Golwalkar's Criticism on Individual freedom and Markets Economy

 Golwalkar's  Criticism on Individual freedom and  Markets Economy

RSS leader M.S. Golwalkar didn’t like freedom. He mocked the “new era of ‘individual freedom’, sanctity of the individual rights’ and ‘equality of opportunity for all’”. No surprise therefore that we hear the voice of Karl Marx in his writings: “the high-sounding concept of ‘individual freedom’ only meant the freedom of those talented few to exploit the rest of the common people and reduce them to abject serfdom. The horrible conditions of the labourers -men, women and even children – working in those factories defied all description. They were now groaning under the heels of the new tyrants in place of the old”. He then claimed that “under the slogan of ‘equality of opportunity’ persons with greater intelligence and wealth monopolised all those new avenues of production of wealth and became the unchallenged financial overlords”.

Naturally, RSS and BJP ideologues vigorously oppose capitalism. Golwalkar wrote about the “evil of capitalism”. He thought that communism had arisen as a reaction to the “tyranny” of capitalism. It is astonishing that the non-violent concepts of freedom and market competition – that have enriched billions of capitalist nation citizens – are considered to constitute a “tyranny”. Deendayal Upadhyaya didn’t like competitive markets. He wrote: “It is believed that free competition gives man the freedom to choose. This is not correct. .. The end of competition in a particular field leads to monopoly and monopolies take away the right of choice from an individual”. He didn’t like capitalism either, because it allegedly “destroys the moral and ethical values in society and makes individuals greedy”.
 

RSS ideologues obviously do know about the powerful self-regulating capacity of markets through reputational mechanisms. In addition, capitalist societies are supported by carefully crafted regulations to prevent fly-by-night operators and cheats, and mechanisms to ensure fair competition. While these regulations are not perfect, they do make capitalist societies more ethical than any alternative. I know this first-hand, having worked in socialist India which is thoroughly corrupt and in capitalist Australia where corruption is largely unheard of. Thengadi wrote: “Obviously, the western model has miserably failed to ensure continued stability and security for the developed countries. Their ‘development’ itself has become a bane, a Frankenstein for them. The days of capitalism are numbered; it will not last even up to 2010 AD”. Fortunately for the world, capitalism is not going anywhere. Instead, all nations that are serious about economic development have adopted most elements of Adam Smith’s system of natural liberty. Even Russia and China have long abandoned their original versions of socialism.
 

The ignorance of Hindtuva ideologues about textbook economics is apparent in virtually everything they say. Thengadi thought that “The Wealth of Nations represented euphoria of the new era of capitalism”. Obviously he had not read Adam Smith’s monumentally insightful book which identifies freedom as the proven mechanism to create national wealth. Smith was by no means a euphoric teenager but a systematic, scientific and clinical observer of reality and analyst of human incentives. It is Thengadi, on the other hand, who makes euphoric assertions about a non-existent Hindu economic model, and has the gall to criticise Adam Smith without having read one word of his masterpiece. The lack of knowledge of economics of Hindutva ideologues is compounded by their ignorance about India’s own mastery over economics that we see in Kautliya’s Arthashastra. Balbir Sihag’s 2014 book, Kautilya: The True Founder of Economics, demonstrates Kautilya’s amazing economic insights which are on par with those of the best economists the world has ever produced – but about which the Hindutva writers have absolutely no clue.
 

RSS and BJP ideologues proclaim a dislike of communism but in reality, like Golwalkar, they channel Marx. Their mindset is fixated on economic equality – a purely socialist ideal. Thengadi reports Golwalkar’s 1972 speech in Thane during which he said that the state should place a “ceiling on individual accumulation”. Thengadi also reported Golwalkar’s view that “basic needs of life must be available to every citizen”. This concept, which originated in Abraham Maslow’s pyramid of needs, is a favourite of the left – a new way to state the Marxist slogan: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”. Golwalkar also wrote in his Bunch of Thoughts about a ceiling on personal income. “Equitable distribution” was a key goal for Golwalkar. Thengadi was personally in agreement with this goal. He wanted an end to “ever-widening disparities, by a movement towards equitability and equality”. To confirm that RSS is fundamentally communist, Golwalkar stated that “the surplus value of labour belongs to the Nation”. It is no surprise that RSS ideologues have firmly supported all economic actions of Nehru’s Congress.