Beyond Left And Right: Why India Needs Integral Humanism's Alternative Dharmic Framework

Political ideologies shape societies’ understanding of power, justice, and human flourishing. In the West, many modern doctrines such as liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism, and capitalism emerged from intense upheaval, often marked by violent conflict.

Each of these ideologies is based on a thoroughly incorrect view of human society perceived through a Western lens and worldview. Each tries to fit human society into an exploiter–exploited antagonistic binary.

Even the solutions they propose are based on this incorrect diagnosis and end up in failure, causing the problems they aim to solve to deteriorate or even creating new problems that are worse than the original ones.

Take, for example, communism and its ideological precursor, socialism, which arise out of a need to remedy this exploiter–exploited dynamic by radically remaking society.

The makers of these ideologies underestimated the complexity of human society, markets, and planning, which ultimately led to the failure of these ideologies at the cost of hundreds of millions of human lives.

On the other hand, capitalism and its ideological foundation, liberalism, are based on the false belief that individuals are autonomous and can ignore or avoid social frameworks. Liberalism’s antagonistic binary is on the basis of individual vs the state that tries to restrain them.

Capitalism builds on the foundation of liberalism by making capital the currency of human value. Thus, when left untethered to regulatory enforcement by a vigilant state, capitalism leads to societal, social, cultural, and economic degradation to the benefit of a few individuals.

A similar binary is observed within fascism, where an us vs them framework glorifies conflict and violence, aiming for the annihilation of those deemed to be lesser individuals.

In contrast, post-independence India developed indigenous frameworks such as Ekatma Manav Darshan (Integral Humanism) and Antyodaya (Uplifting the last man), both grounded in spiritual traditions and the principle of Dharma (righteous duty). Instead of a binary struggle, these Indian philosophies advocate social change through moral uplift and harmony.

In the mid-1960s, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya introduced Ekatma Manav Darshan (Integral Humanism) as an indigenous ideological framework for India’s post-independence development.

At a time when India was experimenting with various imported models like Leninist socialism and American capitalism, Upadhyaya argued that neither materialist capitalism nor class-based socialism aligned with India’s cultural and spiritual heritage. He sought an approach rooted in Dharma, drawing on ancient Indian thought to unify material progress with moral and spiritual well-being.

At its core, Integral Humanism works because its understanding of human society is not based on a simplistic false binary but an elegant and nuanced understanding of the world.

It envisions society as an organic whole, analogous to a family, where each member has inherent duties toward others. Individuals are neither isolated atoms nor faceless cogs in a collective machine, but unique spiritual beings whose growth enriches the entire community.

In this framework:

- Rights and duties are inseparable — individuals flourish by fulfilling their roles within society.

- Harmony arises when personal aspirations align with collective welfare, guided by Dharma.

- There is no antagonistic us versus them; rather, a shared ethos unites diverse groups in a common purpose.

Unlike Western capitalism — which focuses solely on wealth (Artha) and often neglects moral restraint (Dharma) — or communism — which emphasises collective ownership at the expense of spiritual values — Integral Humanism insists on holistic development.

It argues that a society obsessed with material gain will erode its moral foundations, while one that values spiritual goals alone will starve the body.

True progress, it maintains, emerges when Dharmic principles shape economic and social choices, ensuring that prosperity does not come at the cost of ethical decline.

Foundational Differences Between Dharmic and Western Ideologies

Philosophically, Integral Humanism draws on Advaita Vedanta — the non-dualistic view that all existence is one — and applies it to social organisation.

Society is conceived as an organic whole, not merely a contract among self-interested individuals. Individuals have innate duties toward their communities, and those communities collectively form the “national soul” or cultural ethos.

Upadhyaya rejected both Western individualism (which isolates the person) and Marxist collectivism (which can crush individual freedom), advocating instead a model where duties and rights are balanced through shared ethical values.

Most Western ideologies rest on secular or materialist premises.

Liberalism prioritises individual liberty and rights, sometimes divorcing ethical judgement from economic or political decisions.

Socialism and communism derive from dialectical materialism, treating religion and spiritual values as distractions from class struggle.

Fascism rejects universal moral norms altogether, exalting strength and nationalism.

Capitalism, while not explicitly violent in its rhetoric, evolved amid colonialism and enslavement — economic gain often trumped ethical restraint.

By contrast, Integral Humanism and Antyodaya are rooted in Dharma — the principle of righteous duty — and emphasise moral harmony. They reject the notion that material progress alone defines human flourishing. Instead, they assert that spiritual values must guide politics and economics.

In this view:

- Economic decisions must be tempered by moral reflection.

- Social policies must uplift the soul, not just the balance sheet.

- Governance must adhere to ethical norms (such as compassion, truth, and respect for all beings).

This Dharmic orientation contrasts sharply with Western ideologies that either subordinate ethics to material goals (capitalism, communism) or dispense with universal morality in favour of power and ideology (fascism). It offers an alternative in which moral integrity is not collateral to development but its very foundation.

Progress For Every Human

A cornerstone of Integral Humanism is the principle of Antyodaya, which translates to “the rise of the last person.” This concept holds that a nation’s progress is best measured by how it uplifts its most marginalised members.

Rather than focusing on aggregate indicators like GDP, industrial output, or urban growth, Antyodaya demands that social and economic policies first address the plight of those at the very bottom of the economic pyramid.

Rooted in Dharma’s ethical imperative to serve those in greatest need, Antyodaya asserts that neglecting the poorest undermines the moral fabric of society.

In practice, Antyodaya has inspired welfare schemes that target the neediest: food security programmes, subsidised housing, and community development initiatives concentrating on rural and underserved urban areas.

Antyodaya’s moral thrust lies in framing poverty alleviation not as a matter of class conflict but as a duty of social solidarity. It does not pit one group against another; instead, it calls on every citizen — and especially the powerful — to embrace responsibility for the vulnerable.

Today, Integral Humanism and Antyodaya have transformed how the Indian state approaches the issue of governance and economic growth.

Unlike the past, where economic growth was made the enemy, on the basis of socialist frameworks, today economic growth has been prioritised and its benefits harnessed to uplift the poorest and the most backward. Moreover, capitalist instincts have been tempered by rational policymaking that doesn't end up eroding the core of society.

This is seen in the way that the BJP Government has used these principles to frame policies over the past 11 years and during the five years from 1999 to 2004 to alleviate poverty and improve the standard of living of the most backward.

From the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and Rural Electricity Supply Technology Mission scheme during Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s tenure to the Jan Dhan Abhiyan, Har Ghar Bijlee and Nal Se Jal scheme, the BJP has used the economic growth during its tenure to improve the quality of life of every Indian from all walks of life.

Thus, economic growth is not positioned in opposition to poverty alleviation as a zero-sum game, but harnessed to support it and create Jan Bhagidari.

The Right Balance

Bharat’s Ekatma Manav Darshan and Antyodaya emerged from a tradition that places Dharma (righteous duty) at the heart of social and political life. Rooted in ancient spiritual values, they prioritise holistic development (balancing material and spiritual needs) and the upliftment of the poorest as moral imperatives.

Rather than advocating class struggle or celebrating might, they promote peaceful, constructive change through moral persuasion, community engagement, and decentralised governance.

Ideologies that place conflict at their heart often perpetuate cycles of violence, whereas philosophies grounded in Dharma offer a pathway to social justice without bloodshed.

In an era when many societies still grapple with the legacies of ideological violence — wars of liberation that turned into authoritarian regimes, revolutions that betrayed their egalitarian promises — the Indian model of seeking harmony through ethical duty stands as a compelling alternative.

Rather than measuring success by whom one defeats, it measures success by how well one serves the most vulnerable, ensuring that genuine progress means peace for all.