From Civilizational Villages to Urban Imitation

This is part 1 of a series of 3 articles is based on the booklet titled 'Grama Vikas' (Village Development), authored by Ashish Kumar Gupta and Dilip Kelkar and published by Bharatiya Shiksha Sansthan.

Foreword

The question of development in India has long been framed through a narrow and borrowed lens—one that equates progress with urban expansion and modernity with the erosion of tradition. In this framework, the Indian village has gradually been reduced from a vibrant civilizational unit to a symbol of deficiency, spoken of more as a problem to be solved than as a legacy to be understood. This shift in perception has not been accidental; it is the result of decades of intellectual distancing from indigenous knowledge systems and lived historical experience.

This work seeks to challenge that prevailing narrative. It invites the reader to revisit the village not as a relic of the past, but as a foundational pillar of Indian civilization—one that sustained economic prosperity, social harmony, cultural richness, and ethical living for centuries. By questioning the unquestioned assumption that urbanization is the only path to development, this exploration opens space for a deeper, more authentic understanding of progress rooted in India’s own civilizational wisdom.

From Civilizational Villages to Urban Imitation: How India Lost the Village-Centered View

At a time when the consequences of indiscriminate urban models are becoming increasingly evident, this reflection is both timely and necessary. It is an attempt to rekindle a dialogue that has been neglected for too long: a dialogue about balance, self-sufficiency, and the organic relationship between village, city, and civilization.A few decades ago, it was widely believed—and deeply felt—that the soul of India resided in its villages. Even today, the mere remembrance of that bygone village life evokes emotion, nostalgia, and a sense of belonging. History stands as clear testimony that India once truly lived in its villages. The people who inhabited them, and the civilization that flourished through them, together formed a society that was complete in every sense—culturally refined, socially harmonious, economically prosperous, and admired across the world for its civilizational depth and stability.

For centuries, Indian villages were not backward habitations waiting to be “developed.” They were living civilizational units—self-sustaining, ethically guided, and socially integrated. The prosperity of India did not emerge despite its villages, but because of them.

Sadly, in contemporary discourse, the village is no longer viewed through this lens. Today, villages are discussed almost exclusively in terms of problems—poverty, lack of infrastructure, unemployment, migration, and deprivation. The dominant assumption has become that every challenge faced by a village must be resolved through urbanization. Either the village must be transformed into a town, or reshaped in the image of a city. This approach has come to be accepted, almost unquestioningly, as the only path to development.

In the process, we have completely obscured the unique characteristics and inherent strengths of the village as a distinct social, cultural, and economic entity. A village and a city are not merely different stages of development; they are two fundamentally different identities. Yet, the constant comparison between them—always measuring the village against the city—has distorted our understanding. This comparison itself is flawed.

What we witness today is an increasingly un-Indian way of thinking and living—an outcome of a worldview that has distanced itself from indigenous wisdom. The imitation of urban models, often borrowed wholesale from Western contexts, has weakened the organic structures that once sustained village life. If we truly aspire to preserve, strengthen, and rejuvenate our living civilization, culture, and prosperity, then this worldview must be questioned urgently. Delaying this introspection any further will only deepen the damage.

Encouragingly, after repeated missteps and the visible failures of indiscriminate urbanization, a shift in outlook is slowly emerging. There is growing recognition that villages must be made self-sufficient rather than urbanized. At this crucial juncture, it becomes essential to understand the cultural traditions, social organization, and systems that sustained villages for centuries. Equally important is rediscovering the organic relationship that historically existed between the village and the city, where the city complemented the village, rather than consuming it.

Only by learning from these indigenous systems can we evolve an authentic Indian perspective on development. When village life is rooted once again in traditional ways of thinking—adapted to the present but grounded in enduring principles—villages can naturally reclaim their place as peaceful, prosperous, and culturally vibrant units of society.

Conclusion

The decline of the village in contemporary thought is not merely a developmental failure; it is a civilizational forgetting. By measuring villages solely against urban standards, we have overlooked their intrinsic strengths and misunderstood their purpose. Villages were never meant to be cities-in-waiting. They were, and can once again be, complete ecosystems—economically resilient, socially cohesive, and culturally grounded.

The path forward does not lie in romanticizing the past nor in rejecting modernity, but in reclaiming perspective. True progress for India will emerge only when development is rooted in indigenous realities rather than imposed frameworks. Revitalizing villages through self-sufficiency, local knowledge, and traditional social organization is not a step backward; it is a necessary course correction.

Re-establishing the complementary relationship between village and city—where each supports rather than supplants the other—offers a sustainable and distinctly Indian vision of development. If this reorientation is undertaken with sincerity and urgency, villages can once again become centers of peace, prosperity, and cultural vitality. In doing so, India will not merely develop—it will remember who it is.