A non-binary worldview

The Western paradigm of 'my way or the highway' is no longer workable. It is time to accept complexity and contradictions as the norm

The world is entering a dystopian era where nothing that we took for granted even a few decades ago seems to work. Democracy appears to be in trouble everywhere, and its definition is not based on commonsense but is decided by an elite consensus. The state is supposed to have a monopoly on power and violence, but non-state actors, single-issue campaigners, and special interests seem to be exercising power out of proportion to their actual share in the population. The rule of law, supposed to be sacrosanct, is violated in spirit in many countries. It is now about “show me the man and I will show you the rule”. Free speech is no longer about freedom to express your thoughts and opinions fearlessly. The Ayatollahs of academia and narrow interest groups use cancel culture to decide who will be allowed to speak and who will not.

Evidence supporting the above statements is available in plenty, both in India and abroad. A small section of farmers forced the Indian government to repeal laws to reform agriculture. In another instance, a religious community prevented the government from implementing a law to fast-forward citizenship to persecuted minorities in three neighbouring countries. Denmark, once the bastion of free speech, has just legislated an anti-blasphemy law under pressure from Islamists. The military-industrial complex, aided by compromised academics, has pushed the US into supporting two wars, one in Ukraine and another in West Asia, wars that now involve more countries indirectly than at any time since World War II. It only needs a political miscalculation to bring on World War III. The world’s foremost superpower is no longer in control of its borders, with thousands of illegal migrants rushing in. The term “illegal immigrant” itself is going out of fashion, and illegals are called “newcomers”.

Why is all this happening? There are many factors contributing to this situation where there is no consensus on almost any issue, but here’s my take: The Western paradigm of binary logic and the zero-sum game is forcing people to take black-and-white positions on matters that exist in the grey zone. The Abrahamic binary, where there can be only one true god, and the rest are false, where it is my way or the highway, and you are either for us or against us, has outlived its utility. This binary was created to simplify choices for ordinary people, but it is pushing the limits of commonsense. The world is too complex and diverse to be easily comprehended in simplistic Right Vs Wrong, or Us vs Them terms.

Consider where such binaries have led us. We are now being bombarded with either/or choices, where if you have doubts about an extreme focus on green energy, you can be labelled a climate change denier. Small groups decide on the priorities we must all accept using acronyms like ESG and DEI, and anyone who demurs is considered a bigot or a threat to equity and social justice. ESG, which stands for environment, social and governance, and DEI, which stands for diversity, equity and inclusion, are now being pushed by unelected corporate and academic bureaucracies in the US and Europe, where they will not let anyone question their relevance. Nobody in their right mind can deny the importance of caring for the environment or advocating for social inclusivity, but should we care so much about environment and diversity where the net result is a denial of energy for growth in poorer regions, and where inclusion means exclusion of those who disagree with the elite consensus? When cultural Marxists — also known as wokes — can forcibly pigeon-hole every individual, group or community into one of two categories, oppressor or oppressed, we know we have reached the absurd limits of binary logic.

State power has become problematic, as it has both strengthened and weakened. Today, the state can be disrupted by any organised interest group, but, equally, it can exercise unlimited power in alignment with the same groups. The US state is powerful because it is underpinned by a “liberal” academia and Big Tech, both of which have their own agendas. The Chinese state is powerful because it is subservient to the Communist party. The Pakistani state is propped up by its Army. In India, state power is supported by powerful caste, regional and religious groups, both majority and minority. State power is not a neutral referee anywhere.

So how do we move out of this dystopian world? One answer is to let each country decide what the best system is for it. Another is to embrace the Indian idea of plurality. There can be one truth, but complex truths are difficult to nail down. It can be perceived differently by different people, as reflected in the saying: Ekam sat, viprah bahuda vadanti (Truth is one, the wise call it by many names). We need to acknowledge a complex world, and stop thinking that any one solution or vision will work for everybody. We need several approaches to solving a problem, and time will tell us which one works better. In a world where artificial intelligence and powerful interests can control opinion and power indirectly, we should be devolving power to the lowest possible arm of government, which means local elected bodies and communities. If people are not in a position to decide what is right for them and what works, the right to vote alone does not add up to democracy.

 We need to give up the idea that states must have a monopoly on power, for monopolies are self-serving and prone to corruption. This means the power of the state must be counterbalanced by community groups, which can also exercise legitimate power in some areas of law-making and enforcement. In the Western paradigm of empowering individuals at the cost of older forms of community, individuals could ultimately become anti-social, as there is no community to moderate their behaviour or guide their energies in positive directions. If we leave everything to the state, we will get state tyranny, and ultimately powerful groups will subvert the law by infiltrating the state. State power must be shared with different groups legitimately in order to prevent human alienation and anti-social behaviour. The issue is not state power per se, but at which level this power should be exercised and by whom.

Complexity, the sharing of state power among many players, and the acceptance of a multiplicity of social objectives are the new realities of our world today. Universalism does not imply subscription to one idea of progress, but recognising different forms of progress at different speeds. It needs wisdom from the East, which is non-binary in nature, to move us forward. The US struggles to understand why we support Russia while still seeking partnership with it. We instinctively understand this. It is only the Indian approach of holding on to multiple realities and contradictory ideas simultaneously that is likely to deliver peace and progress. Binary logic is out of sync with reality.

The writer is editorial director, Swarajya magazine