Concepts, Methods and Indian Politics: A Conversation with Sudipta Kaviraj

Abstract

The study of Indian politics, especially in the conventional disciplinary framework of political science, is often differentiated from what is called political theory. Indian politics, more generally, refers to the functioning of institutions (Parliament, Supreme Court, political parties) and the everydayness of political processes. On the other hand, political theory is envisaged as a sophisticated mode of thinking about certain concepts (liberty, equality, justice, secularism) and intellectual traditions (liberalism, Marxism and so on). The dominance of Eurocentric Western concepts and categories is clearly visible in such disciplinary representation of political theory as a subject. Although a section of Indian scholars has questioned this imaginary dividing line between theory (read Western!) and politics (read Indian/ empirical!) in last two decades, the study of the theoretical aspects of Indian politics has not yet been given adequate intellectual attention.2 Sudipta Kaviraj’s work is an exception in this regard. He has been engaging with the complexities of Indian politics for serious political theorization for almost five decades. Kaviraj’s work recognizes the historical formation of Indian politics as a point of departure to underline the specific constitution of Indian modernity. Unlike other scholars of his generation, especially the self-declared Marxists, Kaviraj has always been critical of theoretical rigidity of any kind. This intellectual openness helps him to engage with Western intellectual traditions without compromising with his adherence to the empirically informed, historically conscious, and theoretically adventurous analysis of Indian politics. Kaviraj’s work introduces us to an interesting methodological trajectory. He does not outrightly reject the value of Eurocentric/Western theoretical thinking. Instead of employing them uncritically, he asks us to locate these theoretical reflections in their immediate Western context. This contextualization of Western theories, Kaviraj argues, may help us in tracing the manner in which a particular modern experience is understood, evaluated and eventually theorized. In other words, Kaviraj is not merely interested in the act of theory; he seems to explore the mechanisms that produce theoretical reflections. Notes on Methods