昨日のエントリで取り上げたインドの歴史家Ramachandra Guhaが、この論文でそう問い掛けている(Mostly Economics経由)。


More than sixty years ago, in the summer of 1948, the Indian nation, then newly-born, was struggling for its very survival. It was pierced from the left by the Communists, and pinched from the right by Hindu extremists. And there were other problems aplenty. Eight million refugees had to be resettled; provided with land, homes, employment and a sense of citizenship. Five hundred princely states had to be integrated, one by one, a process that involved much massaging of egos (for the Maharajas tended to think very highly of themselves), and just a little coercion.
Few Indians now alive know how uncertain our future looked in the summer of 1948. The question then being asked everywhere was ‘Will India Survive?’. Now, sixty-four years down the road, that fearful query has been replaced by a far more hopeful one, namely, ‘Will India Become a Superpower?’.
This new, anticipatory, expectant question has been prompted by the extraordinary resilience, in the long term, of India’s democratic institutions.


  • 極左勢力の脅威
  • 油断ならないヒンズー至上主義者の存在
  • かつて自由主義勢力として屹立していた中道派の劣化
  • 貧富の差の拡大
  • メディアの卑小化
  • 現在の資源の消費パターンの環境面における持続不可能性
  • 複数政党の連立政権がもたらす不安定性と政策の一貫性の無さ


The political history of the modern world can be written in terms of a three-way contest. On the left,
there are varieties of socialist or communist extremism. On the right, there are varieties of national or religious fanaticism. Placed in the middle are the forces of liberal, constitutional democracy. When the centre is fragile, as in Russia in 1917 or in Germany in 1933, one or other form of extremism will triumph. When the centre is resolute, as in India in 1948, liberal democracy can consolidate itself.



We should judge ourselves not against the achievements, real or imagined, of other countries, but in the light of our own norms and ideals.


またGuhaは、彼の師Dharma Kumarがバーブリー・マスジドの破壊の6ヶ月後に書いたという小論「India as a Nation-State」から、以下の一節を引用している。

instead of deploring our lack of homogeneity we should glory in it. Instead of regarding India as a failed or deformed nation-state we should see it as a new political form, perhaps even as a forerunner of the future. We are in some ways where Europe wants to be, but we have a tremendous job of reform, of repairing our damaged institutions, and of inventing new ones.