Sunday, 11 November 2012

The forgotten Gem-Arthshasthra(Science of wealth)

Good policies are vital to change India’s governance. Before, two thousand years ago, India was the sone ki chidiya (Golden Bird) of the world, that is the reason the west world (Britain, France, Portugal, Greece, Arabs etc) were smitten and in search of India all the way. Such a wealth and glorious state of affairs we had because of India’s public policy was based on Chanakya’s Arthashastra which contains an incredibly sophisticated understanding of human nature and society. Chanakya’s book preceded Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (another extremely superior piece of thinking) by nearly two thousand years.

Now what is that forgotten so called gem Arthashastra? Well, artha means wealth, and shastra means science. So it is the science of wealth.More than 2,000 years ago (321-185 BCE), Vishnugupta Chanakya a minister under the mightiest mauryan empire, wrote The Arthashastra – the science of wealth and welfare. It contains 150 chapters, which are distributed among 15 books. The Arthashastra develops three interlinked and mutually complementary parts:

1. Arthaniti (economic policies) to promote economic growth;
2. dandaniti (administration of justice) to ensure judicial fairness; and
3. videshniti (foreign affairs policy) to maintain independence and to expand the kingdom.
The Arthashastra contains a sufficient number of coherent economic concepts and hypotheses and an inter-dependent system of relationships. Almost all of his insights, concepts, and methodology are relevant today. The Arthashastra far removed from the heart and minds of Indians, for whatever unknown reason, India has simply forgotten this crucial (Bible or Gita) book. It holds the key for India’s future wealth. But we shoddily followed socialism from 1947 and still we are suffering extremely with socialist policies.In fact, socialism is an entirely foreign idea to India. It has purely French-German-British roots (Rousseau-Hegel/Marx-Laski). A complete half-baked western ideology, we Indians has a worst colonial hangover of always admiring the west for anything, though we have many best things in our country. It becomes a common refrain we not even respect the country’s Top national award(Desh rathna,Padmabusan,Visbushan,padhmasri etc) in any aspect as best, but when west has given some Oscar or Nobel prize then only we consider it as an recognition. Given the deep understanding of markets and incentives that Chanakya possessed, and which is part of India’s cultural heritage, it is real shames that Indian is governed purely go by the Western idea of socialism. For sure there are no political parties in India swearing the teachings of Arthashastra or Chanakyian ideologies.What a shame rather fools go by failure ideologies of Marxian etc! What a come down from the brilliant legacy of Chanakya. For instance, Chanakya very wisely regulated even liquor and prostitution, instead of banning them.

Currently i foresee a very rare team like FTI which is considering institutional thinking in a very detailed and systematic way by adopting principles in Arthashastra which is a very good sign for India's future. Unless we prepare for exam and just mere praying god alone will not help us pass the exam, similarly sheer hard work is essential;the same is the case with india which needs sufficient leadership preparation with coherent and aligned world best policies before plunging in to any political landscape,unless the destiny will be in the hands of venal and mendacious politicians. Pls visit FTI site and offer your support

Below schematic depicts you the proposition of FTI’s stand with good policies and system of governance.

Jai Hind!!!Jai Bharat!!!



  1. Socialism requires state control over property, but India has had private control over property for thousands of years. Indian kings never exercised eminent domain over the property of citizens. It was clear to all that property belongs to the people, and that the king’s role was to provide them with justice.But it was quite unfortunate that Nehru wanted everything to develop under welfare state and the effect is we face now.

  2. Arthashastra asserts eminent domain- it states that land is the property of the King who assigns it for the lifetime of a cultivator provided he is industrious and pays the highest amount possible in taxes. Corporations (shrenis) supported hereditary rights in land as well as free enterprise but Arthashastra commends the subversion of Corporations by underhand means- e.g. sowing dissension by exciting mutual jealousies and putting false allegations.
    Arthashastra is a casteist and Statist- it lacks the following crucial ideas
    1) principle of comparative advantage
    2) Common Law tradition- inviolability of private property, freedom of contract, judicial check on executive power, habeas corpus,
    3) Transparency and Just proceeding- Chanakya counsels the use of spies and underhand methods. He does not understand that spies will have their own agenda and misuse their power. Look at how the Pakistani I.S.I, or the Russian K.G.B brought ruin on their countries.
    4) Equality of all before the law- Chanakya gives privileges to Brahmins and imposes conditions of semi-slavery on 'shudras'.

    Praise of the Arthashastra may be expected from Casteist, Manuvadi people. However, they do not really believe in private property or free enterprise because they consider it sinful for 'low born' people to prosper and to gain political power. Narendra Modi belongs to the 'ghanchi' oil-presser caste. The Manuvadis dislike him only for this reason. You will notice most 'elite' Brahmins favor Socialism or Communism because these ideologies are similar to Chanakya and Manu's in that the productive classes are denied power but meant to just slave away for their 'betters'.
    Ambedkar, unlike high caste politicians, showed much more inclination towards Classical Liberalism because he saw that economic progress and free enterprise was the only way to raise up the condition of the oppressed classes. Vivekananda and Aurobindo spoke favorably of Socialism. Rajaji believed in caste based Education as well as all sorts of Swadesi rubbish. Gandhi declared that true Swaraj meant that there should be no trade and specialization on the basis of division of labor and also that the 'bhangi' should follow his ancestral calling but adopt Vegetarian life-style so as to emulate the so called upper-castes.
    My question to you is why Ambedkar is not mentioned while all sorts of 'upper caste' dolts and idiots are praised?
    What about Minoo Masani? You don't mention him because he was Parsi rather than some casteist idiot of a Hindu?
    Subramaniyam Swamy was supposed to be Right wing in Economics. But that idiot of a 'Brahmin' sat in the Janata Govt which abolished the fundamental right to property.
    India is not alone in this. In England too we saw opposition to Free Market Econ from 'upper classes'. Mrs. Thatcher (called 'the grocer's daughter') was considered 'vulgar' and faced opposition from upper class 'wets' who favored more Socialistic policies.
    Harold McMillan, a patrician like Nehru, opposed privatization of Nationalized industries calling it 'selling off the family silver'.
    I think you should consider the 'caste/class' bias of the elites before giving praise to undeserving people. Who do you think promoted the Arthashastra after its rediscovery? All Manuvadi upper castes. Nehru himself used the pen-name 'Chanakya' to refer to himself.
    Do please re-consider your praise of Chanakya. There was an indigenous Shreni based Private Enterprise culture in India from very ancient times but Chanakya sought to subvert it- hence his popularity with upper caste Socialists.