|
|
|
|
Early atheist programs were similar to Gandhi's Constructive work. While
the Constructive program of Gandhi was linked with the political fight
of the Congress and had therefore a nation wide significance, our work
of adult education or village sanitation or removal of untouchability or
women's liberation was intensively confined to a few villages. In a way,
it was even non-political, as we had not proceeded sufficiently far
to come into touch with or to clash with political authority. We moved
in the thin margin outside the direct authority of the government. But
as our work widened, we did clash with the conservative and capitalist
ways of the government, and we found the need of political action. Political
action becomes indispensable in the modern age if social work should be
free and broad. Gandhi told Ramaswamy, an atheist, that he (Gandhi) was
not a politician. He was essentially a man of religion and a social reformer,
and to the extent political factors have come in his way he had been unwillingly
drawn into political sphere. (An Atheist with Gandhi -- page 28).
Despite the fact that our social work in Mudunur village was intensive,
it was not so abiding as we wished. No doubt, Mudunur Suryam became a successful
Insurance agent, Nagulapalli Sitaramaiah became a social worker of repute
and Kalapala Suryam became a legislator. They are all the products of the
adult school and active participants in the work at Mudunur. Also untouchability
is relaxed there to a great extent. But in the very village which was know
to be "the godless village" and in which 142 classified themselves
as atheists in 1941 census, religious ceremonies are reappearing. Evidently
social work without political legislation loses strength. The same is the
experience with the several constructive activities of Gandhi during the
fight for freedom. The lasting contribution of the Congress movement is
the political freedom of India but not social change by constructive work.
Of course, political work without constructive work is blind; at the same
time, the results of constructive work without political action are shortlived.
So we added political action to social work and continued social work along
with political action.
Our active politics started when we participated in the Quit India movement
in 1942. As we continued political action, our politics have grown differently
from the power politics in vogue. The difference is partly due to the atheist
outlook and partly to our acquaintance with the Gandhian method. The principal
feature of power politics is the capture of the authority of the government
by fair or by foul means. The desire to capture power raises competition
for power among those who have the desire. Competition leads to formation
of political parties and rivalries among the parties make the means of
capturing power more foul than fair. Party machinations and corruptive
ways and the many evils to which present democracies are subject flow from
power politics.
The real purpose of politics is to solve people's problems by means of
governmental legislation. Constructive program is the non-political
method of solving people's problems. Sarvodaya is non-political in
that sense. But in the modern age when problems are complex and social
relations are wide, constructive work is not able to cope up with the demands
of people's needs. Therefore, we require politics that is legislation,
to solve our problems. But we find politics also failing to solve the problems
satisfactorily on account of the competition for power entering into politics.
Therefore, unless politics are cleared of the mania for power, politics
cannot fulfill its real purpose of solving people's problems. That is,
those who hold the reins of governmental authority should be people-minded
and not power-minded. But to suppose that lust for power is inherent
in the very institutions of government on account of its centralized authority
and revenues, and to recommend non-political methods for solution
of people's problems especially when non-political methods are inadequate
to deal with the problems of stage of civilizational progress, are born
of a feeling of frustration. Therefore, to be practical a way must be found
to turn power-politics into real politics, that would make persons
in authority people-minded instead of power-minded.
Gandhi proposed the method of decentralization of the basic units of administration
so that the people get into direct touch with their representatives. The
direct touch enables people to control their representatives in authority
and to check their slipping into greed for power, because people stand
to lose by such a wrong. Even in self defense against the evil of power
mania, people should prevent legislators from abuse of power. But effective
check is possible only when units of administration are sufficiently decentralized
to keep legislators in close tough with people. If Gandhi got into the
seat of power on India winning freedom, or if Jawaharlal Nehru followed
the Gandhian way, India would have had politics instead power politics.
Both did not happen. Gandhi was assassinated and Nehru held the power that
preserved the imperialist ways of centralized authority.
India has been politically free since 1947, but is in the grip of power
politics rather than in the dawn of real politics. What program shall we,
the atheists, take up to clear the present politics of power mania? Decentralization
is indeed desirable. But it is not a feasible proposition for us as individual
citizens in a democracy. It can be done only after we get into seats of
power. Even Vinoba with all his prestige, mighty effort of foot march throughout
India, and huge following, could not get administration decentralized effectively,
though that was his avowed purpose. Some of us were with him in the Sarvodaya
movement, as it was known. I wrote a book Why Gram-Raj by name printed
by the Sarvodaya publications. Its theme is the need of decentralization
of the basic units of administration. To start the work from where we are,
we took to the programs of partylessness and pomplessness of legislators.
The progress of atheist political action consisted in formulation and practice
of items of partylessness and pomplessness. Nevertheless, we keep close
to constructive work also.
In 1946, I was invited to the camp of Kasturiba Memorial Trust at Borivilli,
Bombay. Mridula Sarabhai was the Secretary of the Trust. She was quite
rational. She asked me to speak on superstitions. Naturally, I referred
to the need of atheism to fight superstitions. There was a protest against
the mention of atheism in a camp which was run under the aegis of Gandhism.
Also Mridula dropped the item of prayer from the timetable of the camp.
The protest was carried to Gandhi. He did not take a serious notice of
it. He suggested that prayer might be arranged for those who need it. Gandhians
were more "godly" than Gandhi.
Next year Mridula Sarabhai became a Secretary of the All India Congress
Committee along with Kheskar. Sadiq Ali was the Office Secretary. I was
taken in as the Organizer, first at Allahabad,. and then at Delhi Camp
office. Gandhi was staying in the Bhangi Colony on Panchkuan Road among
sweepers. I was going there pretty frequently. I noticed the difference
between the slum dwellings of sweepers where Gandhi lived and the posh
mansions of the cabinet ministers who held the posts in the caretaker government
under the prime ministership of Jawaharlal Nehru in the name of Gandhi.
Obviously the principles of Gandhism and its austerity began to be sidetracked.
Saraswati was with me for some time. We were invited to lunch by Mohammad
Rahamtullah Khan, the president of the Delhi Congress Committee. He was
very elderly and considerate. According to his custom, he served beef as
a dish at the meal. Saraswati and I are vegetarians by the caste habit
which we acquired in childhood. When we discarded caste and religious association,
we revised food habits also that are linked up with caste distinctions.
But normally we remained vegetarian. At that time we ate a bit of beef
to show that we are not sentimentally vegetarian hidebound by caste habits
and religious feelings. We asked Md. Rahamtullah Khan whether he would
eat pork. Pork is a religious taboo to Muslims as beef is to Hindu castes.
Rahamtulla Khan saw the point in our question. He rose above the levels
of religious difference and told us with dignity, "Yes, I should,
when it is served to me." Of course we did not have a dish of pork
ready at hand. But his reply left an impression on us and suggested an
objective program for effacing Hindu-Muslim differences. Twenty five
years later we conducted the program of beef and pork eating in the face
of opposition from conventional religionists. The incident at Md. Rahamtulla
Khan's house formed the basis for an organized and extensive program in
1972.
Nehru was not faithful to Gandhi as Lenin was to Marx. Nehru had immense
love and respect for Gandhi. That was sentimental. He did not consider
the Gandhian discipline of austerity feasible or desirable in independent
India. As Prime Minister of the caretaker government till the August 15,
1947, Nehru was visiting Gandhi who was residing in the slum of the sweepers.
But he was himself living in ministerial mansions of the British imperial
regime. He paid little heed to Gandhi's advice to Governors, ministers
and legislators to deem themselves as servants of people and to live a
way of life close to the common man of India who is poverty stricken. Gandhi
did not simply say this but lived that way of life in a hut at Sevagram
Ashram and in the slums at Delhi. Neither Nehru nor "Gandhians"
appreciated the need of austerity to deserve the respect of the mass of
people for the laws they make.
In contrast to Nehru, stood Lenin. On becoming the Secretary of the Communist
party he refused the increase in his salary. Noteworthy still was his conduct,
when he shifted to Gorky Hill to take rest. There was the mansion of the
commander-in-chief of the Czar who had fled after the revolution.
Lenin stayed not in the mansion, but in the servant's quarter. My admiration
for him grew a thousand fold when I saw the servants quarter by the side
of the big mansion when I visited Moscow in 1974. At once in my mind's
eye Gandhi's hut in Sevagram appeared side by side with the servant's quarter
where Lenin lived. Both stood in terrible contrast with the Teen Murthi
Bhavan in which Nehru lived, the palatial mansion of the commander-in-chief
of the British army in India. Lenin lived in the servant's quarter of the
mansion; Nehru lived in the mansion itself. The difference indicated the
difference in their faithfulness to the ideology they professed.
Inspired by Lenin's simplicity, the rank and file of the Communist party
all over the world lived close to the common people. Following Nehru, Gandhians
deviated from the Gandhian principles.
After the Quit India movement, my close colleague, Tummala Challayya, was
disillusioned with Gandhian ideology which could not inspire Gandhians
with simplicity. He was twice in prison in Quit India movement, and an
ardent Gandhian at first. Later, he moved towards the Communist Party,
and persuaded some others too to join the Party. He and Yellamanchili Ramakrishnayya
followed the path of communism, went under ground and Ramakrishnayya was
shot dead in an encounter with police. Chellayya narrowly escaped capital
punishment.
Chellayya persuaded me at that time to join the Communist Party. The marked
difference between the simplicity of Communist workers and the pompous
ostentation of Congressmen was his irrefutable argument. I looked at Gandhism
and Marxism in their wider perspective, of theoretical implications and
practical programs. Principles of dialectical materialism and their application
to human history basically deny freewill to the individual. This goes against
the atheist assertion of the freewill. In practice, the Marxian ideology
would necessitate secrecy and underground life in the attempt to organize
for the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat or of its
champion, the Communist Party. I am averse to secrecy. While I disapproved
the pomp of congressmen. I could not accept the implications of Marxism.
I felt that both Gandhism and Marxism had good parts and both of them needed
atheist correction for clearing them of faults. I explained this in my
book "Positive Atheism." We carried on the atheist work on political
and constructive fronts, without getting into the streams of the Congress
or of the Communist Party.
Gandhi was assassinated on the January 30 1948. He had to lay down his
life because his followers would not listen to him. His solution to the
Hindu-Muslim problem was to give Jinnah, the Muslim leader, a blank
check to form the government of undivided India. He said that it was firstly
wrong to think in terms of Hindu citizens and Muslim citizens, instead
of thinking in terms of Indian secular citizenship; and that secondly,
even if religious distinctions were granted, Hindus were in two thirds
majority in numbers and could easily be liberal to their Muslim brethren,
though they were found to be stubborn. Love of power blinded reason. The
Congress High Command agreed to the division to avoid the colossal bloodbath.
India was divided on August 15, 1947. Gandhi's protest took the non-violent
from of working for communal harmony. His voice was drowned in communal
frenzy and a Hindu shot down a "Sanatana Hindu," who was simply
a human.
After Gandhi's assassination, I severed connection with the Congress and
proceeded along the atheist path in all aspects of life, as I conceived
them.
We shifted from Mudunur to Patamata as the latter is on the roadside with
better communications being a suburb of Vijayawada town. On the day we
left Mudunur, there was a farewell function. A purse of collections was
presented to us and friends helped us to shift the huts from Mudunur to
Patamata. The seven years' stay at Mudunur and the reminiscences of activities
there have fostered, bonds of lasting relationship. Paturi Nagabhushanam,
the Secretary of the Library movement, secured for us a plot of land at
Patamata to put up our sheds. We called that place also atheist center
and conducted adult education classes in the untouchable slum by our side.
The landlord, Govindarajulu Venkateswara Rao, and his brothers, though
congressmen, objected to our association with untouchables since it would
disturb the peasant-labour relations in the area. But we continued
our programs. They obtained an ex-parte legal decree for our eviction.
Chennupati Ramakotaiah, the head of the village, sympathized with the clash
of my ways with the existing social setup and invited me to his land in
another part of Patamata. The present Atheist Center, has been there since
1948.
Better communications at Patamata facilitated widening of engagements.
I participated in several library and adult education conferences organized
by Paturi Nagabhushanam who had devoted his life to library movement. He
took part in the freedom struggle of 1930-32 and is an enthusiastic Gandhite.
He appreciated my condition that wherever I go for a conference, my lodge
and food should be arranged in the untouchable slum. A notable incident
happened at the Alampur conference. The local organizers who generally
treated untouchables as manual laborers and disliked close association
with them, did not make the arrangements satisfactorily as promised. At
a late hour, Nagabhushanam personally attended to the matter and several
delegates to the conference came to the slum and shared the meal they arranged.
It was a unique event in those parts and it served to awaken new social
consciousness. The most distinguished guest of the function was Gadicherla
Hari Sarvothama Rao, another freedom fighter of radical views. He walked
to the slum for participation in the meal, in spite of his advanced age.
Similar incidents happened at a village in Cuddapah District and at Vallabhapuram
in Guntur District. Each incident gained fresh friends to us who came forward
with sacrifice of caste privileges and worked for equal social respect.
The conference put me in touch with Ayyanki Venkata Ramanaiah, Venkata
Rama Naidu, Putumbaka Sreeramulu, Roche Victoria, Korukonda Subbaraju and
several elite of Andhra Pradesh.
Atheism extended its frontiers through programs of action.
Economic problem is the most important one in human affairs. There are
cases when men and women stake their life for honor and liberty. Wars and
suicides have no place in human life unless there are values considered
more worthy than food and comfort. Yet, in day-to-day life food
is very important. Those for whom food is assured progress in fields of
art and technology is more rapid than those who have to search for or fight
for food. The backwardness of Asian and African countries is primarily
due to their lack of social security. Further, modern age recognizes the
equality of all humans. Therefore, to have social security evenly distributed
among all people yields better results in development of human affairs
than when its availability differs with advantages in competition. Evidently,
socialist countries enjoy greater peace and progress than countries under
capitalist economy, though both have social security. Hence economic equality
is the cry of the day.
Countries that have adopted the Marxian ideology have a materialist awakening
and they have definitely achieved economic equality now. But their achievement
is subject to political dictatorship, which curbs individual freedom. The
problem before atheists is to find out a method by which economic equality
is achieved while preserving the freedom of the individual. That is, taking
democracy and socialism together.
Because no country has so far achieved socialism democratically, the common
belief is that Marxism alone stands for socialism, while democracy supports
capitalism. But we find Gandhi attempted at achieving socialism democratically.
The thirteenth item of his Constructive Program is to work for Economic
Equality. Of course, the method proposed for achieving economic equality
is trusteeship. And Trusteeship is too good to be real. The Sarvodaya movement
which gave trusteeship the best trial has failed in the final achievement.
Therefore, while Marxism is well known by its achievement of socialism,
the thirteenth item of Gandhian program is either little known by the lack
of achievement or where it is known it is discredited by its trusteeship
principal which is both non political and utopian. Nevertheless, the indication
of possibility of achieving socialism democratically is found in the thirteenth
item of the Constructive Program of Gandhi. It is this possibility that
attracts atheists. They feel that if democratic political method is adopted
instead of trusteeship, it is possible to achieve economic equality without
disturbing the freedom of the individual.
The correction needed in this context is to drive democracy towards legislations
in favor of economic equality and atheists feel that democracy can be driven
in that direction when it is rendered partyless and pompless. With this
plan, atheists held the Conference of Gandhi Sangh at Gudivada at first.
The name of Gandhi was taken in order to emphasize that not only Marx but
Gandhi also talked of economic equality. The conference highlighted the
thirteenth item of the Constructive Program. The organizers of the conference
were Mudedla Ramarao and K. Bhujanga Bhushana Rao who were freedom fighters.
S. Ramanathan, President of the All India Rationalist Association and S.
Jagannathan were among the guests from Madras who contributed to the discussion.
Kodati Narayan Rao from Hyderabad helped us give shape to the resolution.
The success of the conference was due to the cooperative effort of several
persons who were interested in evolving a democratic method for achieving
economic equality.
The same work is carried on later when we formed Arthik Samatha Mandal
(Association for the achievement of economic equality) at Wardha under
the presidentship of J.C. Kumarappa. I was the secretary, D.J. Hathekar,
T.K. Bang, Suresh Ram and Vasant Nargolkar were on the committee. We resolved
that democracy should be rid of party and pomp in order to think in terms
of achieving economic equality.
For spreading atheist ideas and programs of work, we wanted to start a
journal. A small printing press with a treadle came in handy. Lavanam underwent
training in press work at Madras with Shramajeevi Acharya. At Patamata
we started the press. My children Vijayam, Samaram, Mythri, Vidya and several
coworkers from Patamata village worked in the press. I edited the Telugu
weekly, Sangham, (Society) in whose columns we discussed the atheist ideology
and plan of action. The press was bought out of public donation and the
journal was run on public sympathy. After running it for five years, we
changed the name to Arthik Samata (Economic Equality), under the editorship
of Lavanam. The change of name was in tune with our emphasis on economic
problems. When our press became too rickety to print, C. Rangappa of Proddatur
printed our journal in his Sarathy Press. He printed some books of atheism
too and helped our work.
Besides the two journals in Telugu, Sangham and Arthik Samata, we ran a
Hindi monthly, Insaan (means a human being) for a few years, to gain contact
with the Hindi States of the North. Now we have the English monthly journal,
The Atheist, which has world wide circulation in atheist circles. For a
year Lavanam was at Kakinada with C.V.K. Rao, assisting the editing of
Sarathi which adopted the ideology of economic equality.
Though we were busy with press, journal and spread of atheist thought,
we did not lose sight of constructive work. Being adjacent to the town,
the constructive work at Patamata was different from the work at Mudunur.
While unemployment and poverty are general problems concentrated in urban
areas in developing countries with no social security, the specific problem
with which we were confronted was the eviction of hut-dwellers who
are untouchables, from the place they were living on. The reason for the
eviction was either the needs of town planning or the ownership of the
land by a rich man. Such a question came to us where 48 huts were involved.
I approached the municipal authorities and the state government to provide
the evicted persons with alternative house sites for the huts. They pleaded
lack of provision in the budget for the help. My wife and I took a straight
course. We helped the evicted hutsmen to occupy a wide and unused road
margin. The municipal authorities objected to the occupation as it was
illegal. Our simple answer was that the occupation was moral. Where there
is discord between legality and morality, legality should be opposed and
morality should be upheld. Law is for man. If law hurts man's life, law
must be changed and man should be allowed to live. The straight and open
vindication of our stand, let the poor people live on there. The stand
we took involved the affected people in the contention and they now stand
on their legs with confidence. They feel strong because they are in the
right.
My children have grown with the humanist outlook. Their marital alliances
disregarded caste distinctions. The daughter of Nara, an atheist married
a muslim on principle. My son Lavanam, married an "untouchable"
and this was the second marriage that was performed at Sevagram on atheist
principles with no mention of god. The first was the marriage of my daughter
Manorama with Arjunarao.
As the children grew up and were qualified educationally by private study
or by regular collegiate education, we had to find work for them. They
did not want salaried jobs. So my second daughter Mythri and Hemalata Lavanam
started a private children school at the atheist center, Patamata. It was
named Vasavya school. Vasavya is a word coined with the first letters of
three words in Telugu, Vastavikata (sense of reality), Sanghadrusti (sociability),
and Vyaktityam (individuality) -- the three qualities that atheism cherishes.
The children of Vasavya school were required to drop caste appellations
of their names. The school enlisted the cooperation of the parents of students
and educated the homes indirectly. It was an enjoyable experience.
The feeling of freedom is the principal feature of atheism. It makes
atheists masters of every situation. Being masters they cannot complain.
With a sense of responsibility, and direct action, they have to redress
whatever they find unjust.
Direct action is the same as Gandhi's Satyagraha. When Gandhi said that
living faith in god was necessary for a Satyagrahi, he spoke in common
conventional language. In spirit and practice, Satyagraha and atheistic
direct action are alike in as much as both should insist upon the right
and oppose the wrong.
Direct action has two advantages. It sets right a wrong. Also it disciplines
the activist. Our action against ornamental flower plants illustrated the
double advantage. We felt that as long as there is scarcity of food any
where, it is anti social to use land, water, manure, time interest or energy
for growing non edibles. From the point of view of social responsibility
the color of tomato or the shape of cabbage is more pleasing to the eyes
then nonedible salvia or pansy. So, after due notice to the concerned authorities,
some of us planned in 1968 to replace ornamental plants with edibles in
the public garden at Hyderabad. T. Ramarao who is not avowedly an atheist,
liked the plan. Before he participated in the operation, he pulled out
chrysanthemums from the pots of his garden and put in coriander there.
By practice and sacrifice he inspired others to do likewise. It spoke of
the honesty of his purpose and added dignity to our work, with the result
that several passers by on the road joined us sympathetically in replacing
flower plants with edibles, in the garden that evening. The police imprisoned
us on the charge of destroying public garden. But the moral value of our
programs was so forceful that on rethinking, the government had to withdraw
the case against us unconditionally after a month.
Our direct action was largely against the pompous extravagance of the heads
of the State. Political power is a potent factor in regulating lives of
the people. On winning political freedom of India, we expected the persons
wielding political power to think and work for the welfare of all people.
But those who were elected to seats of power, misused authority for selfish
gains and used the revenues of the government more for personal comforts
and pride of pomp than for people's welfare. So, we directed our action
against the pompous extravagances of heads of the State.
Elected legislators could abuse power since people were not vigilant enough
to check the excesses of their representatives. Accustomed to feel subservient
to their notion of god, common people obeyed their governments too, instead
of controlling them and preventing lapses. Atheists re-educate the
people to tell them that they are the masters of their government, as democracy
requires them to be. Involvement in the programs of direct action is the
best method of education. Heads of State do need special facilities for
the performance of their special functions. But personal pomp is certainly
an abuse of authority and disdain of people. They travel in first class
and live in luxurious mansions, while common people are packed in third
class compartments and are restricted to huts in slums. At one time, we
insisted on the ministers of the state too traveling in third class in
sympathy with the condition of common people whom they profess to serve.
At the railway station, we prevented them from getting into first class
compartments.
Chundi Veeraswamy, who earns out his livelihood barber, was a great activist
in the program. He could see the injustice in comparison with his hard
labor everyday. We were often kept out by the police till the train left.
However, P.V.G. Raju, and T. Viswanatham when they were ministers traveled
in third class sometimes in sympathy with our demand. M.V. Krishna Rao,
another minister travels in omnibus along with common people, a big change
in the prevailing customs in India. Tanguturi Prakasam, an elderly gentleman,
too traveled in third class on principle when he was the state minister
for revenue.
One minister's reaction was strange. When I persuaded him to travel in
third class, his ministerial dignity, false as it was, was hurt. He slighted
me with "Who are you?" Straight I replied, "I am your master."
The right of democracy struck him hard. He withdrew behind the cordon of
police.
Rajendra Prasad was a close associate of Gandhi. He became the first President
of the Republic of India. In a special interview, I requested him, "The
best place for the President of India is the slum were Gandhi lived. I
won't press that demand now. Please visit the slum wherever you go. Slum
dwellers also are citizens of India. Placed as you are, they cannot easily
approach you. "He was too honest to deny my request. He could not
agree either, on account of the form and pomp that surrounded him, and
parried the question.
I repeated the request with Chandulal Trivedi, when he was the Governor
of Andhra State. He could receive addresses from clubs and corporations,
but he should visit the slums also. Twice we staged black-flag demonstrations
when he paid no heed. Popular sympathy grew in our favor. Third time he
yielded. He visited slums wherever he went thereafter and attended to their
needs. My wife, Saraswati, and Andraiah played notable roles in those direct
actions.
We pressed upon Sanjiva Reddy and Brahmanda Reddy, when they were Chief
Ministers of Andhra Pradesh to shift from their palatial mansions to more
modest abodes, closer to the common people. I had a long discussion with
Kamaraj Nadar on the point when he was the President of the Congress Party.
In 1961-62 fourteen of us, including Saraswati and Lavanam, started on
a foot march from Sevagram Ashram to Delhi. It was 1,100 miles long and
took 99 days. It was a protest march against the pompous extravagance and
party affiliation of the Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. At every camp
on the march and on the way too, we were meeting people, addressing meetings
and explaining that, in democracy people are masters and ministers are
servants. By the time we reached Delhi, we were 38 from different States
of India. We wrote repeatedly to the Prime Minister, the first representative
of the people. We requested him to set an example to the people as the
"heir of Gandhi." He was silent. At Delhi we blocked the entrance
of his official residence, Teen Murthi, as direct protest. He called for
us to talk the next day. Mahavir Bhai and I met him. He said he would gladly
respond to the demand, if the public is sufficiently awakened to the principles
of partylessness and pomplessness. We said that a gesture from him would
rouse the people to democratic consciousness. At present democratic practices
move in a vicious circle shifting responsibilities of change from government
to people and people to government. I found the members of Communist Party
no better in their response. Their members in legislatures draw the same
salaries and allowances as those whom they call bourgeoisie. They say that
circumstances should change for persons to change. How do circumstances
change? Certainly by the effort of some individuals. Lenin did not wait
for the whole bourgeoisie to lose the class character before he lived in
the servant's quarter in Gorki Hill.
Nevertheless, four legislators of the Andhra Legislature elected a voluntary
cut in their salaries and allowances to be honest to their representation
of people's interests. They were C.V.K. Rao, Vavilala Gopalakrishnayya,
M.V. Subbareddi and Koarapati Pattabhi Ramaiah. Another aspect of direct
action is seeking elections.
One-adult-one-vote is the outstanding character of democracy.
The equality of voting franchise ought to lead to equality of economic
opportunity and equality of social respect among people through appropriate
legislation. But democracies have not so far succeeded in establishing
equality, despite the equality of voting franchise. What is the reason?
Atheists have thought over the problem with an open mind. They have tried
to find out where and how democracy is sabotaged in the fair purpose of
achieving equality.
One of the reasons for failure of democracy is the centralization of administration
which removes the representative away from the easy control of people.
Then the representative can abuse the powers of his position and fall into
the temptation of personal comfort. The programs of direct action have
been attempts to control the legislators and to compel them to shed pomp
as far as possible under the conditions of centralized administration.
The second method is seeking election by those who are inspired with the
desire to establish equality democratically. If they get elected, they
can try to introduce legislation to cut down pomp and to decentralize administration.
But there is a hurdle in the way of seeking election. Political parties
have crept into the democratic machinery and have virtually captured the
election platforms. Parties set up their candidates, and scare away non-party
candidates from seeking election. Nor are the party candidates useful for
the purpose of democracy. The competition among political parties for getting
elected by hook or by crook, fouls the election machinery. They collect
huge funds, bribe and corrupt voters, bug and blackmail opponents. After
election their attention is more absorbed in strengthening their positions
by pulling the legs of opponents than working for the welfare of the people.
The way of democracy that is sidetracked by political parties is called
power politics in contrast with the people's politics of real democracy.
Atheists are confronted with this ugly conditions of power politics when
they seek election. Atheists know that there is no mention at all of parties
in democratic constitutions. Even if there is any provision it could be
amended, in view of the harm that political parties do to people's interests.
In the face of the conventions of power politics atheists feet bold to
seek election as non-party candidates.
I sought election to Parliament in the first general election in India
in 1952. Reve stood for the State Assembly from Suryapet Constituency.
Though people were habituated to power politics and they were in the grips
of political parties, I found it easy to put across the purpose of democracy
to the people. I held street corner meetings, contacted the people straight
and held open dialogues. I did not succeed at the polls, but certainly
I succeeded in opening a new path to lead towards people's politics out
of power politics. It was a partyless movement.
M.N. Roy also propounded the theory of partyless democracy earlier. Consistently
he dissolved his party and encouraged the members. to lead the partyless
movement. A.G.K. Murty of Tenali was a protagonist of the cause. He gave
his full support to me. Later when I sought election to the State Assembly
again in 1967, his. colleague M.V. Ramamurthy stood for the Parliament
election. In 1972 elections the number of candidates to seek election from
partyless platform increased. B. Venugopal from Repalle, Parachuri Venkataratnam
from Kuchinapudi, K. Muralidhararao from Nallagonda, S. Narasimhulu from
Cuddapah and Lavanam from Vijayawada were among the candidates.
With the help of Mahadev Singh, S.R.L. Devi and Vandemataram Ramachandrarao,
we held a conference of Partyless Democracy at Hyderabad in 1960. Jayaprakash
Narayan inaugurated the conference. Some principles were highlighted at
the conference. We said that candidates from partyless platform should
considerably cut down election expenses, because they were the main source
of corruption. Those who spend money at the election will be tempted to
recover the money by illicit means after the election. Secondly, the opposition
should be free and fluid, instead of being bloc and whip bound. Opposition
is effective only when it is free. It can then be constructive too depending
on the merits of the issue instead of opposing for the sake of opposition
which is unworthy of the dignity of a legislator. When opposition is free,
the cabinet of ministers accepts the decision of the House by a majority
of free votes, even though it may mean amendment or rejection of a cabinet
proposal. In such a state of partylessness the leader of the House is elected
by the whole House by the method of eliminating.those who get the least
number of votes each time and repeating election. It is the power politics
where parties vie with one another that call elections a "contest"
meaning a kind of rivalry between the different candidates. In the partyless
approach, we seek election but contest with none.
We held a series of talks, seminars and study classes in towns and rural
parts on partyless democracy. I toured the country extensively in the month
of April, May and June 1962 addressing meetings on partyless and pompless
democracy. A week long worker's camp was held at Ghaziabad, near Delhi
in early 1962.
Conferences on Partyless Democracy were organized successfully in August
1961 at Hubli; in June 1962 at Calcutta; in October 1968 at Bangalore and
in February 1975 at Warangal. The discussions on partyless democracy clarified
two features as principal changes from power politics. First, seeking election
is as much a right of the citizen in democracy as casting vote. Party politics
set up party candidates at elections and practically shut out others from
the privilege. Partyless platform breaks the self arrogated monopoly of
political parties and encourages any number of candidates to seek election
in a constituency. Out of the several candidates, voters choose those who
commend themselves by their history of service, integrity of conduct and
ability to represent people. The wide scope cuts across caste and communal
bias and presents alternatives to the yes men of parties. Not the promise
of a showy manifesto but the objective to legislate for establishing economic
equality and social justice becomes prominent. Secondly, an elected member
will serve his full term. The mischief of power politics which asks a member
of the rival party to resign every time will be replaced by the healthy
convention of checking the lapses of a legislator by pressures of direct
action. The extra expenditure of by-elections will be avoided and
the funds will be usefully diverted to promote people's welfare. The party
politics which reduce a citizen's rights only to casting votes periodically
will be activated by the principle that the right of a citizen in democracy
is also to see that his representatives do their duty. Democracy strengthens
through people's participation. Decentralization of the units of administration
certainly facilitates people's participation. But partylessness is the
first state from power politics to decentralization.
Besides Radical Humanists of Royist ideology and Jayaprakash Narayan, members
of Sarvodaya are committed to the principle of partylessness. So, I joined
Sarvodaya a year after it started in 1951. I spoke freely about partyless
programs from Sarvodaya platforms. We held the conference of Partyless
Democracy at Raipur. Vishnu Sran, Tiwary and several friends helped its
spread, with the name of Satyagraha Samaj.
But Sarvodaya largely is non political in its activities. Therefore, though
it agreed to partyless democracy in principle, it discouraged active programs
in that direction. The conference on partyless democracy at Raipur, the
Sevagram-Delhi March in 1961 were opposed by Sarvodaya office bearers
as being political, though members like Thakurdas Bang, Ganesh Prasad Naik,
Mahavir Bhai, Lokendra Bhai and Hemdev Sharma actively supported and participated
in programs of partyless democracy.
Shri Shivamurty Swamy, member of Parliament from Raichur, Karnataka, is
an ardent supporter of Partyless Democracy. He introduced a non-official
bill in Parliament laying it down that the Prime Minister should be elected
by the whole House, giving up the convention of appointing the leader of
the majority party as the prime minister. Sivamurty Swamy held a conference
at Hubli to which Mahavir Bhai, S.R. Subrahmaniam, Lavanam and I were invited.
Partyless democracy which emerged as the political program of atheism by
and large gathered wide support.
Atheist mind is open. Every time it practically writes on a clean slate.
All revolutions do it. Atheism is revolutionary. Atheists respect old values
in so far as they are useful to present times. Atheists do not hesitate
to drop such old values that do not bear the march of progress. The only
two values that abide with atheists are the objective of equality of all
humans and the method of openness. Equality and openness are indispensable
social needs. Put to the test of equality and openness, we find most of
our old values require revision or even rejection. Thinking and working
along these lines, I was confronted with special situations, whose solution
from the atheist standards seemed ordinary to me, while they looked outrageous
to others till they understood me.
The first one related to the social status of unmarried mothers. In India
girls are married early. Till 1935 when Child Marriage Restraint Act was
passed, marriages were mostly pre-puberty. Therefore, motherhood is
shielded by the condition of marriage and unwed motherhood does not arise
except in the case of widows who are not remarried. So by old social custom
unwed motherhood is regarded a heinous crime on the part of the woman.
Unwed mothers either resort to abortion stealthily, or commit suicide.
The first case of an unwed mother we came across was at Mudunur, sometime
in 1946. She was a Brahmin widow. Her head was shaven, as it is the custom
with widows of some castes, including Brahmins. She belonged to an adjacent
village. She was about 25 years of age. When her pregnancy came to be evident,
she was discarded by the village and the helpless woman stayed alone on
the tank bund at a distance. When the case came to our notice, my wife
and I called her to the Atheist Center at Mudunur and offered her all assistance
of food, shelter, maternity home and post-natal care. As friends of
Mudunur were atheistically minded, they agreed with me and came forward
with material help.
The woman was happy at first at our offer. But when she found out that
at the atheist center we live without caste distinctions, she being a brahmin,
refused food at our hands, and left us. She delivered in a hospital. The
experience made us aware both of the condition of unwed mothers and of
the sentiment of caste.
I wrote news articles on the social injustice to unwed mothers. For the
same act, man is left free as he can escape while woman is punished. Should
special hardship be imposed on women on account of the difference in sex?
It is as unfair as the discrimination due to color of the skin in racial
differences.
Later, I found Radha Kishan Home at Hyderabad, run by Mr. and Mrs. Dage,
gave shelter to unwed mothers, but they strictly kept their identity secret.
Such treatment affords relief in individual cases, but does not solve the
problem socially. I was enthused when I found that the Constitution of
USSR, and that of People's China give to unwed mothers the same status
as other mothers.
In 1970 and again in 1974, when I visited USA and Europe, I was glad to
find that there were institutions to take care of unwed mothers. As the
institution of family itself is cracking in Europe and USA and as marital
alliance is going out of fashion, the way of becoming a mother does not
matter much there. Yet, the old custom of disrespecting unwed mother has
not yet been deliberately set aside, though the sting is lost.
In 1951 my second daughter, Mythri, became an unwed mother. As the boy
was married, the question of her marriage with the boy did not arise. As
atheists, Saraswati and I wanted to face the problem openly. Dr. Achamamba
came out with her full support to us. She offered to delivery, pre and
post-natal care. As I was wholly depending on public subscription
for our food and work, I needed support in this open solution of a problem
which was shrouded in secrecy so long.
I made known the fact to some of my friends by words of mouth and by written
letter. Some friends thought that my frankness was foolhardy. A friend
went to the extent of addressing some common friends condemning the condition
of my daughter and deprecating the atheist way of life, in view of this
incident.
But openness paid me well. While a few old friends dropped out, many more
new friends came in support. Gandhi was no more by that time. But Kishorelal
Mushruwala, who wrote the introduction to my book, An Atheist With Gandhi,
appreciated my stand.
Mythri was delivered of a daughter. She married Jonnalagadda Ramalingayya
and has three more children. She acquired academic qualifications and plans
to start a home for women where problems can be solved openly raising the
dignity of women to be equal to men. Sex should not make a difference in
social status as racial traits ought not to.
The second event that raised a furor of protest was openly eating Beef
and Pork. Among Christians no meat is a taboo. But pork eating is forbidden
for Muslims and beef is for Hindus religiously. To disown religious sentiments
into which many people are born, we thought everyone ought to eat tiny
bits of beef and pork together openly. Saraswati and I and our children
are normally vegetarians. As diet habits are associated with caste and
religious distinctions in India, we have no objection to eat a bit of any
meat openly. At Delhi, Saraswati and I had eaten beef with Rahamtulla Khan
as mentioned before. Our atheist friends liked the program and so we proposed
the function of eating tiny bits of beef and pork openly with bread or
rice from 4 to 5 p.m. on Indian Independence Day August 15, 1972 at Atheist
Center, Patamata. There were no special invitations, but anybody was welcome
to witness or to participate in the function. The announcement of the function
looked outrageous to Hindu and Muslim beliefs. But beef and pork eating
clears the mind of religious bias and breeds human outlook. Without understanding
the objective of the function, Sankaracharya of Puri, a high priest of
Hindus, who was then camping at Hyderabad, issued a statement protesting
against the function. I replied that I was not a Hindu but a human, and
so his protest was misdirected. I invited him to the function, if he liked
to transcend a denominational belief and grow human. Sankaracharya, with
vested interests in Hindu sectarianism, rallied a protest with hundreds
of religious people. It became a law and order problem. Police force was
called into action. Amidst wide protest, 136 marched in a queue, noted
down their names and addresses and participated in the function of Beef
and Pork eating that day according to the schedule.
To us beef and pork eating looked a simple social obligation that sheds
sectarian associations, but to others it looked an outrage against religious
practices.
The function was repeated by the Atheist Association at Visakhapatnam and
at Vellore by Senthamizhko. At Coimbatore R. Kasturi arranged a beef and
pork lunch on a wide scale to more than 800 guests. Periayar E.V. Ramaswami
participated in the function which was inaugurated by Saraswati. E.V.R.
was a fighter all through his public life against religious belief and
caste distinctions. His presence at that ripe old age of 95, lent special
significance to the function at Coimbatore.
Abraham who organized the function at Madras limited the number of guests
to 13 to break the Christian superstition in that number. C.S. Murthy,
K. Rangasai and Janardhanam and Paul were among the participants that day.
At Suryapet Kana organized the function in the face of Hindu protest and
at Gudivada too the function was well attended by men women. Manorama,
the widow of Sobhanarao, my early atheist associate and Sanskrit scholar,
took particular care to participate in the function. The details of the
several functions were published in the columns of The Atheist.
The incidents with unmarried mothers and with beef and pork eating were
events of special significance for the Atheist movement, as they shook
religious faith and custom at the roots. No wonder, they attracted attention.
From atheist point of view they are ordinary disciplines of social conduct,
but from the point of view of old values of custom and faith they looked
outrageous. In course of time, the objectives will be understood and the
prejudices will wear off.
Atheism is not new. For a long time it was used as a term of abuse.
Nevertheless, every prophet was persecuted by his contemporaries for blasphemy,
apostasy or heresy, if not altogether for atheism. Obviously, atheism contains
the element of progress and basic change. Therefore, in the last century
Charles Bradlaugh of England projected the idea of atheism more openly
and Robert Ingersoll of U.S.A. called himself an agnostic but spread atheistic
ideas through speeches and writings. In India, Periyar E.V. Ramaswami and
his followers called themselves atheists, though they did not use the words
as such on platforms. They preferred to negotiate in the name of Rationalism.
In fact, many people with atheistic leanings use the terms rationalism,
humanism, or free thought instead. Our speciality consisted in using the
term atheism openly and in giving it a positive content and in evolving
social and economic and specially political programs of action for atheism.
Since 1949, our periodicals, Sangham, Arthik Samata in Telugu, Insaan in
Hindi and The Atheist in English have served to spread and explain the
ideology and programs of atheistic thought and action. So several friends
and sympathizers, directly or indirectly, adopted atheist ways. Kana at
Suryapet and Nara at Nuzvid and Venugopal at Repalle started atheist centers,
and took up the programs of the atheist center at Patamata, including its
political aspect. But others adopted the social and cultural programs and
some called themselves non-political.
The Atheist Society Or India which Jayagopal, the editor of the English
Journal, The Age of Atheism, started independently at Visakhapatnam conducted
the Beef and Pork function, and burned religious scriptures openly. He
takes a variety of bold programs with rationalist thought but they call
their center non-political.
Similarly, J. Veeraswamy and a band of workers at Hyderabad in particular,
and all over Andhra Pradesh in general, take up the program of eradicating
caste differences. They actively encourage inter caste marriages and help
change of names from conventional religious and caste association to nonconformist
forms. Kana and Nara are examples of nonconformism. A legislator with the
name M. V. Subbareddi, reddi being the application of a caste, changed
his name to Gamago. Yet the Caste Eradication Association calls itself
non-political, and turns out excellent work in its own sphere.
Vidya and Seshagirirao who are members of the Congress party, consistently
discard flower garlands and use fruits for reception in sympathy with the
direct action program of replacing ornamental flower plants with edibles.
M.V. Krishnarao, a minister of Andhra Pradesh also rejects flower garlands
and receives only fruits instead.
Vinoba Bhave, who started the Bhoodan movement and gave shape and substance
to the Sarvodaya movement, toured Andhra Pradesh in 1955. My son, Lavanam,
interpreted his Hindi speeches sentence by sentence into Telugu throughout
the seven months of the tour. I was one of the organizers of the tour program.
Vinoba regularly conducts prayers both in the morning and in the evening.
He continued the practice at the meetings in the tour also. But in deference
to the atheist ideology of Lavanam and myself, Vinoba kindly substituted
the regular verses of prayer with five minutes of silence. He said that
during those five minutes the audience, according to their wish, could
severally meditate on god or think of social values of life like truthfulness,
compassion and love. It was an accommodation of atheists in a common audience
with respect to each others views. It was an act of recognition of the
atheistic ideology. Vinoba visited the Atheist Center at Patamata, when
he visited Vijayawada during the tour in 1955. Esteem for any ideology
comes in the long run, not by its theoretical perfections but by the lovable
conduct of its votaries. It is more so in the case of atheism, which has
been a term of contempt so long. The contempt is the result of the propaganda
of interests vested in exploitation of weaker sections. Yet, bias against
it is a fact which atheists cannot ignore to take notice of. Gandhi warned
me against this handicap and advised me to take another name in place of
atheism. But when we chose to take the label of atheism, it is incumbent
on atheists to be doubly wary of their own conduct. A notable achievement
in this direction goes to the credit of Madhu. He is a young man who has
taken to atheism. He acquitted himself so well in social relations, that
his villagers chose him to be the president of the village committee, against
the rich and powerful man of the place who held the post for two terms
already. The machinations of the rich man could not unseat Madhu by virtue
of his sheer spotless character.
Lavanam and Mrs. Lavanam successfully conduct an experiment in reclaiming
criminals at Stuartpuram (Gauntur District) and they withstand the threats
of vested interests in the crimes, on account of their straight forwardness.
J. Vengala Rao, Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, has extended his moral
support to it.
The work at the atheist center gained publicity abroad by the visits of
foreign visitors to atheist center. I was invited to the Congress of the
International Humanist and Ethical Union at Boston, U.S.A. in 1970 and
for the next Congress at Amsterdam in 1974. In that context I had the opportunity
to tour Europe, America, Australia and other countries in Asia. At that
time I visited Madalyn Murray O'Hair at Austin, Texas. She is well known
for her successful struggle to end prayer and the Bible reading in Public
Schools. With the slogan of "Tax the Church," she started the
Society of Separationists (SOS). As a result of exchange of views between
us in 1970 she started the American Atheist Center at Texas.
Likewise, when I visited Adelaide, Laurence Bullock was the Secretary of
the Rationalist Association of South Australia. The Association considered
it appropriate to change the name of their Association to the Atheist Society
of Australia. Thus, rationalist and humanist societies are preferring the
name of atheism, which they deem more appropriate to describe their attitude.
Whatever be the name, the International Humanist and Ethical Congress as
well as Rationalist and Humanist Associations all over the world gave me
a free platform for talking on atheism. Moreover, the platforms of Quaker
groups everywhere, invited me for discussions on atheism. Thus atheism
is no longer a condemned label. The conduct of atheists has salvaged it
from the depths of slander. The name is getting the respect that is its
own and has been denied to it so long.
We conducted the Atheist Meet in l970 at Patamata and the World Atheist
Meet there again in 1972. Madalyn Murray O'Hair was to preside over it,
but she could not go to India on account of visa trouble. At the World
Atheist Meet, R. Kasturi of Coimbatore released my book Positive Atheism.
Margarat Reish and Edwin Lindseen were the two delegates from USA to the
World Atheist Meet. Details of the report about the World Atheist Meet
were published in The Atheist.
When Saraswati and I went to Gandhi in 1944, we had eight children.
Now we have nine and nineteen grand children, including three great grand
children. Gandhi was surprised how we managed that big family without private
property. He had not seen any of the kind so far. The speciality, if any,
is due to our atheistic outlook.
Atheism understands that all distinctions between one person and another
are of our own making. Distinctions of caste, religion and culture exist
so long as we accept them. We can change them whenever we desire. One belongs
to a caste because he accepts and declares it. There are cases where at
strange place persons have taken the label of the caste which is convenient
there. National differences change with frontiers. Classes go when property
relations are changed. Even racial traits blur with blood mixture. When
they exist, they are not related to attainment of talent or exercise of
intelligence. Family relationship also is one of the kind.
The institution of family grows out of the custom of marriage in man woman
relationship. If there is promiscuity, clans and groups or wider human
societies may form. But relationships like brother sister, father mother,
son-daughter, aunt-uncle, husband-wife will disappear. All
people move as friends.
Whether the institutions of marriage and family will ever go out of use
is a hypothetical question. Care of children, affectionate attention and
emotional satisfaction of a sense of belonging are advantages and they
outweigh the snobbery of paternalism and predisposition of kinship which
accompany family ties. Guarantee of social security by the government and,
especially, socialization of property loosened family loyalties to a large
extent. Yet, family remained for its own reasons. Now, the question before
the atheists is not whether family should remain or go, but whether family
relationships should be safer than friendly relationships? Are not family
relationships as artificial as religious brotherhood, national fellowship,
cultural bond, racial alliance or class camaraderie, deserving no special
consideration?
To the atheist mind all persons seemed the same without difference between
members of the family and friends of atheism. Hence, at the atheist centers,
we all moved equal. The members of the family are dear to us not by sanguinity
but by their devotion to and participation in atheist programs. The success
of the conversion of members of family into workers of atheism is seen
by the generous help we received from the public for the upkeep of atheist
centers. They little complain of my large family. On the contrary, they
complimented me on having a good band of workers in my family. In this
context I should make special mention of S.N. Agarwal and Bjorn Merker.
S.N. Agarwat was the Managing Director of Dholpur Glass Works. He visited
our center at Patamata and was pleased with the way my daughter Mythri
and my daughter-in-law Hemalata were running the school for children,
Vasavya Vidyalaya, with the assistance of Shri Rajyam Patnaik. He was impressed
with the team spirit of the workers and attachment of the students to the
teachers alike. He donated the glassware from his factory sufficient both
to equip a laboratory to teach the children and to conduct periodical science
exhibitions, especially to explain superstitions scientifically and to
dispel faith in them. One exhibition was opened by Agarwal himself and
another by Dr. C.D. Deshmukh and Durgabai Deshmukh. Balchand Mohta of Calcutta
helped us with donation of money and material.
Bjorn Merker is a boy from Sweden who came to India to do alternative civil
service to compulsory military training in Sweden. He was at the Atheist
Center for seven months. He identified himself so intimately with the programs
of the Center that he recommended atheist center to his parents for help.
Dr. Helmot and Mrs. Ulla Merker kindly sent us contributions every month
out of their salaries and helped us partly to maintain the center and mostly
to carry on the work in slums. They were my standing hosts in Sweden when
I visited Europe in 1970 and again in 1974. Dr. Marla and Irma were similarly
helpful to us in West Germany.
In India where there is no social security guaranteed by the government.
the entire responsibility of bringing up children rests upon the parents.
Incidentally, the children imbibe the outlook of the parents. So it was
the case with my children too. But, if they disagreed with the ideas of
the childhood, they could leave the home and stand on their feet. As all
my children received good education with the help of the public, any of
them could leave atheist centers and live their own way. In fact, my son
in law, Ramalingaiah left the Atheist Center at Patamata, when he did not
like our Partylessness. He lives by his homeopathic medical practice and
other means. So far none of my children have chosen to leave the Atheist
Center. They live in the Center as atheist workers.
While a blood relative like Ramalingayya left atheist Center, we continue
to enjoy the cooperation and identification of workers like Kana, Ramaswamy,
Chellayya, Madhu, Rangarao, Nagayya, Gopalaswamy, B. Venugopal and several
others at atheist centers at Mudunur, Patamata, Suryapet, Pedanemali, Repalle
and Nuzvid. Bhanu is Madhu's brother. But he is devoted to Atheist center
at Pedanemali more as an atheist worker than as the brother of Madhu, who
is the person in charge of the center.
Atheist centers with the ideology of equality of all humans work in the
midst of people who are accustomed to sectarian customs. As in the case
of every center with a progressive ideology those around us subconsciously
try to exploit us, though they consciously help us too sometimes. Our ideological
impact on them and their conventional exploitation of us are mutual. The
final result every time depends on the strength and weakness of each side.
In the case of simple families, leadership of an ideology often goes with
relationship as with inheritance of private property and skill of profession.
But in atheism, a worker is one who works, irrespective of the family relationship.
The test of work is the sacrifice of personal tastes and comforts for the
promotion of social welfare. Social value of the work takes precedence
over personal talent and training.
As atheists assert the freedom of the individual, they are more concerned
with present programs for plans into the future more than with experiences
of the past. What is good in the past readily comes into our present practice.
Only that which is unsuitable or impracticable to present needs is left
out. Moreover, too much thought over the past inhibits initiative and is
not educative to progress of civilization. Situations change from time
to time and call for fresh thought, plan and action. Religious scriptures
do the greatest harm in this context because they claim infallibility and
unswerving loyalty. They stem progress by smothering initiative and free
thought. Any dogma, spiritualist or scientific, is equally inimical to
progress. Therefore, those whom succeeding generations deem as prophets
of eras of progress, were heretics of their own ages. They revised old
scriptures and scrapped some of them. Revolutions demolish old ways and
start afresh with new plans every time. In this way, atheism is the source
of all innovation and progress. Old civilizations like those of Asia and
Africa, are so much rooted in the past that they have become today a lumber
of old and new mixed in disgusting disorder. They need atheism more urgently
than other countries where a series of religious, cultural, materialist
and industrial revolutions have broken away people from the old repeatedly,
and have made them more progressive than people of the ancient civilizations.
Though ancient civilizations need atheism more than modern ones, there
is a general need of atheism for one important reason. The so-called
developed nations indeed have achieved considerable progress technologically
on account of their materialistic and scientific outlook. It is creditable
so far. But the same developed nations have become exploiters of the weak
people and have become warmongers all over the globe since they lack social
outlook. Scientific skill in the hands of developed nations has come to
mean the greatest threat to life. Scientific progress is used for the manufacture
of lethal weapons, subtle and secret, with immense potentialities, allowing
neither privacy nor safety; for anyone, including the one who wields the
weapon. Suicide squads have come into vogue in military operations.
Atheism is scientific. But its science is subject to social obligations
to fellow humans. It changes the emphasis from simple science to social
needs. If ancient civilizations are superstitious, modern civilizations
are anti-social. Atheism has to set right the wrong on both sides
to make them march together towards one humanity pulling down the artificial
barriers of caste and religion, nation and race, class and culture.
The ideal of one humanity is shared by the rationalists and humanists also.
But they have not developed the machinery for its realization since they
have taken a non-political stance. Politics is the dominating power
in the modern age. To ignore it is to fear to strike. Gandhi's Constructive
Program also was non-poliltical. His greatest achievement consisted
in winning independence for India through political action by a non-violent
method. Constructive work was an extreme form of non-violence, too
good to be real. Under the guidance of Vinoba Bhave, the constructive work
was given another vigorous trial under the name of Sarvodaya. The spectacular
achievements at the start withered out in course of time, not because it
lacked earnestness but because it was non political. After fifteen years
of diligent effort, Jayaprakash Narayan found that Sarvodaya should take
to political programs also. A big mass awakening; followed Narayan's reentry
into active politics. Democracy has a charm in the modern age. But party
system is its unworthy temptation. It has discredited Democracy. Frenzied
zeal for one's own party and, then, indecent lust for the leadership of
the party are at the base of the Watergate scandal and of the dictatorship
in Bangla Desh and of the declaration of Emergency in India. Everything
is in the name of democracy, but the content is partisan attitude, both
for those in power and for those in opposition. Further, opposition is
reduced to a mockery in party democracy. Unhealthy rivalry as fanatical
as that between blind religious faiths rises from party attitudes. On account
of the evils of the party system, honest politicians and the mass of people
are not only losing love for democracy but turning their interests away
from politics. The growth of non-political attitudes is the result
of party politics in democracy.
Non-politics is ineffective. Therefore, atheists as realists, rid
democracy of parties and take to partyless democracy which is real and
effective democracy.
The future of atheism consists in establishing partyless democracy and
achieving one equal humanity through it. National and racial differences
vanish as real democracies federate at first for commonweal and then move
towards one humanity and one wor1d. The United Nations Organization will
have to convert itself into United People's Organization for the purpose.
Atheist awakening rouses people all over the world into the feeling of
mastership over their institutions and systems of life. The spread of the
atheist outlook is hope of humanity to turn from war to peace, from slavery
to freedom, from superstition to a sense of reality, from conflict to cooperation.
Gora suffered an attack of cerebral hemorrhage and died at once while
addressing a public meeting on "Social Change in Rural India,"
held at Vijayawada on the evening of Saturday, July 26, 1975.
Gora's death stunned every one as it was so sudden and shocking. Messages
of condolence and sympathy poured in from all corners of the globe. Gora
lived and died an atheist. He lives in all those who stand for reason,
truth love and tolerance and raise their voice against superstition, blind
dogma, racial discrimination and social and economic inequalities. His
work will be carried forward unhesitatingly.
This book is a text file made from the original book and proofread for
accuracy with respect to the original book. Most British spellings have
been converted to American English. Permission to transmit the book in
electronic form was obtained by John Edwards, AOL John E45 from ATHEIST
CENTRE Lavanam, Director Benz Circle Vijayawada, 520-010 India, Tel (091
866) 472-330. This text may be used unaltered in content in collections,
CD ROM shareware and freeware offerings, and PDA versions. It may be used
and distributed by Project Gutenberg and used, copied and distributed electronically
for free.
