Draft #1
Many influential thinkers argued that Indian minds were fueled by the ideas of Western scholars and philosophers who never visited India, never dealt with Indians, and never read Indian literature. A key figure in this regard is Karl Marx and his Marxists vision of the world. Marx wrote thirty-three articles discussing and analyzing Indian affairs that were published by the New York Tribune, from 1853 to 1858, just after the Sepoy Revolt. In his articles, Marx has explicitly and implicitly showcased his complex positions on the British Empire and his positions on India. Marxism in its pure form means that, revolution can only happen in an industrialized world, and India, at that time, wasn’t. He argued that, what the British will …show more content…
His articles expressed the “hypocrisy and inherent barbarism of bourgeois civilization,” and emphasized that every stage in India, was shaped and molded by British Policies that served the ruling classes interests and desires (Marx& Engels, 1968.p.88). In the “British Rule in India” , Marx noted that the Government of India , exemplified the highest form of oppression Indian people had to experience and live through the ruins for a long time. However, he also expressed in many of his writings that the British influence may not be bad after all, and may in fact, help Indian society and their economic well-being progress. In other words, Marx argued that the “British rule in India was fulfilling a double mission–a mission destructive as well as regenerating” (Marx& Engels, 1968, p.84). He also believed that ‘the ruin and devastation caused by British colonial rule was a terrible but necessary price for “the only social revolution ever heard of in Asia”(p.88). Therefore, the main purpose of the paper is to critically evaluate Marx’s Eurocentered analysis and perceptions of India, with special focus on the caste …show more content…
Caste, however, is not unique to India , in fact, it existed in some other parts of Asia such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka(Guha,2014). One can look at the caste system in India and agree that it is a unique contribution of India to its civilization. In fact, in all societies we have hierarchies and stratifications and within that there are other social divisions. However, as Guha puts it, the peculiarity of Indian social system lies within a molded and shaped system that started as a division of labor and transformed to a hierarchical system (2014). The system was based on your birth place. It is also maintained by exogamy that is, you cannot marry out of your social group. And this social order has been certified by religion and religious principles. And this was the nature of the caste
Many influential thinkers argued that Indian minds were fueled by the ideas of Western scholars and philosophers who never visited India, never dealt with Indians, and never read Indian literature. A key figure in this regard is Karl Marx and his Marxists vision of the world. Marx wrote thirty-three articles discussing and analyzing Indian affairs that were published by the New York Tribune, from 1853 to 1858, just after the Sepoy Revolt. In his articles, Marx has explicitly and implicitly showcased his complex positions on the British Empire and his positions on India. Marxism in its pure form means that, revolution can only happen in an industrialized world, and India, at that time, wasn’t. He argued that, what the British will …show more content…
His articles expressed the “hypocrisy and inherent barbarism of bourgeois civilization,” and emphasized that every stage in India, was shaped and molded by British Policies that served the ruling classes interests and desires (Marx& Engels, 1968.p.88). In the “British Rule in India” , Marx noted that the Government of India , exemplified the highest form of oppression Indian people had to experience and live through the ruins for a long time. However, he also expressed in many of his writings that the British influence may not be bad after all, and may in fact, help Indian society and their economic well-being progress. In other words, Marx argued that the “British rule in India was fulfilling a double mission–a mission destructive as well as regenerating” (Marx& Engels, 1968, p.84). He also believed that ‘the ruin and devastation caused by British colonial rule was a terrible but necessary price for “the only social revolution ever heard of in Asia”(p.88). Therefore, the main purpose of the paper is to critically evaluate Marx’s Eurocentered analysis and perceptions of India, with special focus on the caste …show more content…
Caste, however, is not unique to India , in fact, it existed in some other parts of Asia such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, and Sri Lanka(Guha,2014). One can look at the caste system in India and agree that it is a unique contribution of India to its civilization. In fact, in all societies we have hierarchies and stratifications and within that there are other social divisions. However, as Guha puts it, the peculiarity of Indian social system lies within a molded and shaped system that started as a division of labor and transformed to a hierarchical system (2014). The system was based on your birth place. It is also maintained by exogamy that is, you cannot marry out of your social group. And this social order has been certified by religion and religious principles. And this was the nature of the caste