Loktantrano Mukhya Payo

Here is a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Loktantrano Mukhya Payo" (The Main Foundation of Democracy) by Sukhlal Sanghavi:

This article, published in "Sanskruti" in January 1954, reflects on the true foundation of democracy, especially in the context of India's recent independence and the celebration of Republic Day. The author, Sukhlal Sanghavi, argues that while external structures of democracy are in place, the core principle is often missing.

Sanghavi asserts that the primary and most crucial foundation of democracy is the collective well-being and welfare of the society. This means that every mature and understanding citizen must prioritize the good of the community over their own personal interests and use their abilities for the collective benefit.

He traces the historical decline of this principle. In the times of Buddha and Mahavir, there were republics (Ganrajyas) that embodied democratic elements. However, when faced with significant threats, these republics lacked the necessary organization and strength. Consequently, powerful individuals stepped in to address these crises, leading to the rise of autocratic rule. In this shift, the initial focus on collective welfare became secondary to individual interests and glory.

A similar shift occurred in the religious sphere. The emphasis on active, duty-oriented religious practices (pravrutti) gradually diminished, replaced by a focus on renunciation and spiritual detachment (nivrutti). This, Sanghavi contends, contributed to a decline in a sense of collective responsibility among the common people. In religious matters, this led to an emphasis on a form of inactivity or escapism that provided an illusion of renunciation but actually fostered irresponsibility towards the collective good, often disguised in various forms of religious practice.

The result of this historical trajectory, according to Sanghavi, was a weakening of India, despite its vast resources, intellectual prowess, and rich culture. This decline, he states, manifested as a "slave mentality." He identifies the root cause of this weakness and subservient attitude as the dominance of individual self-interest and personal gain over the genuine understanding and spirit of collective welfare and well-being within the Indian populace.

The author then examines the independence movement. He refers to Dadabhai Naoroji's call for Swaraj (self-rule) and his belief that it would alleviate poverty, unemployment, and suffering. Sanghavi questions what the concept of democracy (Lok Rajya) held for Naoroji and similar figures. He notes that while democratic rule has been achieved, the problems of poverty and hardship persist, if not worsened.

He highlights the efforts of social reformers like the Maharashtrian Brahmin who advocated for Swadeshi (indigenous goods), even if they were inferior to foreign alternatives, to combat poverty and unemployment and prevent the populace from being trapped by capitalism. He also mentions Ganesh Vasudev Joshi (Sarvajanik Kaka) who wore hand-spun khadi as a symbol of his Swaraj work. These examples, Sanghavi suggests, indicate that the proponents of Swaraj and Lok Rajya primarily aimed to establish a nationwide system where individual self-interest would be transformed into a commitment to collective welfare.

Tilak and Gandhi continued this vision. Gandhi, with his intuitive wisdom and activist approach, illuminated and provided practical examples of how to address issues for the public good. Sanghavi states that the tree of democracy has grown from this dedication. However, he expresses concern that despite the celebrations and praise for democracy, the foundation is not truly solid.

He critically analyzes the current state of affairs, pointing to the self-interest of industrialists, the carelessness of officials regarding their responsibilities, the lethargy in work, the primary focus on personal gain by various traders who act as brokers for foreign goods, and the self-serving activities of educated individuals involved in education and running newspapers to shape public opinion.

Based on his observations and evidence, Sanghavi concludes that while democratic rule has been established, its constitution drafted, and its festivals celebrated, the fundamental and strong foundation of collective welfare is missing. He argues that industrialists, officials, intermediaries, educated elites, scholars, and intellectuals are not working with a vision of collective welfare that would strengthen democracy's base. This, he believes, is why the prophecies of prosperity following Swaraj, as envisioned by Naoroji and Gandhi, have not yet materialized.

Sanghavi quotes Mr. Evan, who rightly states that true democracy cannot coexist with poverty and wealth simultaneously. He emphasizes that in its true sense, democracy must erase the distinction between wealth and poverty. If this disparity continues, democracy is merely a nominal concept.

Finally, he connects this to Mahatma Gandhi's dream of a non-violent state, which also implies the impossibility of the co-existence of poverty and affluence within the populace for such a system to be ideal. He concludes by acknowledging Shri Vinoba Bhave's efforts in this direction, striving to bridge the gap between poverty and affluence and manifest the Gita's concept of equanimity in governance.