Politics and Social Change

Previous chapters have examined aspects of the Gandhian and the Bahá'í visions of a nonviolent world. However, a vision is useless unless we strive towards it, and striving, in turn, implies the channelling of human volition through appropriate means. What are these means? How should we go about trying to change the social, economic and political state of affairs?

Our current model of politics and social transformation has its origins many centuries ago. A simplified view of our contemporary political framework is that its ``political machinery'' serves the purpose of balancing the ``power struggle'' between the conflicting interests of opposing parties: of the state and of the individuals it comprises, capital and labor, etc. Democracy is supposed to work by bringing about an ``equilibrium,'' so that if one party becomes too powerful then the politics shifts in the other direction. This model is loosely inspired by the physics of the pendulum, studied by Galileo Galilei in the dark days when Europeans could not openly (and safely) say that the earth was not the center of the solar system. The ``political pendulum,'' as it ``swings left and right'' will ``gravitate'' back towards the ``political center'' (equilibrium point) that best balances the interests of the individual and the state--or else of capital and of labour, etc. But a pendulum is an extremely simple physical system with very limited degrees of freedom: it can swing, however it cannot do much else. In contrast, human politics--not party politics--is an extremely complex process whose dynamics is far richer than the relatively pathetic swinging motion of the pendulum. If science has advanced far beyond the physics of the pendulum, then it is only to be expected that new ways of thinking can also be found in politics. Sadly, our political institutions and the way they function have not changed on any fundamental level for the past few centuries.

One of the greatest, most serious problems with the current political model is that it assumes that the ``right'' and the ``left'' are in a perpetual power struggle. Hence, politics is reduced to balancing the supposedly conflicting interests. This thinking fundamentally contradicts the principle of the oneness of humankind: if humankind is a single organism, then the interests of its different parts must necessarily harmonize with the interests of the whole--and therefore of other parts. But instead of trying to serve the interests of the whole of humankind, our current political system fuels a never-ending, artificial struggle between different segments of society. This bipolar political system is inherently violent, so it cannot serve as the foundation for a truly nonviolent civilization. Indeed, it can never transcend the power struggle.

Multi-party politics fares no better, in this sense, than does the two-party system. What then should we do? As discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5, Gandhi and the Bahá'ís both agree that a nonviolent civilization must have as its basis a nonviolent political system. Specifically, power structures must become decentralizedand the military model of rigidly one-way, top-down, hierarchical organizations must yield to the democratic spirit. This chapter further explores what Gandhi and the Bahá'ís have to say about politics and social transformation.

Back to Published books Baha'i Academics Resource Library ][ Sacred Writings ][ Search
Primary sources ][ Secondary sources ][ Resources and etc.
Bulletin board ][ Links ][ Personal pages ][ Other sites hosted by the Library