Globalisation and Totalization of Power S. Lourdunathan

7/27/2019 Globalisation and Totalization of Power S. Lourdunathan

1/26

1

Globalization and Totalization of Power *

Dr. S. Lourdunathan

Head, Dept. of Philosophy

Arul Anandar college, Karumathur, Madurai Dt

1. Globalization (G) as an economic and political process cuts across the boundaries ofnations. Hinduization (H) as a political and cultural process is consolidated with in a

political space. Thus, Globalization conceived in the sense of trans-nationalization andHinduization operating with in the political territory of the nation appears to be

mutually conflicting. Surprisingly our everyday experience is that in the recent past and

the present both these programs are increasingly operative in the social fabrics of Indian

society. On the one hand, we come across the slogan Buy Indian and on the other handbecause of Globalization, we have the practice of buy the foreign. Hence, in this

paper let me try reflect the conceptual consensus between Globalization and

Hinduization as the two important forces that are not necessarily opposed to each other.Such a consensus I try to argue from the perspective of the notion of politics of Power-

relations termed as Totalization of power.

2. Taking to this objective, let me try to respond to following issues in this paper. How or in what sense Globalization and Hinduization are mutually inclusive of

each other and as a result what is aimed is totalization of power relations. What is meant by totalizattion of power?

3. The programs of Globalization and Hinduization are not promoted in a vacuum. Theyare not practiced in a society that is just and equal. Rather we are well aware that the

human society in which these forces are practiced remains to be unequal and unjust. Itis with in the unjust social setting that these programs are increasingly and coercively

introduced. Any economist and a social scientist would easily provide us with sufficient

data that prove the fact that we are living in an unjust unequal human society. Theeconomists tell us that, a 20% of the world population the so-called upper class

continue to enjoy 85% of the total world resources and the remaining 80% of the

population are forced to distributed amongst themselves the rest 15% of the worldresources. Unfortunately, these 80% of the worlds population, a vast majority of them

live in the developing and yet-to be developed countries. The disparity of distribution

of resources would in turn pave way to the disparity and discrimination in social status.

It is in this context Globalization and Hinduization is promoted.

------------------------------

* A paper presented at National Seminar on Globalization and Rural Development on 1-2.March 2001 at Dept. of Rural Development Science, Arul Anandar College, Karumathur,

Madurai.


2/26

2

4. The second assumption that is not questioned in this paper, is that our Indian culture isnot really Hindu Indian alone; It is a nation of multiple cultures, nations, religions,

language, etc. Multiplicity or heterogeneous-ness marks the characteristic feature of theIndian cultural space. According to 1991 census, religions vise the population of

Hindus are 672.6 millions, Islam populations is 95.2 million, Christians are 18.9

million, Sikhs are 16.3 millions, Buddhists are 6.3 millions, Jains are 3.4 millions andothers are 3.5 million. The political force called Hinduization is forced within thisdiversity only.

5. We know that the term Hindu, did not have any meaning until the late 19 the century.The term Hindu is a political and cultural construction only at the end of 19

thcentury

onwards. And scholars point out such a term was constructed in parallel with and an

alternative to Christian or Islamic notion of singular or ONE religion. With in this

context of Hindu India as singular in religion and polity, the politics of Indianindependence, the politics of Congress party is to be situated. The social contribution of

Indian renaissance movements like Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, and few other revival

movements revolve around this socialization process of Singularization of Indianculture. Such a politics continue until the present day politics. It is not far from truth if

we say that the ruling political party of our nation is an off shoot of this socially

constructed program that started in the end of 19th

century. From Renaissance

period until the present political period, any scholar would easily draw a horizontal lineand a vertical line in conceptual bearing and in political success. Such a monolithic

dimension of reconstruction Hindu nation or Hindu religion in to a singular

entity\identity is purpose-intended. The purpose is political in order to safe guard theinterest of the class and caste privileged society. (In the Indian history, the process of

Singularization of Indian culture is a backward movement)

6. Habermas, of the Frankfurt school of critical theory distinguishes between two types ofhuman action. Our actions are interest bound. (i) Action oriented to success and action

oriented to understanding. Action oriented to success is interest bound, and is

characterized as instrumental and strategic, pragmatic and profit interest-bound. Actionoriented to success believes in force, coercion, technocratic manipulation, authority,

dictation etc. Success and Failure is structured in such instrumental rationality i.e. in the

action oriented to success. Whereas Action oriented to understanding is not strategic,not pragmatic and its interest is communication relation between social actors.

7. The transnational capitalism and its program of Globalization (neo-colonialism) as ahuman action may be categorized as Action oriented to success. It implies that it isinterest bound, profit motivated, and power structured. Those who perform action

oriented to success- are only those who have the ability to do so. Those who are already

socially structured or determined to perform such action. In other words, success is pre-

determined, manipulation is legally based and politically and strategically achieved.

8. At the local national level the political action called Hinduization may also becharacterized as Action oriented to Success. It is purposive, manipulative, pre-conceived, socially programmed, profit-motivated and political in nature. The success


3/26

3

and profit of the already existing capitalists in different nations and the failure of those

who lack sufficient Capital, the success of those high caste people, and the failure of

those lower ones is structured both in globalization and in Hinduization.

9. The powerful and forceful ones in the Indian political arena, and the capitalists of thedeveloped countries enter in to a contract that would maintain their power supremacyeither political or economical or both. Consensus is the way (notion) that operates insuch economic and political contract. Those multi-nationalists and those rich

nationalists consented to themselves to gain profit at cost of any service sectors. The

market economy through a political contract is let-open for the multinational companiesfor purpose of exploitation of human labor and natural resources.

10. Thus, the ideological foundation of globalization is Pragmatism, an American trend thatbelieves that meaningfulness is matter of being useful. So long, the factor X is useful, itis meaningful, and if and when it exhausts its utility, then such X is to be thrown away.

Use and Throwaway (cosumerism) relation is the characteristics of both Globalization

and localization. Both converge on this ideological foundation which believes inPragmatism as a value.

11. Pragmatism as value, believes that the one who is in possession of the forces ofproduction and marketing ability (utilizer) assumes a socially advantageous position ofbeing considered superior. And that which or who is used\exploited is deemed inferior,

reduced to an object or a commodity, and therefore vulnerable for any violations.

Therefore, deep down, both in globalization and in Hinduization Violence is structured.It is on this violent and mutually exclusive and exploitative relation the forces of

Globalization and Hinduisation is founded upon. (e.g. Volcano) Therefore, it is no

wonder, at the social plane there remains the practice of mutilating, disfiguring and

injuring the minorities, the people of the downtrodden communities and powerlessones.

12. Mono Culture: Globalization produces two types of cultures: (i) The culture of theeconomically advantageous as against (ii) the culture of disadvantageous ones. The

culture of the economically advantageous tactically exploits the resources of the culture

of the disadvantageous ones and reduces them to subordinate positions.

13. The former by its political strategy encompasses and enslaves the culture of the later,and in the long run, sweeps away less privileged and reduces them as unprivileged class

and there by h militantly forces them to the periphery. Consequently poverty is andunemployability is maintained in order that cheap labor is guaranteed. Humans of the

periphery are reduced in to less-humans and less-humans are reduced into no-humans

with no culture at all. The economic culture of the upper class would continue remain

the dominant one. Accordingly the progress of the dominant culture will promoted atthe expense of the dominated ones. Such a progress will be projected as human

progress veiling its violent face. Thus globalization may be termed as economic

Darwinism and Hinduization may be termed as political and cultural Darwinism.


4/26

4

History will be interpreted as the history of dominant ones or the successful ones and

history of dominated ones will be systematically lost. History will remain lopsided.

14. The issue of Totalization of PowerIn all societies two classes of people appear- a class that rules and a class that is

ruled. The first class, performs most political functions, monopolizes power and enjoysthe advantages that power brings, whereas the latter is directed and controlled by thefirst ... Ruling classes do not often justify their power exclusively by de facto

possession of it, but try to find a moral and legal basis for it, representing it as the

logical and necessary consequence of doctrines and beliefs. Wherever and wheneverthere is hierarchy and inequality it presupposes a relation of Power of some over or

against many.

15. The notion of the analysis of power is a recent one. Four distinct forms of social poweroften identified by sociologists are force, dominance, authoritarian, and attraction.

Force is the intentional exertion of social pressures on others, to achieve the desired

outcomes. G & H is force in the sense that G employs economic forces, pressures toachieve the intended profits towards the wealth amassment of the upper class. H is

force in the sense that it employs political pressure in order that the multiplicity of

cultures is converted in to a single totality. (The massive re-conversion program at the

point of threat or political persuasion). Dominance is characteristic of G & H. Itinvolves the control and regulation of information flows, economic networks, transport

services, governmental decision making. Authoritarian in the sense of taking possession

of political, legal and religious power to make decisions in favor of the upper class.Attraction as a social power is employed in order to promote habituation characteristics

of uncritical and unresisting mass obedience. (The defense of G & H is maintained on

the grounds that they are inevitable, natural)

There are different theories on Power: What is the theory of power that is operative inG & H? is our inquiry now.

16. On the Creation of Social power three important theories of Social Power may behighlighted with reference to the issue how social power is created or generated. (a)The Dependency theory of power (Richard Emerson 1962) believes that social power

rests on social interdependence. A person or social institution X exercises power over

Y to the extent that Y depends upon X. such a dependency is not natural but historicaland made natural; it is constructed and maintained through a system/grammar/logic

that would sustain X supremacy over Y in continuum. Such a power is activated as X

utilizes Ys dependency to make demands on Y that result in changes in Ys actions or

ideas and perceptions. To put it formally, the dependency of Y on X is directly relatedand proportional to Ys social and economical needs, provided by X. It is also true if

we say that the social power of X over Y is directly proportional to the degree of Ys

dependency on X and inversely proportional to the amount of resistanceby Y that X

can not over come. (And resistance need not always be attributed interms of some sortof violence any resistance to violence, what ever form it may be can not be and is

different from violence; the issue of violence Vs non violence is always an existential

and factual and situational). In the words of Emerson, The Power of X over Y is equalto, and based on, the dependency of Y on X.


5/26

5

17. (b) The Trust theory of power(Talcott Parsons 1963) believes that social power restson peoples involvement in social relationships in which they trust others. This is basedon the notion of Mutual responsibility in the ways that benefit mutual relationship.

Family for example rests upon the basis of Truth theory of power. But in a larger social

groups and formal organizations the issue of Trust is supplemented by Contract,constitution or legal contract. Tu put it formally, the creation of social power with in acollectivity is directly proportional to the investment of trust in it by its participants

namely the actors in the social order.

18. Confli ct theory of social power believes that social power rests on the notion ofConflict, which is a historical social continuum. For Marx, the class struggle between

owners and workers is a social, political and psychological reflection of objective

economic conflicts. Exploitation is built in to capitalism as an economic system, whichin turn polarizes two classes of people setting against each other and therefore,

increases the chances of revolution.

19. Of these three theories on Power, G & H reflects the first one, namely the dependenttheory of power. Every social act is an exercise of power and every social relationship

is a power equation and every group or system is an organization of power. And

Societies are constituted of multiple overlapping and intersecting sociological networksof power.

20. Perspective of Power: (a) The Elite Perspective of Power (b) The Marxist perspectiveof Power (c) The Pluralist perspective of Power.

21. Of these, elitism can be found in writings of Plato, Machiavelly and many otherphilosophers and sociologists. The common theme of elitism is concentration of socialpower in a small set of controlling elites in all societies who by virtue of they being

elites are in possession and justification and interpretation of power relations. Social

change according to elitism can occur through gradual circulation of elites and theirimpetus only. Therefore, to understand any society we must examine the culture of

elites. Such a thesis of elitism negates or is in sharp contrast with the Marxist

perspective of power.

22. Thesecond namely, the Marxists perspective hold that there are three important modelson the base of which the notion of power may be examined. A class model based on the

primacy of economically generated social power; a historical model describing theprocess of dialectic social change and a sociological model describing the inevitable

conflict between two social classes. In so doing, the Marxists have contributed a very

useful tool of social analysis to understand the power structure of society.

23. While both the Elitism and Marxism claim that power has tended to be centralized, incontrast, The Pluralist perspective of Power holds that power is at least moderately

dispersed and could be extensively decentralized by proper management of it. From this


6/26

6

brief survey on perspectives of power, G & H believes in the perspective elitism rather

dominant elitism.

24. In globalization, the practice of imperialistic domination is carried out at two levels.The economic and the political governmental, supported by military control. In

Hinduization the practice of caste domination is carried out at multiple level: thecultural, the social, religious and economical and ideological. In the context ofglobalization, power is economism i.e. possession of the Power of Capital. In the

context of Hinduisation, power is High caste political and economic domination

converted into social domination.

25. Both converge on the conceptual foundations of pragmatism, dependent theory, andelitism. The moments of such conceptual bearings in total may be termed as the

Totalization of power of singular or monolithic class and culture against themultiplicity. It is the monopoly of one against many. By entering a contract trans-

national Globalization and Hinduized nationalism totalize or converge in to a singular

totalized entity as the One Culture. In so doing, the totalized power culture of upperclass sets itself against the Many, namely the plural periphery in continuos conflict and

resistance with the singular totalized entity. A singular totality when it absolutizes itself

it is already sets itself historically against the other cultures by practicing a denial.

Thus, conflict and resistance become the characteristic feature of social life. War is itsultimate fulfillment. When the multiplicity of the peripheries, no longer accept being

violated by tactical repression or institutionalized violence, instrumental rationality, or

peace tactics, the totalized culture begins a war at the practical level. The pluralperiphery is forced to safeguard themselves by any means possible. Conflict theory of

power relations is continued at multiple levels. Such a conflict or contest would restore

the rights to be different in differences. Thus in the context of Globalization and

Hinduization, the issue of Power is a contested reality. On whose side Power isinvested. Consequently, at whose expense power is utilized? How to respond to this

unjust situation? If so, what is ethical dimension with which we need to respond to the

dynamics of Power? These questions should continue to motivate our search foralternatives.

-----------------


7/26

7

From Phenomenology to Liberation

1.

Philosophy to be authentically socially relevant, it should necessarily address the non-philosophical. The non-philosophical here refers to the Global Social Reality whosedimensions are political, economical, cultural, and so on. By responding to Global social

reality from an ethical standpoint philosophy may be claimed to be practical in the sense of

socially relevant. It would save itself from the common criticism armchair philosophy orphilosophy merely interpreted the world. When philosophy addresses or ponders itself,

then there is the problem of sophistry, or mere idealization; From the point of view of a

Philosophy of liberation from the phenomenology of suffering, Philosophical texts are

pondered not in the sense of textual authenticity for it would lead to the problem ofvicious circularity or textual proof type of Philosophy rather, it is done exceptionally as a

pedagogical or methodological propaedutic to provide itself with interpretative categories.

Authenticity of philosophizing involves the critical reflection of the nonphilosophical -thephenomenon, the reality textured in our social living.

2. Philosophy, when it set itself to reflect on its own reality by way of distancing itself fromwhat already is, from its own world, from its own system from its own space. If not, itwould fall back to itself. Its result would be self-enclosure with in its own world. . Self-

enclosure is a refusal to relation. Self-enclosure conceals the desire and the practice of

playing superior or the dominator, the Elite.

3. The philosophies that have emerged from or for the affirmation of the existence of theNon-Being, the matter, the poor, the periphery must also be cautious that it should not

again fall back to the center. Materialism for example by affirming its own prime existencecommits the difficulty perceiving everything from its own world. Again this will lead to the

same old problem of One against Many; for what is defined as Being or One or

foundational existence is conceived in such a way it supercedes over the many. The verydefinition of Oneness counts against the presence of the Many-ness in totalities of all

totalities.

4. What is Phenomenology and what is meant by phenomenology of suffering: we shall try toclarify these here: Phenomenology as its name implies, concerns itself with What is Given,

or what \how it appears from the reality of the world; It refers to the social reality as it

appears or given to us in a specific social system; The issue of Being here refers to What isgiven as a system (ideological\philosophical or structural); it refers to acceptance of the

system (Being) as given).

5. By the term phenomenology of Suffering we may refer to the issue of Discrimination,domination, and power relations, those underlie the phenomenon, the Being or the System.

With in the Classical and European Philosophy, the issues of the phenomenon would be:

Being and Non Being; Permanence Vs Transitory; Eternal Vs the temporary; Spirit orMatter; One Vs Many; Dual Vs Non-Dual; Soul\Mind or Body\matter; Divine or human;


8/26

8

the male Vs the female, human or animal; nature or culture; Science or Pseudo Science,

civilized Vs the uncivilized, the ruler Vs the ruled, the powerful Vs the powerless, the

capitalists Vs the poor etc. Such a polarization of categories may be extended further bothin the actual as well in the dominant philosophical worlds.

6.

Each camp tries to affirm philosophically (provides epistemic or moral justifications) itsown claim of meaningfulness from its own stand point or school of thought. Thosephilosophies that emerged from the Center, its own construct for the affirmation of its own

Self, as One, as Being or as Existence.

7. We shall clarify further: For the purpose of clarification, the approaches to the question ofBeing \ existence in the history of Philosophy may be classified as falling into three major

dimensions or approaches. They are (i) the ontological approach (ii) the Functional

approach and (iii) the critical-liberative approach. Clarification of these approaches wouldin turn pave to the understanding of the phenomenology of suffering and liberation from a

philosophical perspective.

8. What is the ontological approach? This is an attempt to provide a constitutive(theoretically reduced) definition of Existence, man, society etc from an onto-logical point

of view. It is an attempt to provide pure definitions divorced from the non-philosophical

reality. It is purely a rational attempt that provides an idealized definition of Being orExistence. Often the type of philosophizing results from the Dominant Center in

Philosophy. it simply reflects the worldview of the dominant culture or society. It often

looks for the most fundamental definition of what Is. This Is defined in contrast towhat is not.

9. The theoretical formulation of these diverse issues may be singled out as falling intocategory of what is X in its ultimate constituent sense? The X, as a variable here wouldeasily be instantiated as Reality, Man, God etc. For example, for Plato, the ultimate nature

of existence is pure idea, pertaining to the world of forms. This pure idea stands in

opposition to the imagery or the shadowy world. For Sankara, the ultimate sense of realityis Non-Dual and what is non-dual is in opposition to the world of duality. Here arises the

philosophical dualism of Appearance Vs Reality. For Aristotle, the ultimate reality is the

ontological reconciliation of Form and Matter. God, as the ultimate reality, for St. Anselmis purely ontological. For St. Thomas, X is trans-cosmological.

10.By employing the method of deduction and the method of doubt (doubting the other)Descartes of the Modern Philosophy derives that Existence or Being is purely rational.Such a Being for Descartes and many other rationalists exists in itself. That which is

defined to exist in dependent to Spirit is considered as irrational therefore secondary.

Parallel to Descartes, the philosophy of Samkhya established the dualism between Pursa as

prime category and Prakriti as the jadaor matter (inactive). The point here is that categoryof existence that is defined as occupying the central or essential is conceived to be the

Primary as against the category of that which is defined as the Secondary. In the practical

language, the male or the human of the European is placed higher than the non-European.This is the politics of the philosophy of Modernism.


9/26

9

11.The dialectical manifestation of the One in to many and the surrender of Many in to Oneestablish Hegelian Idealism. Is Aurobindos philosophy comparable to that ofHegelianism?. The Subjective idealism of Berkeley is from the point of view of a

Philosophy of liberation, may be said to conceive a sense of subjugation of the object that

is perceived by the subject who perceives. That is why the claim is To be is to be Perceiveand to be perceived.

12.Whether monistic or dualistic, idealistic or realistic the ideological frame of such above-mentioned philosophies conceives a sense of domination of the One, the Primary as againstthe Secondary or Many. This is what I mean by the phenomenon of separation or

discrimination that enforce a sense of oppression of the Dominant over the Other. The

cumulative effect of such philosophies at the social reality is Suffering. Take for example

How Plato, in tune with his philosophy of idealism conceives an Hierarchically spaced orconstrued society, which in turn is justified in Plato as Justice and (made) Natural.

13.Thus the characteristic feature of the ontological sense of philosophizing remains to beaxiomatic, Value-Hierarchical (vertical), formal, structural, pure-existential.

Such a philosophy is other wise termed as the Philosophy of domination. In the sense of

promoting a theoretical position and epistemic justification of the undue affirmation of the

Primacy of the Ontological, such a philosophy contributed to political promotion of anunequal social order. The dualistic trends by placing the Spirit category as superior over

matter, served to distance the Powerful and the Powerless by means of systematic

domination and discrimination. What is Holy is defined in terms of what is not Holy andwhat is touchable is defined against what is untouchable and so the case with any other

value-dualism.

14.Jaques Derrida would criticize such Philosophy as logo centric, whose central conceptsare eidos, arche, telos, etc. They remain to be ones mind-constructs in order that the

Class of people who conceive such logo centrism remains to be the Philosopher King.

15.What is Functionalist sense of approaching to the question of Being or Existence? remainsto be our next inquiry. To put it briefly, The term functionalism is extendable to Scientism,

Positivism, Behaviorism, linguistic analysis of meaning, and Pragmatism. In the modernworld this may be termed as economism of the trans-national capitalism. Functionalist are

those who seek an explandum model for the existing system (Being). They make a slight

divergence from the question of what is X to What X does or How X is

displayed/performs with in the given system. For example, the phenomenon of Capitalismis understood by what or how it successfully performs itself.

16.Functionalist are those who do not question ethical dimension of a system, rather they relyon the pragmatic morality of a system or reality. Meaning is a matter of utility, positivistic,verifiability, testability, repeatability, orderly etc. The danger of functionalism or

modernism is that it projects itself as the only correct model of explanation of reality. Such

a projection in the social life tend to monopolize, envelop, neo-colonize the realities of theworld in its own and only way. Its morality is instrumental, and profit designed.


10/26

10

17.We shall explain this by analyzing the phenomenon of Globalization in the notes entitledas Globalization as totalization of Power. Before we take into such an analysis, it is betterthat we take look of the dualistic or contradictory economic reality of the global market

today. (add here facts and figures regarding the reality of economic disparity )

18.Take a look at these following facts and figures: Global Trends 2015 a study report by the United States Intelligence Community lists out

problem s of the world for the next 15 years. And for India: Aids will be a major problem;

arable lands will be more degraded; deforestation will be more and more intensifying

pollution; Coral reefs will be disturbed; ... India and China will rise in power and can causeadjustment problems; internal conflicts such as communal disputes will be bitter, vicious,

long-lasting and difficult to terminate; they may become interstate conflicts; some of the

northern states will have more population with about 50 per cent points and the four

southern states may have 16 per cent; and the India Pakistan gap will be widened. (TheHindu, Sunday, January 7, 2000).

Poverty is on the rise, in 1989 34.3% of the population of India was under the poverty line,with the Globalization and New Economic policy there was a steep increase in poverty line.

In 1992 it was 40% and in 1997 it was almost 50%; (Unfortunately the political claim isthat globalization would erase the poverty line). According to the World Bank Report, in

East Asia excluding China, 76.4 million people are living below poverty line.

According to 1991 census, religions vise the population of Hindus are 672.6 millions,Islam populations is 95.2 million, Christians are 18.9 million, Sikhs are 16.3 millions,

Buddhists are 6.3 millions, Jains are 3.4millionsand others are 3.5 million. The political

force called Hinduization is forced within this diversity only.

In the worlds population, those who are in poverty make up to 1.1 billion of the 5 billionpeople of the Planet.

The economists tell us that, a 20% of the world population. the so-called upper classcontinue to enjoy 85% of the total world resources and the remaining 80% of thepopulation are forced to distributed amongst themselves the rest 15% of the world

resources. Unfortunately, these 80% of the worlds population, a vast majority of them live

in the developing or yet-to be developed countries. The disparity of distribution of

resources would in turn pave way to the disparity and discrimination in social status.

If we could shrink the earths population to a village of precisely 100 people, with allexisting human ratio remaining the same, it would look like this: There would be 57

Asians, 21 Europeans, 14 from western hemisphere (North and South) and 8 Africans. Of

the total population 51 would be female and 49 are male; 70 would be non-Christians 30

Christians; 50% of entire worlds wealth would be in the hands of the only 6 people and all6 would be citizens of the United States; Nearly 80 persons would be living in substandard

housing; 70 persons would be unable to read; 50 would suffer from mal nutrition and one

would be near death and one would be near birth. Only one would have college education( Jivan, May 1997)

The position of India concerning education is very low among the countries of the world.Only 40.90% of the people are literate. What adds to the problem is that there is stronggender discrimination in the field of education. Out of the total literates 64.13% are male


11/26

11

while only 35.87% are female; the status of female literacy in 1971 was 18.44% and it has

increased to 35.87% in 1991. While the male literacy in 1971 was 39.5% and in 1991, it

was 64.13%. Literacy rate of male is higher than the female.

Humanity is currently in crisis in many dimensions, perhaps the most distressing is theproblem of large scale refugee displacement seeking a home in homeless land. The result of

political wars, persecution, discrimination, and intolerance is the emergence of refugees.Today there are 19 million refugees around the world and another 24 million men, womenand children are displaced in their own lands. One in every 130 people on earth has been

forced to face the problem of displacement (FAR Issue 3 December 1999)

In the political life, there is a growing tendency to move from democracy toauthoritarianism. The emergence of the modern elite with its control of State mechanismshas developed varying forms of domination and oppression

When the country has entered into contract with the multinationals, the peasantry whichconstitute 70% of India are forced to commit suicide due to the problems of land alienation,

product alienation, crop failure and indebtedness. More than 325 small and marginal

farmers mostly cotton growers have committed suicides in Andhra pradesh in 1999.

Suicides have been reported from Karnataka, Maharstra, and even from the state of GreenRevolution i.e., Punjab. The epidemic suicide all over the country is a clear evidence of the

price (here human death) that the nation has to pay with its subjugation to the transnationalcapitalism and its market economy.

19.Globalization is a phenomenology of suffering to those who are secondary, developing orunder developed nations and very especially to those who are already poor, who do not

have the capacity to market economy. It is a form of thought, called economism that

bifurcates the powerful vs the powerless. In its actualization process it allows suicidal of

the poor or the oppressed. Properly conceived, Economism (of Globalization) has a longstanding colonial history of philosophy.

20.The third type of approach in Philosophy is termed here as the critical-liberative approach.The critical liberative approach emerges from the periphery, by pondering the non-philosophical as well as the philosophical that conceal the non-philosophical. It is an

attempt to understand the phenomenology of suffering (discrimination, subjugation and

domination and power-relations veiled in the dominant world view and its social practice)Philosophy is liberative when it permits itself to think the themes in favour of the

oppressed and suffering people. It is not a love of wisdom for its own sake, but a love of

wisdom for the sake of the discriminated Other. It is not mere friendship nor fellowship butthe love of the broken-particular that is ethical and spiritual


12/26

12

Power therefore is multi dimensional. In the context of Racism, it is racial supremacy. These

(however brief reduction) theoretical framework of power, I believe would provide ample

scope for your discussion and deliberations. From this brief enumeration, (the truth we couldevolve is that) Power, whether cultural or Philosophical is inevitable. One can not pretend a

world of powerless ness. However, the significant questions that we need to introspect is: On

whose side Power is invested?. Consequently, at whose expense power is ut il ized? I f so,what i s ethi cal dimension wi th which we need to respond to the dynami cs of Power?

With this short note,

.

Welcome & Introduction AddressDear...

I welcome you all wholeheartedly for this state level seminar on Culture & Philosophy:

Dynamics of Power, organized by the department of Philosophy, Arul Anandar College,

Karumathur on 27 28 February 2001. I thank you for your real and actual presence here.Each one of your presence here reaffirms the sense of fellowship, mutual solidarity,

communion, commitment and celebration. Your coming-together is a revelation of the basic

truth that As humans we are bound to be WE ARE. We are unintentionally and necessarilyrelated to each other and only as inhuman we tend to practice unrelatedness, veiling of each

other with specific politics of power-relations.

Permit me to introduce the perspective and the focus of these two days seminar.

The dynamics of Power in Culture and Philosophy is the problematic rationality of thisacademic seminar. The issue of the dynamics power (in culture and Philosophy) is as old as

human civilization. Along with human evolution, the question regarding POWER has also

evoluted. What is Power?For Socrates this (power) is a Who am I question. For Plato, this is the Philosopher-King.

For the scholastics, this is a shift from the known to the unknown. For modernists, this is

reason. For Darwin this is a survival of the fittest. For the post-Darwinians, this is SocialDarwinism. For the existentialists, this may be a debate between essence and existence and

ultimately human existence. For the Marxists, this is a class struggle. For the colonialists this is

the sun never sets in the British Empire. For the Trans-national capitalists, power is

Globalization. For the Advaitin this is Brahman-Atman identity. For the neo-advaitins, this isPolitical construction of Hindutva. For some, it is nationalism and patriarchy. For political

democracy, this is a politics for number or vote bank. For those who occupy institutions, this is

hierarchy. But for the powerless, power is solidarity and relationship.

Perhaps the most ancient people identified Power with idea of something beyond,

(supernatural). This is found expressed in mythologies of ancient civilizations. Later (we find)

the notion power is identified with the notion of God. And such a God was perceived to be themost Powerful.


13/26

13

But then, if we continue to confront human history, we would immediately learn that our

history is a history of conflicts and wars for Power. It is marked with wars between tribes,classes, races, cultures, and ideologies. The one who is deemed/hailed successful has forced

and ideologised himself to be the privileged and the ruling class. And the one who is defined to

be not so successful is reduced to be the ruled class. Thus, the dynamics of historical andcultural change in all societies remains to be a continuos conflict between two classes of people- a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, is socially and politically constructed

to perform most political functions; it monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages that

power brings, whereas the latter, namely the ruled-class is structured in such a way that itsubordinates the rule of the powerful. It remains to be directed and controlled by the first.

However, the ruling classes do not often justify their power exclusively by de facto possession

of it, but try to find a moral and legal basis for it, representing it as the logical and necessary

consequence of doctrines and beliefs. Human history is therefore is a history of politics ofpower, whose characteristics may be institutional, ideological, cultural, social and

Psychological.

Learning from human history, the underlying and vital issue that needs to be pondered is the

issue of the Dynamics of Power in Culture and Philosophy. The dynamics of power is the basic

Philosophy against or in favor of which, problems of Philosophy and human society needs to

be perceived. Most of the structures of thought, feeling and action exist both as systems ofmeaning and significance and as systems of power and domination, Reason always existed,

only not always in reasonable forms (Karl Marx). Power domination belongs to the very

structure of technical reason. An honest examination of history of ideas, reveal that humanReason (be it west or East) is most often identified with the notion of Power and domination.

Our Philosophies (the so-called world outlooks could either be liberative or dominative.

It is dominative when it encloses\refrains us our from relationship. It is liberative when it

discloses relationship. When it permits itself to think the themes in favour of the oppressed andsuffering people in order to be in proximity. Such proximity is not friendship or fellowship

between the any two ruling class or caste but it is essentially the love of the broken-particular.

It is the love of the unloved. It is the education of those who are deprived of education. It is areclamation of faith. In this sense, our discourse would remain to be authentic, ethical, and

spiritual.

This is why the question regarding the Dynamics of Power both in Philosophy and Cultureneeds to be given a special attention and serious study in social sciences and very especially in

the departments of Philosophy. This is the perspective and the focus of our two days Seminar.

In order to facilitate an indepth and organic reflection and action. I welcome each one of you to

this moment of self-reflection. ... Dr. S. Lourdunathan.

.


14/26

14

FORMS OF CASTE POWER DOMINATION AND DYNAMICS OF DALIT

LIBERATION: SOME THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS

1. In this, paper two issues are addressed.What are the forms of caste power-domination that maintains/perpetuates the poverty of thepowerless people, namely the Dalits?And as a response, we would in turn discuss on the dynamics of a philosophy of liberation

of these made-powerless ones? By doing so, we attempt an interface between the dynamics

of caste power domination and non-caste power relation.

2. In all societies, there always existed two classes of people a class that rules and a classthat is ruled. The first one, though most often to be less numerous, but monopolizes social

power (economic and cultural power) and performs most political functions. And the classthat is ruled succumbs to the power-domination of powerful class. Consequently they suffer

perpetual dependency, economic exploitation, social discrimination, and political

powerlessness and are forced to be treated less human and for some Non-human.

3. Between these two classes of people, there always exist a relation of power, of that ofdomination, dominated, of that of oppression, and oppressed. Between the dualities

domination and dominated there exist a social (cultural, economic & political) a structureand a specific practice of domination.

4. On the Creation of Social power three important theories of Social Power may behighlighted with reference to the issue how social power is created or generated. (a) The

Dependency theory of power (Richard Emerson 1962) believes that social power rests on

social interdependence. A person or social institution X exercises power over Y to the

extent that Y depends upon X. such a dependency is not natural but historical and madenatural; it is constructed and maintained through a system/grammar/logic that would

sustain X supremacy over Y in continuum. Such a power is activated as X utilizes Ys

dependency to make demands on Y that result in changes in Ys actions or ideas andperceptions. To put it formally, the dependency of Y on X is directly related and

proportional to Ys social and economical needs, provided by X.

5. It is also true if we say that the social power of X over Y is directly proportional to thedegree of Ys dependency on X and inversely proportional to the amount of resistanceby

Y that X can not over come. (And resistance need not always be attributed interms of some

sort of violence any resistance to violence, what ever form it may be can not be and isdifferent from violence; the issue of violence Vs non violence is always an existential and

factual and situational). In the words of Emerson, The Power of X over Y is equal to, and

based on, the dependency of Y on X.

6. (b) The Trust theory of power(Talcott Parsons 1963) believes that social power rests onpeoples involvement in social relationships in which they trust others. This is based on the

notion of Mutual responsibility in the ways that benefit mutual relationship. Family forexample rests upon the basis of Truth theory of power. But in a larger social groups and


15/26

15

formal organizations the issue of Trust is supplemented by Contract, constitution or legal

contract. Tu put it formally, the creation of social power with in a collectivity is directly

proportional to the investment of trust in it by its participants namely the actors in thesocial order.

7.

(c) Confli ct theory of social power believes that social power rests on the notion ofConflict, which is a historical social continuum. For Marx, the class struggle betweenowners and workers is a social, political and psychological reflection of objective economic

conflicts. Exploitation is built in to capitalism as an economic system, which in turn

polarizes two classes of people setting against each other and therefore, increases thechances of revolution.

8. is hitehr to: conflict between settled and nomadic communities; self eenclussers9. Dr. Ambedkar in his anthropological analysis points out that the conflict between two

tribes the settled ones Vs the nomadic generated the enclosure of each other in

exclusiveness. In other words, territory occupation and gradual consolidation of multifaceted social power domination (religious, ritual, political, economical, psychological

(according to Ambedkars analysis) serve as the dynamics that explains caste power

domination in Indian society. Both Ambedkar and Marx, agree in a specific sense i.e, both

of them consider conflict as the source of social power-domination for Marx, it isfoundationally an economical category, a singular one, but for Ambedkar though conflict is

foundation to caste power cleavage, its practice is multi faceted. it includes socio-political ,

economical and cultural categories. Thus, for Ambedkar the foundations of caste powerdomination is not single dimensional but multi dimensional and yet interwoven to each

other.

10.\Dynamics of execution of social power:

The dynamics or process of exercising social power involves four important but often highly

interwoven facets: Possessing Resources, Committing resources, converting resources intopower actions and overcoming resistance (Blalock 1989).

Some of the structures of thought, feeling and action exist not only as systems of power

and domination, but also as systems of meaning and significance to their actions and

existence The world-out look images and self images that shape social action

The problem of caste is ultimately a problem of objective social structures of thought andfeeling, of action and social relations.

A caste system is a historical form of life

Caste hierarchy implicitly sustains specifically a Moral sense of self\life.


16/26

16

An unforgettable and unforgivable hierarchy of power and privilege, of stigma and value,

forms the social backbone of many societies with its racial, gender and class hiearchies and this

is very true of India Caste society.

Caste remains is preoccupation, occupation, obsession, and determination in the Indian society.

Therefore, the problem of poverty and net works of power relations in India can not bedivorced from issue of caste.

The wage labour exchange within capitalistic power relations may be treated just, under

capitalism. The freedom to sell your labour to any capitalist that will buy is infact freedom

under capitalism. This justice and freedom are infact injustice and wage -slavery from the

emancipatory standpoint of a potential social transformation.


17/26

17

State Level Seminar on

CULTURE & PHILOSOPHY: Dynamics of Power

27- 28

February 2001

Welcome & Introduction Address

Dear...I welcome you all wholeheartedly for this state level seminar on Culture & Philosophy:Dynamics of Power, organized by the department of Philosophy, Arul Anandar College,

Karumathur on 27 28 February 2001. I thank you for your real and actual presence here.

Each one of your presence here reaffirms the sense of fellowship, mutual solidarity,communion, commitment and celebration. Your coming-together is a revelation of the basic

truth that As humans we are bound to be WE ARE. We are unintentionally and necessarily

related to each other and only as inhuman we tend to practice unrelatedness, veiling of each

other with specific politics of power-relations.

Permit me to introduce the perspective and the focus of these two days seminar.

The dynamics of Power in Culture and Philosophy is the problematic rationality of this

academic seminar. The issue of the dynamics power (in culture and Philosophy) is as old as

human civilization. Along with human evolution, the question regarding POWER has also

evoluted. What is Power?For Socrates this (power) is a Who am I question. For Plato, this is the Philosopher-King.

For the scholastics, this is a shift from the known to the unknown. For modernists, this is

reason. For Darwin this is a survival of the fittest. For the post-Darwinians, this is SocialDarwinism. For the existentialists, this may be a debate between essence and existence and

ultimately human existence. For the Marxists, this is a class struggle. For the colonialists this is

the sun never sets in the British Empire. For the Trans-national capitalists, power is

Globalization. For the Advaitin this is Brahman-Atman identity. For the neo-advaitins, this isPolitical construction of Hindutva. For some, it is nationalism and patriarchy. For political

democracy, this is a politics for number or vote bank. For those who occupy institutions, this is

hierarchy. But for the powerless, power is solidarity and relationship.

Perhaps the most ancient people identified Power with idea of something beyond,

(supernatural). This is found expressed in mythologies of ancient civilizations. Later (we find)the notion power is identified with the notion of God. And such a God was perceived to be the

most Powerful.

But then, if we continue to confront human history, we would immediately learn that ourhistory is a history of conflicts and wars for Power. It is marked with wars between tribes,

classes, races, cultures, and ideologies. The one who is deemed/hailed successful has forced

and ideologised himself to be the privileged and the ruling class. And the one who is defined to

be not so successful is reduced to be the ruled class. Thus, the dynamics of historical andcultural change in all societies remains to be a continuos conflict between two classes of people

- a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, is socially and politically constructed

to perform most political functions; it monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages thatpower brings, whereas the latter, namely the ruled-class is structured in such a way that it


18/26

18

subordinates the rule of the powerful. It remains to be directed and controlled by the first.

However, the ruling classes do not often justify their power exclusively by de facto possession

of it, but try to find a moral and legal basis for it, representing it as the logical and necessaryconsequence of doctrines and beliefs. Human history is therefore is a history of politics of

power, whose characteristics may be institutional, ideological, cultural, social and

Psychological.Learning from human history, the underlying and vital issue that needs to be pondered is theissue of the Dynamics of Power in Culture and Philosophy.

The dynamics of power is the basic Philosophy against or in favor of which, problems of

Philosophy and human society needs to be perceived. Most of the structures of thought,feeling and action exist both as systems of meaning and significance and as systems of power

and domination, Reason always existed, only not always in reasonable forms (Karl Marx).

Power domination belongs to the very structure of technical reason. An honest examination of

history of ideas, reveal that human Reason (be it west or East) is most often identified with thenotion of Power and domination.

Our Philosophies (the so-called world outlooks could either be liberative or dominative.

It is dominative when it encloses\refrains us our from relationship. It is liberative when itdiscloses relationship. When it permits itself to think the themes in favour of the oppressed and

suffering people in order to be in proximity. Such proximity is not friendship or fellowship

between the any two ruling class or caste but it is essentially the love of the broken-particular.

It is the love of the unloved. It is the education of those who are deprived of education. It is areclamation of faith. In this sense, our discourse would remain to be authentic, ethical, and

spiritual.

This is why the question regarding the Dynamics of Power both in Philosophy and Cultureneeds to be given a special attention and serious study in social sciences and very especially in

the departments of Philosophy.

This is the perspective and the focus of our two days Seminar. In order to facilitate an indepthand organic reflection and action. I welcome each one of you to this moment of self reflection.


19/26

19

This history of war for Power is multi dimensional. They are ideological, religious, racial,linguistic, political, social, cultural, economic, and individual except that there is nothing

spiritual in it. Even the so-called Asians, who are proudly, call themselves as inheritors of the

most spiritual, defined themselves as Powerful and simultaneously defining the spirituallypowerless people; The Greeks believed their civilization is the most powerful civilization, bornto rule over the earth. The Romans politically constructed themselves in order to be Powerful.

Consequently, slavery was justified, even considered sanctioned by Divine ordinance. During

the medieval period history tells us the conflict between Religion and Politics centered on thevital issue who is more powerful. There was a gradual forgetting of the notion of God as

powerful, and in its place, Man described/announce himself to be the most powerful in the

order of creation. Unfortunately, wherever there was power, there was an hierarchy of power

relations. In the modern period, man deemed himself as powerful because he consideredhimself rational. By defining his rationality he projected himself to the position of

Powerfulness, and reduced the non-human to be powerless and therefore subservient to him.

Reason always existed, only not always in reasonable forms (Karl Marx).We read in thehuman history, there was always existed War between people of two different nations, races,

castes etc. The Revolutions, whether Industrial or political or scientific or technological or

ideological, they always conceive and conceal the notion and practice of Power of some

against the powerless.

An honest examination of history of ideas, reveal that human Reason (be it west or East) is

most often identified with the notion of Power and domination existence

The meaning of Power and Powerlessness, of Freedom and Slavery, of Caste and Dalit, of high

and low, depends in part upon the social context and concept and the kinds of domination and

oppression practiced or endured by a given generation in particular cultural and historicalcontext.

The context of Capitalism and Trans national capitalism, with its Globalization tactics, is

identifiable with idea and practice of power relations.The context of racial superiority against any other races is identifiable with idea and practice of

power relations.

The context of caste superiority against low caste inferiority is scrutanizable is with idea andpractice of power relations.

The concept and context of Male superiority against the female inferiority is identifiable with

idea and practice of power relations.

The concept and context of religious holiness against non-holiness of the-other, is identifiablewith an idea and practice of power relations.

The concept and Context of political/institutional status or locus against the less or non-

political or non-institutional is identifiable with idea and practice of power relations.

Sufficient times have been spent on the notion of ideal society, ideal man, ideal God,

ontological essences, and so on. In such discourses, consciously or unconsciously,

Philosophers spearheaded the tactic of domination. By ascending to a special world of


20/26

20

language game, many philosophers concealed the practice of power domination against the

many.

We need to descend to life, from language to life, from power to powerlessness, from caste to

castelessness, from institutions to persons, from state to people, from locus to non-locus, from

Brahman to human, from holy to ordinary, from a morality of charity let us desend to an ethicof sharing, sharing the bread. From pragmatic profits to people in relation.

Have you ever suffered hunger in your own flesh?

Have you ever suffered imprisonment in your own flesh?

Have you ever suffered untouchability in your own flesh?

Have you ever suffered discrimination in your flesh?Have you ever suffered illiteracy in your own flesh?

Have you ever suffered discrimination in your own flesh?

Have you ever suffered homeless ness in your own flesh?Have you ever suffered torture because you robbed some bread for your hunger?

If yes, you belong to a humanity that is deemed powerless and if yes, you belong to a

(Hu)manity that is Power-dominative.

.

Globalization and Rural DevelopmentA Focus.

We are at an important period of transformation in the history of humankind. The concepts of

nationalism, national frontiers, borderline militarism etc are gradually transformed into a

singular notion, called Globalization. The world is increasingly reduced into a global village.Though the forces for the beginning of globalization lie down in the historical layers of human

civilization, Globalization as a transnational economic phenomenon lies in the historical

moments of transitions. They include the transition from agrarian society to trade society, fromtrade to colonialism and from colonialism to neo-colonialism called globalization. Five

centuries of arrival of Vasco da Gama was marked in the year 1998. With that the victory of

colonialism was either celebrated or regretted. What remains is that the human face continues

to shrink with the newer forms or scars of colonization. The years of 2000 would mark thestrengthening of the forces of globalization in the face of the earth.

The situation that leads to the strengthening of forces of globalization needs to analyzed. In

addition, the forces that ensure or resist these new forms of colonialism needs to studied andthe impact and value that globalization cause need to be researched. Alternatives or responses

need to be worked out. This is context that this seminar is located.


21/26

21

It has been documented that globalization, wherever adopted, has caused massive

transformation - a transformation of the economies from command economy to market

economy. This change is more vivid in the east European countries, South Asia where the shifttowards market-oriented economic regimes. Many scholars document the impact of such

massive transformation on the economy in general and the impacted common person in

particular. However, the issue of Globalization and Rural Development with specific referenceto Indian Rural context has not been sufficiently analyzed and brought to the public awareness.

Having felt this vital necessity, to study and document the impact of Globalization on Rural

Development, the Department of Rural Development Science, Arul Anandar College,Karumathur, has come forward to conduct this two days discussion. The impact of

Globalization, its market-economy, its information technology, its affective social change on

the rural development, therefore remains to be the focus of this Seminar.

At the international level, globalization is viewed as a path to deepen modernity; it is also

claimed that it strengthens polity and society. It is hypothesized that globalization would

revitalize democracy, federalization process, agriculture, and would promote decentralizationof economic and political power, ensure accountability on the part of the political leaders as

well as people and transparency in administration. It is most often claimed that economic

resources of the entire globe would be in easy access to everyones doorsteps because of

Globalization that the world is increasingly shrinking to global village. Nevertheless, oursincere inquiry on these days is going to converge on the following vital issues:

Could Globalization contribute to rural development? What are its challenges to the rural fabrics of our nation? Are we going to close the doors of Globalization by adopting strategies of

protectionism, nationalism integration and so on Or, are we going to extend globalization to various other fields such as education

and rural development? And if we claim that Globalization is inevitable, in the sense that one can not resist

this global phenomenon, then in what sense one should respond to the issue ofglobalization and its impact on rural development?

We have invited academicians, social activists, agricultural scientists, political scientists,Developmental and communication personals, people who are concerned with environmental

issues, economists and various other consultants from different disciplines of social sciences to

ponder on these issues. I am extremely happy that they have identified issues such as

Globalization: Bio-diversity and Environment, Globalization and Rural Industries,Globalization and development programmes, Implications of WTO Accord, Finance and Issues

related to Trade and Patent, Globalization and totalization of power, Globalization and food

security, globalization and Civil society, Agricultural policies in the context of globalization,

Globalization and Polity and self rule, and Globalization and Social Struggles.

On behalf of the department of rural development science of our college, I cordially invite you

and thank each one of you for having come over here. The moment we communicated to this


22/26

22

seminar, we have had innumerable and a very encouraging responses from all of you. I thank

you for the same.

By way of serving as the convenor of the Seminar, I would only be happy to tell you that thedepartment of rural development science is at your service in times of your needs in these two

days. On behalf of the department May I extend you best wishes for a fruitful participation in

the seminar and discussion on the theme of Globalization and Rural Development. I assure youthat your stay at AAC for these two days will be meaningful and useful. Thank you One andAll.

Phenomenology of Suffering and Liberation

(Lecturers delivered at the Refresher Course organized by the Sri.Aurobindo School of Eastern

and Western Thought, Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, 1113 June 2001)

Dr. S. Lourdunathan

Head

Department of Philosophy

Arul Anandar College (Autonomous)Karumathur626514

Madurai Dt


23/26

23

Tamilnadu

Lecture1Perspectives wittgenstein ; our philosophicla perspectives are not innocet

The Global Reality and the emerging Issues

Lecture2

An Understanding in to the phenomena of Suffering

Lecture3

Dynamics of a Philosophy of Liberation

1. The differntia in social, political and cultural spaceTo be born in India is different from to be born in the United States. This would simply mean

that a person born in India is geographically, culturally, socio-politically is different from theone who is born at New York. The first world to much extent is different from that of the

developing or underdeveloped countries. The same is the case with a person born at New Delhi

Vs a person born at a remote village in far south. The difference lies in Socio Political Spaceamongst individual selves. In the Racial frame of mind, a White (non-Black) is politically,

culturally spatially different from a Black (Non-White).

With in India given to the social frame of Casteism, there is a world of geo-political differencethat is made to exist between persons of different communities.

Most often classical tradition in Philosophy speaks of human nature in general.

Inequalities are pervasive throughout the world. They relate to unequal distribution of wealth,

status, knowledge, skills, and power across different units such as individuals, nations andregions, castes and communities.

The absences of equal opportunities for different social categories spaces the discriminated

groups at a disadvantaged. Inequalities and discriminations are related phenomena andreinforce each other. Inequalities betwen groups can be a source of prejudice and

discrimination if the dominant groups come to hold the subordinate groups in low esteem.

Lewis (1985) observes that, tjpse we


24/26

24

Economism as a problem

Contradictions

(Exercise: How will you title these Issues\problemsgive a suitable heading and share your

immediate reaction to these issues) (enumerate Who is a philosopher in such a context.

1. Global Trends 2015 a study report by the United States Intelligence Community lists outproblem s of the world for the next 15 years. And for India: Aids will be a major problem;

arable lands will be more degraded; deforestation will be more and more intensifyingpollution; Coral reefs will be disturbed; ... India and China will rise in power and can cause

adjustment problems; internal conflicts such as communal disputes will be bitter, vicious,

long-lasting and difficult to terminate; they may become interstate conflicts; some of the

northern states will have more population with about 50 per cent points and the foursouthern states may have 16 per cent; and the India Pakistan gap will be widened. (The

Hindu, Sunday, January 7, 2000).

2. If we could shrink the earths population to a village of precisely 100 people, with allexisting human ratio remaining the same, it would look like this: There would be 57

Asians, 21 Europeans, 14 from western hemisphere (North and South) and 8 Africans. Of

the total population 51 would be female and 49 are male; 70 would be non-Christians 30Christians; 50% of entire worlds wealth would be in the hands of the only 6 people and all


25/26

25

6 would be citizens of the United States; Nearly 80 persons would be living in substandard

housing; 70 persons would be unable to read; 50 would suffer from mal nutrition and one

would be near death and one would be near birth. Only one would have college education( Jivan, May 1997)

3. The position of India concerning education is very low among the countries of the world.Only 40.90% of the people are literate. What adds to the problem is that there is strong

gender discrimination in the field of education. Out of the total literates 64.13% are male

while only 35.87% are female; the status of female literacy in 1971 was 18.44% and it hasincreased to 35.87% in 1991. While the male literacy in 1971 was 39.5% and in 1991, it

was 64.13%. Literacy rate of male is higher than the female.

4. Poverty is on the rise, in 1989 34.3% of the population of India was under the poverty line,with the Globalization and New Economic policy there was a steep increase in poverty line.

In 1992 it was 40% and in 1997 it was almost 50%; (Unfortunately the political claimis that globalization would erase the poverty line). According to the World BankReport, in East Asia excluding China, 76.4 million people are living below povertyline.

In the worlds population, those who are in poverty make up to 1.1 billion of the 5billion people of the Planet.

The economists tell us that, a 20% of the world population. the so-called upper classcontinue to enjoy 85% of the total world resources and the remaining 80% of the

population are forced to distributed amongst themselves the rest 15% of the world

resources. Unfortunately, these 80% of the worlds population, a vast majority of them

live in the developing or yet-to be developed countries. The disparity of distribution ofresources would in turn pave way to the disparity and discrimination in social status.

5. Humanity is currently in crisis in many dimensions, perhaps the most distressing is theproblem of large scale refugee displacement seeking a home in homeless land. The result ofpolitical wars, persecution, discrimination, and intolerance is the emergence of refugees.

Today there are 19 million refugees around the world and another 24 million men, women

and children are displaced in their own lands. One in every 130 people on earth has beenforced to face the problem of displacement (FAR Issue 3 December 1999)

6. In the political life, there is a growing tendency to move from democracy toauthoritarianism. The emergence of the modern elite with its control of State mechanisms

has developed varying forms of domination and oppression


26/26

Documents

Globalisation and Totalization of Power S. Lourdunathan