I don’t know where to begin this, A person who was a religious nationalist, socialist, communist and a radical humanist. He is a rare Political activist with academic bent and action
M.N.Roy has an experience in the organizing socialist party in Mexico and comintern at Russia and helping the attempts to bring a revolution in china. He co-authored the ideological thesis accepted by ComInternational with Lenin. He started the communist party of India in Tashkent.
Roy was disillusioned by the communism and capitalism. He propounded the theory of radical humanism and proposed a new model of democracy in India. This was in stark contrast to the opinion held by most of the leaders. He and Mahatma gandhi alone were the two apostles who argued for indigenous institutions of democracy.
Roy’s main contention with the capitalism and communism is thier utter disregard for and contempt for the humanbeing. Little elaboration would be, In communism man is treated as a helpless being dancing of the dictates of economic forces and his individual personality is to be subordinated for the collectivity. Similarly, malfunctions of Parliamentary democracy and lassiez faire economic doctrine are equally ineffective to solve the crises of modern society.
Roy’s direction was for a organized democracy and cooperative economy. He tried to give these concepts a philosophical background through his radical humanism. He founded a new party to mobilise people and rise awareness about his ideas. New humanism is the manifesto of the Radical democratic party.
Freedom is the basic value of radical humanism. This is defined by Roy as,
“The function of life is to live. The basic incentive of organic living is the struggle for survival. It goes on throughout the long process of biological evolution, until in man it becomes the conscious urge for freedom- the supreme human value” and he proceeds to declare that human struggle for freedom is eternal and man conquers environment by knowledge which is the result of this urge for freedom from the restrictions imposed on him. Man is moral because he is rational. Man’s morality develops with the rationality.
Two important reflections of Roy on Democracy deserve attention.
1. His insistence on partyless politics. he argued that parties indulge in scramble for power and there are no means which will not be explored to achieve that end. To quote him,
“It is known from experience how, in an atmosphere of political backwardness and general ignorance, this system can be abused; how people of questionable character can occupy positions of public trust by virtue of belonging to particular party. A party gives priority and prominence to people not of moral integrity or intellectual merit, but those who can be of greatest help for it to capture power. the result is that parties often serve the purpose of promoting the ambition of individuals either thirsting for power for the sake of power or for material gain.”
2. What is the alternative then?
This was discussed by Roy in his Dehradun study camp. He called it “revolution by consent or pursuasion”. This revolution was not by armed insurrection. This revolution should include all sections of the society. This is to be achieved by people’s committees in towns and villages as a means for securing relief and asserting rights. These committees will eventually grow into organs of decentralised power.
These ideas were published in book “New Orientation” published later.
Radical humanism brought him very close to gandhi. Both stood for decentralisation of political and economic power and both stood for partyless democracy to purify politics.
“Reason, Romanticism and Revolution” is a two volume edition which gives a wider theoretical background for his thinking.
Posted by saikrishna 
Posted by saikrishna 
Posted by saikrishna 