Chandrasekaran Balakrishnan

VS Srinivasa Sastri – Forgotten Liberal Intellectual – Part 2 VS Srinivasa Sastri – Forgotten Liberal Intellectual – Part 2 When VS Srinivasa Sastri joined the Servants of Indian Society he renounced all ambitions of acquiring wealth and power and exercising patronage. By the sheer force of his personality, he rose to great eminence and influence in the affairs of India and the Commonwealth. Chandrasekaran Balakrishnan January 7, 2020 Indian Liberals Editor’s Note: This is the second article in a two-part series paying homage to VS Srinivasa Sastri, the forgotten liberal intellectual of pre-independent India. Read the first part here. Sastri and Indian Liberalism Srinivasa Sastri was born ten days before Mahatma Gandhi. But unlike Gandhi, Sastri was born to a very poor family and rose through his hard works to serve the country like his political guru Gopala Krishna Gokhale. In the early part of the twentieth century, both Gokhale and Sastri were the two greatest sons of India who strived for freedom with liberalism. Both were equally respected in British Governments for their foresighted ideas and reform policies. But at home, both faced furious criticisms on their proposed policies but none could critique their commitments to the patriotism of mother India. Sastri assisted Gokhale on his major works in reform policies including Gokhale’s Universal Elementary Education Bill in Indian Legislative Council in 1912. According to P Kodanda Rao who worked with Sastri first as a private secretary for a decade and then a member of Servants of India Society note that “Parallelism between Gokhale and Sastri is indeed very striking. Both were born poor; both were teachers turned statesmen; both played a conspicuous part in the evolution of the Indian Constitution and the legislatures of India, provincial and central; both made several political visits to England; both took a hand in the South African Indian question; both suffered from bitter and unfair attacks from a section of Indians and were sometimes discounted by the British Government; both stood for constitutional methods of political agitation….; both admired the Mahatma personally and differed from him politically.” However, historians have ignored Sastri’s works through the mirror of ideologies. For example, in the book on Gandhi: The Years that Changed the World-1914-1948, Ramachandra Guha notes that “Sastri was Brahminical in both the good and bad senses of the term: deeply learned in the scriptures, but entirely dependent on the labour of others for his sustenance. As a constitutionalist, he abhorred Gandhi’s use- in South Africa-of strikes, fasts and boycotts to make his case. (Page VIII)”. In contrast, Sastri strived for education for all children including those belonging to weaker sections of the society. He has provided financial supports to several poor children and some were adopted by him to nourish in his house. Thus, it is shocking to note that Mr Guha concludes with a single incidence and he never bothered to read the intellectual contributions of the constitutional method of freedom struggles pursued by Sastri. And it was surprising that Zareer Masani who reviewed Guha’s book in the Open Magazine said, “Indian democracy owes more to liberal politicians like Tej Bahadur Sapru and Srinivasa Sastri, who cooperated with the embryonic parliamentary institutions that the Raj introduced in 1919 and 1937.” Even the veteran left-leaning constitutional expert AG Noorani noted in 2012 that “before 1947 neither Gandhi nor Nehru helped in forging a settlement on the minorities’ rights and safeguards or in promoting parliamentary democracy. The studied rewriting of history, which denies the liberals their stupendous contribution in India’s political evolution until the 1920s when the Gandhi-Nehru hegemony came to hold sway, is unworthy and demeaning…. The liberals are mentioned condescendingly. They were more clear-headed, realistic and practical than Gandhi or Nehru and not a whit inferior in political scruples to either.” Sastri was attracted to Ranade’s vision of “To equalise, to humanise, and to spiritualise” with which he strived his entire political career in British India. Ranade was Gokhale’s guru and influenced Sastri to join for freedom movements with liberal ideas. The veteran Telugu scholar, D.Anjaneyulu (1924-1998) vividly noted that Sastri “A Liberal he was, no doubt, from the beginning of his political career (in 1907) to his last day (in 1946). But Sastri chose to spell his “liberalism” with a small “l”. Like most Indian Liberals of the time, he was bred on the 19th century British classics like Mill on “Liberty” and Morley on “Compromise.” In his case, however, liberalism was not a matter of political strategy or public stance but an article of personal faith.” During the period 1916-1918, Sastri played a vital role for declaration of self-governance in British India after decades of struggles by both Ranade and Gokhale. In 1916, Sastri wrote a Pamphlet titled Self-Governance for India under the British Flag which highlighted the constitutional movements for independence of countries like Canada, Australia, etc. and wondered why India’s case was lingering for long with the unjust rule of British imperialists. When the Montague reform Report was released in 1918 for the gradual introduction of self-governing systems in India, there was a strong difference of opinions among top leaders of the Indian National Congress for the first time since 1885. Eventually, the top leadership was split into two groups, one was supporting the Montagu Reforms and the other was opposing it vehemently. Sastri and the Indian Liberal Party The opposition was called “extremist leaders” which included Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Aurbindo Ghosh, etc. And those who supported the reforms was called “moderate leaders with liberal ideas” who have left the Congress and formed a separate political party called “Indian National Liberal Federation” or The Liberal Party on November 1, 1918, mainly led by VS Srinivasa Sastri, Dinshah Wacha, Surendranath Banarjee, Bhupendranath, and Ambica Charan Mazumdar. It also had other prominent liberal leaders like Tej Bahadur Sapru, Pherozeshah Mehta and M.R.Jayakar among others. These liberals have played a major role in bringing about constitutionalism and liberalism from Indian perspectives. Sastri was president of the liberal party in 1922. According to P Kodanda Rao “when he joined the Servants of Indian Society he renounced all ambitions of acquiring wealth and

Remembering C V Raman,Swarajya Magazine Remembering C V Raman,Swarajya Magazine Chandrasekaran Balakrishnan March 23, 2019 Indian Liberals Sir C V Raman pointing to information on a large blackboard as he gives a lecture, 5 August 1958. (Keystone Features/Hulton Archive/Getty Images) Contemporary India has poor memory, and one of the victims of it has been the ideas, the life, the works, and the legacy of Sir C V Raman. The nation is almost muted on 7 November and 21 November, which are the birth and death anniversaries, respectively, of one of India’s greatest scientists, Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman (1888-1970) who won the Nobel Prize in Physics (1930) at the age of 42 “for his work on the scattering of light and for the discovery of the effect named after him”. It was said to be a simple experiment which he refused to patent. His Nobel Prize winning research was done on equipment that cost just Rs 500. Within six months of Raman’s discovery of Raman Effect in February 1928, the term “Raman Effect” was coined in Germany by scientists Pringsheim and Rosen. Unlike others, C V Raman is remembered on the anniversary of his great scientific breakthrough. It is for this the Government of India had declared 28 February as National Science Day in 1986. The theme for the National Science Day this year (2019) was “Science for the People and the People for Science”. It is here that we find that Raman’s objective of ‘science for people’ is yet to touch upon all the lives in the country and the world. We need to remind ourselves here of the apathy faced by the legacy of our eminent scientists who had strived for promoting science for economic and social well being of all sections of people. C V Raman and countless other yesteryear scientists, who were acclaimed internationally were ignored at home. The planners who formulated science policies soon after independence unfortunately did not bother to take note of the suggestions of someone like C V Raman. Making of Nobel Raman C V Raman was the India’s first and Asian Nobel Laureatein science. Quick reading reveals that scientists around the world were delighted with Raman’s discovery except the elite group of scientists known as Calcutta-Allahabad School of Science!! Raman was nominated 10 times either as single candidate or along with others scientists for the award of Nobel Prize in physics, Raman works published in the period 1907-1917 was entirely out of his spare time! In this period, he published 30 research papers in journals like Nature, Philosophical Magazine and Physical Review on original works he had done in physics, in addition to his job at the Finance Department in the British Raj. Over the years he trained hundreds of students and many of them went on to do groundbreaking works on various aspects of physics. At the age of 14, Raman completed his B A degree in Presidency College, Madras with English and Physics; in both subjects he secured gold medals. During his Master Degree in the same college, he had begun to work on research problems. He obtained the highest distinctions in M A degree in physics. He was barely 18 years old when he published his first research paper in 1906, in the November issue of Philosophical Magazine. Thereafter, very soon he also published another paper in the Nature. In 1907, Raman joined Financial Civil Service with First Rank in the exam. He was first posted in Calcutta as Assistant Accountant General. Some days later, on his way back from office he figured out the existence of the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS), founded by Maherdra Lal Sarcar (1833-1904). At first, he was delighted as he was always interested to do research in basic science. But until Raman took over, the IACS was almost dysfunctional in all respects. He revived the IACS by spending 25 years attracting students who came from all over the country to work with institute. Raman was working on his research problems back and forth from office and home and at IACS. In April 1909, he was transferred to Rangoon as Currency Officer and was reposted back to Calcutta in 1911. During the period 1907-1917, Raman worked with the Finance Department of British Administration in Calcutta. At the same time he had worked independently and established himself as one of the reputed scientists in India and the world. In 1917, Raman resigned from government job and joined as the inaugural Sir Taraknath Palit Professor in Physics in Calcutta University. He was elected as Fellow of Royal Society, London, in 1924 and that followed several other coveted awards/degrees both from India and abroad. Raman’s work on vibrations of strings of violins and other musical instruments led him to bag the F.R.S. in 1933. He then joined the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore, as its Indian Director. He was forced to resign from IISc directorship on false grounds but remained as professor of physics until his retirement in 1948. He founded Raman Research Institute (RRI) in the same year and remained with RRI in the rest of his life. He tirelessly worked with students and often lectured around the world. Raman’s Vision of Free Enterprises Systems for Independent India Sir C V Raman’s thoughts on economic and science policies were quite different from that of India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. There seems to strong evidence that Raman’s vision on science policy and its nexus with industrial and social development has continued to be ignored. Raman’s “dissenting voice” on science policy in independent India comprised mainly of his comments on Jawaharlal Nehru’s flawed initiatives of lopsided science policies. Raman questioned the approach adopted by Nehru and his associates (or “cronies” as Raman called them) to advance science and industrialisation in the country. Raman’s works in science have more to do with how science contributes to society at large both for peace and prosperity. Raman endorsed the free enterprise economic system over the Soviet

Ambedkar :The Forgotten Free Market Econommist Ambedkar :The Forgotten Free Market Econommist Chandrasekaran Balakrishnan April 14, 2016 Indian Liberals   Overlooking Ambedkar’s free market views, his followers have pigeon-holed him merely as a Dalit icon to suit their own narrow political interests. Two decades ago, India liberated itself from the shackles of socialism and a command economy and put itself on the road to a liberal economic system.n the era of liberalization, strangely, the one obvious thing that should have happened, but did not happen, was unearthing the liberal economic ideas of great personalities like C. Rajagopalachari “Rajaji”, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Professor B.R Shenoy, and Professor S.Ambirajan, among others.Since India’s independence in 1947, many of the country’s top institutions and its intelligentsia have suffered from being dominated from the Left. Perhaps this is why even after two decades of liberalization there seems to be much resistance from many who ought to support the basic idea of economic freedom in the country but don’t seem to.Despite this, twentieth century India produced many great classical liberal economists and thinkers such as those named above who pioneered original free market economic ideasIf this comes as a surprise to you, read on.Dr. B.R Ambedkar, best known for his role in drafting India’s constitution, pioneered several pathbreaking free market economic ideas in pre-independent India, scrubbed out of our conscience today.Even self-styled “Ambedkarites” have not taken the trouble to look at his free market economic ideas. In fact, I’d argue that in pre-independent India the one economist whose ideas were global in perspective and close to the Austrian School of Economics (pre-cursor of modern libertarian economics) was none other than Ambedkar. His ideas on economics are relevant today as ever before and in dire need of revival.Ambedkar, before becoming a social reformer and entering politics full time, was a professional practicing economist — a little known fact.But in post-independent India, virtually all of his insightful and powerful economic ideas and writings have been forgotten and neglected, both by Indian intellectuals in general and economic historians and Ambedkarites in particular.A dubious argument put forth by many, especially by “mainstream” Keynesian and Marxist economists, is that Ambedkar’s highly significant contributions in the areas of social reform, political systems and constitution-making have overshadowed his contributions to economics.This makes no sense.Neglect of Ambedkar’s thoughts on economics almost seems deliberate and in many instances, one sees him being referred to as a strong believer of socialism, Marxism and statism which is completely fallacious.Take Anand Teltumbde, Dalit activist and management professor, who argued in an article in Economic & Political Weekly (March 5, 2011) that “Ambedkar, who publicly professed his opposition to capitalism throughout his life, was thus wilfully distorted to be the supporter of neoliberal capitalism, which globalisation is!”Consider the University Grants Commission (UGC) which implements a scheme called “Epoch Making Social Thinkers of India” to conduct research on 24 Indian personalities. Every year the UGC selects several colleges and universities and offers them funding to conduct research on these personalities. Out of 24, Ambedkar is pigeon-holed for research on his “social thoughts”.The real question is: why limit the inquiry to someone’s “social thoughts”?In order to do justice to someone’s contributions to knowledge, serious  and honest research on that individual must be well-rounded and cover all of their contributions, in this case, his economic, social and political thoughts and ideas.In India, there are a total of 29 “Centres for Ambedkar Studies”. This is the second highest, named after a major personality. Not surprisingly, Gandhi merits about 85 centres.It is ironic that there is no department of economics and not even an economics professor, in the Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar National Institute of Social Sciences,  in his birth place, Mhow!So what was Ambedkar’s contribution to economics?Unlike many of his great contemporaries, Ambedkar was professionally trained in “political economics”, as it was then known. In 1918, at the young age of 27, he became Professor of Political Economy at Sydenham College of Commerce and Economics in Bombay.Ambedkar studied a wide range of economic issues such as international trade and commerce, the Indian currency, provincial finance and planning, small holdings and agricultural productivity. Apart from many research articles published in professional journals, his four theses submitted–for two Master’s Degrees and two Doctorate degrees–were replete with insight and analysis.In 1915, he completed an M.A in economics with a thesis on “Ancient Indian Commerce” at Columbia University in New York. In 1916, he submitted another thesis, “National Dividend for India: A Historic and Analytical Study”, for a Ph.D. degree in Economics, and Columbia awarded him a doctorate in 1917. This thesis was later published as a book, The Evolution of Provincial Finance in British India, in London. Further, in 1921, Ambedkar also received an M.Sc. in economics from the London School of Economics (LSE) for his thesis, “Provincial Decentralisation of Imperial Finance in British India”. In 1922 he completed his now famous thesis, “The Problem of the Rupee: Its Origin and its Solution,” submitted for his D.Sc. degree in Economics from the London School of Economics, both published as books in London.Armed with these four postgraduate degrees, two from an Ivy League university in the U.S. and two from a top university in the U.K., Ambedkar could not not be taken lightly by his upper caste, anglicized peers in the Indian establishment.Further, the prolific Ambedkar produced at least three scholarly contributions to economics, in which he makes many original arguments.These are: (1) “Administration and Finance of the East India Company” (1915); (2) “The Problem of the Rupee: Its Origin and Its Solution” (1923), and (3) “The Evolution of Provincial Finance in British India: A Study in the Provincial Decentralisation of Imperial Finance” (1925).The second and third of these works contain many pro-market ideas which were hardly known then but later gained currency in the second half of the twentieth century. What’s more, through his writings Ambedkar pioneered original ideas like “economic and political decision making in an environment of dispersed knowledge” and “alternative monetary systems (and the) denationalized production