The Role of Big Government in Mughal India -- Part 1

 The Role of Big Government in Mughal India -- Part 1

In examining the complexities of Mughal rule in India, it becomes apparent that the central issue transcends simplistic narratives of Hindu versus Muslim or Aurangzeb versus Dara Shikoh. Rather, at the heart of the matter lies the broader question of the role of government and the consequences of centralized authority. The Mughal Empire, like many other historical empires, grappled with the challenges of governance and the balance of power between the state and its subjects. Since the era was so much before formal political theories were introduced into India, it is not fair to blame either Aurangzeb and Dara Shikoh, personally speaking. However, looking objectively, it is hard not to see the overreach of statist power repeatedly and consistently over extended periods of time in the context of the Indian subcontinent under the rule of the Mughals.

At its core, the Mughal Empire was characterized by centralized authority and a strong bureaucratic apparatus. Emperors wielded immense power, both politically and religiously, exerting control over vast territories and diverse populations. This concentration of authority enabled rulers like Aurangzeb to implement policies that reflected their personal beliefs and political ambitions, often at the expense of individual freedoms and religious pluralism. 

However, the problem transcends the religious divide between Hinduism and Islam or the rivalry between Aurangzeb and Dara Shikoh. Instead, it lies in the inherent dangers of unchecked state power, whether exercised through totalitarianism or religious orthodoxy. When governments possess absolute control over their citizens, regardless of religious affiliation, the potential for abuse and oppression becomes all too real.

Throughout history, regimes that have embraced authoritarianism, whether secular or religious, have invariably subjected their citizens to repression and violence. The Mughal Empire, despite its cultural and architectural achievements, was no exception. The use of statist violence to suppress dissent, maintain order, and enforce religious conformity epitomized the dangers of unchecked government authority. It would not be surprising for anyone to learn that money was moved out of India for various reasons by the Mughals to aid and abet various allies outside the Indian subcontinent. That is how statist power has always functioned and such statist power remains a danger as long as it is exercised against the will or the interests of the people.

In this light, the decline of the Mughal Empire serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of centralized power and the need for checks and balances to safeguard individual liberties. As we reflect on the legacy of Mughal rule in India, it becomes clear that the true challenge lies not in religious differences or dynastic rivalries but in the inherent dangers of Big Government. Only by recognizing the dangers of unchecked state power can we strive to build societies that uphold the principles of freedom, justice, and equality for all.

 

Aurangzeb and Dara Shikoh: A Debate on Governance and Orthodoxy

The war of succession of 1658 marked a pivotal moment in Mughal history, pitting Dara, Shuja, Aurangzeb, and Murad against each other in a quadrangular conflict. Throughout this struggle, Aurangzeb's concerns regarding Dara's political maneuvers remained primarily political, devoid of religious overtones. Their differing religious outlooks, epitomized by Aurangzeb's reference to Dara as a mushrik (heretic) and Dara's symbolic attribute of kotah pyjama (narrow pants), were confined to personal animosity. Interestingly, Aurangzeb's support largely stemmed from Rajput allies like Rana Raj Singh of Mewar and Raja Jai Singh Kachwaha of Amber, underscoring the political nature of the conflict.

[Part 2 and Part 3 will be posted as follow up posts to this post]

[Update: Part 2 and Part 3 have been posted]