THE ALTERNATIVE

Path of Development







BY





Gian Singh
National Convener
Kisani Pratishtha Manch




2


Agriculture v/s Industry
As Mode of Production

(The question that will decide the fate of humanity)

So far, the wise men of the world are under the spell of a myth: Industry is the key
that will open the flood gate of plenty and peace. For almost five centuries, none
of the two words are near reach. No country, howsoever industrialised, is free from
misery, want and unemployment. Constant strife is the rule that the world is faced
to. Man has grown more greedy, selfish and violent to his/her fellow beings for
self. It was not his/her nature before. In industrial culture one is so now with no
escape in sight. Crass individualism is ruling the roost of a society that saw
brotherhood once its rule. Not now. For money you are prepared to be a
commodity in the market of butchers. Even emotions are for sale! How it all
happened?
The Soviet experiment that ran for almost 74 years of the last century with no right
to private property tottered on the rock of crass individualism while singing song
for collectivity. Remember, its dream song was a rapid industrial culture to attain.
It did. But the dream of millions was smashed in consequence. Even the Red Army
that was supposed to be an iron fist against capitalist restoration was found to
harbour scoundrels who proved to be butchers of the dream of the twentieth
century.
Let us consider: The Uruguay Round of negotiations on trade concluded for the
first time to include agriculture in the ambit of newly formed World Trade
Organisation. The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) is the new product under this
regime. It is a declaration to capitalise agriculture world over and convert it into a
profession for profit, which so far had been a means of subsistence for the majority
of populations in the world, barring a few western countries. The implications of
this change are grave for the toiling peasant communities in every country. It is a
change of fundamental nature, which no government is entitled to heap on the
population without their express consent.
Seizing the opportunity fast for a globalised market, after the collapse of a parallel
economic zone in former Soviet camp as a competitor, finance capital utilised
Uruguay Round of negotiations on trade and tariff to forge fresh instruments and
force agreements for the set agenda. The rulers in almost every country joined
hands in this endeavour behind the back of their respective citizens. The rulers
found it as a blessed opportunity not to be missed for better service to their
3
respective capitalist class and for mutual aggrandisement. Agreement on
Agriculture under WTO is an eloquent testimony to this changed scenario. It is a
blue print for capitalisation of agriculture in so-called third world countries, as an
industry ready to serve corporate interests in trade and commerce. It is seen as a
green pasture for huge profits to these corporates.
The globalised finance capital is now in hurry. At the earliest, it seeks to convert
every field of social life to its reach before any tangible resistance takes shape. It
has forged such instruments deliberately to serve the set goal. World Trade
Organisation is one such instrument. It is designed to subserve corporate capital at
the global level through trade and commerce with powers to adjudicate disputes
and penalise. All rolled into one, almost as a super-state.
The strident efforts to capitalise agriculture to the status of an industry, as fast as
possible by rulers in the so-called under-developed countries must be seen in
concrete situation that emerged by the beginning of last decade in twentieth
century. The crusaders want the world to forget the bloody chapter in history of
such a path in West, more so in America when small proprietors were
exterminated to take over agriculture by big corporations and Banks. The
corporate capital is now keen to have agriculture in less developed countries of
other continents within its fold to expand pastures and grab super-profits. For them
small proprietor-peasants are expendables and cheap.
Agriculture in almost every under-developed country is not a commercial
concern for most of the inhabitants. It is a way of life for them; a means to subsist
with family labour as the basic input. The rulers, while agreeing to the terms under
A.o.A, did not consider or cared less of the tragedy these efforts to capitalise
agriculture is bound to bring to the majority of inhabitants in these countries.
Truly, it is a going to be a gigantic human tragedy in its repercussions.
Agriculture by its nature is organic in development. It is unlike industry, trade and
commerce, which are exponential in their stride. To convert agriculture to
exponential mode is bound to explode for disaster to these huge populations and
invite their wrath. The globalised economy is incapable to provide them with
alternative means to subsist. The dislocation of huge numbers is another disaster
that the capitalised agriculture will bring in trail with much social upheaval.
However, the globalised corporate world is not concerned with the fate of these
millions after millions destined to ruin. It is this spare population they detest most!
We may recount Indian scene for a better understanding of the issues involved.
This country has traversed a path, so opted by its ruling elite in 1947, for more
than half a century. This is not a small period even in the life of a country to look
back what it has gained or lost and to evaluate its fundamentals. It is almost the
full life span of a working individual. If the balance goes against, no one can claim
clemency for playing with lives involved and the enormity of the crime would be
stupendous. To sit back in complacency and close eyes to the problem also may
not be less offensive to the fait of a country. True, it requires a deep sense of
4
obligation to the people while accountability is an obligation for those who swear
by democracy.
It would be worthwhile to underline the reference point first. Since the days when
state emerged in history, the people are a distinct category to this day. The political
theory of a later period that ascribed representative character to the State is a
fiction of a dubious character that does not work, in fact, at least not now with
global finance capital on rampage universally and the type of control it exercises
on economy and politics worldwide. In the circumstances, reference point for this
submission is the people as against the state.
With this clarification, two aspects need be underlined here to begin with. First,
the choice by the new set of rulers after 1947 was conscious and deliberate for a
capital-centred industry as a much-touted super-highway to progress based on
economic thought that reflected a pattern of development in West Europe. Second,
those who made this choice were the products of educational and socio-economic-
cultural milieu that grew in conditions peculiar to Europe and touted well for
others to follow. Since Britishers were ruling for long over the sea-waves that
touched different continents, this milieu caught the fancy of hangers on or the elite
in each colonial country and soon became an universal thought representing
progress and modernity. The leaders that came to power here at the departure of
British in 1947 were courting this economic thought. They made their natural
choice and then raised strenuous efforts from day one to convince the country that
this choice is a sure path to delivery.
The fact sheet
When this span of journey commenced, the country was in throes of a divided
house. The British had left it virtually bleeding on both sides of the divide. But the
mood of countrymen was upbeat, though in pain. Despite few discontented voices
here and there, the people reposed faith in the wisdom of this leadership that had
inherited the Raj, largely because its leading lights were participants in the
freedom struggle. The faithful of the Royalty till recently also stood behind the
elite, fully assured of their place in the sun. The new constitution of the country
was utilised to convince them.
The communal hysteria that arose with the partition, along-with the Kashmir flare
up between India and Pakistan proved a boon for respective leadership to harness
support at a critical juncture. In addition, India inherited an infrastructure,
including a well-groomed bureaucracy with military and police combine,
originally crafted to work for intense expropriation in the interest of British rulers.
In consonance, a workable network of Railways, ports, roads and irrigation system
was available. Except the communal holocaust and large-scale transfer of
population of the divided provinces, the change in power structure worked smooth
that helped to strengthen its grip hurriedly over the contending forces. There was
no serious challenge to its authority.
The socio-economic situation was however, desperate. The Birlas and Tatas
though were upbeat over their kill during Second World War, courtesy British
5
rule; their class was gasping. Economic situation in the country was in shambles.
A neat division was available. Around ninety percent of the then population
having served the Raj through a long period of expropriation to finance
industrialisation of Britain and tide over the pangs of two world wars, with
entitlements on starvation level with a deep sense of injury from slavery was
penury incarnate. The foreign rule had disinherited this lot to a state of misery. The
rest were the beneficiary of leftovers as also doles from it, including the
bureaucracy and servicemen for being loyal to the Raj, having a good life to dream
moon in future. The disinherited lot, making nearly 90 % of the population had put
faith on the fruits of freedom for a better life against their labour in dignity, justice
and fair play. The countrywide surge however in emotions against imperialist
plunder and strife was high with a deep sense of injury. This the rulers were unable
to ignore.
But, this leadership soon started fooling around and kidding with promises for the
well being of common man year after year that were never kept. While, wealth
continued to concentrate at a remarkable speed in few hands of the rich, the police-
military-administration combine gained muscles to centralise on a frightening
scale with one pretext or the other. Five-Year Plans did not help to smooth over
ruffled feathers or lessen regional disparities either. Nonetheless, these plans
proved a boon to keep fledgling hope survive year after year among the people,
while providing solid infra-structural support for an orderly growth and
consolidation of capitalism here in a period of anarchy worldwide, limping on
Keynesian economics after Second World War. The democracy proved spurious.
Bureaucracy was ruling as ever. Decisions were made over the heads of the
people, but in their name. The family and its neighbourhood community were not
restored to their rightful place in the scheme of things. People soon were
disillusioned, alienated from the decision making process and felt disgusted with
one set of leaders after another. The political and administrative set up got stuck.
By now the situation has reached when the sense of equity and justice has taken a
strong beating while administration, legislature and even judiciary have lost their
sheen for the people. Feeling has grown among them that the Press barons have
scooped the freedom of expression for their benefit and are happy collaborators in
the main with the establishment for privileges and economic reasons. Mal-
practices of the system and institutionalised corruption have left them bewildered
over sharp degeneration all around. This has not come in a day; neither it is a
temporary symptom from an isolated disease.
The context
To understand concretely what happened and why, it will be rewarding to see first
what we are faced to. The society worldwide is fed up of injustice, wants and
misery despite honest labour. Indignity faces man every moment from bullies and
powerful. Life is full of avoidable strife in spite of sermons of peace and
tranquillity all around without any recess. Honest labour does not pay anymore;
neither simplicity of conduct is honoured any longer. Suspicion abounds
everywhere. Strife has become the law. Cutthroat competition to oust the other in
6
dark alley is a principle fully adorned shamelessly, unmindful to the social deficit.
Crash individualism reigns supreme, with no parallel in past history. If society is
to survive, it cannot go this way. It needs a rupture with its present. Simply put,
today it is crying for a basic change in its relations. Indian society no less.
It is true that change is the law of nature. Nothing is static, ever. And society is no
exception. It is always in flux. What, however, needed here is a qualitative change
from the present dispensation. While maintaining status quo, the reformatory
patchwork tried so far incessantly to tide over difficulties or cosmetic changes did
not help in lessening the burden of a sick society for the common mass.
Let us recall that the present Industrial society had started groaning of acute pains
within a century of its existence in its cradle comprising few countries of Europe.
By late eighteenth and early nineteenth century socialists of various hues, some of
them quite honest in their profession appeared on the scene and did try to
ameliorate its ills by suggesting various routes, but to no avail. Malaise was too
deep as a result of capitalist expropriation leading to perpetual strife and tension
when a plea was raised with reason for a fundamental change in social relations.
This was the time when among others, Marx and Engels, with few of their
compatriots tried for a viable diagnosis and suggested an outline of basic change.
For them, working masses were the fountainhead for any such change in society,
and with no via media. They took help from the basics of natural sciences for their
logic to arrive at their conclusions. The schema of their logic naturally changed the
whole gamut of perceptions and gave a new meaning to the social obligation of
concerned citizens. This was one course.
Later, in the early part of twentieth century Lenin with his companions followed
this logic to new dimensions on a number of important questions on social
engineering. He led Russian revolution in 1917 with a chain reaction in other
countries like China, Vietnam, and Cuba etc. with a glittering hope of a better
future for humanity.
In case of India, M.K.Gandhi became a classical example among those who
propounded and professed for a reformatory path with vengeance. He abhorred the
very idea of fundamental change (by then associated with October Revolution of
1917 in Russia), fighting it with an alibi in violence taking it synonymous with
revolution that signified basic change in every branch of science, including social
science. His reformatory campaign, laced with political aim drew a large number
of followers whom he groomed well with his train of thoughts. Here was
suggested another course.
To draw millions of commoners in the struggle for independence was Gandhis
singular achievement with no parallel in Indian history so far. For this he utilised
various stratagem like a master craftsman patiently reverting to social and cultural
causes intermittently for political mobilisation and building up his own
ideological-organisational leadership in Congress party. Still, like all political
leaders and parties in history, it was Gandhi who with a singular mind, but more
brazenly capped fully the mass zeal and initiative to himself as dictator of the
7
struggle. He did not allow any movement going over his dotted line while people,
mistakenly though reposed faith in the political leadership. He abhorred any and
every spontaneous movement from the masses, as other political parties and
leaders do. Here Gandhi was different from Marx on this question. Gandhi used
the mass strength to serve his purpose on the dotted line, while Marx had an
abiding faith in their creativity.
Gandhi suffered, though, unprecedented ignominy while alive when his heir
apparent and other disciples, on attaining power did not care about the philosophy
he had advanced during Independence struggle. So, it can be taken safely that his
ideas found no field for even experimentation and test for truth. The case of Lenin
in Russia had been a bit different in this matter. In Russia the precepts of Lenin on
strategic questions were under experiment till the period of Stalin at least. In the
later period, one can take shelter to claim that Lenin, Stalin stood betrayed by the
followers on essential points of strategy, though this betrayal theory tells a sad
commentary on the revolutionary principles of a communist formation. The
experiment in Russia, then collapsed finally in 1991 with a whimper, but to the
dismay of millions world over.
In case of Gandhi, the claim from his followers, later, those self-afflicting and non-
violent methods from him in conducting struggle for freedom proved remarkably
successful with the attainment of Independence remain largely unsubstantiated on
historical facts. This claim, though, is being repeated ad nauseam so long on state
patronage with the result that unsuspecting masses at large now tend to believe in
the theory as something like a gospel truth.
As for his methods, there is hardly any substance to prove that British rulers
became less barbaric in repression because of Gandhian methods or these methods
helped to change their heart in terms of colonial possessions and ambitions. His
heir-apparent and followers later proved classical examples of stark failure of
Gandhis philosophy in social trusteeship and methods by running an outright
exploitative system, exercising oppressive power, blatant misuse of authority,
amassing ill-gotten wealth and vulgar consumption.
Followers marginalised Gandhi
Just after attaining state power, Gandhian principles were discarded by his
disciples, while Gandhi was on the scene. The settled frame of the new
Constitution for the country is an eloquent testimony to this tragedy for his ideas.
Though it is said that Gandhi ji was restless in his last days over this betrayal of
his principles, he did nothing or could not do anything apparently against such
blatant departure by them. May be, his disciples could ignore him so clearly
because Gandhi neither held any power in the government, nor he was in a
controlling position in the ruling party, while his followers having keen eyes on
grabbing power, were careful enough to walk in line with the authorities and later,
with bureaucrats trained in British methods. This is another type of tragedy for
social activists that power and position alone have become the criterion for being
effective, though it could not be otherwise when grabbing of power is adorned as a
8
single point object of every social movement. Worshiping power thus, merit of the
principal or the person has lost relevance generally.
It is another matter that the new rulers needed an icon to swear by. They adore
Gandhi in public like anything till today, perhaps, because of his public appeal.
This ruse of constant praise in public suited the rulers nicely in the new scheme of
things, while his views were brushed aside on vital issues dear to him. His early
death perhaps facilitated this ruse to work effectively so late in the day.
The new crop of native rulers adopted the British model of governance as well as
economic development quite contrary to the views held by Gandhi close to his
chest during the struggle for Independence against British rule. He pleaded for the
country to become a federation of little village republics. In his scheme of things
village republics were conceived as mode of governance and cottage industries
were to serve the cause of development. The new rulers on the other hand
fashioned their economic policy based on industrialisation with a highly
centralised state structure with full armed-strength to support it.
Gandhi made Charkha as a symbol for his concept of cottage industries that he
posed to be the fulcrum of future development in the country. The blueprint could
not enthuse the common masses as it hardly answered their timely aspirations. Yet,
it can be stated that Gandhi too lacked precision on his blue print for countrys
development as an alternate paradigm in place of industry. They could hardly
distinguish Charkha and cottage of the future from their present state of penury.
The ruling elite could bypass him on this account.
The colonial state was made to exercise sovereign rights over natural resources
here by British rulers to extract wealth. The need of the hour, however, was to
revert back community command over means of production and natural resources,
more so on land, mines, water and forests at the time of Independence. But Gandhi
could do little when his disciples retained the colonial legacy by the Principle of
Eminent Domain over natural resources with the state instead. This could hardly
enthuse the masses.
While the path represented by Gandhi collapsed before it could take off, the one
for basic change represented by Lenin and Stalin in countries of socialist camp
floundered after 74 years of experimentation. Reasons may be many. Few are
important to study in our context.
One fatal blunder the leadership committed, more so during this period of building
socialism, was to sidetrack the principal contradiction between the state and the
people. With faith in the strength and creativity of masses, the level of reliance on
the state structure is inexplicable. In addition, a ruthless state machine during the
transitory stage of socialism saps this creativity of the masses as well as their
enthusiasm for a new experiment to build society.
On the question of state power in hand, leaders explain it as a sure lever to end
their misery and strife. The masses can initially be charmed with the prospect of
handling state power in the interest of common good for all honest workmen and
9
their kins. In their honest simplicity they may believe that state structure could as
well be a lever to liberate them from misery, ignorance and strife. They can hardly
realise initially that it can never. That does not happen, as it could not happen with
some serious maladies at the base. Apart from others, one is the ill-conceived faith
nurtured in the state and its structures as something that can bring good to them.
The system is destined to act otherwise.
Let us recall that basically, the state is a sure organ of repression with its own
dynamism that cannot be by-passed. It cannot be an instrument of development
and equity. State is not neutral, as is believed by many. It acts and has the ability to
act in favour of only the powerful. And without equity, development means
nothing but perpetuating expropriation of labour-power in real terms. Human
history testifies this bare truth to the hilt. Recent history of the experiment to build
socialism by the state in Soviet Union and companion countries of the camp amply
corroborates this bare lesson.
In addition, it is worth remembering that the state power in Russia as else where
did never pass into the hands of masses as enjoined in a coined slogan for
revolution i.e. All power to Soviets. In the name of Soviets again the state power
slipped into the hands of a small number of people representing the ruling party.
True, it was in the name of workers, soldiers and peasants! Yet, it was a replica of
representative democracy and a sure travesty of the slogan. The way party
leadership then handled the state during this period of experiment to build
socialism is also important to analyse for a lesson.
The practice formulated and executed during this period both in the realm of state
and political organisation, as vanguard of the ruling class or classes is a good
indication how the system faulted. In realm of state, the leadership bent its
energies in their mistaken belief that a highly centralised state structure will lead
happily to build socialism at a speed with no parallel. In consequence, the state
brought whole of social life under its tutelage with a leviathan bureaucracy at
every level. It usurped arbitrary powers in consonance with 'centralised structure.
Citizens life came under complete surveillance of the state leaving no room for
him or her to manoeuvre for freedom. Stratification and regimentation became
complete and oppressive. In course of time, it led to extreme alienation of people
from the state and its leadership, which in this case was also leadership of a
political party, combining two incompatible roles of vanguard and a ruler as well.
Moreover, the way how question of grabbing state power is focussed as a central
issue of revolution, necessarily develops a mindset that sanctifies struggle for
power among fellow beings by hook or crook breeding worst type of jealousies,
cliques and violence against their own comrades. Mind it, there is no other concept
of state power so far except that entails heavy dose of privileges for persons
involved.
In such a setting, it is not surprising that one set of leaders in hurry to grab state
power combine to eliminate own comrades in power. By now it is a highly
developed feature universally with no end in sight. Any and every one has now a
10
justification for such behaviour in grabbing power for common good. Deceit,
treachery, lies and corruption then find a valuable market with no awkward
question to answer.
For power, the question of principles is relegated to background in routine when it
is posed as a sanctimonious object. This played havoc in Russia while people were
busy in raising production for abundance. It is playing havoc in other places too
without fail.
On hindsight, it may be said that placing too much faith in the service of a state to
deliver during the phase of socialist construction without any tangible check on its
fangs blinds reason against ruthless state oppression not always justifiable. The
whole democratic process remained thwarted. People, in the process were
disarmed ideologically and organisationally against the might of state.
In addition, the midwife formulation for the state and its violence goes counter to
the creative power of the people. In case of basic change, with faith in the strength
and creativity of people at large, the question of such a mid-wife is a wrong poser
and turns non-relevant.
Another folly of first grade the Soviet Union committed in all probability was its
unchaste hurry to compete with the capitalist world for industrial development of
a foreign frame. It forgot, perhaps deliberately, that so far development in the
capitalist mode was dependent on internal as well as external expropriation and
deprivation of the commons as a matter of principle. Industrialisation of necessity
entails expropriation, overt or covert. In such a hurry then, the new rulers of the
experiment in all probability sidetracked or did not care for the cost in terms of
social-cultural development and human relations.
Despite claim, the experiment remained rooted with the past basically, except in
matters of ownership over means of production. The State replaced private
ownership over means of production with a mistaken notion that it signifies social
ownership. This socialist state was mistakenly presented as something
synonymous to people. That proved fatal. It turned the masses complacent that
took the ruling leadership in their simplicity as its own integral part. Let us not
forget that this trickery could succeed only by sidetracking the first principal
contradiction between state and the people from their active attention.
None can deny that the people had remained alienated in this erstwhile USSR
dispensation too, as before. If one does not opt to forget that alienation of man,
even within the socialist society is a symptom of a sure capital-based socio-
economic structure that generates it hourly but surely like individualism in vision
and approach.
Pursuing unhindered industrialisation, in erstwhile Soviet Union, the ruling
communist party, as representative of labour proved ultimately to be a faithful
instrument of developing capital, may be unwittingly. The state remained
monolithic and devilish with regard to the people at large with a spacious
11
argument. Commodity production dominated till end of the experiment. Commons
were destroyed and state property was equated with socialism that it was not.
Unnecessary faith was placed on industrial mode of production in unchaste copy
of Adam Smith and Ricardo who were high priests of unabashed capitalism and
individualism; ignoring the aspect of stability to the society that industrialization
cannot provide, when speed is the essence of this mode.
The state structure there did not reflect in any field that it was transitory in nature,
preparing to wither away. Uncouth claims of production in abundance proved
slippery and highly manipulated. Still, it was a gigantic experiment with fringe
benefits to the working masses. At best, it proved better in matters of social
security than the advanced capitalist world. However, the experiment essentially
failed to be revolutionary in character with little benefit to the social science of
change in comparison to the labour put in by the working masses and sacrifices
made.
With the collapse of this experiment in building socialism through instrumentation
of the state, the situation now in all countries is more or less the same. On three
fundamental accounts, namely, Principal contradiction between people and the
state as also Basic contradiction between collective way of life and individualism,
the masses face the same situation universally. In addition, capital, at the exclusion
of man, is taken as a vehicle of creating social wealth with internal and external
expropriation of labour-power to serve this interest as sacred. It is a universal
feature, notwithstanding differences in form or intensity. In the circumstances, this
status quo is a slow death, but death nevertheless.
Presently what is the situation? Life for the common man is no better than this
slow death. We are in a highly iniquitous and stratified world that is in perpetual
strife for reasons not necessary to survive or advance. As a consequence, the man
who produces, stands at the tail end of the spectrum deprived even of two square
meals a day while the idle one at the top wallows in wealth by sheer manipulating
the system at will. The whole state apparatus is a happy collaborator of the rich in
this game of deceit whereas it initially was designed to provide physical security
from invaders and plunderers with a nominal share in produce for the service.
In addition, the state apparatus now has assumed a basically repressive character
of an all-pervading octopus over its citizens in the interest of rich and
manipulators. Though administrative and judicial structures promise equal
treatment in law, in practice however, these are increasingly shedding their
neutral posture when the state is going openly in favour of resourceful. The
powerful is at the neck of less powerful to gain bigger share in the pound of flesh
in the market of butchers, extolling the virtues of competition while at times the
deprived are victims of both. If someone joins the ranks of butchers themselves
employing tricks of trade, the system is happy to welcome. The deprived man
winks in awe and thanks his fate for mere survival in such sordid events. Only
with some collective action there remains a possibility to face the currents firmly.
12
It is true, such a situation has not come in a day. This is the outcome of a long
journey and the present phase of structural transformation of global economy is a
natural culmination of a path that began its journey some three hundred years ago
with the industrial revolution taking shape for historical reasons first in Britain,
followed by other nations in Europe, with a common legacy of colonial
expropriation. Mercantile capital at that stage had pushed them to plunder other
lands with all underhand means at their command that one acquires from
professions of ease.
Deceit, treachery, outright murders and armed invasions were their weapons in this
trade. This was done all with single-minded zeal. They continued to flourish at the
cost of millions after millions from subject lands loosing their hearth and homes
while drawing upon the tremendous surpluses extracted heartlessly from colonised
nations of the world with a sheer force of a brute to tell upon their lives. Neither
this was necessary, nor inevitable.
Humanity could easily have survived and progressed without this brutal chapter in
its history. But it did not. Reasons were specific. If Indians and Chinese did
survive in history without this ruthlessness laced with treachery on other nations,
the Europeans either did not bring anything extra-ordinary to the richness of
humanity, except such brutality and treachery. They brought perpetual strife,
untold humiliation and misery to their own populations along with death to
millions after millions in other lands. Claims apart, bloodshed or violence as a
method can never make one progressive and civilized, better than others. Still,
they claimed for both.
However, it is true that European powers did succeed in subjugating the entire
African, Australian, American and South Asian countries for long period by such
deceit and repression. In North America and Australia the whole indigenous
populations were ruthlessly exterminated and thus the foundation for new white
nations of European origin was laid. African and Indian slaves were yoked to
produce wealth for these new settlers. Natural resources of the subject nations
were ploughed in to grind the wheels of its industries with a captive market at
hand in these lands of their occupation. They did it with a single-minded
dedication.
This way industrialisation became the buzzword all around. It charmed many. It
proved an irony that the new state in Russia after 1917 opted for a mode of
development that brewed social strife. It plunged whole hog to transform an
agrarian society to an industrial one hurriedly with means of social production in
possession of state, though adopting a low-cost economy. The effort was led and
controlled by the ruling communist party providing a further legitimacy to this
captivating slogan for others also to follow. Industry was placed in the centre of
development and consequently agriculture became subservient to it.
Simultaneously, farming also was transformed from a family-labour based affair
to a large-scale industrial concern there.
13
Let one remember that this was a European model basically that had developed
and flourished on large-scale internal and external expropriation. It could not be
otherwise in Soviet Union, as also in other so-called socialist countries, though
direct external expropriation in their case was not possible. Naturally, these
countries, including Soviet Union had to bear the resultant effects of this model in
spite of the fact that means of production were in command of the state, with a
powerful leadership and a vast political army of cadres to direct. At a stage of
maturing contradictions within the womb, the system asserted and threw out the
state that was having alien features like low cost economy and welfare projects to
the detriment of full capitalist growth. Likewise, social welfare projects were
thrown out in India when its capitalist growth reached a stage of relative maturity
and joined hands with imperialists abroad for a share in the market for its finance
and commodities. Now, WTO is the common venture of all capitalist-imperialist
countries for these pursuits at the global level.
Industrial mode necessarily produces individualism
The first and foremost result of this industrial mode as a law was the growth of
individualism, free from the will of man. Its growth was found not subject to the
form of ownership over its means. It happened, and in hindsight it can be said,
with disastrous effects to the course of history. Post facto, this conclusion is sharp
and explicit.
Secondly, the industrial mode creating over-production and shortage
simultaneously creates material conditions essentially for strife in society; it
cannot provide stability either. Instability and strife are its inherent characteristics,
as is the un-even development, notwithstanding the change of mode in ownership
over its means. Let one remember, the industrial mode provides exponential
growth in production, where reversal is dangerous and forward move is disastrous.
In such a scenario a fatal crash is inherent in the circumstances. At a stage,
industry essentially creates over-production in relation to its cost of production
even in a low cost economy if run to capacity, necessitating external market with
all evil consequences for tranquillity in trail for the common man within its own
country as well as outside. The need for export-oriented economy arises out of
such a dichotomy even in a state professing socialism as erstwhile USSR did face.
The element of planning may help keep its edges in check for a while. But the
inherent law of such development resulting in uneven course, also found
expression in the history of Soviet Union with 74 years of strenuous efforts to the
contrary, when industrial mode essentially involves commodity production and
capital formation, may be invisibly. On first opportunity in 1991, a well-
entrenched group of capitalists-mafiosi, including many Red Army officers of high
ranking with considerable accumulation and clout, emerged as if out of the blue.
They led the political leadership afterwards in decision-making process to their
advantage.
The industrial mode is also incapable to satisfy the requirements of a whole
society considering its cost-supply cycle. Wants remain constantly unfulfilled for
14
commoners in spite of hard and honest physical labour, more so in a high cost
economy. The race for gainful employment turns nightmare for them. It is true
even for European countries where density of population in relation to resources is
much less. Industrialisation then is a sheer fantasy for such countries as populous
as China and India.
Here one fact must be underlined that industrial mode is incapable to harness
energies of masses to the full for its economic reasons. It essentially resorts then to
unproductive activities direct in proportion to its level of development in order to
keep the extra productive population engaged, without caring a bit for social
wastage and the debasing effect involved, such as tourism to prostitution like
services. In case of Soviet Union this tragedy was averted by resorting to
reduction in working days and hours continuously, though pressure of population
in relation to its resources was much less. Still that did not make the society richer
in content. May be the leadership failed here. Nevertheless, society did pay the
price.
One can easily understand as to why capitalist class worldwide is so virulent in its
campaign to put industrialisation as a pre-condition for growth and progress while
projecting it as pivot of social development employing every means at its disposal,
including education. It could not do otherwise. This serves its economic, political
and social purpose best with a least price tag. It sets the individual actuated by
self-interest in rat race to catch the moon in ones life span is ready made
guarantee for it to keep masses split perpetually and at each others throat.
The full blown exercise by a ruling minority to theorize the market forces in
constant competition as a fulcrum of prosperity, progress and efficiency, in fact is
a fine tuned strategy to prop up this rat race while keeping the majority of masses
under its sway by such strife. Nonetheless, it was a tragedy of sorts that proponents
of a new society free from exploitation; wants and strife too should have adopted
the same mode of development for a race they could not have won. The reasons
were not compelling either.
Much is made of one argument in favour of capitalism and its industrial mode that
this will lead to the development of productive forces and liquidation of feudal
relations. This clearly stems from their European understanding of history or as
Europeans taught about it, that industry with capital at its base is superior to
agriculture in development of productive forces apart from their skewed
understanding what feudal relations denote in history, more so in India.
Here another query now must be raised. What succour such developed productive
forces by industrial mode can provide to ameliorate the condition of pauperised
and disinherited people or inversely help them in struggle to overthrow this
exploitative capitalist system? Question arises, how much these productive forces,
so developed during half a century of Independent India have gone beneficial to
these half-fed, half-clad people or helped weakening the grip of capitalism-cum-
feudalism over their lives? Situation in fact is in reverse. These charming
15
productive forces have served more to strengthen capitalist exploitation of the
masses rather than making their lives easier.
World again is now under the spell of market forces! What are these market
forces? It was a euphemism introduced by the crusaders on behalf of capital for
newly recruited disciples in erstwhile countries of socialist camp who were shy to
use the proper, but discredited term capitalism in initial stage of conversion.
This capitalism was not a new phenomenon in the twentieth century world to
adopt a new phraseology like market forces. Still, these new crusaders had to
recount features of its youth to impress upon the new generation of gullible for
acceptance once more a thoroughly rejected mode of social life that was cast off
after a span of painful experience. The past is a mute witness to the system that
thrives on a high cost economic life. The free competition could neither result
in low prices ever to consumers or provide efficiency in production and
distribution of goods for society, nor release forces of uninterrupted growth, even
in hay days of its youth.
Then, to expect such high goals in its grey period remains a mystery these
crusaders fail to explain, in their zeal to rejoice with these newfound allies in the
loot of common resources for private gain. It is not that these crusaders or
apologists for capitalism are block-headed maggots who are oblivious of this
history. Their fresh effort to refurbish the face of this brutal social force then
ostensibly seeks to gain another lease of life possible in present circumstances. But
the question remains, how this goes to the benefit of society?
Individualism, the bane of society
The theoretical premise of such a campaign for capital-based market forces to
contend is the virtue these apologists constantly search in individualism. It found
a precious base in the earlier slogan of individual liberty; brewing the two to
their great advantage, crafting many mythical formulations in trail. It is not true
that man by nature is motivated to exert best only by selfish ends, more so by
monetary interest. Man by birth is not selfish; he or she is made so. Philosophy of
Individualism worked for three hundred years to make one so. Full-fledged
conditioning for such long has made common man think and behave like a selfish
and forget ones own past in this connection. Likewise de-conditioning is a distinct
possibility. History of pre-industrial phase does not corroborate that self is a
guiding attribute of man in general. Barring a few degenerated lots of feudal kings
and nawabs in the later period of feudal autarchy; Indian history does not provide
substance to such illogical formulations to justify.
Social history proves otherwise. Only in social setting man exists as man and
blooms. Without social interaction his or her potent remains stale and sterile.
Talent is a product of this social interaction and no one has the right to expropriate
this social additive. Money is a poor compensation in exchange for this additive
and cannot enrich either in substance. However, in course of history this
philosophy of individualism was brought to fore which cuts at the very root of
this social law by seeking to make man confined to self and weaving relations to
16
serve the powerful; getting crumbs in exchange as offerings of fate. Man is facing
this dualism. This is the basic contradiction of social life to resolve today. It
cannot be pushed aside any longer, but at the cost of ruin.
Studies substantiate that it was industrial revolution, which had provided the
material ground to fashion individualism as a systematic philosophy with
individual, in contrast to his family and community as the focal point of interest.
Industry needed an independent worker, free from all social,
psychological/emotional affiliations and family encumbrances for a concentrated
production spiral to his or her best with least possible obligations in exchange. Its
basic unit for production was thus crafted as a free individual, though in a chain
combination stills an individual to contribute.
With industrial mode, individualism is a necessary by-product. This society can
hardly afford. Let us for a moment recollect here that mere stable property in
private mode exercised collectively by family-labour earlier during pre-industrial
phase could not give shape to individualism as a philosophy, different from the
importance of individual in a community setting it had. It is though true that
individual interest had started taking shape much earlier in human history but it
could not give birth to individualism prior to the growth of industrial-commercial
nexus.
Neither this individualism withered away substantially in Soviet Union merely
with the abolition of private property, with industrial mode at the centre of social
production for long 74 years of experiment in socialist construction. Rather,
individualism worked more perniciously even within the portals of communist
party there and almost in all other so-called socialist countries without exception.
This is emphasized not to plead in any manner for private property but to clear
chaff from the grain and pinpoint the real culprit for this evil of individualism in
society.
Individualism as an insidious philosophy, necessarily generated by industrial-
commercial paradigm of development has wrought the very social fabric to ruin.
The process of dehumanisation has brought the society to its knees. Alienation of
man has reached a stage of unbearable proportion to tolerate. In the circumstance,
it is nearly impossible for any one to justify the existence of these evil effects of
the present capital-based productive system in the society. Neither it is possible to
bypass these effects in the long run, keeping the system intact.
Role of political parties in history:
There is another important aspect of this industrial-commercial paradigm that
requires careful attention. History testifies that the concept of democracy arose to
be a political creed of this new class at a particular juncture. It needed fair play for
different financial groups contending against each other. It brought in the concept
of democracy as its political creed with representative medium through political
parties to operate. The creed later also helped to provide with social legitimacy to
the rule of this minority.
17
In this industrial dispensation, while the state tends to assume a highly centralized
structure day by day in conformity with its inherent law of political economy, the
creed of democracy gave birth necessarily, as an unwanted corollary, to release
energy of the masses and awaken them afresh to their strength. This undesired by-
product, however, is a writ doom for the whole system of expropriation, if such an
eventuality is allowed to materialize unhindered. Here this stratagem of
representative democracy that obviously helped to offset the danger from any
released energy of the masses at large. This insulates the capitalist system from
such a collapse, with an elaborate system of political parties as a fresh
interpretation of democracy to serve it as a necessary appendage by keeping the
masses in check within a specified frame with no one to cross.
And, the political parties did the job commendably to prove their worth by
wresting the energy of common mass in keeping their initiative and activism
within their own hold. Both ways it served the industrial-commercial interests best
- in economy and political management. As an institution, the political party
everywhere factually served these interests as its faithful product, in spite of
claims to the contrary. So far there has been no exception. In the experiment to
build socialism in erstwhile Soviet Union, with a sole communist party at its
helm, the initiative of people had gone extinguished and their activism flushed out.
It is now crystal clear.
Profitably it may be recalled that all rulers in human history fear energies of the
masses most. Soviet rulers fared no better than bourgeois rulers did. Neither
Chinese, nor the Vietnamese. The same is true of other countries. The small
exception seems to be Cuba, gleaned from scanty reports available. With
concentration of authority in the hands of a centralised leadership, initiative and
activism of rank and file in a communist party is extinguished like-wise. In such a
condition, initiative of the people is a far cry to expect.
In addition, the communist party (CPSU) as a sole arbiter of initiative and activism
on behalf of the masses happened to be more dangerous than beneficial in their
contest against the state. The masses totally depended on the wishes of the party
machinery there in its contest for resolving the first principal contradiction
between people and the state. It proved a historical tragedy of massive magnitude
to the aspiring working population for a new life.
This obstacle has to be met adequately in order to release the initiative and
activism of the masses if the society is to bloom again with youthful energy and
fragrance.
Fundamental change is the answer
In the circumstances, society needs a different set of relations and a fresh look on
concepts that were made the basis of the aborted attempt. True, it is not for the first
time that someone talks today about necessity of a basic change in society. The
idea had gained ground after reformatory efforts did not satisfy the social urges of
the times long back. Still patchwork mentality has its own attraction for some
people despite recent experiences and lessons in history! Nevertheless, by now
18
certain parameters are well laid as to concretise what is meant by a fundamental
change in society in this era of capitalist organisation after reformist socialism also
could not succeed in bringing any relief to the distracted humanity.
That the society is suffering from evils of deprivation and alienation under a
repressive system of governance in the interest of capital can hardly be contested.
Social thinkers in their wisdom charted a path for abolition of classes and the state.
They suggested recourse from each according to his ability, to each according to
his work without expropriation while destroying the foundation for parasites and
leading to the society that will live by the principle, from each according to his or
her ability, to each according to the need.
These thinkers traced the course of history that man had traversed in his march to
civilisation and summarised lessons for charting out his fortune in future for a
better and peaceful life. With primitive accumulation, mercantile capital gave an
urge for individual ownership in its wake. It provided a strong impetus to the
system of expropriation necessary for an era of industrial revolution with capital at
its centre and individualism as the philosophy to guide. In this era of industrial and
commercial culture labour-power is replaced with the pernicious instrument of
capital as the focal point of social production. This replacement necessarily
dehumanises man in the process. Another characteristic feature of capital is the
rapid alienation of man from means of social production, leading ultimately to his
or her transformation as a commodity. Then, capital has a tendency to centralise
and concentrate in few hands while putting millions after millions to destitution
with an elaborate system of expropriation. It works profitably under a highly
centralised and powerful state structure.
There is hardly anything left to support a system that demolishes the very
foundation of a just society and strikes at its social roots. Expropriation of ones
labour for enriching the other or, say, to rob Peter and benefit Paul, can hardly be
defended on any sane account.
The Indian scene
India has suffered humiliation of a colonised land for long. The brute British
colonisers not only plundered its resources to their hearts content; they mauled its
spirit also by dubious methods. The whole Indian social and administrative
structure was demolished and fashioned afresh on an alien model to serve colonial
interests of the rulers. The culture and value system of plunderers was super-
imposed on Indian subjects. The whole effort damaged the nation all-around,
specially its will. This cultural-moral and educational intervention sapped its
energy to a large extent. It has still to be revived.
Unfortunately, new set of native rulers, after attaining independence in 1947,
adopted not only the colonial administrative set up, but also saw its future in
British model of economic development through industry, as its pivot with in-built
colonial apparatus of expropriation along with the British model of political
structure in democracy.
19
First for democracy: In the then Constituent Assembly members after member
had advocated abrogation of British hierarchical model for governance, pleading
for Gram Swarajya instead. It could have paved way for Gaon Ganrajya as an
effective mechanism to release mass energy again for social activism. The new
rulers cunningly promised for Gram Panchayats instead, as mere administrative
units in future and dispensed with the autonomous village republics that the
country had a desire to revert back for enjoying real freedom in democracy. This is
part of recent Indian history. To this day people are aspiring to taste real
democracy in their effort for better life. It remains to be redeemed still. What
recently they have done is a gross distortion of the original concept.
To bypass Gandhi, his disciples both Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel proved
master tacticians in matters of governance and grooming the ignorant mass behind
these policies of pampering capital at the cost of labour laced with uncouth
repression and deceit even in initial stage of indigenous rule. The state financed
the growth of indigenous private capital with expropriation of agriculture in deceit,
as it lacked strength to stand on its own. Planning route was adopted by the state to
reach the target in hurry as a late entrant in race for capital accumulation.
The slogan that ranted the atmosphere after independence was development so
that poverty is attacked at roots with the wealth so created. The much-hyped
notion of development as sacred in itself is a crafty web from pen pushers of status
quo with trickle theory in command that did never bring any succour to the masses
so far.
The Nehru edict that development first, just distribution afterwards have proved a
much crafty clich that robbed working people for half a century. It has benefited
the expropriators most. Development must secure equity in process; otherwise it is
a cunning game. There is no first or last in this game. Moreover, development has
to provide peace and stability to society.
For such a crafty design, the present is full of a duality. Indignity, injustice, strife
and shortages for the common man are full despite honest labour for hours
unnatural for man in a day. Alienation is complete for them. They are at the
receiving end. The beneficiaries of the system on the other hand are wallowing in
wealth and are happy to have learnt the art of manipulating this system to their
advantage. What capitalist system did to others, it did the same in India.
More than half a century has gone by now with policies in practice that brought
misery to the people. The industrial mode has wrought disaster, as it should, with
only captains of capital to thrive. Many versions of reformatory practices have
been tried so far in the name of ameliorating conditions and correcting distortions,
but to the utter desperation of the toiling masses. They are worse today. The
intensity is higher. The development during these 55 years could add only around
10 per cent to make it twenty percent of citizens as the beneficiaries who have
reaped the advantage at the cost of millions after millions in toil.
The people are suffering worst type of deprivation all around and groaning under
the weight of ruthless exploitation and social strife. Thus, there is no point in
20
experimenting upon various versions of reformatory efforts or believing in
cosmetic changes the rulers of the day promise one after the other every alternate
day. The long period lost is no less to test their vitality and relevance. Hence, the
need for change in direction.
It is now clear that after Independence, the same industrial mode of development
was adopted here that had dominated the European scene. This was done to serve
the capital-based interests. For financing this project an elaborate system of
internal expropriation with neo-colonial character was brought in place, in addition
to the investment from public exchequer for promoting much needed basic inputs
at subsidised costs to private entrepreneurs. Since agriculture was the only
productive field available, it was made to finance it insidiously.
It had a striking difference with the old colonial plunder. This time, the
expropriation was purely internal to start with and worked out surreptitiously
despite the country that claimed to be a democratic one. It had its effect.
Independence started loosing its glamour and sheen at a speed for the majority of
population again. The ruthless internal colonial expropriation to make up capital
for rapid industrialisation as its agenda told upon mental and physical health of the
entire working people, except those who could find place or manipulate one in the
organised sector, including its privileged civil and armed services. A bit of
explanation will be timely.
It is well recognised that all the wealth of a nation is actualised through labour of
its people, working with bare hands or with tools, while economic system is the
totality of production of goods and services along with their distribution. In
distribution, the trick is played while fixing entitlements of different partners in
social production; depriving working people when the idle class is bestowed with
undeserved wealth by powers that be. It is done while computing money-value to
economic goods and services with a definite bias favouring the idle class of people
occupying vantage position in the system and its establishment. Individuals
occupying vantage positions in the system tend to acquire vested interests with
facility to stake claims on the additives by other non-influential elements in
production. Thus here they got exorbitant entitlements in the flow of goods and
services or money incomes having no relationship with their actual contributions
to production. The organised sector reaped benefits of such manipulation. It is the
sordid tale of internal colonial expropriation in the country ostensibly to provide
impetus for rapid industrialization. The worst victim has been the unorganised
sector of economy, inhabiting rural India largely.
By sheer manipulation in terms of trade and fiscal policies, including rural debt
weighing heavily against agriculture, in a high-cost economy and the
discriminatory methods in determining entitlements to the farming sector have
played havoc with lives of working population that constitute nearly 73 per cent of
the total. Whereas, nearly 7 to10 percent of the deprived population, living in
urban centres, is victim of the same process barely surviving on odd foot--path
jobs that may come their way or on punishing jobs in small scale industries with
depressed wages on degrading terms. Around ten per cent of the total rural
21
population is the beneficiary in real terms of present development strategy that
cultivates linkages with and acts as a subsidiary of urban sector. This is the section
that acts as an active collaborator of the ruling class in both political and economic
fields. All others are gasping for breath.
In a way it is the unorganised rural India that has been made to pay for the riches
of the organised urban sector. If rural India is penury incarnate till today, reason
may not be anywhere else to seek. To sum up, it can be said safely that the
contradiction between labour and capital here today is reflected through urban
organised sector and unorganised rural India. The situation needs to be changed
and this contradiction over-turned resolutely with a viable alternative!
Dispassionate history of the lost opportunity during these last fifty-five years is a
sad tale of deceit and betrayal of the toiling mass in India by the entire political
leadership in the country. There is hardly any exception. Not merely the ruling
ones but also those who adorn opposition benches are happy collaborators in the
game of state power to rule over the masses and worst type of expropriation. Even
the part of this leadership belonging to formal mass organizations can hardly be
absolved of this charge. They too tread the same path outlined and drawn by the
ruling class or classes in the interest of governance. So far there is none among
them as an organised entity that stood by the people to face this onslaught of
capital as well as state machinery and remained steadfast with their interests.
At present, both industry and agriculture as forms of development are beset with
crisis, but for different reasons. The crisis in industry is a crisis for speeding up
expropriation of labour-power to a new level of intensity while shifting emphasis
on to speculative economy for highest possible returns in speed for capital. The
economy is being given a shift to tide over the in-born difficulties, after
consolidating capitalist mode in the first phase of permit-license Raj and duly
buttressed by public sector undertakings at public expense. In its search for new
pastures outside, the country is tagged to WTO directions.
The crisis in agriculture on the other hand is due to over-extraction to finance
industrialisation for over half a century with no sufficient purchasing power left
with majority of the population in the country. The misery of the majority in
population is due to this crisis in agriculture for over-extraction. However, the
industrial-financial interests are bent upon converting agriculture to serve their
interests in the new setting of WTO conditionality, with no concern to the future of
millions engaged in farming at present.
Fresh priority needed:
The country needs a change for the better. So far, industrialisation is the buzzword
for social progress and human values, but with disastrous effects for humanity at
large, with few gains to claim. It is time to re-think the priority. We seek to
subscribe for re-affirmation of agriculture coupled with animal husbandry as a
viable form for production relations in the country with community command over
natural resources, including water, land. mines and forests. It challenges the very
wisdom of past three hundred years sponsored by interested groups that ascribe
22
pivotal role to capital-based industry as a development strategy for abundance,
whereas nowhere in the world industrialisation could lead the society to abundance
and peace without misery and expropriation, both internal and external. India is no
exception. Hence the need for change in focus.
We feel the time has come to ask for priorities of the nation are fixed afresh. It is
a myth that industry alone develops productive forces and agriculture is
synonymous to backwardness. For social stability and harmonious development
speed alone is not a deciding factor to choose which industry symbolizes. The
whole paradigm has to be rethought and overhauled. The present one has failed to
deliver. After achieving independence the new class in power was in a hurry to
reap riches and make up for the lost period during British occupation.
During these fifty-four years since 1947, it is only the industrial and commercial
sector with a supporting service sector that has gained from this course making up
hardly 20 per cent of the population in the country. The remaining 80 per cent
have been forced to bear the burden of this economy at the cost of their lives. The
country is now facing same ills of the system what western nations gathered in
more than 300 years.
Nowhere in the world any country could thrive traversing this path of
industrialisation merely on its own volition and resources, without expropriation of
others. India can be no exception. Now the leadership of this country has
embarked upon a path to gain access to this expropriation in other countries with
blessings from America, of course, forgetting its own sad experiences in slavery.
It is difficult to contest on facts a formulation that industry is no way to develop
any nation, if aim is to ameliorate the condition of masses without expropriation
and a life in peace without strife. For over three hundred years, industry and
commerce have dominated as a course of development in the world, giving
preference to capital accumulation instead of primacy to labour-power. But still
the world is no better a place to live in peace with human dignity intact.
In India, the leaders had promised honey and heaven to the people in 1947 while
choosing this path of rapid industrialisation. What the people got in bargain is
there for all to experience. For over two thirds of the countrymen it is no better
than hell on earth. This gruelling past is a sufficient ground to search for new path
to tread.
Growth Pattern is not uni-linear:
In this connection one fallacy may be fought that growth pattern is uni-linear. It is
now well known fact that there are three generically different patterns of growth:
namely Natural curve, Linear curve and Exponential curve. One German lady has
explained that Curve A represents an idealised form of normal physical growth
pattern in nature, which our bodies follow, as well as those of plants and animals.
It continues growth both qualitatively and quantitatively. Curve B represents a
mechanical or linear growth pattern, e.g., more machines produce more goods as
more coal produces more energy that comes to an end when the machines are
23
stopped or coal gets stopped, which normally these do. Curve C represents an
exponential growth pattern that is exact opposite to curve A. Starting slowly in
beginning, then rising vertically. Exponential growth in the physical realm usually
ends with the death of the host and the organism on which it depends.
Thus industry, commerce and service industries, including speculative finance
transactions, like share markets etc. belong to Curve B and Curve C type of growth
pattern respectively, while agriculture, animal husbandry and allied activities
belong to Curve A pattern. The experience of last three hundred years of
industrial, commercial and speculative activities worldwide confirms this pattern
of growth with tears and little consolation.
If one is not quite obdurate in approach, the next best pattern to choose for the
society, more so for India, then leads one to agriculture as a natural way of life
with supportive industrial activities under strict neighbour-hood community
supervision according to its actual needs and confirming to its social objectives.
The alternative mode in development with agriculture as its pivot, based on
family-labour, have to be fashioned in tune to the present requirements of society,
but not for greed, duly buttressed continuously by scientific advancement. One
cannot accept a notion so assiduously propagated continuously by vested interests
for long that agriculture is a barren pattern to answer the call of society or
scientific developments remain hostile to agricultural way of life. Of late, however
the Government is bent upon changing the face of agriculture completely. Let us
examine.
WTO and Indian Agriculture
The future of Indian agriculture is now a subject of heated discussion in the
country. The context is the Agreement on Agriculture as a part of obligation under
WTO undertaken by the then government clandestinely. The official regiment is
defending its stance to change the face of Indian agriculture at the behest of
powerful MNCs, while the total political leadership in opposition is berating the
present government over the difficulties farming community is facing today,
without telling the basic reason of this plight. However, one thing is clear that
none of these leaders or organisations in opposition is explicit enough to call for
abrogation of this agreement with WTO on agriculture. The peasantry is in a fix.
The main opposition party in Parliament recently made an explicit statement
officially to explain away the situation again in a diplomatic fashion, which has by
now become a trade mark of such organisations in the country. Smt. Sonia Gandhi,
addressing a Kisan rally called to explain away the stand of Congress party on the
emerging situation stated that there is nothing wrong with this agreement; the fault
lies in its implementation by the present rulers. Unfortunately, the chairperson of
congress party in her bid to give a clean chit to its own past through this statement,
provided ready help to the BJP led government for its agriculture reforms in
parliament on WTO lines to take effect. This was a fine game in tandem. Congress
is no different on agriculture policy that brought ruin to peasantry?
24
The WTO regime seeks to change farming here upside down and with it the lives
of peasants for all times to come. The whole political leadership, on the other
hand, is busy in sabre-rattling of usual fashion to skirt the real issues. The
government, including top brass in bureaucracy often defends the agreement on
agriculture for some perceived benefits to the nation, while at times when
cornered, the ruling leadership pleads its helplessness in view of the international
obligations the government has undertaken. It is unfortunate that for the
government an undertaking with WTO is primary while its fidelity to the Indian
people is dispensable. Nevertheless, central government led by BJP, unmindful of
the past, is pushing the country to ruin in its search for new pastures to serve the
same section of a class, which has benefited most during these last fifty-four years.
The government is pursuing in zeal the path of total Americanisation that will
strike doom for the country putting even its sovereignty in jeopardy. In fact, it is
on its toes to implement a policy that was initiated by Congress government at the
centre with no feeling of guilt to this day. The fact of the matter is that all
governments since 1991 have toed the same line of capitulation before the
organised international capital and defended the interests of this moneyed class in
sharp contrast to those of the people. What Narsimha Rao-Manmohan Singh
started in 1991, pushed further with verve by Chidambaram of the United Front, is
now zealously nurtured by Vajpayee-Sinha duo. In consequence, the people are
now left to fend for themselves against the attack of wild sharks basking under
protective wings of the state.
Pushing the country for almost a decade now to globalisation and liberalisation
of an American vintage based on unabashed capital market, the turn has come for
agriculture to bear. This is all in the name of accelerating the pace of
industrialisation of the country to serve the interest of development without
caring to tell what industrialisation has done to the people during last fifty-four
years. The nation is deep in quagmire of inflation, high cost economy, unchecked
loot of natural resources, ever rising prices and soaring unemployment, all
resulting in pauperisation of the common people and debilitating corruption all
around. Injustice is written all over. Nation is in the midst of strife and crime. Still,
the rulers are hell bent to extol the virtues of capital as a golden object in the life.
Keeping such a weak reference point as a sacred cow, the rulers have come
forward to overhaul farming in the hot pursuit of this capital - native and foreign.
The National Agriculture Policy released in July last year is an eloquent
testimony to the intentions of this government, as well as the moneyed class
worldwide. Their eyes are glued to grab land, water, forests and mines with
unchecked sway over other natural resources to milk unchecked profit, totally
unmindful of what may happen to millions and millions of people in bargain,
including simple tribals whom the constitution offered a protective shield of its
schedule five. Neither the hallowed provisions of constitution nor the verdict of
the Supreme Court last year on this schedule in Samata versus A.P. Government
and others seem to worry this government in a hurry to serve international capital.
25
It seeks to change these provisions flagrantly flexing muscles of parliamentary
number at the cost of Tribals displacement from their lands and hearths forever.
It is a tragic story. Indian agriculture is bled white for long. As a strategic move,
the rulers have made it a loosing pursuit deliberately during these fifty years or so
by manipulating fiscal and pricing policies to the disadvantage of the peasants.
The trade terms weighed heavily against them bringing ruin in turn. The simple
peasants were fooled around for their ignorance of the ways this ruling elite excels
in debunking. The peasants were branded as unskilled for being unlettered and
they in simplicity believed the rulers to a faith.
The treachery game, however, was played when wage scale for their family-labour
was computed under this lowest category to a miserly low while tabulating cost
price of agriculture produce terming the profession of a peasant as unskilled. It
was around 10 rupees a day for 147 days in a year as per data for the year in 1990.
It rose to Rs. 15 in 1995 and 17 in 1997. At present it may be around Rs. 20 at the
end of twentieth century, whereas lowest paid unskilled employee in the organised
sector is getting not less than Rs. 250 to Rs.1000 per day, what to say of
bureaucracy, politicians and the capitalists.
The earnings of higher functionaries even in public sector industries and services
are mind-boggling in comparison after the fifth pay commission bonanza, with all
other privileges in addition. The bureaucrats pocket up to Rs.1000 a day while
industrialists and commercial tycoons are unhappy with Rs.2 lakhs a day. Rather,
earnings of the favoured rich have no limit with due government support in fiscal
policy year after year. In spite of loud protestations recorded in the constitution for
social justice and equity, rulers are maintaining a highly discriminatory criterion to
fix wages for urban and rural sectors to this day, without any qualms for justice
and fair play.
On this account alone, according to one rough estimate, not less than Rs.3 lakh-
crores are expropriated every year from the farming sector. In addition, artisans, as
a part of agriculture sector are ruined to the benefit of urban industries. The parity
in prices of agricultural produce with industrial goods is still a distant dream. The
peasantry at the same time is highly taxed on the indirect route. The excise duties
on tractors, fertilizer and other inputs is much more what is doled out as subsidies.
Rural debt on modern methods of financial management with compound interest is
another route to expropriate this sector to suicide. Small amount of subsidies to
agriculture sector cannot hide this deprivation in spite of sponsored propaganda of
vested interests to the contrary.
In fact the rulers of all hues have debunked the peasantry that is simple in mind
and unknown to the ways of the rulers. Indian peasantry since August 1947 has
been ruined by a deliberate policy. Now it is time to reverse the process. All along,
these measures in deceit adopted by them have brought about a situation where
peasants are forced to vacate lands on their own in desperation so that the
moneybags can walk over and occupy it for profit.
National Agriculture Policy - 2000
26
The National Agricultural Policy 2000 marks the watershed in its history. The
intensive use of capital and technology is pleaded for raising production in
agriculture to feed the 'teeming millions' which Indian farmer does not possess!
The NAP declares that even the government has no wherewithal to provide the
same. It is a plea to hand over agriculture to those who have the money in the
interest of agicultural development. It is a plea to replace intensive family-labour
as the basic unit in Indian agriculture and hand it over to Banks and corporate
houses for its intensive capitalisation. The new entrepreneur farmer will pursue
agriculture not for subsistence but for profit as a business. The unstated national
agenda thus is corporatisation of Indian agriculture through intensive capital
investment. The credit boom in the wake of NAP is thus a calculated move. The
BJP led government through this agriculture policy have detailed the steps it
intends to take for take-over of farming by these sharks - national or international,
perhaps in a phased manner to offset any organised resistance from them in
desperation. This emerging situation is too clear that requires no special calibre to
understand. Still the political leadership, including the opposition is busy in the
game of deceit and political jugglery as usual. They are, for example, playing
orchestra in unison for diversification of agriculture for cash crops to confuse the
peasants and muddle the real issue at debate, in the interest of foreign trade with
European countries. Moreover, how big is the market for flowers from such a big
population for instance?
Grow flowers or fruits for America and get food grains from there for subsistence
at terms dictated by her in both the cases. This is the crux of advice by these
apologists of globalisation. Only a mug head will depend on others for food and
livelihood security. The tale of misery, which peasants are suffering in states,
including Kerala with cash crops as their main stay, is easily ignored in zeal to
support the government policy. Mostly these were peasants that banked on cash
crops who committed suicide in shame in recent past, including Andhra, Haryana
and Punjab. Unfortunately in this game almost all agriculture experts are also
playing the tune wittingly or otherwise that suits the politicians nicely in service of
the capitalist class for maximum profit.
The concern for peasantry currently being exhibited with gusto by Congress
leadership is too thin a veil. In no case Congress can absolve itself of what
peasantry is suffering today. It is the cumulative effect of the policies pursued with
zeal by its government during its rule of almost 45 years in the country turning
farming as nonviable pursuit completely. These policies turned peasants almost
paupers. Who else is responsible for adopting the industrial route to development
in the country if not this party in power since 1947 and discriminating against
agriculture in terms of trade and wage structure? The Congress has neither
accepted its responsibility so far, nor expressed regret for the same. The latest
stance by its leader that there is nothing wrong with the agreement on agriculture
under WTO, it is only the faulty implementation by the BJP led government is
nothing short of its faithfulness to the policies that ruined the peasantry so far. It is
27
like being too clever to put curtain on its crime and a ruse to absolve itself of the
guilt.
Same is the position of Prakash Singh Badal or Kanwaljit Singh or O.P. Chautala
while in power and the like when they express doubts about WTO while pursuing
industrial growth strategies as dictated by World Bank and this organisation with
such unconcealed zeal. The whole of Gurgaon district in Haryana for example, is
being placed at the disposal of these sharks at the cost of its inhabitants, mainly
displacing the peasants living there for centuries in exchange for mere paper
money that is depreciating every hour to serve exporters.
Those who reject subservience to WTO and this so-called National Agriculture
Policy as ruinous to peasantry must also reject this capital-based industrial strategy
of development itself, if to remain honest to logic. The central government has
opened the gates for capital to take over Indian agriculture, by courtesy of this
policy. It is a blueprint for corporatisation of agriculture and a sure path to ruin
rural India, as America did to its millions on its path to industrial culture of
modernity without any sense of lament and shame.
The position of left political parties is no different. They happily followed the tail
of Gowda-Chidambaram duo during UF regime that pursued the same route with
much zeal. Neither they could save their principles nor BJP could be kept away
from power! Their tragedy does not end here. There is hardly any place for
peasantry in their textbooks. Peasantry is to fade away in their scheme, to give
place to the proletariat. The status of an ally for the peasantry is a fine game of
jugglery when agriculture is considered a din of conservatism and backwardness.
The theory that pleads for dissolution of peasantry in service to industrialisation as
a course of history is now too naive to be retained after the sad experiment in
erstwhile Soviet Union. Any one subscribing to scientific reasoning after such a
debacle in experimental exercise should have openly discarded it. None of the kind
has come from them so far. For now what they demand tactically is merely some
relief to peasants on this front. It is time they come out of this past.
Today traditional farming is a loosing pursuit for those who depend on family
labour as their main stay in this endeavour. In this high cost economy, being
pursued zealously by the government to serve trade, industry and service sectors,
cost of production in agriculture is constantly on rise while their gain is artificially
depressed. One must question these premises of high cost economy that bring ruin
to the masses.
There is hardly any doubt left that what the government has embarked on doing
will lead to sure ruin of the peasantry and conversion of farming into a big
business affair where rural India of today have no place to breath. Paper money
now will be the owner of lands instead of the tiller. Peasants are destined to be
converted into bonded labourers and then finally to be pushed into dustbin of
history as was the story of traditional peasant families in America and Australia.
Following this path agriculture production may rise for a while, once farming is
taken over by the moneybags. The government may also earn foreign exchange for
28
the benefit of industrial and commercial houses to finance their trade and life-
style. But at what cost to the 80 per cent of the population and for how long, one
should tell this bare fact also. Capital-intensive agriculture is no cure of the
problem. Agriculture by nature is different from industry. The growth pattern
in agriculture is organic. It is qualitatively different from the exponential growth in
commerce and industry. It cannot be converted into industry for rapid growth
without a disaster as erstwhile Soviet Union experienced while Europe, America
pass through periodically. Industry is exponential while agriculture is linear in
nature, despite technological intervention and scientific innovations.
It is unfortunate that many educated apologists of the ruling junta have started to
proclaim that incompetents have no right to survive, let them perish to extol the
wild goose play of market forces. The arrogance of the ruling elite to dictate the
terms of survival for people are palpable enough to pocket lying down. The
argument of such sick souls is hardly short of a Nazi mind-set in knickers. No
version of democracy can ever accept such a belligerent ego of the power-drunks.
Indian state is a highly centralised and brutally armed entity today standing solidly
behind naked exploitative system for the masses. Today it has the guts to brazenly
shed off the people in favour of the rich. It is maintaining well the colonial
character it inherited to fulfil its neo-colonial task of internal expropriation in
service of capitalist class and is now engrossed to help it for external jaunts. All its
attributes are oiled to act against the people at need and in the interest of capital
like imperialists. Indian capitalism is happy to have such a capable and well-
groomed political leadership in democratic double-speak, fit for the job so
undertaken.
The pressure of democratic movement once could force a situation of relative
freedom in political and social actions. True, the state is not in a position to take
that despotic position immediately. Somewhat looseness in administrative
machinery of a leviathan provides another helpful opening available to breathe.
This provides a little leeway, valuable though in comparison to many countries of
the Third World.
Despite this, the state is truly a leviathan. The symptoms are bad enough. It is a
heavy cross around the neck of commoners with all despotic powers in its hands,
notwithstanding the democratic commitments. Under a well-groomed democratic
veneer in India, octopus-like reach of the government is frightening in its
implications for common man. Complete control over resources with the state has
made life of hapless citizens totally dependent on its will today. This was never
within the scheme of things the state was conceived for. It facilitated to make the
state all-powerful and conversely, the life of commoners miserable. The situation
has to be over-turned.
Yes, the way lies with the will
In a recent conversation, one radical leader of repute commented that power of the
state is truly stupendous and difficult to nibble a scratch on it even with the best of
arms with adversaries on behalf of citizens.
29
Yes, to redeem life for common working people, the present octopus-like
capitalist-imperialist state has either to be over-thrown or made worthless in that
sense.
In this connection, one more important aspect has to be kept in view. As is said,
revolution is a radical rupture with the present and, again, it is a continuous
process. It cannot and should not be equated with any particular form or confined
to one moment of rupture. Moreover, any old form cannot be repeated for history.
In India, revolutionaries are to devise new methods to start nibbling at the roots of
this octopus for a radical rupture to occur.
Let us recollect that the very basis of this centralised power rests in representative
democracy. It has to be given a fatal blow. Instead, focus now has to come on the
participative democracy. It is a natural right of citizens to manage their own life in
community setting voluntarily. No authority must be given the right to interfere in
this self-management of local affairs necessary to carry day-to-day life in the
community, including inherent power of dispute resolution. It should now be
asserted and asserted powerfully. It will again release the initiative of masses that
has been grabbed by hostile and alien forces inimical to them.
All power to village council or Gaon Sansad is now the central slogan where face-
to-face community must reign supreme for all practical purposes important to
them and disperse politico-administrative power. It is a potent slogan today and
one fully capable to initiate revolutionary change in the power structure. This non-
centralised polity must take the place of and act thus as a counter-blow to the
present centralised one. This is the viable alternative even for a socialist stage to
checkmate the Principal contradiction of modern day life. It has the potentiality to
bring change in balance of forces as well as put back initiative in the hands of the
masses at large. Moreover, struggle starts at grassroots level making it impossible
to wither away.
Another important aspect is that the state is continuing here an unhindered legacy
of colonial dictum in Principle of Eminent Domain, claiming first ownership over
all natural resources deemed vested in it. The citizens are, thus deprived of their
right to live with dignity, extinguishing their natural right over the sources they
had reclaimed since centuries with hard labour and untold sacrifices. The right of
citizens over these resources is prior to the advent of this state agency. The
concept inherent in the Principle of Eminent Domain has its origin in colonial
exploitation that suited well the new rulers right after independence for neo-
colonial objects. Curiously enough no political party, even the most radical among
them has raised its little finger on this sordid game so far. This concept needs to be
over thrown outright, if citizens rights are to be redeemed.
The right of community over these resources and its competence to manage these
has to be marked in earnest. Citizens have the natural right to use these resources
for sustenance within the ambit of respective face-to-face community. The practice
to vest property in the state on behalf of a nation is merely another method to
30
sustain this Principle which is colonial in nature and a bedrock foundation of state
domination - and domination of a fascist nature that goes against the people.
Nationalisation of resources as well as means of production proved a sore notion
that brought doom to socialist conception. It was one of the biggest fiasco of
twentieth century. Community command over these resources is the alternative
instead, viable to sustain social progress.
Imperialism today is relying primarily on its financial prowess to dominate
through the instrumentation of WTO, IMF and World Bank, duly supported by the
military power to safeguard its interests. The blow has to come at this source.
Agricultural credit system in India, as else where, is genocidal is frame. It has to
be met squarely. The real art of managing money-economy in the modern world
comprises the art of contrived processes being presented as natural so that the
victims are left guessing, offsetting the possibility of revolt, reaction or even
significant resistance. The compound interest on agricultural credit is insidious and
must be resisted in the first instance to strike at the very root of expropriation in
agriculture.
Need of a formal Organisation?
In matters of social formation where man or woman can flower best is a question
of prime importance. At present apart from family in a setting of neighbourhood
community, there is still a need for some sort of formal organisation to help the
masses in their endeavour to gain supremacy in social management.
Apparently a political party is another voluntary organisation of men in society,
like so many other social organisations that members of society tend to combine
voluntarily for some particular object or objects to achieve. However, it is not as
simple as that. Political parties are not political parties if these do not chase state-
power relentlessly. So, what to the people who are destined to be ruled anyway till
the state lasts? In recent times political parties in fact have attained a much deeper
meaning in social life of a country. The octopus like growth of these parties in
importance virtually threatens today the freedom of choice of men who combine,
more so if one happens to withdraw this choice. These are of no use to the people.
At present other formal type of organisations available, are also largely patterned
on political parties that vie for power or share in power structure. This is again
proving a damper on the initiative and creativity of the people. Such organisations
have worked virtually to disable the institution of family and neighbourhood
community as viable formations for the people. Hence, that pattern has to be
discarded in social interest by them.
We have fought the concept of political parties as an anti-people growth in society
brought up by crafty machinations of minority rule. The damage done by this
mechanism to the initiative and social activism of masses so essential for a healthy
growth of human values is stupendous in history. Likewise, all formal
organisations also brought up to answer the growing complexities of life, more so
when natural social formations in family and its face-to-face community are
31
banished craftily, do have serious limitations. If society is to grow in its natural
course there is no alternative to family and its community so far. These basic
institutions of society have to be resurrected to provide a healthy growth of human
relations and for social change.
There is little doubt that common masses can do much and do without these
political parties altogether. Time has come to shun these political parties on whose
physical and moral support these happen to survive, though to act against their
very interests. In addition, there has to be a serious effort to limit the scope and
sweep of other formal organisations also to keep these under leash and within a
well-defined frame of an obligation.
Commoners are living under very difficult times for honourable survival.
Moreover, They cannot stoop low merely for animal survival. Human dignity is an
attribute we can hardly barter. For this incessant struggle against formidable
adverse forces, till family and its community get resurrected into an active social
force of adequate potential, it is difficult to dispense with some kind of formal
organisations of the people. A type foremost among such organisations has to
answer these five basic functions, namely:
(1) resurrection of family and its community into active organism again
(2) release mass initiative and activism of the masses for a fundamental change
in social and production relations,
(3) working to limit the sweep and scope of state structure day-by-day and hour
by hour
(4) assert the natural rights of citizens, struggle against deprivation and injustice
(5) help create awareness among people for better life values and organisation

Naturally, the practice, methodology and cultural-moral-ethical categories of such
an organisation have to be strictly in accordance with these above listed basic
functions, and where human dignity and equity have a fair scope to flower.
Realising the primacy of family and its neighbourhood community as informal
formation of man in society such an organisation must seek to function in tandem
with, and not in contradiction to Gram Sabha in furtherance of its object.
Otherwise, the power is bound to slip away in align hands, as has been the history
of former socialist camp.

Need of the Hour
With a clear vision and clarity on vital issues so arrived, the movement for social
action to change the present state of affairs basically, has to be given a shape in
right earnest. This is the need of the hour. Hiatus has to be broken and cynicism
overcomes. The illusions so systematically created are to be shattered and the bare
reality of present day life exposed so that people come closure to truth and face
them squarely. The faith in their own strength to manage social affairs has to be
32
regenerated among the masses patiently and systematically in action. The
manoeuvre and conspiracies from the ruling circles and vested interests to divest
the people of this strength and keep them apart on narrow and sectarian issues
have to be fought relentlessly.
First those who are conscious enough about their social obligation as part of their
own existence have to initiate the steps to begin with and open dialogue with those
sections of society that need the change, create conditions where they exchange
opinions and express their concern. They themselves have to come closure
ideologically and culturally, build their ethical and moral frame in consonance
with the new emerging social relations. The differences between religions and
castes do not give reason to disassociate among ourselves to fight the adversaries
and loose our battle against capital. Religion may be a matter of personal faith
while caste entity is a social reality that does not antagonise others, if it is not
made as a vehicle to climb to power and suppress others. Caste can be no basis for
mistrust and rivalry among the working masses in their struggle for social
existence with dignity.
Let us repeat, this effort to change the social-economic-political relations afresh in
collectivity have to be essentially democratic, sincere and honest. It precludes
every underhand tricks and rely on a style of functioning that nurture sharing of
responsibilities. The concept of division of labour has to be shunned for good.
The reference frame of every activity has to be the people in all situations.
Situations must change, but the reference point remains the same.
Such a collectivity to help the working masses in the country to re-assert
themselves against the assault of capital and vested interests associated with its
rule may not be allowed to develop into a vested interest in itself. Its functioning
has to be patterned in a way that precludes this possibility. Its live contact with
common masses must refresh its vital organs constantly with one precaution:
vested interests in rural areas should not be allowed to prevail upon its activities
and policies.
The Call
Parties miserably failed to measure up the task. Creamy faces but cheats
underneath with eyes glued on privileges of power preside over all of them. This is
not to despair but a point of deep regret. So what we have said is nothing but for a
patient attention and friendly dialogue.
True, it is hard times for the people economically and politically. They are under
stress. The rulers do want them to work under duress and remain hostage. The
cage has to be broken and broken, with their own strength and stamina. No alien
help will do the job for them. Neither they can survive and survive with dignity
while remaining in the bounds of this cage any longer. Enough is enough.
Human ingenuity has no limit. It can find its course out of the worst situations,
provided one has not lost the will to stand erect against injustice and inequity that
are dehumanising in essence. For onward march, society needs the services of
33
those among its ranks that can answer such challenges in first instance, so that
peoples energies get rolled by. Ebb is not there forever to last. It requires
energetic efforts, though, to limit its course for tide to take on. With a clear vision
and clarity of thought their best sons and daughters have to be harnessed for
initiating the counter-offensive against the marauders with zeal and grit. That is
the call. Those who have not lost their sense of social obligation completely and
those who can be groomed to such a level of thought have to answer it first.
While summing up we realise that society is living past the long period of
experiences of (a) two bloody World Wars for colonial possessions in search of
loot by Europeans carrying the cross of civilising mission over blacks and
browns, (b) strenuous efforts by captains of metropolitan capital to get going
amidst trying conditions with and without democratic practice of their own make,
(c) efforts spanning almost two-third of twentieth century to build a new man and
a new society in socialism after seizure of state-power in different countries.(d)
efforts spanning over half a century to build a welfare state or democratic
socialism of various vantage by transfer of state power by peaceful means, now
gone over to American way completely.
In light of these experiences society has gone through, at best this review can be an
approach to assess things in present day situation with many nuances or details of
argument one may not like to associate fully. Such friends are welcome to keep
their counsels. What we require is an uninhibited dialogue with open mind to listen
and argue. The object is to find a viable alternate path of social development and
change for the better.
To conclude, a note of caution seems necessary. We do not want to sound obdurate
ourselves in any sense. Neither we claim extra-ordinary wisdom.
By summing up, it can be said:
The present paradigm of development, more so with borrowed capital, has to be
changed altogether. Farming, based on family labour, need be the pivot of
development strategy now with supportive industries at the discretion of local
community enjoying 51 % of shares against its land use; gains going for common
benefit in the locality. Much the country has paid more than borrowed. Foreign
loans be abrogated unilaterally.
We reject export-based strategy of a high cost economy.
Country should withdraw from WTO and such obligations abrogated immediately.
Agriculture should be kept out of any such trade obligation.
Political parties have betrayed the people in their struggle for survival. Their so-
called mass organisations are more loyal to their respective political formations
than to the people. Let people shun them all completely.
People need to develop confidence in their own strength. Let villages and local
basties be their centres of struggle having due coordination with other centres.
34
The natural right of the community to command over land, forest, mineral wealth
and water resources be recognised. Land and water be kept out of commodity
discipline.
The right of use over agriculture land and its produce belongs to one who actually
tills it.
While computing cost of agriculture produce, the labour component in no case be
less than that of a skilled labour and cost of a reasonable standard be accounted.
Right to work for every able-bodied person be guaranteed at a living wage.
Development works in or around their village or habitat be ensured for sustained
growth.
Education and health should be the first charge on government funds.
Agriculture inputs including implements should be exempted from excise and
other state levies.
State procurement of agriculture produce should be ensured. Middlemen must be
not allowed in such a trade.
Hydropower production be given top priority and agriculture get first charge on it.
Gram Sabha as the nodal institution should manage rural credit. RBI must provide
finance directly to Gram Sabhas. All rural, credit more so for agriculture should
not exceed 4 per cent simple interest in any case. Compound interest need be
made a penal offence. All rural debt at present be cancelled. Coercive methods for
its recovery in any case must be not allowed. Gram Sabhas should fix loan
liabilities after due process of verification.
Patent regime on seed and bio-products be abolished and trade for profit on these
banned.

Gian Singh
National Convener
Kisani Pratishtha Manch


Contact: 383/6 Fatehpuri Colony, Rohtak-124001 (Haryana) India
Mobile: +919416358044 Email: kisanipm@rediffmail.com