Articles by Neera Chandhoke

Political theorists no doubt have to take the history of injustice, for example, untouchability, seriously. But, the beginning point of repair of historical injustice is the "here" and the "now," the democratic context that shapes collective lives and aspirations. Comprehension of how deep the roots of injustice are, is important. But, it is also important not to get trapped too much in the past and in the politics of recrimination and resentment that divides society irremediably, and prevents the consolidation of a consensus on the need to battle discrimination.

Drawing on the Mahabharata, a common source of our cultural heritage, this article points out that the epic enunciates what raj dharma, or a ruler's duties, should be. There is nothing esoteric or mystic about them; they are things that we all know. The rules of dharma serve as rules of the limits of power. The rules of dharma are also the rights of the ruled, the right to expect that the State will treat them without fear or favour. Transgressing them leads to tragedy. One hopes our new government is aware of this truism.

On the assumption that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi is going to be re-elected in this month's assembly election, he is being touted by many in the Bharatiya Janata Party as the party's prime ministerial candidate in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Gujarat is assumed to have benefi ted from Modi's administrative acumen and its economic performance is much praised. However, on a number of social and human development indicators, the performance of Gujarat is abysmal, especially where tribals, children, women and minorities are concerned. Civil society in the state also seems to be struck by a kind of paralysis in the face of state violence against the minorities. What then does such "growth" mean?

Though much intellectual energy has been expended on the "poverty problem" in India, the debate simply does not take into account the highly unequal social context in which poverty is produced and reproduced. Can we reflect on the right not to be poor without taking on these background inequalities? Arguably, the right not to be poor is best articulated as a subset of the generic right to equality. The concept of equality is, however, not self-explanatory. In many circles, redistributive justice has replaced equality. It is therefore time to ask the question - equality for what? Is equality only about the provision of minimal resources, or is it about enabling a sense of self-worth so that people can participate in the multiple transactions of society with a degree of confidence? Unless we are careful about the way we approach the poverty debate, we will land up not with equality, but with "sufficientarianism".

It is time holders of state power understand that mobilisation in civil society against, or for policies, is an integral part of democratic politics, particularly when representatives have betrayed us time and again. The State enacts, implements, and adjudicates policies in our name, and governs in our name. We therefore have the right to ask why we should accept unjust and arbitrary policies, and above all corruption. But this does not mean that we uncritically accept civil society initiatives as wholly good and entirely democratic; these initiatives should also be subjected to public scrutiny and engaged with.