lt} Chap1er29

42. Khairmode, C.B. 'Dr. Ambedkar Vol-1 1: Bombay: Buddha Jana Panchaya, Samathi 1
p.259. . '
959
43. Jadhav,
44. Narendra. Dr. Ambedkarl Economic Thought and Philo,ophy, op. cit., P.46.
Ibid., p.46.
45. Ibid., p.51 .
46. Ambedlcar, B.R. Writings and Speeches, Vol. 1, op. dt. , p.165.
47. Jadhav, Narendra. op. cit., pp.51-52.
4B. 0mvedt Gail, http//www.ambedkar.org
49. Jadhav,
SO. Keer, Dhananjay.
Narendra.D,
51 . Ibid., pp.57-58.
op.Ambedkar: Life and Mission. Bombay: Popular l'ralcashan, 1962, p.303.
cit., pp.61-62.
1,.oh 1
·a: Democracy
_
52. Quest.
Thorat,2004),
Sukhdeo.
p.8. The Hindu Social System and Human Righ• of Dali•. (New Delhi: Critical
53. Ibid.
54. Ambedkar, B.R. Writings and Speeches, Vol. 3, op. cit., p.95.
55. Jadhav, Narendra. op. cit., p.64. -Sanjay Kumar
56. op.
Ambedkar, B.R. 'India and the Pre-requisites of Communism' Writing, and Speeches Vol-3,
cit., p.462. m Manohar Lohia believed that self-realization, se~-developmem
57. Ibid., p.446.
a complete development of personality was llOSsible in an atm0-
58. Ibid., p.450. . .. or ere of freedom. Therefore, liberty was the necessary condition
59. Jamanadas, K. :tvnbedkar and Communism: Reply to Manc,st Look at Rel,g,on Buddhist sp~ent of human awareness or self-realization. Furthermore, the
Approach'. .
for the attat of ,freedom was possible only in_an atmosphere of equality.
60.. Ambedkar,
61 Ibid. B. R. 'States and Minodties' Writing, and Speeches, Vol. 1, op. Cit., pp.396-397. ;oyrnent . was inseparable from equahty. Llberty and equality were
62. Ibid. ~erefore, hbehrtysame coin. The existence of one was impossible without
(\\'O sides of t ty in which men were given an equal opportunity of se~-
63. Ibid., p.37. I II dh Th Bh p l 0
64 . Das, Bhagwan. (Compiled by) Thus Spoke Ambedkar Vo . I, Ja un er: e eem atn a the ther. A sc;'~~so a society where there was liberty. Moreover, the fulftl-
Publications. 1963, p.67.
}iZation wa_ as possible only under the state. The present study is an
6S. Keer, Dhananjay. op. cit., p.151 .
'":nt oftto cnttca1~y draw together
equ~hty . Lohia's ideas regarding freedom, equality
,nernP
(11

and state.

he Concept of Freedom
T . 'd 'd freedom .tn10 two pans: the first pan was .connected with
H non-
J,ohia d1vt e rs and the second one was connected with property. e gave
Property matte . dividuals in non-property matters. He asserted:
f edom tom
full re Of rivacy and freedom must be recogrtized ' in all those spheres,
Rights
h. harePnot d'irectly connected with property.
w tc . . e us a comprehensive list of non-property
However, Lohia did no~gt~ concerned the private life of individuals.
matters pr ,tho~ meadtt:~at~h~:e were certain spheres of life that hdagrd:psbe
::::m
In
. ly mention
sta
t organtZauons an
the control of the tell g~::ri:n~I in the sphere of house-
·

dividuals should be free fro_mgea 1:velihood, etc. Every individual shoul1.ohia·d

inment, mama • . litical party.
::;:l•/17i::
I
in choosinJ- ~::::~~~~0%:[s:cide Therefore, he
ported every m iv tters
strong y sup h m
was a thoroug . d·vidualist
t in non-property ma .
•'1:1 Chap1cr 30
l.ohia: Demoer.icy ClI.111111
ere of freedom . From this, it naturally followed .
l.ohia further argued 1ha1'Riglns of privacy in 1he sphere of h ,n,iosrh of the absence of external restraint; lhe bestthat for h,m, liberty
ing or en1ertainmen1, for instance. may have indirect effects on 1h ou*keep. th
~isted that he be left alone to do what he dee ed ing for lhe indi-
of property. Whal is 1hen 10 I~ d~ne' One must be ready to :k~tution 1;du~I :;:~ non-property ~atters. . m best, at least in the
should for instnnct· not he permcss,ble to encroach on privacy O nsks. It #et<:• 1 rniore Loh1a believed m lhe maxim that 1h . d' .
I
th:11 sentiments rather 1han the instirution of property would be en tie Sround fUrl~~ 10 th~ society for his action in so far as the e •n IVtdual was not
The second part of Lohias frec-clom was basically connect.,;;':~'"Sed'.2 resP".°51 peerson but himself. TI1is clearly involved tl,Y rnncemed lhe inter-
crty. tohia did not allow full freedom to individuals in those sph 1lh Prop. no . e View of SOci
& of or aggregate of self-seeking individuals and f h ety as a
were directly connected witl1 property, lx.>cause, ·.. . no direct eres Which __,iectiOll I f ' O I e SOcial good
"" . more than the sum tota o their separate satisf ti as
betw<.'t'n property and _privacy seems logicaHy_ to be necessary·.¼:'ection ,,oth•OS sidered an individual as an end in !he sphere ~;f~~· Therefore,
democrats and cap1tahsts insist that recogml!On of the rights of Wever.
must neces.s:1rily permit property and its rewards in some fom, Pnvacy
11
tp1ua con
_-,oertl' matters.
l"dte
';;::er
UI . . 1 I · ty be •c.uom of non-
socte . d" ~me a means to an end. Moreover
second part o r om, an m ,v, ual was regarded as a means and
1hot tl1ey believe in the right of privacy in !he field of property ; means
00 toh1 111 'et)' as an end.
dis.1J,trced \\ith this view. He also rejected the conununist 0.. ,n · a
• .. ers1lip 0 f die S(lC1 LOhia freedom was for !he development of individual"ty d
property because it ·has led to encro;1chmen1 on privacy on all ki for ' . ' , an indi-
nds . was both a personal and social good. Individual devel
relaiionships from child-bearing to making of speeches·.• Tiierefore of ,;dua111)' Th f d f th . . . opment must
communist and e1pitalist systems have failed to give us a correct ' ve a social value. e. ree om o . e md1v1dual good in itself should also
111 eans 10 the happiness of society as a whole.
;meed concept of indi\'iUu;1l freedom which involves individual g~ al. 3
social good as well . Lohia tried to reconcile individual good and SOCial and be ;hia w:mted to give backward people or races !he benefit of liberty.
by allowin!( full fn."<-clom to individuals in non-property matters and bygrx:;_ was a staunch supporter of liberty to backward people and wanted 10
mittin~ stale or R0Vemment control over the sphere of property. How pc tte referential opportUnity to them for a certain period.
I10w far d.d I d . I . d' .
1 1e suco..--e m t us 1recuon? It needs proper evaluation and
ever give ~hia considered individual initiative from the viewpoint of soeial
thorough discus.(;ion. gress, and hence saw the need for proper checks upon the individual
TI1e line of distinc1ion lx twecn property and non-property maners is ~om. He reacted against the over-centralization of government admin-
c.x.tn-mdy hard 10 dr.1w. Moreover, he gave the right of committing suicide is(rltion. He believed that an organization should be much more flexible,
10 every man and woman and even to children, which cannot be defended re relieved by local autonomy and less oppressive to !he individual.
lx'C'JUse an indi\·idual's lifl' is rdated to his or her relatives. Sudden loss ~!hough he seemed to be a socialist when he opposed capitalism and
of his or her life may relieve him or her of all worries forever but at the snowed his concern for economic equality to the individual, he did not like
s.1me time, it cre:ues 1m10y social problems. A person's dependents become lhe idea of excessive state control. As he was primarily an individualist, he
a social liability. 11,erefore, :11 no cost. cm the right to commit suicide be rel:lined the idea of individual initiative and freedom.
granted to any one, if he or she is ;1 social animal. To tohia, individuals were rational beings, and hence they had to
Lohia supponed full freedom in the sphere of non-property mattees. work for themselves. They had to be granted proper opportunities for the
Sur h unlimited fr\.."t'<lom cannot Ix- justified bet...--ause it would creJte chJos development of their life. Freedom was freedom nOI for animal wishes and
:ind anarchy in the society. In the absence of a comprehensive lis1 of non• desires, but for social good. The freedom of !he individual was confined to
prupeny m~ttters and an authority. every individual would interpret and the realization of self-consciousness. Man attained moral freedom when he
cl:1im his fret.-dom or privacy with regard to non•property maners, in dif- remained av.':lre of others while considering his own interests. Thus, Lohia
ft~rc.nt ways. whid1 would finally result incomplete lawlessness. Therefore, discussed individual liberty in the context of olher individuals in lhe society.
some restraints of tht> state or organizations or groups. in the sphere of For him, individual good was necessarily a social good. There " "JS no dif-
non•pruperty matters al so, should be allowed in the imerests of individual ference between a moral action and a social action. He argued tl1at a morJI
:md society both. It ,v:1s not nceessary that all individuals would always act action was always an action based on reason. Our action was reasonable
wiSe.ly. honestly and selflessly. Al the same time, state control in spheres when it was performed .with reference to olher individuals.
which were din.--ctly conni.xted with property should be relaxed as the
soci:il gcxxl may remain a dream in absence of individual interest in the
growtl1 of national t'('Onomy.
Limitations on Freedom
Lohia ·s argument rested upon a negative conception of liberty. He w;1s
Lohia asserted that we could not escape state planning or sociali>ation.
0
cominn.--d that human personality could develop ::md expand only in an Even in extreme capitalist societies, some types of sickness ins~rJnr~ ~
unemployment relief have become obligatory. ·state inveStrnent m region.,
·(H Chapter 30
Lohia: Demoeracy CDII
10 remain so. Lohia was against this po
·ned t1telll pined: pu 1ar meaning of the
and industries which do not anract private capital , is becoming fair! 11'5 "" uali!Y• He o
eral. Planning to do good may therefore be expected to increase my gen.
1ef111 e<l . for equality in the modem world has become th d .
in lands of poverty and scarce capital. With that will increase encr~a ohre so ""'e desire.1 r and not equa I. The ef',on to be equal both . eth esire for
on privacy'.5 However, he was against· state p Iannmg
• the basis of which
c ment '" silll' a . m e collec-
ttei~S . dividual spheres will be corrupted if it simply._ __
in compulsion of any planning and involved freedom of individual Th 1ay and 1n 6 •=omes the
fore, top priority had to be given to the preservation of individual freedere-
pve be alike.
oe5ifC tO
and initiative. 0m
.d that real freedom was not possible either in ca . .
llillsat . . b d . pttaismor
1
It is difficult to make a demarcation between individual good and SOCi IP . ]Jecause capita1ism re inequalities on the one ha d
un1srn, . . f • d ' .d I f n and
good. What is the due proponion between the liberty of each individua: ceroJ1l . killed the spin! o m 1v1 ua reedom on the other. Th 1
and the liberty of all? How can one man enjoy freedom without subtractina -n1untSlll . . . I t th t . . fd ere ore,
c011...(he syste-c "~ are 1mm1ca o. e rue spmt o emocracy which s1gm • 'fies
from the freedom of another, and how much should each surrender th g
10 I,O(h ·!)ertY and equality. Loh1a wanted to establish a democratic-SOCialist
other in order to create the 'greatest common measure' for the totality? e
1 I,O(h h which would constantly move on the _axis of liberty and equality;
one form or another, this is the riddle of the Sphinx which runs through a~
r,rr:;iefY thUS implied equality. Liberty and equality a'.e neither in conflict nor
political theory. And a solution has not yet evolved.
uttertY te but are different facets of the same ideal. As Lohia opined·
Moreover, it is impossible to define with precision the spheres of per. n separa ' .
sonal liberty and collective control, and it has been implied that the demar- eVC d and bread are inseparable. At least in Asia, and neither com-
cation of those spheres may and does vary from age to age. Furthermore, it ree olll . l h .
f . m nor capitalism can supp y t ese two articles to us ... I would
is unquestionable that in the delicate balance between individual good and inuntS that Asia can be saved from communism only if it is saved
suggest .
social good or moral personality and civic responsibility, there is a constant 1 7
danger that either the one or the other may be exaggerated. from cap •,talism and feuda ism.
moval of inequality from human society was one of the seven rev-
Resistance Against the State :nie refO
Lohia. He pointed out that · ... the poorer the country, the greater
oluaons ality within it'. 8 He further observed that ' ... conscience dies in
Lohia perrnined individuals the right of resistance against authority. He per- is lhe m~ the gulf is so wide that the eye prefers to avert its gaze'.9 Lohia
mined it wherever and whenever an individual's freedom was in danger; or nds
1a w his thought that capitalist society bred inequality which proved
excessive state interference created an obstacle in the path of the develop-
was: : ; to freedom . Sinlilarly, he disliked the communistic system which
ment of individual personality on the one hand and social progress on the
anu
other. as based on ·ear ,, '
whereas the capitalist system worked under the tempta-
. ' th .
w fi 'S ch systems which depend on temptation and fear ,or err
TI1is right of resistance against authority creates many problems which · nofpro t. u ' · hasth
uo . d growth must inevitably breed inequality. Inequality us
remain unsolved. First, it is difficult to draw a line between legitimate and dy' nam1sm an ' . . h . .
ded as a part of human nature. Cap11ahsm, w en 11 is not
illegitimate state interfe rence in the individual freedom. Second, the ques- come to b e regar . . I' to
tion arises as to who is competent enough to draw this line, the individual, . glories in what it calls the humanity of mequa tty'.
dooi:g, was an exponent of socialism. He believed in the system of
society, state or government . Titird, the right of resistance of every individual
may create chaos and anarchy in the society; because someone may misuse socialis:. He criticized capitalism and communism ~n the ground~~~
the power. Fourth, in the absence of a clear demarcation between legitimate th systems failed to prepare the soil for the genmnat1on of the f .
1
and illegitimate state interference every individual may claim himself to be li~rty and equality evenly. Therefore, Lohia preferred the syst~~:e:~~~
right and declare society to be wrong. As a result, the individual and society ism which believed in the equal growth and development o
will both be in constant struggle for the right claim. Therefore, his right of equality. According to him:
resistance is vague. . words then they are equality and
If socialism is to be defined m twod fi . . has been given earlier at
prosperity. 1 do not know if this e muon_ . . far 11
any time. If so, I could call it the best defimuon given so .
The Concept of Equality
. . , 12 He observed that all
For Lohia, 'Equality and prospenty are twmsc.enmries of dirt and filth
TI1e popular mea ning of the term 'equality' is that all men are equal and all ming prosperous.
be
parts of the world all were co ft to make this. country
should be entitled to identical treatment and income. Those who subscribe . Th s only one way Ie
had accumulated in India. ere wa I' 'Here equality is the means
to this meaning of equality assen that all men are born equal and nature prosperous and that was the way of equa ,ty.
·W Chapter 30 Lohia: Democracy IDllla
stract and Concrete
and prosperity the e nd'.13 He further said that whether th
tal ·s1
·..r.Ab
, o r soc,a· 11·st, m
· d ustna .
• 11zation was not possible Witho et system"--
. .•., cap;. ~hw c1arne ntal question anses--what IS equalny> To Loh
a· n d d 1' seased country like India capital could be fanned u capital • In a PDor E4 tlJe run n exact definition of equality. Lohia did not , ,a,hn was
f . , . . ' onythrouh ·""'
,1"' A,Jt 10 give a of equality w hi ch meant equality or opponu
,o11ow I e aca-
way o equality. Cap,tahsm cannot perfonn its own functl·o 1h g the •· finiuon
.
. , nny He con-
.ism cannot create capital. Prosperity can come only throu hnsere · ea PIia •1 · . de (IU·ned equality m many ,arms and meanings He
Loh1a • asserted that liberty and equality were not ingconn· equality·· 14 #
u-;..,.,d an
d exa
s of abstract and concrete The real meaning of
interpreted
g/P:~ • 1errn equa 111y
sepa rate but dfffe rent facets of the same ideal. However, if b/~:~r even ~I)' ill understood, unless we know the relauonsh,p between abstract
mean unrestrained freedom for every individual 10 satisfy his a rty We er_.not t,e
concrete. The re are two forms of equality-abstract and concrete As
wealth a nd powe r, it will result in degeneration of the social ord~pebtne for jll<I_ oiJServed:
centrat:Jo · n o f wea It h an d power ·m the hands of the few to the disadvar Ycon.
o f the ma ny. Great inequalities of wealth make the anainment of free~tage bstraC1 concept and generalization equality can only mean an
,-s an a an emotio n, and perhaps also a wish that all arrange-
impossible for the less fortunate. Those who are wealthy and control ~m 3unosphe~tical , social, or economic, shall be equal as between one
gove rnme nt use the ir autho rity in perpetuating the inequalities. This ham~ men~d• ·and another. 17
pers freedom as me n are deprived of the o pportunities they need for that ;ndiVI ua
ad equate self-expression a nd self-developme nt which goes With freedom that the ge neral and abstract concept of equality has no mean-
Equal ity, w hich aims to put an e nd to the glaring contrasts in wealth and It means ·gnifies an atmosphere, an emotion, a wish, or a dream. Lohia
powe r, is really the true basis o f liberty. Freedom means security and secu. ;,,g. It merely s,eneral and abstract equality must be expressed in panicular
riry dema nds the disappearance of those inequalities that place the weak at s,id that thiS gtenns·, and only then equality would have meaning to human
oncrete
the me rcy o f the strong. and c A5 he assertS:
According to Lohia, injustice and inequality were prevalent through- IJelllgs· '. ·n1 is that equa1ity, unless 11. 1s. expressed m . concreIe
o ut the wo rld but the Afro-Asian states were more afflicted than the Euro- essent:Ja1 P01 . . 1s
11te . ,.
nns ,s an atm osphere ' an emotion, a wish, or a dream.
Ame rican States. He wa nted to establish such a socialist society where justice
a nd equality would beco me the way of life. He has mentioned repeatedly te ' ding to Loh'ta, the ideal appeared in the human. mind in two shapes.
in his w ritings, the seve n types of injustices and inequalities against which Accor btractand the other concrete . An abstract ideal . had a concreteI
revolutio ns were ta king place throughout the world. These revolutions are ane wastha sgh it remame . d an ideal still · It happened at 11mes. that a genera
as fo llows : shape al ou a concrete shape, and then it became mearungless. .
idea failed to.get . d th I the abstract idea related to general desrres.
I. For equality between ma n and woman He furth_er explam;ali : nd the ending of exploitation by man of _man
5
2. Aga inst political. economic a nd spiritual inequality based on skin colour 0emocracy, 1u t1ce, ei
I tyTh y had powerfully motivated human minds.
3. Against inequality o f backward and high groups or castes based on long were such general i ea s. deeternal although the content or these abstrac·
trad itio n, a nd for giving special opportunities to the backward 'Ibey were purely abstract an . t time 'It is only when the ideal appears
4. Aga inst fo reig n e nslavement a nd for freedom and democratic rule all n·ons has been changing from umefl o h. uman aclion•.I9 It is obvious that
over the world h that ,1 can m uence 'd I .
in a concrete s ape . nl . . expressed in concrete fonn. The , ea m
5. For econo mic eq uality and planned production and against the exis- an ideal has no meaning u ess It: d .IS concrete fonn motivates ac11on.
te nce o f an anachme nt for private capital . its abstract form motivates thoug t an ' Th one cannot survive without
I.ohia said that both were interdependent. e
6. Against unjust e ncroachments on private life and for democratic methods
7. Aga inst weapons and for Satyagraha is Loh. O pined·
the other. As ,a · th ht and ilS concrete
f motivates oug d if
The re moval o f 1hese seven types of inequalities and injustices cannot Thus tlie ideal in abstract orm 1· e without the other an ' . ,1
. The one cannot ,v I reahty
be possible unless people know the !rue concept of equality. Lohta said form motivates action. . k h eneral ideal to the curren d
the ac hieveme nt of equality was difficult not o nly because of the ~urrent does it stinks. In order to Im t ~;e abstract must first be translate t
. nce o f I·nequal,·ty but also because o f ce rtain errors of tho ught. it must have a concrete image. dard for measuring the curren
existe h J Equal- into be concrete in order to be stan
. c . ·ta nce is no t equality in food , which is difficul t and unw o esome.
,ry, ,o r m, . 1 f . fixed ration This 1. 20
rea tty. r has no mearung . unless it is
An equal po rtio n of food means the equa ity o pnson, a . f
examp le sho uld have no meaning beyond showing that the concept o Similarly a general and abstract equ:~;lity. AS Lohia observed:
. ' be
equali ty must be well understood to ar ruu . f . ' 16 translated in;o a particular and concrete e
{ti Chapter 30
l.ohia: Demoeraey C?:111
, rl material equaliry must mean the
Abstract equaliry, for instance, must continually be b h . 1113
5in 113ti~OS as well as the inward approxima:':'3 rd approXirnation
. ·Iup
Lions . Wtt. I1 concrete equalil)•
. and other generalizat'roug t Ullo rela ·
th
treated similarly.21 ' ions must be 1 ualit)' must mean outward kinship as much .:' m the nation.
Sf>jfitu~ eq for the purpose of concretization of equal· n means mward
E_qualiry is a generalized concept, universally valid. It must a . t([llllnt!11ltY·11 alit)', inward equality and outward equa/\;::enaI equality,
defintte content l:>elore being practised. 'Socialism has tried to P C'(juire a .,;ritual eq ach other. Lohta was of the folloWing vie,? Id always go
. ,,. raUel toe · .
into_tt. by " "Jy o f mcome
. Ut alike·
ceilings, restricted land holdings, and the meaning
Lohia, the general concept of equaliry " "JS an atmosphere a w· h ·22 To P' ·ntegrated concept of these four meanings of
ly an t . .th. .
. .
equanimity k·
. nsI_ate ct mm
un Ie~ It. \\':IS tr-J · concrete equalil)• of one type'or is,a
another dream
w· '
on terial equahty w1 m the nauon and among not· . • m-
sh1·pJ.,.rnar,1e a supreme atm
. of hfe
. and its purpose." IOOS IS Worthy
defintte meaning, like equality before the law, the equality of fOOd sub -~th tO .,....0
a serva nt posses.sing a house, children's allowance, unemployment ~1 Y,
ance, old age pension and the like. TI1ese are all concrete ideas of eq~1 ~w- 11ieoretically, the four meanings of equality are sound and desirable but
. may be raised that the extension of spiritual and inwa d
0esuon . d . . . r equa1.
thc· welfare state in practice. People talking of a welfare state in Ind· any, 1Q whole mankin IS unpractical, because it is beyond the
do not know wh at ii means.23 ia Just to the I I. h capac-
ilJ' mmon peop e to cu ttvate t emselves the feeling of inward and
ll1e abstrnc1 and the concrete should I><, so understood in their rel _ · , of co 'th th h I f . 'tu I · ·
,cy_ . al equaliry wt e e po ~pm a trauimg or refinement of culture.
lionship that connection w ith rea lity is not lost, nor are concrete requlf;_ sp1ntu 1,ohia rejected the quesuon and supported his theory,
ments Slated in such low tenns that the objective ever remains a distant ~owever,
peak. 'f\.faximum and immediate attainability relevant to the current situation 1 uch a tranquillity has ever in the past been possible 10 those
in relationshi p to the ideal is the touchstone. To rea lize the idea[ of eca- .. . orh sve prepared themselves for it. Why should it not be possible 1
nornic equalily, state nafr rt'quires such a concn:te concept as is based who a
all or almost all of ma
nkin"''"
u:
0
00
m:tximum and immediate attainability of the cherished end'. 24 Lohia fun.her
opined that lht' cuncn~te must be rele,-::mt to the time and the area . It must .ng in his mind the structure of the Indian society, Lohia advocated
try tn :ipproxi matt.• the gener..il to 1.hc maximum possible extent but always K::i:al opportuniry in place of equal opportunity for women, Adivasis,
in such a fas hion that it appeared (Xlssihle and reasonable. pief~ sbudras and backward classes who constitute 90% of the popula-
TilU:--, equality should be sn1died in its borh forms-abstract and con- Haniansf
. no 1n• d'ta. Indeed ' these communities in India are socially, economically,
110
crete. The ahstr.1ct equality and the concrete equality are neither identical . Uy and politically backward. Even nine out of the 10% of the
nur independent but lx:>t.h are interrelated and inter-dependent . TI1erefore, educauedonaD
11 .. (h'igh caste) are also backward
VI)" .
in all respects.
.
Therefore,
hoth shuuld const~mth· imcr.1ct and interpl ay. It is their very nature makes so-cardin to Lohia, 99% population of India n";'1ed preferential treatment.
the conct.·p1of e<1ualit)~more meaningful. vivid , living, prJctical and realistic. acco . g referential op(Xlrtuniry demanded, ... the_ secunng of 60% of
As Lohia opint'd: And this_ p sts in Government, political parties, business and the anned
leadersh1pb pol o by convention to the backward castes and group namely
Mankind has now reached 1he stage when i1.s mind must naturnlly rec- ser y aw rH an1a
vices, shudras, .. ns ' Adiv~sis and the lower easies among religious
ognize as separate the two identities of the abstract and the concre1e women,
.. •29
bu1 mos1 <:onstan1l y en~1ct 1heir interaction and interplay. 25 minonues ... Lohia wanted to remove economic disparity from the_sociery.

Equality: Inward and Outward, Material and Spiritual Equ:i~w:;~r,the soluti;n f:et:sf::~~:-:rt;!~ndi1/:;d~:~s::.J
1
or alikeness. It meant a r was neither possible nor desirable.
l.uhi~1 has ust'd the tenn equality in four other meanings. Equality is found Lohia was of the view that total equa tty I Some measure
10 he inward and outw;ird as wdl as spiritual and material. Lohia argued
National wealth could be diSlri~ute~_eqry~~!~n::;;!:!i~-n of wealth and
1hat tht' feel ing of inward equa lity and outward t'qualiry could be developed of inequality is bound to eXtst. qua I
by !'> piritual tr:.1 ining or refinement of cuhure. Through cons~ant trai.ning, income. As Lohia opined:
m:an 111:1y acqui['(" :1 st.ate in whid 1 he will l:x>th know and see lus expene~ce . . . d ed endemic to all people. The 101al
of virtorv and dele:11or pleasure and pain. He will undoub1edly feel the JOY Some measure of inequahty is I~ e h evenly divided among its
or the s~rrow ~ts it is difficuh 10 SL't.' how a person who is aware can make national produce of a country is now ereed An1ong the white peo-
himself insen~itin..· 10 ourw::1rd happenings. ·such a man will not practice population nor is property equally elsownpproximation
. of wealth and
deceit neither lie nor murder and his soul shall increasingly free itself of fear pie, however, there is a trend towar a
or pride or urge 10 exploi1 '.l6 income.30
7 ·W Chapter 30

of Equality
Lohia: Demoeracy er-..
Lohia felt that the state had to provide the minimum
lized life for all its members. He advocated 'basic minimu ~;ndard of civi-
~ethodS d mental question arises as to how equ .
1
·1Jas1c
. mm1mum,
. . , h e meant particularly an econom,·c m·m· ,or all men · BY t11e fun : spheres. Lohia recommended three met~~uld l:e real-
' ' . 'ifl differe~ examples are the three time honoured mod cfo mpulsion,
for a decent living of the individual. Through economictn1mum
. . necessary ii'' ,on an . d es obeychange' J6
h I ' _,<1)9.511 vegetarianism must un er no circumstances ·
e a so .interpreted as economic equality, he wanted to as mm1mum wh·tc h
security . to t h e m
. d'1v1dual
. sure econo=·
necessary for his self-realization. Loh' '"1c
f'r·,_iJ1'5tllnce, 0 nal example. Non-smoking and non-drinking gcao be 0nd .lhe
• • proporuonal
mamtam . equality in the fulfilment of the primary 1a Wanted
d t ~e of pers
fO th methods o f examp1e and persuasion. The mod n f put into
M.. • ..,cfice bY ears to be universal in application whereas persuaeO . persohnal
m1mum •ood, c 1othes, housing, medicine and education must be
nee s ~~ 0
. e. p•• I appe ' , s1on as a
lo all me n of the society. Lohia was very impressed with the c· . pro:'ided a,mP e . \y smaller scope. A government practices compulsion throu h
of European countries. . He wanted to restore this civic minimum iv1c mnumu
in .'11 .,,(llparauvde n opposition practices compulsion through civil-disobed· g
,.
According to him: 1nd1a. the \a\1/, an arnple must be concerned with
.
precept and practice in
1ence.
,
al exa b. ones
pers<>~ e. The example of one _man cannot _nng equality. Man must make
From the _point of view of basic essentials of life, namely, minimum 0
wo Uf~dividually and collecuvely for bn_ngmg equ_ahty m society. Society
food , mm,mum clothes, and m a sense minimum housing, Europeans cffort5rnpcsed of individuals. Any change m the society depends upon the
have thus been provided a basis of equality Within the nation. 31 CO of people.
character
. For Lohia , equality and freedom were inseparable. Freedom is a dream
m the absence of equaht,•. TI1erefore, equaht,• 1s the pre-condition of free- MeasureS for the Achievement of Equality
dom. Lohm preferred maxi mum attainable equaHt,• between man and man. mmended an 11-point programme or measure which would be
And this brings equality and freedom both. As he saw ii: hia recouuu 1· . I d' . ty
IP . bringing equa 1ty m n 1an soc1e :
helpful tn
We seek to establish social ownership that will strive for a maximum . · education of uniform standard type and the expenditure on
anainable equality between man and man , and will secure bread schoo s and the salaries of the teacher should be unifonn. All privileged
pnrnaryl
through freedom and freedom through bread. 32
ls for primary education should be closed down.
2 schoo • holdings should be exempted from taxes and land rev-
Uneconorruc dI d
· enue. It 1s • qm·te possible that as a. result land taxes an an revenue
Equality: Legal, Political and Economic . be e laced by agricultural mcome tax.
r p _ ear plan should be drawn up to provide irrigation water
Like an academician, Lohia also examined different kinds of equality. First, 3 might
A five- to seven Y d d 'th free t
legal equality has been established throughout the world. 'Legal equality · · . 1 1 land. This water should be provi e e1 er or a
is equality before the law. In a law court , the judge is not expected to rec- to all a~:u%~ost or credit that every peasant may use it for his _land.
ognize difference in social status between one individual and another, and 4 such rru as a med'tum, s h ouId be removed from all sectors of publicthlife.
E glish
applies a single law irrespective of their social situation. The law of the theft, . n , , h Id be allowed to spend more than n,ooo per mon .
for instance: operates an all men alike. The rich man may in certain situa- 5. No pershon
6. There s ousldo~e one class for all passengers in the railways for the
tions obta in the benefit of the doubt by employing skilled counsel, although
the judge may be highly scrupulous'.33 coming two decades. II the capacity of the automobile industry
7. For the corning 20 years, a f f buses tractors or taXis and the
Second, 'Once legal equality was established, the phase of political should be utilized for the manu acture o '
equalit,• came . Political equality means the equality of the adult vote. Until ·vate use must stop.
manufacture o f cars, or pn h Id ot exceed more than 2(1¾,
recently the vote was tied up with property and educational qualifications, 5
and the woman's vote is comparatively recent acquisition'. 34 8. Price fluctuation of any one cwpl ~u tri:I commodity should not be
and the selling price of an essent1a m us
TI1ird, economic equalit,• is basically related to political equality. Politi-
more than one and half times its cost. be . to the backward com-
c.al equality carries no meaning in the absence of economic equality. He 'ty should given
views that domestic institutions and political equality will prove ridiculous 9. 60% preferential opportum .. women and the backward castes
munities that is, the Adivas1s, han1ans, b . ly this principle of pref-
in absence of economic equality. 'Their parliamentary system gets poisoned
with privilege and votes are too dumb or listen to make effective use of their among the ' Hindus and no n-Hindus · O suchv1ousvocations
' as requ ire spe-
be
1
vote•.3S It is clear from this argument that economic equality is a precondi- erential opportunity does not appJe :r legislative functions cannot
tio n for political equalit,•. cial skill, e.g., surgery, but executi
counted as such.
lohia: Demoeracy m.....,
·W Chapter 30 values generalized beyond mea . ._,....

10. Ownership of more 1han IWo houses should be nationalized.

to tO ,;0!Tle . . .
. f certain concrete pnnctples that
nmg, but a gu·d
I e to action
~ "e ~ S•~doal. Decentralization of political andsought to actualize the
11. F.ffcc1ivc distribution of land and control over its price.'37 •• ·c I e .,. h' economic po
n ·on of democracy. ,o tm, ' ... The gre . wer is the
~ ·c round_ the present age ts . a~s
1
I11
de~entralization and its tngl~ quality of
The Concept of Four-Pillar State 1!'51~eyh erms of defined pohttcal power belo . meaning must be
in t . ngtng to smau .
id !JOI racy and economic arrangements and technolo units of
According 10 Lohia, human awareness was possible in an atmo~ fil_.r1 demOCk·ng man greater understanding of co gy that would
iJiPdle wor • 1
n ro over productive
1
lihcny. Liberty requires equali1y and the fulfillmen1 of equali1y is poss~b~
~,t ' 41 ' 1· · I d
under lhe state. Lohia agreed with Arislotle that the state was inevitabt •;oi:ess • l'eVed that po 1t1ca emocracy remained a Wish .
for lhe attainment of Rood life. However, his treatmen1 of the state was noe p 1,0hia ~d1emocracy. He further argued that democracy m the absence
academic bu1 rea lislic and it was based on ac1uai functi ons which lhe stat 1 o(TIJC . d I, .. . wasnotmerelya
J eeon f palitical nghts an peop e s parttapauon in gov--- Pa .
performed in sociely. TI1c state worked for attaining social justice whic~ "~,e,110. nothe first WorldW:ar, democracy had come to mean.... mo,.,nt. d rticu-
meant, according to him, lhe welfa re of aHthe individuals based on equal- •·~rll' sill. ced economic 1us~ce,
. . equaI opportunity, . . rean more
industrial democracy.
ily and freedom.
¢31an ocracv and sociahsm a~e mterdepend~nt: However, different theo-
Now, lhe fundamental ques1ion arises: on wha1 principle should the
penl . i·sm and different pictures of a SOCtahst society have bee
slate he based' 1.ohia was a bitter critic of principles of capitalism and com- of soc1a 1 . . . n pre-
munism, but he liked the political aims of capitalism-individual freedom nes ed time to time by soc1a11st thinkers and workers. But all SOCialists
[rom · · I f · 1 ·
clemocrncy, human rights, constitutional method and world peace; and th~ sent certa1·n common pnnc1p . . es o soc1a 1Sm, . at least in theory· These
1ccept . ciples of soaahsm are the followmg: Socialization and mod-
economic aims of Marxism or Communism-socialization of all the means - nion pnn f od . .
of production, aixilition of private property and cessation of the oppression cou•··
·zauon o
. · f the means o pr bol' uctton, maximum equality, cessation of the
. f .
and exploitation of man by man. He also preferred the Gandhian ideas of ertu101'tation of man by man, a 111011 o pnvate property, elimination of
decemrn lized economy and polit ica l system, and non-violent method. How- eicr . m individual freedom, democratic set-up, resistance by peaceful
ever Luhia interpreted these fundamental concepts in a different way and ,:apitahs : tional methods and world peace.
gaw them a new colour. As Lohi:l opined, and conStttu socialism was basically meant to bring about changes and
J.ohian ts in the economic and political fields of the Indian environ-
I believe that it is silly to he a Gandhian or Marxist and it is equally
iJTlprover;:t
111en1. Lo a
defined socialism in terms of 'equality' and 'prosperity'. To quote
so to be an anti-Gandhian or anti-Marxist. There are priceless trea-
sures to learn from Gandhi as from Marx, but the learning can only him, .
be clone when the frnme of reference does not derive from an age or f ialism is to be defined in iwo words then they are: equality and
a person.311 l SOC . 1 do not know if this definition has been given earlier at
Similarly, communism basically differs from socialism. The former y time. so, I would call it the best definition given so far. The
prospenty.If
believes in a stateless society, whereas the latter retains state. Lohia beauti- an ·n of socialism is ingrained in these two words: concrete mea~;
mea_m g f u·me and place and total meaning in terms of ideals.
full y jXlinted out their difference, 'Communism is equal to socialism minus ing m terms o ' . . .
clemocr.Ky, plus centmli,.ation, plus civil war, plus Russia '.39 th b .s of this definition of socialism, Lohia claimed his socialism
On e as1 ean socialism which had failed to acquire a face of
Democracy and Socialism as distinct _from Europ italist democracy .and Russian communism. His
its own, d1Stmct from cap d d !'berated from the traditional stains of
Lohia considered democracy and socialism as the two sides of the same .. ew regenerate an 1
soc1ahsm was n , . Id be capable of becoming, even among
coin . There could be no socialism without democracy. He evolved a theory socialism. Therefore, it alone wou . d victorious inslrument of the
of limited personality of individual , party, government and state. To quote the least organized groups, a massive an
him , 'Democr.icy in ail circumstances shall be the sheet-anchor of the ideas liberation of man and masses. . .
and progrnnuners of socialism. Democracy means the inevitable answer- The aims of Lohian socialism are the followrng. .
ability of administrntion to elected assembly. It also means recognition r d ·ustice tempered by equality
I 'Maximum attainable equa It)' an I hil ·d;"g the double impasse
and respect of the limited personality of individual, party, government and · . . h. h w e avo1 "'
state-four categories, which together constitute the agencies of political 2. A decent standard of hvmg w ic .' .
. 1 · I matenal1Sm, wi
·u tend to establish complete
0
action·.• He furtJ1er considered democracy as not a manner of speech in of capitalistic and dia ecttca . d moral needs of man
harmony beiween the matenal an
l2iJ Chaptcr30
Lohia: Dcmoeracy m.....,__
no.sscss limited powers. The hands of .._.....
3. An industrial and agricultuml technique and its judicio . usl ,,-- h Id h . common ......, I
~1e fll d He firmly e t c view that only d ,~vp e mtLSl
· IlJt'Cle
su · d lo man and conducive lo his entire ph)'sical, us organ,Zalio n,
intellec .., ;,,. I1enc . d ecentr.ilir.aro f
moml developmem lua1 and ,..-. rengt d individual free o m and strengthened the base I n o pow.
r,,.gun
e ~ f11n1 eeconeIud ed ,
• !ly of democ111cy·
4. 111~ decentm liz:ition of political and econo mic power so as mak •.
e· 1 fina . h. I . . I
10 , b e ll
e:1sdy av:ulable lo the commo n man, and reslriction of bureaucrn tpll n . tatorial or luerarc ,ca pnnap e can never lll lif .
11ie die eople for they have sunk very low and p
encoumgc_>ment of coopcr:uion in all domains panicularly in the~ y tlie
of prcx:luclion, dislribution and consumption of national Produce'. ,~nia,n ···. SS of the p
,11,1. I and are y
e; very numerous.46
c into the
', are unerly disor-
g:1111ie<
According lo w hia , his concepl of democmcy and socialism Would
/lt'rn11na1(' and nounsh under the Four-P,llar state which had proved
lrihuiion in 1he field of political theory. As Lohia observed , a con. I Structure
fe(lerarther c n·ticized the federal
. .
structure of lhe Indian admin,s· .
ff . ra 1ve sys-
Democmcy ca n bring wann1h lo the blood of the common man onl fu 11
iohi" ·d not rejecl the pnnc1p1e o ederahsm, but he wanted lo broaden
when constilutio nal theo ry sl:1"s pr:1Clising the Slate of four limbs, th~ ~ ,. tJe d'. . of federalism. The present federal system sets up l\•~t·
,.,. .5d,cuon , d . . •~ ,er
village, th e dislriu. the province, and the centre. Organically covered die jun ,e centre and the ,e eratmg uruts. Lohia disliked the two-pillar
by the nes h and blood of eq ualities ... , lhis constitutional skeleton of S(llles-tl of the state. He argued that local self-governments did nm derive
the fo ur-pillar stale c m bring l0 democrJcy joyous fulfilment .«
S(Jllclure from the stale consutut,on, but powers had been conferred
Lohia expressed dissatisfaction with lhc_> lhen political adminislralive ,heir pO~~rsi·aes 1 and rural governments by lhe Acts of lhe legislature and
systems of India . I-It' :1rgued tha1 1he poli1ica l and administrative institutions 00 mu n,c,paThese powers are very 1·1m1le · d· f
m nature. There ore, they neither
Weft' 110 1 in lune with the 1.radi1ional life of India. And those institutions n:1rlianienl.
,,.. legis\auve . powe rs nor even execmive powers in the real sense of the
were hascd on foreign clements which were detrimental to the growth of a h:l"e Lohia opined:
s1rong and hea hh y lnd i;1. Ahhough bo rrowing has been a common means tetfll5· AS
a confermem from lop and are nm a pan of the organic
of social den.•lopment. no borrowed institrnion can thrive unless it is prop.
e rl y acclim:11 ized and in1..,grJ1ed. ... (hey are! d They are cenainly no legislative powers and not even
law of any an . 47
·ve in any full way.
l.uhia w:is ni li<od of the hier:1rchica l principle of the Indian administra-
execuu It in such constitutional framework, it is nm possible for
lion, which leaned on 1!1e concemr.1tion of power. As he observed, 'through
AS a reSu ·tizen to take an intelligent or effective pan in the
various fonns of fX>lirical organizaLion which mankind has hitherto evolved, an ordinary c, . ' . . . 48
th e hiernrchic:1I principle has ahnosr always come on top. Whether in a 10ta! affairs1 of h,s country.
monarchy. a clictaiorship or a de mocmcy, power tends lo get co ncentrated "' " nme nt is supposed 10 be the nursery of democracy. ll
in ~1 few cent res :ind in a few persons and the hiernrch}' of less and lesser r.ocal self-gover f democracy If we want lo make the democrJlic
, ndation swne o . f
power is then buih up'.'15 is the ,ou . 1 d·a we have 10 make the local sel -govemmenis
da · n srrongmni, Id ·
The hiei:1rd1ical principle applied 10 the Indian adminislrnlio n is against faun uo . . r on They must enjoy legis ative an execuuve
. arts of the consutu I . h h nm<>n>
rh t· spirit of dt..•muc-rJcy and socialism . Under a democratic state, people orgamc p stitulion of the land itself, because l ey are_1_e P- ~·-, .
should gel mort' power ,md 1he officers should he allowed lo e njoy less powers by the con I ere common people actively part,c1pa1e ,n the
po wer. ll is a fa c1 that only a negligible pan of 1he educated middle class inStirutions of ll1e coumry, w d that sovereignty should be exercised at all
· · l ·1tion Lo h,a conten e I be empow-
,md t'Vt'n amo ng them o nl r those d irecll y engaged in political activity, are adm101s r, _- . . Th main administrative centres mus
invol veJ in the workin~ of ou r democmcy. Th erefore, tl1e hierarchical base levels of admm,stralton. e d be free to exercise those powers. There-
of the administ:r.nion n;usr be converted in1 0 :1 broad based one. The mere ered with sovereign powers an r r on of political power. To him,
fore Lohia stood for the decenlra ,za , . . be
fa c1 th:11 t've ry ad ult Indian has ll1e rig ht 10 vole does not make the adminis-
lr.llio n hroad-based. The millions uf individual and desperate vOlers are like ' r .cal power the pnnc,ple may
As to the decentralization of po Ill . ~m divisible powers to
as one of the maxim . f the
laid down straig h t away
a heap of particles of s~md that can never be a foundation for any structure.
. •ilh the integrity and uml)' 0
·111e pan.ides must be united to form bricks or encased within concrete lhe village or lhe city cons1s1en1 "
moulds 10 able to act as foundation stones. 49
1.o hia sloocl fo r llie d ivision of sovereignty al many levels of adminis- country. ·iiagers so 1hat they
. ,e more powers to v1 ' ·u . may
lrJtio n. He re jcc1ed the concepts of omnipotent and o mnico mpetent slate. Lohia's intemio n was to £" ·f r of powers 10 v1 agers
could realize the value of Swar:1j. The tr:rns e
am Chapter 30
Lohia: Dem.,,._
~••cy ni.....
letely separate existence; rather th . . ,-....
become the stepping stone for the reali,.ation of d
India . Lohi:t finnly said,
.
emoerauc SOciaiism in -,<• ,hre:I
'°
, a c<Jl11Pd of common bond. As lohia obseey 10ed one•=·•- . h
rved 11, """'" wn a
,._,,d u•. must indeed run a common bond st ' rough these Vari
If It is acknowledgro that the individual residing in his villa e Wh
t'~ d life mmunities into a state·. 13 rong enough to hand';:
"1:..,ouscorned that ' ... the four-pillar stare • •
can practice democracy of the first grade will be given ab g da ere he 1""''. .,,-a1 Wll . . 14 IS no11 0
d 'd h. . un n1 P<>w
ers so as lo ec, e IS own desuny that principle is accomplished.SO - J.Oh If-sufficient village . He remarked tha be Confused With th
, r)lese ed be' ttheco e
·-"' '" ·11age seem to ,antastic in the prese ncept or the self.
,,.-_ ·eiit Vt Ii nt con1ex1 Th
;Ji" uJtiple problems. uman wants are multiplyin da · e village is
The Four-Pillar State: The Village, the District,
the Province and the Centre
!11 ered nature, ume and space. It is absurd tIO
11'5 conqu hen no part of the world can depend 1.mk of a Village self-
Yby day. Science

;Jlicie0t;;'erefore, Lohia concluded that, on ns own resources in

Now the question arises as 10 how lo solve the problems of th . . age-
;id~inistration? Lohia said that decentralization of powers and activ: Ioci~a~ dli.l ncept of self-sufficiency had better to be . .
r)le co . . e11m1na ect Th .
patm~ of people in administration could be a reality, unless some n:e~·Ct· ... t stay in close relauonsh1p with numerous th 1. · e vi·1
were introduced. He found the solution for all the problems in chan i •es 1age mus Id at large.55 o er villages and
aisO the wor
present two-tier administration into the Four-Pillar state. Therefore ~:g the
a new theory to the realm of administration. He discussed his conc~pt 1•~e th same time, the concept of divisible political po
Four-Pillar state which comprised the village the district the prov,· 0 t e /<I eted so elastically that it became capable of con:~:a~ould have
the centre wi1h sovereign powers and would ' be, according , to him, nee
creaand to be tfC3 with the integnty of the country. sttetching
,,istent 11· ·11
by the constitution itself. All these four limbs of the state would organi~~ co,w according to Lo ,a, v, ages and districts would ha I
ve a c ose rela-
function interdependently, The sovereign powers must not reside alone t '{1tus, .
hip with one another. They would be mterdependem and have numer-
the ~-entre and fcder:1ting units but also with districts and villages Whic~ (iOOSI,onds, economic as ':ell as mlnual. And all of them would constitute a
\:'ere the primary JX>litical institutions where a group of men and women olJS .on whose temtonal mtegnty, unity and peace were be .
sif!gle na0 , 10 mam-
hved and work~-d for the interest of the whole community. To quote Lohia, . ed perfectly.
The four-pillar state would be based ~n the principle of division or
Sovereign power must not reside alone in centre and federating units,
The village, the dIStnct, the province and the centte would all
II must be broken up and diffused over the smallest region where a p0wersdleir functions and powers from the constitution of the land. Lohia
group of rnen and women live. 111e next great advance in constitution denve ted certain functions of the four-pillar state. He himself admitted
m~1king will be when a country frames its constitution on the basis enurnera k . I
th functions may not la e pracuca shape but they were adequate
of the four-pillar state, the village, the district, the province and the ihal eseof direction and policy. He observed,
Ct'ntrc. be ing four pillars of equal majesty and dignity. 51 painters
1 be pennined to indicate certain illustrations of the Four-Pillar
Lohia ex plained that the four-pillar state was obviously not a mere maywhich may or may not tum out 10 be valid in practice but which
CXl.--.:-Utive arrJngemc:nl. However, all the fou r limbs of the state would have state
are adequate pointers o fd·trect,on
. and po1·icy. 56
sovereign 1:x>wers with their own jurisdiction of legislation and execution.
Even the villa~e and the district would have power of making legislation. did not present a comprehensive list or functions or the four-pillar
They wou ld also exec:ute the laws made by the province and the centre. He . d'cated certain functions which should be performed by the
state but m ' fth
The prcsc.:.· 111 IOC'J ) sdf-guvemments fX>Ssess on ly executive and not legisla- different limbs of the state. According 10 him, the armed forces o estate
tive IX>wns. As Lohil opined, The four-pillar state in both a legislative and may be contra lied by the centre, the armed police by the province
Whil but
· d all
an executive arrangemen!'. 52 ther lice may be brought under district and village controI. e m us-
I-le further sa id that the fou r-pillar state provided a structure and a way. o_ Jik the railways or iron and steel may be controlled by the centre, the
11lis state was a way of life and to all spheres of human activity, for example, mes e ·1 textile industry of the future may be left lo district and village
production , planning, education, ownership, administration and the like. It small urn t While rice fixing may be a central subject,

s!::::
ownership and mamgelmen . d the ~tio of c:,pital and labour in it may
would work on the principle of community life. All its limbs would choose ctu of agncu ture an
thl'ir own way of Jill'. 'll1l.' commonalty of the state was 10 be so organized 1:'to :e choice of the district and th: village. Seu•::
and sovereign JX)wer so diffused that each little community in it lived the , le those ,or coopera ·
through their servants, ,or examp ' . I of irrigation. seeds, revenue
way of life it (·hose. H owever, various ways of community life would not and agricultural development, a substanua part
Lohia: Demoeracy ni......,
-ij1 Chapter 30 ver the powers of these local bod· -._.....
di~· J-lo"'eco~trol and they have become se:es have been tightened by
collecting and the like may be transferred to the viUage and the district .. . 1n •.-,uve h be d ants or state
f iniS"" 5entatives ave en emoralized Th governments
need not add that a substantial pan of state revenues should stay with ti 1 ;JIOge repre · ey act more or less lik~
village and d istrict'. 57 1e {JII 1"3nts• d . . I'
.,.1se . found ina equa:1es m par 1amentary democra
ln the Socialist Party's Election Manifesto of 1962, Lohia further pointed 13
O fPh s well and neither was able to Prevent cy and Proletarian
out certain functions of the four-pillar state.
,Jill'tors
Jiip a
1.0hia fi
nnly expressed the view that both
concentratio r
th °
n power
I . One-fourth of all governmental and plan expenditure should be through 0l)'f"°nY•
nd
nny could be removed, only if the co e concentration of
village, district and city panchayats. th
an•"' a d t established in India. Lohia concluded~cept of e four-pillar
2. Police should be subordinate to village, city and district panchayats or I'° ·"'0 ul ·
any o f their agencies. st"te . pawer to small communities of men wh d
giving "bl h , . ere emocracy or
3. The post of the collector should be abolished and all his functions 'BY rade is poss, e , t e ,our-pillar state ensu ft
tJie j\rst g democracy to the common man' 62 res e ective and
distributed among various bodies in the district. As far as possible, the ifttelligent . . .
principles of e lection should be applied in administration, instead of . h s not mentioned the size and population for th .
nominations. [.0h1a a . e creation of a
and a distnct government. He has merely pointed out the villa e
4. Agriculture, industry and other property, which is nationalized, should ,,;11age . the provmce and the centre, as the four limbs of th , ilgl '
as far as possible, be owned and administered by village, city, and diStnct, e ,our-p ar
district panchayats. i1te In addition, he has nm worked out the system of election for the four
5. Economic decentralization, corresponding to political and administra- ~!;
lilt-
of the scate. He has failed to work out a detailed picture of the four-
tive decentralization should be brought about through maximum utili- ·uar 5cate. d · l" d
ution of small machines. 58 p• sunilarly, he expecte c~mmumty ~e un er the four-pillar state. All the
li!nbs of the state exerctSed sovereign powers. Under such a situation
Lohia said that the four-pillar state must possess the power of planning. four unity life, and integrity and ~nity of the country seem to be doubtful.
Planning must not be the subject of centre alone. He preferred social own- ())tnJ!l I disobedience of the four hmbs of the state may lead the country to
ership to mixed economy. Mutua .
Lohia's four-pillar state rose above the issue of regionalism. He argued brink of rum. . . .
the must be a comprehensive hst of functions which should distrib-
that the feeling of provincial narrowness or regionalism may be subdued if
'Jli~erent functions to the village, the district, the province and the
the four-pillar state instead of the two-tier state would be established, and th
ute eunder the four-pillar state. Lohia has simply mentioned functions like
'power, including the right to choose its language of primary instruction and
cen:i police, armed forces, railway, iron and .steel and textile industries.
commerce, were given to the village community'.59 The moment the village
and tJ1e district start to exercise their sovereign powers, many local problems
aon d' 'bution of functions under the four limbs of the state was not clear
HIS tStncrete. To quote him, 'No precise list of federal or state or district or
will be automatically solved. The voices of provincial narrowness will come nd
down.
a con concurrent subjectS can yet be drawn up'.63 He funher said that
village_ or e and time and perhaps the next Constituent Assembly of India
However, Lohia considered the functioning of the four-pillar state in the 'Expenenc 6'I kin f th ' Ula
present conditions a Herculean task. Illiteracy, fears, superstitions, castes will make precise allocation_s'- Indeed the war g o e ,our-p . r state
and selfishness may create many problems on the path of the smooth func- in the absence of a precise hst of functions will create many confustons and
tioning of the four-pillar state. Therefore, in the present situation, this con- nuisances. be th
cept may appear fantastic to many in India. However Lohia observed, 'And There is no guarantee that the four-pillar state m:'Y provem e mes-
yet 10 give him power seems the only way to deliver the people from iner- siah in the present situation. If the two-tier system fails m India, th~ four-uer
tia as well as an administration that is both top heavy and corrupt'. 60 He stem may also meet the same fate. Because, as Lord Acton said, ~wer
expressed full faith in tJ1e proper functioning of the four-pillar state which d absolute power corrupts absolutely, so the sovereign village
corrupts an • · •tself bad Its success
wou ld prove a panacea for all ills in the course of time. He father said, ·.. d district
may misuse powers. The system tS not m I .
the only way 10 purify controls is to leave their administration to the village an . th character of man. Therefore, apart from pro-
or failure depends upon . e h Id also make effons to bring
town and district panchayats and to take them out of the hands of legislators viding a good administrative system, we s ou
and government servants'.61
about changes in human nature. . ·ties on the models of the
Under the Panchayati Raj Scheme, the village panchayats, the Panchayat Lohia wanted to estabhsh village commu:i, that has no collective
Samitis and tJ1e Zila Parishads have been established as rural governments ancient period. How the atomized village of t y
,ij.j Chapter 30 lohia:~
Notes and Referen cy Cf.11111
~ill of its own . and is complete ly 31 the mercy of selfish and .
interest can be integrated into a real self-governing co . explo11a1ive . Ram Manohar. Marx. Gandhi and Socialism H
·table fo d · fI d mmunuy and mad Lon••· )()(XX ' Yde!abad: N
s un . at,o n o n ian polity is the most important questi f . ea t. 1963, P· Preface, . ava H,fld Pu~«bons.
reconstruCTJOn . °
on national
2- lbid
Lo hia rejected the Weste rn system of democracy as it does not •iv
31t,,d
scope to the people to participate in the management of the· , ff . g e full
4 J~d )()(XIX.
based upon an atomized society, the stale being made u ,fr a . a.1rs and is S 1b1d.. P·
f. d " "d I p o an •norga . ,d.• p.234. . .
sum o in 1v1 ua s . According to him, this was both against the s .
1 nic
of man and the scientific organization of society. In its place ;"''" t•ture 6. lb [ford Harris Jr: Loh1a and Amenca Meet, Madras· Sneh 1
Wo • . ·
1 11am Manohar Loh1a, op. c_,1., p.XXXVII.
· aa1a Rama Reddy 1
. %1. p81.
for a model of democracy which was based on an integrated c~ ie p eadect 8 t,,d p.)()()(VII.
· d II · I f ncept1on of 9
society an a OWL'< th e ullest possible scope 10 the individual 10 ..
pale in the management of his affairs, without the intem1ediation of p~-~ic,-
o·:,.i.: p2Z2
1 • h' Rarn Manohar. .1n the art1c · 1e 'Equa Iity and Prosperity' M ki
p:1r1ics. po 1t1ca1 11. LO toe,ember1966,p.J. · an nd. NewDeJh1,Vol. X,
No. ,
, Today, th e problem is to put man in touch with man so that they ma 12- J,id., p.3.
live .togethe r m meaningful, understandable and controllable relationshi y tJ. Ibid., p.4.
Loh,a was very much impressed with the community life of the . ps. 14 /bid.. p.4. . 531
· Lohia, Ram Manohar, op. cit. p. .
Indian villages and the Greek city-states. Small size, small populatioannc,ent 15
Ii, If ff, . 'cor- 16: Ibid. pp.232-233
porate c , se -su · 1c1ency and no o pposition between individual and state
11. ibid., p.227.
were 1he common fearurcs of the ancient villages and the Greek city-states' 18. Jbid., p.227.
lie wan1ed 10 revive and orga nize his political systems and foundation j l9. Ibid., p.21 2.
democratic institutions on the basis o f community life. Whil e territorial co~- 10. Ibid., p.212.
tiguiry of a number of families is the starting point and the most important 11. Ibid., p.218.
condition, does nol in itself make a community. The present-day Indian 11. Ibid.. p.217.
villages are no l proper commu nities. They were so at one time, but now 23. lbid.,p229-
~ue me re territorial settlements. life in 1hem being individualistic, rather than 14. Ibid., p.231.
15. Ibid., p.232.
co mmunal. mineral rather than o rganic.
26. Ibid., p.2 41 ·
He argued that caste, class. race, religion and politics divided men 17. Ibid., p.241 .
into different. often conOicting groups. However, the community brought 28. ibid.. p.240.
them together, united them and harmonized their interests. In the com- Lohia. Ram Manohar. The Caste System, (Hyderabad: Nava Hind Prakashan}. p.114
29
muniry. .IRricuhure, industry, ca pital , labour, skill and intelligence are not : Lohia, Ram Manohar. op, cit., p.XXXVII.
30
at loggerheads with one another but are synthesized in the service of the Jl . Ibid., p.228.
communil y. 32_Wofford, Harris Jr: op. cit. p.151 .
Lohia. Ram Manohar. op. c,t .. p.228.
lohia criticized the method of planning in India. Our planning does not 31
34. ibid., p.228.
begi n with the village and 1he region and go upwards, but originates from 35. Ibid., pp.XXXVIJ-XXXVIII.
the centre , going downwards. This does not help to develop the communi- 36. Ibid., p.237. . , · be 1966 45
ties , because they are not given an opportunity to plan for themselves as 37. Lohia, Ram Manohar. 'Equality and Prosperity , op. crt. Vol. X. No.7. Decem r , pp. - .
commu nities and then to coordinate their plans from level to level. 38. Lohia, Ram Manohar. op. cit, P·1• .
39. Lohia. Ram Manohar. Foreign Policy, Ahgarh: Dwadash Shrew Private Ltd, 1963. pA9
The four-pillar siate stood for community life. Lohia wanted to curtail
40. Lohia, Ram Manohar. p.483.
the unlirni1 ed powers of 1.he sta te. He wants ro give real power in the hands
41. Ibid., p.479. . . , · V I X No 7 December 1966. pJ.
of common people rather than party leaders and administrators. The aim of 42. l ohia, Ram Manohar. 'E~uahty and Prosperity, ~P-c,t., H~~d Public~tions, 19S6. pp.91-92.
his struggle was to decentralize the economic and political powers both, so 43. Lohia, Ram Manohar. Will To Power. Hyderabad. Nava
thal the founda1ion of democracy c-Jn become strong and people can get an 44. Lohia, Ram Manohar. op. cit. p.286. W Id M. d C~cuna· Maitrayani. 1951. p.69.
opporiunity 10 iaste the frui1 of swaraj. 45. Lohia, Ram Manohar. Fragments of a or m. . .
46. Ibid., p.73.
Ibid., p.70.