Spiritual Gurus,
Motivational Speakers, Management Experts etc. all do emphasize importance of “an
individual being present in PRESENT”. But contrary to it, when it comes about
society and nations, spiritual gurus (?), political leaders etc. exhorts masses
to take pride in, preserve, follow or take revenge of wrong done in past etc and also to sacrifice present for the sake
of future. Does what is good for individual is not applicable at the level of
Society and /or Nation? If it is also applicable for Society and Nation then
any talk about taking shelter under past (continuing it) or dreaming about
future at the cost of PRESENT should be suicidal for Society and Nation. What
about future of “New” PRESENT democratic set up when the followers believe in
past? Further, can a society/ nation aspire
to be economically FUTURE oriented, progressive, strong etc when its social,
psychological fabric is emphasizing or
immersed in past. What can be the synergetic interplay of Past, Present and
Future?
Why it is important to
be present in PRESENT? When someone has too much past and not enough of present,
mind is preoccupied by Guilt, Regret, Resentment, Grievances, Sadness,
Bitterness and all forms of non forgiveness. Similarly when someone has too
much future and not enough present he feels Unease, Anxiety, Tension, Stress
and Worry. All the above things are “the dysfunction” of MIND whose existence itself depends on past
and future and these states of mind hamper or reduce the productivity as well
as joy and happiness of human being. Observe the many ways in which unease, discontent
and tension arises within us through unnecessary judgment, resistance to what
IS, and denial of NOW. On the other hand Present does not have mind just BLISS.
Glimpse of love and joy are brief moments of deep peace which are possible
whenever a gap occurs in the stream of thought created by mind. The mind is
essentially a survival machine and its functions are attack and defense against
other minds, gathering, storing and analyzing information. Further, as humans
have become increasingly identified with their mind, most relationships (individual,
society or nation wise) are not rooted in PRESENT and so turn in to a source of
pain and become dominated by problems and conflict.
The mental unease/
unrest/ conflict etc caused by past or future imagination in the society/
country is only an outward reflection of an inner psychic state of mind. So, we
should be more concerned in what goes on inside us, than what happens outside.
If we get inside right, the outside will fall into place. Now, why dwelling in
past and future is bad for society or nation? First there are good chances that
perception about what we have actually experienced and seen or heard in our own
lifetime changes over time and then we feel that what we perceived earlier was
wrong. If it happens about our own experience, then (secondly) what is
guarantee that long past and future which we have not experienced and will not
experience but have emotions (described in previous paragraph) about it and
acting (for and against something, someone or some community) based on what is
reaching us through books, lectures, history books and so on has reached/
reaching us correctly or will come out as projected/ predicted.
What we call “History” (Historical
imagination) is the narration about past and our experience is that over a
period narration of history changes. The king who fought British was called
patriotic, but is now labeled communal and the leader whom we read as communal
is now described as patriotic. Leftist historian present that whatever
meaningful is in India have come from west and right leaning historian connect
everything to a glorious ancient past. Such contradictory version abound in
every aspect, be it role of Mughals (enriched/destroyed culture), 1857 (mutiny/
independence war), independence struggle (violent /non violent) and so on. We
do not know who is right and who is wrong; ultimately what reaches us is
narration of Victorious party. Once we have narration/ belief, it is not too
hard to find evidence to substantiate it. But ultimately it is a version out of
many. Our experience of near future (today’s present but twenty- thirty years
back future, technological imagination) also, (which was either projected as
dream world or dooms day) has not come true. To give an example, take the case
of 2020 vision of India dreamed by APJ Kalam in 1998 or danger of population
explosion (now called demographic dividend), both have not materialized. We
have also seen how different persons have made political career for self or
have become business tycoon just by showing illusionary images of future for
common people or nation. That is why sometimes we have to doubt the motive of
history writer or motivator for bright future. In language of science, it can
be said with certainty that what reaches us through a prism is a partial colored
light, and full white light never reaches us.
Further
based on a version of past, creating a victim identity (for self or society or
nation) or (wrong) belief that other people and what they did to us are the
reason for what we are now, our present condition, for our emotional pain or
our inability to be our true self is not
correct. Reason is (perception may be wrong and), it causes only bitterness
without any inner urge to improve ourselves. Then, who suffers from this victim
identity, denial of present and/or cutting off relationship with the
individual/ community cause of pain in us? It is fallacy that the people isolating other do not suffer. Both
suffer as love is natural hate is deliberate.
Social isolation of/ by otherwise healthy,
well-functioning individuals /community eventually results in psychological and
physical disintegration of both side. It
also harms physical health due to increased wear and tear of body (caused by systems
response to stress). Consequently society and nation also suffer. Another example of mutual suffering – nuclear
war heads and /or Bio-war heads etc are
considered today’s biggest threats to humanity’s existence ONLY because someone who is too much engrossed in
past (trying to take revenge) or future (trying to become superpower etc) will decide to use them.
So, best thing is to
accept that it was our inability to overcome challenge, whether it is political
or cultural, of that (past) time, and accept that, we are responsible for what
we are today. It is just like a student standing second in a class exam. What
we expect from him? Accept that student coming first is better than him and try
to improve self, without creating any negativity about student standing first.
In proverbial term “to shorten a line without touching it” is to “draw a bigger
line than the first one”. It will change course of action, and opens up door
for self improvement as well as dialogue. We can speak to the person/ group
(believed to be cause of unease/ unrest/ conflict) concerned and express fully
what we feel and drop the negativity that our mind has created around the
situation. It absolves bitterness and we can interact based on merit and
demerit of each individual/community based on PRESENT. Further, based on
premise that opposite is complementary we can overall increase the economic
well being of nation by utilizing the skills and attitude (we are lacking) of
that other. Anything else does not serves purpose whatsoever except to
strengthen a false sense of self.
In spite of whatever said
above regarding PRESENT and its usefulness, Society and Nation do have a past - future orientation / imagination.
Past-oriented/ historically imagined societies are concerned with traditional values, family etc. and ways of doing things and hate to change. They look to the
past for inspiration, motivation, sustenance, hope, guidance and direction and
direct their efforts and resources in what already exists. These societies are
risk averse and prefer the mother
tongue. They feel that global intercourse threatens the specificity and
individuality and wants to protect traditions from the intrusion of the
international market and culture. Historical imagination is frequently employed
ideologically and can pave the way for fundamentalism;
Nationalism and racism are deeply rooted here in. However it would be unwise to
conclude that historical imagination is always unnecessary; without it there is
no poetry, religion, ethics, ceremonies, symbols, allegories, and holidays.
On the other hand future-oriented
or technological imaginative societies have a great deal of optimism about the
future. They think they can shape it and view it as a matter of planning, doing
and controlling. These cultures invest their efforts and resources in an ever-changing
view of what the future may hold. They are, inevitably, more abstract, more
imaginative and creative. They are risk-centered and risk-assuming cultures. In the spirit of technological imagination,
the newest is always the best—be it invention, discovery, fashion, idea and so
on. The spirit of the technological imagination is the spirit of progress, the
betterment of society. Every conflict is taken as sign of malfunction and to a
problem that needs to be solved, especially social problems. Science shares the
spirit of it and is the offspring of it. It is universalistic, as technology
binds and bolsters the world: all computer engineers speak the same language,
and the economy is global. However, technological imagination also can evolve
into a kind of fundamentalism.
Past-oriented
societies include India, China (has since taken a break from past), Britain,
Japan etc. The United States and, increasingly, Brazil, are examples of
future-oriented societies. Additionally,
though historical imagination provides modern wars with ideologies,
technological imagination provides them with weapons. The past or future orientation of a culture is
fundamental to its existence and almost impossible to reconcile with
differently held views. However, in view of what we discussed above and even
if we consider PAST correct we have to evaluate its relevance in PRESENT
(DEMOCRACY) for FUTURE (economic progress).
One of the greatest
political inventions of modern times is Democracy. Churchill’s well-known saying
“democracy is a fairly bad political institution, yet still the best ever
invented”. It is the best because modernity can best reproduce itself within
the framework of democracies; democracies have the greatest potential to secure
the freedom of the individual. Further, democracy is an imperfect political
order, as all political orders are. Where there is perfection, there can be
neither action nor criticism, yet irritation for imperfection remains.
Only where there is unjust distribution can one make a case for distributive
justice; only where many things are wrong can one make the case to set it
right. Democracy opens the door for making such claims; it opens the territory
of future-orientedness in politics. Democracy, while offering space for the
dynamics of modernity, gives the future-orientedness in politics on to
historical foundation. Democratic institutions are the embodiment
of the future in the present, for they offer the opportunity not just for
future-oriented action, but also for future-oriented negation (disapproval). A
byproduct of democracy is the kind of constitution that works as a political
foundation. It is not a natural foundation ( not being natural is its strength,
future orinted as well as its weakness, try to break from past),
for as the name suggests, it is constituted; In the modern world, freedom can
be founded if the constitution is behaving like the arche ( element or principle of a thing), the
fundament to which (ideally) all laws have to take recourse.
Even though present
democracy is for future, the “New” democratic societies/ nations have come into
being after certain past, having left that past (?), and embarked upon
something new. Every new democracy is between past and future and the past (non
democratic) and the future (democratic) are entirely different. Here political
institutions have been created and the freedom for political actions does exist,
yet the attitudes necessary to maintain these institutions are sometimes absent
due to shadow of past. Does the past of the new democracies is necessary and/or
their future free? Question is whether or not the (shadow of) past is still in
the present—and if yes, how. Shadow of past can be there by way of former
social and economic elite remain in place, and continued old attitudes and
mentalities. Past can be still there in present by way of traditions, ways of
life, cultural priorities, and spiritual aspirations.
Remember it is an
orientation, that can shape every aspect of behavior/ governance and, when the
orientations are not matched within or without groups or communities, the
clashes are obvious. Thus the two kinds of imagination—historical
and technological —are fighting a constant battle in (present) Democracy and
the battle is carried out under the burden and pressure of adaptation. Technological
imagination enforces rapid adaptation; historical imagination supports
resistance. One needs to adapt in the time between past and future, to the rule
of law, including civil and human rights; to a market economy, including the
global market; to the latest technology. But it takes time to adjust. In the new
democracies adjustment is partial, for one has to adjust from the requirements
of nondemocratic and economically noncompetitive social and political systems,
to other, differently democratic and economically competitive, social and
political systems. It needs time and cannot happen as abruptly as the change of
political institutions and economic systems themselves. One can perhaps import
the wording of a democratic constitution and can introduce fair laws in a short
time, but one cannot produce law-abiding citizens. One can privatize enterprises,
but one cannot introduce the entrepreneurial spirit from one day to the next. Further,
the efficacy of actions taken and decisions made in present for the future from
the vantage point of the future can be limited by this past. Individuals
should be aware of the limits of contestation ( ie. dispute and argument) and
that the future of the present is a future within this limit.
The new democracies have
to determine where those limits are and what constraints exist. (Constraints
can come from past tradition as well as aspiration of future.) Constraints are
the framework, the limit, on the space for free action while preserving the
freedom of action. Needless to say, questions about the past in the present and the
answers to those questions substantially influence questions concerning the
future of the present—ideas, strategies, options, wishes of political and
social actors. What is at stake is learning how to live constantly
and continuously between past and future: how to cope with the tension between
historical imagination and technological imagination; how to accept life in a
state of uncertainty, in the process of constant trial and error, in
contingency and freedom which sets its own limits.
The present always can
be better than it is without the shadow of past and future. But there is no escape from, society or
nations having past and future. The past remaining in present does limits the
present in at least two different ways: first, in the preservation of
traditional attitudes and behavior, which needs to adjust to new circumstances and
second, in the fear of both the ghosts of the past and of the risks of the
future. While democracy (constitution) takes its course correction based on
past and future. Past too has to modify as per requirement of present and future.
Likewise our future is limited by past and present. What is required is proper
mix of each in PRESENT, so that overall wellbeing of citizen- economic, social
and spiritual is achieved. Not one single aspect (past, present and future)
should overshadow other. In other words having discussed importance of future
orientation of society for economic well being and (present) democracy being
prerequisite to achieve it, we can say past should be used as a stepping stone
for leap forward and not as burden over
our head retarding pace of our progress or joy of today. Having too much past in our
psyche, is like participating in a race with front of our car in opposite
direction and driving in reverse gear. We just cannot hope to win the race.
