Author:
Publication: The Times of India
Date: January 3, 2004
URL: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/401547.cms
Introduction: Records show that
India's yields in agriculture in the pre-colonisation period were consistently
higher tan those in Europe while its achievements in science were considerable.
Dharmpal is a noted Gandhian and
historian of Indian science. He is well known for his "rediscovery" of
Indian science. His work has often been path breaking and instilled a whole
generation of Indians with a new-found faith in the country's indigenous
scientific traditions and cultures.
In New Delhi to receive the prestigious
Infinity Foundation award, he spoke to Ninad D Sheth on his continuing
search for indigenous ways in science.
Q.: Where do you see the gap in
the path that India has chosen for progress?
A.: The problem is one of rootlessness
and cultural deprivation. We'd decided, in 1947, to go in for western solutions
and models. In the process, indigenous paths have been ignored and often
systematically and deliberately undermined.
Q.: How is this any different from,
say, the Chinese model?
A.: The Chinese have, in many ways,
displayed not only a civilisational consciousness of their past but also
employed it on a limited scale. I say limited because the Chinese too have
broadly abandoned their traditional ways and struck out on a western path.
However, they have not discredited
their ancient belief systems and alternative solutions, be these in science,
medicine or even applied technology. India on the other hand lost out because
of wrong choices in the post-Independence period. Ironically, with Gandhi
we had the right recipe but this was ignored.
Q.: You have spoken about the harm
done to "indigenous sources" during the British period? What was the situation
before that?
A.: There is no doubt that to an
extent the earlier period also saw the suppression of these indigenous
options and alternatives. However, the British imposed their own systems
in an exploitative manner on Indians through the elite.
This was most evident in agriculture
and science - in both of which India had considerable achievements before
the arrival of the British. Records show that India 's yields in agriculture
in the pre-colonisation period were consistently higher than those in Europe
while its achievements in science, compared to some of the so-called "industrial
revolution" achievements, were considerable.
Archival records also clearly show
that the British not only foisted their world view of science upon India
but deliberately ignored existing and robust Indian alter-natives in science
and technology.
Q.: So you would say that the British
rule was an unmitigated disaster, with little benefit for India ?
A.: Yes, that is what I would say.
The great myth of British railways and administration misses the point
of the kind of exploitative institutions and ruthless efficiency which
culminated in large-scale famines during and preceding the Second World
War, killing millions.
Q.: How long can one blame the British
Empire ?
A.: I do not believe that I am
apportioning blame. One has to stop and reflect and reconsider. We have
no new dawn. We can't by definition. We are following an alien way. For
a new dawn it's important to give importance to indigenous belief systems.
We have to make a choice between that and this faux modernity.
But doesn't the global stage offer
India many natural advantages, say, in software...
I see a disconnect here. You say
that software, for example, empowers. I do not see it that way. In fact,
it makes you all the more dependent externally on contracts. Internally,
it creates a huge digital divide - an altogether new form of deprivation.
Q.: So, looking at the future, are
you hopeful that older ways will find relevant expression?
A.: There is no lack of traditional
values expressing themselves - in the protests by tribal groups against
big dams and big science, for example. It is not as if you have to invent
alternatives. They are being expressed and practised all the time.
What is needed is a new respect
for these ways and a system of nurturing them. The need is to first take
pride in our own selves, our own heritage, our own alternatives which,
if put to use, can be a great creative force as shown during the Gandhian
struggle.
Q.: Is doing what you suggest really
possible? In this day and age can we turn globalisation off? Would that
not harm us more?
A.: I do not see globalisation
as all-encompassing or inevitable. There are many protests already happening.
People are saying that they don't want to be a part of this globalisation,
that it is not their choice.
And you can see it not just amongst
small indigenous movements but amongst many large protest groups. Not just
in India but abroad. The real issue is to challenge this assumption, fashionable
in public discourse, that globalisation is inevitable, that there is no
alternative. Not recognising so many different alternatives is a form of
arrogance.
Q.: One of your main interests has
been Indian achievements in science. With big science now dominating, and
talk of a man on the moon and other such projects in the air, do you think
this is the correct way of utilising our scientific talent?
A.: The big science obsession is
a mistake. It is another example of what I term the wrong route taken by
India. Big science is not the way that India needs to go. What is needed
is creative implementation of locally relevant technologies. In many areas,
such as agriculture, the small farmer has many things to teach big science.
