READINGS FROM RUSSELL: A FEW OBSERVATIONS by Sujato Datta

I recently happened to come across a handful of pieces of Bertrand Russell which offers ideas about society which are riveting and at the same time rocking the cages of conservative dogma in ideological thought. For the benefit of reference and verification, I talk about four essays in particular, ' The Future of Mankind', ' On Being Modern-minded', 'The Superior Virtue of the Oppressed' and ' An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish'. Russell saw a world, which was more volatile than ever before, disrupted by fighting among the two superpowers of the world and unprecedented advances in thought, technology and unmatched departures in world politics.

The greatest depth of Russell's work lies in his revolt against British idealism. It goes without saying, that idealism is not merely a product of fascination, nostalgia or idolatry but is overwhelmingly a form of political ideology. Dogmas have always risen riding the swift waves of idealism. In, 'The Superior Virtue of the Oppressed' Russell talks about what he calls, "a curious form of admiration for groups to which the admirer doesn't belong.". He makes it a point to note that this admiration is evoke towards subject beings, something in line with the romanticization of the 'simple tribal life', including mainly the poor, women and children. From a victor's perspective, it is thus a projection of the requirement to protect the subject. The subject is thought to be behind the stage of historical development acquired by the victor. This perception is what influenced the reception of historicism and Eurocentric history by the subordinated colonies, because of the constructions of the colonies to the 'not-yets' as pointed out by Dipesh Chakrabarty in 'Provincializing Europe'. Chakrabarty writes,

"Consider the classic liberal but historicist essays by John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty" and "On Representative Government" both of which proclaimed self-rule as the highest form of government and yet argued against giving Indians or Africans self-rule on grounds that were indeed historicist. According to Mill, Indians or Africans were not yet civilized enough to rule themselves. Some historical time of development and civilization had to elapse before they could be considered prepared for such a task."

The notion on which this claim is premised is fundamentally idealistic. Another example would be the act of instilling in the woman's body the 'dubious honour' of virtue, which in performance is the attempt to desexualize the woman's body. It fulfills the two-fold task of displacing the individuality of the woman and also dispossessing her of individual agency. Protection of these virtues is painted , particularly in South-East Asian societies, as a binary opposite and mutual exclusive of material specifics. The thought goes as saving the chastity of the woman to make up for the loss of control of the indigenous population in the  material world which has been taken over by the first-world countries.

Russell talks at length about the implications of this on children. He points out traditions within Christianity which regarded children as carriers of energy which can easily be manipulated by Satan. Hence it posits a need for regulation. This is where he problematizes this notion. Since the understanding of requirement for regulation is so generalised, schooling is seen as something very natural. Society fails to see the dangers and shortcomings of the school systems. The very hierarchy in which the school operates reproduces existing channels of domination and subordination. Nowhere is it taught to question power. The normalisation of obedience is thought to be harmless by the subjects because they are kept oblivious of their potentials. The idea of a homogenous metric for regulation is where the birth of the subject occurs. Regulation of creative energy is its immediate death. Russell, further provides a principled reasoning for this behaviour. He says, "The idealising of the victim is useful for a time because it is kind to refuse them power since it would destroy their virtue." This framework is systematicaally induced to prevent the distribution of power. The same argument can be made for the indigenous populations around the world. Russell writes, " The 18th century colonisers loved to sentimentalise about the 'noble savage' and the 'simpler annals of the poor'." This fantasization is still visible in the reproduction of indigenous people and settings in movies as it was in literature for the past two centuries. Idealization is thus, theoritical claim to power for the victor and the deliberate alienation of the subject from it. Russell goes on to talk about, in similar terms, about how in modern thought such an admiration has developed for the proletariat. many literary geniuses remain blind to the dangers of the romanticization of the pauper and the urban poor.

In, 'An Outline of an Intellectual Rubbish', Russell discusses various shades of socio-political and philosophical thought. He studies and critiques the role of religion and theology. Russell publicly identified as an agnostic. Coinciding with Russell and falling back on a little history one can discern the continuum of clerical control over thought. Despite the emergence of humanism and rationality, the grip of theological speculation on society, remained more or less firm throughout the centuries. He links the continuous prevalence of religion with the continued existence of self-importance. He says, "We believe, first and foremost, what makes us feel we are fine fellows." The fact that if God wants to punish you he would have to recognize your act is the belief that keeps the wheel going. One does not need to look far to draw the link with religious fundamentalism. The altruistic principle of martyrdom is what is marketed by the violence-mongering prophets of extremism to draw people to it. Criticizing the clergy's attempts to keep populations in darkness, Russell says, "...at each stage the clergy tries to make the public forget their early obscurantism in order that their present obscurantism may not be recognized for what it is.". To draw an example, the violence perpetuated by Christians on pagans and indigenous populations have existed only in history books. Once again the world fails to see how Christianity has joined hands with domination. It is lobbying to stop vaccination, to ban abortions and its prophets are raping children.

I will deviate a little here to make an analogy with religion and the links are pretty obvious. The issue is capitalism. In brazenly statist forms, it encourages amnesia and diverted argumentation. The amnesia is necessary because how else could a system which collapsed twice in a span of 90 years threw billions into poverty, stretched the environment to its limits still exist?

Russell also makes an addition to the reason for the prevalence of religion. He sees the modern morals as constituted by two fundamentally opposite tendencies. On one hand, we have, "...rational precepts as to how to live together peacably in a society" and on the other we have " Traditional taboos derived originally from ancient superstition but proximately from sacred books.".

A question that Russell ponders in relation, is that of nationalism. He had been principally against watertight characterisations. Even in his take on ethics, he had remained a utilitarian. There were no uniform set of morals or no fixed moral metric that guided society. He mentions in the essay, how, "Economic considerations override human nature." Thus, he posits that when it comes to nations or nationalities, fixing a uniform set of morals from within or without is always counter-productive. He writes, " Generalisations about national characteristics are just as common and just as unwarranted generalisations about women." A case in point here, would be how the nation is almost universally recognised as a woman. He busts the myth of nationalism being a phenomenon from below and links it directly with power, somewhat echoing Orwell. He writes, " What appears to one nation as the national character of another, depends upon a few prominent individuals or upon the class that happens to have power." Here, not only does he assert nationalism to be a dictate from above to create historical conditions and link it with conscience to overwhelm material considerations, he hints at the production of nationalism as a creation of the bourgeoisie class. The premise of binary differentiation of nationalism, fails to contemporarize history as it lacks the ability to take cognizance of several simultaneously existing time and spaces. It is thus left as a tool for the organised rulers who fashion it as their own weapon. Its tangible manifestation then becomes Nazi Germany. Russell notes, "For this reason, all generalisations on the subject, are liable to be completely upset by any important political change." Thus the perception of a nation and its Other will always depend on the people who inhabit the existing power structures and institutions.

In, ' The Future of Mankind' Russell attempts a bold prediction of the world as it comes to be. According to him, the future that he predicts, was to come by the end of Second World War. He lays out three possibilities for mankind:-

1) The world comes under a single government
2) The human race is annihilated
3) A return to barbarism or savagery

It is obvious that he did not predict a correct timeline. What we are left to ponder, however, is the probability of the fruition of these occurences in the long run. Starting with the most extreme condition, the complete annihilation of mankind does not seem in sight. There are not yet reports of such bio-genetic degradation of the human race or any signs of losing out to species more and better equipped in terms of natural selection. However, the intensified rate of exploitation of the environment may pose certain dangers. Apart from that with technological advancement and steady pharmaceutical development, the threat of complete annihilation does not appear to be very prominent. Furthermore, with the logic of deterrence being more or less widely accepted, an apocalyptic nuclear conflict or a succeeding nuclear winter also does not appear very probable. However, the threat of a partial annihilation exists. This is not an advocacy of the Malthusian Theory of Population, but the speculation of culmination point of an intensified process of resource concentration. Slavoj Zizek in his recent debate with Jordan Peterson, noted how the recent advances in biological and genetic engineering will lead to one class of individuals having access to a genetically improved body and surviving much longer than other people. This disproportionate access to pharmaceutical drugs and mechanism around the world are reflective of that. It's not that competition will be a direct causality for lowering of prices because competition in capitalism occurs at the profit end. The cost price will be recovered by paying lower wages rather than lower prices. Moreover in case of basic necessities like this, the customer's compulsion nullifies the service end performance, particularly in the third world countries.

I'll vociferously contend Russell's point about a return to barbarism or savagery. For that there would have to be a disappearance of wealth which is unlikely. Wealth has a fascinating capability to reproduce itself but not redistribute itself. Another thing that needs to happen is the disappearance of a vast system of knowledge which is an unlikely rupture in the long continuum of the human race.

I now come to the possibility of a world government The United States of America is the closest thing to a single world government. Its economic and technological prowess means it controls nearly every maneuver in the world. Soft power is the biggest victory that USA has scored. Any crime against the US becomes the most dangerous crime which is evident from how Assange was hunted down. He is now being refused a lawyer. States acting against US interests are punished by economic sanctions which cripple the populations of the country. Yet its own crimes go unchecked. It murders, rapes, maims and tortures men, women and children, separates children from their families at the borders and sponsors coups to topple elected governments. It basically 'governs' the world has a hegemon.

I am yet to read more of Russell's works and more about his life. More observations will in all probability help to shed more light on  his thoughts.