Upload
jessica-rodriguez
View
224
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
1/13
Indian Political Science ssociation
RADICAL HUMANISM OF M. N. ROYAuthor(s): B. K. MahakulSource: The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 66, No. 3 (July-Sept., 2005), pp. 607-618Published by: Indian Political Science AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41856152.
Accessed: 07/05/2014 05:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Indian Political Science Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Indian Journal of Political Science.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41856152?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/41856152?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ipsa8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
2/13
The Indian Journal f Political cience
Vol.
LXVI,
No.
3,
July-Sept.,
005
RADICAL
HUMANISM
OF M.
N.
ROY
B
K
Mahakul
Manalyendra
ath
oy
s a
political
hinker
f
Modern
ndias
a Radical
umanist,
y
isowning
arxism.n
volving
heo-
cial
hilosophyf
Radical
umanism,
e
onsiders
imself
s
humanistnd ot
n rthodoxarxist,
f
ntegrated
adical-
ism
ith
cientific
umanismrNew
umanism.is
olitical
views
re
ounded
n easonnd
morality
nd
ot
n
ny ogma.
Hebelievedhathe risisfmodemivilizationsdue o he
lack
f
ntegrated
iew
f
uman
ature.
ccording
o
M.N.Roy,
in
ny evolutionary
ocial
hilosophy
overeignty
f
manmust
be
recognized.
anmustetaken
s a moral
ntity
ndnot
merely
biological
ne.
oy
as
ritical
f
heMarxianon-
cepts
f
conomic
eterminism,
ictatorship
f
he
roletariat,
dialectal
aterialism,
nd
urplus
alue.
ccording
o
him,
he
economic
tructure
f
he
ociety
hould
e o
planned
hat
t
would
romotereedom
nd
well-being
f
hendividual.
e
asserts
hat
he ask
f
very
ighter
or
new umanistic
orld
would
e
o
make
very
ndividualonscious
f
is nnate
a-
tionality.
hus
oy
tresses
hat either
apitalism
or arlia
mentaiy
ystem
an
olve he
roblemsf
mankind.
ew u-
manismsthenlylternative,hicheconcilesocialrgani-
zation
nd
ndividual
reedom.
is
hilosophy
f
Radical u-
manism
s onsidered
s
his
most
mportant
ontribution,
hich
mayrovideor
strong
oundation
o
ndian
emocracy.
Manabendra
ath
Roy,
he hinker
nd
ntellectual,
assed
hrough
three
tages.
n
the
irst
tage,
e
was
a
national
evolutionary
ngaged
n
smuggling
rms
nd
money
or
he
evolutionary
ovement
n
Bengal.
n
the econd
tage,
e
was a Marxist
ctive
nCommunist
ovement.
n
the
third
nd final
tage,
he
emerged
s a
Radical
Humanist,
y
disowning
Marxism s an ntellectual,.N.Roy ad zest or ew deas.Heaccepted
Marxism
n 1919
while
n
Mexico,
buthe
did notremain
Marxist.
n
1
28,
Roydeveloped
erious ifferences
ith he ommunist
nternational;
inwhich
as member
ince 918
nd
breaking
ff
is
elations
ereached
India.
Since that
ime,
e
developed
new
Social
Philosophy
nown s
Radical
Humanism.
n
evolving
the social
philosophy
f
Radical
Humanism,
oy
was
nfluenced
y
different
hinkersike
Marx,Hobbes,
Hegel,
nd Lenin
tc.
Roy
attempted
o
unite he ationaldeas
of these
different
hinkers,
hichwere
iverse
ven
onflicting
tands
f
hought;
inonePhilosophicalystem.n 1940Roybegan journeywayfrom
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
3/13
The IndianJournal f Political cience 608
Marxism owards
adicalism.
Humanism-he
Concept-
he term umanism
as
beenderived rom
he
Latinword Humanus'
meaning system
f
thought
rimarily
oncerned
with uman
eing
nd with uman
ffairs
n
general.
herehavebeen
several chools f
humanism,
articularly
rench nd
German
chools,
which
ave
ontributeduch
n
ts
development
n
history.
owever,
ll
of
them ave
one common
hing
hat,
hey
ttach
rimary
mportance
o
man.Thehumanistsssert hatmanbynatures goodandcapableof
indefinite
dvances owards
erfection.
M.N.Roy
onsidered
imselfs a
Radical nd
not
n
orthodox
n
between 940 to
1947.
Later,
e
changed
rom
adicalism o
whathe
called
ntegral
cientific
umanismrNew
Humanism.n
August
947 n
the
manifestof New
Humanism,
oy
explained
is
political
iews s
being
ounded n
reason nd
morality
nd not n
anydogma.
Roy
aid:
Most
revolutionaryolitical ractice
e
guided y
theJesuitic
ictum-
the ndJustifieshemeans. hefinalanctionfrevolutioneingtsmoral
appeal-
he
ppeal
for
ocial
ustice- ogically
he
nswer o the
atter
question
must
e
in he
negative.
t s
very
oubtful
f
moral
bjects
an
ever
be
attained
y
mmoral
means. n
critical
movements,
hen
arger
issues are
involved nd
greater hings
re at
stake,
ome
temporary
compromise
n
behaviour
may
be
permissible.
ut when
practices
repugnant
o
thical
rinciples
nd
raditionaluman
alues re
tabilized
as
the
permanent
eaturesf
the
evolutionaryegime,
hemeans
efeat
the
nd.
Therefore,
ommunistolitical
ractice
as
not
aken
he
world,
not ven he
working
lass,
nywhere
ear neworder ffreedomnd
social
ustice.
On
the
contrary,
t
has
plunged
he
rmy
f
revolution-
Proletarians
well s
non-proletarian
n
n
ntellectual
onfusion,
piritual;
chaos,
motional
rustration,
nd a
general
emoralization
Roy
1947:
34
-37).
Thesewords
were
eminiscentf
Gandhiwho
Roy
had
denounced
for
he
reater
art
fhis ife.
M.N.Roy
has
viewed;
history
annotbe
considered
merely
successionf
vents.t
ontainshe ecords f
man's
truggle
or
reedom.
Inthe
ast
man itherubmittedo the orces f
nature rto a
blind
aith
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
4/13
Radical Humanism f M. N. Roy 609
in he xistencef
supernatural
gency
ike
God
finding
imself
elpless
against
he orces fnature
e wanted eliverance
nd
magined
od for
absolute
ependence
nd subordination.s a
result f several
hundred
years
f
struggle
an
ultimately
ucceeded
n
casting
ff
he llusion f
his
relation
ith od.
Renaissance
n
Europe
was a
revolt
f
man
gainst
the
uthoritarianismf
religion.
iberated rom he
yranny
f
theology
and
the
prejudices
f
supernaturalism,
ankind
marched owardswhat
we callmodernivilization.nsuch situationoyfeltheneed f new
philosophy
o
usher
n
the
ge
of man thad to
be a
primarily
oncerned
with
human
ife,
philosophy
which
would set human
pirit
ree,
philosophy
which
would
explain
all the
phenomena
f nature nd
experiences
fhuman
ifewithout
ny
eferenceo
supernaturalowers-
a
philosophy
ith social
purpose.
or
Roy,
he
nd
f
humanistradition
in hewake fmodernization
hrough
echanizationas
tragedy aking
the start
f a decend civilization
prevailing
hen.
Giving
his
own
appreciationf he ituation .N.Roy aid, Theeclipse f hehumanist
tradition
s the ourse f his
egeneration
nd
decay.
Modern ivilization
stood t the
headof the
declining lane
of
decay
hemovementt
broke
away
from
raditionf
humanism-subordinatedan to the
nstitutions
(Roy
1952:269).
Roy's
NewHumanism as
cosmopolitan
noutlook.tcould hink
not
n terms f the
nation r a class but
only
n terms f man.
Such
a
conception
ouldbe the oundation
fNew
Humanism,ew,
ecause
t
s
Humanism
nriched,
einforced
nd
elaborated
y
scientific
nowledge
and social
experience ained
uring
he enturies
f
modern
ivilization
(Royl947:
34).
His
New
Humanism
s
pledged
to the
ideal of a
commonwealth
nd
fraternity
f freeman.
He believed that a
commonwealth
f
morally
nd
spiritually
iberated
ndividual s the
fundamental
equirement
or
he ealizationf better
ndhealthier
ociety.
Such
humanistic
ociety
would e a
spiritual
ommunity
ot imited
y
the oundaries
f
national tates-
apitalist,
ascist,
r
of
any
ther ind.
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
5/13
The IndianJournal fPolitical cience 610
As a Radical
Humanist,
oy's approach
was ndividualistic.an
must e taken s a
moral
ntity
nd
not
merely
biological
ne. Man s
moral ecausehe
s
rational. he
universe ust e taken s a
moral rder
governed
y
aws
nherent
n tself. he ndividual ust ot e
subordinated
either o
a nation r
to
a class.
Roy
rejected
oththe
nationalism
f
Congressmen
nd
he
heory
f lass
truggle
f he
Communists.
e said:
Radicalism hinks
n terms
eitherfnation or f
class;
ts oncerns
man, tconceives reedoms freedomfthe ndividual Roy1947:36).
The
individual
hould
not ose his
dentity
n the
collective
go
of the
nation r
of the lass.
The
Nation-State,
n
practice,
makesno
greater
concession
othe
oncept
f ndividualreedomhan he
lass-state
f he
Communists,
ndalso of
the ocialists. ndno modern
emocratic
tate
has
yet utgrown
ationalistollectivism
Roy,
1952).
M.N.Roy
was
impressed y
the
philosophy
f Karl
Marx
n
the
beginning
f
his
political
areer.
e
accepted
Marxism ecause e
believed
thatMarxwas a humanist
nd that
e
was
deeply
oncerned
boutman.
Humanism
n Marx
had
strong
ttractionor
Roy.
However, 940,
s
a
Radical
Humanist,
oy
ceased
to
believe
n
theMarxian
heory
f class
struggle.
ociety
ouldnot
urvive
ithoutomekind f ocial
cohesive
force
nd,
ccordingly
lass
struggle
ouldnotbe
the
only ealityRoy
1947).
Linkedwith his
heory
f social
cohesiveness
oy's emphasis
wason the
ole
f hemiddle
lass s the
most
rogressive
lass
nmodern
society.
Whereas
n
Marxian
heory
he
working
lass hasa
special lace,
in ater ormulationsf
Roy
themiddle lass had a
special
tatus.
oy
emphasized
he ndividualndnot he
lass,
butwhen e
spoke
n
terms
of lasseshe
gavepride lace
o he
middle lass nd
not
o
he
roletariat,
whom
Roy
characterized
s
themost
ackward tratumf
society
Roy
1952).
Roy recognized
he
ontributionf Marx n
giving
new social
philosophy,
ut
e
rejectednterpretation
f
Marxism
y
he
ontemporary
Communists.ommunismegan s a movementor he alvation fthe
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
6/13
Radical Humanism fM. N.Roy 611
world
ortured
nd ormented
y apitalist
xploitation
ut
ately
s
causing
grave
misgivings
ven
mong
he
rogressive
orces f he
modern orld.
According
o
Roy,
The abolition
f
private roperty,
tate
wnership
f
the
means f
production
nd
planned
conomy
o not
y
hemselves
nd
exploitation
f abour
nor
ead to
an
equal
distributionf wealth
Roy
1
52:3
1
.
To
Roy,
ictatorship
f
ny
kind
was nconsistent
ith
he
deal
for
reedom. he
claim fCommunists
hat roletarian
ictatorship
ith
planned conomyrings reatestoodofthegreatestumber as been
tested nd
proved
wrong.
M.N.Roy
was critical
of the Marxian
concept
of economic
determinism.
conomicdeterminism
annot e the
ocial
philosophy,
which
s
required
o ead
civilizedmankind
utof
the
resent
risis.
Roy
viewed
hat,
we
mustook
beyond
he
deceptive
deal
of
Communism
f
the
hreatened
atastrophe
s tobe
avoided.
We must avefaith
nhuman
ingenuity
nd
the reativeness
f the
human
mind,
which re farfrom
being
xhausted ,
Roy,
961
1
).
He
contended
hat he new ocial rder
must
ombine
lanning
ith reedom
nd should e
led
by
the
deal
of
collective
welfare
nd
progress .
Roy
denounced
he heoriesf lass
truggle
nd f he
ictatorship
of
theProletariat.
e wanted
o
emphasize
he
ndividual ore han he
class,
whethertbe the
working
lass
or
the
middle lass.
Roy nvisaged
the onflictf he
resent
ge
as between
otalitarianism
nd
democracy,
betweenhe ll-devouring-collectivego-nationr lass nd hendividual
struggling
or reedom
Roy
1947:33)
Roy
sserted
hat
Marxian
mphasis
on revolution
nd on the
dictatorship
f
the Proletariat ould ead
to
totalitarianism.
evolutionsould
not
bring
boutmiracles.
oy
did not
discard
heword revolution'
n
total.
As
a Radical
Humanist,
oy
ame
to believe
that revolutionhouldbe
brought
bout
not
through
lass
struggle
r
armed iolence ut
hrough
ducation.
ducation
ot n the
conventionalenseof
reading
nd
writing,
ut
ducation
n the
ultural
sense, f a high egree fgeneral uman evelopment.he method f
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
7/13
The IndianJournal fPolitical cience 612
education
hat
oy mphasized
or
ringing
bout
heRadical
Humanist
revolution
as not
very
ifferent
rom
he onstitutional
ethod hat he
early
moderates
nd liberals
f
India
had advocated.
Roy's
revolution
involved
o sudden
hange.
His
radical
humanisticevolution as to be
achieved,
ot
by
violence
r
armed
nsurrection,
ut
through
he
low
process
f education.
M.N.Roy
was
very
much ritical
fwestern
emocracy,specially
parliamentary
emocracy.
emocracy,
hich,
means
only
ounting
f
headswhen
eadshave
no freedomo ive
n
dignity
s a mere
eception.
Modern
emocracy
ants o be
in
power
nd
for his
hey
want
o
keep
people
backward.Under
parliamentary
ystem
ntelligence,ntegrity,
wisdom,
moral
xcellence o
not ount
ormuch.Yet these
re human
virtues. nless
hese
nfluence
olitical
rganization,
democratic
ay
of
ife
an never
e realized.
nless
arliamentary
emocracy
s basedon
moral
onscience
f the
majority
n
power
t cannot ealize
hedesired
end-greatestood
of the
great
number.
Withno
recognition
f the
importance
f
individuals
n
social
life and freedom
arliamentary
democracy
oes
not
allow
individuals o
participate
n the
regular
functioning
f
political
ife.
With
rivate
monopolies
n themeans
of
production
he
principle
f
equality
s never ealized.As
a
result
f
all
these efectsnder
arliamentary
emocracy
he
overnment
or
he
eople
can
hardly
e
a
government
fthe
eople,
ecause he
majority
n
power
still
ules
y
aw and
not
by
conscience.
n order o
make he ommon
man
ealize
hat e
has a
unique lace
as a
sovereign,
oy
viewed hat
foundation
f
organized
ocal democracies ust e laid.
M.N.Roy
was
very
much
ritical f
Marxism n
the
following
grounds.
As
a Radical
Humanist
oy
did
not
agree
with he economic
interpretation
f
history.
e was
greatly
nfluenced
y
Materialism
nd
theMarxist
heory
hat xistence
etermined
onsciousness,
ut
he
yet
assertedhat he
heory
fthe conomic
nterpretation
f
history
idnot
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
8/13
Radical Humanism fM. N. Roy 613
follow
necessarily
s a
corollary
rom
materialist
hilosophy
Roy
1951:198).
The
biological truggle
or
xistence ould not be
equated
with he
conomic
mpulse
oearn livelihood.
oy
bserved:
The
point
of
departure
f theMarxist
istoriology
as themistake f
confounding
physical
rge
with conomicmotive
Roy
1952:217).
Roy
viewed he
biologicalurge
of
self-preservationreceded
he
economic
motive f
earning
livelihood,
n the ame manner s
the dea
of
themeans
of
production recededthedevelopment f the means of production
themselves.
an,
prior
o
becoming
homo-economicus
n
search f
economic
menities,
as
guided
ybiological
onsiderations.
Roy
criticized
arxianmaterialisms
dogmatic
ndunscientific.
He
argued
hat
n Marx'sdialectical
materialism,
here s an element f
contradiction.
ialectics s
a
process
f
ogic
or as a method f
enquiry
was
acceptable
o
Roy.
But
ogic
could notbe confused
ith
ntology
andthe awsof
thought
ouldnot e taken
s a
description
f he
rocess
of
naturer he ontentf
reality.
ialectics,
tating
hat hematter oves
through
he riad
ystem
f
thesis,
ntithesisnd
synthesis,
s
essentially
an ideal
system.
n
contrast,
aterialism
s
scientifically
eutral.
oy,
therefore,
ointed
ut hattwas
llogical
o
place
n
ne
quation
ialectics,
whichs
subjective
n
naturend
materialism,
hich s
objective
n
nature.
Roy
critisedMarxianDialectics hat
he
ubject
matter f a branch f
metaphysical
nquiry
was
being
confounded
with he nstrumentf
conducting
hat
nquiry
Roy,
195
1 1
9).
Roy
was believer
n
reason
nd n
enemy
f
radition
nd
heology.
He
criticized
arxism
s
theological.
ince
history
s made
y
he
peration
of the
orces f
production,
ne
may
onclude
hat here
s
very
ittle
hat
mancan
do. He
becomes
slave to the
forces f
production.
oy
was
critical
f
Marx
on
the
ground
hat he atter enied
he
utonomy
nd
sovereignty
fthe ndividual. o
Marx,
he
human atures
malleable,
t
lacks
nything
table
nd
permanent,
nd it s determined
y
economic
forces.ncontrast,oy rgued,heressomethingtable ndpermanent
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
9/13
8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
10/13
Radical Humanism fM. N. Roy 615
Radicalism onsists
f
ll
positive
lementsfMarxism reed rom
its fallacies
nd clarified
n the
ight
f
greater
cientific
nowledge.
t
was the reaction
gainst
he
contemporary
ocio-cultural
risis.The
manifesto
f Radical Humanismaid down
that,
the
deal of Radical
Democracy
will
be
attained
hrough
he
ollective fforts
f
spiritually
freemen ndwomen nited
n a
political arty
ith
he eterminationf
creating
neworder f freedom.
he
members f the
party
ill
guides,
friendsndphilosophersf he eopleratherhans there ould e rulers
consistent ith he
oal
of
freedom;
olitical
ractice
f
the
arty
ill
be
rational
ndethical
Radicalism s neither
ptimistic
or
pessimistic.
t is rather
synthesis
f activism nd
rationalism.
n
analyzing
he actual human
situation,
adicalism ries o find ut hevarious
ossibilities.
hisholds
out no false
hope
and
without
eingpessimistic
t
seeks to
adjust
he
methodology
f ction o he
ossibility
f vailable esources. adicalism
proposes
common
truggle
gainst
nternationalnti-social lements.
Under
Radicalism
lanning
ouldbe threefold-ike
ocial,
democratic
and conomic.
lanning
n
conomic
phere,ccording
o
Radicalism ust
not
only
ssure
ncreasing
roductivity
nd
bettertandardf
iving
ut
greater pportunity
o ndividualso take nitiatives.
ccording
o
Roy,
the
new
ocial
philosophy
ust tart ith
eviving
aithnman
egarding
his
potentialities. ny
attempt
o
promote
conomic
welfare,
ocial
reconstruction
nd
political iberty
must
begin
withman.
Roy
said,
humanism as
he
nly
lternativeot
nly
ocommunismut o ll
forms
of nstitutionalism
Democracy
anbe established
nly
y
he eassertion
of
he umanistradition.an s
themeasure f
his
world.
eing nherently
rational
e
can
lways
earn rom
xperience.
e
develops
is
ntellectual
faculties
nd
moral alues nhis ffortso ecure betterife or imself
(Roy,
1948).
To
Roy,
The
basic
idea of a new
revolutionary
ocial
philosophy
ust
e
that he
ndividuals
prior
o
society,
nd ndividual
freedom
ust ave
priority
ver ocial
organization
Roy,
1952:284)
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
11/13
The IndianJournal f Political cience 616
There ccurred
ignificant
iscontinuity
nd
hange
n
M.N.Roy's
career.
His
political
evolution
assed
from
nilitant ationalism
o
Communism
o New Humanism.
n
the nd of his
career
Roy
came to
believe
more
ndmore n ndividualism
nd
iberalism.
nlikemedieval
Indian
aints nd
he
ontemporary
ocial nd
political
eaders,
M.N.Roy
built
p
the
humanist
hilosophy
ith
lesh,
lood ndbrain.
emocracy
wasthe
ase,
while ationalismts
enter,
nd
overeignty
fman
ts
pex.
Roy hus, ave philosophyf ife.Roy's nnereing evoltedgainsthe
disappearance
f
individual reedom.n
the
history
f
modern ndian
thought
any
minenthinkers
rote
n
poverty
n ndia
nd
xploitation
of
he
weak
y
he
trong.
ut
Roy
wasthe irst
an,
who
nalysed
ocial,
political
nd
economic orces
workingpon
ndian
ociety
rom ime o
time.He asserted
hat
he ask f the
fighter
or new
humanistic orld
would e to
make
very
ndividual
onscious fhis
nnate
ationality
nd
to
find
is
unity
with
thers
n
a
Cosmopolitan
ommonwealthf free
men ndwomen. e declared isfaithhat,Man did not ppear n the
earth ut of nowhere. e rose out
of the
background
f the
physical
universe,
hrough
he
ong
rocess
f
biological
volution.
he
Umbilical
Cord
was never roken:
Man,
with
is
mind,
ntelligence,
illremain
n
integral
art
f he
hysical
niverse.he atters a
Cosmos-a
aw-governed
system.
herefore,
an's
being
nd
becoming,
is
emotions, ill,
deas
are lso determined an s
essentially
ational. his
reason
nman s an
echo of
the
harmony
f
theuniverse.
Morality
must e referredack
to
man's nnateationality.he nnateationalityfman sthe nly uarantee
of harmonious
rder,
hichwill
lso be a moral
rder,
ecause
morality
is a rational
unction.
herefore,
he
urpose
f ll
social ndeavourhould
be to
man
increasingly
conscious of
his innate
rationality
(Roy,
1947:34-47)
The
philosophy
f revolution
volved
n the
basis
of thewhole
stock
fhuman
eritage
or
olitical
ction nd
economic econstruction
is
known s
New Humanism. t
stressthat
neither
apitalism
nor
Parliamentaryystem
an olve he
roblems.
ocialism ndCommunism
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
12/13
Radical Humanism fM. N.Roy 617
reject
he otion ffreedom. ew
Humanisms the
nly
lternative,
hich
reconcilesocial
organization
nd
ndividual
reedom.
ccording
o
Roy,
The
basic dea
of new
revolutionary
ocial
philosophy
ust
e
that he
individuals
prior
o
society,
nd ndividual
reedom ust ave
priority
over ocial
rganization
Roy,
1952:
284).
M.N.
Roy
hadbeen onsidered
as one of the most earned f Modern ndian
writers n
politics
nd
philosophy.
is
philosophy
f Radical Humanisms considered
s the
most mportantontribution,hich ouldprovide or strongasis to
Indian
emocracy.
REFERENCES
:
Appadorai,
: Indian olitical
hinking,
xford
niversity
ress,
New
Delhi,
1971.
Ghosh,
:
Political deas and Movement
n
India,Allied,
New
Delhi,
1975.
Mahadevan,
.P.M
:
Contemporary
ndian
hilosophy,terling,
New
Delhi,
1981.
Mishra,
mesh
History
f
ndian
hilosophy,
ol.
1,
Tirabhuki
Pub., Allahabad,
957.
Narvan,
.S
:
Modern
ndian
Thought,
sia
Publishing
ouse,
Bombay,
954.
Radhakrishnan,. (Ed) : Contemporaryndian hilosophy,llen
&
Unwin, ondon,
958
Raju,
P.T.(Ed)
:
Idealist
Thought
n
India,
Allen and
Unwin,
London,
953.
Ray,
B.G. :
Contemporary
ndian
Philosophers,
Kitabistan,
Allahabad,
947.
Roy,
M.N
Constitutionffreendia-
A
Draft,
adical
Democratic
Party,
elhi,
1946.
This content downloaded from 128.97.27.21 on Wed, 7 May 2014 05:13:33 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Radical Humanism of m. n. Roy b. k. Mahakul
13/13