The Writers & Scholars present at the meeting.

From left to right: Sandhya Jain, Gautam Siddhartha, Balbir.K.Punj, Puja Rai, Devendra Swaroop, V.P. Bhatia & Praveen.

S. Gurumurthy delivering his keynote address.

Also seen in the picture (from left to right): Dina Nath Mishra, Arun Shourie, Madan Das Devi, S. Gurumurthy, Nirmal Verma & Ramesh Chandra Jain.

The Foundation is coming out with a 40 volume book series on India: Religions and Political Challenges to be written by eminent writers, thinkers, academicians, media persons and social activists. Subjects and authors of the volumes would follow:

VOLUME SIZE

80 to 160 pages or 30,000 to 60,000 words.

TIME FRAME

• 1st set of the series to be released in February 2003.
• 2nd and last set to be released in August 2003.
• Manuscripts are to be submitted to the editorial board of the foundation 3 months before the scheduled release.

LANGUAGE AND TRANSLATION

• Medium can be both English or Hindi.
• The translator has to be chosen by the writers in consultation with the editorial board.
• The translation cost would be borne by the Foundation.

RESEARCH AND EXPENDITURE

• Research material collection is the responsibility of the writer.
• A limit of Rs. 10,000 (by Cheque) has been approved for research work for each writer by the Foundation. The cheque may be obtained from B.K. Jha, Trustee of the Foundation.

EDITORIAL BOARD

Devendra Swarup,

T.V.R. Shenoy

&

Dina Nath Mishra

PROJECT COORDINATOR

Rakesh Sinha

1. Roots and Fruits of Partition - Devendra Swarup
2. Semitic Influence as the Source of Global Conflicts - S. Gurumurthy
3. Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava and the Indian Constitution - Surya Prakash & K.N. Bhatt
4. Secularism on the Leftist Chessboard - Balbir K. Punj
5. Islam and Secularism - Prafulla Goradia
6. Minoritism - Muzaffar Hussain
7. National Integration: Views of Lohia, Kripalani and Ambedkar - R.S. Nirjar
8. Dilemma of Indian Muslims - Surya Kant Bali
9. Media and Secularism - Gautam Siddharth
10. Hinduism and The New Millennium - S.G. Kashikar
11. Demise of Secularism in Pakistan and Bangladesh: A Study - Sardindu Mukherji
12. Image War in Indian Politics - Dina Nath Mishra
13. Foreign Funding and Political Implication - Rajender Chadha
14. Civilizational Clashes and Hindu View - Rameshwar Mishra 'Pankaj'
15. Secularism in Indian Tradition - Sushama Yadav
16. Gender: Hindu View - Kusum Lata Kedia
17. Critique of Leftist View of Secularism - Himanshu Roy
18. Minority Question and Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar - Shri Prakash Singh
19. India in Emerging World Order - Sudhanshu Trivedi
20. Secular Tradition in Ancient India - Pooja Rai
21. The Role and Relevance of the Minority Commission In India - Rakesh Sinha
22. English Media X-rayed - M.V. Kamath
23. Cultural Nationalism a Study of Lal, Bal and Pal - Poornima Singh
24. Indian Muslim Modernity Vs. Traditionalism - Rameeza Hakim
25. A Journey from Secularism to Pseudo-Secularism
26. Challenges of Hindu Reforms
27. Communal Riots in Post Independent India: A Fact Sheet
28. Demographic Changes: Aggressive and Benign and their Impact
29. Future of 'War On Islamic Terrorism
30. Future of Secularism in India and the World
31. Is the World Heading Toward Civilizational Conflict?
32. Islamic Fundamentalism and the Role of the West
33. Jammu and Kashmir Issue and Secular Polity
34. North-East and Secularism
35. Religious Conversion and its Social, Political and Secular Implications
36. Religious Conversion: Views of Vivekanand, Ram Mohan Rai and Gandhi
37. Reporting on Communal Riots in India
38. Scope for Reforms in Islam
39. Secular Polity: A Study of Election Manifestoes
40. Secular West: The Present Trends
41. Secularism - Indian View and Western Construct
42. The RSS and Secular World View
43. Threats to Religious Diversity in India
    

1. Nirmal Verma - Padma Vibhushan, Known Literary Figure, Gyanpeeth Awardee.
2. S. Gurumurthy - Thinker, Social Worker, and Co-convener, Jagran Manch.
3. Arun Shourie - Minister for Disinvestment.
4. Madan Das Devi - RSS Sah Sar Karyavaha.
5. K.N. Bhatt - Senior Advocate & Former Additional Solicitor General of India.
6. V.P. Bhatia - Former Editor, Organiser.
7. A. Surya Prakash - Journalist & Director, IILM.
8. Ramesh Chandra Jain - Director, Gyan Peeth, Times of India Group.
9. Devendra Swaroop - Columnist & Historian.
10. Hari Kishor Singh - Political Thinker & Former Minister of State MEA.
11. Muzaffar Hussain - Journalist.
12. Yashwant Deshmukh - Director, C-Voter.
13. R.S. Nirjar - Director, All India Council of Technical Education.
14. Makkhan Lal - Director, Delhi Institute of Archaeology.
15. Vasant Gadre - Dean of School of Languages, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
16. Surya Kant Bali - Writer & Columnist.
17. Mahesh Chandra Sharma - Vice President, Nehru Yuvak Kendra.
18. Rakesh Sinha - Reader, DU & Columnist.
19. D.P. Sinha - Director, U.P. Sangeet Natak Academy.
20. J.K. Bajaj - Member ICSSR, Center for Policy Study.
21. Gautam Siddharth - Senior Assistant Editor, Pioneer.
22. Sandhya Jain - Columnist, Fellow Birla Foundation.
23. Umesh Updhyay - Director Electronic Co.
24. Himanshu Roy - Reader, DU.
25. Pankaj K. Mishra - Lecturer, DU.
26. Shri Prakash Singh - Reader, DU.
27. Meenakshi Jain - Reader, DU.
28. B.K. Jha - Surgeon Social Activist.
29. Manmath Narayan Singh - Research Scholar, JNU.
30. S.K. Jha - Reader, DU.
31. Sudhanshu Trivedi - Associate Prof., Kanpur.
32. Puja Rai - Lecturer, DU.
33. Rajesh K. Jha - Lecturer, DU.
34. Swadesh Sharma - Reader, DU.
35. Nand Kishore Garg - MLA, Social Activist, Chairman, Agrasen Group of Institutes.
36. Rashmi Das - Journalist.
37. Seema Subbanna - Social Activist.
38. Ashutosh Misra - Research Fellow, Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses.
39. Praveen - Vivekanand Kendra, Kanyakumari.
40. Praveenjit Nambiar - Social Activist & Executive.
41. Ashish K. Singh - Researcher.
42. Avanijesh Awasthi - Lecturer, DU.
43. Balbir K. Punj - Member of Parliament and Foundation's Trustee.
44. Dina Nath Mishra - Member of Parliament, Journalist, Trustee and Founder President.

In the sense American intellectual activity has been built on foundations. Agar aap koi bhi ek American scholar ko dekhen, he is one of the great psychologists today. They work the most on the physiology of the mind on consciousness. If you read any book of his, in its first five pages aap yeh dekhiye ki woh kin-kin ko acknowledge karte hain. The unknown foundations and it has been one of the great omissions of the Indian tax system that we have not allowed, not made it profitable for business houses and other people to set up foundations for intellectual activity. I also feel in the sense that we underestimate, what Ramswarup Ji used to call, the seed value of ideas. In India, intellectual effort is not gaining the attention that it should. I believe that no movement can be sustained for any length of time without a continuous influx of new ideas. Its very good example is the conservative revolution in economic and social policies in the UK and the United States. Ms. Margret Thatcher's coming, and Ronald Reagan's accession were turning point and, it was a result of twenty years of strenuous intellectual efforts. The settings of institutions like the Institute of Public Policy and so on, in which they themselves worked for twenty years ki ek taxation policy par aapko chaahiye there is an answer that has been worked out. It has been debated for a day. You want something on ecology, it has been worked out in detail. That kind of effort we must put in and foundations are the real way to do it because they bring persons together.

I also feel that there is a second lesson in India. Mr. J.P. Nayak khehte they ki India mein problem aata hai we don't looked at it for many years. So that problem grows, it swells, it balloons, and explodes. Dekha... are problem hai isika. So what do you do? You set up an institution to deal with the problem. Ten years later the problem is still there and the institution is become another problem. The Institute for Advanced Studies, Nirmal Verma knows this very well. Hamaare yahaan advanced study nahin hai to Princeton ka naam lekar wahaan ki institution ek beautiful viceries ke lounge ko ruined kar ke institution banati hai. Institution has become a problem very little has come out of it. So may be there is another model and that is, we should not set up an institution which in a conventional sense has a building and a corpus. Those then become a points of contest. Jaise property inheritance per fight ho jaati hai families mein, isi tarah sansthaoon mein un cheezoon per fight ho jaati hai. May be what we should attempt in India is an Institution which disburses funds to individual scholars to meet there needs wherever they are. There are many examples of this kind that we should do and that requires a minimal need only connected with that particular work and it should be made available to the scholar wherever he/she is. There are two rules and this one is regarding in selecting the scholar. We must be brutally objective. Yeh lihaaz ki, he is a good person, he has a difficult times should not to be a criteria. The main issue is the objective of the series or of the books that we are planning and if it is able to do that, fine, and if it is not able to do it well, because he is starving then, we have to find some other way of helping him. We should not sacrifice the objectives of the institution etc. The second is that, there must be absolute strictness in standard and in delivery. If, the time has been given January 2003 it must be January 2003, a particular date. In India, too many journals come up and they fade away. Foundations are set up and they fall into disuse. So that beginning is a good thing but it must be preserved. I think, the third point, which strikes me is that it is said that for intellectual work, actually very few persons are required. Aaj kal probably more are required because our mind was bombarded with impressions and images from all sides. But if you go back to 19th century the number of British Civil servant, who worked and actually forged the spectacles through which we came to see our history and our own tradition, was probably 25 or 30 percent. But the interesting thing was, that they did sustain work of the highest standard. Even today, India terms Dawson's volumes are masterly thing and that time koi woh nahin thi district mein, koi electricity nahin thi, koi communication nahin tha, koi railway line nahin thi. A scholars was sitting on his own working day and night and producing things which would last for ages. So, that kind of sustained effort is very necessary. The second point in that individual's effort is excellence. In India shoddiness is regarded as proof of commitment. Hamara libaas vaisa ho, jhola phata hua ho. That is regarded. Room untidy hai, contrast to Gandhi Ji's meticulous ways, so that is excellence and actually in India excellence is under assault. Today mediocrity is the norm and that is why I feel this is very important especially in groups that are disciplined or dedicated and therefore they are groups on to themselves. They become deaf to others. So that striving effort that absolute determination that whatever I shall do will meet the approbation of the experts in that field. It is true the experts may be motivated. Often it is Marxist historians who will comment adversely on what this group produces for on history. But that is separate matter.

So, excellence should be one. I think the next point is that a group is that our work must add up. It must reinforce each other's work. Kyonki ek aatish baazi jalaane se diwali to hoti nahin. Gurumurthy once used a very important phrase to me. He said a revolution is that when can we find that their is a revolution on that is when a million person are spontaneously doing something that contributes to a particular phase and this is one of Gandhiji's many incomparable skills that whatever any individual was doing he roped him/her into the national struggle. If somebody could give up his life he was the part of the nation, if he couldn't but could go up to jail he was the part of the nation struggle, if he could not but could wear Khadi, he was the part of the nation struggle. Still if you couldn't but only spin at home because he was a government officer could not go to Khadi and become black ball in the office he could spin at the home and still be the part of the nation's struggle. If you couldn't do that and you just did Sandhya which was roped into the nation's struggle. It was accumulation and therefore the work of scholars must also add to each other that is why the importance of what Dina Nath Ji has initiated of doing -- a series and not just an individual book.

We had many great examples of series for instance, Max Muller's fifty volumes on "The Secret Books of the East" changed the west view about the east because it was a series and not just one book. In our own time the corpus that Sita Ram Goyal has produced has presided over has got it the people doing to Voice of India publications actually are cumulated. They reinforce each other from different direction. That is why they provide a pair of spectacles. One of the best examples I have seen, is by the Dalai Lama's initiative there is a thing called the Library of Tibet. It's a series of books and the second is that you know its great troops need to be restated in a language and example and medium and addressing problems of the time. We just keep reading the classics. Many of us may infer the lesson that holds our life at this movement. We often discover that in the reading The Dhampad or The Gita or any thing that this is the phrase that oozes into my heart today because my circumstances has allowed me to see the truth of that but most people will not be able to do it most of us are not as reflected. Therefore the great truths have to be restated and that's a very interesting point in this library of Tibet series. They are just not reprinting the Tibetans religious literature the Dalai Lama and the other Lama's are giving discourses on those teachings and thereby introducing them into our current labs. That is why the spectacles that we may have or the truths that we may have internalise or which we want to propagate and share with others. They have to be restated in the medium and contact of our child's.

I end by reflecting on the point of books. I think the first point that I have learnt Nirmal Verma and others are creative writers so they think spontaneously. But people like me are bookish writers and we read books and write our own books. Two, for example stood are in good steps one is reading is the enemy of writing. Many of us continue to read and accumulate. I have a sister in law who has done a book on The Ramayana and Indonesia because she discovered a temple of Shiva in a remote Island in Indonesia. But she has gone eight years on that book but can we even right the perfect book. One of the greatest in world influential economics and trade marshal wrote a principles of economics which we all memorize, which is the great text book on micro-economics but he never wrote the second volume because he was always perfecting this particular volume and reading more about it. So we should read to accumulate evidence and then just not wait to write for a charity. Second thing I found is re-writing is the secret of good writing. It is very necessary but that we should try to re-write even ideological works. I feel that strong words detract from the force of the argument. I give an example of a friend. Look at Baljit Roy's work on Bangladeshi infiltration. It is very important. It contains primary evidence but it uses strong words and thereby the words over come the facts. So while writing the books one has to remember that the facts speak for themselves. Thank you.

S. Gurumuthy, in his keynote address, dealt with methodology of the research. He argued that unless we confront the social, political and cultural realities of the Indian society, it would not be possible to rediscover the soul of India. He suggested not to rely on one percent Indians who perceive everything from the western perspective. Originality comes when we start thinking positively and try to find utilities of old institutions in our contemporary society. Then he elaborated his own experiences and study of the institution of caste.

He said " the caste is the most dominant institution of Hindu society. Yet there is considerable hypocrisy over it. It is also a fact that caste rules the private lives of all Hindus, of at least 9 out of 10 Hindus. Their marriage are determined by caste. Their rituals are defined by caste. Their relationships are within their caste. The castes largely also live together, without growing a ghetto mindset. This has happened for thousands of years. In fact if there is any aspect of the Hindu life, which distinguishes the Hindu society from say the western, or more appropriately, the Christian, world, it the arrangement of caste. Without going into the origins of caste we should deal with it as an issue of the present. It needs a practical approach. An idealistic view of caste will not will not enable the Hindu society to handle the caste issue."

He further negated the western approach to the Indian social realities. He said, "For centuries ahead Bharat will not accept Anglo-Saxon Individualism. It will be largely a society in which the family and caste dominate. The entire present day approach to caste is based on the assumption that caste will phase itself out and what will remain atomised Hindu society. This assumption has been blown off in the last fifty years. Not only has caste defied the assault of the left and modern forces and also the efforts of different Hindu organisations to dissolve caste, it has also emerged as the predominant social, even political force of India. It has defied even the most successful atomising religious ideologies, Christianity and Islam. Even they have not been able to liquidate the caste phenomenon."

He then discussed the impact and role Mandal movement in Indian politics. tracing the origin of resurgence of so called backward section of the Indian society he said, "The mass caste-based political parties, save in the case of the Dravidian movement in the 1960s and 1970s, were never against Hindus, though political conflicts could have forced them to take a pro-minority stance for votes. In truth it is the leftist, modern and pseudo secular elements that are anti-Hindu.

"A comparison of the Western view of life and the Hindu view of life, the striking difference is the absence in the west of what Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya had pointed out as the core of the Hindu view of life. Apart from the fact that the individual is guided by the principle of Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha [Purushartha], the individual enabled to observe this principle by a social order, which makes such observance not just possible but makes it a duty. The arrangement of life in Hindu social order starts with the individual, expands into the family, encompasses the collectives-village, caste and community- and submerges into the divine where the Individual returns to his inner self. There is a continuous link between the gross individual who starts out and the individual soul into which he returns as part of his liberation process, the Moksha. The original arrangement in the Hindu social order was a non-competing society in which the social arrangement avoided competition. The varna system ensured that competition was not needed for economic growth and had substituted mutual social duties as the mechanism for triggering production, distribution and prosperity. Now without going into the merits of the system, it is evident that the old system is no more. So varna has ceased to be a living phenomenon. Not that varna ceased to be a living phenomenon yesterday. It began to erode even In Mahabharata days with Brahmins taking to war and Kshatriyas taking to penance. So varna ceased to be the social order of the Hindus thousands of year back. It has now indisputably lost all practical relevance except for scholastic and historical studies, as a historical phenomenon."

"But what has not lost relevance is the caste system. Despite the unprecedented assault on the caste system by the whole of the Indian establishment - the intellectuals, social reformers, political parties and leaders, and the total opinion making that has gone against caste as a phenomenon and organisation-caste has not just survived. It has become stronger. It has even challenged the other forms of organisations including political parties. Post Independent India started with the goal of casteless society among other things. Every political party promised casteless polity. But today after 50 years, we have not just castes around, but a whole range of caste-run polity, from caste-influenced to a caste-based polity, in place of the promised casteless polity. This phenomenon of caste-based polity is pervasive all over India, including in states and regions where high voltage social reform movements had fought. Like Tamil Nadu where the Dravidian movement against caste had threatened to even tear apart the nation, caste is the major determinant of polity. So is Maharashtra and Punjab. This naturally leads to the question, what makes the institution of caste so strong. Where lies the vitality of this Institution? This needs an in depth analysis. Without such analysis the most important and crucial element of Hindu society will remain unexplored. And to that extent the understanding of the Hindu society will remain impaired. But before we begin the analysis it must be conceded that caste is an inalienable part of the Hindu society. The Issue is how to handle it? Is it a deadly weakness of the Hindu society as it is repeatedly declared to be or its unique strength? The biggest challenge is to address the un-addressed issue of caste and its dimensions in Hindu socio-economic and socio-political life.

"Does Caste create hierarchy and inhibit social mobility? No, at least not now. Caste becomes the vehicle for social mobility. No caste accepts to be inferior to others. In fact every caste considers itself to superior to others implying the absence of hierarchy, other than perceived hierarchy.

"On whether caste means hierarchy, a brilliant insight into this aspect of caste is found in the book 'Interrogating Caste' by Dipankar Gupta, a Marxist scholar (10). His study shows that no caste considers itself to be lower in status, even though every caste considers every other caste to be lower in status. He speaks of an encounter in Gujarat with a low caste woman who claimed that her caste was really a Rajput variety and it was turned into a low caste after it was defeated in a war. She also told him that one day her caste would get back its rightful position. Says Dipankar Gupta: "This encounter nearly twenty years ago led me to wonder how many low castes have elevated opinions about their caste origins. The enquiry first led me to the works of British administrators like Hunter, Risely, and Enthovan who recorded a large number of caste origins. A new world was revealed to me as I read account after account of those who are customarily called 'low' castes denying their lowly pedigree. Sometimes they said they were Brahmans of a certain kind, on many occasions they claimed Kshatriya [or warrior] status, and frequently their origin myths also suggested that they were the creations of gods -usually Lord Shiva". In his introduction to the book in which he sets out his conclusions on whether caste is a hierarchy, Dipankar Gupta says: "Anyone writing on caste cannot ignore the popular conceptions about the phenomenon. In this case the dominant lay notion of the caste system is also the prevalent academic view. That is why it is so difficult to dislodge the belief that a single caste hierarchy is universally acknowledged and accepted by everyone within the caste system. In fact it is far more realistic to say that there are probably as many hierarchies as there are castes in India. To believe that there is a single caste order to which every caste from Brahman to untouchable acquiesce ideologically is a gross misstatement of facts on the ground."

Thus caste hierarchy is not universally acknowledged or accepted. It is only a popular notion. Each caste however low it is considered to be by the other caste/s is proud of its caste heritage. Therefore the notion that caste inevitably means hierarchy needs to be reconsidered.

The other objection that caste bars social mobility, true in the past, is not true any more. In fact, the entire political mobilisation of caste based or caste inspired political parties is based on caste. Here caste is no more the bar for social mobility. Instead caste becomes the vehicle for social mobility. In fact Romila Thapar another Marxist scholar endorses this view (11). The notion that caste is a bar to social mobility is based on the Anglo-Saxon wand-view, which atomises all social units into individuals. If castes are dismantled and the constituents are atomised, then the individual, identified as the erstwhile member of the now non-existent caste, will have difficulty in securing social mobility. But functioning caste ensures the social mobility of its constituents. For, the caste, as a whole, works in this direction. It is not only in the field of politics. Even in the field of economics, the existence of functioning caste ensures rather than impedes social mobility. It is because caste is a in dissoluble bond in India. So when an individual in a new caste [which is not a bania caste] takes to business, he does not take to business as an individual. His caste, his biradri, supports him in his efforts. In fact, once a person belonging to a caste enters a business, others also invariably follow suit Because it is only within the same caste, one is jealous of the other and therefore competes with the other. In contrast, a person belonging to a caste is in mental competition more with his fellow caste man than with someone belonging to another caste. For, competition is among people who consider themselves as equals. A study of the new communities/castes, which have taken to business, indicates that they have taken to business almost as a caste. There is competition as well as co-operation within the caste in business, which has resulted in competitive pursuit of entrepreneurship in which risk taking and enterprise have become almost a movement. A study of the new communities in business like the Ramgadias in Punjab, the Jatavs in Agra, the Patels in Gujarat, the Kammas in Andhra Pradesh, the Nadars, Goundars and Naidus of Tamilnadu shows that the castes have turned into major business communities because of competition and co-operation within the caste. There is a contageon effect within a caste. Interestingly the World Development Report of the World Bank, for the year 2001, observes this phenomenon of caste in business in the context of the Goundar community, which has made phenomenal growth as businessmen in the last few decades. This is about the growth of knitwear export business in Tirupur. Says the World Bank (12):

TIRUPUR IN TAMIL NADU (INDIA): INSIDERS AND OUTSIDERS IN THE USE OF INFORIIAL INSTTITUTIONS:

Since 1985 Tirupur has become a hotbed of economic activity in the production of knitted garments. By the 1990s, with high growth rates of exports, Tirupur was a world leader in the knitted garment industry. The success of this Industry is striking. This is particularly so as the production of knitted garments is capital-intensive, and the state banking monopoly had been Ineffective at targeting capital funds to efficient entrepreneurs, especially at the levels necessary to sustain Tirupur's high growth rates.

What is behind this story of development? The needed capital was raised within the Gounder community, a caste relegated to /and-based activities, relying on community and family networks. Those with capital in the Gounder community transfer it to others in the community through long-established informal credit institutions and rotating savings and Credit associations. These networks were viewed as more reliable in transmitting information and enforcing contracts than the banking and legal systems that offered weak protection of creditor rights. The intense competition in the garment industry ensured that good money would not follow bad and that firms would pay attention to the needs of customers.

But there is more to this story. Outsiders (non -Gounders) have entered the industry. These participants do not have access to community funds. Yet outsiders, starling with around one-third as much capital as the Gounders, have outperformed them, developing larger-scale and better-integrated production capacity and making up more of the complicated export business.

Thus, the Gounders' networks have stimulated trade, but for those not part of the network, many opportunities for using better ideas remain unexploited because they do not have access to the same network of funding sources. Public institutions, such as collateral law (and enforcement), would allow stronger creditor protection and promote lending by formal institutions such as banks, allowing entrants not part of the network to better participate in the market.

Source: World Development Report, page 175, published by the World Bank.

This is a demonstrable case of how community connections result in competition to set up business as well as to cooperate with those setting up businesses. It evident from the data available that the members of new castes, most of them from the backward classes, who have entered business, have entered not as unconnected individuals, but as the members of a caste, with the some caste members supporting the new entrant and some others following suit in a spirit of competition. Others feel confident that since their caste man has done it, they can also do it. They also feel compelled that since their caste man has done it, they must do it. This spirit of competition turns the enterprise within the community virtually a mass entrepreneurial movement.

While many traditionally non-business communities have taken to businesses and turned into entrepreneurs massively by contageon competition within the community, the role of the educated is a direct contrast. In most business schools almost every student gets placement in the campus interviews. Even a small number of them do not become entrepreneurs. In fact most the business schools take pride in even advertising the fact that all their students have got plum employment even ahead of their final examinations. With the result, while education prepares students to become employees, the communitarian contageon competitive effect massifies entrepreneurs. So we have uneducated or under educated businessmen and highly educated employees. Why the educated tend to become employees? It is not difficult to find answers. The students who go to colleges see themselves only as individuals. In contrast, the constituent of a community in business sees himself as the member of the community.