Kaka D. Iralu
In the title of this article, I did not pit (put) the word “lies” against the word “truth” because in Naga politics, the word “Lies” has taken cover behind the word “pragmatism.”In Naga politics today, the truth is not reigning over us but lies masquerading as pragmatic truths. And since political lies are cleverly camouflaged under the umbrella of pragmatic truths, Nagas are not aware that they have been living under the shadow of “Pragmatic Lies” for all the past 56 years i.e. from the establishment of statehood in 1960 to 2016). But what is “Pragmatism or “The pragmatic option”?”Here we will first deal with Pragmatism as a philosophical school of thought. Secondly, we will examine how this philosophical thought, applied to politics, had affected modern man and particularly Nagas in their own political context.
Pragmatism is an American philosophy that developed in the 1870s under Charles Sanders Peirce and further developed by later twentieth century Philosophers like William James and John Dewey. According to Pragmatism, the truth or meaning of an idea lies in its observable practical consequences rather than anything moral or social. This means that an ideology or proposition is true, if it works satisfactorily to one’s advantage. It also means that unpractical ideas are to be rejected. In Pragmatism “whatever works, is the truth.” It also asserts that because reality changes, “whatever works” will also change with the changing realities. Thus, truth must also be changeable and no one can claim to possess any final or ultimate truth. Pragmatism focuses on a changing universe rather than an unchanging one.
As the 20th century drew to an end, pragmatism was applied to Politics, Education, Psychology, Economics and even Law. (In the field of Law, it brought about catastrophic consequences, but we have no time for that in the present article) In the field of politics, “expediency” (the advantageous), rather than historical truths, became the deciding factor in settling political disputes. One proponent of the pragmatic philosophy, K. B. Clark even said “pragmatic men of power have no time or inclination to deal with social morality."Political deals and settlements thus began to be done on pragmatic reasons rather than moral political truths.
For those who understand Philosophy, it may be interesting to go one step backwards into history before the dawn of Pragmatism, and dwell on what Hegel (1770-1831) had said. This is important because pragmatism was built on what Hegel had said. Now, Hegel said that truth is not absolute in itself but that truth can only be derived from a synthesis of the truth and its opposite-falsehood. He presented his idea in the form of a synthesis. He argued that truth should not be accepted as an absolute entity (thesis) but that truth should be a synthesis (Mixture) of “truth” (Thesis) and its opposite “falsehood” (Antithesis). What Hegel had propounded was therefore, that truth is relative (Not absolute) and tentative (Not final). Then came along Peirce and Dewey and said “Well in that case, whatever works should be the truth and not what is right or what is wrong.” Thus was born the famous modern political word of “Stating the politically correct thing” which ultimately meant-the workable thing and not necessarily the morally right thing. In the end, the politically workable thing became “the politically correct thing!” Karl Marx, the founder of the communist socialist political ideology also built his political theory on Hegel’s constantly changing and fluctuating relative concept of truth in the march of history.
THE INTRODUCTION OF THE PRAGMATIC IDEOLOGY INTO NAGA POLITICS.
The first batch of educated Nagas introduced this pragmatic political ideology into Naga politics when they signed the 16 Point Agreement with India in 1960. This pragmatic Nagas must have thought that it would be far more advantageous (Pragmatic) for them to settle down under an Indian financed state then to fight the might of India, insisting on the truths of their political rights. Tragically, this move undid all that the Nagas had achieved under the NNC, FGN and the Naga army through out 14 years of systematic and heroic resistance (1946-1960). In a real sense, the deaths of nearly 200,000 Nagas who had died in that heroic resistance were nullified. This, at the time when A.Z. Phizo had finally reached London with a documented record of India’s invasion of Nagaland and all the atrocities committed on the Naga nation. (Phizo reached London on June 12, 1960 and addressed the world press on July 26, 1960. But on that same day of July 26, 1960, the Naga People’s Convention met Nehru in Delhi and signed the 16 Point Agreement with India)
As for Naga history from that point on, it will require volumes of books to recount all the Indian and Naga treacheries and trickery that have brought us to the present political and economic mess. And in the midst of all these corruptions, presently, some Indian leaders are again secretly talking with some Naga leaders to find a pragmatic solution to the 69 year Indo- Naga political conflict of invasion.
As for the rest of the Nagas, the question will be: Will you accept another pragmatic solution or continue to defend the political truth that Nagas are not Indians and Nagaland is not Indian Territory. Here, Fidelity to the truth or Compromise with the pragmatic alternative will be the test of the hour. And your response will reflect your Christianity as to whether you are a disciple of the Way the Truth and the life.
