Classical Liberalism

Also published on Twitter

The rise of the Liberal Raj bears the greatest resemblance to the global spread of Buddhism.

Both piggybacked on the material value created by ideologies that were “culturally” parent to it (Classical liberalism and Hinduism respectively), persuaded elites to take the Dharma’s interests to be their own and eventually became the destroyers of their parent ideologies while usurping credit for the latter’s success.

Also published on Twitter

2nd urbanization : Hinduism : Buddhism = Industrial Revolution : Classical Liberalism : Modern Liberalism

2 enabled 1, the surplus of which 3 piggybacked on to project global soft power

Classical liberalism doesn’t have anything ideologically in common with Left-liberalism. They share a common root much like the Abrahamic faiths share a common root, but they do not have anything common in substance.

As for the East India Company, its problem was just that it was a very extractive economy, and they destroyed Hindu culture for straightforward material reasons, similar to any empire of yore would.

For example, the Arthaśāstra also talks about abolishing practices of barbarians after conquering their lands (probably referring to Mauryan occupation of Afghanistan & Balochistan, or maybe even some non-Vedic cultures within India). This was not “liberalism”.

Whoever acts against the will of the people will also become unreliable. He should adopt the same mode of life, the same dress, language, and customs as those of the people. He should follow the people in their faith with which they celebrate their national, religious and congregational festivals or amusements.

His spies should often bring home to the mind of the leaders of provinces, villages, castes, and corporations the hurt inflicted on the enemies in contrast with the high esteem and favour with which they are treated by the conqueror, who finds his own prosperity in theirs. He should please them by giving gifts, remitting taxes, and providing for their security.

He should always hold righteous life in high esteem. Learned men, orators, charitable and brave persons should be favoured with gifts of land and money and with remission of taxes.

He should release all the prisoners, and afford help to miserable, helpless, and diseased persons. He should prohibit the slaughter of animals for half a month during the period of Cháturmásya (from July to September), for four nights during the full moon, and for a night on the day of the birth-star of the conqueror or of the national star.

He should also prohibit the slaughter of females and young ones (yonibálavadham) as well as castration. Having abolished those customs or transactions which he might consider either as injurious to the growth of his revenue and army or as unrighteous, he should establish righteous transactions.

He should exile born thieves, barbarians and traitors to remote areas, as with the captured enemy. Those who were opposed to him, but are convinced of their own fall with that of their master, should be pacified. If a relative of the enemy takes shelter in a wild tract on the border and harasses him, he should be provided with a sterile portion of territory or with one fourth of a fertile tract, on the condition of supplying the conqueror a fixed amount of money and troops, in raising which he will incur the displeasure of the people and be destroyed by them.

He should initiate the observance of all those customs, which, though righteous and practised by others, are not observed in his own country, and give no room for the practice of whatever is unrighteous, though observed by others.

—Kautilya, in the Arthaśāstra, 13.5