History - And This Historic Moment

Why do we study History?

Because, as Arnold Toynbee put it, "the study of the past without an eye on the future is impossible; and if it were possible, it would be perverse."

And what is History?

It is a study of the unique, and the non-repeatable, what happened at a particular moment in time, and at one geographical location. 

The historian proceeds towards an "understanding" of these people and events. And from these, we learn - for the future that we must contemplate.

There will never be another Socrates or Diogenes, never another Napoleon or Hitler, never another Satchmo or Morrison.

History is NOT Theory - as the Marxists claim.

Theory is "abstract" - composed of "regularities" that are "abstracted out" of the whole - and these theories apply to all times and all places.

In the Science of Economics, the regularities are "laws of thought" - which guide our "actions" in the marketplace, which we must undertake in order to satisfy our needs.

There are many kinds of histories: a history of jazz, a history of ideas, a history of the military, and so on and so forth.

But "economic history" devoid of the correct Theory is meaningless. There are many histories of money that have not benefited from reading Carl Menger's lucid essay on the theory of the "spontaneous" origin of money - from the trading minds of ordinary, unlettered men, of ages long past. Money is NOT a "creature of The State."

It is thus that Toynbee erred grievously when he coined the expression "industrial revolution." The term indicates that it all happened in an instant - suddenly.

Hernando de Soto solved the "mystery of capital" by pointing to the absence of property titles in the Third World.

There is an essay in my Natural Order (available on the right-hand bar) that looks at how property titling and protection came about in Olde England - and this is how that particular nation slowly graduated out of feudalism and into capitalism. More on this, later.

However, there is much I learnt from Toynbee's famous "study of history": the crucial role played by "challenge-and-response," for example, which surely explains why poor English youth braved scurvy to sail to the East - or, to put it another way, why poverty is a great motivator. The "virtuous circle of poverty." The children of the rich more often than not get hooked on to lives of idleness and vice. There is a Vicious Circle of Prosperity - not Poverty - and this is very important for my poor countrymen to note.

Similarly, Toynbee made some very important studies on the responses that occur when advanced and backward civilisations collide: how some retreat into orthodoxy, while others embrace the new. The former he called "zealotism" - which is the CONgress topi and khadi kurta-pajama, and also the BJP's "Ram Rajya"; the best example of the latter are the Japs after Perry's "gunboat diplomacy," when the entire Imperial Court adopted western attire, and droves of scholars were sent to the West to learn. Within decades, Japan could take on the West.

In any case, India, from 1947 itself, has been "zealotist." English language education has been actively discouraged; the vast masses speak only in their vernacular, thereby dividing us all into distinct and separate linguistic areas. We have never tried to "learn" the secrets of the success of the modern West. We have just basked in the false pride of having "thrown out the British Raj."

And as for all our Marxist historians and pseudo-economists - all "bureaucrat-professors" in State employ - they have deliberately destroyed both History as well as Theory.

How can this nation of the deliberately blinded contemplate the uncertain future?

I will attempt to clear the air in this brief post.

The unique, non-repeatable historical personage we all need to "understand" is Lord Curzon - and so, to begin with, look at his portrait above very carefully. He was born a British "aristocrat" - he was not a "commoner." He knew early on in life that he would be entrusted with great responsibilities - and so he studied a lot. He read lots and lots of BOOKS. But he did not know people. Especially ordinary folk.

His decision to partition Bengal along communal lines went against the advice of the entire Indian Civil Service - all British officers from the middle classes, people who had lived and worked among the peasantry, and were known to be quite fond of them, in fact. You find many sketches of these officers, smoking their pipes leaning against a tree, talking to the village folk, sorting out land ownership disputes and so on, and drinking their sweet teas, even.

It is this ghastly decision in 1905 that led to the "nationalist agitation." First, with the CONgress. And as for the Muslim League, it was formed in 1906 - in Dacca. Then came the Partition of India in 1947, and the "democratic majoritarian principle" prevailed, so minorities were told to shift. Riots followed. Millions perished.

Today, the Pakistan-India enmity, the BJP's hatred towards other religious groups, and even the "international politics" of the US - these are all remnants of Curzon's insanity. Note how TIME magazine featured Narendra Modi as their poster boy.

Further, Curzon was the Great Centraliser.

There is a very long History of British rule in India before Curzon - most of it under the Company. During this period, the "system" was to leave the district officer alone, and "let him get on with it." During this period, there were British district officers in Company administered territories - and there were lots and lots of local rulers who pledged loyalty to the British Crown, through "solemn treaties," but ruled themselves. From most British historical accounts, the civil service felt that local rulers were BETTER than they were, because the people preferred them. These rulers were thus instructed, advised - and also let alone. Take Manipur, for example: their Raja ran a highly respected, culturally advanced, and quite prosperous 13-gun Salute State! The North-East was administered by the British only in the late 1850s - and the administration was very light. All the local traditions and customs were respected. The people were "loyal." Many fought bravely for the Brits in WW2 - and even died.

Curzon was a very different kettle of fish from all other previous governors-general and viceroys. He partitioned Bengal against the advice tendered to him - and then, he went on to centralise all decision-making in himself. He could not "delegate." He trusted no one. He thought it was only he who knew best.

After running away with his capital to New Delhi, he spent summers in Simla, of course, high up in a solitary and gloomy castle out of town. There, every night, his liveried servants would bring to his study loads and loads of files, which he would carefully study and decide upon. He wanted to take decisions on anything and everything - and this delayed matters in almost all cases, for obvious reasons. In a few decades, nothing worked. At least not as it used to. And then came Mountbatten - and I guess you know the rest.

Everything was then CENTRALISED.

Everything was COMMUNALISED.

Communal riots became a regular feature throughout India.

We in India therefore need to know three things: first, we need to know why the West succeeded so spectacularly; second, we need to know how we can revert to small, local units of civil government, because centralisation was NEVER how India - a huge sub-continent - was ever well run; and third, which is vital, how we can develop a mental attitude biased towards civic harmony, and against needless strife.

The relevant essay in my Natural Order book is the one that discusses how the Common Law originated - it tells the very same tale that Hernando de Soto has told about poor nations. The essay shows that there was nothing like a sudden "industrial revolution"; on the contrary, with property rights and transferable paper titles, and proper legal records as well, LAND became an "economic good," which was NOT the case under feudalism.

It is this that led to the progressive accumulation of capital - which is the basis of civilisation. People could then borrow - and take risks. Lenders - even foreign lenders - were safe.

The Lesson: Private Property - and titles. 

Second: The same book contains an essay on the Lord Mayor of the Olde City of London - and its traditional Civic Sword, which was used to keep the King OUT of civic affairs. Civic Independence. An independence that still continues, and is carefully guarded. It is here, in this "One Square Mile Of Liberty," that the John Bull Capitalism of the Honourable East India Company was headquartered. One square mile of liberty built much of the British Empire - with merchant ships. They exported their own gold - and imported nonsensical things like spices, and prospered. Imports are the way forward.

Third: The urban market economy is about Rugged Individualism. YOU yourself decide where to invest, what to buy, what to sell and so on. YOU yourself are responsible to yourself for your gains and losses. There is NO COLLECTIVE.

Now, the greatest advantage of the urban market economy is that we interact peacefully and gainfully with COMPLETE STRANGERS.

We do NOT open our shops for relatives and friends.

We are very happy when foreign tourists drop by.

This is called a "catallaxy" - and this is the WORD to remember, instead of the very harmful word "community."

Hayek wrote somewhere that he had "fallen in love with this word."

And I hope you all will do so, too.

Do read my column on this word, written with great love as well.

So, think of a Great and Open Market Society - made up of rugged individuals, open to all comers, from anywhere in the world.

Sing all the love songs dedicated to pardesis.

Tourism is the Biggest Industry in the World.

It requires Peace.

Liberty - to have FUN.

Hospitality.

And transportation, of course.

This is a very crucial Historical Moment.

Look at the EU and their collapsing paper Euro.

So, avoid Centralisation - and central banking.

Look at the paper US dollar.

Look at our own inflationism.

The whole world's broke,

Ain't worth fixing,

You gotta get out,

And make a New Beginning.

As far as I am concerned, I have taken the irrevocable decision to personally stay forever out of any kind of activism as well as administration.

With my For Civilisation, Against Politics: Arguments for an Intellectual-Moral Revolution I have "arrived" as a philosopher. I feel "self-actualised."

I am quite confident that this little book will have an enormous impact worldwide - and be the "game changer" that was really required.

So, I am happy to remain just The Thinker.

You all must be The Doers.

The doer and the thinker,

No allowance for the other,

As the fading light illuminates,

The mercenary's creed...

And the Poet lifts his Pen,

While the Soldier lifts his Sword.

Jethro Tull - Thick as a Brick.