Proponents of liberal democracy have since the end of the Cold War aggressively purported the dichotomy of Independence into two aspects: Economic Independence and Political Independence. In falsely suggesting that economics and politics are unrelated and by conveniently disregarding all other facets of human life as not having the same importance, it further suggests the idea that Economic Independence should precede Political Independence in the context of social change. While this supposition in the present era of globalism may seem seductive, this dichotomization is costly and has occurred in the same scheming way that the Western knowledge system dichotomized humanity into two conceptual entities: ‘State and Man.’
The dichotomization of Independence is obstructing the natural and equal development of all life; and is invariably strengthening a state-centered status quo. Just as humanity is indivisible, so is Independence undividable. Fundamental to this understanding is the recognition that Independence is not the end, it is only the means; the necessary condition by which humanity can freely exercise the development of its full human dignity and human worth. Therefore, the imposition that suggests a dichotomization of Independence actually implies a perception that views Independence as the end and not the means. This creates a false illusion by which the State continues its survival. The consequence of such a worldview prevents the holistic growth of humanity, while nurturing the forces of the powers that be.
The assertion that political Independence should be first or the view that Economic Independence should come before the Political, has only caused needless and fruitless polarizations. Schumacher reminds us that the foundation of a just peace cannot be laid by universal prosperity in the modern sense because such prosperity if attainable at all, is attainable only by cultivating such drives of human nature, such as greed and envy, which destroys human intelligence, happiness, serenity and thereby the peacefulness of humanity. The truth of the matter is that the issue of Independence cannot be fragmented. Sufficient historical and present global occurrences amply suggest that the stability and well being of any political community requires the effective realization of both Political and Economic Independence.
Only together, can the spirit of Independence withstand the test of time. Fundamental to the sustenance of a worldview that nurtures the values of a shared humanity is the realization and acknowledgement that life is not and cannot be compartmentalized. It is interconnected, interdependent and interrelated into a complex web of relations. Simply put; one affects the other just as the principle of the ‘butterfly effect.’ From this view point independence cannot be dichotomized, but should be understood and exercised as a relational value that finds meaning only when it is respected and approached as an indivisible entity. Independence therefore is a means, not the end.
This distinction is critical in differentiating between those who seek to exercise Independence to greater fulfillment of life, while the other finds attainment in the symbolism and status of Independence; even when they are not able to exercise it fully. There is no doubt that Political Independence on its own cannot survive, and it is equally true that Economic Independence on its own will not elevate the dignity and quality of human life. In their individual attributes as economic and political freedom, they are but incomplete and unsustainable, but together in relationship they are complementary in bringing out the true and fullest meaning of what it is to be independent. Metaphorically, they are different sides of the same coin.
Most independent movements however have fallen into dichotomizing the values of Independence. Nagas too are faced with this dilemma and it would be detrimental for Nagas to entrap themselves in this dichotomy. The failure to engage in a deeper and critical process of understanding the meaning of Independence and contextualizing its values in the local context would only prevent Nagas from making a more informed decision. The issue cannot be simplified. A dichotomized view of Independence negates the interactive nature of how public policy, politics and economics, in general, are influenced by actions of civil society, implying that the lives of ordinary people are put on hold until Political or Economic Independence is achieved.
This again is part of the illusion created by a fragmented view of Independence. It would, therefore, be helpful if Naga students begin articulating a holistic understanding and process of how Independence is exercised in the daily lives of ordinary men and women. If the Independence that Nagas yearn for is an Independence that will give ownership to the people to make decisions and exercise their rights to elevate their quality of lives and to define the course of their dignity, then, it is essential that Independence is not dichotomized into narrow elements of economics and politics. After all Independence is a much richer and fuller concept. Hence, if Independence is to be a living reality in the every day conduct of human affairs, it is imperatives that all facets of Independence must simultaneously be pursued, not one over the other, but together harmoniously as one entity.
