पृष्ठ

गुरुवार, 11 जून 2026

Thinking Justice

Justice, as an idea, a norm, or an enforceable principle, flourishes only in a culture of excellence. Such a culture values competence, responsibility, self-restraint, and the realisation of individual potential. Justice is both a product and a guardian of this culture.

At its most basic level, justice requires that wrongdoing be recognised as wrong, that the wrongdoer be held accountable, and that the victim receive restitution or redress. Yet where poverty, deprivation, disorder, and dependency become pervasive, injustice often ceases to appear exceptional. It comes to be accepted as the normal state of affairs, a fait accompli. In such circumstances, the delivery of justice is perceived not as a matter of right but as an act of benevolence, charity, generosity, or, worse still, chivalry.

What, then, is excellence? It is not merely exceptional achievement, nor is it simply the possession of wealth, status, or skill. Excellence is a state in which individuals and societies remain mindful of the potential of the human mind and consciously cultivate it. It is a social condition in which individuals are encouraged to realise their capacities while remaining bound by the obligation not to dominate, coerce, exploit, or harm others. Such a condition rests upon a deep respect for individuality, not merely as a matter of rights but as a recognition that each human being possesses a unique potential for thought, judgment, creativity, and self-realisation. The acceptance and appreciation of individuality are nurtured by literature, art, philosophy, and the broader life of the mind. These deepen human awareness, enlarge the moral imagination, and cultivate the capacity to recognise other persons as distinct centres of experience rather than as instruments, abstractions, or members of a category.

The consciousness of excellence and the level of prosperity go hand in hand. They sustain and reinforce one another. It is the cultivation of the mind that gives rise to prosperity, just as prosperity creates conditions conducive to the further cultivation of the mind. Conversely, a society that neglects the cultivation of the mind breeds poverty, while pervasive poverty leaves little room for such cultivation. The two thus stand in a reciprocal relationship, each strengthening or weakening the other.

Literature, art, and intellectual pursuits do not merely require patronage; they require a society that can afford, both materially and mentally, to look beyond the demands of immediate survival. A civilisation preoccupied entirely with subsistence struggles cannot readily make excellence a shared aspiration. Where the horizon of life is confined to mere survival, the higher cultivation of the mind becomes difficult to sustain, and with it the consciousness from which justice, responsibility, and individuality derive their strength.
Excellence may be understood most clearly when contrasted with decadence, which is the state of general poverty, squalor, disorder, indifference, and the erosion of duty and accountability. It is a condition in which a society ceases to value and reproduce excellence. Wrongdoing loses its moral distinctiveness and comes to be regarded as an inevitable feature of life. Under such conditions, the moral and institutional foundations of justice weaken, and public life gradually descends into cynicism and arbitrariness.

Ultimately, justice is sustained by a collective state of mind. It depends upon habits of thought and conduct that generate stability, predictability, trust, and accountability. These habits are neither automatic nor self-perpetuating. They require constant cultivation. Excellence is precisely this condition of cultivated awareness: a state in which people remain mindful of the potential of the mind, both in themselves and in others. When such awareness weakens, society drifts toward mindlessness. The ideas, norms, and practices that sustain justice are then gradually absorbed into that vast swamp of mindlessness, where neither excellence nor justice can long survive.

Historically, ideas of justice have often been formulated from the perspective of those who imagined society as requiring supervision from above. Justice was therefore conceived as a mechanism administered by a superior authority rather than as a culture cultivated by society itself. Yet a society not subjected to aggression or tyranny tends to develop norms, customs, and expectations that sustain cooperation, accountability, and mutual respect. In such circumstances, justice emerges less as an external imposition than as an internal achievement. Laws and institutions may preserve and articulate it, but its true source lies in the culture of excellence from which it arises.

Niraj Kumar Jha

मंगलवार, 9 जून 2026

Commoners Speak Now

Before social media, a relatively small number of people spoke in the name of commoners, often usurping their voices and even their sense of being. Post-colonialism examined how international power cliques, through their intellectual and institutional machinery, claimed to speak on behalf of the world's marginalised while simultaneously casting them in their own image. Yet many of the protagonists of post-colonial discourse were themselves carving out niches within Western academia, speaking in the name of the very people from whom they had become socially and materially distant.

The phenomenon is not confined to international politics or academia. It operated at every level of society, descending through institutions, communities, and even families. Someone would speak for another, define another, and gradually appropriate another's being. The power to represent often became the power to replace.

The social media landscape has opened the means of public expression to ordinary people. Millions now speak for themselves rather than through designated intermediaries. It is perhaps not surprising that, as direct voices proliferate, the lords of abstraction redouble their efforts at distraction.

Niraj Kumar Jha

सोमवार, 8 जून 2026

For the Sake of True Vision

Let me suggest another way of distinguishing education from indoctrination, a theme I often return to. Education enables individuals to see reality as it is; indoctrination trains them to see doctrine as reality. The former cultivates the capacity to question, investigate, and revise one's beliefs in light of evidence. The latter demands conformity to predetermined truths and discourages independent judgment.

Many twentieth-century communist regimes resorted to what theocratic regimes have long attempted: a comprehensive capture of the human mind or the generation of a cognitive fog that obscures independent judgment. The aim was to absorb individuals into a grand order, subsuming their individuality while elevating a select few to a status approaching reverence or unquestionable authority.
What I have written is an abstraction—a pure type. Reality is rarely so neat. Even the most liberal order may carry traces of the same affliction; it is often a matter of extent rather than kind.

Let me reiterate here the Gayatri Mantra, an eternal prayer for true knowledge and the illumination of the human intellect:

ॐ भूर्भुवः स्वः ।
तत्सवितुर्वरेण्यं
भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि ।
धियो यो नः प्रचोदयात् ॥

"We meditate upon the adorable radiance of the divine Source. May that divine light illuminate and inspire our intellects."

The prayer does not ask for conformity, certainty, or submission. It asks for enlightened judgment. In that sense, it captures the spirit of education at its highest: not the acceptance of doctrine as reality, but the cultivation of the intellectual and moral faculties necessary to perceive reality with clarity.

Niraj Kumar Jha

बुधवार, 3 जून 2026

On Realism and Idealism

Realism and idealism are often seen as binaries. The fact is that neither is sufficient on its own, and both can become counterproductive when pursued in isolation. The practical and the possible must inform those seeking to realise idealistic aspirations. Such judgment emerges from careful historical and comparative study, from observing realities and mending one's ways accordingly; it does not arise from forcing historical events into preconceived imaginative constructs, reducing history to neat patterns, or adhering rigidly to predetermined outcomes and methods. Equally, crass realism erodes the trust, solidarity, and shared meaning that make collective life possible, culminating in a desolation that negates the very purpose it sought to serve.

Niraj Kumar Jha

रविवार, 31 मई 2026

Responsibility as Power

There is a famous Hollywood movie line: "With great power comes great responsibility." As it is often delivered, it appears to be a law of life, but it is, in fact, a moral dictum. Let me place it in proper perspective. Power is about owning responsibility; otherwise, it becomes merely a position of domination for personal aggrandisement.

Similarly, any privilege enjoyed at public cost must be justified by a commensurate contribution to the public good. Amidst general deprivation and squalor, any privilege derived from public resources or based on public property is an abominably undeserved entitlement. The passage of time often corrects such excesses.

Niraj Kumar Jha

शुक्रवार, 29 मई 2026

Neo-imperialism

Let me clarify at the outset that what I am noting here about neo-imperialism is only my impression. I studied neo-imperialism as a Political Science student at a leading university in our country. The lessons on the subject were overwhelming to me at the time, but later I realised that the entire exercise was teleological. The most bizarre aspect was that Vladimir Lenin’s theory of imperialism, adapted from John A. Hobson, was taught almost as an axiomatic framework for understanding international affairs, even though it explained a pre-existing phenomenon as the outcome of a later-occurring development. Secondly, what it offered as a way out was the advocacy of an order that was feudal at its core, rooted in patronage and clientelism, though presented under the garb of modernity and in the name of liberation. Those who understood the rules of the game eventually defeated the erstwhile bosses of the world at their own game, and now those very bosses appear to be entreating the emergent powers for favour and accommodation. The lingering folly once again leaves us, if not at the receiving end, certainly not at the winning end.

Niraj Kumar Jha

गुरुवार, 28 मई 2026

साम्राज्य और एम्पाइअर

अनुवाद प्रायः भाषाओं के समांतर शब्दों के माध्यम से किया जाता है, किंतु ऐसे समांतर शब्द अनेक बार सभ्यताओं के मौलिक अंतर को ढक देते हैं। उदाहरण के लिए भारत में अब यह समझ एक सीमा तक विकसित हुई है कि ‘रीलिजन’ और ‘धर्म’ में मौलिक भेद है। इसी प्रकार ‘साम्राज्य’ और ‘एम्पाइअर’ (अथवा अन्य सभ्यताओं के समांतर शब्दों) के बीच भी मौलिक अंतर है, जिसे मेरी जानकारी के अनुसार अभी तक सामान्य बोध के क्षेत्र में पर्याप्त रूप से दृष्टिगत नहीं किया गया है।

भारतीय परिप्रेक्ष्य में साम्राज्य का मूल उद्देश्य धर्म का विस्तार, न्याय की स्थापना, शांति और संपर्क को निर्बाध बनाना तथा सामान्य समृद्धि के मार्गों को निष्कंटक करना था। यह व्यापक सामूहिक शक्ति का लोककल्याण और विपत्तियों के निवारण हेतु व्यवस्थित उपयोग था। चक्रवर्ती का ध्येय आदर्श और न्यायप्रिय धर्मराज के रूप में शस्त्र और शास्त्र, दोनों के माध्यम से संसार में धर्मचक्र की स्थापना करना था।

इसके विपरीत, एम्पाइअर प्रायः किसी व्यक्ति अथवा संगठित समूह की सर्वोच्चता और लिप्सा-पूर्ति के उद्देश्य से व्यापक स्तर पर लोगों के दमन और दोहन की व्यवस्था रहा है। निश्चय ही दोनों ही स्थितियों में अपवादों की बहुलता मिलती है, किंतु रामराज्य का आदर्श तथा अशोक और चंद्रगुप्त द्वितीय के साम्राज्य जैसे उदाहरण भारतीय अवधारणा की विशिष्टता को स्पष्ट करते हैं।

पुनश्च : उक्त संदर्भ में मेरा आग्रह है कि हिंदी में सम्प्रेषण के लिए ‘एम्पाइअर’ तथा ‘इम्पीरियलिज़्म’ शब्दों का यथावत प्रयोग किया जाए। उदाहरणार्थ, ‘ब्रिटिश एम्पाइअर’ और ‘ब्रिटिश एम्पाइअरवाद’ कहा जाए, न कि ‘ब्रिटिश साम्राज्य’ और ‘साम्राज्यवाद’।

नीरज कुमार झा