Like knowledge systems of ancient civilizations everywhere, ancient Indian knowledge systems have been recognized for their emphasis on sustainable living practices. There is renewed interest in ‘going back to these roots’, a return to and a rediscovery of traditional knowledge and lifestyles, which we identify as neotraditionalism. Neotraditionalism has emerged in the encounter of the customary with the metropolitan colonial West and is influenced by Western Enlightenment’s liberal ethic of equality. It suffers from a blindness to diversity and (...) difference. In this article, we argue that equality as universal feature of neotraditionalism makes it closer to Western consumer capitalism than it does to customary knowledge and practices. We suggest that modern western capitalism combined with Western Enlightenment’s liberal ethic of equality has eroded our appreciation for the link between difference, diversity and sustainability. Western capitalism is not only about changing modes of production but also about changing modes of consumption: the emergence of mass consumption practices with their emphasis on civic equality was a necessary step in the dismantling of aristocratic hierarchy. Restrictions in social structures hinder the emergence of bigger markets for capitalists and manufacturers. We therefore argue that the preoccupation of neotraditionalism with a universalization of tradition that is blind to jati-based differences and diversities undermines the implicit demand– supply balances that were historically at work within the framework of traditional sacred cultural beliefs and practices. Because of this, neotraditionalism errs on the side of promoting consumer capitalism and thereby eroding its ability to further the achievement of sustainability based on tradition. As such, neotraditionalism needs to delink from the liberal myth of equality and embrace diversity of consumption practices in order to truly enable sustainable lifestyles anchored in ancient Indian knowledge systems. (shrink)

This book outlines an idea of world politics as thinking and speaking about the conditions of world order. World order is understood not as an arrangement of entities but a complex of variously situated activities conducted by individuals as members of diverse associations of their own. Within contemporary international relations it entails a theoretical position, neotraditionalism, as a reformulation of the initial "traditionalist" approach in the wake of rationalism and subsequent reflectivist critique.