One of the privileges of Dharampalji's association is the large amount of history, polity and society one can get to know just through talking with him. The few people who have had the advantage of his association over the years would vouch for his great story telling abilities with a characteristic punch line! We have tried to capture some of these stories, anecdotes and insights of Dharampalji in the last couple of years. With pleasure we share some of them through this page.
Documentation in India - "We in India do not have the habit
of documenting good work, this probably comes out of the fact that humility
is taught of a great virtue and any man would rather not document about
himself. It is necessary to document the hundred odd good attempts being
made across the country"
The group (community) decision structure
in India as against individualistic structure that was imposed. - One
of the things done by the Britishers' was to take over the management of
the natural resources till then collectively managed by the entire village
and tell them that the government will hereafter maintain it for them.
This has happened in the case of the traditional water ways and the forests
and the temples,etc. In fact one of the justification for the take over
of the temple management by the government - by the Britishers- is that
they are not looting the temples as the Moghuls did, what was unsaid is
the fact that they let them to decay, by removing the support structure
from the community.
The decision making style used to be group decision and every thing was
discussed in public to arrive at a decision. Most of the decision was arrived
as consensus, if it was not possible to arrive at a decision, the norm was
to postpone the decision making for another day. This was understood and
exploited by the Britishers too, who pushed often for quick decisions while
negotiating with the Indians thereby pushing for decision to their advantage.
[Unlike the Japanese who have institutionalised this, the Indians have
not institutionalised this habit of postponing the decision making and thinking
over it]
JRD Tata and Nehru: Since the freedom struggle days Nehru and Tata
knew each other and had regular meetings. But, Tata felt that after the
Independence there was a change in Nehru, he would not ask for any opinion
or comment on any problem. Tata felt that this was a change for the bad
as he felt that there should have been a discussion between Nehru and the
Industrialists like himself. Dharampalji's comments: "If you ask for
an opinion, then you will have to listen see…"
Diversity as against factionism - We in India are a socially diverse
people and many of these diverse cultures are quiet assertive and perhaps
certain amount of pride in the uniqueness of the individual culture…but,
this does not mean that we work in factions, it is the sense of defeated-ness
that has been brought about by the 200 years of imperialistic rule that
has resulted in us developing this sense of factionism. Gandhi was successful
because he could appeal to the something that was common (perhaps) among
all the diverse cultures that are part of this country…he gave a purpose
that was far above the factionalism and there was also a sense of achievement
(victory) which he could infuse in the way things were executed…this
gave the diverse cultures too a purpose towards which they could converge
and work together. This is perhaps the real success of Gandhi.
The great levellers of the society - holi festival, Jagannathapuri,etc.
- The holi festival is perhaps a great leveller in the society…as you
are not supposed to say no to any one applying colours even on the roads,
regardless of who the person is you are to accept the greetings and reciprocate…this
is similar to the Jagannatha puri temple, where prasad is served to everyone
who walks in and while you are having your prasad if someone passing by
puts his had in your prasad to take some, you are not supposed to stop the
person from doing so…this is also a great social leveller. There have
been quiet a few such levellers in the society which seem to bring together
all sections of the society.
On earlier Indian policing and militia. - Earlier Indian militia
was local and supported by the local community, the role of the militia
was to protect the local population from any invading army. Similarly the
policing was also supported by the local community. The police were supposed
to find out and recover any theft in the local community within a specified
time. If they fail to do so, then they are bound to return the value of
the item to the victim of the theft from their own wealth. This faith on
the individuals to give the correct value and the police in being completely
dedicated to the community was so unbelievable to the English when they
first encountered this(sometime in the 1750s), that one of them wrote to
his friend in London saying that if such a system was followed in London,
the police will be flooded by too many theft cases (this in reference to
the dependability of people of the then London!!!).
Some comments on the West - The western attitude of destroying a
system if it is not in accordance with the times (like the education system
in India when McLay studied it or the religion of India according to Wilberforce)
in contrast to the Indian attitude of managing things if they have survived
for some / long time, letting it down to die in a loooong painful manner.
"The tendency of the western nations is that they will try to eliminate
those that do not live up to the standard which they define as civilisation,
this is the rule and it is considered correct. Darwin theory comes much
later, the main thing is that this is the way in which the west thinks.
Survival of the fittest, and others have to either be fit or let to wither
away - if not helped in the process. They will not be bothered if few lakh
rural Indians die of natural calamity. This is not a problem for them, those
people are any way not fit to live, so let them die will be the attitude.