The imperative need for the devolution and decentralisation of political power in not a Gandhian ‘fad’; it is being recognized by most of the progressive political thinkers of the West. Although pluralists, guild socialists, syndicalist, and anarchists differ in details, they are at one in pleading for devolution of democracy on functional basis. They are all against a highly centralised administration, both economic and political. “If men’s faith in social action is to be revivified,” observes Prof. Joad, “the State must be cut up and its functions distributed.” “It must be made possible for the individual to belong to a variety of small bodies possessing executive powers, dealing both with production and with local administration. As a member of these, he can once again feel that he counts politically, that his will matters, and that his work is really done for society… It would seem, then, that the machinery of Government must be reduced in scale. It must be made manageable by being made local, so that, in seeing the concrete results of their political labours before them, people can be brought to realise that where self-government is a fact, society is malleable to their wills because society is they.[43]“Democracy” writes prof. Cole, “is hostile to centralisation, for it is a spirit which wants freedom to manifest itself immediately and on the spot, wherever the need for the expression of a collective will arises.” “To canalise it, so as to make it all flow into a single central channel, is to destroy its spontaneity, and to make it unreal.[44] In his ‘Fabian Socialism’, Prof. Cole further observes, “If we want to diffuse widely among ordinary men and women a capacity for collective activity and an understanding of public affairs we must set out to build our society upon little democracies of workers…”According to Prof. Aldous Huxley, ‘the political road to a better society is the road of decentralisation and responsible self-government”.[45] Centralisation of power results in curtailment of individual liberties and a progressive regimentation of the people even in countries hitherto enjoying a democratic form of government. We are apt to forget that, after all, democracy is made for man and not man for democracy. Democracy is only a means to an end; it must therefore be adapted and adjusted to the social and psychological conveniences of human beings. Modern Sociology upholds the principles that ‘Man is happiest when living in small communities’. [46]If we neglect this ‘human factor’ and do not create small harmonious groups, points out Roy Glenday, all grandiose schemes for constructing a new world order are destined to founder. “Without group ties a man is like an oyster without its shell,” observes Karl Mannheim. To use Prof. Ginsberg’s phrase, it is ‘the consciousness of kind’ which brings together the individuals of a group into ties of fellowship. Such ties of sentiment and loyalty which are essential for the functioning of real democracy are missing in the modern types of centralised democratic governments. That is why Prof. Adams, after analysing the drawbacks of modern representative States, wants us ‘to go to the root of the trouble and pursue a bold policy of devolution, of decentralization.’[47] Prof. Laski favours decentralisation because ‘obedience is rarely creative in a highly centralised state; it becomes mechanical and inert.’ “Centralisation makes for uniformity; it lacks the genius of time and place.[48]” Lewis Mumford, the well-known sociologist, recommends the building up of ‘small balanced communities in the open country.’ Such small communities enjoying a very large measure of local self government become the proper training grounds of true and vital democracy. They are an invaluable anti-dote against the bureaucratic spirit and facilitate an informed discussion and appropriate solution of local problems. “It was in small communities,” declares Lord Bryce, “that Democracy first arose: it was from them that the theories of its first literary prophets and apostles were derived: it is in them that the way in which the real will of the people tells upon the working of government can be studies, because most of the questions that come before the people are within their own knowledge.[49] Elucidating the advantages of local self-government in villages and communes, Dr Beni Prasad states:
