[Appadurai, Chakrabarty, Ganguly, and Prashad respond to the attacks in Mumbai at The Immanent Frame] 10:21 AM
[Sri Aurobindo argued that pacifism can do nothing to root out the ... December 07, 2008 When elites eschew defense: The case of India By Ed Kaitz. Profound thinkers like Aurobindo Ghose, India's greatest...]
[For many decades the highest quality of democracy is assessed to have been in Scandinavian countries. But all have an established evangelical Lutheran church. So we cannot say, as theoreticians of democracy, that an established church per se is dissonant with the democratic state.
But it would have been totally inappropriate for India to select the Scandinavian model. India has great religious heterogeneity and by Scandinavian standards, a terrific intensity of religious practice. So the unique Indian model was devised — one that recognises all religions, respects all religions, even financially supports all religions. The French idea of secularism based on state hostility to religion and the US notion based on its separation from the state was also not attractive in the Indian context.
India has also overturned the secularists’ prediction and hope ? that the more urban and educated the people are, the less involved in religion they would be, and therefore more secular. In India, data proves the exact opposite has happened — the greater the size of the city you live in, the more educated you are, the more you practice religion.
I am horrified by events in Orissa and in Gujarat earlier. But as a comparativist, I must look at the larger frame.
The conventional wisdom is that the greater the intensity of religious practice, the more dangerous it is for democracy. But our data tells us that for all of India’s four major religions — Hinduism, Islam, Christianity and Sikhism — the reverse is true. The greater the intensity of religious practice, the greater the support for democracy. My judgment is that this would not have happened if India had not chosen its inventive form of secularism. Sometimes the state doesn’t live up to it. But in comparative terms, it is a success story. -- Alfred C. Stepan, Indian Express > Op-Ed > ‘In India, the greater the intensity of religious practice, the greater the support for democracy’ Vandita Mishra > Oct 24, 2008: You have written about the need to recast notions of secularism, to see the relationship between the democratic state and religion as one of “twin tolerations”. Where do you place Indian secularism? 10:44 AM] 11:45 AM
[Can religion be compatible with liberal democracy? World Religions and Democracy brings together insights from renowned scholars and world leaders in a provocative and timely discussion of religion’s role in the success or failure of democracy. An essay by Alfred Stepan outlines the concept of “twin tolerations” and differentiation, and creates a template that can be applied to all of the religion-democracy relationships observed and analyzed throughout the volume. “Twin tolerations” means that there is a clear distinction and a mutual respect between political authorities and religious leaders and bodies. When true differentiation is accomplished, the religious sector enjoys freedom of activity and the ability to peacefully influence its members but does not wield direct political power. A country’s ability to implement the principle of differentiation directly affects the successful development of democracy.]
It was somewhat agonizing to sit through the speeches made during the Annual Conference of Sri Aurobindo Society (Hindi Zone) in Noida on 6 & 7 December 2008 as recurring allusions (and expressing affiliation) to Hinduism was nauseating. No wonder, RSS chief K S Sudarshan’s message was prominently read out at the outset.
Although the religion vs. spirituality issue was deliberated on the expected literal lines, it seemed that as if there is no difference between the official Neheruvian version and what is taught by The Mother and Sri Aurobindo. Strangely, there was no willingness to debate the matter and voluntary interventions were prevented.
Savitri Era Religion refuses to perpetuate the confusing obsession for plurality which holds that all religions are good. Savitri Erans must organize themselves to present a unified vision before the youth of this country through the Savitri Era Party. [TNM]
