Bharat Jhunjhunwala
There are slim chances of the Congress, BJP or the Third Front attaining majority on their own. In the circumstances, the Third (and Fourth) Front will have to join hands either with the Congress or BJP to form the next government. The Left parties who are an important constituent of the Third Front had initially joined hands with the Congress in the last Parliament. But towards the end, they joined hands with BJP to bring a non-confidence motion against the Congress on the nuclear deal. That was, however, a temporary arrangement. There is occasion now to take this friendship further ahead. The Left and BJP should understand the plus points of each other and make a true durable alliance.
The BJP is incensed with the Left parties’ espousal of class conflict. Indeed, the Left parties have tried to join hands with the capitalists in Nandigram and Singur but that was merely a tactical necessity. They have recognized that it is not possible to create a socialist economy at the level of the State with a capitalist government ruling at the Centre. They have been forced to court capitalists like Tatas out of this frustration. Basically, given a chance, they would like to make a government that puts leash on private businesses. The BJP is much more business-friendly. It supported Indian IT companies and helped develop India as a global software power. It is even called party of traders. The two groups do not see eye to eye on this issue. They will have to resolve this matter if they have to together provide a stable government to the country.
The BJP’s allegation is that the Left Parties harbour hatred towards the business class. This is true. But one has to understand the reasons for this hatred. Left parties hold that the businessman is only interested in his profits. He is not concerned with the impact of his activities on the people. It is thus seen that top businessmen of the country are involved in tobacco and liquor businesses. Or big farmers happily engage harvesters and deprive the farm workers of employment. The Left parties hold that it is not possible to change the character of the businessman. Thus, pro-people economics cannot be implemented within the capitalist system. The solution, they say, is for the people to take the reins of the economy in their own hands. Industries should be nationalized so that they can follow pro-people policies without being constrained by the compulsions of the market. For example, a worker’s government can ban the use of harvesters and pass on the consequent increase in the price of food grains to the consumers. This requires negating the principle of efficiency that comes with harvesters.
Indeed, it is not possible to change the character of the businessman who has to be cruel and self-centred in order to survive in the market. He has to evade taxes and sell on the sly if his competitors are doing so. But the solution is not to nationalize the industries and hand them over to government bureaucrats. The experience of Soviet Russia, Communist China and public sector undertakings in our country attests to the fact that government officials are as cruel towards the poor as private businessmen. Additionally, they are inefficient. We had nationalized coal, sugar and textile industries in the sixties and seventies. Instead of providing revenues to the government, they made losses and became a burden. These were nationalized to provide relief to the people. Instead taxes had to be imposed on the people to provide relief to these undertakings. Thus, the problem has been correctly identified by the Left parties but the solution suggested by them is not acceptable.
The Indian tradition appears to be more acceptable on this issue. It is said that the government should not run industries itself and instead give direction to private businesses. The Indian tradition accepts that the Vaisya is short-sighted and selfish, exactly as the Left says. Thus, it says, the Vaisya must live under the control of the Kshatriya. Friction between the businessman and government is more likely to deliver both efficiency and good governance. Government officials running businesses develop corrupt tendencies similar to those of private businessmen. Thus replacing short-sighted private businessmen with corrupt government officials provides no solution. Worse, there is left in the society no institution that can exercise control if the government-run industries go in the wrong direction. This is the lesson from Soviet Russia. Government-run industries produced bad quality goods at exorbitant prices. Thus the Indian tradition says that friction between businessmen and government is likely to produce good results. Competition among businessmen will ensure efficiency. Wrong direction taken by businessmen can be controlled by government regulators, just as mother and father are unable to bring up a child alone and can do so better together despite their differences of opinion. Thus the Left parties should demand effective regulation of businesses instead of their nationalization. This would be consistent with the Indian tradition.
The BJP will also have to revise its perception of the Left. The businessman-government combine has turned anti-people in our history. The common man of India has often supported foreign invaders because the domestic businessman-government combine has turned oppressive. Tribals of Dungarpur in Rajasthan told this writer that they would escape into the British-ruled Presidency areas of Ajmer to escape oppression by home-grown princely rulers.
The Left tradition has failed because government officials become both cruel and corrupt. In this situation the Left approach of organizing the poor for demanding relief has been somewhat successful as seen in increase in wages in Kerala and implementation of land reforms in Bengal. Therefore, the BJP must see the Left call for ‘‘class war’’ as being similar to Lord Rama leading the vanaras against the tyranny of Ravana.
The Left and BJP have unwittingly pitted themselves against each other. The Left must appreciate that nationalization of industry will not deliver. The BJP must appreciate that the common man has a right to revolt against the tyranny of the business-bureaucracy combine. The two must join hands to provide a pro-people government to the people of this great country. THE SENTINEL
There are slim chances of the Congress, BJP or the Third Front attaining majority on their own. In the circumstances, the Third (and Fourth) Front will have to join hands either with the Congress or BJP to form the next government. The Left parties who are an important constituent of the Third Front had initially joined hands with the Congress in the last Parliament. But towards the end, they joined hands with BJP to bring a non-confidence motion against the Congress on the nuclear deal. That was, however, a temporary arrangement. There is occasion now to take this friendship further ahead. The Left and BJP should understand the plus points of each other and make a true durable alliance.
The BJP is incensed with the Left parties’ espousal of class conflict. Indeed, the Left parties have tried to join hands with the capitalists in Nandigram and Singur but that was merely a tactical necessity. They have recognized that it is not possible to create a socialist economy at the level of the State with a capitalist government ruling at the Centre. They have been forced to court capitalists like Tatas out of this frustration. Basically, given a chance, they would like to make a government that puts leash on private businesses. The BJP is much more business-friendly. It supported Indian IT companies and helped develop India as a global software power. It is even called party of traders. The two groups do not see eye to eye on this issue. They will have to resolve this matter if they have to together provide a stable government to the country.
The BJP’s allegation is that the Left Parties harbour hatred towards the business class. This is true. But one has to understand the reasons for this hatred. Left parties hold that the businessman is only interested in his profits. He is not concerned with the impact of his activities on the people. It is thus seen that top businessmen of the country are involved in tobacco and liquor businesses. Or big farmers happily engage harvesters and deprive the farm workers of employment. The Left parties hold that it is not possible to change the character of the businessman. Thus, pro-people economics cannot be implemented within the capitalist system. The solution, they say, is for the people to take the reins of the economy in their own hands. Industries should be nationalized so that they can follow pro-people policies without being constrained by the compulsions of the market. For example, a worker’s government can ban the use of harvesters and pass on the consequent increase in the price of food grains to the consumers. This requires negating the principle of efficiency that comes with harvesters.
Indeed, it is not possible to change the character of the businessman who has to be cruel and self-centred in order to survive in the market. He has to evade taxes and sell on the sly if his competitors are doing so. But the solution is not to nationalize the industries and hand them over to government bureaucrats. The experience of Soviet Russia, Communist China and public sector undertakings in our country attests to the fact that government officials are as cruel towards the poor as private businessmen. Additionally, they are inefficient. We had nationalized coal, sugar and textile industries in the sixties and seventies. Instead of providing revenues to the government, they made losses and became a burden. These were nationalized to provide relief to the people. Instead taxes had to be imposed on the people to provide relief to these undertakings. Thus, the problem has been correctly identified by the Left parties but the solution suggested by them is not acceptable.
The Indian tradition appears to be more acceptable on this issue. It is said that the government should not run industries itself and instead give direction to private businesses. The Indian tradition accepts that the Vaisya is short-sighted and selfish, exactly as the Left says. Thus, it says, the Vaisya must live under the control of the Kshatriya. Friction between the businessman and government is more likely to deliver both efficiency and good governance. Government officials running businesses develop corrupt tendencies similar to those of private businessmen. Thus replacing short-sighted private businessmen with corrupt government officials provides no solution. Worse, there is left in the society no institution that can exercise control if the government-run industries go in the wrong direction. This is the lesson from Soviet Russia. Government-run industries produced bad quality goods at exorbitant prices. Thus the Indian tradition says that friction between businessmen and government is likely to produce good results. Competition among businessmen will ensure efficiency. Wrong direction taken by businessmen can be controlled by government regulators, just as mother and father are unable to bring up a child alone and can do so better together despite their differences of opinion. Thus the Left parties should demand effective regulation of businesses instead of their nationalization. This would be consistent with the Indian tradition.
The BJP will also have to revise its perception of the Left. The businessman-government combine has turned anti-people in our history. The common man of India has often supported foreign invaders because the domestic businessman-government combine has turned oppressive. Tribals of Dungarpur in Rajasthan told this writer that they would escape into the British-ruled Presidency areas of Ajmer to escape oppression by home-grown princely rulers.
The Left tradition has failed because government officials become both cruel and corrupt. In this situation the Left approach of organizing the poor for demanding relief has been somewhat successful as seen in increase in wages in Kerala and implementation of land reforms in Bengal. Therefore, the BJP must see the Left call for ‘‘class war’’ as being similar to Lord Rama leading the vanaras against the tyranny of Ravana.
The Left and BJP have unwittingly pitted themselves against each other. The Left must appreciate that nationalization of industry will not deliver. The BJP must appreciate that the common man has a right to revolt against the tyranny of the business-bureaucracy combine. The two must join hands to provide a pro-people government to the people of this great country. THE SENTINEL
No comments:
Post a Comment