The Transparent Stream of Human Modernity: Decoded the Indic Way

Guest Post by Abhivardhan

Modernity and tradition, like individuality and collectivity, are considered dichotomous to each other. This often, from cultures to societies has been disproven in many beautiful and ugly ways. Even when it comes to establishing the relationship between the centrality of rights and the cultural-ethical basis that transforms itself, either through maintaining the status quo, or degrading it or maybe evolving it – it seems quite clear that exclusivist approaches in society, economics, technology and even law, fails mostly. If exclusivist approaches are adopted, they might be adopted for specific policy causes, which can be found in the way a “splinternet” might emerge or how refugees of a particular identity are prevented from migration into certain countries. Again, civilizations are like puzzles of infinite order: they never solve eternally. The jigsaw within them just grows, becomes complex or simple and then shapes accordingly, which thus, has to be observed carefully with the courage to respect nuances. 

This short article is therefore a meticulous epistemological attempt to address the benefit of linking tradition and modernity in the Indic sphere or the Indo-European-Indo-Pacific scheme of things. It has much to do with steps beyond realizing the need to achieve decoloniality, and to seek where proper and newer options can come up for any civilizational identity and state. The reason the Indo-Pacific is covered is because it is definitely an India-centric concept, and is evolving (so suggestions have been drafted in such a manner). In addition, the focus on the Indo-European civilization and relationship (beyond Indo-EU strategic ties and more focus on cultural bonds) has been given in order to explain how linking of tradition and modernity benefits civilizations and their objectives. This is not a geopolitics-related or politics-related article, but is more inclined towards cultural lines to address how both of these schemes of things should be strategically put into use by the Indian people as well as the proponents and sponsors of the “Indic cause” as is popularly called upon.

Indo-Pacific as the Strategic Ground 

The Indo-Pacific is a new concept, and has origins in the Japanese (led by former Japanese PM Shinzo Abe’s concept of FOIP) diplomatic vowels. The reason this concept is practically a strategic ground, is because (1) as stated, it is an emerging idea, and can be shaped by any country or civilization state (persona ficta) as they wish to. Soft law and hard law are shaped in such a manner that private and state actors shape the fictional aspects of their own civilization states (irrespective of the hard reality of whether the civilizational basis has any historical identity or not). That is why, the Soviet Union and the European Union are civilization states. The former demolished due to the fact that it could not survive in the realpolitik the way its founders designed, while the latter asserts their collective notion of sovereignty, which again, is because of the Treaty of the European Union and the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union & not that Europe is some proper sovereign state. The US is an ideological state, fully sovereign, and claims to have some civilizational identity, whether it is discriminatory, colonial or ethnocentric for any other entity which might not agree with the same realm of policy approach towards sovereignty. For India, the simple problem we have is that from the intellectual and cultural frame of vision, after Chanakya, Vivekananda, Tagore and many other visionaries, there is virtually no prominent pupil or school of thought that shapes the civilizational identity itself. The focus of culture-centric rejuvenation of the Indic cultures starts and ends with the legal disputes related to temples. A Journalist has excellently summarized this problem, which people must read and think about. The quantitative part of achieving something might seem quite representative. However, representation alone isn’t the means to an end. 

From technology to environment to jurisprudence, there is literally an epistemic blackout or shortage of Indic thinkers and schools of thought, because (1) the understanding and inclusion of the Indic cultures into the epistemic reference frames is colonial and (2) even if there is an original undertaking, that is yet unknown and not backed with economic and individual-collective motivation. Let us be honest by taking this issue from a behavioral economics perspective. Civilizations which are economically weak (and let us not generalize every economic issue to GDP growth and poverty) in a scrumptiously linked way, then cultures degrade or dissolve faster than before, like in no time. Second, the undertaking if is merely short-term – and not institutional (not just through the state actors) from the very society, which kind of osmosed the cultural heritage they had received, somehow anyways, then there can be no legitimate expectation from the social strata to transform anything the X or Y way they are interested in. Since there is a real and unfortunate blackout, a clear focus on capitalizing on thought leadership and design thinking approaches is anyways a necessity. That – again, in line with reason no. (2), has to happen. Most of those cases are not state-led, nor led by political entities. In fact, the concept of H-nationalism, which has inspiration from Italian nationalism, is yet under mere logistic elongation by those political stakeholders who defend the same, like the other form of nationalism in India, which was led by the Indian National Congress. The only difference between the former and the latter is that the former is more pragmatic – since achieving them is a thirst, which needs to be immediately quenched. Still, the stakeholders perhaps are themselves unclear about the approach they are intending to lead, and so are rightfully accused of Americanizing the framework infamously. 

Cultural rejuvenation is impossible if the related policy issues are not addressed. For example, in architecture, you need both state-supported support for research, and at the same time, you have an excruciating challenge to envision and bring up the traditional heritage of Indic architecture into the limelight and peninsula of modernity. In education, we need a lot of research publications in various Indian regional languages, since that will strengthen research education among people (as we know native languages tend to assist people more to educate and transform than foreign languages, so quickly). Indian jurisprudence needs to come out of comparative constitutional law and has to particularize its Grundnorm. It cannot exist with weak state/ghost state-related ideas like constitutional morality, the basic structure, judicial supremacy and others just because the state is weak and incapable to maintain law and order or even take up the responsibility. The notion of power and strategy in India when it comes to defense and security has to be crystal-clear, civilizational (of course not expansionist, because practically we don’t need it) and alternative-centric. The West is a clear maestro of providing alternatives in the world of globalization and global governance. You don’t need a world government to develop global governance. If any international issue, irrespective of the undisputed fact that sovereignty should never be compromised, involves actors and conditions of transnational nature, it can exacerbate itself to be global. Of course, there should be meaningful interpretations here as well to see where sovereignty is identified and respected. 

Hence, the Indo-Pacific is a good region of thought and chain of experimentation plus choices through which India and the Indian stakeholders must envision in every field of study, research and practice to come up with alternative solutions, which are both linear and cyclic, and so short-term and long-term. These safeguards however should be maintained:

• Don’t copy exclusivity and create binaries/artificial dichotomies
• Focus on social and other forms of mobility
• Contributing to the well-being of an international community is not always “unreasonable altruism”. In both soft and hard power contexts, contributing through non-state/state actors yields benefits, and India should extensively focus on it
• Develop clear repulsion towards academic, policy, legal and epistemological mediocrity. Yet at the same time, develop an approach where you can deal with complex adaptive systems, to shun and avoid mediocrities. In addition, it is not that tough as is usually professed. Mediocrity arises due to many reasons, but in this example, treat mediocrity as the disease, and not the mediocre. Even a mediocre person can become exceptional at its own best. Who knows?
• Embrace individuality and collectivity. See how historically, philosophically and even practically, the linkages can exist. India’s ancestors knew how to do it. Let us revisit that. Smart civilizations embrace that.

Indo-European as a Cultural Abode

India has recently adopted a quite sensible diplomatic approach to develop more cooperation with Europe and the EU. This in many ways is a great opportunity for everyone, since it is clear that in law, economics, environment and technology, Europe will be a sensible partner. Another reason why Europe must be focused is that the concept of Eurasia is civilizational, and real. The Indo-European civilization is, colloquially, a deeper relationship between languages, cultures, traditions and the value systems that are shared commonly. Of course, colonialism has severely damaged those shared values, traditions and systems cum substances of linkage. Yet, culture can be put into use in a much productive way in terms of changing those trajectories. Europe needs diversity and India needs representation and rejuvenation. These needs are not some philosophical assertions made, because culture, economics and environment – in their own fruitful combinations, naturalize the Pagan systems of worship and social & individual life. From Eastern Europe to West Asia to ASEAN, the Indian culture has amazing relationships that have grown for decades and centuries. I can start from Urdu to Hindi and even from the cultural references of Hindu deities similarly found in Japan and Korea. I can even happily mention the similar meanings of the cycles of seasons and the significance of one of them Spring, reflected in Shum, the very folk-cyberpunk performance by the Ukrainian band, Go_A in Eurovision 2021. I can also talk about the historic origins of milk, chess, algebra, yoga, Ludo, Snakes and Ladders, the understanding of water cycle in the Mahapuranas, Ikigai as a Japanese concept, the beauty of Natyashastra, the concept of democracy in the Mahajanapada times and what not. This list does not end because India’s relationship with the West has this angle, which maybe the West has literally ignored for long due to colonial attitudes and designs. Yet, China – for example – as a civilization state, is not able to establish those relationships. Technology feudality and Belt and Road Initiative-based debt-trap diplomacy are merely tools of top-down force. Even in the context of power, Europe and India, somehow, organically – and aesthetically are near to mutually cohabiting fairer and mature power-competence-accountability relationships, which even Russia and the US have for a long time, not been able to achieve. Europe is achieving that because of its own stakeholders indirectly, while India even if it intends to achieve – is bound by coloniality and ethnocentrism that it is the exact confused state as if some ghost-weak state remains in. This lack of strategic aptitude and commitment because of the most short-term and weak reason of secularizing everything damages the state and the relevant stakeholders. Also, the naturalistic and deep-rooted cultural relevance of Indic cultures, which premise the divinity of nature (means earth) – is ignored and limited under the colonial understanding of politics and identities, which primarily is seen in every sphere of the Indosphere. 

Yes, the state should stop being in a denial mode. However, the private actors must also envision beyond rhetoric and estimating soft bigotry of low expectations too much. India is known for experimenting and innovating – even in the ancient times. The fact that India’s ancestors were capable of understanding such deep nuances of nature, shows how creative and intelligible approaches in policy making can become if the linking of tradition and modernity is achieved. That can be maybe, hypothetically reflected in the way a decentralized, pseudonymous blockchain-based economic framework might be created, which supports cultural rejuvenation from the lowest altars of MSMEs up to temples and other important cultural institutions. Secularization and ideological liberalism are short-term, impractical, and can be only used like the trial package of some Antivirus software. They are good tools to understand societies. However, I am confident that in the 21^st century, civilizations like India would and should be mature to seek where its shape and space is earned, and how that linkage of tradition and modernity is pioneered. I am in position to suggest in every domain, however, at least on the aspects of policy directionality, this should be the key goal. Those who pioneer the fact that modernity and tradition are interlinked and intermingled towards each other, as civilizations scientifically exist, and focus on that largely, are the champions of those civilizational suzerains that need to exist, since they are not just special, they are the imprints of human evolution. That maybe, philosophically, should be the goal of humanity. Be it for India too.

Abhivardhan is the Chairperson & Managing Trustee of the Indian Society of Artificial Intelligence and Law & the President of Global Law Assembly. He is an avid podcaster and runs the Internationalism Global Podcasts from India.He is available on LinkedIn. 

---

Solutions will not be found while Indigenous people are treated as victims for whom someone else must find solutions.

Malcolm Fraser