İşbölümünün toplumun özü olduğu anlaşılınca, birey ve toplum arasındaki antitez ortadan kalkar. Bireysellik ilkesi ve toplumsallık ilkesi arasındaki çelişki yok olur.
Ludwig von Mises
Her bireyin takip edeceği, kendine has değerler olduğunu kabul etmeyen bir toplum, birey haysiyetine saygı duymaz ve özgürlüğü gerçekten bilemez.
Sayfa 61 - Friedrich Hayek
That Bombay is now a memory. In the last twenty years, the rise of Hindu nationalism and a local variant, Maratha chauvinism, has systematically destroyed the old city. The regional party that has spearheaded this movement, the Shiv Sena, is named after a seventeenth century chieftain, Shivaji, who opposed New Delhi's (Muslim) Mughal emperors. The party is determined to rid the state of Maha- rashtra, of which Bombay is the capital, of all "alien" influences. (The Muslims came to India beginning in the twelfth century; 800 years is apparently not long enough to be considered a native.) This is most evident in its campaign to rename cities, towns, roads, and buildings that have anything other than pure Hindu names. It culminated in the renaming of Bombay as Mumbai in 1996, an act that illustrates the invented quality of much of Hindu nationalism. Unlike Beijing (a long-standing city whose name was Anglicized into Peking by Westerners), Mumbai did not really exist as a city before the Portuguese and the British called it Bombay. Like Singapore and Hong Kong, it was a tiny fishermen's village. The city was a colonial creation. "Mumbai" is not a return to the past but the validation of a myth.
Sayfa 112
Okur Takip Önerileri
Ethnic conflict is as old as recorded history, and dictatorships are hardly innocent in fomenting it. But newly democratizing societies display a disturbingly common tendency toward it. The reason is simple: as society opens up and politicians scramble for power, they appeal to the public for votes using what ends up being the most direct, effective language, that of group solidarity in opposition to some other group. Often this stokes the fires of ethnic or religious conflict. Sometimes the conflict turns into a full-scale war.
Sayfa 113
Even with the best historical insights, one can't predict when a country will embrace democracy. It often depends on a complex mix of historical facts particular to each country. Why did Spain move to democracy only in 1977 and not earlier? Because its dictator-for-life, Franco, died two years earlier. Why Hungary in 1989? Because that year the Soviet Union stopped threatening it with a military invasion if it liberalized its politics. Why India in 1947? Because that's when Britain liquidated its empire on the subcontinent. And so on. The more interesting question, however, is what makes democracy endure. Political regimes change for varied reasons-war, economic crises, death. But when an autocratic regime does collapse and people try to establish a democracy, what makes it last? Historically, the best single answer to that question has been wealth.
Sayfa 71