Some Political Remarks Dated 17 December 2012 On some Problems and the Tasks of Regeneration of the Movements for

Human Social Liberation in the Present and Coming Centuries Pradip Baksi The ongoing financial crisis of capitalism has renewed some interest in socialism. Till date this interest remains beholden to the 20th century stereotypes of social-democratic, Marxist, Leninist, Anarchist, Syndicaliststatist propaganda and agitation. For the last 10,000+ years, i.e., ever since their emergence, the states/governments of the world are mixtures of repressive apparatuses and ideological hegemony. In ancient Greece and Rome, the repressive apparatuses were the stronger components of that mixture. The ancient Chinese, Persian and Indian empires had huge armies, yet, in these regions the component of ideological hegemony was the stronger part of that mixture. Entry of the Asiatic religion of Christianity slightly changed the corresponding picture in Europe. The component of ideological hegemony gradually increased in the states that inherited the Northern Mediterranean Basin Culture, after the emergence of western parliamentary / constitutional democracies, through the English, American and French revolutions of the 17th-18th centuries, to meet the growing needs of management of public opinion, before and after the parliamentary elections. This western model of statecraft spread in the rest of the world through the emergence, decay and death of Portuguese, Spanish, English, French, Austro-Hungarian, Russian etc. colonial empires up to the end of the 20th century. Contemporary socialist politics is a product of this history. It has copied the western statist model of public opinion management with varying degrees of success. Like the contemporary bankers, the contemporary socialists are also unable to come out of their past practice, despite its demonstrated failures. These are some of the PROBLEMS of contemporary capitalism and of its socialists. Though the modern states / governments of Iran, China and India look like their western counterparts, they still retain a very large part of their ancient Islamic, Confucian, Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu etc. hegemonic ideological components. While the current financial crisis has considerably weakened both the repressive capacities and the public opinion management capabilities of western democracies under capitalism, the states / governments of modern Iran, China and India appear less disabled in these areas of capacity and capability. It appears that the present rulers of Iran have not completely rejected the following advice of sage Sadi:

Baa Rayat sulh Kun waz jang i khasm aiman nishin Zaanki Shaahinshaah i aadil raa Rayat lashkar ast. [Be on friendly terms with thy subjects, and rest easy about the warfare of thine enemies; for an upright emperor his subjects are his army.] The present rulers of China are following the ancient Taoist principle of Wu-Wei [laissez-faire] in the domain of political economy, tempered with Confucianism. The rulers of India are following Kautiliyas ancient precepts of Sachibayatta Rajtantra [dynastic rule controlled by advisors/secretaries], presented as parliamentary democracy. Thus, it appears that as of now, some older ideologies of Asia are still more powerful than their modern western counterparts, for the hegemonic interests of statecraft. Is there any lesson in the above narrative for the present and future efforts aimed at human social liberation on planet earth? Yes and, it is this: Instead of searching for tools in the junkyard of bankrupt policies of capitalism and its socialists, the TASK is to thoroughly explore and investigate the teachings of the sages of all lands. Human social liberation involves all aspects of human life. State / government and politics are merely some parts of human social life. For the last 3-5 centuries the importance of these parts was overblown for various reasons. Some mere parts even if puffed up for some time cannot solve all the problems of the whole. The tasks ahead for human social liberation are about its totality. Only if we address the whole of it, may we be able tackle the problems of the political parts of it and, not the other way round.