it.

“There is, in India, an urgent need for greater attention to the destructive aspects of growth including environmental plunder (e.g. through razing of forests, indiscriminate mining, depletion of groundwater, drying of rivers and massacre of fauna) and involuntary displacement of communities – particularly adivasi communities that have strong roots in a particular ecosystem.”

“…it would be mistake to ‘sit back’ and rely on economic growth per se to transform the living condition of the unprivileged.”

“There is, in fact, no real barrier in India in combining multi-party democratic governance with active social intervention. But what would be needed is much greater public engagement with the central demands of justice and development through more vigorous democratic practice.”

Bibliography:
Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Reason Before Identity: The Romanes Lecture for 1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
The Idea of Justice. London: Penguin Books, 2009.

INDIAN SECULAR DEMOCRACY & THE PLIGHT OF THE POOR Queries and Worries





Is there life after democracy?… By democracy I don’t mean democracy as an ideal or an aspiration. I mean the working model…What happens once democracy has been used up? When it has been hollowed out and emptied of meaning? What happens when each of its institutions has metastatized into something dangerous? What happens now that democracy and the Free market have fused into a single predatory organism with a thin, constricted imagination that revolves almost entirely around the idea of maximizing profit? Is it possible to reverse this process?
-          Arundhati Roy, ‘Introduction’,  Listening to Grasshopers: Field Notes on Democracy, Penguin (2010).

India. One of the facts that fascinate people about our country is our socio-economic-political system ‘constitutional (representative) secular democracy’ that pulls the chords to keep the nation going and growing as one country despite diversity. Thanks to the colonizers, they did the ground work by re-engineering the kingdoms big and small to form a single colony for their vested interests. Otherwise, the present demography a conglomeration of multi-ethnic groups with their unique language, culture, social structure, governance, worship and political system would have never been possible. Whatever be the past, now we function as one – one country, one citizenship; we aim at the integral growth of the society governed by a secular representative democratic political system. But, we shall not take things for granted. With the rise of political scandals, the arrogant governance in parts of our country, lopsided development projects and neglect of the major section of our society, suspicion abounds as to whether the present socio-economic-political system for justice and stability we once dreamed it would.

An aerial view of India make people believe that India is fast developing. Growing urbanization and westernization of our country with its long straight roads, the feature once envied in Hollywood movies, big malls, sky-scrappers, cities crowded by cars, rivers regulated with big dams, forests invaded for minerals, fast trains, rise in the literacy rate, metros in major cities, and (100 billion euro) monitory assistance to the European economic crisis impress people about its rapid growth. The women in rags, on the other hand begging around with her kids is a not a rare sight here. Taken as a symbol she represents the suffering side of our country, where millions of poor - displaced, outcast, let-down - with mixed feelings of sadness and anger look at the affluent as their source of support next to God.

It is not difficult to find people, Indians who have nothing more to lose but their breath in a stone’s throw anywhere in India. Let alone the mentally ill. We find families and groups of people spread across cities and pavements. Where have they come from? Where are they going? What are they doing for a living? Do they actually live or learn the art of slow death? The latest statistics of UNO presents that the largest number of the world’s poor live in India. It is only a part of the story. Added to them, India has people deprived of culture, language, land, religion, respect, human dignity and freedom of speech: adivasis, dalits and minorities. ‘Poor’ therefore mean all these people in India. Their stories are pathetic. For most of them, it has gone from bad to worse.

In Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated seventy thousand people have been killed since 1989.  Gujarat riots (2002) which cost the lives of thousands of muslims and livelihood of almost all of them are fresh in our memories. No worse is the plight of Christians in Orissa (2007). Atrocities against the low caste are rampant we do not see them mentioned in the media but for some sensual stories like rape, riots, and murder in various pockets of India. Truth is the India is not immune to caste-virus.   They were hunted down village after village until they disappeared in the wilderness. In Chhattisgarh the Adivasis of Dantewara the poor and the most vulnerable people are being evacuated in thousands, the free the land for steel plants. Already 644 villages have been emptied. But in our country, 70 per cent of the rural population – seven hundred million people – lives in rural areas. Their livelihood depends on their access to the natural resources. To snatch these away would result impoverishment in a barbaric scale. Utsa Patnaik, a well known agaricultural economist, notest that 40 per cent of the rural population in India has the same food grain absorption level as sub-Sharan Africa. India hosts more than a third of world’s under nourished children. (Roy, Listening to Grasshoppers)

Such is the state of our development and welfare of the nation – one nation, India. This raises serious questions about our governance. The data suggests that the government consciously chooses to be indifferent to a group of its citizens, the Poor. Otherwise how can this happen in a secular democracy where everyone is represented in the parliament. It is simplistic to throw the blame on politicians. How can everyone be corrupt or co-exist with corruption, injustice and fascism? Basically something is wrong with our system. After all they are our representatives. We have elected them. Democracy in India is anything but good governance. It means well being of the politicians, the political party, the rich, the middle class, the educated, and the (religious) majority. None of us are  surprised at the report of the alleged assets of Mayawathi, the BSP leader and former Chief Minister of UP. Of course she is nowhere close to Raja, the former Central Minister of IT. The mess begins with elections.

As Deepavali, Pongal, Ramzan, Christmas comes every year, we have general elections every six years in India. With all the banners, loud music, public gatherings, meals, fasts, sacred vows, celeberations and media hype the latter outdoes every other festival in our country. Election campaigns are ethnic (racial, cultural, lingual) caste based and communalized. The grandiose of a festival comes with the amount of money and number of people engaged in it. How true then, general elections tops every other festival for it involves minimum of two to ten billion US dollars and people all over India. No wonder, BBC arranged a special tour, across India, for journalists from all over the world to witness the recent general elections. Whether election has any connection to democracy remains a debatable query. We have ministers in prestigious posts who never made it in the present general election.

Money works miracles in India. Elections are a ‘million dollars business’, everyone wants to be part of it. Since, it involves buying and selling ‘vote-banks’; only the richest and powerful (majority) finally get through. To be minister you have to be either rich or right wing fundamentalist in India. Take the case of the successful young politicians they are either rich, influential (Yadev groups in UP) or take up fundamentalist ideologies (Varun Gandhi). Therefore, there is hardly victory for an independent secular candidate. Let us neither blame the people nor the politicians because in India representative democracy functions this way: rich and majority rule the country the rest are tolerated until they work for the welfare of the Country which belongs to the former.  

What happened to our democracy? What have we turned it to be? Narendra Modi the master mind of Gujarat pogrom, becomes the third consecutive chief minister of Gujarat. We have sold our democracy right-wing ideologies (fascist Hindutva) and to meta-private firms so much so that they define what does democracy, development, progress, good governance, justice and equality mean in India today. If democracy means people’s governance of the country through their representatives, of course it happens in India. But the term ‘people’ in the above definition has specified connotation, in countries like India it refers to not all but the chosen – the aristocracy, the middle class and the caste-hindus. They rule the country with their representatives - Congress, BJP or Communists it makes but a minor difference. They would fight against corruption and rape-murder cases of their people. But make no noise about people brutally murdered in Gujarat, Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Kashmir, Manipur and other distant lands of India. Their voices are heard, opinions are taken and complaints are received.  Development projects are directed to their wellbeing. Legal system is their watch dog. Like the roman citizens of old, they (aristocrats, politicians) escape punishment.  

In the past over 2,50,000 farmers have committed suicide unable to withstand the economic crisis’ in their families. Millions of people in Orissa, Chattisgarh and Jharkand are displaced to make space for development; others who are bent on defending their home land (mountains and forests) are being hunt down as ‘terrorists from within’. Another great section of people are persecuted, bludgeoned and are treated as ‘refuges’ to be sent back to their countries (holy land) because they worship different gods. Freedom fight in Kashmir and Manipur is a different story altogether. We cannot afford to lose them because they are India’s pride. We hold them under force. We use military to keep their voice down. There is a soldier for every twenty citizens in Kashmir. Yet India is the second largest democracy in the global scenario. Probably it is true because one finds a democratic rule for its citizens - the term narrowed down to aristocrats and middle class wo/men. The rest are tolerated in as much as they contribute to the development of its citizens.

This is Indian secular democracy. It appears then that we have two choices either we try to catch up with the affluent powerful, thereafter become part of the growing India or perish by falling down to the bottom line. The latter would always remain a stranger in this country worse as its workforce and resource to be exploited for its development. Neither the myth of ‘we are indians’ nor the current political system is going to transform our lives. They have taken and are waiting to swindle even the little we have. Probably they are passing clear messages that we are not wanted. It is time that we realize and work on our future. We have the duty to build a nation for our children, a secular political system that would work for our well being. Left to the present scenario we may suffer a slow destruction until one day we are extinct.

For the poor in India, there is no life after democracy. 

TESTIMONIES OF INSIDERS: Feeling the Spirit of Lumen Gentium (LG)


Our content for this hour is cumulative. The experiences of selected scholars, genuinely interested and involved in what had been happening, before, after and during the Vatican council II, is twined to make a rope-ladder to peep into the mind of the council. It serves well to sense the spirit of LG, the document under our study.  The following are their names, Ladislas Orsy sj (1921-), Martin E. Marty (1928-), Charles E. Curren (1934-), Richard Rohr ofm (1943-), Daniel E. Pilarcyzk (1934-), Francis Sullivan sj (1922-), Lawrence S. Cunningham (1935-) and Richard P. McBrien (1936-). They represent the ‘events’ that elude our empirical senses voices, debates, heated arguments, tedious seminars, learning-unlearning- and-relearnings, long discussions, quarrels, similar such things that went into making literally every word of the council documents. They tell us what happened when LG in the present form was formulated. More important, they share with us the spirit of LG ‘what it means to be the church’.  During the council, most of them were research students of theology, some were teaching theology, Fr. Sullivan was directly involved in LG and another Archbishop Pilarcyzk was the rector of the seminary. Their sharing primarily is a testimony of what happened to them with the ‘conciliar event’.

1950s, the Context of LG

The climate a decade before the Vatican II was one of rising momentum to embark into the sea of new interpretations of the old mysteries. Fr. Orsy speaking about it, phrases it as “new wine in the making”. New approaches, understandings, insights and altogether a new theology was in the making by theologians like Henri de Lubac, Teilhard de Chardin, Yves Congar, M.D. Chenu, Karl Rahner, Edward Schillebecckx, John Courtney Murray, Bernard Lonergan, Bernard Haring, Josep Fuchs and others. In contrast to the traditional beliefs which almost reduced the church to pope, the new theology interpreted church as ‘people of God, not just bishops, priests, and religious but ‘all’, called to holiness and continual conversion’.

The Church (Roman Curia) then received such ideas with contempt. It tightened the reigns of many such outstanding theologians. One after another they were ordered to be silent. Describing the situation, Fr. Orsy writes, “A cold air of suspicion swept over the church… Once again it seemed that there were no prophets in Israel; there was sadness in the land.” The stout new pope on the other hand, Fr. Curran would say, was least impressive compared to the aristocratic posture of the then late Pius XII. However, he brought in an air of excitement with his call for the works of renewal in the church: synod of Rome, the updating of canon law and an ecumenical council. People, sincerely expected no big change from him and his renewal programme, than a re-affirmation of Vatican I. On the other hand his renewal programme churned the Church almost upside down.

Spirit of LG

Prof. Madges writing about LG exclaims, “No document of Vatican II experienced more thorough going revision between its first draft and final approved document as Lumen Gentium”. It held special place among all the documents of Vatican II, since so to say ‘as a concept’ it governed literally the proceedings of the whole council. The council came to a critical point already in the first session. The sheep that usually nods ‘yes’ and gets away with the documents rejected the draft on sources of revelation. After repeated clarifications, arguments and voting sessions 60% against and a small group for it, the session had come to an abrupt end. The queer novelty, at that time, was the ‘no’ to the documents that had passed the desk of the chair of peter.

Pope John XXIII discerned the action of the Holy Spirit working through bishops (co-heirs of the apostolic tradition) from the proceeding of the session. He announced, therefore a revision of the committees[1] for all the issues of the council. This was the turning point and the rise of a new ecclesiology. Fr. Orsy dramatizes these events, “magisterium was correcting the magisterium. That is, the ordinary magisterium of the council was supporting much of the new theology. It kept completing, rectifying, even reversing what was presented earlier as the ‘official teaching of the church’.” The church thus gradually got redefined from traditional monarchical model, to a pilgrim people of God, a mother; from the community of unequals to a community where all are called to holiness with charisms unique to the individuals baptized in the spirit and share the royal priesthood of Christ.

The new ecclesiology of the LG proposes reorientations in three major areas: the relationship of clergy and laity within the church, the relationship between the Catholic and other Christian churches and communities, and the relationship of the bishops to the pope. In all these aspects there is a shift in the conception of the church from a ruling authourity to a humble handmaid journeying in dialogue, after the example of Mother Mary.

Conclusion

Despite the radical change that has happened with LG in the theology of the church, yet the church has not fully released its strings tied to Vatican I. The subtle interior tension between the older tradition and the proposed new one is evident in the document and in our efforts to actualize it. The more pressing problem today is to rejuvenate the Church as its institutional relevance is gradually falling apart. This is evident in the decreasing enthusiasm in the rituals of the church and increase in the interest about the wellbeing of the interior world. Cunningham speaking about the future of the church quotes Karl Rahner, “the Christians of the future would either be a mystic or would not be a Christian at all”.  ‘Mystic’ in Rahner means one who goes beyond the mere church observance to experience the divine in Jesus Christ. In Rahner, we have clue for our future.

Our experience to the contrary is that with the support of some ‘modern’ theologians and priests the church seems to be going back to Vatican I, in the name of renewing its vitality in the world. This movement is backed by quite irrational accusation against Vatican II, as the cause for the decrease in the Church attendance and its general decline.

Caution: History teaches that every great change has humble beginning. The future of our church is determined by what happens to us here. This is our reservoir of action in our apostolate. What then is our understanding of the church?

Bibliography:
Madges, William “Formulating a New Understanding of the Church”; Orsy, Ladislas “A Lesson in Ecclesiology”; Marty, Martin E. “Certainty and Condemnations,”; Curran, Charles E. “The Church as the Pilgrim People of God”; Rohr, Richard “Honesty and Creativity in the Church”; Pilarczyk, Daniel E. “Bringing Old and New Together”; Sullivan, Francis “Vatican II on the Charisms of the Faithful”; Cunningham, Lawrence S. “Tensions in Vatican II and How to Proceed Today”; Mc Brien, Richard P. “Renewed Commitment to Vatican II as Best Preparation for the New Millenium." Vatican II: Forty Personal Stories. Edited by William Madges and Michael J. Daley. New York: Twenty-Third Publication, 2003. 69-104.


[1] The new committees were given the authourity to change the proposed texts and the power to propose new one.