Summary of "Tarun Khaitan on Decolonising Institutions"

Philosophy Bites • Hosted by David Edmonds & Nigel Warburton • Guest: Tarun Khaitan
Date: February 26, 2026

Overview

In this episode, David Edmonds and Nigel Warburton interview Tarun Khaitan, Professor of Law at the London School of Economics, about the current movement to "decolonise" constitutions and institutions, especially focusing on India. The conversation explores claims that India's constitution is a legacy of colonialism, examines the motivations and arguments behind the push for decolonisation, and critically analyses the philosophical and political implications of such positions.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Defining Decolonisation in Context (00:54–02:01)

• Khaitan explains that calls to replace constitutions as "colonial legacies" have gained momentum in previously colonised countries like India and South Africa. While these constitutions were drafted by local leaders, critics argue the drafters operated under a so-called "colonised imagination"—an idea similar to "false consciousness."
• Quote (Tarun Khaitan, 01:28):

  "The claim is an indirect one that the framers of these constitutions, although they were respectively Indians and South Africans, had what people arguing for this position called a colonized imagination. And that is the reason why the product of their efforts was a colonial constitution."

2. False Consciousness & Political Motivations (02:01–03:39)

• Khaitan draws a connection between the false consciousness argument and political trends—a global disenchantment with liberal democracies, and, in India, the narrative serves specific political agendas.
• The "decoloniality" frame is seen as offering more intellectual credibility than overtly nationalist or class-based rhetoric.
• In India, right-wing Hindu nationalists use this narrative to justify calls for "de-Islamization" as well as "de-Europeanization," raising concerns about the implications for the country's pluralism.

3. Indian Constitution's Origins & Nature (03:48–05:31)

• The Indian Constitution was drafted post-WWII, after a period of violent partition and significant negotiation among diverse Indian political factions except for the communists, who boycotted.
• Quote (Tarun Khaitan, 04:32):

  "It's not an ideologically pure, neat constitution... It's a political compromise with a moral skeleton designed to take the messiness that is India to its future and most importantly to keep it together."

4. What is Being Challenged by Decolonialists? (05:42–06:16)

• Values targeted include civil liberties, secularism, separation of powers, the rule of law, and democracy—portrayed as "foreign" or "European" impositions.
• Quote (Tarun Khaitan, 05:55):

  "All of these are ostensibly non-indigenous European ideas borrowed by colonized minds and need to be given up."

5. Authenticity, Power, and the Rejection of Universal Values (06:22–07:32)

• The decoloniality discourse focuses on indigeneity, authenticity, and power, rejecting moral universality as itself a colonial construct.
• Khaitan critiques this view for conflating power with morality, denying the latter any independent status.
• Quote (Tarun Khaitan, 07:08):

  "Morality itself is a construct of colonialism and therefore itself afflicted by power... what matters is power alone. And morality is just window dressing for legitimizing power."

6. Selective Indigeneity and the Problem of Plurality (07:46–10:11)

• The indigenization advocated by figures like J. Sai Deepak is highly selective—favoring a pre-Islamic, upper-caste Hindu framework while ignoring India's religious and philosophical diversity, including Buddhism, Jainism, the Bhakti movement, and Mughal syncretism.
• Quote (Khaitan, 08:58):

  "There are few things less Indian than a monolithic one dimensional value framework of the Hindu right... this claim to indigeneity rejects what has foundationally been long standing value system of embracing plurality."

7. Critique of False Consciousness: Agency, Parallels with Colonialism (10:11–12:18)

• Khaitan sees the false consciousness critique as unfalsifiable and patronizing, denying agency to the constitution's framers—many of whom fought colonial oppression.
• Ironically, it echoes colonial rationales for denying self-rule ("Indians are like children").
• Quote (Khaitan, 11:27):

  "There is a strange and again ironic parallel in the claim that these people did not have the agency to think for themselves... we see that argument coming full circle in the hands of these decoloniality critics."

8. Ideological Pervasiveness and Complexity (12:47–15:28)

• Khaitan notes that while our values are certainly influenced by power structures, Indian constitution-making was not simply copying the colonizers; ideas were adapted, rejected, or reshaped.
• He draws on Stuart Hall's model of "encoding and decoding": people may accept, negotiate, or resist dominant ideas, but always with agency.
• Quote (Khaitan, 14:19):

  "Just because power accepts the truth does not make it false... The reality of constitution making and how ideas travel across borders is mediated by power. But there is agency on both sides, and we need to appreciate that."

9. Negotiation, Adaptation, and India’s Plural Sources (16:37–18:17)

• Negotiation did not mean a dialogue with colonisers, but rather an internal critical engagement within Indian society. The Indian Constitution's ideas arose from the global context, the freedom struggle, and deep Indian traditions of pluralism.

10. Rejection of British Imperialism's Paternalism (18:17–19:54)

• Edmonds draws a contrast with John Stuart Mill's view that non-Europeans required paternalistic rule. The Indian Constituent Assembly explicitly rejected such views by granting universal adult franchise and embracing democracy among a diverse and often impoverished populace—something unheard of in other post-colonial transitions.
• Quote (Khaitan, 19:09):

  "India became a democracy with full adult franchise. There was no example of a large country with a largely poor population experimenting with democracy."

11. What Can Be Learned from Decolonial Arguments? (19:54–21:30)

• Khaitan acknowledges value in recognising the role of power in shaping knowledge and institutions, but warns against uncritically rejecting ideas based solely on their origins ("born in a foreign land") or embracing selectively reconstructed traditions.
• Quote (Khaitan, 21:05):

  "Rejecting ideas because they were supposedly born in a foreign land and embracing ideas cherry picked from some imagined golden past... does a huge disservice to both the Indian people and the possibility of a moral future as well."

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the irony of decolonial arguments:

  "There is a strange and again ironic parallel in the claim that these people did not have the agency to think for themselves... we see that argument coming full circle in the hands of these decoloniality critics." — Tarun Khaitan (11:27)

• On selective indigeneity:

  "There are few things less Indian than a monolithic one dimensional value framework of the Hindu right." — Tarun Khaitan (08:58)

• On agency in receiving powerful ideas:

  "Just because power accepts the truth does not make it false. I think racism continues to be bad, but the idea is not hegemonic anymore. Right?" — Tarun Khaitan (14:09)

• On the role of the Indian Constitution:

  "It's a political compromise with a moral skeleton designed to take the messiness that is India to its future and most importantly to keep it together." — Tarun Khaitan (04:32)

Important Timestamps

• 00:54 – What is meant by "decolonising institutions" and where it's being debated.
• 01:28 – The argument about “colonised imagination” and false consciousness.
• 03:48 – Origins of the Indian Constitution, political context, and framers’ motivations.
• 05:42 – Which values are contested by the decolonial movement.
• 06:22 – The turn away from universal values towards authenticity and identity.
• 07:46 – The selective definition of "indigeneity."
• 10:11 – The challenge of addressing accusations of false consciousness.
• 11:27 – Parallels between decolonial critics and colonial attitudes.
• 14:19 – The nuanced model of agency and negotiation, referencing Stuart Hall.
• 16:37 – Constitution as internal negotiation, not with the coloniser.
• 19:09 – India's exceptional adoption of universal adult franchise post-colonialism.
• 21:05 – Final reflection on the perils of rejecting ideas solely on their origin.

Conclusion

Tarun Khaitan provides a nuanced critique of the discourse on decolonising institutions, cautioning against reductive arguments that treat Indian constitutional democracy as simply a colonial artifact. He highlights the rich, plural roots of India's constitutional values and urges for a sophisticated analysis of power, agency, and the moral dimensions of institutional design—rather than a simplistic return to a selectively imagined indigeneity.