De-colonization of Ideas: Symbolism vs. Feasibility

Introduction

In recent times, we have heard the terms ‘colonization’ and ‘decolonization’ at least a dozen times. One may question, since it’s been 78 years that we have been an independent and sovereign nation, why are we still debating over ‘decolonization’. We have oftentimes seen our Honourable ministers, be it of Union or States, very much emphasize the need to ‘decolonize’ and ‘let go of residual colonial mindset’. The decolonization discourse has come to be a substantial subject of contemplation with the ever-increasing sentiment of nationalism, taking the country by storm. That brings us to a question, which forms the eye of this storm – What exactly is this novel found discourse of decolonization after seven decades of independence?

The Educational System and the Need for Decolonization

The ardent promoters of this idea are, of the opinion that, while India was freed from the clutches of physical dominance, it is nowhere near escaping the intellectual dominance of colonizers. We are still enslaved to colonial ideas and our mindset is structured to always be subservient. We may have seen sovereignty across the horizon in 1947 but it never truly manifested in the minds of the nationals and this is the consequence of long-standing cultural subjection of the people of this country. This cultural subjection means not assimilation but suppression of native’s culturally original ideas and values by that of their dominator. The most terrifying aspect of it is that people so suppressed don’t even realize the truth of inhibition of originality closeted behind the facade of development. This lack of originality means a boxed mindset which, does not even befit the traditional and cultural civilizational notions of these persons. Thus creating a dystopian world where a natively structured thought process is forcibly made to be functionally alien. As one would expect, it naturally results in a bizarre state of affairs which, couldn’t be more riotous. Therefore, while India may have gained political independence decades back, we may still very well be in the clutches of intellectual slavery. We still blindly follow the ‘Western’ perspectives of education and their system, which to say the least, couldn’t be more contrary to our own ‘Indian’ system for imparting knowledge – Gurukul. Consequently, it creates a so-called “shadow mind”, substantially meaning that Indians, unconsciously embrace the Western ideologies as their own while dismissing our own, indigenous ones. The obvious implication of it is the denigration of our intellectual heritage. We do once in a while try to look back into our heritage; however, it comes off as a subordinate thought. Therefore, what we ought to seek is emancipation from intellectual slavery that we are bound by. Only then, would we be genuinely and undoubtedly free and sovereign. The entire argument here underscores the idea of cultural relativity and post-colonial legal theory emphasizing the importance of indigenous traditions.

Is Decolonization in the Legal System just a farce?

However, as we contemplate this “Swaraj in Ideas”, we must consider some practical implications and feasibility of its extreme implementation. Today’s world is a global village, to say the least, with cross-nation interactions which, couldn’t be more commonplace. In this world of essential international interactions, arises a need for uniformity of thought processes, which may or may not result in diverse ideologies. Yet these varied ideologies can harmoniously interact only if the basic structure forming them, i.e., the thought process, is consistent. This consistency can only be achieved by uniformity in the educational system. Education is fundamental in shaping the minds of people, yet if it is incredibly varied, further interactions between two such groups become challenging. Most of the world now follows a systematic educational framework, which if we were to suddenly cast away, would only result in our loss. Furthermore, while we can always amend the educational framework moderately, we cannot truly revamp it entirely. Moreover, concerns have been stated not only regarding the “colonization” of the educational system but various other aspects of our societal life as well. A prominent example of it is the legal system in the country which is the bestowment of the colonial era. There is a constant contention between the validity of British-era laws and the need for new indigenous ones. Post-legal theorists deem colonial law as an instrument of dominance. However, others argue that, while laws need to be amended with, respect to the evolving requirements of the society, scraping off of still relevant laws in the name of decolonization is nothing but a politically motivated farce. The so-called “our” laws might very well be the reproduction of colonial laws with an “Indian” cover and this is nothing more than “symbolism”. Our entire legal system is currently based on the British one which, in fact, is working quite effectively, although some things might be amiss, it is still a comparatively feasible system. In the view of positivists like H.L. Hart, the validity of laws is independent of their origin, and so the origin of these laws shouldn’t be a matter of discussion. A prominent example of it is the Kesavananda Bharti Case, wherein the Supreme Court of India upheld the basic structure doctrine- derived from Western legal ideology, as essential to the democratic identity of our country. To state, the words of Lakshmi Kant Maitra, an anti-colonial leader, in a speech in the Constituent Assembly, he said that we have been nurtured in the British Criminal Law of Jurisprudence and, reared in its spirits, while upholding the principle of 'benefit of doubt' in death penalty cases. This signifies how we may want to be politically De-colonised, but assimilation of Western ideologies is not always “intellectual colonization”.

Conclusion

While there is some truth in the idea of cultural subjection and consequently the need for indigenous ideologies, it does not mean the eradication of certain Western ones. To revitalize our culture, we need not desperately advocate the idea of cultural relativity and compel the demolition of an established universal system. The contention between symbolism, with its nationalist and intrinsic perspective, and feasibility, with its universal application, needs a harmonious reconciliation. While we need to decolonize our colonial mindset to a certain extent, we shouldn’t be clinging to our native ideologies with a sense of validation from our national identity. In my opinion, legal pluralism, in the field of law, is one such concept where we embrace our native and inherent philosophies while also assimilating external ones. It is only with acceptance of ideologies as such that we can say to have achieved true liberation or “Swaraj” in our Ideas.

REFERENCES

1. K.C. Bhatttacharya, Swaraj in Ideas, https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199769261.003.0007
2. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225.
3. Raghav Pandey, Decolonising the Law: The Wrong Answer to the Wrong Question, Socio-Legal Review (Jan. 25, 2024), https://www.sociolegalreview.com/post/decolonising-the-law-the-wrong-answer-to-the-wrong-question

Note:

The author affirms that this article is an entirely original work, never before submitted for publication at any journal, blog, or other publication avenue. Any unintentional resemblance to previously published material is purely coincidental. This article is intended solely for academic and, scholarly discussion. The author takes personal responsibility for any potential infringement of intellectual property rights belonging to any individuals, organizations, governments, or institutions.